Another Obama ‘Scandal’? Nope… GOP Rep Claims Responsibility For AP Surveillance

[Galraedia]

Source: Addicting Info

Just when you thought another event was about to be added to the growing list of Obama ‘scandals’ – what with the Benghazi ‘cover-up’ (debunked by a single e-mail), the IRS surveillance of Tea Party-supporting groups (which flame-throwers like Allen West attempted to conflate into ‘conspiracies’ with no success), and the continuing heat on the military for its policies on sexual abuse – the Department of Justice investigation of Associated Press telephone records, widely expected to be another partisan blowtorch, has just been defended by a Republican congressman who claims it was the Republicans themselves who demanded the investigation last year.

Representative Trey Gowdy (R-SC) spoke to Fox News’ Greta Van Susteren about the issue, one libertarians, journalists, and freedom of information advocates all believe demands review and reform, and instead of using it to bludgeon the administration for overstepping (which most of his party, the media, and even the President’s own party are doing), he instead claimed it was the natural evolution of a GOP demand for a probe. From Think Progress:

“Greta, you were an attorney. There are lots of privileges — husband-wife, priest-penitent, attorney-client, none of them unqualified. So when you have a major national security leak, which is a compelling issue, and you juxtapose that with the right of the media to do its job and provide oversight, there’s a conflict. And there’s no federal statute on point. But the Supreme Court has said if there is a compelling interest, which there certainly is in national security cases, and the information is relevant which it has to be to justify a subpoena, and you have no alternative means of getting the information, then the Department of Justice had no choice. . . .

“Think back a year ago. We had the attorney general and other Department of Justice employees, and we grilled them over national security leaks. And here they are doing what we asked them to do, investigate the leak.”

Read more: http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/05/16/no-choice-gop-congressman-cites-national-security-defends-doj-investigation-of-ap-video/

[villager]

1. so now the administration's Amen Choir here can start to criticize the DOJ overreach?

[bluemarkers]

2. don't know where to go with that

Is it a Homer Simpson moment?

?

[Control-Z]

3. Bam!

Perfect. Of course, some of us have been saying this all along.

[BainsBane]

4. It's not a question of who demanded it

The fact is that DOJ did it. That is far more consequential. Anyone can ask for something, but seizing records without a warrant is serious. It's a clear violation of civil liberties, even if it was legal.

[JDPriestly]

7. Sorry. But the Supreme Court ruled that a pen register, that is a listing of phone numbers

called by someone, can be obtained without a problem.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_v._Maryland

Read all about it. We shall see whether the First Amendment trumps that holding.

[BainsBane]

8. Did they just seize phone numbers in the AP case

Or voice mail or recordings of the content of the calls?

[randome]

9. It was numbers and timestamps. Jesus, that information is all over the web!

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[BainsBane]

12. I do have a job

and the articles I read were not specific.

[randome]

13. Sorry. Did not mean to come across as rude.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[BainsBane]

15. I'm reading up on it now

but you make a good point. I should figure out what I'm talking about before forming an opinion.

[ms liberty]

23. A gracious and fair-minded reply. And exactly how liberal should react...

When it is appropriate...I commend you for your honest and fair response. Here at DU, oftentimes we don't see that, do we (lol!).

[zerosumgame0005]

16. um, I have a job too

but I knew that days ago...

[BainsBane]

17. well, I imagine there are many things I know

that you do not. That's how it goes.

[zerosumgame0005]

19. you can imagine all you want

but that does not make it a fact.

[BainsBane]

26. Really?

You believe you know absolutely everything? It must be amazing to be all knowing. I myself am human and not a deity.

[Samantha]

25. You can wiggle out of this by using this well-known Rumsfeld backstop

"... as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we now know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we do not know we don't know."

Sam

[BainsBane]

27. derp

[zerosumgame0005]

44. yes, that does seem appropriate for you

[zerosumgame0005]

43. wriggle out of what exactly?

I do have a job and I am fairly aware of the world around me, unlike the person I replied to. So I am a bit confused as to your point?

[timdog44]

32. Um, I don't have a job

and I did not know that. How does that fit into your not so civil posting.

I watched the above discourse and saw it resolved in a very civil manner and then up popped the devil, I mean, zerosumgame0005

[zerosumgame0005]

45. huh, so romeysbain

gets a pass for his nonsense?

[timdog44]

46. I guess I will

leave that up to you. I know what I think. Actually I think you do too.

[obama2terms]

42. Some people have more time consuming jobs than others

[JDPriestly]

21. It is my understanding that it is just the phone numbers and dates of the calls.

That's all they would need in the initial stages of an investigation of a leak.

[randome]

10. They had a subpoena. Did you not know that?

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[cali]

37. It's an administrative subpoena issued by the department, never reviewed by

independent judiciary. Lots of things are legal without being right.

but I suppose if you lived in Germany in the 30s you'd be parroting that the Nuremberg Laws were legal, damnit!

[Galraedia]

14. Republicans blocked a bill that would have made it illegal

The defeated bill would have required approval from a federal court before reporters’ phone records were subpoenaed. Darrell Issa, who condemned the AP subpoena Monday, was one of only 21 House Members to vote against the bill.

Late Monday afternoon, the AP broke the news that months worth of its telephone records had been divulged in response to a broad government subpoena. The Department of Justice issued the subpoena to the AP’s telephone company, without notifying AP itself, as part of the criminal investigation of a national security leak. Investigators obtained the call logs of numerous AP reporters and editors for a period spanning April and May of 2012 as a result of the subpoena. Last Friday, the DOJ delivered a letter to the AP revealing the subpoena and the records that had been obtained as a result.

The Department of Justice told NBC News that it had acted “consistent with DOJ regulations” in obtaining the call logs. The applicable regulations do permit the DOJ to subpoena the phone records of a news organization without prior notice only if the DOJ determines that such prior notice would pose “a substantial threat to the integrity of the investigation” and the Attorney General approves.

Read more: http://www.buzzfeed.com/nycsouthpaw/gop-congressmen-killed-a-media-shield-law-that-wou-4xje

[freshwest]

28. +1. Fell in their own trap.

[John2]

30. The way I understand it,

the DOJ did get a warrant. DOJ has done nothing illegal as others has stated. It is just pushing the rightwing propaganda. The facts are certain groups are still trying to attach corruption to this Administration instead of focusing on the country's more important issues. The American people have grown too smart for these political games. All this stuff will backfire on these groups in the end.

[cynzke]

33. Thinking Back!

Weren't there accusations out there that this might have been secretly leaked by the White House to the AP to look good?

[BainsBane]

34. That got an administrative supoena

not a warrant. They never went to a judge. It does appear that what they did was legal, but I still consider it a violation of civil liberties. There is nothing right wing about it. I'm not going to decide infractions of civil liberties are okay as long as the government carrying it out is headed by Democrats rather than Republicans.

[cali]

38. they didn't get a warrant. they issued their own administrative subpoena

No judge issues or reviews such subpoenas and it is grotesque. yes, it's "legal". So were the Nuremberg laws so lets stop with the "if it's legal, it's all good" idiocy.

[Tx4obama]

5. K&R :)

[sheshe2]

6. K&R!

[Cha]

11. WTH, was he thinking? Connecting some dots with reality

based information!?!

Oddly refreshing, isn’t it, that lack of pit-bull Obama-bashing?

thanks Galraedia

[NoMoreWarNow]

18. totally predictable-- the most serious "scandal"

is the one that will get ignored.

http://www.salon.com/2013/05/15/absolutely_outrageous_big_brother_is_listening/

[Gman]

20. LOL! Be careful what you ask for because

You just might get it.

I don't like the whole idea but I've no love for AP either. So it's hard to get real upset about this.

[CakeGrrl]

22. K/R

[Hekate]

24. Imagine that

[Tarheel_Dem]

29. You know, this just gets better & better.

[tanyev]

31. Guess it's going to be awhile before Rep. Gowdy gets another invite to Fox News.

[limpyhobbler]

35. Too late. Obama already took credit for it via "I make no apologies" nt

[tofuandbeer]

36. The GOP isn't even trying to hide their tactics:

it's a straight out attack on the current administration. Even their lies and deceit (such as rewording the released emails to their liking), have no effect or shame on the GOP.

It's either because the country is slowly improving economically (and the GOP wants to bury it in the press), or because Obama/Dems had the gall to try and pass gun legislation.

Something's going on here.

[freshwest]

40. No one's talking about restraining gun violence or the sequester now, and both are killing people.

They'll start recycling poutrages soon.

[freshwest]

39. K&R

[Up2Late]

41. Yup.

[timdog44]

47. After reading this entire thread

it seems to me that confusion reigns. There have been some disagreements, one at least that was settled amicably. The big things that are going on where there is disagreement are 1) Benghazi 2) IRS oversight of tax exempt groups and 3) AP phone call interceptions. It is hard for me to believe that what is happening here is not easily seen by this group. These are all bullshit "crises" perpetrated by the right wing to discredit the administration and its policies. All have been disproved. All this along with the 37th vote to abolish the Affordable Care Act are to prevent anything meaningful to happen in congress. The IRS thing is especially odious, because "they" are using it as a means to prevent final enactment of the Affordable Care Act. Because by discrediting the IRS they will discredit the ability of that department from administering the ACA. And this is a real crisis. And it was fomented by a republican official in the IRS who failed to do her job and then squealed to the authorities as if she had nothing to do with it. She should have done her job and there would never had been even a hint of impropriety. And actually the numbers show that no political persuasion was targeted any more than any other. One crisis that is not getting the attention that it truly deserves is the sexual abuse taking place in our military which is being covered up by upper echelon officers. And this one thing is something the right wing is not all up in arms about.
And all this overshadows the news that the deficit is plunging and that austerity is a failed program. Jobs and economy are what we should be focusing on. A rambling discourse on what I think about all this.