BREAKING: Judge says Glenn Beck must identify his sources on Boston Marathon Bombing - First Amendment showdown has begun.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding this...so it's an anti-defamation case; shouldn't they strictly be litigating whether what he said caused material damage of some kind to the plaintiff? I didn't know that anti-defamation lawsuits delved into the veracity of the claims (which wanting the names of the sources seems to be heading this toward).

A Judge who has been hearing the case of Glenn Beck's defamation lawsuit filed by a Saudi Arabian, who was injured in the bombing, has ruled that Beck must reveal his sources in the Boston Marathon Bombing case.

This is a huge blow to the First Amendment and Alternative Media reporters. I know Beck must be horrified with this ruling.

The young Saudi who filed the lawsuit against Beck and his companies for defamation was injured in the bombing. Beck claims he had two different Homeland Security sources who claimed the same young man was on a terrorist watch list.

Beck's sources also claimed this young man was the "money man" behind the attack.

This puts Beck in a position of terrible consequence in either decision he makes...especially as a reporter. In my opinion, his First Amendment Rights are being blatantly stripped from him.

[link to www.politico.com]
U.S. District Court Judge Patti Saris ruled that Beck must disclose the names of two Department of Homeland Security employees who allegedly gave a Beck producer information backing up the radio and TV host's claim that Alharbi was the "money man" behind the attack.

The judge said deposition testimony from Beck and two of his top deputies at the time — Joel Cheatwood and Joe Weasel — was "vague and often contradictory" about what the sources said and when they said it. She also noted that the key sources spoke directly only with Weasel, who claimed to record the information on Post-It notes "which he then discarded."

Saris said she ordered the production of records from several government agencies, but they were not of help in confirming what the Beck aides were allegedly told. "None of the documents supports the idea that Alharbi was the 'the money man' financing the Boston Marathon attacks," the Boston-based judge wrote in her 61-page ruling.

The judge acknowledged that forcing disclosure of the sources' identities raised "First Amendment concerns," but she suggested those could be limited by restricting distribution of the information.

A Judge who has been hearing the case of Glenn Beck's defamation lawsuit filed by a Saudi Arabian, who was injured in the bombing, has ruled that Beck must reveal his sources in the Boston Marathon Bombing case.

This is a huge blow to the First Amendment and Alternative Media reporters. I know Beck must be horrified with this ruling.

The young Saudi who filed the lawsuit against Beck and his companies for defamation was injured in the bombing. Beck claims he had two different Homeland Security sources who claimed the same young man was on a terrorist watch list.

Beck's sources also claimed this young man was the "money man" behind the attack.

This puts Beck in a position of terrible consequence in either decision he makes...especially as a reporter. In my opinion, his First Amendment Rights are being blatantly stripped from him.

[link to www.politico.com]
U.S. District Court Judge Patti Saris ruled that Beck must disclose the names of two Department of Homeland Security employees who allegedly gave a Beck producer information backing up the radio and TV host's claim that Alharbi was the "money man" behind the attack.

The judge said deposition testimony from Beck and two of his top deputies at the time — Joel Cheatwood and Joe Weasel — was "vague and often contradictory" about what the sources said and when they said it. She also noted that the key sources spoke directly only with Weasel, who claimed to record the information on Post-It notes "which he then discarded."

Saris said she ordered the production of records from several government agencies, but they were not of help in confirming what the Beck aides were allegedly told. "None of the documents supports the idea that Alharbi was the 'the money man' financing the Boston Marathon attacks," the Boston-based judge wrote in her 61-page ruling.

The judge acknowledged that forcing disclosure of the sources' identities raised "First Amendment concerns," but she suggested those could be limited by restricting distribution of the information.

Beck is on really shaky ground here, and he could lose everything.

If he gives his sources up, he is basically a reporter no one will trust.

If he doesn't give his sources up, he is in violation of the court.

Man, I feel for him.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding this...so it's an anti-defamation case; shouldn't they strictly be litigating whether what he said caused material damage of some kind to the plaintiff? I didn't know that anti-defamation lawsuits delved into the veracity of the claims (which wanting the names of the sources seems to be heading this toward).

...

I totally agree. Someone has it out for Beck.