Tuesday, May 21, 2013

THIS JUST IN! IN THE KITCHEN WITH JAY CARNEY!

BULLY BOY PRESS & CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL-AID TABLE

WHITE HOUSE PLUS-SIZE SPOKESMODEL JAY CARNEY SHARED WITH THESE REPORTERS YESTERDAY HIS FAVORITE RECIPE.

"I'M QUITE THE COOK," CARNEY BOASTED. "AND THIS IS A SIMPLE SANDWICH RECIPE THAT REQUIRES NO COOKING!"

"FIRST," HE EXPLAINED, "ON FRIDAY, TELL AN OUTRAGEOUS LIE. THEN THE NEXT MONDAY ADMIT THAT YOU GOT IT WRONG IN FRONT OF THE WHOLE PRESS CORPS. I CALL IT A S**T SANDWICH AND BEING THE SPOKESPERSON FOR THE WHITE HOUSE HAS MADE ME AN EXPERT NOT JUST ON MAKING THEM BUT ON EATING THEM. WITH RELISH!"

FROM THE TCI WIRE:

In the US, The War on the First Amendment continues. Last Monday brought the shocking news that the US Justice Dept had secretly seized two months of phone records from the historic, 167-year-old news organization the Associated Press. This was over a 'leak' supposedly. But the Justice Dept knew of the 2012 report over a week before it was published. The Justice Dept also felt that they would ignore laws requiring them to at first work with the AP and resort to secret seizure only after that. Instead, they moved to secret seziure and when the records were seized no one still knows. (It could have been 45 days prior to them notifying the AP. But it could have been as much as 90 days.) No one knows. This is not a free society, this is not an open society. This is an offense and it's outrageous.

Yesterday, another attack in The War on the First Amendment is revealed. Ann E. Marimow (Washington Post) breaks the news of the Justice Dept targeting Fox News' James Rosen over press reports he filed on North Korea. They not only seized his phone records, they also sezied his personal e-mails and "used security badge access records to track the reporter's comings and goings from the State Department." First Amendment attorney Charles Tobin tells the Post, "Search warrants like these have a severe chilling effect on the free flow of important information to the public. That's a very dangerous road to go down." CNN explains, "The case centered on the leak of intelligence about North Korea in 2009, in which analysts predicted the possibility of a nuclear test if the U.S. enacted further sanctions on the regime. Fox News reported on that analysis on June 11, 2009." Free Speech Radio News reports it this way:

Dorian Merina: More information has surfaced on the Department of Justice's surveillance of journalists. The Washington Post reports that the DOJ spied on Fox News DC correspondent James Rosen after he wrote an article in 2009 about North Korea's nuclear program. Not only did investigators review his phone records, they also tracked his security badge to find out when he visited the State Department and they got a search warrant allowing them to read his personal Gmail correspondence. The warrant identifies Rosen as a reporter, but also alleges that as a recipient of leaked information he is a co-conspirator, subject to charges that are punishable by up to 10 years in prison. So far, no formal charges against Rosen have been filed.

Ned Resnikoff (NBC News) adds:

The revelation that the DOJ would classify a journalist as an un-indicted co-conspirator under the 1917 Espionage Act is “even a bigger deal” than the department’s seizure of Associated Press phone records, said Ben Wizner, director of the ACLU’s Speech, Privacy and Technology Project.
"A line has been crossed that has always been a very critical bulwark,” he said. “That’s the line between government leakers and media publishers." No journalist has ever been prosecuted under the Espionage Act, what has traditionally "only been used against those who gave or sold secrets to the enemy."

The Project on Government Secrecy's Steven Aftergood tells Ann E. Marimow, "Asking for information has never been deemed a crime. It's a line that has not been crossed up until now."
Fox News Vice President of News Michael Clemente issued a statement today noting, "We are outraged to learn today that James Rosen was named a criminal co-conspirator for simply doing his job as a reporter. In fact, it is downright chilling. We will unequivocally defend his right to operate as a member of what up until now has always been a free press." US Senator Marco Rubio's office sent out the following today:

Washington, D.C. - U.S. Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) issued the following statement after a report was released claiming that the Obama Administration targeted a FOX News reporter during a leak investigation:
"I am very concerned by reports the Obama Administration targeted a FOX News reporter for possible criminal prosecution for doing what appears to be normal news-gathering protected by the First Amendment. The sort of reporting by James Rosen detailed in the report is the same sort of reporting that helped Mr. Rosen aggressively pursue questions about the Administration’s handling of Benghazi. National security leaks are criminal and put American lives on the line, and federal prosecutors should, of course, vigorously investigate. But we expect that they do so within the bounds of the law, and that the investigations focus on the leakers within the government – not on media organizations that have First Amendment protections and serve a vital function in our democracy. We must insist that federal agents not use legitimate investigations as an excuse to harass journalists they deem unfriendly to the President or the Administration. We shouldn’t even have to ask if our government would do such a thing, but unfortunately as the unfolding IRS scandal shows, this White House has created a culture where we do have to explicitly make these kinds of requests."

Digging around the story, Garance Franke-Ruta (The Atlantic) notes Rosen but also wonders who else in the press has the government gone after? She writes, "In an August 2010 report on the indictment of Stephen Jin-Woo Kim on charges of 'disclosing national defense information in June 2009 to a national news organization, believed to be Fox News,' several other reporters were mentioned in relation to the DoJ leak investigations, in addition to Rosen." She notes Siobhan Gorman (Wall St. Journal) and Richard Silverstein (Tikun Olam) were two others mentioned. Philip Klein (Washington Examiner) wonders if it goes beyond this case and AP:

Last year, Bloomberg reported that Attorney General Eric Holder “has prosecuted more government officials for alleged leaks under the World War I-era Espionage Act than all his predecessors combined, including law-and-order Republicans John Mitchell, Edwin Meese and John Ashcroft.” The administration has also received a failing grade for its ignoring of Freedom of Information Act requests.
Taken together, all such actions have a toll. They mean that federal officials are less likely to blow the whistle on government wrongdoing and that journalists are less likely to obtain damning information that they can pass along to the public. The suggestion by the DOJ that Rosen broke the law, if followed to its logical conclusion, would mean the end of investigative journalism in America.

Mother Jones' David Corn Tweeted:

‏@DavidCornDC 6h

If a reporter asks a source who handles classified material for info, does DOJ see that as a crime? The Rosen case may be more imp. than AP.

Expand

For that observation, he got blowback and had to try and provide a Twitter tutorial on Freedom of the Press:

David Corn ‏@DavidCornDC 5h

Should DOJ have characterized Woodward as criminal co-conspirator for getting info from Felt or NYT reporters for accepting Pentagon Papers?

Expand
David Corn ‏@DavidCornDC 6h

A reminder to Fox/Rosen haters: Bush-Cheney national security abuses uncovered by nat. sec. reporters who could now be at risk.

Expand
David Corn ‏@DavidCornDC 6h

To Fox-hating tweeps, one doesn't have to defend Fox/Rosen to note DOJ is moving into a troubling area-criminalizing reporter-source contact

Expand
Mother Jones ‏@MotherJones 6h

An Inside Look at How DOJ Goes After Reporters, Not Just Leakers http://bit.ly/16FrlgE

Retweeted by David Corn
Expand

Why did Corn have to perform a tutorial? Because of the nonsense pushback of "Don't Say Nothing Bad About My Baby." Writing about the scandal of targeting the AP, Craig Aaron (The Progressive) noted last week:

The probe appears to be unprecedented in its scale and scope. But as Trevor Timm of the Freedom of the Press Foundation notes: “In five years, the Obama administration has prosecuted more leakers under the Espionage Act than all other administrations combined, and virtually all these prosecutions have engulfed journalists one way or another.”
The initial reaction of the Obama administration was evasion from Attorney General Eric Holder and squirming by White House Spokesman Jay Carney -- who became flustered when the briefing-room lapdogs started to snarl.
Pro-Obama messengers were instructed to act concerned the reporters might have tipped off the terrorists and -- if that didn’t work -- to shout “Valerie Plame” a lot. But that mostly served as a reminder of how much the most transparent administration ever™ was outdoing another famous Dick: Dick Cheney.

As many have noted, you can see the pushback nonsense at CJR again today. But who takes CJR seriously anymore? Rhonda Roland Shearer's expose "CJR Reporter Lying, Exploiting a Source? What's happening at Columbia Journalism Review?" revealed CJR doesn't check their facts, they humiliate a private citizen and won't apologize or correct their errors, they allow a 'reporter' to do a stunt to make a documentary and they treat it as news, they defend their 'reporter' lying to newspaper reporters . . . The list never ends.

In the world of real journalism, there is concern. Connie Schultz (Orlando Sentinel) notes:

Meanwhile, journalists around the country are asking, "What the heck is going on?"
It should be the question on every concerned citizen's mind. It breaks my heart that we need this reminder: A thriving — and free — press is often the only check on representative government. Already, potential government whistle-blowers have lost their nerve and never will pick up that phone.

It's a point New York Times investigative reporter Mark Mazzetti makes to Greg Sargent (Washington Post) today, "There’s no question that this has a chilling effect. People who have talked in the past are less willing to talk now. Everyone is worried about communication and how to communicate, and [asking if there] is there any method of communication that is not being monitored. It’s got people on both sides -- the reporter and source side -- pretty concerned." Jordy Yager and Mike Lillis (The Hill) point out, "Obama himself has made no apologies for the Justice’s sweep of AP phone records."

He issued no apologies for that. But late Friday, he did issue the following:

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release

May 17, 2013

Notice -- Continuation of the National Emergency with Respect to the Stabilization of Iraq

NOTICE

- - - - - - -

CONTINUATION OF THE NATIONAL EMERGENCY
WITH RESPECT TO THE STABILIZATION OF IRAQ

On May 22, 2003, by Executive Order 13303, the President declared a national emergency pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701-1706) to deal with the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States posed by obstacles to the continued reconstruction of Iraq, the restoration and maintenance of peace and security in the country, and the development of political, administrative, and economic institutions in Iraq.

The obstacles to the continued reconstruction of Iraq, the restoration and maintenance of peace and security in the country, and the development of political, administrative, and economic institutions in Iraq continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States. For this reason, the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13303, as modified in scope and relied upon for additional steps taken in Executive Order 13315 of August 28, 2003, Executive Order 13350 of July 29, 2004, Executive Order 13364 of November 29, 2004, and Executive Order 13438 of July 17, 2007, must continue in effect beyond May 22, 2013. Therefore, in accordance with section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)), I am continuing for 1 year the national emergency with respect to the stabilization of Iraq declared in Executive Order 13303.
This notice shall be published in the Federal Register and transmitted to the Congress.

BARACK OBAMA

THE WHITE HOUSE,
May 17, 2013.

Why is a US president issuing declarations -- national emergency ones -- about the supposed 'free' Iraq? Oh, that's right. It's not really free of the US.

RECOMMENDED: