Associated Press phone records seized

[Ted King]

cbelt3 wrote:
The concept of an 'independent' Department of Justice is not factually true. The DOJ reports to the Attorney General, who is a cabinet officer under the President. There have been rules established that create a sort of 'firewall' between the AG and the DOJ and the President, but little interference blips happen all the time (in all Presidencies).

Buck Passing is endemic in a poorly run Executive branch. This administration is looking more and more like a frat house operation like GWB's.

Though it's certainly possible, I doubt that Obama had personally okayed what happened with the IRS or pushed for policies that would have made inevitable the decisions within IRS to target conservative groups. By my standards, I don't think he is culpable for what happened based on what I know to this point. In the case of this DOJ going after AP's "phone" records, I would be surprised if Obama didn't have a close hand in shaping the policy that made the choice to go after reporters' communications almost inevitable. By my standards, I do think that he is culpable for the actions of the DOJ in the case of the AP communications record search (though that may change if as I learn more about what happened).

A free press is absolutely essential for the health of our democracy. These actions by the DOJ go too far toward creating an environment where the free press cannot function as it ought. Fortunately for the free press, they have a lot of power and they can and will fight back vigorously. That's good, but I wish the press had been as fired up about the pushing up against the boundaries of everyone's individual liberty by this administration practically from the get go (not only embracing much of the degeneration of individual liberty that happened under Bush, but not infrequently reducing individual liberties even more). But the press, like too many of us, were swept along by the hysteria of terrorism after 9/11 and essentially actively promoted reductions in individual liberty. Well, press guys*, this recent DOJ action against you is just another aspect of the beast of terrorism hysteria you helped unleash that is now coming back to bite your butts.


*that is obviously an overgeneralization; there have been a significant number of "press guys" - and gals - who were and are trying to call attention to the degradation of individual liberty that has been happening especially since 9/11, but I think their voices were largely drowned out by fellow "journalists" who were no more thoughtful about the value of individual liberty than were a lot of people in the country who were gripped by the terrorism hysteria.

[Speedy]

The troublesome part is that the DOJ is using this method to go after Congressional leakers.

[Ted King]

Speedy wrote:
The troublesome part is that the DOJ is using this method to go after Congressional leakers.

Part of the troublesomeness is that the administration regularly leaks similar kinds of things. The administration is okay with leaks they sign off on, but heaven forbid that a congressperson would delegate themselves the same power. If they think leaks are bad then they shouldn't be the biggest leakers in Washington. When it comes to this aspect of his presidency, Obama seems to be lost in some maze of rationalizations for doing things he really ought to not be doing.

[Speedy]

Ted King wrote:
[quote=Speedy]
The troublesome part is that the DOJ is using this method to go after Congressional leakers.

Part of the troublesomeness is that the administration regularly leaks similar kinds of things. The administration is okay with leaks they sign off on, but heaven forbid that a congressperson would delegate themselves the same power. If they think leaks are bad then they shouldn't be the biggest leakers in Washington. When it comes to this aspect of his presidency, Obama seems to be lost in some maze of rationalizations for doing things he really ought to not be doing.
Sadly transparency is proving difficult.

[$tevie]

Ted King wrote:
[quote=Speedy]
The troublesome part is that the DOJ is using this method to go after Congressional leakers.

Part of the troublesomeness is that the administration regularly leaks similar kinds of things. The administration is okay with leaks they sign off on, but heaven forbid that a congressperson would delegate themselves the same power. If they think leaks are bad then they shouldn't be the biggest leakers in Washington. When it comes to this aspect of his presidency, Obama seems to be lost in some maze of rationalizations for doing things he really ought to not be doing.
I do not understand why he seems so willing or even eager to perpetuate the loss of individual liberties. I totally agree that the press contributed to creating a myth that Americans desired safety more than they desired freedom, but I feel that the hysteria has largely worn off while Obama has gotten stuck in somewhere in the 2000s. Sometimes I think he's trying to combat the whole "Democrats are soft on terrorists" thing but sometimes I think he's an enthusiastic believer in trampling on freedom. It is upsetting to say the least.

[Gutenberg]

Since the stories were about CIA the Justice Department probably went to a FISA court. Very dicey in my opinion.

I know quite a few national reporters who use their personal cell phones to make some calls, and I know one who has had so many Boost phones in the last couple of years it's not funny. He's a little on the tinfoil beanie side, though maybe he has reason for the paranoia.

There is no shield law, and given the atmosphere in which we are all operating these days, there probably never will be. If you are going to protect a source you have to be willing to go to jail. That's part of the business for some people, and reporters who don't want to take the risk should stay in features.

It used to be that the FBI informed you if you were caught on a wiretap, but no more. That was an effect of the Patriot Act.

[Lemon Drop]

I'm under the impression that there were no wiretaps in this case, just logs of calls made and received by a group of people from a variety of phones. Is that correct or were there wiretaps too?

if DOJ used FISA for this, I agree that's very dicey.

Ihttp://www.aclu.org/support-oversight-secret-fisa-court

[Gutenberg]

No. There were no wiretaps. But they had to have had some kind of authorization to seize the records and I am guessing--I do not know--that they used FISA. I don't know where else you can get a secret subpoena.

[Lemon Drop]

based on what Holder said today, sounds like the DOJ's deputy AG approved the subpoena and no court was involved, because Holder had recused himself from the investigation since he was also targeted by the FBI as a potential source of the leak.

that's either true or a nifty way for Holder to pass the blame to someone else.

[Gutenberg]

I am having trouble believing that Justice presented AP with a subpoena and AP did not tell them to go to hell. There has to be something more to it.