The following podcast contains advertising to access an ad-free version of the law

fair podcast become a material supporter of law fair at patreon.com slash law

fair. That's patreon.com slash law fair. Also check out law fair's other podcast

offerings, rational security, chatter, law fair no bull and the aftermath.

Hello, and welcome to the law fair podcast. I'm Benjamin Wittes. This is the last

in our series of podcasts from the Hoover Institution's October 25th media

colloquium at Stanford University. In this final session, Jack Goldsmith addresses

the group of distinguished journalists about the changing legal norms of

national security journalism and the journalists push back. It's a sometimes

funny often combative and highly informative session in which Jack and the

reporters discuss when and whether journalists and sources should be

prosecuted for publication of national security secrets and why journalists

never actually are. They also discuss the merits and risks of leaks and some

of the underlying powers the government is engaged in under the Obama

administration. The title of my session is secrecy accountability and the

constitution. I'm going to try to talk about something that touches on all three

of those words and I'm going to much I want to do this what I'm going to say has

been touched upon in the conversation already. I'll try to put it a little bit

different frame. I want to start off by saying that there's no one in this room

who's not a journalist who admires national security journalism more than I do.

I have friends. I consider myself close acquaintances with many of you.

I've talked to many of you. I admire your work and I've defended journalism

...