Obama administration spied on Fox News reporter James Rosen

Party Rooster

Unleash The Beast
Apr 27, 2005
40,304
7,454
438
The Inland Empire State
#1
Scooped BIV on this one...:cool:

Obama administration spied on Fox News reporter James Rosen

The Ticket - 5 hrs ago

The Justice Department spied extensively on Fox News reporter James Rosen in 2010, collecting his telephone records, tracking his movements in and out of the State Department and seizing two days of Rosen’s personal emails, the Washington Post reported on Monday.

In a chilling move sure to rile defenders of civil liberties, an FBI agent also accused Rosen of breaking anti-espionage law with behavior that—as described in the agent's own affidavit—falls well inside the bounds of traditional news reporting. (Disclosure: This reporter counts Rosen among his friends.)

UPDATE: Fox News responds with a blistering statement that asserts Rosen was "simply doing his job" in his role as "a member of what up until now has always been a free press.”

The revelations surfaced with President Barack Obama’s administration already under fire for seizing two months of telephone records of reporters and editors at the Associated Press. Obama last week said he makes “no apologies” for investigations into national security-related leaks. The AP's CEO, Gray Pruitt, said Sunday that the seizure was "unconstitutional."

The Obama administration has prosecuted twice as many leakers as all previous administrations combined.

“The president is a strong defender of the First Amendment and a firm believer in the need for the press to be unfettered in its ability to conduct investigative reporting and facilitate a free flow of information,” White House press secretary Jay Carney insisted last week. “He also, of course, recognizes the need for the Justice Department to investigate alleged criminal activity without undue influence.”

The details of the government's strategy against Rosen sound like something out of a spy novel.

Investigators looking into disclosures of sensitive information about North Korea got Rosen’s telephone records and a warrant for his personal emails but also used his State Department security badge to track his movements in and out of that building, the Post reported, citing court documents.

The case began when Rosen reported on June 11, 2009, that U.S. intelligence believed North Korea might respond to tighter United Nations sanctions with new nuclear tests. Rosen reported that the information came from CIA sources inside the hermetic Stalinist state.

Investigators zeroed in on State Department arms expert Stephen Jin-Woo Kim, who was among a small group of intelligence officials to receive a top-secret report on the issue the same day that Rosen's piece ran online.

But FBI agent Reginald Reyes wrote that there was evidence Rosen had broken the law, “at the very least, either as an aider, abettor and/or co-conspirator,” the Post said.

And just what did Rosen do? Here's Reyes in an affidavit to support his request for a search warrant:

“From the beginning of their relationship, the Reporter asked, solicited and encouraged Mr. Kim to disclose sensitive United States internal documents and intelligence information about the Foreign Country," the FBI agent wrote. "The Reporter did so by employing flattery and playing to Mr. Kim’s vanity and ego.”

"Much like an intelligence officer would run an clandestine intelligence source, the Reporter instructed Mr. Kim on a covert communications plan," Reyes said, explicitly comparing reportorial tactics to espionage.

Here is how the Post described another section of Reyes' report:

Using italics for emphasis, Reyes explained how Rosen allegedly used a “covert communications plan” and quoted from an e-mail exchange between Rosen and Kim that seems to describe a secret system for passing along information.

In the exchange, Rosen used the alias “Leo” to address Kim and called himself “Alex,” an apparent reference to Alexander Butterfield, the man best known for running the secret recording system in the Nixon White House, according to the affidavit.

Rosen instructed Kim to send him coded signals on his Google account, according to a quote from his e-mail in the affidavit: “One asterisk means to contact them, or that previously suggested plans for communication are to proceed as agreed; two asterisks means the opposite.”

He also wrote, according to the affidavit: “What I am interested in, as you might expect, is breaking news ahead of my competitors” including “what intelligence is picking up.” And: “I’d love to see some internal State Department analyses.”

The communications system is a bit cloak-and-dagger, but it's not clear from the Post report or the affidavit that Rosen did anything outside the bounds of traditional reporting. People who know Rosen will smile at the Butterfield reference: The tenacious Fox News reporter is known as a Beatles fanatic, Tom Wolfe devotee and Watergate obsessive.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/obama-admin-spied-fox-news-reporter-james-rosen-134204299.html
 

Falldog

Wackbag's Best Conservative
Donator
May 16, 2007
19,166
6,825
568
Nothern VA
#2
up until now has always been a free press
lol'd

I look forward to Fox and the token Republicans bitching about this 100x more than the AP tapping. At least Don & friends will appreciate Obama's strong stance against the leaking of gov secrets.
 

Party Rooster

Unleash The Beast
Apr 27, 2005
40,304
7,454
438
The Inland Empire State
#3
lol'd

I look forward to Fox and the token Republicans bitching about this 100x more than the AP tapping. At least Don & friends will appreciate Obama's strong stance against the leaking of gov secrets.
It's lazy. Investigate your own people harder if you think they're leaking stuff they shouldn't. I wonder if the time frames coincide with when they blew that British agent's cover in Saudi Arabia.
 

Don the Radio Guy

G-Bb-A-D
Donator
Mar 30, 2006
69,628
5,081
568
Wyoming
#4
lol'd

I look forward to Fox and the token Republicans bitching about this 100x more than the AP tapping. At least Don & friends will appreciate Obama's strong stance against the leaking of gov secrets.
I was against the AP tapping too, troll. Leave me the fuck out of it.
 

Falldog

Wackbag's Best Conservative
Donator
May 16, 2007
19,166
6,825
568
Nothern VA
#5
It's lazy. Investigate your own people harder if you think they're leaking stuff they shouldn't.
When I investigate shit I always do the hard shit first instead of following obvious leads.
 

Party Rooster

Unleash The Beast
Apr 27, 2005
40,304
7,454
438
The Inland Empire State
#6
I can't believe a judge signed off on the search warrant.

And that State Department employee is so fucked. Enjoy your stay at Club Fed.
 

Neon

ネオン
Donator
Mar 23, 2008
51,774
18,522
513
Kingdom of Charis
#7
lol'd

I look forward to Fox and the token Republicans bitching about this 100x more than the AP tapping. At least Don & friends will appreciate Obama's strong stance against the leaking of gov secrets.
I saw tons of right wing outrage at the AP tapping. I'm sure Fox will be harsher on this because if you're a Fox pundit who actually knows Rosen, you're probably also angry about this on a personal level. Not saying I agree with it, but it also wouldn't automatically strike me as political.
 

Falldog

Wackbag's Best Conservative
Donator
May 16, 2007
19,166
6,825
568
Nothern VA
#8
I saw tons of right wing outrage at the AP tapping. I'm sure Fox will be harsher on this because if you're a Fox pundit who actually knows Rosen, you're probably also angry about this on a personal level. Not saying I agree with it, but it also wouldn't automatically strike me as political.
Not nearly as much as speculation over Benghazi. Fox loves to play the victim so this will be great for them.
 

Neon

ネオン
Donator
Mar 23, 2008
51,774
18,522
513
Kingdom of Charis
#9
Not nearly as much as speculation over Benghazi. Fox loves to play the victim so this will be great for them.
I was just watching the initial report on this from Fox and they keep mentioning the AP story over and over. If anything it helps bolster the claim that there is a pattern here.
 
Feb 5, 2003
5,543
919
753
With a stranger
#11
lol'd

I look forward to Fox and the token Republicans bitching about this 100x more than the AP tapping. At least Don & friends will appreciate Obama's strong stance against the leaking of gov secrets.
And I look forward to MSNBC, CNN, the Huffington Post, etc. making a much smaller deal out of this than the AP story (which wasn't tapping, by the way, it was a records search and I was against that, too). This administration really is unbelievable.
 
Feb 5, 2003
5,543
919
753
With a stranger
#14
Not sure if hyperbole or unrealistic expectations.
None of the above. I don't think it's unreasonable or unrealistic to expect the President and the people he appoints to not target the media for doing its job, to not target groups with different political beliefs for additional and unfair scrutiny from the IRS, and to not lie to the country about something like terrorist attacks before an election. All of this coming from "the most trasnparent administration ever," an "outsider" who was going to "change Washington," and all that nonsense would be funny if it wasn't so serious.
 

Falldog

Wackbag's Best Conservative
Donator
May 16, 2007
19,166
6,825
568
Nothern VA
#15
None of the above. I don't think it's unreasonable or unrealistic to expect the President and the people he appoints to not target the media for doing its job, to not target groups with different political beliefs for additional and unfair scrutiny from the IRS, and to not lie to the country about something like terrorist attacks before an election. All of this coming from "the most trasnparent administration ever," an "outsider" who was going to "change Washington," and all that nonsense would be funny if it wasn't so serious.
Didn't happen, didn't happen, and questionable. At least be accurate in your complaints.
 

Neon

ネオン
Donator
Mar 23, 2008
51,774
18,522
513
Kingdom of Charis
#16
Didn't happen, didn't happen, and questionable. At least be accurate in your complaints.
Wait, you're saying the IRS thing didn't happen? You should listen to the democrats in the hearing today.
 

Falldog

Wackbag's Best Conservative
Donator
May 16, 2007
19,166
6,825
568
Nothern VA
#17
Wait, you're saying the IRS thing didn't happen? You should listen to the democrats in the hearing today.
I'm saying the president and the people he appointed did not target groups.
 

Neon

ネオン
Donator
Mar 23, 2008
51,774
18,522
513
Kingdom of Charis
#18
I'm saying the president and the people he appointed did not target groups.
If two grunts abusing prisoners in Abu Ghraib reflects badly on the Bush Administration, then high-ranking IRS officials running political witch hunts most certainly reflects badly on the Obama Administration. Especially considering how many times the people involved visited The White House. 118 was it?
 

Falldog

Wackbag's Best Conservative
Donator
May 16, 2007
19,166
6,825
568
Nothern VA
#19
If two grunts abusing prisoners in Abu Ghraib reflects badly on the Bush Administration, then high-ranking IRS officials running political witch hunts most certainly reflects badly on the Obama Administration. Especially considering how many times the people involved visited The White House. 118 was it?
When did I say it didn't reflect negatively on the administration?
 
Feb 5, 2003
5,543
919
753
With a stranger
#20
Didn't happen, didn't happen, and questionable. At least be accurate in your complaints.
So the government didn't label a reporter as a co-conspirator in a criminal complaint against someone who leaked information and didn't seize an unusual amount of phone records from the AP? The IRS didn't target conservative groups unfairly? Lerner refused to testify about what happened so there must be more to the story than the bullshit excuses they've tried selling us so far. Middle managers in the government don't jsut make those sorts of decisions on their own. By pleading the 5th she was covering her own ass and avoiding selling out her superiors. And the Benghazi thing isn't questionable by any streatch of the imagination. The administration lied. They sent Rice out to make the Sunday morning rounds with talking points they knew were false and they left out information they knew to be true and kept selling that version of events even after it was known to be wrong.
 

Neon

ネオン
Donator
Mar 23, 2008
51,774
18,522
513
Kingdom of Charis
#21
When did I say it didn't reflect negatively on the administration?
I would argue that my expectation of any administration is that it curb this stuff internally, and not let it erupt into a national scandal. And regarding your first "never happened" - I would argue that the justice department treating journalists as co-conspirators in leak cases absolutely leads back to people the president appointed. You don't just make a decision like that on a junior level because it's a major precedent.
 
Feb 5, 2003
5,543
919
753
With a stranger
#22
I would argue that my expectation of any administration is that it curb this stuff internally, and not let it erupt into a national scandal. And regarding your first "never happened" - I would argue that the justice department treating journalists as co-conspirators in leak cases absolutely leads back to people the president appointed. You don't just make a decision like that on a junior level because it's a major precedent.
The best-case scenario is that the person the President nominated for the position (in this case, Holder) does not have adequate control over his department. Between the AP phone records, the Rosen story, and Fast and Furious it seems like Holder is either completely incapable of overseeing the Justice Department or he had managed to keep his job despite a total disregard for the laws of this country.
 

Falldog

Wackbag's Best Conservative
Donator
May 16, 2007
19,166
6,825
568
Nothern VA
#23
I would argue that my expectation of any administration is that it curb this stuff internally, and not let it erupt into a national scandal. And regarding your first "never happened" - I would argue that the justice department treating journalists as co-conspirators in leak cases absolutely leads back to people the president appointed. You don't just make a decision like that on a junior level because it's a major precedent.
Again, there's a difference between reporting on a leak and conspiring with someone to obtain information.
 

Neon

ネオン
Donator
Mar 23, 2008
51,774
18,522
513
Kingdom of Charis
#24
Again, there's a difference between reporting on a leak and conspiring with someone to obtain information.
He wasn't reporting on a leak. He reported info leaked to him by a State Department source about North Korea. That led to him being examined as a co-conspirator. That's pretty outrageous.
 

Falldog

Wackbag's Best Conservative
Donator
May 16, 2007
19,166
6,825
568
Nothern VA
#25
He wasn't reporting on a leak. He reported info leaked
First off, you know what I meant. Second off, they apparently have evidence that shows he was working with the source to get the information. It was 'Hey, can you get me some more info? Here's how we'll do it' not 'Oh, someone send me some sweet info.' If he had taken the info to Russia instead of a news article he'd be a spy.