Government spies on reporters using WW1 Espionage act

[August]

The Justice Department did more than seize a Fox News reporter's emails while suggesting he was a criminal "co-conspirator" in a leak case -- it did so under one of the most serious wartime laws in America, the Espionage Act. It's the same law used by the Nixon administration to go after The New York Times and Daniel Ellsberg over the leak of the Pentagon Papers. It's the law used to charge the Rosenbergs, American communists, for allegedly passing secret information to the Soviet Union -- they were executed for the offense in 1953.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/05/22/doj-invoked-espionage-act-in-calling-fox-news-reporter-criminal-co-conspirator/#ixzz2U7d295rC

I'm sure the usual suspects will be in here to claim it's no big deal but here is a second instance of the government spying on the media.

[Sailor Steve]

the usual suspects
Is it really necessary to be confrontational and antagonistic right off the bat?

[Tchocky]

As GT goes, yes yes it's necessary.

[AVGWarhawk]

My thoughts are that spying is more widespread than we think. :yep:

[Tribesman]

I think the journalists should get the same treatment as Manning, how dare they leak confidential information:rotfl2:

[Sailor Steve]

My thoughts are that spying is more widespread than we think. :yep:
I'm sure you're right. Someone mentioned in another thread the concept that people who work with laws usually manage to feel that they are above the law.

[edit] It was Armistead. "I think the problem is, those with authority often tend to think they're above authority."

I'm reminded of an early Saturday Night Live skit in which Garrett Morris storms into an FBI office, demanding to see everything they have on him. Dan Aykroyde denies over and over having ever even heard of him. Morris finally leaves, convinced they have nothing on him at all. As soon as he's gone Aykroyd pages his secretary and says "Get me everything you can find on a Garrett Morris!"

Probably not so far from the truth.

[WernherVonTrapp]

I remember back in (I think) the mid to late 90s, I attended a course for Advanced Criminal Investigations sponsored by the United States Department of Criminal Justice/FBI. If I remember correctly at that time, it hadn't been long since cell phones went from a backpack battery and brick sized phone to the smaller handheld versions. I'm sure it's old news now but even back then, before the advent of GPS phones, they were able to triangulate your cellphone conversations and get a pretty accurate fix on a users location, anywhere in the world. According to the FBI agent advising us of this, it was not common knowledge at the time and was not for public dissemination.

I'm not paranoid about the government eavesdropping on me or watching me. I've never had direct cause to be concerned. The media is the media and has to keep it's shareholders happy by printing articles that they're sure someone will want to read. I'm not suggesting that it has no bearing on whether it's fact or not but that's what they do. They sell a product, which just happens to be "The News". Personally, it seems to me that the media is becoming more and more like paparazzi than objective journalism/reporting, but that's my opinion. I've been interviewed by the media, had statements printed and have been photographed by them.

Do I trust the government? Now that's a completely different perspective of mine. Right now, I'm not afraid of the Government. Back in my early years in Law Enforcement, I was sometimes astonished by things I learned they were capable of (regarding investigative reach/power). Nothing would surprise me now.

[Catfish]

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/05/22/doj-invoked-espionage-act-in-calling-fox-news-reporter-criminal-co-conspirator/#ixzz2U7d295rC
I'm sure the usual suspects will be in here to claim it's no big deal but here is a second instance of the government spying on the media.

Ok Fox news.
Whether it is the government spying at you - some services of a certain kind tend to do that without authorization, and higher knowing.

But yes, since 9/11 the US live in a state of war, and with that all kind of eavesdropping etc. has become legal. Such things are usually allowed, in a war.
In Germany we do not need it though, we are being eavesdropped without a pretext, and most do not mind. As the people in London do not mind the surveillance cameras, and they being eavesdropped.

And, b.t.w. as i linked in another post, in the US the NSA indeed records every eMail, and every telephone call. It is not personally listened to unless there is something 'suspect' found by the algorythms used, but yes all can be read and listened to, anytime.
The new intelligence center that made this possible is in Wyoming, and i am sure you heard about it.

[August]

Ok Fox news.

So you are claiming the story is false?

[AVGWarhawk]

So you are claiming the story is false?

FOX News, fair and balanced?

[August]

Is a liberal rag like the New York Times any more palatable?

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/21/us/politics/white-house-defends-tracking-fox-reporter.html?_r=0

[Sailor Steve]

FOX News, fair and balanced?
And everyone knows that Fox, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS and Wikipedia are never correct and always lie.

It seems to be a common game to dismiss anything by anybody we don't like.

[Ducimus]

And everyone knows that Fox, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS and Wikipedia are never correct and always lie.

It seems to be a common game to dismiss anything by anybody we don't like.

Pretty much.

Six or seven months ago, by reputation alone I would NEVER listen or read ANYTHING from fox news. Honestly as domestic news sources go, I only followed CNN because I thought they were the least bias or most impartial. It was during the gun debate that I saw information and articles appear on CNN that I knew were either skewed or just plain wrong, that I start questioning it and started looking at fox news to see what else was being said.

Since then, whenever i want to check the news, I look at both, filter out the bias that both have and make my own decision. It is my thought however, that most people do what I used to do. Only look at one news source and dismiss anything else by reputation.

There is no fair and balanced, impartial or unbiased news source. They're all skewed. If you want fair and balanced, your going to have to read things that might not tickle your ears, and compare that to a news source that may tickles your ears. "Fair and balanced" is in between. Until you make yourself look at both ends of the bias spectrum, your never going to arrive at some semblance of the truth of any given story making its rounds in the news.

[AVGWarhawk]

Is a liberal rag like the New York Times any more palatable?

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/21/us/politics/white-house-defends-tracking-fox-reporter.html?_r=0

August, all news outlets are rags......end of story.

[Tchocky]

August, all news outlets are rags......end of story.

See, I can appreciate where that sentiment comes from but it's too easy to give up. :-)

[August]

So let's assume the reports are true. We now have two instances of the administration attempting to muzzle the press.

Between this and the other recent abuses of power I think the Nixon comparisons are quite accurate.

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/php/galleries/image.php/307/135/135.jpg

[AVGWarhawk]

See, I can appreciate where that sentiment comes from but it's too easy to give up. :-)

True. Lately I have been reading the BBC and Reuters.

[desertstriker]

Ok Fox news.

And, b.t.w. as i linked in another post, in the US the NSA indeed records every eMail, and every telephone call. It is not personally listened to unless there is something 'suspect' found by the algorythms used, but yes all can be read and listened to, anytime.
The new intelligence center that made this possible is in Wyoming, and i am sure you heard about it.
and with some common sense you can guess any of those words and sometimes they change daily. like after the boston bombing i guarentee the NSA tuned into the USA and their computers searched for "boston" "group" among other things.

And everyone knows that Fox, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS and Wikipedia are never correct and always lie.

It seems to be a common game to dismiss anything by anybody we don't like.
wikipedia has gotten better about what is up and now IIRC all edits and new submissions are checked.

but all news sources are biased some more than others. personally I only listen to fox about foreign news at times domestic example the very recent Moore tornado. for some things I will go overseas for my news since almost all major papers in other countries have a English version online to get a foreign perspective.

[Tribesman]

True. Lately I have been reading the BBC and Reuters.
But BBC is euro weenie and reuters is Connecticut Canuckians so both must be liberal rags

[AVGWarhawk]

But BBC is euro weenie and reuters is Connecticut Canuckians so both must be liberal rags

I just needed a change. :up:

[August]

August, all news outlets are rags......end of story.

Maybe that's so but when both ends of the media spectrum are reporting the same thing it's not anywhere near an "end of story".

[AVGWarhawk]

Maybe that's so but when both ends of the media spectrum are reporting the same thing it's not anywhere near an "end of story".

Depends on the story. To answer your question a few back, no one is claiming the story is false. We can say stories get quite skewed from news outfit to news outfit. Some don't report it at all.

[Sailor Steve]

wikipedia has gotten better about what is up and now IIRC all edits and new submissions are checked.
I've praised Wiki in these forums in the last day or so. My point wasn't about any of those; it was that people seem all to ready to dismiss any story by saying "Oh, THAT source!"

[soopaman2]

How about, I do not care.

What about those jobs jobs jobs 2010 tea baggers, it seems all you care about is banning abortions, crushing Obamacare for the 50th attempt, instituting Christian Sharia, and letting (invisible spook in the sky) Jesus write the laws.


I bet that statement made me "a usual suspect"?


And if you are reading the NY Post for facts....

There is more bikinis and horseracing, than news in that paper.

Rupert Murdoch Tea Bagger rag.

The National Enquirer claims Laura is leaving George Bush because he is drunk, breaking news, no agenda!

[August]

How about, I do not care.

What about those jobs jobs jobs 2010 tea baggers, it seems all you care about is banning abortions, crushing Obamacare for the 50th attempt, instituting Christian Sharia, and letting (invisible spook in the sky) Jesus write the laws.


I bet that statement made me "a usual suspect"?


And if you are reading the NY Post for facts....

There is more bikinis and horseracing, than news in that paper.

Rupert Murdoch Tea Bagger rag.

The National Enquirer claims Laura is leaving George Bush because he is drunk, breaking news, no agenda!

1. New York Times, not New York Post.

2. Tea Partiers can hardly push any agenda when you Democrats control both the Senate and the Administration.

3. You only don't care because it's your side acting like tyrants. Progressives always seem to have a problem taking responsibility for their own screw ups but maybe y'all should realize that your lack of caring now will someday come back to haunt you.

[soopaman2]

1. New York Times, not New York Post.

2. Tea Partiers can hardly push any agenda when you Democrats control both the Senate and the Administration.

3. You only don't care because it's your side acting like tyrants. Progressives always seem to have a problem taking responsibility for their own screw ups but maybe y'all should realize that your lack of caring now will someday come back to haunt you.

Times, yech sorry, although great cover pics, always a corpse or some sick crap. My bad August

You democrats? I am independant, and voted for more Republicans in my life, between national and state elections, as a matter of fact Obama is the only demoncrat I voted for, I am all about Chris Christie! The republican Governor of NJ.



You misunderstand my compassion , and read it as "liberalism":)

My I don't care came from the lack of drive in anyone to change the stagnation we are in.

I have passion, you have passion August, we are not too far off from one another, but our government has become a college frat rivalry...

If people like us, with souls, ran the government, we would find a happy middle ground, but these guys want victory at all costs, and pitting us against one another is key to us ignoring the graft, and oligarchy they have set up for themselves.

George Washington went back to his farm when done, much like the Roman General Cincinattus...

But once politics becomes a career, then all is lost.

[AVGWarhawk]

George Washington went back to his farm when done,

So did Bush, Carter, Reagan.....:O:

[Tribesman]

I just needed a change. :up:
It does make me wonder though.
If most of the media is a vast global liberal conspiracy, does that mean the vast global jewish conspiracy has lost the job?

[Catfish]

Just remember close before WW1, to english banks and Tories it had been the german-jewish financial conspiracy, published in the Times :hmmm:
How the scapegoats change.

[August]

You democrats?

Sorry, my mistake.

[Platapus]

I do think that 18 U.S.C. Chapter 37 needs to be rewritten. There are loopholes and ill defined terms big enough to pilot an aircraft carrier through. :nope: