MEDIA ETHICS (ASSUMING THEY EXIST): Grand Theft Journalism, as dissected by Tom Kuntz at RealClear Investigations:

If, as is widely alleged, agents of the Russian government performed the hacking of Democrats’ emails to sway the presidential election, the press needs to ask if it can have it both ways. Is it appropriate to publish knowing you may be a tool of a hostile foreign government and only later decry its perfidious intent?

Few questions are harder to answer. A basic journalistic instinct is to verify the information and then publish, even if you can’t establish the source. But is that good enough in an age when authoritarian states like Russia and North Korea are or might be the sources? If Snowden was working for Russia, as some believe, should that change the decision to publish stories based on his leaks of American intelligence secrets?

(Let’s pause here to contemplate the irony of progressives who celebrate Snowden yet bay for Russia’s blood over election-year hacking activities – and those on the right suddenly warming to the previously loathed WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange for denying Russian involvement.)

Actually, the ethics are quite clear: Our side gets leaks from patriots. Their side consorts with thieves and thugs.