• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama administration spied on Fox News reporter James Rosen: Report [W:85]

I love the progressive position on this issue, which is: "so fracking what."

Progressives could care less if conservative media is attacked by our own government. As a matter of fact I bet most progressives are bewildered that this didn't happen sooner.

Heya Nick.
yo2.gif
.....actually I think it was part revenge and having to do with the 2010 election. Consider. Obama fires an IG in 2009. The Media runs the story until 2010. Then all the Democrats in Congress sending letters to the IRS. All from Welch's Letter and Baucus Questioning about the 501 3 C.. Then True the Vote takes place out of Texas. Which they were a group that was more concerned about Election Fraud.

Schumer and a host of Top Democrats sent letters to the IRS. Even Levin was going to investigate why the IRS had failed to look into the 501s. Which is what the Democrats perceived was happening after Kevin Johnson. Obama's buddy and Mayor of Sacramento and his Educational group AmeriCorps got Busted out.
 
Sharyl Attkisson's computers compromised

Sharyl Attkisson, the Emmy-award winning CBS News investigative reporter, says that her personal and work computers have been compromised and are under investigation.

"I can confirm that an intrusion of my computers has been under some investigation on my end for some months but I'm not prepared to make an allegation against a specific entity today as I've been patient and methodical about this matter," Attkisson told POLITICO on Tuesday. "I need to check with my attorney and CBS to get their recommendations on info we make public."

In an earlier interview with WPHT Philadelphia, Attkisson said that though she did not know the full details of the intrustion, "there could be some relationship between these things and what's happened to James [Rosen]," the Fox News reporter who became the subject of a Justice Dept. investigation after reporting on CIA intelligence about North Korea in 2009.

Sharyl Attkisson's computers compromised - POLITICO.com
 
Sharyl Attkisson's computers compromised

Sharyl Attkisson, the Emmy-award winning CBS News investigative reporter, says that her personal and work computers have been compromised and are under investigation.

"I can confirm that an intrusion of my computers has been under some investigation on my end for some months but I'm not prepared to make an allegation against a specific entity today as I've been patient and methodical about this matter," Attkisson told POLITICO on Tuesday. "I need to check with my attorney and CBS to get their recommendations on info we make public."

In an earlier interview with WPHT Philadelphia, Attkisson said that though she did not know the full details of the intrustion, "there could be some relationship between these things and what's happened to James [Rosen]," the Fox News reporter who became the subject of a Justice Dept. investigation after reporting on CIA intelligence about North Korea in 2009.

Sharyl Attkisson's computers compromised - POLITICO.com



every day is one day closer getting rid of Obama the tyrant and is corrupt Chicago administration
 
Sharyl Attkisson's computers compromised

Sharyl Attkisson, the Emmy-award winning CBS News investigative reporter, says that her personal and work computers have been compromised and are under investigation.

"I can confirm that an intrusion of my computers has been under some investigation on my end for some months but I'm not prepared to make an allegation against a specific entity today as I've been patient and methodical about this matter," Attkisson told POLITICO on Tuesday. "I need to check with my attorney and CBS to get their recommendations on info we make public."

In an earlier interview with WPHT Philadelphia, Attkisson said that though she did not know the full details of the intrustion, "there could be some relationship between these things and what's happened to James [Rosen]," the Fox News reporter who became the subject of a Justice Dept. investigation after reporting on CIA intelligence about North Korea in 2009.

Sharyl Attkisson's computers compromised - POLITICO.com

How "interesting." Politico also says, " Attkisson told WPHT that irregular activity on her computer was first identified in Feb. 2011, when she was reporting on the Fast and Furious gun-walking scandal and on the Obama administration's green energy spending, which she said "the administration was very sensitive about." Attkisson has also been a persistent investigator of the events surrounding last year's attack in Benghazi, and its aftermath."

Coincidence?
 
How "interesting." Politico also says, " Attkisson told WPHT that irregular activity on her computer was first identified in Feb. 2011, when she was reporting on the Fast and Furious gun-walking scandal and on the Obama administration's green energy spending, which she said "the administration was very sensitive about." Attkisson has also been a persistent investigator of the events surrounding last year's attack in Benghazi, and its aftermath."

Coincidence?

Heya NB. :2wave: Plus now the IG report and their findings on the DOJ.....with what took place with Dodson. Course Earlier I mentioned Obama Firing an IG in 2009 over the investigation into Obama's Buddy, Kevin Johnson.
 
You're the one defending thuggery and corruption here

Where was Obama during the 7 hour Benghazi attack? Where was he and what was he doing? If Benghazi is the new Birther movement, tell us where Obama was and what was he doing.

Tell us the crime committed by Rosen here. He's a journalist soliciting information. The Government seized his personal emails and private communications. You're defending that. Why?

I don't see how asking for information could be a crime.

The askee can say no.
 
Translation: B000000000000000000SH!

Prove I ever supported such behavior from Bush. You're grasping at straws.

You ever supported Bush's foreign policy or domestic spying program? Yes or no please.
 
Somebody is trying REALLY hard to make this personal and it's just not working out his way.

Simple facts:

1. Kim and Rosen exchanged e-mails.
2. Rosen asked Kim to released classified documents.
3. Rosen should have known that doing so would mean Kim breaking the law.
4. Rosen is at the very least guilty of conspiracy to break the law.

That you keep trying over and over to hide behind the word "alleged" doesn't change the facts. Well, it would for a paid shill. Is that what you are Gie? A shill? I'd hate to think somebody would spend a year and a half of their lives getting paid to defend a website. It seems like such a bottom feeder job.

How would Rosen know what was classified and what is not?
 
Just a wee bit more on this from Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Eugene Robinson, who touches on many of the points some of the more thoughtful posters in this thread have tried to point out to certain Fox News obsessives. All ignored of course, but it does goes to illustrate the height and width of the blinders these types enjoy parading in front of the forum. ;)

Eugene Robinson: Obama administration mistakes news for espionage - The Washington Post


The Fox News case is even worse. At issue is a 2009 story about how North Korea was expected to react to a U.N. Security Council resolution criticizing the rogue nation’s nuclear tests. The Justice Department is prosecuting Stephen Jin-Woo Kim, then an analyst working for the State Department, for allegedly leaking to Fox News reporter Rosen a report about what North Korea was thought likely to do.

Prosecutors examined Rosen’s phone records, read his e-mails and, using the electronic record left by his security badge, even tracked when he entered and left the State Department building. How did officials justify such snooping? By asserting in an FBI affidavit, according to The Post, that Rosen broke the law “at the very least, either as an aider, abettor and/or co-conspirator.”

In other words, since there is no law that makes publishing this classified information illegal, the Justice Department claims that obtaining the information was a violation of the Espionage Act.

Rosen has not been charged. Every investigative reporter, however, has been put on notice.

If this had been the view of prior administrations, surely Bob Woodward would be a lifer in some federal prison. The cell next door might be occupied by my Post colleague Dana Priest, who disclosed the CIA’s network of secret prisons. Or by the New York Times’ James Risen and Eric Lichtblau, who revealed the National Security Agency’s eavesdropping program.

A federal “shield” law protecting reporters from having to divulge their sources means nothing if it includes an exception for cases involving national security, as Obama favors. The president needs to understand that behavior commonly known as “whistleblowing” and “journalism” must not be construed as espionage.


As the Obama administration and the author of this thread illustrate, it is too late to point out that journalism is not espionage. The knee jerking has already begun from the same old sources of same at DP they always come from! I say lets have full disclosure and investigation of this and let the chips fall where they may. As well I'll put a "bet" of a full year Gold donation at DP that we'll never see this investigation produce a single charge of anything. :cool:

The question I have is why would the information that Rosen reported be classified in the US?

North Korea saying the will react to a resolution is not news, it should be a given.
 
I'm down with that. Information is classified directly relative to the damage it would do to the national security of the United States if exposed. When you leak, you ruin collection methods and sources, making us less able to anticipate and/or head off attacks. When you leak, people can die. People whose lives are worth more than you getting a big scoop and a raise from your editor.

You would be correct in a perfect worl but administrations classify information that will do damage to their administration and have nothing to do with national security.
 
Seriously, however, spies do pose as members of the press - exactly because it is such good cover. They are supposed to be lurking around, eliciting information, meeting with sources, etc.

Yes but they don't usually appear on a national broadcast news cannel for all to identify.
 
Two birds/one stone.

Maybe but this will have the other news channels backing Fow News which hasn't happened since the Obama administration made them an enemy of the administration.
 
How do you sleep at night defending a man who knowingly lied to the faces of grieving families as they sat next to the coffins of their loved ones?

You mean like this???????????

This is what a president does.



US President Barack Obama has paid his respects to 18 Americans killed in Afghanistan, the first time he has honoured the fallen in this way.

NPR notes that,



The dramatic image of a president on the tarmac was a portrait not witnessed in years.

Why?



His predecessor, George W Bush, visited the families of dead troops but never received the bodies at the base, in Dover, Delaware.

Mr Bush also did not go to military funerals, telling the military newspaper Stars and Stripes three years ago that he preferred to meet families privately.

Bush also preferred to go bed early, but apparently, could never get his ass out of bed early enough to honor the soldiers he so recklessly sent off to die.

Disgraceful: In 8 Years, George W. Bush Never Greeted Fallen Troops | Firedoglake
 
Who the **** are you to tell someone when and where to post. You need to continue with your BS and STFU.

As far as the subject is concerned, Rosen is at best a piece of **** for asking for classified material, but I don't think this matters to you. All you care about is attacking Obama and this administration no matter what!

Do you have any proof he knew what he was asking for was classified?

Do you also think he is the only reporter to ask governement officials for information?

Why is it that the government can use reporters when they want to to leak info, but when it is something they didn't purposely leak, they get upset?
 
Big time Obama supporter, columnist Eugene Robinson had this to say today:


The Fox News case is even worse. At issue is a 2009 story about how North Korea was expected to react to a U.N. Security Council resolution criticizing the rogue nation's nuclear tests. The Justice Department is prosecuting Stephen Jin-Woo Kim, then an analyst working for the State Department, for allegedly leaking to Fox reporter Rosen a report about what North Korea was thought likely to do.

Prosecutors examined Rosen's phone records, read his emails and, using the electronic record left by his security badge, even tracked when he entered and left the State Department building. How did officials justify such snooping? By asserting in an FBI affidavit, according to the Post, that Rosen broke the law "at the very least, either as an aider, abettor and/or co-conspirator."

In other words, since there is no law that makes publishing this classified information illegal, the Justice Department claims that obtaining the information was a violation of the Espionage Act.

Rosen has not been charged. Every investigative reporter, however, has been put on notice.

If this had been the view of prior administrations, surely Bob Woodward would be a lifer in some federal prison. The cell next door might be occupied by my Post colleague Dana Priest, who disclosed the CIA's network of secret prisons. Or by The New York Times' James Risen and Eric Lichtblau, who revealed the National Security Agency's eavesdropping program.

Read more: It's News, Not Espionage | RealClearPolitics

The Obama Administration is getting out of hand in a very USSR/Castro kind of way and someone needs to put a stop to it.
 
more from pulitzer prize winning eugene robinson:

If this had been the view of prior administrations, surely Bob Woodward would be a lifer in some federal prison. The cell next door might be occupied by my Post colleague Dana Priest, who disclosed the CIA’s network of secret prisons. Or by the New York Times’ James Risen and Eric Lichtblau, who revealed the National Security Agency’s eavesdropping program.

A federal “shield” law protecting reporters from having to divulge their sources means nothing if it includes an exception for cases involving national security, as Obama favors. The president needs to understand that behavior commonly known as “whistleblowing” and “journalism” must not be construed as espionage.

Eugene Robinson: Obama administration mistakes news for espionage - The Washington Post

chilling

with the sweep of the ap, the outright spying on james rosen, the leak intended to destroy personally f&f whistle blower dodson, and now cbs' sharyl attkisson's disclosure about her computer being hacked, it is becoming more undeniable that eric holder's doj has run amok

yesterday, relibable lib al hunt, citing "experienced democrats" with whom he has been strategizing, advised the white house to dump holder (which aint gonna happen)

How Obama Can Rescue His Presidency From Faux Scandals - Bloomberg

hunt, executive editor of bloomberg's washington bureau and husband of judy woodruff, also suggests obama appoint a special prosecutor to look into the irs and put to bed the notion of promoting susan rice to nsa

ron fournier, longtime ap washington bureau chief and now editor of the elite natl journal, after collaborating evidently to the same sources, comes up with pretty much the same laundry list of things to do to get america's trust back

5 Ways Obama Can Restore the Public's Trust and Rescue His Presidency - NationalJournal.com

it is what it is---clusterfail
 
And on the other side of the coin - dealing with the analysts who disclose this information - Obama indicated a few months ago that he was "seeking new rules to allow federal agencies to fire employees without appeal if their work has some tie to national security."
 
Yes but they don't usually appear on a national broadcast news cannel for all to identify.

Admittedly it was back during the 40s / 50s, but there have actually been several high-profile reporters who turned out to be working for other nations. Don't confuse what is smart with what spies do; lots of the same personal flaws that go into driving someone towards espionage against their own (an inordinate love of risk, love of money, desire to be smarter than everyone else) will drive the same individual to do stupid things.
 
You would be correct in a perfect worl but administrations classify information that will do damage to their administration and have nothing to do with national security.

administrations do not classify information (though once they become aware of it they can apply rules to how it is handled in the future). Original Classification Authorities get applied typically by the original collector/processor. I'm not saying they wouldn't; just that they don't have the mechanism to do so easily.
 
Then go and prosecute the reporters at the New York Times and the Washington Post first. Otherwise it's just political retribution.

Do them all at the same time or else you are demonstrating just as much favoritism the other way 'round.

But I agree. The administration likely doesn't give a rats butt about the actual spillage - they tapped AP because AP stole their thunder on timing, not because they exposed something the administration didn't want out there. They are out for political retribution.

Ah, Chicago Politics.
 
Washington Times columnist: More to the story?


CIA source says Fox News scandal the "4th Shoe"; says it goes much deeper; says WH also sitting on "something" that has top aides terrified...says only a few in WH know that "something" -- "It's been deep sixed, like Osama bin Laden." Will there be a Fifth Shoe?!

Just rumors for now...
 
The question I have is why would the information that Rosen reported be classified in the US?

North Korea saying the will react to a resolution is not news, it should be a given.
Given that the vast majority of people kvetching about Rosen (here at DP) are all well known and regular Fox News obsessives, I don't look for a rational or logical thread in their complaints and attempts to make Rosen out to be a criminal guilty of "espionage".
 
You ever supported Bush's foreign policy or domestic spying program? Yes or no please.

Nope

The only engagement I ever supported was removing Al Qaeda from Afghanistan because it was the right thing to do

Do you support the Obama Administration acting like the Gestapo, tracking and monitoring reporters? Yes or No please
 
How do you think our diplomatic relations with a potential lunatic dictator armed with nuclear weapons will be viewed relative to the "clear and present danger test"?
Clear-and-present danger test legal definition of Clear-and-present danger test. Clear-and-present danger test synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.

Eighteen years later, the Supreme Court appeared to return to Holmes's views in Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444, 89 S. Ct. 1827, 23 L. Ed. 2d 430 (1969). In Brandenburg, the Court reversed the conviction of a Ku Klux Klan leader under a state statute, Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 2923.13, prohibiting advocacy of crime and violence as a necessary means to accomplish political reform. The Court held that a state could not "forbid or proscribe advocacy of the use of force … except where such advocacy is directed to producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action." Though the Court's opinion fails to mention specifically the phrase clear and present danger, many Constitutional Law scholars have seen Brandenburg as a return to the Holmes-Brandeis immediacy test first set forth in Abrams. However, the Court has not specifically addressed the clear-and-present-danger doctrine since Brandenburg, and thus it is not clear whether the Court would embrace it anew or would fashion an entirely new standard for determining whether, in certain circumstances, free expression can be punished.
 
Back
Top Bottom