Or Something like that… Says Ear Leader to our slime bucket of an Attorney General…
The review ordered by President Obama into the Justice Department’s policies on pursuing reporters’ records could have Attorney General Eric Holder effectively reviewing his own actions.
Under Justice Department guidelines, the attorney general would most likely have had to sign off on the controversial search warrant that allowed federal authorities to seize the private emails of a Fox News reporter.
What could possibly go wrong?! What was that gramps used to say about Fox – Hen house….something….Hey where”s all the CHICKENS!??! Damn it!
This, and another case involving the Associated Press, prompted Obama on Thursday to announce that Holder had agreed to conduct a review of DOJ policies on investigations that involve reporters.
“I’ve raised these issues with the attorney general, who shares my concern,” Obama said, adding that Holder would report back by July 12.
But part of the review could involve checking up on his own decisions. Department guidelines say: “The Attorney General’s authorization is normally required before the issuance of any subpoena to a member of the news media or for the telephone toll records of a member of the news media.”
Eric sez : ” I’ve conducted a review of myself – and I’ve reached the conclusion that – I’m fucking awesome!! Kneel you dirty peasant! Kneel and kiss the royal hand of Justice!
In this case, Holder had no apparent reason to recuse himself and likely would have been the one to sign off on a search warrant that allowed authorities to seize the personal emails of reporter James Rosen.
Attorney Jesselyn Radack, who works with the Government Accountability Project and has represented accused leakers, told FoxNews.com she’s not convinced by the administration’s latest effort. “I don’t think there needs to be a review of the internal guidelines. … There needs to be a review of why they weren’t followed,” she said, adding Holder appears to have a “conflict of interest” in the review.
It’s unclear what specific language Holder agreed to.
In the original 2010 affidavit seeking the warrant, Rosen was accused of being a criminal “co-conspirator” as part of a leak case. The Justice Department cited the World War I-era Espionage Act in making the claim, using it to justify the seizure of his personal files.
Though Rosen was never charged, media and civil liberties groups decried the move as “chilling.”
Never charged. Geee…could it be Because you violated the law Eric? ….Maybe it’s because that anything you possibly could have tried to charge Rosen with – would have been tossed out of court so fast it would have broken the sound barrier going out the doors…. Damned hard to throw a rock when you’re sitting in a glass house now ain’t it Eric ol Chap?
Obama voiced concern about the cases for the first time Thursday, during a wide-ranging speech on counterterrorism policy. He said he was “troubled” by the developments and that journalists should not be “at legal risk” for doing their jobs.
“As Commander-in Chief, I believe we must keep information secret that protects our operations and our people in the field.
“But a free press is also essential for our
CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC….. for the millionth damn time – we do NOT live in a fucking democracy - you of the “Constitutional scholar” Mr. 57 states fame….
That’s who we are, and I’m troubled by the possibility that leak investigations may chill the investigative journalism that holds government accountable.