There's a fundamental misunderstanding among Assange supporters.

[cab67]

3. The constitution doesn't specify what a firearm is, either.

Nor does it specify what qualifies as an act of war, whether for purposes of declaring war or prosecuting people for treason.

There are Federal court decisions within the past 2 or 3 years that have deemed some people as "not journalists."

I never said certification was needed. It's used by journalists for admission to certain events (e.g. White House press conferences), and that's because not everyone who calls themself a "journalist" really is one. The point wasn't that one needs such credentials to be called a "journalist;" it was that lay and legal understandings of the word are not always the same, and the use of credentials in some cases reflects that.

I agree that court decisions have been back and forth in some points, but no court has ever found that the mere act of disseminating information, in and of itself, qualifies as "journalism."