tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4896836091935734799.post8044375519172773077..comments2024-03-15T08:52:03.058-04:00Comments on ONE ANGLER'S VOYAGE: THE JOKE'S ON FLORIDA'S STATE FISHERY MANAGERSCharles Witekhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16752632941300366580noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4896836091935734799.post-8356168388630634932017-08-07T08:42:33.099-04:002017-08-07T08:42:33.099-04:00Trying to see how many times you can be wrong in o...Trying to see how many times you can be wrong in one day? My invitation to testify before the subcommittee was addressed to me as 'recreational fisherman and outdoor writer." So the subcommittee expressly acknowledged my role as a journalist. And this blog is not financed by anyone, including the EDF (approximately two posts per month are clearly marked as reprints from blogs I write for the Marine Fish Conservation Network, which I am paid for). But I have no connections with EDF, and except for the reprints, no one pays me for this blog. Anyone who says otherwise is a damned liar.Charles Witekhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16752632941300366580noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4896836091935734799.post-23087015635474045342017-08-06T10:41:05.809-04:002017-08-06T10:41:05.809-04:00Yes, it would expose your ties to The Environmenta...Yes, it would expose your ties to The Environmental Defense Fund and how they are funding your propaganda blog. You were there to testify as a fisheries expert not as a journalist - your refusal to answer the question of where you got that information tells the story.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4896836091935734799.post-31560518433676372462017-08-02T16:12:12.896-04:002017-08-02T16:12:12.896-04:00Except it never happened. No Fifth Amendment prot...Except it never happened. No Fifth Amendment protection was ever sought. That was a baseless claim made by the editor of a second-rate local fish rag with no knowledge of the law.<br /><br />I refused to answer the question because as a matter of journalistic ethics, a writer protects his sources. I was given information that the public had a right to know, and I provided it to the public. I was given the information in confidence, and I honored that confidence. That is something done to protect the public interest and the provisions of the First Amendment--Freedom of the Press--and not the Fifth, which deals with criminal issues. As much as the current administration may want to change the fact, informing the public about what's going on in Washington isn't illegal. At least not yet.Charles Witekhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16752632941300366580noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4896836091935734799.post-83506356665663965732017-07-31T10:02:51.762-04:002017-07-31T10:02:51.762-04:00From the testimony given by Mr. Charles Witek at t...From the testimony given by Mr. Charles Witek at the Congressional hearing;<br /><br />"....Witek claimed to be nothing more than a concerned recreational fisherman, yet the former Wall Street attorney refused to answer how he’d come into possession of unpublished discussion documents coming out of the House Natural Resources Committee.<br /><br />“Actually I would prefer not to answer that question,” Witek replied, seemingly invoking his Fifth Amendment rights before the congressional subcommittee." <br /><br />So, here is yet another example of how the enviro-funded types portray themselves as one thing, but are in actuality quite another - invoking the 5th amendment to prevent his REAL agenda from being discovered.<br /><br />Mr. Witek is a paid freelance "journalist" attorney.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com