Slashdot Mirror
Feds Confiscate Investigative Reporter's Confidential Files During Raid
schwit1 writes "Using a warrant to search for guns, Homeland security officers and Maryland police confiscated a journalist's confidential files. The reporter had written a series of articles critical of the TSA. It appears that the raid was specifically designed to get her files, which contain identifying information about her sources in the TSA. 'In particular, the files included notes that were used to expose how the Federal Air Marshal Service had lied to Congress about the number of airline flights there were actually protecting against another terrorist attack,' Hudson [the reporter] wrote in a summary about the raid provided to The Daily Caller. Recalling the experience during an interview this week, Hudson said: 'When they called and told me about it, I just about had a heart attack.' She said she asked Bosch [the investigator heading the raid] why they took the files. He responded that they needed to run them by TSA to make sure it was 'legitimate' for her to have them. '"Legitimate" for me to have my own notes?' she said incredulously on Wednesday. Asked how many sources she thinks may have been exposed, Hudson said: 'A lot. More than one. There were a lot of names in those files. This guy basically came in here and took my anonymous sources and turned them over — took my whistleblowers — and turned it over to the agency they were blowing the whistle on,' Hudson said. 'And these guys still work there.'"
I donâ(TM)t suppose this critical file of confidential sources and interview information was encrypted?
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
Leader of the free world!!!
Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
'"Legitimate" for me to have my own notes?' she said incredulously on Wednesday.
Depends, how large are these constitution free border zones again?
A raid to steal a reporter's notes (verses a Watergate sneak-theft)? That crosses the line into jackboot thuggery.
Laughter is the Spackle of the Soul.
imagine a boot stamping on a human face, forever.
Our government began abusing other countries and the media ignored it.
Our government began abusing it's citizens and the media ignored it.
Our government began abusing the media...
The real Sig captains the Northwestern. This one captains
http://www.whistleblowers.gov/
This looks to be well outside of the intent of the law, if not outside the reach of the national security letter, but the writing's been on the wall for a while now that even this government is out of control and can no longer be trusted at all, with any information, whatsoever.
Better to have off-site backups and have everything encrypted. Journalists critical of any government anywhere, take heed.
"Hitler's police state worked on the rule that if you said nothing, no harm, could come to you. If you had doubts about the way the country was going, you kept them to yourself - or paid the price".
http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/nazi_police_state.htm
"Kill 'em all and let Root sort 'em out"
1. The issue is not that she lost her information, it's that her confidential anonymous sources have now been potentially revealed to the agency they were blowing the whistle on.
2. Where can you hide your stuff that law enforcement cannot find it if they try hard enough?
3. The government can find any excuse to raid you if they want (in this case, because in 1986 her husband was found guilty of resisting arrest). And once they do find an excuse, what can you do when an elite, armored team shows up at your doorstep?
There is nothing you as an individual can do to retaliate against this, other than speaking out (as she is doing). If you really want to prevent this from happening, choose to live somewhere else, or just be a nice little citizen and never try to rock the boat.
What imaginary guns were they looking for? Where'd the intell saying there were imaginary guns come from?
Laughter is the Spackle of the Soul.
Were this the previous administration (Bush) using jackbooted tactics like this there would be a huge uproar in the US press and public. Why do they tolerate it now? It's just as dangerous to freedom, and to people's rights and a free press as it would have been 8 years go.
I mean, seriously? What kind of journalist, investigating malfeasance by federal agencies, would have the names of her sources in plain text? Sounds like someone on the local newspaper who would ordinarily be writing the horoscopes and gardening news.
Wait a minute! You are implying it's the Journalists fault and not the Government's fault who illegally confiscated her materials? Either that or you are diverting the argument from the Government Employees breaking the law.
You should be ranting and raving to get Government Employees people fired and put in jail for breaking the law, not complaining about the journalists.
Are you happy that your tax dollars were just spent in illegal activities? Just not care as long as it's not you getting fucked?
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
At this point, the best defense is a good offense. They know by now their identities are compromised to their employer, so whatever they said that could be construed to be negative against the TSA will be used against them. Otherwise, it's just a waiting game to find out how much harassment and attrition will be leveled against them to force them to resign, if not downright fire them.
Except if they go public with it. In unison. Loudly. Right now.
Turn the tables. Then again, that approach will be heavily dependent on how the media will cover it, and what the spinsters have to say. Yes - there are risks. Yes - these are probably people with families and commitments and responsibilities that would be at risk. Then again, as of this raid, they already are.
In my mind, this was a stupid move by the establishment. The whistleblowers now have nothing to lose. Absolutely nothing.
How many constitutionally guaranteed rights can the DHS violate with a single action? Quite a few it turns out. . .
what the REAL threat to American freedom is: government bureaucrats desperately wanting to stay in power hooking up with jackbooted thugs cloaked in the mantle of the state, stomping all over Liberty.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
If you have desirable skills, it's time to leave the u.s. If you can't leave then move your data and services outside the u.s. I don't mean to godwin, but I spent most of my life wondering when I would have left Germany if I lived there during the rise of the Nazis, and how I can apply this to my own life. Two of my great-grandparents fled and lost some modest lands, and one of my grandfather's land was invaded by the Germans. He went back to fight the Germans while in the u.s. army. I often wondered at what point my great-grandparents decided it was time to give up and leave Germany. They left a comfortable aristocratic life and became immigrants in the u.s., owning a neighborhood grocery store. They made a new and somewhat comfortable life for themselves in the u.s. but gave up more to leave. About 6 years ago I decided to leave the u.s. and move to Switzerland, one of the last bastions of freedom in the West. I was lucky - it's difficult to get a work permit here, and will be even more difficult after the elections coming up. So, if you can, just leave. Don't be a cog in the evil that the u.s. has become. If you can't leave, then do what you can to not support it.
A warrant should be very specific about what items are to be siezed. If the warrant was for guns, how does that get extended to files ?
Lying on an affidavit is perjury and gathering evidence is limited to what the warrant states. Other evidence outside the scope of the warrant requires another warrant before it can be taken. Otherwise that evidence is inadmissible.
The difference is in prior presidencies, the people doing this crap were fired, or arrested all the way up to the president resigning. Meanwhile, this joker keeps blaming everyone else and playing his golf.
Seriously? Did you just beam in?
If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
Not much longer.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
And "exercising one's freedoms" doesn't convey the complete scenario.
She was REPORTING on LIES that GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES were telling.
So she is treated the same as if she was holding innocent children hostage at gunpoint.
We are not in a "police state" yet. But tactics such as that for "crimes" that are not crimes WITHOUT REPERCUSSIONS FOR WHOMEVER AUTHORIZED IT do blur the distinction.
If this is true, law enforcement (a) blatantly exceeded the scope of a lawful search warrant; and (b) used a search warrant as a pretext to seize material that they had no authority to seize.
This is unusually bad. People need to lose their jobs for this.
If Ann Coulter is associated with it..... I'm NOT
Audrey Hudson writes for Newsmax and formerly for the Washington Times. The story has appeared on WND, TheDailyCaller, TheBlaze and other right wing sites. It is being studiously ignored by all other Western media, as per a Google News search, just now.
Selective outrage; the jackboots kick in the door on a conservative reporter and you people and your MSM are fine with it.
Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
The difference is in prior presidencies, the people doing this crap were fired, or arrested all the way up to the president resigning.
Uh. We are talking about the US here. Are you sure you are thinking of the right country?
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
A tyrant is someone who can sign the death warrants for a thousand people without a second thought.
A bureaucrat is someone who, when told they've been reprieved, will insist on properly-completed individual documents for each person.
Wrong question. The correct question follows: Is there a law that allows for the seizure of journalistic notes when the warrant was for guns?
I cannot believe that the Feds would do anything to hurt a whistleblower. After all, this text still appears (despite scurrilous reports to the contrary) on the Obama/Biden campaign website:
The politician said it, I believe it, that settles it.
Why AC?? Embrace your hate. Be proud of it.
Hate filled people like you are the best argument I can imagine for an unfettered 2nd Amendment.
Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
Yes, actually, it does. If a warrant says "search and seize guns", and you find something that's not a gun, you don't get to mess with it.
"[N]o Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." "Guns and whatever other stuff we find" is not a particular description.
Bullshit. A prima facie examination of a document is all that would be required.
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
Here are a few key points from the original story in The Daily Caller:
Warrant Basis:
The document notes that her husband, Paul Flanagan, was found guilty in 1986 to resisting arrest in Prince George's County. The warrant called for police to search the residence they share and seize all weapons and ammunition because he is prohibited under the law from possessing firearms.
Militarization of Police Angle:
At about 4:30 a.m. on Aug. 6, Hudson said officers dressed in full body armor presented a search warrant to enter the home she shares on the bay with her husband. She estimates that at least seven officers took part in the raid.
Document Seizure Justification:
Diaz explained that the files were taken because they found official government papers, which Hudson had obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request.
"During the course of the search, the CGIS agent discovered government documents labeled FOUO - For Official Use Only (FOUO) - and LES - Law Enforcement Sensitive. The files that contained these documents were cataloged on the search warrant inventory and taken from the premises," Diaz said.
"The documents were reviewed with the source agency and determined to be obtained properly through the Freedom of Information Act," he said.
Document Seizure Counterpoint:
But Hudson doesn't buy the explanation: "That explains the one file they took but does not explain why they took four other files with my handwritten and typed interview notes with confidential sources, that I staked my reputation as a journalist to protect under the auspices of the First Amendment of the Constitution," she said.
They Did Have Guns:
During the raid, the officers also went after Hudson's three pistols and three long guns, which she obtained legally.
"I'm a Kentucky girl," she said. "I come kitchen trained, and firearm ready. I grew up with guns and I've always been around guns."
She Is A "Real" Reporter:
Hudson has been a reporter in Washington, D.C. for nearly 15 years and was nominated twice by The Washington Times for the Pulitzer Prize. She is a freelancer for Newsmax and the Colorado Observer.
Her Investigative Reporting:
While at the Times, Hudson reported extensively on the air marshal program - specifically about whether Homeland Security officials had lied to Congress and reported protecting more flights than they really were. Using her sources inside the government, Hudson has also reported for years about possible terrorist "dry-runs" on airplanes.
Unlike some other reporters whose sources have been targeted in recent years by the government, Hudson said none of the information she had was classified or given to her by someone who broke the law.
"None of the documents were classified," she said. "There were no laws broken in me obtaining these files."
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
Ding Dong, that's the sound of Ford pardoning Nixon because we're a nation of men, not of laws.
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
that very well might have to do with the purchase/maintenance/use of guns.
When you start adding arbitrary meaning to your interpretation of the law, you can get away with anything. I mean, why don't they seize the house too, since it was obviously used to shelter said gun, and also seize bank accounts because the money to purchase the guns came from there.... etc, etc etc. THIS is what is happening all over America - bullshit interpretation of what you WANT the law to mean instead of what it actually means. On the part of cops, judges and prosecutors. Well, do enjoy the police state this has led to. I'm glad I don't live there.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
You naive righty vs lefty folks are so blind. The puppet may change but the hands holding the strings are the same. They use issues like abortion and gay rights to divide the population so we can be controlled. United we are dangerous bit it is so easy to get us bickering with each other so we ignore the real threat.
it blows my fucking mind how many people here are placing the blame on the person who's papers were confiscated. this is completely unacceptable.
A search warrant has to list what is being searched for. If it's not on the list it can't be taken.
Now they did see official-use-only documents that they took, and presumably they could attempt to justify this as being evidence of other illegal activity (stealing documents). However they also took her handwritten notes which clearly were not official government documents.
Not only that, they did not make it clear to the journalist that documents were even taken, who only found out about this a month later.
These notes were then passed on to the TSA who has no jurisdiction in the matter.
Basically there was a long string of mistakes being made by the law enforcement. Enough so that you could use this in a cadet training program as an "identify everything illegal in this search procedure" exercise.
According to the article summery, the claim is that the files were taken specifically because they didn't know if the TSA would allow her to have them.
So evidently, they did read the notes and knew they had nothing to do with the purchase/maintenance/use of guns.
This entire fiasco leaves the impression that the warrant was a bogus excuse to get at the notes and discover who the sources were. From what I can tell, resisting arrest is not even a disqualifying crime in Maryland so her husband wouldn't be bared from owning or possessing a firearm anyways. Perhaps it is something in the new gun law just passed by that would imply the older convictions would be grandfathered in.
Do a Google search for the title of the article and you will come up with who is running with this story:
- The Daily Caller
- WorldNetDaily
- The Blaze
- Pajamas Media
- Free Republic
- American Thinker
* Others
And, this woman worked for the "Moonie" Times a freelancer for Newsmax.
Starting to see a pattern?
I'm now *very* skeptical of the truth of this story.
======
* I had not head of the other sites they include:
Topix (News aggregator for Gannet)
Some "top secret" / security blogs
Now they did see official-use-only documents that they took, and presumably they could attempt to justify this as being evidence of other illegal activity (stealing documents).
Certainly NOT. No matter how the documents were marked, if it wasn't something covered by the warrant, then they would have to AT LEAST have had probable cause to believe the documents were stolen FIRST, before it would be legal to seize them. Law enforcement simply DOES NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY to seize documents in order to later try to find evidence of something illegal. That's called a "fishing expedition" and it is illegal as hell.
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.[1]"
Note 'particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized'.
People were familiar with this trick a long time ago.
Their names were never published, and only discovered in an illegal search. If I write down in my notebook 'Cowboy Neal has inappropriate sexual relations with his water bottle', and never tell anyone what I have written, and never publish it, than what exactly am I guilty of?
END COMMUNICATION
Yes, actually, it does. If a warrant says "search and seize guns", and you find something that's not a gun, you don't get to mess with it.
Unfortunately there is the plain sight doctrine or plain view doctrine. http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/plain_view_doctrine
You don't understand the problem at all. Liberal and Conservative are camoflage suits worn by politicians.
Yes, Obama is breaking the law (mainly as an accessory before the fact). But he's able to do this because of the precedents set by Bush. That's what the cycle has been for (at least) decades. The Republicans extend the power of the government, but don't dare use that power because of the opposition (at least apparently). While the Republicans are in power the Democrats vilify their mad power grabs. Then the Democrats take power, and rather then repealing the extension of power, they use the powers that have been granted to them by their predecessors.
In this case, however, it sounds like the actual criminal actions were performed by the Maryland police. (With various TSA personnel accessories before the fact.) I expect that Obama is only an accessory after the fact...and even that hasn't yet been proven. He may decline to support this action.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/oct/25/armed-agents-seize-records-reporter-washington-tim/