Slashdot Mirror
Justice Department Seizes Reporter's Phone, Email Records In Leak Probe (thehill.com)
According to The New York Times, the Department of Justice seized a New York Times reporter's phone and email records this year in an effort to probe the leaking of classified information, the first known instance of the DOJ going after a journalist's data under President Trump. The Hill reports: The Times reported Thursday that the DOJ seized years' worth of records from journalist Ali Watkins's time as a reporter at BuzzFeed News and Politico before she joined The Times in 2017 as a federal law enforcement reporter, according to the report Thursday. Watkins was alerted by a prosecutor in February that the DOJ had years of records and subscriber information from telecommunications companies such as Google and Verizon for two email accounts and a phone number belonging to her. Investigators did not receive the content of the records, according to The Times. The newspaper reported that it learned of the letter on Thursday.
I assume we're supposed to be outraged at this because Trump.
Except they're going after someone leaking classified information to a reporter during a "three year relationship" with her. So basically they caught someone sending her secrets, got a warrant, and are now going after the leaker using that evidence. With due process. Like they're supposed to.
Apparently we're supposed to be outraged because she's a reporter. Except this type of stuff happened all the time under Obama and no one in the media cared then. So the sudden outrage is a bit... weird.
so finally will the press wake up and tell the public that metadata not necessarily the content is important ?
As a side note this would not have been such a problem if the journalist Ali Watkins had actually run their own email server like ms clinton had...
so lesson learnt dont depend on a third party like gmail/office365 if you want privacy and certainly do not depend on something like signal not to leak your metadata
Slashdot is way too liberal with shitposters. Why can't we just cancel obvious troll accounts - terminate them and permban the IP? Clutch Nixon 5434978 is an obvious troll and spamming whole threads with off-topic "poems", these shitposts are of no use to anyone. If you want political topics (I don't), then at least kick out the obvious trolls and shitposters.
Or even better, permanently IP ban or shadow ban all off-topic commentators. You can start with my own account because of this comment, I don't care, as long as you do it with every off-topic troll poster out there so Slashdot becomes readable again.
He has been in regular e-mail contact with Ahmed Y. who is not a terrorist. How long will it be before Ahmed Y. finds himself on a on a no-fly list??
Come on, the correct question would be :
- How long before Ahmed Y. finds himself waterboarded at some black site, just in case he could be having something interesting to say ?
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
Nancy Pelosi and Maxine Waters are evidence to the contrary.
Interestingly, the FBI is currently alleging that the use of communications platforms with encryption such as WhatsApp amounts to obstruction of justice and evidence of criminal intent when used to communicate with people who might eventually become witnesses - even if they are witnesses for the defense.
So all of you folks who poo-poo the slippery slope argument... well, there you go. They are also all over companies like Apple for building encryption into their phones and have used the fact that devices are encrypted as evidence of criminal intent.
England is currently living out the argumentum ad absurdum from the gun control debate - having outlawed guns and the sorts of knives used for hunting or defense and finding that people are still violent, they are now talking about banning kitchen knives with pointed ends.
Give the government and inch, and they'll use that inch against you.
Just the first time it's happened under this Administration.
So what does that mean when Obama did the same thing? That he's a petty tyrant that is lashing out? I guess so. Good thing he was the one to put this framework into place and abuse the fuck out of it isn't it.
Om, nomnomnom...
Coming from a military background I have no trouble realizing that there is a lot of information that should not be made public for perfectly reasonable and legal reasons. Not every piece of classified data is classified for bad reasons. As a matter of fact most of them are classified for very valid reasons.
The Senate Intelligence Committee is tasked with oversight of the TLA. If they can't keep information that is necessary and important to U.S. security secret then the TLA just won't keep them in the loop. That is not a better situation for the country, the citizenry or freedom.
Reporters do not have some kind of magic get out of jail card when they solicit or receive classified information they are not cleared to know. Public officials, employees and contractors have no legal right to release classified material because they disagree with policy or don't like specific elected officials.
The liberal fantasy that people who break the law should be immune from legal consequences because of their politics or which side their on is irrational. Henry David Thoreau understood that, which is why he went to jail instead of paying a tax in support of a war with which he did not agree. He did not expect to escape consequences for his actions. He expected to take the consequences because the stand he was taking was, to him, right and important.
if you believe something is important enough to break the law to take a stand you should be willing to accept the consequences of taking that stand.