Tag: associated press

Jul 19 2013

New DOJ Journalist Rules: For Thee But Not For Me

Cross posted from The Stars Hollow Gazette

In the recent embarrassing uproar over Attorney General Eric Holder’s labeling a James Rosen, reporter for Fox News, a co-conspirator in a federal leak probe and issued a secret search warrant for his e-mails, Holder said that Department of Justice rules would be reviewed and revised as needed. The “New Rules” on media policy (pdf) were issued last week. The rules, as Marcy Wheeler at empty wheel points out, will only apply to explicitly to “members of the news media,” not journalists per se.

The definition might permit the exclusion of bloggers and book writers, not to mention publishers like WikiLeaks. [..]

That approach would have several advantages over protecting “the news media.” First, by protecting the act of journalism, you include those independent reporters who are unquestioningly engaging in journalism (overcoming the blogger question I laid out, but also those working independently on book projects, and potentially – though this would be a contentious though much needed debate – publishers like WikiLeaks), but also exclude those news personalities who are engaging in entertainment, corporate propaganda, or government disinformation.

The rules also are a move to set up an “official press.” More from Marcy who goes into detail:

The First Amendment was written, in part, to eliminate the kind of official press that parrots only the King’s sanctioned views. But with its revised “News Media Policies,” DOJ gets us closer to having just that, an official press.

That’s because all the changes laid out in the new policy (some of which are good, some of which are obviously flawed) apply only to “members of the news media.” They repeat over and over and over and over, “news media.” I’m not sure they once utter the word “journalist” or “reporter.” And according to DOJ’s Domestic Investigation and Operations Guide, a whole slew of journalists are not included in their definition of “news media.” [..]

The limitation of all these changes to the “news media” is most obvious when it treats the Privacy Protection Act – which should have prevented DOJ from treating James Rosen as a  suspect. [..]

The PPA, however, applies to all persons “reasonably believed to have a purpose to disseminate to the public a newspaper, book, broadcast, or other similar form of public communication.” [..]

I’m clearly covered by the PPA. But the FBI could easily decide to exclude me from this “news media” protection so as to be able to snoop into my work product.

Congratulations to the “members of the news media” who have been deemed the President’s official press. I hope you use your privileges wisely.

Update: I’ve learned that the issue of whom this applied to did come up in background meetings at DOJ; in fact, DOJ raised the issue. The problem is, there is no credentialing system that could define who gets this protection and DOJ didn’t want to lay it out (and most of the people invited have never been anything but a member of the news media, making it hard for them to understand how to differentiate a journalist).

Ultimately, I think DOJ is so anxious for Congress to pass a shield law (which they say elsewhere in their report) because it’ll mean Congress will do the dirty work of defining who is and who is not a journalist.

The full article is a wealth of information and worth the time to read it, along with all the links.

The Obama administration and Congress are coming very close to creating a state sanctioned press, a true “Pravda on the Potomac,” as The Washington Post is unofficially called. This is Cass Sunstein’s dream come true.

May 15 2013

Obama DOJ: What First Amendment

Cross posted from The Stars Hollow Gazette

I’m proud to be here as you host World Press Freedom Day.  So everybody from the American press corps, you should thank the people of Costa Rica for celebrating free speech and an independent press as essential pillars of our democracy.

~President Obama

Remarks by President Obama and President Chinchilla of Costa Rica in a Joint Press Conference, in National Center for Art and Culture San Jose, Costa Rica, 10 days ago.

That was so ten days ago. The news broke that Obama Department of Justice had secretly seized two months of phone records of the Associated Press reporters and editors.

The government would not say why it sought the records. Officials have previously said in public testimony that the U.S. attorney in Washington is conducting a criminal investigation into who may have provided information contained in a May 7, 2012, AP story about a foiled terror plot. The story disclosed details of a CIA operation in Yemen that stopped an al-Qaida plot in the spring of 2012 to detonate a bomb on an airplane bound for the United States.

In testimony in February, CIA Director John Brennan noted that the FBI had questioned him about whether he was AP’s source, which he denied. He called the release of the information to the media about the terror plot an “unauthorized and dangerous disclosure of classified information.”

Prosecutors have sought phone records from reporters before, but the seizure of records from such a wide array of AP offices, including general AP switchboards numbers and an office-wide shared fax line, is unusual.

The president and CEO of AP, Gary Pruitt sent a letter protesting the “massive and unprecedented intrusion” (pdf):

Last Friday afternoon, AP General Counsel Laura Malone received a letter from the office of United States Attorney Ronald C. Machen Jr. advising that, at some unidentified time earlier this year, the Department obtained telephone toll records for more than 20 separate telephone lines assigned to the AP and its journalists. The records that were secretly obtained cover a full two-month period in early 2012 and, at least as described in Mr. Machen’s letter, include all such records for, among other phone lines, an AP general phone number in New York City as well as AP bureaus in New York City, Washington, D.C., Hartford, Connecticut, and at the House of Representatives. This action was taken without advance notice to AP or to any of the affected journalists, and even after the fact no notice has been sent to individual journalists whose home phones and cell phone records were seized by the Department.

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 newsgathering activities undertaken by the AP during a two month period, provide a road map to AP’s newsgathering operations, and disclose information about AP’s activities and operations that the government has no conceivable right to know.(my emphasis)

h/t to Marcy Wheeler who points out the two months, April to May of 2012, that were of interest covered the period that, now CIA Director, John Brennan had rolled out his drone propaganda campaign:

That would mean they’d get the sources for this Kimberly Dozier story published May 21 [..]

Within 10 days of the time Dozier published that story, John Brennan had rolled out an enormous propaganda campaign – based on descriptions of the drone targeting process that Brennan’s power grab had replaced, not the new drone targeting process – that suckered almost everyone commenting on drones that drone targeting retained its previous, more deliberative, targeting process, the one Brennan had just changed.

And that propaganda campaign, in turn, hid another apparent detail: that UndieBomb 2.0, a Saudi sting had actually occurred earlier in April, and that UndieBomb 2.0 preceded and perhaps justified the signature strikes done at the behest of the Yemenis (or more likely the Saudis).

Marcy listed the timeline of the AP stories that were focused on Brennan and the undie bomber. However, it was after the Dozier story that  Brennan began his propaganda campaign to cover up how illegal and uncontrollable the drone program is.

Comparing this to Nixon and Watergate, Charles P. Pierce goes full throttle on why Eric Holder should be fired:

This isn’t hard. This is what made Egil (Bud) Krogh famous. This is what got people sent to jail in the mid-1970’s. This is the Plumbers, all over again, except slightly more formal this time, and laundered, disgracefully, even more directly through the Department Of Justice. And of course, this is not nearly good enough. And even if you point out, as you should, that the AP is hyping this story a little — The government “secretly” obtained the records? Doesn’t that imply that nobody knew the records had been seized? Wasn’t there a subpoena? The phone companies knew. — the ignoble clumsiness of this more than obviates those particular quibbles.

The White House on Monday said that other than press reports it had no knowledge of Justice Department attempts to seek AP phone records. “We are not involved in decisions made in connection with criminal investigations, as those matters are handled independently by the Justice Department,” spokesman Jay Carney said.

That is all my arse. At the least, this was a counter-terrorism operation. (Why else would Brennan have been questioned already?). Which puts the whole business inside the White House. And you’d have to be a toddler or a fool to believe that Eric Holder could go off on his own and take as politically volatile a step as this. But, let us take the White House at its word. Eric Holder did this by himself. He should be gone. This moment. Not only is this constitutionally abhorrent, it is politically moronic. Nobody likes the press, I will grant you that, but the administration is soft if it thinks the public distrusts the press that much. And to have this genuinely chilling revelation emerge simultaneously with the Benghazi, Benghazi!, BENGHAZI! mummery and the IRS dumbassery is pretty much a full broadside below the water line of this administration’s credibility. Good god, this is going to be one long-ass summer.

Pres. Obama needs to do damage control starting with throwing Holder to the wolves. I suspect this will be the next congressional investigation in an effort to not just derail Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign but to build a case for impeachment of Obama for abuse of his executive powers. A long hot summer, indeed.

Apr 12 2010

Will Sen. Scott Brown Meet With Massachusetts Immigrant Youth Before April 17?

Originally posted on Citizen Orange.

In case you missed it, the Associated Press recently covered our request for a meeting with Senator Scott Brown (R-Mass.).  We are asking Sen. Brown to meet with us before April 17.

Harvard College Act on a Dream has been trying to meet with Sen. Brown since he was first elected at the beginning of the semester.  We were told that his office was a mess the first couple of months, but we were finally asked to fax our meeting request to his office.  We sent the fax on March 5, 2010. 

After not getting a commitment to a meeting for over a month, we were forced to take our meeting request public.  We
joined forces with the Student
Immigrant Movement to set up an
online petition which already has over 100 signatures (please sign
it if you haven’t done so, yet).  The online petition resulted in
coverage from the AP, and now our request is all over the web.  We were
happy to hear through the AP that his office has received our meeting
request and will shortly ask for more information from us.

Still, it’s going to take a lot more than an AP article and a hundred petition signatures to secure a meeting with Brown.  Here are some things you can do to help:

  1. SIGN the petition at change.org and ask all of your friends and family to do the same, especially if they are Massachusetts residents. 
  2. CALL Brown’s D.C. office (202-224-4543) and his local office (617-565-3170) to ask whether or not Brown will meet with us before April 17.
  3. JOIN the Facebook group and ask your Facebook friends to do the same
  4. HELP us fight any misinformation or nativism that you see online regarding our meeting request.   

Dec 07 2009

Good Lord, what a bunch of jackasses

What a bunch of jackasses.  

These people are not only incredibly stupid, they think we’re even more stupid than they are.

And they might be right.

Check this shit out:

US says bin Laden sometimes slips into Afghanistan

Oh REEEEEAAALLY?  

Let’s see how this is working here.  The Pentagon crook Robert Gates has decided that in spite of a majority of Americans “lacking the resolve” to “perservere” and “win at all costs” in Afghanistan, has decided to have some stupid lackey tell us that hey, you know, sometimes Osama bin Laden actually crosses the border and ENTERS Afghanistan.

He could be there right now!   He could be!  I mean, prove that he’s not!  I’ll bet you five bucks he’s there right now!   And and and if he does, and we’re bombing Afghanistan when he walks into it, he might walk into one of our bombs and and and then he’d be, like, dead!  ‘Cause we’d blow him up!  

What a childish bunch of douchebags.

Do they have any evidence of this?

No.

Is there any intelligence that might actually support such speculation?

No.

Is this anything other than a wild guess?

No.

Is it pure unadulterated bullshit?

Yes.

I could just as easily get up on a podium in front of the press and swear that I’m pretty sure Ken Lay is alive and well and living in a Penthouse suite in Reno.  Have I actually seen him?  No.   Do I have any evidnece he’s there?   No.   Then why would I say such a thing?   Because he could be there.   It’s possible!


Asked on CNN’s “State of the Union” whether the administration has reliable intelligence on bin Laden’s whereabouts, Jones replied, “The best estimate is that he is somewhere in North Waziristan, sometimes on the Pakistani side of the border, sometimes on the Afghan side of the border.”

Yeah, and sometimes he’s at the Taco Bell in Kandahar.  I mean, why not?  He could be.   That’s a “guess”, too, right up there with his “best guess”.   What makes one “guess” better than another “guess?”

Jones did not comment on the intelligence behind that estimate, nor did he cite a time period or describe more specifically bin Laden’s apparent border crossings.

That’s because he doesn’t have any intelligence.  Of any kind.  The kind in your brain that makes you smart, or the kind that gives you information.

Gates told ABC’s “This Week” that “we don’t know for a fact where Osama bin Laden is,” although he agreed that his likely location is North Waziristan.

Yeah, and who told you that, Gates?  The Osama fairy?  

Obama administration officials have often asserted, as did the Bush administration, that they believe bin Laden is being sheltered on the Pakistani side of the border, along with other senior al-Qaida leaders. But Jones broke new ground by saying publicly that the al-Qaida chief may at times have slipped back into Afghanistan.

Oh good, they believe it.   Well my son believes that Santa Claus lives on the North Pole, and I think that both are about as likely.

I quit believing in Santa Claus when I was eight years old, and I quit believing in the Osama Bin Boogeyman a few years ago, too.  Both are myths designed to manipulate people into behaving certain ways.  My son will jump through all KINDS of hoops when I tell him stories about Santa Claus.   It feel kinda guilty, but we do it to everybody, right?

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., made a somewhat similar, if less specific, remark Sunday about bin Laden’s movements. He told NBC’s “Meet the Press” that knowledgeable people have told him that bin Laden “moves back and forth.”

Yeah, and he does pilates every morning, too.  And brushes his teeth with the bones of a dead secretary from 9/11.  

Have you seen that movie “Idiocracy”?   This country is actually turning into that.

“Squirrel!!”

Nov 24 2009

The AP — Whorin’ it up as always! Got good insurance? Then you’re the same as a welfare queen.

The AP continues its right-wing propagandistic ways, this time asking one of those “hypothetical” questions that the right wing loves to throw out there, you know, the “Is Obama really a Muslim”, or “Is Bill Clinton guilty of rape?” or whatever, you know the drill, it’s something anyone can do, it’s the classic “when did you stop beating your wife?” technique, but nobody does but the right-wing in this country because, well, nobody owns the media in this countyry except the right wing corporate bastards, and the AP is their clearinghouse for this shit.

So today, thanks to EK’s afternoon news digest here, I am presented with this gem:

Health reform: Is tax on ‘Cadillac’ plans fair?

Jan 08 2008

AP busted — Internal memo — Everything Britney is “Big Deal”

Well if you were wondering exactly who decides that every move Britney Spears makes is newsworthy, look no farther than the GOP-worshipping Associated Press.  

An AP internal memo reads as follows:


From: Baker, Frank S.

Sent: Tue 1/8/2008 11:58 AM

To: News – Southern California Editorial Staff

Subject: Britney

All:

Now and for the foreseeable future, virtually everything involving Britney is a big deal. That doesn’t mean every rumor makes it on the wire. But it does mean that we want to pay attention to what others are reporting and seek to confirm those stories that WE feel warrant the wire. And when we determine that we’ll write something, we must expedite it.

Thanks.

Frank