1st Amendment protection than a traditional news vehicle? Proprietary information is leaked to the press all the time - and newspapers are allowed to protect their sources. Even more maddening, this company obviously was lying, cheating and stealing from their clients! If you're going to break 1st Amendment precedent, why do it for these goofballs?
This sets dangerous precedent for not only 3rd party news sources like ML Implode, but for us as Americans.
just an observation:
"13. The "unverified report" found on Respondent's website is a scaned image that is
in the exact same format and includes virtally identical information to that found in the 2007
Loan Chart that Petitioner filed with the NHBD and the MDB."
Isn't anyone interested in knowing whether the governing bodies are doing what they should be doing? Is confidential information being treated that way?
View next topic View previous topic
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
