PDA

View Full Version : Obama Admin Overreach #12,419


Smiling Assassin27
05-13-2013, 04:02 PM
Our 'transparent' Obama Administration secretly obtains phone records of AP reporters and editors. Reap what you sow, MSM:

The Justice Department secretly obtained two months of telephone records of reporters and editors for The Associated Press in what the news cooperative's top executive called a "massive and unprecedented intrusion" into how news organizations gather the news.

The records obtained by the Justice Department 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.


News organizations normally are notified in advance that the government wants phone records and enter into negotiations over the desired information. In this case, however, the government, in its letter to the AP, cited an exemption to those rules that holds that prior notification can be waived if such notice, in the exemption's wording, might "pose a substantial threat to the integrity of the investigation."

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/govt-obtains-wide-ap-phone-records-probe

ant1999e
05-13-2013, 04:53 PM
But what about the Iraq war???

Requiem
05-13-2013, 04:56 PM
Sounds legit.

cutthemdown
05-13-2013, 05:09 PM
Obama had a leak in the white house, or still does, so i am not surprised he went looking for it. Most likely whoever it was shut it down before the big kenyan got wise.

cutthemdown
05-13-2013, 05:13 PM
My cousin lives in Costa Rica now. He's a doctor. He went there to work because he blew the whistle on a scam doing hand surgeries (carpal tunnel) on 80 and 90 yr old patients from rest homes that didn't need them. I have only met him twice but did get down to Costa Rica one time and checked out his life. Its a good one lol. Good looking wife and they live in mostly an area with other Americans and Euros.

He told me he got caught because the hospital checked their phone records and saw he had talked to a reporter and someone at a regulatory agency. Not sure if it was police or what. The moral of the story I guess to never use your phone when giving out a juicy story or blowing the whistle on someone. Or I guess even turning in your neighbor for a crime etc etc. Use a pay phone or an untraceable Obama phone lol. My cousin basically could not get a job after that. No hospital will hire someone who won't keep secrets. According to him hospital staff will even cover up mistakes that led to people dying.

cutthemdown
05-13-2013, 05:15 PM
I don't have a big problem with the White House looking for a leak. But Obama was totally lying when he said he would be more transparent. LOL hes more closed up then any recent Presidents.

houghtam
05-13-2013, 06:18 PM
I don't have a big problem with the White House looking for a leak. But Obama was totally lying when he said he would be more transparent. LOL hes more closed up then any recent Presidents.

I wouldn't say he is any more or less transparent than any other president. I think it's just like a lot of people on here have said, including most conservatives, which is that he made a lot of promises (e.g. Gitmo), and then when he got into office he realized that things were a lot more complicated than he thought. IMO it just seems like he's failing more in that area than others because he ran on the platform of being different. That is his biggest failure as a president.

You can make excuses til the end of the day on how he's had to face blatant racism, a floundering economy, an obstructionist agenda from the opposition...but at the end of the day, he hasn't followed through on what was supposed to have been the most important message. And that is troubling.

It may just be the nature of the presidency. There may just be certain things that you cannot be transparent with for a variety of reasons. It just seems to me that people play the "national security" card for everything, when I just can't envision a world where our security is really all that fragile. You have to wonder if having a person in the White House as opposed to a politician, someone who could expose and blow up all the **** that goes on at the top levels, would really be all that bad for this country at this point.

Never happen, but it's nice to think about.

cutthemdown
05-13-2013, 07:21 PM
Yeah but some things like how repubs are holding up appointments were fine tuned the last 4 yrs of GWB. I do agree repubs using it way more but IMO thats because Obama has pushed a high level of controversial things and people to lead agencies. Whatever one day it will be dems fillibustering and repubs will be mad they cant pass something. Then dems will say you did it to us etc. All part of the game. I find it all more interesting then I do upsetting like many of you.

Politically speaking repubs getting a tad smarter. They will be able to say look we worked with dems on immigration and maybe get a tad better with the latino vote. They still have a lot of work to do with white women. Then obviously the black vote is pretty much out of reach for them right now. Still though if Obamacare implementation is tough on people its going to really hurt the dems in 2014. The economy actually growing a tad but i still think Obamacare is going to hurt it bad once it really kicks in.

cutthemdown
05-13-2013, 07:24 PM
I also agree Presidents probably get a briefing after elected and they find out many things that change how they previously thought.

No clearer example then how Obama went from this:

The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. government can’t pay its own bills. ... I therefore intend to oppose the effort to increase America’s debt limit.”

to this:


“I think if you look at the history, getting votes for the debt ceiling is always difficult, and budgets in this town are always difficult.”
— President Obama, news conference (http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/01/14/news-conference-president), Jan. 14, 2013

Rohirrim
05-13-2013, 08:03 PM
That was pure slime. Like the head of the AP said, it was "Nixonian." Somebody needs to tell Obama he is not the emperor of the United States.

elsid13
05-13-2013, 08:20 PM
That was pure slime. Like the head of the AP said, it was "Nixonian." Somebody needs to tell Obama he is not the emperor of the United States.

To be fair, this was and is a Justice Dept criminal probe of leaked information about CIA operation in Yemen (2nd underwear bombing that was thwarted). The White House most likely wasn't brief about the case. They weren't going after the press but the sources in the House that provided the information. Also the Justice Department didn't break any laws if they were granted subpoena powers by judge in national security areana.

Rohirrim
05-13-2013, 08:22 PM
To be fair, this was and is a Justice Dept criminal probe of leaked information about CIA operation in Yemen (2nd underwear bombing that was thwarted). The White House most likely wasn't brief about the case. They weren't going after the press but the sources in the House that provided the information. Also the Justice Department didn't break any laws if they were granted subpoena powers by judge in national security areana.

Those laws are ****. Those laws are the **** laws that Obama campaigned against and said he would change. :bs:

No good ever came from a government wielding its power against the press. Holder should resign immediately. Obama should demand it.

elsid13
05-13-2013, 08:34 PM
Those laws are ****. Those laws are the **** laws that Obama campaigned against and said he would change. :bs:

No good ever came from a government wielding its power against the press. Holder should resign immediately. Obama should demand it.

We both know that isn't going to happen. It is never as black and white as folks want it to be. I agree that DoJ was overly aggressive in their pursuit of information, but with no laws on the book that prevent them from doing such (just internal regulations), they are going to operate in the grey on this one.

Rohirrim
05-13-2013, 08:39 PM
We both know that isn't going to happen. It is never as black and white as folks want it to be. I agree that DoJ was overly aggressive in their pursuit of information, but with no laws on the book that prevent them from doing such (just internal regulations), they are going to operate in the grey on this one.

They should refer to the Constitution.

barryr
05-13-2013, 09:50 PM
This is the kind of country Obama supporters want I guess. Tapping phones is tolerated as long as a democrat is doing it. If Nixon had been a democrat, he's be labeled a hero.

cutthemdown
05-13-2013, 10:28 PM
I actually think this issue spans the parties. Neither conservatives or liberals give a rats ass about personal freedom and privacy anymore. They want cameras tracking us, access to our text messages, emails, they want it all.

But by turning us against each other on issues like the war, taxes, healthcare, gay marraige, immigration we aren't united enough to take back our consititutional rights.

cutthemdown
05-13-2013, 10:30 PM
The media is a joke though. A bunch of networks closely tied to the liberals pushing their agenda and trying to make conservatives look bad.

and then the conservative response. Fox News which is just real news sprinkled in with the conservative message and spin.

Journalist are supposed to seak the truth and find stories not be part of a parties PR campaign.

Taco John
05-13-2013, 10:46 PM
This could be the one that brings him down. We'll see the extent of it in the coming months and years. But either way you look at it, this is either criminal or grossly incompetent on his part. You got stuff like this and the IRS scandal erupting underneath you, and you say you didn't know anything - that doesn't make you look like someone who has control.

If Obama wasn't a lame duck by now (I think he was), this pretty well seals it up.

cutthemdown
05-13-2013, 10:58 PM
I think for the IRS one we are going to need a special investigator and any and all emails from the Washington IRS office. Every single one needs to be gone through to see who they talked to about it.

elsid13
05-14-2013, 03:44 AM
They should refer to the Constitution.

And if they followed due process?

The Obama DoJ has been extremely aggressive when come to prosecuting national security "leaks" and this is just another example of it (google Batimore sun and trailblazer) . And yes I have little sympathy for House Rep or staffer that passed along information to the AP.

elsid13
05-14-2013, 03:46 AM
This is the kind of country Obama supporters want I guess. Tapping phones is tolerated as long as a democrat is doing it. If Nixon had been a democrat, he's be labeled a hero.

Let get the facts straight, they obtain phone records from phone companies (which requires a subpoena) they tap the conversations.

Rohirrim
05-14-2013, 07:34 AM
And if they followed due process?

The Obama DoJ has been extremely aggressive when come to prosecuting national security "leaks" and this is just another example of it (google Batimore sun and trailblazer) . And yes I have little sympathy for House Rep or staffer that passed along information to the AP.

Come on. Obama is a constitutional professor. He knows that some of these "Patriot" laws are pure bull**** and violate the spirit of the Constitution, if not its particulars. He was willing to say so when he was campaigning. If he's not going to work to toss them out, the least he could do is not use them for his own political ends. Let's tell the truth, Obama (or Holder) was trying to flush out political opponents using powers bestowed on them by the Patriot Act. On the one hand it shows the disgusting level to which our government has sunk, and on the other, the president needs to show the kind of leadership where this sort of bull**** is not allowed, even if it might lead to some political advantage. Hell, especially if it might lead to political advantage.

Damn. Where's TR when you need him? IMHO, Obama has given up. He's just phoning it in this last term. That's how all this kind of **** can happen. There's no leader at the top so the functionaries in the administration just start winging it. I can't blame Obama, really. The rabid Right Wing has made it impossible to govern. Damned if you do. Damned if you don't.

cutthemdown
05-14-2013, 08:15 AM
And if they followed due process?

The Obama DoJ has been extremely aggressive when come to prosecuting national security "leaks" and this is just another example of it (google Batimore sun and trailblazer) . And yes I have little sympathy for House Rep or staffer that passed along information to the AP.

The leak was in the White House.

ant1999e
05-14-2013, 12:00 PM
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Rvqb1EvV--s" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

peacepipe
05-14-2013, 12:33 PM
The leak was in the White House.

According to whom?

TonyR
05-14-2013, 01:58 PM
The Non-Story of the AP Phone Records, At Least So Far

http://www.volokh.com/2013/05/13/the-non-story-of-the-ap-phone-records-at-least-so-far/

elsid13
05-14-2013, 02:44 PM
The leak was in the White House.

Why do you think that? If that was the case why go after the phone records of House Reporters phones?

Rigs11
05-14-2013, 03:09 PM
good. those liberal media bastards deserve this!

Rohirrim
05-14-2013, 03:21 PM
The Non-Story of the AP Phone Records, At Least So Far

http://www.volokh.com/2013/05/13/the-non-story-of-the-ap-phone-records-at-least-so-far/

Are leaks inherently evil? Seems like the DOJ action was pretty wide-sweeping. I would characterize it as an over-reaction. Not only that, but they were investigating a leak associated with a past operation, not a pending one. Were lives in danger? No. Sounds like the interest was more political than national security.

I'm starting to see Holder as the Rahim Moore of Attorney Generals. ;D

elsid13
05-14-2013, 03:27 PM
Are leaks inherently evil? Seems like the DOJ action was pretty wide-sweeping. I would characterize it as an over-reaction. Not only that, but they were investigating a leak associated with a past operation, not a pending one. Were lives in danger? No. Sounds like the interest was more political than national security.

I'm starting to see Holder as the Rahim Moore of Attorney Generals. ;D

US and an Ally intelligence agency were able to infiltrate Al Quida in Yemen (AQiY), but telling the world that the "bomber" worked for us it open up the AQiY ability to understand how we did it and prevent it from happening again. If the "bomber" had just disappeared like we planned they would be clueless on what happen and our method. Sometimes how we do something is more important then what we did. It is very national security related.

Rohirrim
05-14-2013, 03:38 PM
US and an Ally intelligence agency were able to infiltrate Al Quida in Yemen (AQiY), but telling the world that the "bomber" worked for us it open up the AQiY ability to understand how we did it and prevent it from happening again. If the "bomber" had just disappeared like we planned they would be clueless on what happen and our method. Sometimes how we do something is more important then what we did. It is very national security related.

Once the operation has taken place I imagine they wouldn't have much trouble figuring out what happened, leak or not. What I keep seeing is an expansion of government powers under all sorts of various "threats" like drugs, terrorism, etc. The government using its power to intimidate the press is chilling, on its face.

orinjkrush
05-14-2013, 03:53 PM
this is more about the gangstas the O man brought with him than it is about him. This is Chicago-land gangstas operating the way they know how.

DenverBrit
05-14-2013, 03:55 PM
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Rvqb1EvV--s" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Hole-in-one. Now deport him. :~ohyah!:

elsid13
05-14-2013, 04:23 PM
Once the operation has taken place I imagine they wouldn't have much trouble figuring out what happened, leak or not. What I keep seeing is an expansion of government powers under all sorts of various "threats" like drugs, terrorism, etc. The government using its power to intimidate the press is chilling, on its face.

If he had just disappeared they would have been scrambling to figure out what happen, did our SIGINT discover something, is there US assets in their operation, did they just screw up. Doubt in the enemies mind is critical to our success.

Arkie
05-14-2013, 05:13 PM
What I keep seeing is an expansion of government powers under all sorts of various "threats" like drugs, terrorism, etc.

Trading freedom for security

barryr
05-14-2013, 07:57 PM
Let get the facts straight, they obtain phone records from phone companies (which requires a subpoena) they tap the conversations.

Yeah, so much better.

ant1999e
05-24-2013, 10:38 AM
Obama appoints Holder to investigate Holder

In a page ripped right out of Kafka, President Obama announced Thursday afternoon that he will appoint Attorney General Eric Holder to investigate the Attorney General’s targeting of journalists he suspected received classified data.

The targeting first came to light last week with the discovery that the Justice Department had seized two months of telephone records from Associated Press offices and reporters.

On Sunday, It was reported that Fox News correspondents’ records were also seized, extending even to Fox reporter James Rosen’s personal emails and his parent’s telephone records. The DOJ labeled Rosen as a “flight risk” and criminal “co-conspirator” in its search warrant application.

The president indicated he was “troubled by the possibility that leak investigations may chill the investigative journalism that holds government accountable,” and, according to The Hill, expressed those concerns to Attorney General Eric Holder.

“Journalists should not be at legal risk for doing their jobs,” Obama continued. “Our focus must be on those who break the law.”

“Those who break the law” are those who leak confidential information — not journalists who simply do their job.

Yet Holder personally approved the DOJ’s investigation of Fox journalist Rosen, including the search warrant application, according to NBC News.

The far left-leaning Huffington Post suggested that rather than appoint Holder to investigate his own department, the president ought to send him on his way. “Time to go,” the paper proclaimed on its home page.

Perhaps I'm either melodramatic or overly logical, but isn't appointing Holder to investigate his own department a bit like asking Adolf Eichmann to investigate living accommodations at Auschwitz?

Interestingly, back when President Obama was candidate Obama, he called for the resignation of George W. Bush’s attorney general, Alberto Gonzales, as being too much the president’s attorney and not enough the people’s attorney. This clip is from a March, 2007 appearance on Larry King Live.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/TlUmruKGAAc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

http://gopthedailydose.com/2013/05/24/obama-appoints-holder-to-investigate-holder/

peacepipe
05-24-2013, 11:09 AM
Obama appoints Holder to investigate Holder

In a page ripped right out of Kafka, President Obama announced Thursday afternoon that he will appoint Attorney General Eric Holder to investigate the Attorney General’s targeting of journalists he suspected received classified data.

The targeting first came to light last week with the discovery that the Justice Department had seized two months of telephone records from Associated Press offices and reporters.

On Sunday, It was reported that Fox News correspondents’ records were also seized, extending even to Fox reporter James Rosen’s personal emails and his parent’s telephone records. The DOJ labeled Rosen as a “flight risk” and criminal “co-conspirator” in its search warrant application.

The president indicated he was “troubled by the possibility that leak investigations may chill the investigative journalism that holds government accountable,” and, according to The Hill, expressed those concerns to Attorney General Eric Holder.

“Journalists should not be at legal risk for doing their jobs,” Obama continued. “Our focus must be on those who break the law.”

“Those who break the law” are those who leak confidential information — not journalists who simply do their job.

Yet Holder personally approved the DOJ’s investigation of Fox journalist Rosen, including the search warrant application, according to NBC News.

The far left-leaning Huffington Post suggested that rather than appoint Holder to investigate his own department, the president ought to send him on his way. “Time to go,” the paper proclaimed on its home page.

Perhaps I'm either melodramatic or overly logical, but isn't appointing Holder to investigate his own department a bit like asking Adolf Eichmann to investigate living accommodations at Auschwitz?

Interestingly, back when President Obama was candidate Obama, he called for the resignation of George W. Bush’s attorney general, Alberto Gonzales, as being too much the president’s attorney and not enough the people’s attorney. This clip is from a March, 2007 appearance on Larry King Live.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/TlUmruKGAAc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Link?

ant1999e
05-24-2013, 11:23 AM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/23/eric-holder-fox-news-james-rosen-warrant_n_3328663.html

Eric Holder Signed Off On Search Warrant For James Rosen Emails: NBC News

Attorney General Eric Holder personally signed off on the warrant that allowed the Justice Department to search Fox News reporter James Rosen's personal email, NBC News' Michael Isikoff reported Thursday.

The report places Holder at the center of one of the most controversial clashes between the press and the government in recent memory. The warrant he approved named Rosen as a "co-conspirator" in a leak investigation, causing many to warn that the Justice Department was potentially criminalizing journalism. The warrant also approved the tracking of Rosen's movements in and out of the State Department, as well as his communications with his source, Stephen Kim.

The Justice Department later said that it did not intend to press any charges against Rosen.

The attorney general is usually required to approve requests to search journalists' materials, but that rule does not extend to email records.
(Holder recused himself from the investigation into the Associated Press, meaning that he absolved himself of that responsibility.) Holder has previously said that he was not sure how many times he had authorized the search of journalists' records.

The revelation came hours after President Obama said in a speech that he was concerned about the potential implications of the Fox News and AP investigations. Obama said that Holder would be reviewing the department's rules for investigations that involve reporters.

Fox News chief Roger Ailes responded to the Justice Department's investigation on Thursday, sending a staff memo condemning the Obama administration's choices.

"We reject the government’s efforts to criminalize the pursuit of investigative journalism and falsely characterize a Fox News reporter to a Federal judge as a “co-conspirator” in a crime," Ailes wrote. "I know how concerned you are because so many of you have asked me: why should the government make me afraid to use a work phone or email account to gather news or even call a friend or family member? Well, they shouldn’t have done it."

cutthemdown
05-24-2013, 12:51 PM
What a joke. Holder needs to step down and we need an outside investigator big time.

barryr
05-24-2013, 01:12 PM
Of course Holder did. This admin. is more corrupt as Obama supporters believed Nixon or any republican was. But the rules of the game change for political reasons. Soldiers die? Who cares unless a republican is in the WH? Wire taps and digging up info. on reporters? Who cares unless a republican is in the WH. Drones killing innocent people? Who cares unless a republican is in the WH. IRS harassing people and auditing people for obvious political reasons? Who cares unless it's ordered by a republican admin. What a country.

Requiem
05-24-2013, 01:51 PM
Let us know when 100+ members of Obama's Administration get indicted on federal crimes, k?

Smiling Assassin27
06-06-2013, 09:22 AM
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BMFhkr1CAAAFUYY.png

ant1999e
06-06-2013, 11:36 AM
U.S. Is Secretly Collecting Records of Verizon Calls

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/07/us/nsa-verizon-calls.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is secretly carrying out a domestic surveillance program under which it is collecting business communications records involving Americans under a hotly debated section of the Patriot Act, according to a highly classified court order disclosed on Wednesday night.

A senior Obama administration official said on Thursday morning that a court order for the business records of Verizon customers, disclosed by the newspaper The Guardian, “does not allow the government to listen in on anyone’s telephone calls” and “does not include the content of any communications or the name of any subscriber,” but rather “relates exclusively to metadata, such as a telephone number or the length of the call.”

The official emphasized that “all three branches of government are involved in reviewing and authorizing” any domestic intelligence collection under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, and that any surveillance activities under it are overseen by the Justice Department, the office of the Director of National Intelligence, and the FISA Court “to ensure that they comply with the Constitution and laws of the United States and appropriately protect privacy and civil liberties.”

“Information of the sort described in the Guardian article has been a critical tool in protecting the nation from terrorist threats to the United States,” the official said, “as it allows counterterrorism personnel to discover whether known or suspected terrorists have been in contact with other persons who may be engaged in terrorist activities, particularly people located inside the United States.”

On Capitol Hill, people familiar with the program said that it was completely lawful and had been going on for years.

“As far as I know, this is the exact three-month renewal of what has been the case for the past seven years,” said Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California and the chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. “It has been briefed to Congress,” she added, and there is no content involved.

Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, told reporters on Thursday that he did not have a problem with the surveillance program because it was imperative in the war on terror.

“If we don’t do it,” Mr. Graham said, “we’re crazy.”

But some Democrats and Republicans greeted the news with alarm.

Senator Richard Durbin of Illinois, the No. 2 Democrat, said he and other senators initially learned of the government’s review of phone records in an earlier classified briefing, and although they were concerned by what they had heard, they were limited in what they could publicly criticize.

“There’s been a concern about this issue for some time,” he told reporters in the Capitol. “That’s why I think sunsetting many of these laws is appropriate because circumstances change in terms of America’s security. And our information and knowledge change in terms of threats to America.”

The order, signed in April by Judge Roger Vinson of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, directs a Verizon Communications subsidiary, Verizon Business Network Services, to turn over “on an ongoing daily basis” to the National Security Agency all call logs “between the United States and abroad” or “wholly within the United States, including local telephone calls.”

The order does not apply to the content of the communications.

Senator Mark Udall, a Colorado Democrat who has raised warnings about sweeping federal surveillance, suggested on Thursday that the program represented excessive action by the government.

“While I cannot corroborate the details of this particular report, this sort of widescale surveillance should concern all of us and is the kind of government overreach I’ve said Americans would find shocking,” Mr. Udall said. “As a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, it’s why I will keep fighting for transparency and appropriate checks on the surveillance of Americans.”

United States Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. said on Thursday that members of Congress were fully briefed on the intelligence-gathering program that included the daily collection of telephone records from Verizon Communications.

Verizon Business Network Services is one of the nation’s largest telecommunications and Internet providers for corporations. It was not clear whether similar orders have gone to other parts of Verizon, like its residential or cellphone services, or to other telecommunications carriers. The order prohibits its recipient from discussing its existence, and representatives of both Verizon and AT&T declined to comment Wednesday evening.

The four-page order was disclosed Wednesday evening. Obama administration officials at the F.B.I. and the White House also declined to comment on it Wednesday evening, but did not deny the report, and a person familiar with the order confirmed its authenticity. “We will respond as soon as we can,” Marci Green Miller, a National Security Agency spokeswoman, said in an e-mail.

The order was sought by the Federal Bureau of Investigation under a section of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the 1978 law that regulates domestic surveillance for national security purposes, including “tangible things” like a business’s customer records. The provision was expanded by Section 215 of the Patriot Act, which Congress enacted after the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

The order was marked “TOP SECRET//SI//NOFORN,” referring to communications-related intelligence information that may not be released to noncitizens. That would make it among the most closely held secrets in the federal government, and its disclosure comes amid a furor over the Obama administration’s aggressive tactics in its investigations of leaks.

The collection of call logs is set to expire in July unless the court extends it.

The collection of communications logs — or calling “metadata” — is believed to be a major component of the Bush administration’s program of surveillance that took place without court orders. The newly disclosed order raised the question of whether the government continued that type of information collection by bringing it under the Patriot Act.

The disclosure late Wednesday seemed likely to inspire further controversy over the scope of government surveillance. Kate Martin of the Center for National Security Studies, a civil liberties advocacy group, said that “absent some explanation I haven’t thought of, this looks like the largest assault on privacy since the N.S.A. wiretapped Americans in clear violation of the law” under the Bush administration. “On what possible basis has the government refused to tell us that it believes that the law authorizes this kind of request?” she said.

For several years, two Democrats on the Senate Intelligence Committee, Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon and Senator Udall, have been cryptically warning that the government was interpreting its surveillance powers under that section of the Patriot Act in a way that would be alarming to the public if it knew about it.

“We believe most Americans would be stunned to learn the details of how these secret court opinions have interpreted Section 215 of the Patriot Act,” they wrote last year in a letter to Mr. Holder.

They added: “As we see it, there is now a significant gap between what most Americans think the law allows and what the government secretly claims the law allows. This is a problem, because it is impossible to have an informed public debate about what the law should say when the public doesn’t know what its government thinks the law says.”

A spokesman for Senator Wyden did not respond Wednesday to a request for comment on the Verizon order.

The senators were angry because the Obama administration described Section 215 orders as being similar to a grand jury subpoena for obtaining business records, like a suspect’s hotel or credit card records, in the course of an ordinary criminal investigation. The senators said the secret interpretation of the law was nothing like that.

Section 215 of the Patriot Act made it easier to get an order from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to obtain business records so long as they were merely deemed “relevant” to a national-security investigation.

The Justice Department has denied being misleading about the Patriot Act. Department officials have acknowledged since 2009 that a secret, sensitive intelligence program is based on the law and have insisted that their statements about the matter have been accurate.

The New York Times filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit in 2011 for a report describing the government’s interpretation of its surveillance powers under the Patriot Act. But the Obama administration withheld the report, and a judge dismissed the case.

Dukes
06-06-2013, 12:34 PM
MMMMM I love the smell of Tyranny in the morning.

houghtam
06-06-2013, 12:45 PM
And here we are again. Did you read the article? Several references in there about how this has been going on for years.

Where were your complaints when your boy was in office, you partisan shill?

Rigs11
06-06-2013, 01:21 PM
And here we are again. Did you read the article? Several references in there about how this has been going on for years.

Where were your complaints when your boy was in office, you partisan shill?

There were no complaints from the rightards till now. they are trying everything to bring down obama. guess what? it ain't working. his poll numbers are holding steady.

TonyR
06-06-2013, 01:50 PM
And here we are again. Did you read the article? Several references in there about how this has been going on for years.

Where were your complaints when your boy was in office, you partisan shill?

Also, that story is from that liberal rag NYT. So how can it be true?

houghtam
06-06-2013, 02:06 PM
Also, that story is from that liberal rag NYT. So how can it be true?

Yeah where's barry to whine about how the liberal media isn't covering this?

Smiling Assassin27
06-06-2013, 02:33 PM
When you're a liberal and you lose the NYT...

Those reassurances have never been persuasive — whether on secret warrants to scoop up a news agency’s phone records or secret orders to kill an American suspected of terrorism — especially coming from a president who once promised transparency and accountability. The administration has now lost all credibility. Mr. Obama is proving the truism that the executive will use any power it is given and very likely abuse it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/07/opinion/president-obamas-dragnet.html?_r=0


Hilarious that it took this long, but then it is the NYT--sworn to uphold Democratic pols come hell or high water. The corruption is just so obvious that even the NYT can't sacrifice anymore of its already low credibility for the sake of Caesar.

TonyR
06-06-2013, 02:38 PM
Hilarious that it took this long, but then it is the NYT--sworn to uphold Democratic pols come hell or high water.

What's really hilarious is that you ever believed the NYT was remotely as biased as you think it was. But when you do nothing but gulp down right wing propaganda it's really not all that surprising that you're so detached from reality.

BroncoBeavis
06-06-2013, 03:13 PM
What's really hilarious is that you ever believed the NYT was remotely as biased as you think it was. But when you do nothing but gulp down right wing propaganda it's really not all that surprising that you're so detached from reality.

If we can count on anything, we can count on Big Tony making the reaction to the story the real story. Polls and Politics. amirite? Polls and Politics.

houghtam
06-06-2013, 03:31 PM
If we can count on anything, we can count on Big Tony making the reaction to the story the real story. Polls and Politics. amirite? Polls and Politics.

What part of us telling you that nothing is going to come of this have you not understood so far? Lets recap shall we?

Story breaks. You cry foul. We say let's see where the investigation leads. You point out numerous times where you think it's leading. We say its not going to matter because nothing will come of it (gee, I wonder if there's precedent). You link the Watergate story. We laugh at what a ridiculous comparison it is and then link stories about what a non-story this is. You whine about how politics works.

Considering its taking you weeks to figure out, it seems like you're a bit slow on the uptake.

cutthemdown
06-06-2013, 03:36 PM
What a trainwreck Obamas whole administration has become. From Fast and Furious, to Benghazzigate, to IRSgate, to attacking freedom of the press and leaking state secrets at the same time this administration a few decades after its over will rate on of the worst ever by historians.

Then one day we will finally find out the truth about all his mysteries.

Smiling Assassin27
06-06-2013, 03:42 PM
When did the NYT become so racist? ;)

houghtam
06-06-2013, 03:54 PM
What a trainwreck Obamas whole administration has become. From Fast and Furious, to Benghazzigate, to IRSgate, to attacking freedom of the press and leaking state secrets at the same time this administration a few decades after its over will rate on of the worst ever by historians.

Then one day we will finally find out the truth about all his mysteries.

LOL Hilarious!

Except the previous administration started Fast and Furious (then known as Wide Receiver), had a major terrorist attack on US soil, used the IRS to target groups opposed to their views, wiretapped people without a warrant to do so, outed a CIA agent... (that's all without even bringing up Iraq, Afghanistan, Katrina)

Worst ever? Obama isn't even the worst this millennium.

Arkie
06-06-2013, 05:12 PM
Worst ever? Obama isn't even the worst this millennium.

What a way to start off the new millennium! Sixteen years of the two worst Presidents in history. The sad reality is that Romney, McCain, and Kerry wouldn't have been any better. It's not a political party problem, it's a federal government problem.

cutthemdown
06-06-2013, 05:21 PM
LOL Hilarious!

Except the previous administration started Fast and Furious (then known as Wide Receiver), had a major terrorist attack on US soil, used the IRS to target groups opposed to their views, wiretapped people without a warrant to do so, outed a CIA agent... (that's all without even bringing up Iraq, Afghanistan, Katrina)

Worst ever? Obama isn't even the worst this millennium.

LOL Obama could sprout horns and you would say yeah but Bush was a draft dodger! HAHA! Your hope and change president is crap and you know it. Wait until Obamacare kicks in and the economy takes the last **** of Obamas term. People will be as sick of him as they were carter by the time he goes.

peacepipe
06-06-2013, 05:39 PM
What a way to start off the new millennium! Sixteen years of the two worst Presidents in history. The sad reality is that Romney, McCain, and Kerry wouldn't have been any better. It's not a political party problem, it's a federal government problem.

:Whaaaa!: the big evil federal government.

houghtam
06-06-2013, 05:49 PM
LOL Obama could sprout horns and you would say yeah but Bush was a draft dodger! HAHA! Your hope and change president is crap and you know it. Wait until Obamacare kicks in and the economy takes the last **** of Obamas term. People will be as sick of him as they were carter by the time he goes.

That's not the point. You've missed it, as always.

The point is that you're right. In terms of how he goes about getting things done, transparency and foreign policy, he's not much different than anyone we've seen over the past 50 years. That means your claim that he is somehow the worst president ever needs to show that he's done some really bad stuff for which there is no precedent.

There is precedent for ALL the items you listed. That means Obama is just more of the same, not the worst president ever. My inclusion of Bush into the argument is to show that not only was there precedent for all the items you listed, but there was precedent for all the items you listed JUST from the last administration alone!

So why the outrage? I was under the impression that you all knew that the hope and change mantra was BS. If there's no surprise, if there's a history of overreach that doesn't start with the Obama presidency, if there is no proof the Obama administration is doing anything illegal AND hasn't been done before...I ask again...why so much outrage and overexaggeration?

Because. He's a Democrat.

To put it another, simpler way that maybe you can understand...how is it possible for someone to be simultaneously "more of the same" and "the worst ever?"

DenverBrit
06-06-2013, 05:49 PM
What a way to start off the new millennium! Sixteen years of the two worst Presidents in history. The sad reality is that Romney, McCain, and Kerry wouldn't have been any better. It's not a political party problem, it's a federal government problem.

I think it's both.

Obama was a reaction the the bizarre Bush years, just like Carter after the Nixon resignation (not counting the unelected Ford) and Reagan after the Carter years.

We don't necessarily elect the best for the job, more like in reaction to the previous administration along party lines.

The bureaucrats and the Federal system remain largely intact and keep growing.

BroncoBeavis
06-06-2013, 06:32 PM
:Whaaaa!: the big evil federal government.

You picked one hell of a day for that line of sarcasm. LOL

TonyR
06-06-2013, 06:41 PM
If we can count on anything, we can count on Big Tony making the reaction to the story the real story. Polls and Politics. amirite? Polls and Politics.

Lots of people here attack sources like the NYT when it doesn't fit the narrative of their cocooned right wing reality. You are one of the main offenders here of attacking the source of news and opinions you don't like, so you should be quite familiar with it. I think it's fair for me to point out how funny it is when y'all jump to post articles from those terrible sources when they fit your agenda. Nowhere did I say the story was bad or false or untrustworthy. Only that it's funny seeing one of the righties jumping all over it. Like hungry dogs to table scraps.

BroncoBeavis
06-06-2013, 06:54 PM
Lots of people here attack sources like the NYT when it doesn't fit the narrative of their cocooned right wing reality. You are one of the main offenders here of attacking the source of news and opinions you don't like, so you should be quite familiar with it. I think it's fair for me to point out how funny it is when y'all jump to post articles from those terrible sources when they fit your agenda. Nowhere did I say the story was bad or false or untrustworthy. Only that it's funny seeing one of the righties jumping all over it. Like hungry dogs to table scraps.

It's clear you don't understand the nature of bias. It's not generally about terrible vs great. It's about agendas and focus.

Anyway, sources who normally share your view are joining the bipartisan chorus while you bury your head in the sand. It only serves to illustrate how completely at the margins you are with your excusemaking and denialism.

If someone used right-leaning sources, you'd discredit them. So they use your 'gold standard' sources, so you say "How dare you!" In essence, you're really just locking yourself in a dark closet and plugging your ears.

TonyR
06-06-2013, 09:03 PM
LOL A guy pushing a Daily Caller piece trying to lecture me on the "nature of bias" and "agendas and focus"! Hilarious! Good stuff, Beavis. I know you weren't going for funny. Even so, I am laughing at you!

Obushma
06-06-2013, 09:14 PM
LOL A guy pushing a Daily Caller piece trying to lecture me on the "nature of bias" and "agendas and focus"! Hilarious! Good stuff, Beavis. I know you weren't going for funny. Even so, I am laughing at you!

Just flop your tongue out and commence with your Obama boot lick

cutthemdown
06-06-2013, 11:40 PM
Lots of people here attack sources like the NYT when it doesn't fit the narrative of their cocooned right wing reality. You are one of the main offenders here of attacking the source of news and opinions you don't like, so you should be quite familiar with it. I think it's fair for me to point out how funny it is when y'all jump to post articles from those terrible sources when they fit your agenda. Nowhere did I say the story was bad or false or untrustworthy. Only that it's funny seeing one of the righties jumping all over it. Like hungry dogs to table scraps.

So you don't attack when right leaning news sources are used? This is big because when the liberal leaning media starts to turn you know its getting bad.

Vegas_Bronco
06-07-2013, 12:18 AM
Take 1 min to detach and truly understand how serious this issue is...regardless of the party affiliation.

Let not him who is houseless pull down the house of another, but let him work diligently and build one for himself, thus by example assuring that his own shall be safe from violence when built.

Abraham Lincoln

TonyR
06-07-2013, 07:20 AM
Just flop your tongue out and commence with your Obama boot lick

Show me where in my post you see any boots being licked? I don't even mention Obama.

BroncoBeavis
06-07-2013, 08:05 AM
LOL A guy pushing a Daily Caller piece trying to lecture me on the "nature of bias" and "agendas and focus"! Hilarious! Good stuff, Beavis. I know you weren't going for funny. Even so, I am laughing at you!

Don't think I ever pushed the Daily Caller piece. Even so, it followed up on what was already testimony. You can continue to believe in this fantasy world that so long as Daily Caller said something about something you can treat it as anti-truth.

But it's fairly clear you already do that with anything that doesn't fit your preconceived checklist of notions.

Goooooooooooooooobama! LOL

BroncoBeavis
06-07-2013, 08:07 AM
Show me where in my post you see any boots being licked? I don't even mention Obama.

Of course you don't. If the Obama admin effs up, you won't talk about Obama. You'll talk about everyone who's talking about Obama.

You're kinda like the Surveillance State version of Ted Haggard.

BroncoInferno
06-07-2013, 08:18 AM
It's clear you don't understand the nature of bias. It's not generally about terrible vs great. It's about agendas and focus.

Anyway, sources who normally share your view are joining the bipartisan chorus while you bury your head in the sand. It only serves to illustrate how completely at the margins you are with your excusemaking and denialism.

If someone used right-leaning sources, you'd discredit them. So they use your 'gold standard' sources, so you say "How dare you!" In essence, you're really just locking yourself in a dark closet and plugging your ears.

If Hitler says, "2+2=4," that statement is true regardless of the ignominy of the source. Saying "Hitler is an evil a-hole" is irrelevant to the validity of the statement itself. You typing a smiley and making smart-ass comments about a particular source does nothing to discredit the argument. Like when righties pretend to have discredited global warming because Al Gore flew on a jet. Al Gore's lifestyle is immaterial to the validity of his argument. To be fair, you get this from the left too when they laugh at Fox News or The Weekly Standard. I'm sure you can find posts of mine where I've done the same. But it's a fallacy to do so. Address the argument, or it's safe to assume you don't know how to.

TonyR
06-07-2013, 08:22 AM
But it's fairly clear you already do that with anything that doesn't fit your preconceived checklist of notions.


You mean, kinda like your assumption that Obama is "guilty" in this whole IRS thing? Kinda like that?

Look, if you're stupid enough to think the Daily Caller is a more reliable source than the NYT then I don't know what to tell you. And you've failed to see how silly and ludicrous your attempt at "teaching" me about bias is. The Daily Caller is a propaganda outfit with a clear agenda. I shouldn't have to explain this to you. Occasionally you show a level of intelligence which at least suggests you can probably understand this through the red haze of your Obama hatred.

TonyR
06-07-2013, 08:27 AM
What a trainwreck Obamas whole administration has become. From Fast and Furious, to Benghazzigate, to IRSgate, to attacking freedom of the press and leaking state secrets at the same time this administration a few decades after its over will rate on of the worst ever by historians.

I appreciate that conservative reformers must pay lip-service to shibboleths about Barack Obama being the worst president of all time, who won’t rest until he has snuffed out the remains of constitutional liberty, etc. etc. Dissent too much from party orthodoxy, and you find yourself outside the party altogether.

Still … conservative reformers should admit, if only to themselves, the harm that has been done by the politics of total war over the past five years. Now Republicans are working themselves into a frenzy that will paralyze Congress for the next 18 months at least, and could well lead to an impeachment crisis. As it becomes clear that the IRS story is an agency scandal, not a White House scandal, conservative reformers need to be ready to do their part to apply the brakes and turn the steering wheel. There will be a Republican president again someday, and that president will need American political institutions to work. Republicans also lose as those institutions degenerate. - David Frum
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/06/03/all-good-things.html

Smiling Assassin27
06-07-2013, 08:46 AM
Ah, I spoke to soon on the NYT. After saying the President has lost all credibility, they came back with this:

The President has lost all credibility...ON THIS ISSUE.

I'm shocked it took a whole day to back off their statement. How long before we see the NYT editorial that says 'The President has shown an almost deistic ability to regain credibility...ON EVERY ISSUE!'?

NYT can slink back into the admin's good graces and relinquish the spine they seemed to grow just yesterday. Pu$$ies.

BroncoBeavis
06-07-2013, 08:49 AM
You mean, kinda like your assumption that Obama is "guilty" in this whole IRS thing? Kinda like that?

Never said he was guilty. I said there are far too many open questions for you and PP to declare anything a dead end. Which you like to do. At every opportunity.

These abuses are both consistent and widespread. The WH did itself few favors with the 'few rogue agents' bull**** right off the bat. It's demonstrably beyond that.

But anytime you see someone lead off with a lie (or even stacked layers of lies), it makes most people wonder where the real truth ends. Only the team players will watch lie after lie and still valiantly cling to any leftover plausible deniability.

elsid13
06-07-2013, 08:49 AM
- David Frum
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/06/03/all-good-things.html

That argument only works if they were actually interested in governing. It far better for those institutions not to work if you are only interested in getting elected.

Rohirrim
06-07-2013, 08:53 AM
- David Frum
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/06/03/all-good-things.html

It's interesting to think about what the Right might want, isn't it? We know they want to tear down our government and are doing everything in their power to destroy it. I guess an apt analogy would be, maybe they can't shut down the engine directly, but they can certainly keep putting sand in the gas tank until it fails. And then what?

We can suss out the government they would like by simply following their agenda. No taxes on corporations. No estate taxes. No capital gains taxes. (The incomes of the rich have gone up by 60% over the last two decades already. Who knows where these tax policies would lead?) Totally uncontrolled banksters. Uncontrolled corporations. Shut down Fed. No social programs. Healthcare completely left to the discretion of the insurance corporations without government intervention. Medicare and Social Security shut down. Medicaid gone. No EPA. No federal education program, other than making sure the Bible is part of the curriculum. No gay marriage. No immigration. The war on drugs goes on and on and on. America goes into Syria. What else would they like?

TonyR
06-07-2013, 08:57 AM
Ah, I spoke to soon on the NYT. After saying the President has lost all credibility, they came back with this...

LOL You are aware that the NYT isn't some monolithic entity with a single voice, right? That the opinions and stories produced and published by and for the publication aren't all written by the same person?

BroncoBeavis
06-07-2013, 08:57 AM
It's interesting to think about what the Right might want, isn't it? We know they want to tear down our government and are doing everything in their power to destroy it. I guess an apt analogy would be, maybe they can't shut down the engine directly, but they can certainly keep putting sand in the gas tank until it fails. And then what?

Damn, that sounds almost Gaffenian. LOL

cutthemdown
06-07-2013, 09:12 AM
- David Frum
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/06/03/all-good-things.html

When he said its clear the IRS is an agency scandal I stopped reading. He doesn't know that. We have an IRS who refuses to admit who ordered the targetting. One of them plead the 5th to avoid answering it. If that doesn't set off alarms someone at the white house could be involved what does?

BroncoBeavis
06-07-2013, 11:16 AM
When he said its clear the IRS is an agency scandal I stopped reading. He doesn't know that. We have an IRS who refuses to admit who ordered the targetting. One of them plead the 5th to avoid answering it. If that doesn't set off alarms someone at the white house could be involved what does?

Uncut video of Obama ordering Shulman to get it done. That's all they'll accept. I thought maybe a signed document would be enough, but these guys would tell us signatures are too easy to forge. And photos can be shopped. Useless. :)