Jake Tapper

The statement involves a public official discussing a decision on a legal case, which is a matter of public interest and contributes to civic dialogue. It addresses the timing of a decision on re-sentencing in a high-profile case, indicating responsiveness to public interest.

1. Principle 1:

   I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.

   The statement does not use harmful language and is neutral in tone, adhering to the principle of doing no harm. [+1]
2. Principle 2:

   I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.

   There is no indication of disrespecting privacy or engaging in harassment or hate speech. [+1]
3. Principle 3:

   I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.

   The statement does not explicitly promote understanding, empathy, or compassion, but it does show responsiveness to public interest.
4. Principle 4:

   I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.

   The statement does not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments, maintaining a professional tone. [+1]
5. Principle 6:

   I will use my influence for the betterment of society.

   By addressing a public concern, the statement uses influence for societal betterment, showing accountability to public interest. [+1]
6. Principle 7:

   I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.

   The statement upholds free speech and uses the platform responsibly by informing the public about a significant legal decision. [+1]