AP: Govt obtains wide AP phone records in probe

[visionary]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/26/us/leaks-inquiries-show-how-wide-a-net-is-cast.html?_r=0

Sweeping Leak Inquiries Reveal How Wide a Net U.S. Has Cast

 

Even before the F.B.I. conducted 550 interviews of officials and seized the phone records of Associated Press reporters in a leak investigation connected to a 2012 article about a Yemen bomb plot, agents had sought the same reporters’ sources for two other articles about terrorism.

 

In a separate case last year, F.B.I. agents asked the White House, the Defense Department and intelligence agencies for phone and e-mail logs showing exchanges with a New York Times reporter writing about computer attacks on Iran. Agents grilled officials about their contacts with him, two people familiar with the investigation said.

Some officials are now declining to take calls from certain reporters, concerned that any contact may lead to investigation. Some complain of being taken from their offices to endure uncomfortable questioning. And the government officials typically must pay for lawyers themselves, unlike reporters for large news organizations whose companies provide legal representation.

 

“For every reporter that is dealing with this, there are hundreds of national security officials who feel under siege — without benefit of a corporate legal department or a media megaphone for support,” said a former Obama administration official. “There are lots of people in the government spending lots of money on legal fees.”

[Larry]

Deleted post. 

[RedskinsFan44]

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/05/25/sources-fox-news-knew-of-phone-records-subpoena-three-years-ago/

 

The parent company of Fox News was aware years ago
that the Justice Department was targeting one of its reporters in a
leak investigation, sources said Saturday.
One law enforcement source said the Justice Department notified a
media organization three years ago of a subpoena for detailed telephone
records, and a second told CNN that organization was Fox News.

It is standard procedure for Justice Department officials to notify
news organizations when they subpoena an outlet or its reporters.

Doubt Fox will report on this.  My opinion is of the three scandals (Benghazi, AP probe, IRS Tea Party Investigation), the IRS scandal is the one that has legs.

[visionary]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/31/us/politics/holder-may-rein-in-prosecutors-on-leaks.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&smid=tw-thecaucus&_r=0

Holder Weighs Tighter Rules on Prosecutors in Leak Cases

 

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr., under fire over investigative tactics in leak cases, has opened internal discussions over tightening rules on when prosecutors may seek phone logs and other information that could identify reporters’ sources as he began a series of a meetings on Thursday with leaders of news media organizations.

 

According to an adviser familiar with the deliberations, Mr. Holder has discussed expanding a requirement for high-level review of proposed subpoenas for reporters’ phone records so that it would include e-mails. He is also examining whether to tighten a standard for when officials may seek such records without giving prior notice to the news organization.

 

President Obama has given Mr. Holder until July 12 to make his proposals, and Mr. Holder wants to complete an overhaul of department regulations on leak investigations before his tenure is over, said the adviser, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the deliberations are preliminary. Mr. Holder has given no indication that he intends to step down any time soon, however.

[twa]

gonna tighten up on judge shopping? 

[Larry]

gonna tighten up on judge shopping?

Gonna tighten up on making huge accusations without even attempting to back them up?

[mikered30]

[aREDSKIN]

Gonna tighten up on making huge accusations without even attempting to back them up?

 

 

Here you go. But I suspect you will summarily dismiss it because you won't like the link. 

 

 

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/nathan-roush/2013/05/29/holder-scrambled-find-judge-approve-rosen-subpoena-after-rejected-twic

[Larry]

Here you go. But I suspect you will summarily dismiss it because you won't like the link.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/nathan-roush/2013/05/29/holder-scrambled-find-judge-approve-rosen-subpoena-after-rejected-twic

Well, I'm seeing a lot on that link that just screams that the author is pushing an agenda. BUT ........

I assume that his facts are correct.

I'd certainly like to learn more about it.

[twa]

Gonna tighten up on making huge accusations without even attempting to back them up?

 

 It;s a state secret Komrade, even your asking is possibly worth a wiretap

 

maybe a audit will teach you

[Popeman38]

So, If the AG under Bush had issued a warrant to investigate a CNN reporter under the Espionage Act of 1917, would the people defending the actions of the Obama Admin approve of that as well?

 

Let's think about this for a second. The AG testified before Congress that he knew of no investigation into a member of the press, the whole time knowing that he had personally signed off on the investigation and had taken the warrant to 2 judges who denied it and finally found a 3rd judge to approve it? And people are OK with that?

 

Eric Holder has done enough to be fired, immediately. 

[twa]

Holder probably thought they meant knew in the biblical sense

[Larry]

So, If the AG under Bush had issued a warrant to investigate a CNN reporter under the Espionage Act of 1917, would the people defending the actions of the Obama Admin approve of that as well?

Let's think about this for a second. The AG testified before Congress that he knew of no investigation into a member of the press, the whole time knowing that he had personally signed off on the investigation and had taken the warrant to 2 judges who denied it and finally found a 3rd judge to approve it? And people are OK with that?

Eric Holder has done enough to be fired, immediately.

Or, perhaps, he said they weren't investigating a member if he press, because they aren't. They're investigating WHO GAVE classified information to the press.

Nah. That would require climbing down off of the "war on journalism" high horse.

[twa]

fairly certain the filing alleged a crime by the reporter of soliciting classified info....but facts are inconvienient

[Larry]

fairly certain the filing alleged a crime by the reporter of soliciting classified info....but facts are inconvienient

It did.

Which does not in any way dispute what I said.

But then, you knew that, which was why you started by claiming one thing, then, when I pointed out that it wasn't true, fell back to the fallback response you already had prepared.

[visionary]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/06/nsa-phone-records-verizon-court-order

Revealed: NSA collecting phone records of millions of Americans daily

 

The National Security Agency is currently collecting the telephone records of millions of US customers of Verizon, one of America's largest telecoms providers, under a top secret court order issued in April.

 

The order, a copy of which has been obtained by the Guardian, requires Verizon on an "ongoing, daily basis" to give the NSA information on all telephone calls in its systems, both within the US and between the US and other countries

.

The document shows for the first time that under the Obama administration the communication records of millions of US citizens are being collected indiscriminately and in bulk – regardless of whether they are suspected of any wrongdoing.

The secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (Fisa) granted the order to the FBI on April 25, giving the government unlimited authority to obtain the data for a specified three-month period ending on July 19.

 

Under the terms of the blanket order, the numbers of both parties on a call are handed over, as is location data, call duration, unique identifiers, and the time and duration of all calls. The contents of the conversation itself are not covered.

 

 

http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/06/05/secret-surveillance-the-nsa-is-collecting-u-s-phone-records/

The order cites Section 215 of the Patriot Act as justifying the request, but as Cindy Cohn of the Electronic Frontier Foundation told the Washington Post, “Section 215 is written as if they’re going after individual people based on individual investigations.” Michael A. Mason, Verizon’s chief security officer, is a former FBI attorney who joined the Verizon in 2008, months before Congress retroactively legalized President George W. Bush’s warrantless wiretapping program with then-Senator Barack Obama’s support.

[twa]

fairly certain the filing alleged a crime by the reporter of soliciting classified info....but facts are inconvienient

It did.

Which does not in any way dispute what I said.

But then, you knew that, which was why you started by claiming one thing, then, when I pointed out that it wasn't true, fell back to the fallback response you already had prepared.

What did I claim that was untrue?

[visionary]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/06/05/al-gore-calls-obama-administrations-collection-of-phone-records-obscenely-outrageous/

Al Gore calls Obama administration’s collection of phone records ‘obscenely outrageous’

 

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/report-nsa-verizon-call-records-92315.html?hp=t1_3

Some lawmakers — including Sens. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Mark Udall (D-Colo.), who both serve on the Intelligence Committee — have long contended that the federal government is using orders from the FISA court to engage in surveillance that would shock and anger many Americans.

In a Senate floor speech in December, Wyden hinted at classified information he had received but could not share due to Senate rules that indicated the law “on Americans’ privacy has been real, and it is not hypothetical.”

“When the public finds out that these secret interpretations are so dramatically different than what the public law says, I think there’s going to be extraordinary anger in the country,” he told the Huffington Post the following month.

 

[Larry]

What did I claim that was untrue?

 

You're right.

Popeman was the one claiming that Holder was investigating a member of the press, and lied about it. And I was pointing out to him that the facts suggest a different story. And you jumped in to defend the untrue thing that he was saying. (By moving the goalposts from "they were investigating a reporter" to "the warrant said he committed a crime".) 

 

(Report of phone records data vacuuming)

I'm a bit surprised.

I was under the impression that the government's been doing this, without a warrant, begining in the mid-Bush years

[Tulane Skins Fan]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/06/05/al-gore-calls-obama-administrations-collection-of-phone-records-obscenely-outrageous/

Al Gore calls Obama administration’s collection of phone records ‘obscenely outrageous’

 

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/report-nsa-verizon-call-records-92315.html?hp=t1_3

Some lawmakers — including Sens. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Mark Udall (D-Colo.), who both serve on the Intelligence Committee — have long contended that the federal government is using orders from the FISA court to engage in surveillance that would shock and anger many Americans.

In a Senate floor speech in December, Wyden hinted at classified information he had received but could not share due to Senate rules that indicated the law “on Americans’ privacy has been real, and it is not hypothetical.”

“When the public finds out that these secret interpretations are so dramatically different than what the public law says, I think there’s going to be extraordinary anger in the country,” he told the Huffington Post the following month.

This is a failure of America. Its a failure of all the bush supporters/GOP who lashed out when people questioned the the PATRIOT Act and said those people were "letting the terrorists win."

Is a failure by Obama and the democrats who have not held Obama to his campaign promise to repeal the Act.

Its another example of LEGAL searches that we have allowed and it is repulsive this time at least.

[SkinsHokieFan]

And to think Tulane, without leakers exposing "classified information" , we would never have found about this failure of America

[Tulane Skins Fan]

And to think Tulane, without leakers exposing "classified information" , we would never have found about this failure of America

 

Actually, this should have been expected.  Its permissible by law.  We voted into congress and the white house people who passed, signed and approved this law.  

 

I'm not so much surprised by this, as I am affirmed that the Patriot Act is the worst thing this country has done in many years.  It should be called the "**** YOUR CIVIL RIGHTS" ACT, instead.