Lake Erie Conservative

thoughtful discussion(s) about issue(s)

Posts Tagged ‘Justice Department’

… Congress has a Job to Do [Impeach the AG] …

Posted by paulfromwloh on Thursday,August 1st,2013

.. It is clear that Barack Obama will not hold his administration to account . Especially with the hypocritical attitude towards its statement “as the most transparent administration in history … ” . ha!Ha! Yea , Right !

.. Ideally , Holder should hold himself to account for his own actions . He has a long career and lifetime of corruption and corrupt acts . His involvement in the Marc Rich affair was , one would think , a capstone . Well , you would be wrong . His actions during his tenure as Attorney General of the United States are far below and well beyond the pale .

If POTUS will not hold the  AG to account , then Congress has Its own Job to Do

It is Time to Impeach , Try , Convict , and Remove the Attorney General of  the United States , Eric Holder , from office , and bar

President Barack Obama listens as Vice Preside...

President Barack Obama listens as Vice President Joe Biden (left) presents the report on the Roadmap to Recovery as he meets with his Cabinet in the State Dining Room of the White House, Monday, June 8, 2009. Looking on at right are Attorney General Eric Holder and Housing and Urban Development Secretary Shaun Donovan (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

him from ever holding any public office in our nation ever again .

.. It is clear that Barack Obama will not put Eric Holder to account  for his actions . He is , by far , the most corruption attorney general in our naiton ‘ s history . It seems as if his actions  during the Clinton Administration as Deputy Attorney General , especially in the marc  Rich controversy , were only a warm up act . He  said that he had learned his lesson  . Well , Guess what ?

.. He lied . Plain and Simple . Time and Time again . In a number of controversies at law , and at equity . Since POTUS will not step up , Congress must do so . This news article is only the latest in a ong line of evidence against the A.G. …

Published July 31, 2013

| FoxNews.com

House Republicans, in a lengthy report on the Justice Department’s leak investigations, formally accused Attorney General Eric Holder of misleading Congress with “deceptive” testimony that he knew nothing of the “potential prosecution” of the press.

The 70-page report was released late Wednesday by Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee. To coincide with the release, lawmakers also wrote a letter to President Obama calling for a “change in leadership” at the Justice Department.

“The deceptive and misleading testimony of Attorney General Holder is unfortunately just the most recent example in a long list of scandals that have plagued the department,” House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., said in a statement.

The report delved into the department’s aggressive investigations over various security leaks, but focused in large part on the FBI affidavit seeking a search warrant for Fox News correspondent James Rosen’s emails in connection with one such probe. The DOJ sought access to the documents by arguing Rosen was a likely criminal “co-conspirator” in a leak case, citing the Espionage Act.

Yet on May 15, shortly before the document was made public, Holder told the House Judiciary Committee that he hadn’t heard of any effort to prosecute reporters.

“With regard to potential prosecution of the press for the disclosure of material, that is not something that I have ever been involved, heard of, or would think would be a wise policy,” Holder said. He discussed the issue amid concerns about the DOJ grabbing phone records from Associated Press offices.

The newly released House report concluded that this comment was “deceptive and misleading.”

The report said: “We believe that Mr. Holder’s simple and direct statement had the intended effect — to leave the members of the Committee with the impression that not only had the potential prosecution of a reporter never been contemplated during Mr. Holder’s tenure, but that nothing comparable to the Rosen search warrant had ever been executed by this administration. … On the basis of Mr. Holder’s testimony, there was little doubt in the Members’ minds that the legal machinery for such an undertaking had never been started.”

Justice spokesman Brian Fallon on Wednesday said the latest report “was produced on a purely partisan basis” and said its findings “are contrary to the record and strongly disputed by many of the committee’s own members.”

The Justice Department has previously explained that the investigation involving Rosen never escalated into any prosecution of the reporter. The department has acknowledged Holder had approved of the application for the search warrant, but claims his testimony before Congress was nevertheless accurate.

The report dismissed that explanation. “We take little comfort in Mr. Holder’s assurances to us now that the Department never intended to prosecute Mr. Rosen when it labeled him a criminal suspect in 2010,” the report said. “Tarnishing a journalist as a suspect in a national security investigation is not something that should be taken lightly. Espionage is a serious federal crime, punishable by up to a decade in prison. In essence, the Justice Department dangled Mr. Rosen over a cliff. But the American people were then assured by Mr. Holder that this was appropriate because there was never a potential of him falling to his doom.”

The Justice Department has since completed a review of its policies for investigations involving journalists, and has called for a number of reforms. The House GOP report praised some of these efforts. But it also questioned one particular recommendation that the Privacy Protection Act of 1980 be changed so that a journalist can be targeted only when they are the focus of a criminal probe for conduct beyond normal news-gathering.

The report claimed, though, that this was already the intent of the law.

“Mr. Holder attempted to disguise his clearly erroneous reading of the statute as a defect in the law,” the report said. “Rather than admit that he gave deceptive testimony, and that Mr. Rosen was actually a target of prosecution (and further raise the ire of the media), Mr. Holder instead represented that Mr. Rosen was never a true suspect.”

This explanation, the report claimed, served “only to provide cover for Mr. Holder’s misleading testimony.”

LEC again — the link to  the congressional letter is [USH Judiciary Cmte Ltr POTUS re AG]  . The one for the house Judiciary Committee report on Holder ‘ s actions is [USH Judiciary Cmte Rpt Eric Holder (Investigative Actions)]

Advertisements

Posted in Investigative, legal info, legal opinion, personal opinion | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

… Yes , It is TrayvonGate ! …

Posted by paulfromwloh on Thursday,July 11th,2013

.. You can understand family , friends , and loved ones being upset over Trayvon Martin ..

.. even local or regional figures ..

.. statewide , now that is a stretch ..

.. but the United States Department of InJustice ?!?!

.. Yup . Main InJustice has struck again . It appears , and is appearing , that Erich Holder and his flunkies at Main InJustice are playing ” ” ” send in the Activists . ” As it is , they already have . See below  …

[h/t — theOtherMcCain]

While I haven’t followed the George Zimmerman trial closely, I have noticed the widespread reaction to the trial, namely, “Why are they even having this trial?” There is no way in hell Zimmerman will be convicted. Some see it as a clear-cut case of self-defense, but everyone who has watched the testimony sees enough “reasonable doubt” in the prosecution’s case that it seems obvious the jury will acquit.

So, once again: Why are they even having this trial? And the answer would seem to be, because the Obama administration wanted it.

LEC — spot on , Rob . It is exactly what they wanted . And in the middle of an election year , so much the better .

[h/t — Lee Stranahan , @ Breitbart.com(biggovernment)]

                 The newest Obama scandal is seventeen months old .

Welcome to Trayvongate, where the President of the United States used both the bully pulpit, the Department of Justice and sly media manipulation to gin up charges of racism in the George Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin shooting. Now that the trial is almost finished and the only act of racism mentioned so far came from the victim–Martin called Zimmerman ‘a creepy ass cracker’ according to testimony–the cynical and repeated use of the race card by the White house is even more abhorrent.

Judicial Watch revealed documents today that proved what Breitbart News reported in April, 2012: that Eric Holder’s Department of Justice took an active role in racially charged rallies in Sanford, Florida and that the Community Relations Service helped force the temporary resignation of Sheriff Bill Lee. That resignation made it appear that Sanford authorities were suspect and possibly complicit in covering up something.

Some of my reporting at the time was based on interviews with numerous public officials in Sanford who wanted to remain anonymous out of fear of retribution from the Obama administration. They described a situation where the CRS team took over and forced decisions while clearing a path for protests and rallies that heightened the appearence of racial tensions.

The CRS is a small unit within the Department of Justice and ostensibly it serves a legitimate purpose; attempting to cool down tense situation. As its website says:

The Community Relations Service is the Department’s “peacemaker” for community conflicts and tensions arising from differences of race, color, and national origin. Created by the Civil Rights Act of 1964, CRS is the only Federal agency dedicated to assist State and local units of government, private and public organizations, and community groups with preventing and resolving racial and ethnic tensions, incidents, and civil disorders, and in restoring racial stability and harmony.

However, under the highly politicized Holder Department of Justice, the CRS has acted as ‘spies and muscle’ according to a source familiar with the unit. In the Zimmerman case, they ended up as doing nothing to facilitate ‘racial stability and harmony ‘, instead acting a heavy thumb on the scales of justice and helping to force events that gave the nation an impression that Martin’s death was racially motivated.

Not just George Zimmerman, but the police and the entire town were targeted in rallies that saw people being bused-in for protests. We now have proof via the Judicial Watch release that these rallies were facilitated by the Obama administration. They were also highly racially charged. Close Obama ally Al Sharpton, along with Jesse Jackson, led the charge. As CBS Miami reported:

 

“We live in the middle of an American paradox,” Rev. Sharpton told the crowd. “We can put a black man in the White House but we cannot walk a black child through a gated neighborhood. We are not selling out, bowing out or backing down until there is justice for Trayvon.”

 

“This is not about a hoodie, it’s about racial profiling,” Jackson said. “We will use our marching feet, civil disobedience and every weapon in our non-violent arsenal until justice is served.”

 

However, much of the rhetoric surrounding the Zimmerman story was violent. Many will remember that the New Black Panther party actually offered a $10,000 bounty for the ‘capture’ of George Zimmerman. As the Orlando Sentinal reported:

New Black Panther leader Mikhail Muhammad announced the reward during a protest in Sanford Saturday. And when asked whether he was inciting violence, Muhammad replied defiantly: “An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.”

The bounty announcement came moments after members of the group called for the mobilization of 10,000 black men to capture Zimmerman, who shot Trayvon in a gated Sanford community on Feb. 26.

Muhammad said members of his group would search for Zimmerman themselves in Maitland — where the 28-year old worked before the shooting, employees there told the Orlando Sentinel. He declined to say when the group would begin their search.

J. Christian Adams knows the New Black Panther Party well; he resigned his position at the DOJ over the refusal to prosecute the Panthers for the now infamous Philadephia voter intimidation actions during the 2008 election. Adams outlined the crimes committed by the NBPP in Sanford:

Let’s start with solicitation to kidnap.  In announcing a reward for the seizure of Zimmerman, the New Black Panthers may have violated Florida Code 787.01.  It makes it a felony to “by threat, confining or abducting, or imprisoning another person against his . . .  will without lawful authority with intent to . .  . terrorize.”

Merely soliciting someone else to do this is also a felony in Florida under Florida Code 777.04.  “A person who solicits another to commit an offense prohibited by law and in the course of such solicitation commands, encourages, hires, or requests another person to engage in specific conduct which would constitute such offense or an attempt to commit such offense commits the offense of criminal solicitation.

That’s only part of the list. The New Black Panther’s outrageous, illegal call for vigilante justice happened on March 24th. According the records obtained by Judicial Watch, the Department of Justice deployed to Sanford the next day: March 25th, 2012. However, the DOJ did not go to Sanford to make arrests against the New Black Panthers. Instead, according the the written record, obtained by Judicial Watch, they “deployed to Sanford, FL, to work marches, demonstrations, and rallies related to the shooting and death of an African-American teen by a neighborhood watch captain.”

Once again, the Holder Department of Justice failed to prosecute the New Black Panther Party. They actually helped facilitate mass rallies against Zimmerman and the City of Sanford.

These actions are made even more scandalous by the direct insertion of the President of the United States into the story. President Obama made his famous “If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon” remark at the White House, but what got considerably less press was the fact that Obama had a prior relationship with Martin’s attorney Benjamin Crump. Obama worked with him on another racially charged case when he was a Senator.

Breitbart News reported on the Obama connection to the 2006 story of Martin Lee Anderson. Attorney Crump said publicly that he was following the same media ‘playbook’ as the Anderson case. Tactics included using a photo of Anderson as a child, the same way the media used the Crump-supplied photo of Trayvon Martin as child. This story from 2006 shows the involvement of Senator Obama (who did not end up appearing at the rally), Sharpton and Jackson as well as other usual suspects from the far left.

A rally will be taking place in Tallahassee Friday, April 21 regarding the ongoing investigation into the death of 14-year-old Martin Lee Anderson. Anderson died Jan. 6 at a Panhandle boot camp after being kneed and punched by Bay County Sheriff’s boot camp guards.

Students from Florida State University, Tallahassee Community College and Florida A&M University have been involved in the planning and organization of the event at which Rev. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton will be making appearances.

Charlie and Martin Sheen, who donated $10,000 to the cause, are also reportedly planning to attend Friday, along with former TLC member Tionne “T-Boz” Watkins and Afeni Shakur, mother of the murdered rapper Tupac Shakur. According Samantha Greer, an FSU student and volunteer for the Coalition for Justice for Martin Lee Anderson, Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois may also make an appearance. Greer stressed that the Coalition is still looking for volunteers and that anyone is welcome to join the cause.

What we saw in 2012 was the Obama administration using taxpayer resources to ratchet up racial tensions in a local crime case and literally creating key story points in the narrative, such as forcing the sheriff to temporarily resign. At the same time, the President himself made an emotional statement about the victim with direct reference to his race, without revealing that he had worked with the victim’s attorney a few years earlier in a similar case. At the same time, Obama media ally (and Sharpton employer) NBC outrageously edited the Zimmerman audio to make Zimmerman appear racist. All these manipulative and deceptive uses of the race card–pushed along by the Holder DOJ at taxpayer expense–happened just months before the 2012 presidential election.

The only reason this isn’t a major scandal already is the media hasn’t ever done its job and declared it one.

 

Posted in Investigative, legal info, legal opinion, personal opinion | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

… Thomas Perez is So Busted …

Posted by paulfromwloh on Monday,June 17th,2013

Thomas Perez is So Busted

… and was said in the ’60s , the whole world is watching …

LEC here — I wanted to paste this together , and repost it on my blog , as one unit , with links [] and [] with the great news that Hans announces below

[h/t to pjmedia , and one hell of a lawyer and writer , hans von spakovsky !]

SCOTUS Takes Up Mt. Holly Case

Posted By Hans A. von Spakovsky On June 17, 2013 @ 7:04 am In Politics

The Supreme Court has just granted certiorari in Mt. Holly, NJ v. Mt. Holly Gardens Citizens, so it will hear arguments on the case in the fall.  This is the case I  previously wrote about that involves the questionable  “disparate impact” legal theory that has gotten Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights (and Obama Labor Secretary nominee) Thomas Perez into so much trouble.  The Court granted review despite a brief from the Solicitor General telling the Supremes that they should not take the case.  No doubt, civil rights groups will now do everything they can (perhaps with the help of the administration) to convince the town of Mt. Holly to dismiss its case before their pet legal theory gets tossed out by the Supreme Court.

LEC again — you can bet that the Supremes are watching this .

[-] the town of Mt Holly  has taken it this far . I strongly doubt that they are willing to settle . Able to settle , yes . Willing , No . Especially with the spotlight this one is going to get .

[-] the pressure that the interest groups and the ObamaCraps are going to put on them will be enormous . They will play hardball , fair or foul , to get the town to settle . However , they need the Court ‘ s permission . No , not the district court , this time .

[-] One thing that this does is that it gets the case out of the hands of the ObamaCraps . They would not and will not dare pull a rerun of what Thomas Perez pulled in the Magner v Gallagher case , out of the 10th Circuit [St. Paul , Mn] . They may want to , but not with even the chance that the chicanery could screw up Cory Booker ‘ s Senate election . Oh , Booker has to run in 2014 . Someone may want to run then , especially if it looks like a strong Republican year , and Christie wins in a blowout , with coattails .

[-] There are at least 4 votes to shoot down disparate impact . I am thinking that there will be at least 6 [Scalia , Thomas , Alito , CJ Roberts , Kennedy , plus either Sotomayor or Breyer ] . Forget about Ginsberg . Also , given Perez ‘ monkeyshines , I do not think that Kagan can participate in the case .

[-] Briefs , especially the amicus briefs , and the arguments too , are going to be World War III . This one is going to be one of the highlights of the next Supreme Court term .

[-] You can forget about Perez getting a confirmation vote for Labour Secretary . There is no way in hell that he will get it , especially with the other cases on Presidential powers on recess appointments pending .

[-] ditto , POTUS ‘ pseudo appointees to the D.C. circuit . The current cast of regular appeallate judges , plus Srnivisian (the new guy , a conservative , of all things) , plus the senior judges (7 or 8 of them) can easily handle the workload .

PJ Media » More Justice Department Chicanery: Thomas Perez and ‘Disparate

Impact’ » Print

More Justice Department Chicanery: Thomas Perez and ‘Disparate Impact’

Posted By Hans von Spakovsky On June 1, 2013 @ 12:00 am In Judiciary,Legal,US

News | 19 Comments

 

One of the administration’s favorite legal theories, “disparate impact,” may get

taken up again by the Supreme Court. Will the administration try to engineer

some kind of payoff to take the issue away from the Court — again?

In June 2012, the town of Mount Holly, N.J., petitioned the Supreme Court to

review the legitimacy of racial discrimination claims premised solely on a

disparate impact theory under the Fair Housing Act. Under this theory, a policy

— such as requiring high credit scores for loans — can be completely neutral,

but if it yields a disparate impact on a particular racial or gender group, an

institution using that policy can be held liable for discrimination. In other

words, an entity can be found to have discriminated even if it didn’t actually

intend to discriminate.

Thomas Perez, the assistant attorney general for Civil Rights at the Justice

Department and President Obama’s nominee to be Labor secretary, has used

disparate impact to extort huge settlements from the financial industry under

the Fair Housing Act (FHA).

Here, Mount Holly is alleged to have discriminated simply because it wanted to

redevelop and rebuild a rundown housing development in a high-crime area where

almost half the residents are black. Thus, the rebuilding plan would have had a

statistically larger impact on black residents than white residents.

The issue of whether a mere disparate impact claim violates the FHA, or whether

the more rigorous standard of intentional discrimination is required was before

the Supreme Court last year. In that case, Magner v. Gallagher, the city of St.

Paul, MN, was accused of violating the FHA because it aggressively enforced the

health and safety provisions of its housing code. Slumlords sued the city,

claiming that enforcement had a disparate impact because the majority of their

tenants were racial minorities.

In other words, they were using the FHA to obstruct the city’s attempt to

improve the horrible living conditions of poor families.

Thomas Perez concocted a quid pro quo deal to have the Magner case dismissed —

even though the U.S. was not a party in the case. At the time, the federal

government was considering intervening in a separate False Claims Act case worth

almost $200 million against St. Paul. The city had received tens of millions of

dollars from the federal government based on what career attorneys within the

Justice Department called a “particularly egregious example of false

certifications” by the city.

Perez told St. Paul that the Justice Department would stay out of the False

Claims Act case if the city withdrew the Magner case that the Supreme Court had

agreed to hear. The city jumped at the deal.

A report from the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee later

concluded that Perez “sought, facilitated, and consummated this deal because he

feared that the Court would find disparate impact unsupported by the text of the

Fair Housing Act.” According to the same report, Perez also attempted to hide

both the deal and his involvement in it.

He even called a key lawyer in the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Minnesota and told

him to make sure there wasn’t “any mention of the Magner case” in the False

Claims Act case files.

Fast forward to the new claim involving Mount Holly: although the U.S. is,

again, not a party to the case, the Supreme Court last October asked the Justice

Department to file a brief advising whether it thought the Court should accept

the case for review.

To no one’s surprise, the brief [1] that Justice recently filed told the Court

it should not take the case. The question of whether disparate impact claims are

available under the FHA “does not warrant review,” it declared. The brief was

filed by Solicitor General Donald B. Verrilli, Jr., and right under his name is

that of Thomas E. Perez.

Verrilli and Perez argue that disparate impact claims are a “reasonable

construction of the statute’s text, structure, and history” and that there is no

conflict in the courts of appeal on this issue. But the brief ends with an

argument you wouldn’t expect from Justice, given Perez’s sub rosa involvement in

getting the Magner case dismissed — especially in light of recent revelations

that he violated federal law and Justice Department rules by using his personal

email account to facilitate the deal.

Verrilli and Perez fault Mount Holly for even raising the issue of whether

disparate impact claims are valid under the FHA. Mount Holly, they write, had

the “opportunity to raise both questions” in the lower courts when the Magner

case was before the Supreme Court,” and therefore can’t bring it up now.

With stunning chutzpah, the government is arguing that Mount Holly should have

been aware that disparate impact was a live issue when review was granted in

Magner v. Gallagher and should have raised the issue in its own case.

This is wrong for two reasons. First, the timeliness of Mount Holly’s claim that

disparate impact does not constitute a violation of the FHA has no relation

whatsoever to someone else’s lawsuit, such as the Magner case. Second, even if

Mount Holly mistakenly thought disparate impact was not a live legal issue when

Magner was before the Supreme Court, Mount Holly would have learned it was a

live issue when the scandal became public over the government’s quid pro quo

deal that bought off St. Paul and caused the city to dismiss the Magner case.

Therefore, the government’s very actions in Magner make the Mount Holly

disparate impact claims in the current case timely.

It should also be noted that while the brief criticizes Mount Holly for not

raising this issue when Magner was before the Supreme Court, it fails to inform

the Court that a senior Justice Department official (whose name is on the brief)

helped get that very case dismissed before the Court could hear oral arguments.

Should we be surprised by any of these convoluted machinations?

Probably not, given what happened the last time disparate impact was being

considered by the Supreme Court. The House report concluded that the quid pro

quo in the Magner case “manipulated the rule of law and pushed the limits of

justice to make” the deal happen.

The Supreme Court should accept the Mount Holly case. And if Justice approaches

Mount Holly with a Magner-esque deal, the city should reject it so the Court can

finally rule on the validity of disparate impact claims.

 

 

Posted in personal opinion | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

… What are these ObamaCraps Thinking ??? …

Posted by paulfromwloh on Monday,May 20th,2013

What Are These ObamaCraps Thinking ???

.. A reporter is doing her or his job . Even though , normally , possession of certain material is a very big no – no (ie , illegal) . A reporter , especially one doing their job , is given a certain amount of latitude . It appears that the ObamaCrap Department of InJustice has really done it again .

.. James Rosen is a solid reporter . He is a long – time correspondent for FoxNewsChannel , covering State , Defence , and Intelligence issues . He is not someone who is known for stepping over a line . He has , to my knowledge , a very understated manner , but a very strong professional reputation . How anyone can think of him as the target of any kind of criminal investigation , I do not understand .

.. Well , guess what . Jimmy Rosen , it appears , is on the hot seat . Until now , in secret . The InJustice Department was conducting a criminal investigation , one that you would think would target someone in their own department . Well , no  . They are  going after the media . Again .

.. You think , after the AP imbroglio , they would have learned their lesson . Unfortunately , that appears not to be the case . InJustice is targeting Rosen , but not just him . They are going after another FoxSnooze producer , along with west – coast based correspondent William LaJeunesse . Why ?

.. It appears that they are really mad over getting badly burned on the botched ATF operation that was ” Fast and Furious . ” Well , they are pissed over part and parcel getting out . They are going after a high – profile target . Guess who ! James Rosen .

** here ** read the search warrant affadavit (James Rosen case FNC) for yourself . It is a pdf file , no scribd to fiddle with …

… to quote … [h/t — Newsbusters]

When the Justice Department began investigating possible leaks of classified information about North Korea in 2009, investigators did more than obtain telephone records of a working journalist suspected of receiving the secret material.

They used security badge access records to track the reporter’s comings and goings from the State Department, according to a newly obtained court affidavit. They traced the timing of his calls with a State Department security adviser suspected of sharing the classified report. They obtained a search warrant for the reporter’s personal e – mails.

The case of Stephen Jin-Woo Kim, the government adviser, and James Rosen, the chief Washington correspondent for Fox News, bears striking similarities to a sweeping leaks investigation disclosed last week in which federal investigators obtained records over two months of more than 20 telephone lines assigned to the Associated Press.

… and , to quote … [h/t — the Washington Post]

Obama last week defended the Justice Department’s handling of the investigation involving the AP, which is focused on who leaked information to the news organization about a foiled plot involving the al-Qaeda affiliate in Yemen. AP executives and First Amendment watchdogs have criticized the Justice Department in part for the broad scope of the phone records it secretly subpoenaed from AP offices in Washington, Hartford , Conn., and New York.

“The latest events show an expansion of this law enforcement technique,” said attorney Abbe Lowell, who is defending Kim on federal charges filed in 2010 that he disclosed national defense information. A trial is possible as soon as 2014. “Individual reporters or small time periods have turned into 20 [telephone] lines and months of records with no obvious attempt to be targeted or narrow.”

The president said press freedoms must be balanced against the protection of U.S. personnel overseas. According to the office of Ronald Machen Jr., the U.S. attorney for the District, its prosecutors followed federal regulations by first seeking the information through other means before subpoenaing media phone records. Machen’s office is investigating both the Kim and AP cases. The Justice Department said in a statement that in both cases it had abided by “all applicable laws, regulations, and longstanding Department of Justice policies intended to safeguard the First Amendment interests of the press in reporting the news and the public in receiving it.”

… FoxNewsChannel Statement … [h/t — Twitchy]

” We are outraged to learn today that James Rosen was named a criminal co – conspirator for simply doing his job as a reporter . In  fact , it is downright  chilling . We will unequivocally defend his right to operate as a member of   [what up   unitl now has always been a free press . ]”

.. One should remember , that it remains an open question whether it is ever illegal , for a reporter to solicit information. No reporter, including Rosen, has been prosecuted for doing so .

… In effect , this is criminalizing news reporting . Where the hell is the Department of InJustice going ? What are they doing ? What are  they thinking ? …

Posted in personal opinion | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »