More than one week after the AP announced that the Justice Department subpoenaed two months of phone records in an apparent attempt to discover the source of an intelligence leak, the president and CEO of the news agency attacked US President Barack Obama and his administration for what he considers an unconstitutional intrusion on the way journalism is conducted.Speaking to CBS News on how the Justice Department secretly sought months’ worth of phone records, AP President Gary Pruitt said the government has “no business” interfering with journalists.“I don’t know what their motive is, but I can tell you their actions are unconstitutional,” Pruitt said on Sunday’s Face the Nation.On the record, the government has yet to explain why they requested the logs for 21 different phone lines used by the AP. But according to the company’s top executive, the government is doing everything in its power — and some things that aren’t — to learn the identity of the source that went to the media about a foiled terrorist attack thwarted by the CIA in 2012.“We don’t question their right to conduct these sorts of investigations, we just think they went about it the wrong way,” Pruitt said. “So sweeping, so secretively, so abusively, and harassingly and overbroad that it is an unconstitutional act.”In spring of that 2012, the US Department of Homeland Security and the White House independently said there was no credible evidence of a terrorist plot aimed at an American target to commemorate the anniversary of the death of al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden. Pruitt told CBS that wasn’t true, though, and during an interview over the weekend he explained why it was important to explain the administration’s mistake — and the mistakes the government made as a result.“We felt the American public needed to know this story,” Pruitt told CBS, calling claims from Washington that there was no credible evidence of a terrorist plot “misleading to the American public.”Pruitt said the AP went to the government and intelligence agencies to make sure there would not be a national security risk by publishing news of the foiled terror plot. After five days, they went live with their scoop after being told any risk had been eliminated.“We acted responsibly. We held the story,” Pruitt said. “We held it for five days. On the fifth day, we heard from high officials in two parts of the government that the national security issues had passed, and at that point we released the story.”In doing so, Pruitt believes the AP prompted a probe of the news agency that has crossed the boundaries of what the government can and can’t do. After the story was published, nearly two dozen direct lines, cell phones and home phones were subpoenaed by the Justice Department for offices in New York, Washington and Connecticut.“Approximately 100 journalists used these telephone lines as part of newsgathering,” said Pruitt, who added that “thousands upon thousands” of work-related calls by AP journalists were made on those numbers.Speaking to CBS, Pruitt said he believes the administration violated their own guidelines by gunning straight for a subpoena without trying to work out an investigation with the AP.“The rules require them to come to us first. But in this case they didn’t, claiming an exception, saying if they had it would have posed a substantial threat to their investigation. But they have not explained why it would, and we can’t understand why it would,” pleaded Pruitt. “We never even had possession of these records. They were in the possession of our telephone service company, and they couldn’t be tampered with. So usually they would come to us, we would try to narrow the request, the subpoena, if we didn’t come to an agreement we could go to a judge and an independent arbiter could decide on the scope of the subpoena. We never got a chance.”The result, warned Pruitt, has been a chilling effect that is already impacting the way journalists report news. “Already, officials that would talk to us and people we would normally talk to in the normal course of news gathering are already saying to us that they are a little reluctant to talk to us. They fear that they will be monitored by the government,” he said.In the days since the AP disclosed that they were targeted by the Justice Department, other reports have surfaced as well. On Sunday, the Washington Post revealed that a Fox News journalist was investigated by the DoJ after he published classified intelligence that was believed to have been leaked by a State Department official. To investigate a June 2009 article, the Justice Department obtained the records of Fox reporter James Roser and a State Department advisor, Stephen Jin-Woo Kim.“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,” The New Yorker’s Ryan Lizza reported on Sunday.Abbe Lowell, who is defending Kim on federal charges that he disclosed national defense information by going to Roser, told the Post that “The latest events show an expansion of this law enforcement technique.”Should the government continue to corner the Fourth Estate, Pruitt warned that future results could be catastrophic for the state of free speech.”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.”"It’s too early to know if we’ll take legal action but I can tell you we are positively displeased and we do feel that our constitutional rights have been violated,” Pruitt added to an AP article on the scandal. … Read More
Adam Lanza vs. the knock-off jihadis
Leave it to Joe Biden – or his speechwriters – to come up with the best description yet of Tamarlan and Dzohkhar Tsarnaev: “knock-off jihadis.” Knock-offs are, of course, cheap imitations, not the real thing, but the word also gets in a sly allusion to “whack-off” and “jerk-off,” or maybe that’s just me. It’s intentionally belittling. Biden thumbed his nose at those who would put the Tsarnaevs in a class with Mohammed Atta or Anwar al-Awlaki, let alone Osama bin Laden, and his words set up predictable braying on the right. (I learned about the controversy when I defended Biden’s comments on Joy Behar’s “Say Anything” while talking about my book, and inspired more invective on the right.)Continue Reading… … Read More
Republican lawmaker defends call to torture: ‘Me, bin Laden and a baseball bat’
New York state Sen. Greg Ball (R) on Monday doubled down on his call to torture the Boston Marathon bombing suspect, saying that if he had the same opportunity after the attacks September 11, 2011, ‘it would have been me Osama bin Laden and a baseball bat.” In a tweet on Friday, Ball…
Evidence al-Qaida “received” WikiLeaks information permitted in Manning trial
On the first day of the latest round of pre-trial hearings in the Bradley Manning court martial proceedings, military judge Col. Denise Lind ruled that the government would be permitted to use evidence that al-Qaida and specifically Osama bin Laden “received” material published by WikiLeaks as a part of the prosecution’s most serious charge — that Manning “aided the enemy.”Reporting from the Fort Meade courtroom, Firedoglake’s Kevin Gosztola noted, Lind “wholly rejected the arguments the defense had made that evidence involving receipt of information by al-Qaida or al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) would be prejudicial to proceedings.”However, Lind also ruled that the onus will be on the government to prove that Manning aided the enemy. As Gosztola reported:Continue Reading… … Read More
New York judge sets bin Ladin’s son-in-law trial for January
A New York federal judge has set the terrorism trial of Osama bin Laden’s son-in-law for January after defense lawyers said US budget cuts would make it hard to prepare by an earlier date. Judge Lewis Kaplan issued an order signed Tuesday fixing a January 7 start date for the trial of…
Thatcher, Warren haters: Don’t cheer for death
In the face of death, there is an inevitable human impulse to break the tension with some fear-of-mortality-deflating levity. And often, a little tastelessness in the name of the recently departed is really just healthy nose-thumbing at the grim reaper. But when a widely despised individual – or even the offspring of one – dies, the glee can become deafening.A mere 12 hours after Margaret Thatcher exhaled her last breath Monday, a 75-year-old tune from a musical was on its way to becoming an overnight, chart storming hit. By Tuesday, “Ding Dong! The Witch Is Dead” had become the biggest, most celebratory way of marking a death since Osama Bin Laden helped make “Party In the USA” a mega hit.Continue Reading… … Read More
Trial of Osama bin Laden’s son-in-law faces ‘stunning’ delay due to sequester cuts
The highly anticipated New York trial of Osama bin Laden’s son-in-law could be delayed because his court-appointed lawyers have been hit by US budget cuts, they said Monday. Federal Judge Lewis Kaplan called the revelation that a package of US federal government cuts known as the sequester…


