OT: US govt seizing phone records from Associated Press

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
This thread has been locked
Messages 41 - 60 of total 76 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
bluering

Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
May 14, 2013 - 08:26pm PT
Conservatives dont give a damn about press freedom,

its just like the deficit or unemployment,
NEVER heard about those either, till obama came along


Bush Used the IRS, FBI, CIA and Secret Service to Go After Opponents -- Where Was the Fox and GOP Outrage?
http://www.alternet.org/bush-used-irs-fbi-cia-and-secret-service-go-after-opponents-where-was-fox-and-gop-outrage?page=0%2C1

So it's okay if Dems do it now? It's just a matter of party-affiliation?

Do you have equal dissent against these actions? Or is Obama exempt?
bluering

Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
May 14, 2013 - 08:42pm PT
Nope and nope. Now answer the question about President Bush. Directly. If you've the courage../.

DMT


What question is that?

EDIT:
good people call the doctor and ambulance when theres a heart attack
all your calling for is burning the house down


What did you call for with Bush/Cheney?
10b4me

Ice climber
Soon 2B Arizona
May 14, 2013 - 09:14pm PT
"When's the last time you went climbing?

I'm going climbing tomorrow :-)
bluering

Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
May 14, 2013 - 09:28pm PT
"When's the last time you went climbing?"

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah!

DMT


I don't know how that's relevant, but 2 weeks ago. Fishing last weekend with the boy.

Funny how you gauge people. Very judgemental.
nutjob

Sport climber
Almost to Hollywood, Baby!
Topic Author's Reply - May 14, 2013 - 09:31pm PT
I think making this a partisan issue is a distraction. Who cares Obama Bush etc... the point here is something that is bigger than the ideology of democrats or republicans.

This is at the fundamental heart of the principles of democracy, the ideas behind creating an institution with safeguards to limit the power that the "haves" can accumulate at the expense of the "have-nots."

It's easy to act all glib and cool/jaded about expecting these things, saying how we're all doomed or we're so naive or we don't know what's coming still (the political version of "yer gonna die"). That's about as useful to our society as being completely ignorant. It's a willful surrender and its cowardly if you think what's happening is wrong. My point in making this first post was to spread awareness, to create a shift in perception and increase the general feeling of the populace in the direction of "we're not gonna take it."

I'm a coward too, in that I'm not doing everything I can possibly do fight this threat to our society. I pick and choose my battles, and sometimes I don't give it everything I've got. In the end, we deserve the government we help to make.
nutjob

Sport climber
Almost to Hollywood, Baby!
Topic Author's Reply - May 14, 2013 - 09:43pm PT
This is what I like to hear:
Lawmakers from both parties on Tuesday criticized the Justice Department's decision to obtain the AP records. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid called the action "inexcusable."

Update:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/05/14/us-usa-justice-ap-idUSBRE94C0ZW20130514
nutjob

Sport climber
Almost to Hollywood, Baby!
Topic Author's Reply - May 14, 2013 - 09:56pm PT
"seized" might imply heavy boots marching in and taking by physical force.

A subpoena from a government agency carries that implied threat if you do not comply. It's like your boss "asking" you to do something, multiplied by a million. Not much of a distinction from my perspective.

It's just a way of smiling while you step on someone's neck, and claiming that you are being civil.
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
May 14, 2013 - 10:00pm PT
Dems had both the Senate and the House for Bush's last 2 years, and could EASILY have launched hearings on the Iraq casus belli - except, of course,
most of them voted for it.

fixed it for ya.
nutjob

Sport climber
Almost to Hollywood, Baby!
Topic Author's Reply - May 14, 2013 - 10:00pm PT
In the end, when there is more transparency around the circumstances of this incident, it may all turn out to be reasonable and justified. But it deserves public outrage and attention it is getting from the public and our elected representatives, to make sure that the checks and balances against government power are in place.
froodish

Social climber
Portland, Oregon
May 14, 2013 - 10:17pm PT
John Yoo, torture enabler John Yoo now cares about constitutional rights? That's a laugh.
nutjob

Sport climber
Almost to Hollywood, Baby!
Topic Author's Reply - May 14, 2013 - 10:38pm PT
jghedge - good point about access to lawyers to ensure that laws are followed to limit the extent of what is seized. But I suspect the devil is in the details, and not much a lawyer can do when "national security" and "classified evidence" is invoked as a reason to obtain something that would otherwise not be permitted.

Dingus - you gonna make that judge go mental!
MisterE

Social climber
May 14, 2013 - 10:40pm PT
Great: The Government of Misinformation stealing "information" from the Purveyors of Misinformation.

Real tragedy there.
WBraun

climber
May 14, 2013 - 10:47pm PT
The Government of Misinformation stealing "information" from the Purveyors of Misinformation.

LOL This is definitely the best line in the whole affair .......
nutjob

Sport climber
Almost to Hollywood, Baby!
Topic Author's Reply - May 14, 2013 - 10:49pm PT
I might have to get off my high horse long enough to admit that was a pretty funny line.
bluering

Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
May 14, 2013 - 10:58pm PT
You spelled judgmental wrong.

DMT


You are an unproud master of posing lame arguements and then backing away from them when you're called out. I see a pattern here.

Every time you think you're being bright or clever and I call you out, you desist into distraction. Every time I confront your assertions or questions, you f*#king change the subject.

Common tactic for people with no arguement that is based in fact or reality.

Kinda like Jay Carney. Nice club you're in!
ontheedgeandscaredtodeath

Social climber
SLO, Ca
May 15, 2013 - 12:05am PT
One possibility is that the government actually believed there has been a significant security breach and needs to find the leak. Any protection against compelling a journalist to reveal a source would not extend to the AP's telephone company. The shield, if any, has to stop somewhere and the DOJ is responsible for investigating what would be a serious and dangerous crime.



WBraun

climber
May 15, 2013 - 12:15am PT
significant security breach


The modern govt's. are always fearful of security breaches that will expose their lies and corruptions to the sheep ........
mechrist

Gym climber
South of Heaven
May 15, 2013 - 02:00am PT
Every time you think you're being bright or clever and I call you out, you desist into distraction.

That is loaded with humor, although the author doesn't realize it, which makes it even more funny.
bookworm

Social climber
Falls Church, VA
May 15, 2013 - 08:53am PT
legally, it looks as though doj is protected by the patriot act--haven't examined the fine print, but i don't think this is criminal

the consequences, however, are still huge...barry has lost the trust of the media; without his lapdogs, he's going to have a rough second term

this won't help his relationship with the press:

"During an interview with NPR’s Carrie Johnson on Tuesday, Holder was asked how often his department has obtained such records of journalists’ work.

“I’m not sure how many of those cases … I have actually signed off on,” Holder said. “I take them very seriously. I know that I have refused to sign a few [and] pushed a few back for modifications.”


the ag is "not sure" how many times he's approved the seizure of journalists' phone records?

that can only mean there are SEVERAL more cases still waiting to be discovered...or that he's just stupid
couchmaster

climber
pdx
May 15, 2013 - 11:13am PT
John P asked:
"I have been searching for the report of phones being tapped at the Associated Press .... can't find any news article about that....someone help me ?

Here ya are Schmidt. Of interest is the leading democrat and republicans (Harry Reid and Orrin Hatch) are both outraged.
"Reid, the Senate's top Democrat, told reporters at the Capitol, "I don't know who did it, why it was done, but it's inexcusable, and there is no way to justify this."
That should tell you something of the gravity of the issue so that you can ignore idiots like mechrist running around calling people morons for being concerned. We all should be deeply concerned about this. It's an issue of substance that is deeper than the usual Repub/dem discourse divide

http://news.yahoo.com/associated-press-says-u-government-seized-journalists-phone-001433899.html


"By David Ingram and Tabassum Zakaria

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said on Tuesday he did not make the controversial decision to secretly seize telephone records of the Associated Press but defended his department's actions in the investigation of what he called a "very, very serious leak."

The decision to seek phone records of one of the world's largest news-gathering organizations was made by Deputy Attorney General Jim Cole, Holder said.

Holder, speaking at a press conference, said he recused himself from the matter to avoid a potential conflict of interest because he was interviewed by the FBI as part of the same leak investigation that targeted the AP records.

That seizure, denounced by critics as a gross intrusion into freedom of the press, has created an uproar in Washington and led to questions over how the Obama administration is balancing the need for national security with privacy rights.

Combined with a separate furor over the Internal Revenue Service's targeting of conservative political groups for extra scrutiny, it also is stoking fears of excessive government intrusion under President Barack Obama.

The White House has said it had no advance knowledge of the IRS or Justice Department actions.

Lawmakers from both parties on Tuesday criticized the Justice Department's decision to obtain the AP records. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid called the action "inexcusable."

But in a letter to AP president Gary Pruitt, Cole on Tuesday defended the department's unusual action against a member of the media, saying it was a necessary step in the year-old criminal probe of leaks of classified information.

A law enforcement official said the probe is related to information in a May 7, 2012, AP story about an operation, conducted by the CIA and allied intelligence agencies, that stopped a Yemen-based al Qaeda plot to detonate a bomb on an airplane headed for the United States.

Cole declined Pruitt's request to return the records.

"We strive in every case to strike the proper balance between the public's interest in the free flow of information and the public's interest in the protection of national security and effective enforcement of our laws," he wrote. "We believe we have done so in this matter."

Pruitt, in a statement responding to Cole's letter, said "it does not adequately address our concerns," which include that the subpoena's scope was "overbroad under the law" and that the AP was not notified in advance.

The AP story at issue, he said, contradicted White House assertions that there was no credible threat to the American people in May 2012 around the first anniversary of the killing of al Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden.

Cole disclosed that investigators conducted more than 550 interviews and reviewed tens of thousands of documents in the probe before seizing the toll records of AP phone calls.

Holder said he did not have specific knowledge about the formulation of the subpoena for the AP records, but does not believe the Justice Department did anything wrong.

PUT AMERICANS 'AT RISK'

"This was ... a very, very serious leak," he said. "I have been a prosecutor since 1976 and I have to say that this is among, if not the most serious, it is within the top two or three most serious leaks that I have ever seen," Holder said, speaking at an unrelated press conference on Medicare fraud.

"It put the American people at risk, and that is not hyperbole," he said. "And trying to determine who was responsible for that, I think, required very aggressive action."

In June 2012, Holder ordered two U.S. attorneys to pursue separate leak investigations, the subject of which he did not identify.

The probes followed calls by Congress to crack down on national security leaks after the Associated Press report on the Yemen plot and a New York Times report on details of the Stuxnet computer virus that sabotaged Iran's nuclear centrifuges.

The AP said it was informed last Friday that the Justice Department had gathered records for more than 20 phone lines assigned to the news agency and its reporters, covering April and May of last year.

Pruitt, in a letter to Holder on Monday, called the seizure a "massive and unprecedented intrusion" into news-gathering operations.

Five reporters and an editor involved in the AP story about the Yemen plot were among those whose phone records were obtained by the government, the AP said.

Reuters reported that on May 7, 2012, Obama's top White House counterterrorism adviser John Brennan, who is now CIA director, held a small, private teleconference to brief former counterterrorism advisers who are TV commentators and told them the plot was never a threat to U.S. public safety because Washington had "inside control" over it.

One of the former officials on the call later said on network TV that the U.S. government had indicated implicitly that "they had somebody on the inside who wasn't going to let it happen."

U.S. and European authorities later acknowledged the alleged plot had been discovered because an informant had been planted inside the conspiracy by MI5, Britain's principal counterterrorism agency.

The original AP story made no mention of an undercover informant or "control" over the operation by the United States or its allies.

Brennan acknowledged during his Senate confirmation hearing that he had been interviewed by prosecutors in connection with two leak inquiries, including the Yemen probe. He told Congress that he had not leaked any classified information.

Several prominent Republicans last year called for a crackdown on leaks, with some suggesting the White House was orchestrating them to burnish Obama's security credentials and chances for re-election in November.

FREEDOM OF THE PRESS

Senator Orrin Hatch, a Republican on the Judiciary Committee, when asked whether Republicans had the type of action taken against the AP in mind, said: "No, I don't think anybody wants to take away the freedom of the press. ... You can't be free if you've got government monitoring your calls, and your interviews. How is that a free press?"

Reid, the Senate's top Democrat, told reporters at the Capitol, "I don't know who did it, why it was done, but it's inexcusable, and there is no way to justify this."

The Obama administration has been aggressive in combating national security leaks, conducting at least a half-dozen prosecutions - more than under all other previous presidents combined, according to tallies by multiple news organizations.

Mark Corallo, a Justice Department spokesman between 2002 and 2005, said that during his tenure, the rule was that any request from any part of the Justice Department for the issuing of subpoenas against a news organization had to be submitted to his office for approval.

Corallo said that of "dozens" of requests from prosecutors for subpoenas directed against news organizations, he approved one during his tenure.

White House spokesman Jay Carney said that President Barack Obama "believes that the press as a rule needs to have an unfettered ability to pursue investigative journalism."

"He is also committed, as president and as a citizen, to the proposition that we cannot allow classified information, that can do harm to our national security interests or do harm to individuals, to be leaked," Carney said.

"Certainly there have been lots of presidents upset about leaks and there have been a number of chief executives who have gone to rather extraordinary lengths," said Darrell West, director of Governance Studies at the Brookings Institution think tank.

"But I think people believed that Obama was more committed to civil liberties so it's actually more shocking that he did it rather that someone like (George W.) Bush and (Richard) Nixon because people had higher expectations of him," he said.

(Additional reporting by Susan Cornwell, Jennifer Saba, Mark Hosenball and Mark Felsenthal; Writing by Karey Van Hall; Editing by Warren Strobel, Cynthia Osterman and Jim Loney)"

regards to all.
Messages 41 - 60 of total 76 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
 
Our Guidebooks
spacerCheck 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks

guidebook icon
Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Recent Route Beta