AP Phone Records Scandal: You Rang? (Open Thread)

© Miri WTPOTUS May 16, 2013

800px-FeTAp613-1 - Copy
By now, almost everyone is aware of three scandals currently plaguing the Obama administration:  Benghazi talking points, IRS targeting of conservatives, and the Department of Justice (DOJ) subpoenaing telephone records of AP reporters to investigate an alleged national security leak.  Let’s look at that last scandal in more depth.

Floyd Abrams, a prominent First Amendment and media attorney, said, “The breathtaking scope of these subpoenas served on the telephone companies might suggest that after all this time, they [the DOJ] have no idea who they’re looking for.” …

“I don’t think that there is any doubt that this is a serious investigation that they have spent a lot of time on and that they feel deeply about,” Abrams said. Justice’s targeting of a large number of phone lines and the AP journalists who use them “taken together, certainly makes it look like the largest, most intrusive action by the government vis-a-vis the press that I can remember.” [emphasis added to all quotes]

Most news stories report that these were only “phone logs”, not tapped conversations.  The logs

 … listed outgoing calls for the work and personal phone numbers of individual reporters, general AP office numbers in New York, Washington and Hartford, Conn., and the main number for AP reporters in the House of Representatives press gallery, according to attorneys for the AP. It was not clear if the records also included incoming calls or the duration of calls.

Getting phone logs for AP reporters who worked out of the House of Representatives is especially problematic, according to Representative Devin Nunes, because it raises the issue of separation of powers.  By what right does the DOJ demand access to phone records that potentially concern members of Congress, the representatives of the People?

Another question is why this subpoena was “overbroad”, sweeping up records from as many as 100 reporters, most of whom were not involved in the leak investigation.  President and  CEO of the AP, Gary Pruitt, wants answers and has written to the DOJ, demanding them.

There can be no possible justification for such an overbroad collection of the telephone communications of The Associated Press and its reporters. These records potentially reveal communications with confidential sources across all of the news gathering activities undertaken by the AP during a two-month period, provide a road map to AP’s news gathering operations, and disclose information about AP’s activities and operations that the government has no conceivable right to know.

We regard this action by the Department of Justice as a serious interference with AP’s constitutional rights to gather and report the news.

Another issue is whether or not Eric Holder truly recused himself from this situation BEFORE the activity came to light. He said,

I can’t remember when I recused myself from the AP investigation, and I know I didn’t do it in writing

Sound familiar? It has been suggested that ANY Attorney General could simply use a similar secret recusal with no paper trail to evade any uncomfortable revelation.  One reporter asked on Twitter:

If there’s no written record of recusal, who told DAG Cole that he was running the AP investigation?

Because these are only phone “logs”, no conversations were recorded, or so this story alleges:

The records were presumably obtained from phone companies earlier this year although the government letter did not explain that. None of the information provided by the government to the AP suggested the actual phone conversations were monitored.

But is that assumption true?  The media would be wise to not rely upon such reassurances and dig deeper into the activities of the Obama administration.  Consider this story from the first week of this month:

Are all telephone calls recorded and accessible to the US government? A former FBI counterterrorism agent claims on CNN that this is the case:

The real capabilities and behavior of the US surveillance state are almost entirely unknown to the American public because, like most things of significance done by the US government, it operates behind an impenetrable wall of secrecy. But a seemingly spontaneous admission this week by a former FBI counterterrorism agent provides a rather startling acknowledgment of just how vast and invasive these surveillance activities are.

In the context of the investigation into the Boston Marathon bombing, Erin Burnett of CNN interviewed Tim Clemente, a former FBI counterterrorism agent.  She asked whether the FBI could somehow learn what was said between Tamerlan Tsarnaev and his wife over the telephone, before and after the terrorist attack:

BURNETT: … There’s no way they actually can find out what happened, right, unless she tells them?

CLEMENTE: “No, there is a way. We certainly have ways in national security investigations to find out exactly what was said in that conversation. It’s not necessarily something that the FBI is going to want to present in court, but it may help lead the investigation and/or lead to questioning of her. We certainly can find that out.

BURNETT: “So they can actually get that? People are saying, look, that is incredible.

CLEMENTE: “No, welcome to America. All of that stuff is being captured as we speak whether we know it or like it or not.”

Clemente appeared again on CNN and elaborated further:

[He] added expressly that “all digital communications in the past” are recorded and stored: repeat that last part: “no digital communication is secure”, by which he means not that any communication is susceptible to government interception as it happens (although that is true), but far beyond that: all digital communications – meaning telephone calls, emails, online chats and the like – are automatically recorded and stored and accessible to the government after the fact.

To describe that is to define what a ubiquitous, limitless Surveillance State is.  …

[Former AT&T engineer Mark Klein revealed]  “that the NSA [National Security Agency] set up a system that vacuumed up Internet and phone-call data from ordinary Americans with the cooperation of AT&T” and that “contrary to the government’s depiction of its surveillance program as aimed at overseas terrorists . . . much of the data sent through AT&T to the NSA was purely domestic.”  …

Every day, collection systems at the National Security Agency intercept and store 1.7 billion e-mails, phone calls and other types of communications,” [according to a story in the Washington Post].

You can see the obvious danger here.  Clemente took pains to say that this isn’t anything the FBI will likely ever present in a court, which suggests that they know that it’s constitutionally problematic.  But it gives them INFORMATION, and knowledge is, of course, POWER.

Doubtless the Obama administration would suggest that this is merely one freedom (our privacy) that we Americans MUST surrender in order to be kept safe.  This “leak” involves “national security”, so they have to listen to all of those phone conversations, in order to keep us safe.

What else might they learn, unrelated to the alleged leak?  Can they be trusted to not use, politically, anything they learned outside the realm of their investigation into the “leak”?  Why WAS that subpoena so “overbroad”?

Trust them.  They capture and store ALL of our “digital communications” only so that they will be able to retrospectively go back and nail terrorists.  Criminals.  Someone like Tamerlan Tsarnaev’s wife, if she happens to be complicit in his crimes.

They’re not targeting ordinary Americans who are simply going about their business, or reporters who are exercising their constitutionally protected rights to free speech and freedom of the press.  (May as well mention freedom of association, too.)

AP reporters had better sit up and take notice.  With their telephone records–date, time, number called–OBAMA’S GOVERNMENT can now easily go back through the NSA’s billions of captured, recorded, and stored digital phone conversations and learn not only who possibly leaked national security information but also the details of every reporter’s conversations with ANY of their sources during those two months.

What power that ability hands to this corrupt administration!  “Corrupt” to us, who’ve been watching this administration from the beginning; but “corrupt” to the previously “Obama lapdog media”?

Do these 100+ reporters TRUST Obama and Holder to NOT use what they now know to their political advantage, especially in light of what reporters learned recently about how the IRS targeted political opponents of Barack Hussein Obama?


131 responses to “AP Phone Records Scandal: You Rang? (Open Thread)



    what’s going on in the press? doesn’t look good. wonder what they know?

    • i am starting to wonder. is the fact that the Cold Case Posse joining in the Alabama case getting legs?

      in one week the uptick on bringing up the birthers just to dismiss them has me wondering.

      Glenn Beck, Chris Matthews, Bernie Goldberg/ Bill O’Reilly and others all in one week. wondering if they under the gun to “mention” the absurdity of the looney birthers… or else.

    • Of course he knew he gave the Sic Em!!! order. 🙂

    • ^^
      I find it ironic, now, that only weeks before the IRS put this hold on my bank account, I’d been asked to be a contributing writer for key Tea Party personality “Joe the Plumber.” I’d been writing freelance articles on veterans affairs for some time, publishing and distributing them mostly through Facebook, and I viewed the personal call Joe made to me as one of the greatest compliments I’d been paid in regard to those articles. I jumped at the opportunity to join his team and give my work, such as this piece, a wider audience. I can’t help but think that part of my decision to join Joe’s team may have played a part in being singled out by the IRS at this specific time and having my VA disability money taken from me in complete breach of federal law.

      Joe the Plumber’s targeted-investigation should have had congressional hearings during the 2008 primaries… the first clue. and his goon was fake-fired back then.

    • If you think about it, blogging conservatives have gotten the same thuggish treatment from obots. Haven’t we? I mean, they go out of their way to try to find out anything they can about people with whom they disagree politically. They are nasty. They “out” them. They intimidate them and their families. They even threaten them and their livelihoods. It’s an AMORAL mentality. It’s astroturfed and coordinated somewhat, for sure. But it’s also a mindset that’s decades in the making. The end result of their brainwashing of young minds. The chickens coming home to roost, as a result of them letting the likes of Ayers TEACH children. Now there’s an entire generation of young people who believe that their ends justify ANY means.

  2. Dear Lord, please make barky go away. Please make him the laughingstock of all the peoples throughout the world. IJNWP, Amen.


  3. Calling All American Thinkers!

    Truth Be Told, here’s how:


    • Nobody even knows who they are. They won’t tell Congress. They imply some are in the hospital while others are back “in country”.

      • so they say, Miri. Congress is acting pretty wimpy on the subject so I can only imagine what the truth is about these people. We know that 4 died that night, and we have the right to know how many were injured. i wonder if any one was taken captive, too.

        • After Hicks testified, I heard several Congressmen saying that they WANT those names. Don’t know if they’re going to keep pursuing it, though. One has to wonder WHY these people didn’t come forward, if they’re still alive.

  4. HEY ..GLENN BECK… DO your dang research…. or SHUT UP DUDE!
    were SICK of ALL the deadbeats…. the fooled … “protecters”….
    no matter what is missing …. they say it’s REALLY NOT? BUTT’ it IS!


  5. May 15, 2013

    “Texas Republican Sen. Cruz eligible to be president should he decide to run”

    “Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz was born in Canada but is qualified to become president should he mount a campaign in 2016 or beyond.

    Cruz was born in Calgary, and his father is from Cuba. But the Republican senator’s mother is from the first state of Delaware, which appears to settle the issue.

    The 42-year-old Cruz has yet to publicly announce his intentions, but in front of a microphone he talks mostly about big-picture national issues, with most of the presidential buzz coming from supporters.

    “I’ve been in 25 cities in the last few months, all I have to do is mention Ted Cruz’s name, and they stand up and cheer,” former South Carolina Republican Sen. Jim DeMint said at a state party dinner earlier this month. “They’re hungry for someone who’s not afraid, willing to stand up and trying to change the status quo.””

    First Posted: 08/28/09
    Updated: 05/25/11

    “DeMint Defends Obama Against ‘Birthers’ — But Little Else”

    “On Monday, however, the South Carolina Republican found himself defending Barack Obama from the fringier elements of his own political party: the conspiracy theorists who insist the president was not born in the United States.

    “I may have disagreements with [the president] on issues,” DeMint told the Huffington Post. “But he is my president, he deserves our respect, and we need forget that nonsense …

    “He is not only a citizen,” he added, “he is our president.””


  6. OH ORLY……. Carl Gallups take on it …. She has & will continue to fight….Butt’ we have to pull this off for the good of all of US!!!
    Every piece of the pie will make a very fine pie….. someday!


    • this is interesting… what is your take on this everyone?

    • Rosemary Woodhouse

      I’ve stated my opinion of Orly on numerous occasions, and shall repeat it: while I admire her tenacity, she hasn’t the gravitas to spearhead this movement and is a bit of a laughingstock. Again, her intentions are great. It’s her delivery that sucks. Harsh perhaps, but true.

      I’ve also stated on another blog I used to frequent, is all of the massive EGOS involved will eventually sink the ship. I don’t want to sound like one of the “sacrifice for the greater good” socialists, but to reinstate dignity, integrity, values, rule of law, in short, everything that has made this nation great, everyone…each individual…MUST lay their ego aside to work for a cause greater than ourselves…our nation: The United States of America. Our Founding Fathers did no less. Even more selflessness is required in this most dire time in our nation’s history.

      • I hear you, RW. The egos are getting on my nerves. It diminishes the arguments.

        • Rosemary Woodhouse

          Absolutely, Miri. And that’s why I respect and appreciate all of the genuinely extraordinary work that is done at WTPOTUS! It is done as pure service devoid of ego. Not one egomaniac among you. Amazing! You all have done extraordinary research- not to garner attention to yourselves, as individuals, but in service to our country. God bless all of you!

    • That was so obvious. I knew that had to be the case. I’d wondered why there was that convenient opening in some unrelated event where a lawyer during a “question and answer” session asks her the question that gives her the opportunity to “apologize”. This is their usual M.O. when something’s going to come out and they want to diffuse it in advance. They truly do think were STUPID.

      • another ruse.

        they are waging the Syrian War behind our backs and that is why Erdogan was here. they are keeping us “occupied”.

        there’s all kinds of stuff going on with Russia and Iran. Iran is heading the arms treaty shenanigans. that we’re going to sign. oh yes. do look thataway. the IRS, et al , are the domestic henchmen…to keep Congress busy.

        20,000 muslamics against the Copts in Egypt. crickets; Kerry said defend the muslamics in Nigeria? what are “They” up to?

  7. omigish, the stench.

    hope the dumpster divers will handle it.

  8. remember this? oh maybe not since it wasn’t reported. October 2012


    what we do remember is that weekend barky disappeared. went to a non-existent soccer game… and we remember the volcano spewing without warning, as well as the Gulf when 11 people were killed on site.

    are the Benghazi Survivors alive?

    • I remember that only too well. And the video that seemed to show somebody finishing off the survivors, with the sound of gunshots clearly heard.

    • “… Klamath Falls, Oregon—Law enforcement officials thwarted a Mexican cartel-linked narcotics operation with a number of raids in the early morning hours of May 16, 2013. Officers made at least 38 arrests, then seized approximately four pounds of methamphetamine, over fifty firearms, and an undetermined amount of cash.

      In an exclusive interview with Breitbart News, the Oregon Department of Justice Communications Director, Jeff Manning, confirmed these details and added that the operation involved raids of at least 23 homes and businesses. Manning said law enforcement is looking for at least ten other individuals in connection with these groups.

      “We cannot comment at this time on whether or not all of those arrested were US citizens or here illegally,” said Manning. “There is a clear connection to Mexican cartels and this narcotics ring was an active dealing operation on a scale we have not seen previously in Oregon.”

      “This investigation began last October,” said Manning.

      The Oregonian’s Les Zaitz, who first covered the arrests, has theorized that this long-term investigation started following the discovery of two corpses buried in in Klamath County, OR. The corpses were discovered during the same month this investigation began. Oregon DOJ’s Manning said, “That reporter came up with that on his own. We did not confirm any connection.” However, Manning also said, “We do not deny any connection between the two matters.”

      If the Oregonian’s theory is correct, authorities are finding Mexican cartel victims buried beneath US soil, deep into the continental U.S. …”


  9. AP CEO calls records seizure unconstitutional

    The president and chief executive officer of The Associated Press on Sunday called the government’s secret seizure of two months of reporters’ phone records “unconstitutional” and said the news cooperative had not ruled out legal action against the Justice Department.

    Gary Pruitt, in his first television interviews since it was revealed the Justice Department subpoenaed phone records of AP reporters and editors, said the move already has had a chilling effect on journalism. Pruitt said the seizure has made sources less willing to talk to AP journalists and, in the long term, could limit Americans’ information from all news outlets. …”

    Well, that was the whole point, wasn’t it? Who’s going to talk to ANY reporter over any phone for any reason, when the DOJ can just go trolling through the records and then, according to that UK story, call up the actual conversations to listen to at their leisure? Here’s more:

    “… Pruitt told CBS’ “Face the Nation” that the government has no business monitoring the AP’s newsgathering activities.

    “And if they restrict that apparatus … the people of the United States will only know what the government wants them to know and that’s not what the framers of the Constitution had in mind when they wrote the First Amendment,” he said.

    In a separate interview with the AP, Pruitt said the news cooperative had not decided its next move but had not ruled out legal action against the government. He said the Justice Department’s investigation is out of control and President Barack Obama should rein it in.”

    How nice and how novel to hear a member of the lamestream media talking about the Framers. He’d better watch out! Before you know it, the IRS will be auditing him.

    • From April 3, 2012

      Roger Aronoff:

      “AP Chairman Comes Close to Endorsing Obama”

      “The chairman of the Associated Press news agency (AP), Dean Singleton, left little doubt who he is supporting for president in 2012. From the tone and words of his introduction today of President Obama, who was speaking to an AP luncheon, to the softball questions he asked following the speech, there could be no doubt that he wants to see Barack Obama reelected.

      In his introduction, Singleton referred to what he called Obama’s “always genteel way” and took obvious potshots at his critics.”


      • Pruitt became CEO of AP the same month: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_B._Pruitt “In April 2012 it was announced he was going to become CEO of the Associated Press.” Singleton is chairman of the board of directors. What’s interesting is that I didn’t know this:

        “The AP is a not-for-profit cooperative news agency that was founded in 1845 by five newspapers who wanted to pool their resources in covering the Mexican-American War. It has grown and evolved to become the largest and most widely recognized U.S.-based news agency. Unlike newspapers like The New York Times and Washington Post, the two most important newspapers that comprise the AP, it generally strives to at least maintain the appearance of reporting without a political agenda. But too often they don’t live up to that standard.”

        I didn’t know the NY Times and WaPo were basically the AP.

    • What will Pruitt think of this one? http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/a-rare-peek-into-a-justice-department-leak-probe/2013/05/19/0bc473de-be5e-11e2-97d4-a479289a31f9_story.html

      “A rare peek into a Justice Department leak probe

      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.

      At a time when President Obama’s administration is under renewed scrutiny for an unprecedented number of leak investigations, the Kim case provides a rare glimpse into the inner workings of one such probe.

      Court documents in the Kim case reveal how deeply investigators explored the private communications of a working journalist — and raise the question of how often journalists have been investigated as closely as Rosen was in 2010. The case also raises new concerns among critics of government secrecy about the possible stifling effect of these investigations on a critical element of press freedom: the exchange of information between reporters and their sources. …”

      Of note is that I noticed an odd defensive attitude in favor of Barry’s spin this past week, from Rosen. What else did they learn about him whilst perusing his PRIVATE email communications?

      • What I seem to remember is that Rosen emphasized in some story that there’s no evidence Barry was aware of what the IRS is doing. Look at this part of the story:

        “[FBI agent Reginald] Reyes wrote that there was evidence Rosen had broken the law, “at the very least, either as an aider, abettor and/or co-conspirator.” That fact distinguishes his case from the probe of the AP, in which the news organization is not the likely target.”

        The story notes that Obama has investigated “leaks” more than any other president. So, is the leak investigating just the EXCUSE to be able to troll through reporters’ communications, gather “dirt” on them, or perhaps even find something, anything, that’s even vaguely criminal, and THEN use the threat of outing or even prosecution to make puppets of these reporters? Speculation, sure. But could it be true? More:

        ” … Privacy protections limit searching or seizing a reporter’s work, but not when there is evidence that the journalist broke the law against unauthorized leaks. A federal judge signed off on the search warrant — agreeing that there was probable cause that Rosen was a co-conspirator.

        [U.S. attorney] Machen’s office said in a statement that it is limited in commenting on an open case, but that the government “exhausted all reasonable non-media alternatives for collecting the evidence” before seeking a search warrant.

        However, it remains an open question whether it’s ever illegal, given the First Amendment’s protection of press freedom, for a reporter to solicit information. No reporter, including Rosen, has been prosecuted for doing so. …”

        So the questions I have are:

        1. Has ANYONE been charged in this case?

        2. If not, why not?


        4. Why does he still work at FOX?

        5. Will he continue to work there, with everyone now knowing what we know: That the DOJ may at any point decide to prosecute him, so how unbiased can we believe any of his reports are in the meantime?

        6. Does Barry’s DOJ investigate ONLY to collect information to use to make puppets of reporters?

        7. How many OTHER reporters have been compromised by becoming subject to the DOJ’s proctological exams?

        • http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/348782/obama-administration%E2%80%99s-two-front-war-fox-john-fund

          The Obama Administration’s Two-Front War on Fox

          … Context is everything. The very same month Justice’s probe into Rosen’s story began, the Obama administration’s war on Fox News began. As NRO’s Eliana Johnson has reported:

          In June of 2009, the president complained about a “certain cable network” devoted entirely to attacking his administration. Four months later, former White House communications director Anita Dunn in 2009 said of Fox, “We’re going to treat them the way we would treat an opponent,” adding, “We don’t need to pretend that this is the way that legitimate news organizations behave.” The administration went on to try to exclude Fox from the network pool that covers the White House, making a recent appointee — pay czar Kenneth Feinberg — available for interviews to every network but Fox. When the other networks refused to conduct the interview until Fox was included, the White House relented. But the verbal assault continued, with Obama telling Rolling Stone magazine in 2010 that the network represents a point of view that is “ultimately destructive for the long-term growth of a country that has a vibrant middle class and is competitive in the world.” …”

        • This long article, which I just found in the UK media, basically touches upon what I wrote above. It’s good to learn that other reporters are outraged by what’s going on with regard to Rosen–that the DOJ USED allegations that Rosen was committing a crime (which he wasn’t) by “soliciting” information from classified documents (when Obama classifies virtually EVERYTHING) to obtain a search warrant (from a likely complicit DC judge) to obtain and read Rosen’s personal communications. One reporter tweeted that the alternative, for people in Rosen’s position, is simply to REPORT ONLY WHAT BARRY TELLS YOU TO! IF the lamestream will FINALLY get on board with the Republicans, they may just save our Republic. Barry: The black Nixon. The black Clinton.

          • if there’s these few, there’s a boat load. they’re probably listening to all their phone calls now. no kidding.

            • I believe it. There was even a story in the paper about this–that it’s likely this is a plan to intimidate reporters. It’s what I suggested yesterday: Obama, unlike most every president before him, is taking a hard line against “leaks”. But that’s just his EXCUSE to get the subpoenas to troll through all the reporters’ records, hoping to find ANYTHING to use against them to keep them from doing their jobs. This could easily explain at least SOME of the bias towards Obama that we see throughout the lamestream media, including FOX. By any means necessary. It’s the Chicago thug way, too. Use the connections with the CEOs or stockholders (in the case of FOX–the Saudis). Make up Obama Truth Squads. Use the power of the subpoena and all the government’s agencies to make sure reporters know what they might face if they aren’t “friendly”. Shut reporters who don’t “submit” out of press conferences and pools. Every means at their disposal. Like the MAFIA. Actually, they make the Mafia look like amateurs.

              • http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2013/05/the-doj-versus-journalist-gmail.html

                “The Washington Post reported today that, in the course of a leak investigation of a State Department employee who allegedly provided Fox News’s James Rosen with classified information, the Obama Justice Department not only subpoenaed Rosen’s private e-mails but also said that Rosen was “an aider and abettor and/or co-conspirator” in the alleged crime.

                Rosen was not charged with any crime, but it is unprecedented for the government, in an official court document, to accuse a reporter of breaking the law for conducting the routine business of reporting on government secrets.

                Here is the full forty-four-page Justice Department application for the search warrant of Rosen’s Gmail account. …”

                Link to the Scribd document at the link.

                • Now this is confusing. The judge listed on the subpoena of Rosen’s records is Alan Kay, U.S. magistrate. But this story: http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2013/05/judge-ruled-feds-need-not-notify-fox-reporter-of-search-164397.html

                  talks about how Judge Royce Lamberth made a ruling in 2010 that Rosen didn’t need to be informed about the subpoena of his personal emails, apparently because, in his judgment, the IP was the subject of the subpoena, not Rosen! Outrageous.

                  Judge ruled feds need not notify Fox reporter of search

                  A federal judge in Washington ruled in 2010 that the Justice Department was not required by law to notify Fox reporter James Rosen that prosecutors had obtained his emails in connection with an investigation into a leak about North Korean plans to test a nuclear weapon.

                  In September 2010, Chief U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth overruled the conclusion of federal magistrate John Facciola that Rosen—whose Gmail account was searched—was entitled by law to be informed.

                  Prosecutors contended that under the statute used to get Rosen’s emails, the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, they were not required to provide any notice of the search.

                  In his decision (posted here), Lamberth said the usual search warrant notification provisions apply, but found they were “satisfied by leaving a copy of the warrant with a third-party ISP [internet service provider].” That made the notification sort of a moot point, since Google got the warrant in the first place.

                  “The government has no further obligation to notify the subscriber of the e-mail account at issue,” Lamberth wrote. …”

                  I wonder what prompted Facciola to rule? Did Google object? Oh, well. It’s in the details of the ruling, linked above.

  10. get a load of this:

    and the next article on the site is how the Congress is going to clamp down on Pro Life agencies for misrepresentation of legitimate services.

    • So, that’s the “American way”: Force an abortion. In India, they fix the problem by making the rapist MARRY the victim. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324020504578396790797373784.html

      To Wed Your Rapist, or Not: Indian Women on Trial

      Just weeks after a gang-rape that shocked India, the National Human Rights Commission convened a meeting to discuss what to do about violence against women.

      At the January gathering, G.P. Mathur, a retired Supreme Court justice, startled the crowd: He said it can be appropriate for women to marry their alleged rapists, provided the marriage isn’t coerced. In a recent interview with The Wall Street Journal in which he elaborated on his views, Mr. Mathur described such marriages as “compromises” that victims and their families seek in order to avoid the stigma of a public trial. …”

      And they consider that not to be “coerced?” Their families pressure them to preserve family “honor”?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s