Slashdot Mirror
Activist Admits To Bugging US Senate Minority Leader
cold fjord writes "Curtis Morrison, co-founder of the Progress Kentucky PAC, which had previous issued an apology over a racially charged tweet about Senator McConnell's wife (former Secretary of Labor, Elaine Chao), has admitted to bugging Senator McConnell. Morrison admitted he was behind the recording and said a grand jury is investigating the situation. "[Assistant] U.S. attorney, Bryan Calhoun, telephoned my attorney yesterday, asking to meet with him next Friday as charges against me are being presented to a grand jury," Morrison wrote on Salon. Morrison writes that after releasing the recording, his personal life took a negative turn. 'I've never doubted that making the recording was ethical.' He also says that he doesn't believe his actions were illegal, but admits he could be prosecuted for them."' Morrison has said that one of his inspirations was Julian Assange. Given the current direction of government activity, he may simply have been trying to build a suitable resume for future federal employment."
It is truly sad to see the direction things have been heading in the United States.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
First, there is an expectation of privacy inside one's office, and secondly Kentucky is a one party notify state when it comes to recording, so one party to the discussions taking place in the office needed to know that they were being recorded. Public records searches don't apply here.
Thirty four characters live here.
Referencing both Fox *and* the Moonie paper?
Get out.
--
BMO
Let's see, this puts him in the same ethical category as E Howard Hunt, Charles Colson, G Gordon Liddy, Virgilio Gonzalez, Bernard Barker, James McCord, Eugenio Martinez, and Frank Sturgis. What could possibly go wrong with that?
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you
This story belongs to politico or any number of political blogs. Why in the fuck is this story on a site that is ostensibly news for nerds???
There is no nerd angle here whatsoever.
Bugging ?
The voices were coming from the other side of a nearby door, which had a window. I pulled out my Flip camera and started to record.
I don’t need to tell you what a weapon the pocket video camera has become."
Recently, the group turned its attention to McConnell’s wife, former Secretary of Labor Elaine Chao, with a focus on her race. ... In a Feb. 14 Twitter message, Progress says: "This woman has the ear of (Sen. McConnell)—she's his wife. May explain why your job moved to China!"
So "China" is a race now? Are there many 19th century reporters in Louisville?
Ezekiel 23:20
I think there's an argument that a truly open government would allow us to see what's going on in the public offices of the elected officials (I think that would also further decrease our ability to compromise, but that's a digression...).
However, this was in a campaign office. That's not a public function, it's necessarily a private group which is (supposed to be) separate from the staff and work of the public office. Recording campaign discussions is just dirty politics, not looking out for the public good.
In corporatist America, politicians bugger you.
Space game using normal deck of cards: http://BattleCards.org
What he did was neither ethical, legal, or even a remotely good idea. Even if your opponent is a prick. I cannot imagine in what universe he is inhabiting that he thinks that this was not going to get him in serious trouble (as well it should.) And under what journalistic ethical code is bugging somebody's office allowed?
I'm no fan of Julian Assange (not because I think that wikileaks is illegal or immoral, rather because the way he handles it, and himself, is really poor...) but this isn't even remotely similar. The only inspiration he could have possibly drawn from Julian is a gigantic ego.
Just because one does not hold Fox News in high regard does not mean you view their politically opposed rivals as better.
The fact we have to choose between left* and right leaning "news" shows how broken journalism has become (probably always was).
The facts, or the "news" does not have any political agenda. The duty of journalists is to report what is actually going on, not endorsing the varying political agendas surrounding the facts.
As a European, the left/right divide in the US news outlets is very much relative and always leaning heavily to the right. Both sides are corporate apologists, the key difference being only one side (openly) holds the poor in contempt. The other difference being, R or D in the White House is the decider in which side parrots the Government line this week. But one side is always uncritically reporting the Presidents/Federal actions.
I apologize; you are correct. I should have read all the linked articles. It's a grey area that the law will have to sort out. (I suspect it hinges on if he would have been considered trespassing at the time, and if the participants in the recorded meeting had a reasonable expectation of privacy.)
I don't want ANYONE to think it's EVER ethically or legally justifiable to bug my personal residence, or the personal residence of anyone else.
How do people like this activist justify it for themselves, but disallow it for everyone else? You don't want to be spied on, but you can do some spying yourself?
While in his semester office, you mean? Assuming that were true, it elephant matter nectar this was a campaign meeting, at a private office, not his senate office. Personally, I think leaders should be able to have frank, honest discussions with advisors. I know that JFK's private consultations with his attorney general (and brother) helped avoid World War 3. For the consultations to be forthright, that means those discussions aren't public.
Slashdot has become the frustrated-nerd outlet for Fox News.
That post got mangled.
While in his senate office, you mean? Assuming that were true, it wouldn't matter because this was a campaign meeting, at a private office, not his senate office. Personally, I think leaders should be able to have frank, honest discussions with advisors. I know that JFK's private consultations with his attorney general (and brother) helped avoid World War 3. For the consultations to be forthright, that means they aren't public, and therefore carefully worded for political purposes.
You wete do right on 1-11, then out comes the GIANT tinfoil hat for #12.
said by you from the gecko
from the *get go* ?
I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
1. Fox went to court in Florida to defend the "right" to lie as news. They are the only news network to do so in the history of reporting. This is significant.
Wrong! First, it was NOT FoxNews. It was a Fox affiliate. You know, the TV station that shows "Family Guy" and "The Simpsons"? Next, they never went to court to fight for the "right to lie as news". That was something that a blogger wrote on his blog in his "analysis" of the verdict.
This case was about a story on BGH (Bovine Growth Hormone) in milk. Jane Akre and Steve Wilson were "journalists" who wrote a story about the dangers of BGH. The Fox Broadcasting Company station, WTVT in Tampa, Florida, was willing to air the story, but was also going to give Monsanto a chance to respond. This pissed Akre and Wilson off. They thought they would be allowed to report their story without any chance at giving the company that they were skewering a chance to respond. Akre and Wilson pulled their story and sued, arguing that Monsanto would just lie, and therefor should not be allowed to respond.
Nowhere, did FoxNews, or even the Fox affiliate WTVT EVER claim that they had a right to lie.
2. Shepard Smith (the only redeeming quality of Fox) is not enough to balance the derp.
Next, on number 2, Shepherd Smith is not the only liberal on FoxNews. Bob Beckel, Mariah Liason, Juan Williams, Sally Kohn, Alan Colmes, Kristen Powers, Susan Estrich, Pat Caddell, Greta Van Sustren and many others are on FoxNews to represent the liberal perspective.
Deal with it.
I recommend that you take your own advice.
I bought a CueCat Scanner at a thrift shop for $1, I can lend it to anyone who needs it.
After WWII, Americans scoffed at the notion that something like Hitler's Germany or Stalin's Soviet Union could happen here in America. Scoff no more, America. It could happen here. Morrison and millions like him are the reasons why.
So, let me get this straight. He didn't surreptitiously gain access to any area any random member of the public wouldn't have access to. He didn't plant any recording device to record in his absence. He stood outside a door and with a cel phone recorded what any passerby would have heard had they stopped to listen. Is that correct?
That doesn't even sound particularly unethical to me. A bit sleazy, but then if McConnell's careless enough to have that kind of discussion where anyone in the hallway can overhear the problem doesn't lie with the people in the hallway listening.
Anyone that reads only one news source is equally guilty, be it Democracy Now or Foxnews.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
Please mod the parent up.
The "fox news argued in court that they have the right to lie" is in itself a lie. It's one of those things where people repeat it enough to believe that it is true. Even googling it you get links to nothing but blogs about it, with not one professional analysis to speak of. Further, they all claim that Fox News itself was behind it, even though neither Fox nor its parent company had anything to do with it. It was all done by a local news station who happens to be a Fox TV affiliate (as in, they get the rights to air Fox television shows, but it doesn't extend much beyond that.)
And of course, all of the above completely ignores that the TV station itself simply wanted a fair story as opposed to a blanket slam piece. Compare that to say MSNBC who is known to deliberately alter news content (most recently, editing the George Zimmerman audio clips) in order to fit their "racism" narrative.
Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
Even assuming this were true, it's of no importance whatsoever - President Obama's mother was an American citizen, therefore her children are American citizens, no matter where they're born.
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
No one is even talking about that in this thread but you. You are the only plant, and you appear to be rooted in an inadequate medium.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
One of Slashdot's weaknesses is the lack of an "edit" button. Most sites have them these days... It'd be even better if they had one with a link to the original comment, to prevent all sorts of trollish foolishness.
Recording is only illegal if there was a reasonable expectation of privacy. Two neighbors arguing on their front lawn have none. You can record them and play it back on the evening news if you so choose. Two neighbors arguing in their living room? A grey area if they are being loud and you do so from the street. Only illegal if you, for instance, have to put a mic on the glass.
In all fairness, there are plenty of wingnuts that view the existence of liberals as treasonous. And there certainly isn't any shortage of ethically bankrupt "journalism" on either side.
Again, I suggest you check your local laws.
There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
1. Fox went to court in Florida to defend the "right" to lie as news. They are the only news network to do so in the history of reporting.
Ironically, you're lying.
You're referring to the case New World Communications vs. Akre. WTVT is a local station in Tampa Bay owned by New World Communications (which is owned by News Corporation and thus is a Fox owned and operated station.) You note that WTVT isn't Fox News Channel, because you called it "Fox" in a discussion about "Fox News." Nice slight of hand. Jane Akre was a WTVT reporter who wanted to air a piece critical of Monsanto without giving Monsanto a chance to respond, and the WTVT brass turned her down. WTVT claims that the original piece that Akre submitted was biased and misleading, and so produced a new piece including a response from Monsanto. She and her then-husband, Steve Wilson, eventually had their employment contracts terminated without cause.
Akre and Wilson then sued New World under a Florida whistleblower law. They alleged that airing a piece with Monsanto's response would constitute a violation of the an FCC policy authorized under the Communications Act of 1933, and that they were fired for threatening to expose this violation of law. On the facts of whether including Monsanto's response constituted lying, a jury would rule dismiss all of their claims. A jury, in fact, ruled that New World wasn't lying.
The jury awarded Akre money because she thought she was acting as a whistleblower, and New World appealed THAT part of the ruling. In their appeal, New World said that the Florida whistleblower statue required the whistleblower to be reporting a violation of law, not a violation of FCC policy. This is a wildly different argument than "defending the right to lie."
The appeals court ruled that because the thing that Akre was going to report to the FCC on wasn't a "law" as required by the Florida whistleblower law, she was not protected by the whistleblower law. Because she wasn't protected by the whistleblower law, the appeals court overturned Akre's jury award without considering the merits of the case. (They did, however, note that the original jury overturned all of Akre and Wilson's claims about WTVT lying.)
The other interesting part of this is that nowhere in the court documents does either side advance anything about a "right to lie." New World never argued that they had one, and Akre never argued that WTVT claimed that they did in any formal document. Four years after the appeal ruling, Akre filed a complaint with the FCC that WTVT shouldn't have their license renewed. She didn't even claim anything about a right to lie then.
This site has a good overview of what happened in the Akre case:
http://www.campaignfreedom.org/2009/11/03/fox-lies-videotape-debunking-an-internet-myth/
So does Akre's Wikipedia page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Akre
This story is an urban legend that was spread to attack Fox News, but it was completely false. Thank you for not spreading it further.
elephant matter nectar
You've found the fabled Lost Verse of "Glass Onion". Congratulations.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
Actually there are a few other posts criticizing the media's linking this in any form or fashion to Julian or Wiki leaks and not condoning this guys behavior. I just was bold enough to say that it may be more like this guy serving a greater agenda than flaming a republican campaign and doing it badly.
At least even indirectly. So cry me a river if you don't see any humor in any of that or insight.
This still leaves it open to the journalist, which facts he will report on, and what angle of reporting he will choose. But again -- that's the Freedom of the Press.