Skip to main content

View Diary: Rolling Stone/John Knefel: "What's at Stake When the Department of Justice Seizes AP Phone Records" (26 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  It doesn't seem that "seized" is the right word. (6+ / 0-)

    The telephone companies apparently handed over records they keep as a matter of course to be helpful.
    As I have been arguing for months, if not years, it is unwise to rely on the amendments to the Constitution to insure respect for human rights. Not only are privacy, perambulation and association, for example, never mentioned, but the only "protection" for the referenced rights of the press or individuals is that information inappropriately collected cannot be used to prosecute crime in a court. So, if there is no intent or need to prosecute, there's no practical impediment to the collection or, for that matter, the indefinite detention of persons whom it is inadvisible to put on trial.
    It seems telling that the DoJ is relying on laws dating back to 1917. It tells us that, while the Congress has been busy dicking around with women's health and the toting of arms as regular apparel, restraints on our agents of government have been pretty much ignored. Which makes sense. After all, the last thing wanted by our agents in the legislative branches is restrictions on themselves and their cohorts.

    Yes, executive branch bureaucrats are often derided in Congress, but that has about as much credibility as the head of the household dissing "the little woman" who puts dinner in front of him on time. Legislators have a penchant for making themselves seem more important than they are and falling down on their real jobs. And the Obama administration is exposing all the warts. The laws are antiquated because Congress has been more concerned with doling out favors to supporters and prolonging their tenure in office for a long time. Quantified in terms of dollars makes the dole easier to trace but making our natural resources and national treasures available for exploitation has been going on almost forever.

    We organize governments to deliver services and prevent abuse.

    by hannah on Sun May 19, 2013 at 04:40:22 AM PDT

    •  They handed the records over because of a (0+ / 0-)

      secret Patriot Act/FISA subpoena.

      •  Then that info should have been front (0+ / 0-)

        and center and our representatives in Congress should be castigated because of that. All I've read, so far, is that an old law on the books since 1917 was used.
        For that matter, that the PATRIOT Act was a compendium of stuff compiled during the prior Clinton administration as desiderata for bureaucrats should be hammered home.
        I happen to be of the opinion that the Cons are blow-hards and incompetents whose agenda. Would never be implemented if the Dems didn't do it for them.
        Democrats are a good example of the good intentions with which the path to hell is paved. Indeed, in the hands of Democrats, the Cons' malevolence is converted into good intentions. The Dems are made to feel virtuous in doing the Cons' dirty work for them.

        We organize governments to deliver services and prevent abuse.

        by hannah on Sun May 19, 2013 at 10:10:22 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Secret subpeona is the term (0+ / 0-)

          AP President used on on the teevee this morning. Secret subpoenas are Patriot Act stuff. (Though not really sure if a FISA court was involved...just guessing on that.)

          The AP went with the story because the Administration was lying saying they were not aware of any terrorist plots/threats related the anniversary of Osama bin Laden's death. After sitting on the story for five days the AP published the story.

          As a result, they were punished.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site