Skip to comments.Five questions about the AP surveillance
Posted on 05/17/2013 12:04:47 PM PDT by Brad from Tennessee
As is their pattern, defenders of the president offer a straw man in regard to the subpoena of Associated Press phone records: Shouldnt we investigate leaks?
Duh, yes. The entire question, however, revolves around the extent of the probe and its necessity. Only the Richard Nixon fan club would argue, for example, that it is okay to willy-nilly conduct surveillance of the press on a leak that wasnt actually a threat to national security.
The AP issue revolves around several issues.
Did the AP endanger national security?
The Post reported:
For five days, reporters at the Associated Press had been sitting on a big scoop about a foiled al-Qaeda plot at the request of CIA officials. Then, in a hastily scheduled Monday morning meeting, the journalists were asked by agency officials to hold off on publishing the story for just one more day.
The CIA officials, who had initially cited national security concerns in an attempt to delay publication, no longer had those worries, according to individuals familiar with the exchange. Instead, the Obama administration was planning to announce the successful counterterrorism operation that Tuesday. . .
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
[The operation unfolded even as the White House and department of homeland security assured the American public that they knew of no al-Qaida plots against the US around the anniversary of bin Laden's death. The AP learned about the thwarted plot last week but agreed to White House and CIA requests not to publish it immediately because the sensitive intelligence operation was still under way.
Once those concerns were allayed, the AP decided to disclose the plot Monday despite requests from the Obama administration to wait for an official announcement Tuesday.]
Considering how sensitive the President is to real or imagined criticism it's not a reach that Obama told Holder to teach the AP a lesson.
Link to 5-12 original AP story:
So, as a result of all of the questionable looking into phone records, did they find their leak, and were they punished?
I only have one question:
Are ANY reporters now pi$$ed off enough to begin reporting the facts about the most corrupt, and probably illegal, administration in American History?
BENGHAZI DOT ONE, WHY THE VIDEO AND WHY AP
No and no.
I have absolutely no problem with the Justice department obtaining information on the AP thru valid subpoena or warrant, but information on the subpoena or warrant aren’t forthcoming. Until recently, nobody was even mentioning them.
I don’t believe an investigative agency and or law enforcement agency should be in the position to approve and issue warrants.
I want to know what type of subpoena or warrant was issued, who approved it and who requested it.
I mean really, who here would have a problem if instead of the AP it was Al Jazeera who this was done to?
In other words, Zero says, "YES!" if a whistleblower tells (the truth) about Benghazi, it could jeopardize National Security! Never mind that the whistleblower is in fact exposing a lie or a situation the public has every right to know about what treason the government wrought.
The Administration will implicitly argue for its ability to discretionarily hide the truth, because its exposure could challenge their longevity, hence bring down the delicate house of cards they consider as the means to their well-intentioned end.
Of course, giving notice to every potential whistleblower that they will have been recorded and that retribution will be brought to their doorstep is very much part of their goal. Such a person will surely at a minimum not be allowed to keep last year's bonus next time around. (/s)
Hence, it was perfectly fine (to the liberals in power) to use the long-scrutinized-but-quiet AP story to the fore as the Benghazi began "threatening" the secrets of this administration and their attempt to build a bridge for their solidification of "Hopey-Changey" beyond the 2016 election.
“Are ANY reporters now pi$$ed off enough to begin reporting the facts about the most corrupt, and probably illegal, administration in American History?”
That is a good question. My thought is their may be a couple but their superiors will reign them in. I am afraid in a couple of weeks if not sooner they will be back to their old ways of kissing Obama’s posterior.
Eric Holder told Congress he didn't have the “factual foundation” to answer those questions. He recused himself but doesn't remember exactly when because he didn't put it in writing.
Funny how the lap dawgs get all uppity when it’s their ox getting gored,eh?
This isn’t our fight, leave it to the AP. We need to concentrate on gutting the IRS, commiecare, and immigration.
Keep your eyes on the prize!
Yup. But it is one charge in the growing list of articles of impeachment. Keep pouring it on, on all fronts. Feed the media frenzy. Keep the congress riled up. If we can’t impeach him, force him to resign. In the very least stop his communist agenda. Reign ion the IRS and the rest of the federal Gestapo!! Get Obama’s CommieCare repealed or at least defunded and defanged!!
It can not be mentioned enough.......if there was ever a time to communicate with your Congressional Rep, this is it! Call, write, email let them know your outrage. Nothing is more important and even more so if it is a Dem.
Yup. Let the congress know in no uncertain terms that we want this unAmerican communist/fascist crap ripped out by the roots and burned, never to rise again!!
I agree, if there enough constitutionalists left in congress to follow all the slime trails, but if commiecare goes into effect, the republic is lost. If the IRS isn’t neutered, the republic is lost, and if amnesty is passed, then what we’re seeing today will be seen from now on, but in an increasingly sinister form.
All of this was released now for a reason. IMO, it was a trade-off to create enough of a smoke screen to pass amnesty, which would guarantee the future of a permanent Cloward Piven USSA.
I’ve been wondering why no one is talking about the incredibly intrusive questionnaires put out by the Obama Administration during its census taking process. Not everyone got the intrusive documents, and some of those who did, checked with their state DAs and were assured that they were legitimate and must be answered or the citizen would be subject to federal penalty.
Among other things, they wanted to know your income, where it came from, how much money do you have now? Those who received them and felt compelled to answer stated that they felt very violated and uneasy about what information they gave up in that situation.
This seems to be as big a deal as the other things which have been in the news lately about the IRS.
What about that?
I recall this incident, and while I can’t believe I’m saying this, the Just-Us dept is right on this one...
This was an ongoing operation where there was a Saudi operative within Al-Queda Arabian Peninsula, it it was completely blown by a leak within the Obama regime to “blow their horn” about how good they were at blocking terrorist plots.
The leaker needs to be charged with treason, and if it means that the AP call records were seized (only with a warrant), then so be it.
I got one of those and it somehow blew into my burn barrel. Tsk.
People were questioning them but most had no clue how badly this administration would flaunt every law and shred the entire Constitution. Some of us knew and talked about it heren, but the country at large has been ‘trained’ to obey.
“.......All of this was released now for a reason. IMO, it was a trade-off to create enough of a smoke screen to pass amnesty, which would guarantee the future of a permanent Cloward Piven USSA.”
Concerned we all know that Cloward Piven is a means to an end, and NOT a result. I understand your train of thought however, and your point is well taken.
As for the prior theory of trade-off I think that’s a distinct possibility NOT to be discounted, however I lean more towards the perspective of the sheer idiocy of the Leftist, and their historic tendency to reach far beyond their mortality. I believe all of this current activity is the filing in of the chickens to the roost, and we must keep spreading the scratch to keep them coming.
There was no leak. It was obama himself who wanted to claim credit for the foiled bombing attempt to show haw good he is at keeping the country safe. Not to mention that it irked him no end that Israel’s Mossad was getting credit for it. It’s the same reason he outed stuxnet as a ‘joint’ American/Israeli op.
Um. Coincidences in politics? Why now? Why the Friday dumps? Why all at once?
The left had pre-prepared talking points for all of this, and IMO, it was designed to overwhelm the congressional minority that could handle the volume, and create a screen play for amnesty. Keeps the lapdawg media busy with covering the nasty GOPs attacks on St Zero, as well as their gored ox AP phone taps. Well played actually.
I think they miscalculated the backlash from the public, and the press however. Hope it’s enough.
A little here, a little there all week long. We’ve been commenting here at FR about what a bad week it’s been for Obama, and today’s revelations about match the rest of the week. Seems like more today, but I think it’s because of the Congressional hearing that was today. Gives the illusion of more activity than it was.
I hope your observation about the backlash Press/public is correct also. I think it is. We shall see.
I agree. But I think the leaker worked in the White House. This foiled Yemeni bomb plot was the latest in a series of leaks aimed at inflating Obama. It and the Sustex computer virus story were particularly egregious because intel projects of foreign allies were exposed. Tom Donilon was the chief suspect. With news media accusing the White House and members of Congress talking about a special prosecutor Obama told Holder to investigate. Or go through the motions, since they knew all along who leaked.
Yes, indeed, we shall see.
T’was a tip of the hat, and a nod.
Our Lord has not forsaken us. What lessons are we to learn?
What lessons indeed!
Did DOJ grab 60 Minutes/CBS' Steve Kroft's emails?
BACKSTORY After Hillary huffily told Congress "What difference does it make," she and O were shortly thereafter sitting with 60/Min's Steve Kroft. O looked lovingly at Hillary (stupidly thinking she had saved his *** on Benghazi). O told Kroft she was "the best" secy of state we ever had.
Did O maneuver himself and Hillary on 60 Min? Does Kroft have emails from O? Did O's admin produce the segment? Did CBS and Kroft acquiesce in the setup---- to allow O to manipulate public opinion on Benghazi? .....Obama knew the horrific inside details at the time of the 60/Min interview---as the facts clearly show now----so then the entire Kroft interview was a lie. What does Kroft say now, knowing he was lied to?
The breathtaking aspect of the O scandals is that they uncover rot in all the old familiar places we already suspected rot existed.
BOTTOM LINE We need to know whether Holder/DOJ grabbed Kroft's emails---and all other communications from O to CBS, etc.