Do you remember back to the Clarence Thomas / Anita Hill Supreme Justice debacle? He put forth a few pages of his journal to prove that the accusation of sexual harassment was false. The investigation proceeded to the judgement in favor of the 'prosecution', that since he opened a few pages then the rest of his journal was fair game and he had to turn it over.
My husband took the stand that if you aren't willing to have it read then you have no business writing it down. Some of his opinion I attribute to his military background where there are regulations requiring some information be kept from the general public for security purposes.
I didn't follow Clarence Thomas very closely, so that's interesting. What did the rest of the journal show, I wonder. I guess I'll go google it. That's terrifying to know that I could make a "flirtatious remark" to somebody and the next thing I know have my journal read in court! If I ever took a public sector job we'd be headed to the burn pile for sure.
I can definitely see how a military background would definitely make one hesitate before picking up a pen.
But doesn't our military tend to have more classified documents than anybody?
Dunno. There's always the CIA. I guess that wikileaks is busy making everyone less secretive. Is it a good thing? I don't know that either.
Maybe I'm remembering the Clarence Thomas case wrong. I was sure that there was a diary involved but I can't find it anywhere on Google. Frustrating. Maybe I'm having premature Alzheimers. I wonder if I should give Doug a heads-up so it won't be so much of a shock though I suspect he won't be too surprised somehow.
You mean you can't recall all the details from an over-hyped media sensation court case from 1991?
Get thee to a head shrinker, post-haste!
I believe I can DIY it!
Source
Ha hahahaha! Not what I was thinking of, but hilarious!!!