WOW the Coast Gaurd ?
- Thread starter mike84z28
- Start date
The Best online firearms community in Louisiana.
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
no b/c a journalist would never marry anyone in the NSA
Look, I don't want to go back and forth on the philosophy of posting on a internet forum, so I'll just agree to disagree here.
That's your new standard; I'm too spineless to stand by the things I post as fact, reply?
Regardless, they took items that were not tide to the warrant. THIS isn't the first "opposition" member of the media who gets a strange knock on the door. And it wont be long until its a common thing.
People are all too ignorant, which still surprises me considering the main topic of the forum, when it comes to the overreach of this government.
People are all too ignorant, which still surprises me considering the main topic of the forum, when it comes to the overreach of this government.
She was on Fox News this afternoon. All she mentioned that the search warrant was for was the potato gun. I don't think she is giving the whole story. The search warrant will list the items searched for. If the Coast Guard shows up with a search warrant to look for a potato gun, go get the potato gun and give it to them, search over. She claims it was bought on line five years ago.
Washington Times article --http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/oct/25/armed-agents-seize-records-reporter-washington-tim/?page=all#pagebreak
Atlantic Wire Article - http://www.theatlanticwire.com/poli...ok-her-files-while-searching-home-guns/70941/
FWIW....I think its a valid article and reinforces earlier reports of the Justice Department's seizure of records from reporters. The AP has been fighting them for months now. Obama and Holder have an issue with leaks....and yet every president for the last 4 decades has had leaks. Remember Watergate.
And yet...Obama and Holder have come to the conclusion that they can just disregard the Constitution because they don't want any leaks.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...f8fab2-4025-11e3-b028-de922d7a3f47_story.html
INDIANAPOLIS — Associated Press Executive Editor Kathleen Carroll said Monday she is looking forward to the start of new Obama administration protections for journalists after the Justice Department’s *overly broad* collection of AP phone records.
Justice Department officials acknowledged in the spring they seized records for 21 AP phone lines during an investigation into the leak of information on a foiled al-Qaida bomb plot. The revelation spurred strong criticism from press and civil rights groups. It also resurrected long-simmering questions of what tools journalists should use to protect their sources and where the line is drawn in protecting national security interests.
*The Justice Department has agreed to amend the rules that we spoke about, because in many ways the protections that were in those rules seemed not to have occurred in our particular case,* Carroll said. *We are, as an institution, glad the rules have been changed so there will be additional oversight when the media is involved. And we look forward to the implementation of those new rules, which have not yet to this point occurred.*
Carroll’s comments came Monday during a panel discussion entitled *Is journalism a crime?* during the 80th annual Associated Press Media Editors’ conference in Indianapolis.
The Obama administration has been aggressively pursuing people it believes have revealed government secrets, including seeking records and testimony of journalists who were given classified information and then published stories about it.
The Justice Department launched its investigation of the AP shortly after the news cooperative reported that U.S. intelligence had learned that al-Qaida’s Yemen branch hoped to launch a spectacular attack using a new, nearly undetectable bomb aboard a U.S.-bound airliner around the anniversary of Osama bin Laden’s death. The May 7, 2012, story attributed details of the operation, including that the FBI had the bomb in its possession, to unnamed government officials.
CIA Director John Brennan has called the leak *irresponsible and damaging,* while Attorney General Eric Holder said the story was the result of *a very serious leak, a very grave leak.*
About a year after the story was published, the Justice Department informed the AP that it had secretly obtained nearly two months of call records for 21 telephone lines used by AP reporters and editors, including some who worked on the story.
The news cooperative protested the government’s actions as chilling to investigative journalism. AP chief executive Gary Pruitt called the records’ seizure a *massive and unprecedented intrusion* into how news organizations gather the news.
The very scope of the Justice Department’s records seizure was surprising, Carroll said Monday. Phone lines for reporters and editors in Washington, D.C., were gathered along with AP phone lines in Hartford, Conn., but so were phone records of employees’ spouses, Carroll said.
*You can see where we felt this was broad, overly broad: What in the world could they hope to gain from records like Hartford, Connecticut’s?* Carroll said.
Panelists discussed a broad range of concerns outlining tensions between national security interests and the public’s right to know what its government is doing.
Gary Ross, a veteran national security worker and author of *Who Watches the Watchmen?* said it may appear the Obama administration is cracking down more frequently on leaks, but changes in the digital age have raise the stakes in that debate.
People like WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and former CIA contractor Edward Snowden now have access to much greater troves of information and the rise of non-traditional media outlets have broken governmental relationships that used to be maintained by more mainstream outlets, he said.
*Where do you draw that line in protecting government information and the public’s right to know?* Ross said.
Atlantic Wire Article - http://www.theatlanticwire.com/poli...ok-her-files-while-searching-home-guns/70941/
FWIW....I think its a valid article and reinforces earlier reports of the Justice Department's seizure of records from reporters. The AP has been fighting them for months now. Obama and Holder have an issue with leaks....and yet every president for the last 4 decades has had leaks. Remember Watergate.
And yet...Obama and Holder have come to the conclusion that they can just disregard the Constitution because they don't want any leaks.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...f8fab2-4025-11e3-b028-de922d7a3f47_story.html
INDIANAPOLIS — Associated Press Executive Editor Kathleen Carroll said Monday she is looking forward to the start of new Obama administration protections for journalists after the Justice Department’s *overly broad* collection of AP phone records.
Justice Department officials acknowledged in the spring they seized records for 21 AP phone lines during an investigation into the leak of information on a foiled al-Qaida bomb plot. The revelation spurred strong criticism from press and civil rights groups. It also resurrected long-simmering questions of what tools journalists should use to protect their sources and where the line is drawn in protecting national security interests.
*The Justice Department has agreed to amend the rules that we spoke about, because in many ways the protections that were in those rules seemed not to have occurred in our particular case,* Carroll said. *We are, as an institution, glad the rules have been changed so there will be additional oversight when the media is involved. And we look forward to the implementation of those new rules, which have not yet to this point occurred.*
Carroll’s comments came Monday during a panel discussion entitled *Is journalism a crime?* during the 80th annual Associated Press Media Editors’ conference in Indianapolis.
The Obama administration has been aggressively pursuing people it believes have revealed government secrets, including seeking records and testimony of journalists who were given classified information and then published stories about it.
The Justice Department launched its investigation of the AP shortly after the news cooperative reported that U.S. intelligence had learned that al-Qaida’s Yemen branch hoped to launch a spectacular attack using a new, nearly undetectable bomb aboard a U.S.-bound airliner around the anniversary of Osama bin Laden’s death. The May 7, 2012, story attributed details of the operation, including that the FBI had the bomb in its possession, to unnamed government officials.
CIA Director John Brennan has called the leak *irresponsible and damaging,* while Attorney General Eric Holder said the story was the result of *a very serious leak, a very grave leak.*
About a year after the story was published, the Justice Department informed the AP that it had secretly obtained nearly two months of call records for 21 telephone lines used by AP reporters and editors, including some who worked on the story.
The news cooperative protested the government’s actions as chilling to investigative journalism. AP chief executive Gary Pruitt called the records’ seizure a *massive and unprecedented intrusion* into how news organizations gather the news.
The very scope of the Justice Department’s records seizure was surprising, Carroll said Monday. Phone lines for reporters and editors in Washington, D.C., were gathered along with AP phone lines in Hartford, Conn., but so were phone records of employees’ spouses, Carroll said.
*You can see where we felt this was broad, overly broad: What in the world could they hope to gain from records like Hartford, Connecticut’s?* Carroll said.
Panelists discussed a broad range of concerns outlining tensions between national security interests and the public’s right to know what its government is doing.
Gary Ross, a veteran national security worker and author of *Who Watches the Watchmen?* said it may appear the Obama administration is cracking down more frequently on leaks, but changes in the digital age have raise the stakes in that debate.
People like WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and former CIA contractor Edward Snowden now have access to much greater troves of information and the rise of non-traditional media outlets have broken governmental relationships that used to be maintained by more mainstream outlets, he said.
*Where do you draw that line in protecting government information and the public’s right to know?* Ross said.
general mills
Well-Known Member
everything else aside, this had me at warrant for a potato gun. you can't own a potato gun? Like the piece of PVC you fill with hairspray and spark off with a lighter? Those were pretty much like a science project when I was younger.
So, if the phony media deliberately slants a story, leaves important details out, exaggerates or embellishes details; against an ideological foe in their pursuit to discredit or sway public opinion about that person, group, or organization; it's all good. But as soon as the worm turns, we should all be outraged at this unacceptable attack on the 1st Amendment?
Cry about it!
You reap what you sow; you phony bags of dung!
Cry about it!You reap what you sow; you phony bags of dung!
SpeedRacer
Well-Known Member
From what I gather the Coast Guard was involved because the husband is an employee there, possibly with access to sensitive material. I could certainly see how a gov/mil employee + journalist spouse could lead to trouble.
It's just an investigation. No one was arrested or charged. I don't see what the big uproar is about. Did the agents overstep their warrant? Probably. And if they did, I'm sure that wrong will be accounted for and Mrs. Journalist will get fat paid for it and everyone will sleep soundly.
It's just an investigation. No one was arrested or charged. I don't see what the big uproar is about. Did the agents overstep their warrant? Probably. And if they did, I'm sure that wrong will be accounted for and Mrs. Journalist will get fat paid for it and everyone will sleep soundly.
So, the material taken was marked LE use only, confidential, etc? Wouldn't having a bunch of stuff labeled as not for you, give a reasonable suspiscion it isn't for you? I mean, isn't that part of why it is labeled as such?
I would think that if the government wanted to abuse their power and obtain knowledge, they would listen into all of your phone calls secretly. Seems a lot less likely to give them trouble than kicking in a reporter's door.
I would think that if the government wanted to abuse their power and obtain knowledge, they would listen into all of your phone calls secretly. Seems a lot less likely to give them trouble than kicking in a reporter's door.
Last edited:
dixiejarhead
Well-Known Member
Somebody screwed up. It will come out in the wash. CGIS = Coast Guard Investigative Service - they have jusridiction since the husband was suspected of leaking information that may be labelled LE sensative and is employed by the US Coast Guard.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong; If they have a warrant for illegal weapons, potato gun, etc; during the search for said weapons they happen upon files that appear to have been obtained illegally (or anything else illegal), then they could take them at that time even though it's not specifically listed on the warrant. That would explain why they took them without it being on the warrant. The warrant would allow them to look anywhere something that was on the warrant could be hidden. Even if guns were listed on the warrant, I could hide my LCP between files easy enough.
It might be a loophole, but it's still legal. CGIS is looking for x, but doesn't have enough tangible evidence for a judge to sign a warrant for x. They also know that the person has illegal item y-z, and they can prove it. Judge signs warrant for items y-z, and during the search for items y-z they find illegal item x, they can seize it as well.
It might be a loophole, but it's still legal. CGIS is looking for x, but doesn't have enough tangible evidence for a judge to sign a warrant for x. They also know that the person has illegal item y-z, and they can prove it. Judge signs warrant for items y-z, and during the search for items y-z they find illegal item x, they can seize it as well.
That depends on the circumstances. I'm assuming you're talking mags and guns right? With the knowledge that the AWB ended and those items stopped being LE use only I'd say it is unreasonable. If is laser designators they use to mark **** jets are supposed to blow up, I'd say it is reasonable. A lot of it depends on the context.
Staff online
-
340six-Global Mod-
Members online
- Jiggy205
- jdavid1
- lashooter68
- tball65
- southerner985
- rivaskid
- Jstudz220
- BlakeLavespere
- mforsta
- cbbr
- redhammer5
- rjamesmann
- Bigchillin83
- Scrape
- black-irishman
- Bennie
- easy_does_it_24
- 70mikenike70
- Bill
- rebelray84
- Scottm35
- Big H
- Gator 45/70
- lp11
- rk06classic
- javery5.0
- Jsonier820
- dwc123
- EightySix
- tekkaman_tnt
- ONTARGET7.62
- Codyjohn61
- Idontknowwhatimdoing
- kz45
- aceinyerface
- 340six
- 3fifty7
- 356tsw
- speedfreek
- gmshooter
- rhettro
- Daspy
- 700Camo
- Tboy
- nlognion93
- Martman300
