Congress, Constitutional Law, Courts, Criminal law, Free Speech, Lawyering, Media, Politics, Society

Nixonian or Obamaesque? Obama Administration Spied On Associated Press Editors and Reporters

220px-Richard_NixonPresident_Barack_ObamaI recently published a column on how Barack Obama has publicly assumed many of the powers that were once cited as the basis for the investigation and attempted impeachment of Richard Nixon. One of those areas was the Obama Administration’s crackdown on journalists. This week Attorney General Eric Holder appears to have yet again added to this ignoble record. It appears that the Justice Department secretly obtained two months of telephone records of reporters and editors for The Associated Press. This disclosure follows another recent disclosure that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) targeted conservative groups associated with the Tea Party. Yet, once again, most Democrats remain silent in a type of cult of personality where principle is discarded in favor of loyalty to the President.


The spying on reporters by the Obama Administration included outgoing calls for the work and personal phone numbers of individual reporters. The seizure covered general AP office numbers in New York, Washington and Hartford, Conn. The Justice Department showed no restraint or concern, even including the AP in the House of Representatives press gallery. It now appears that in a few years historians could well be saying the Nixon was perfectly Obamaesque in his abuses.

AP President and Chief Executive Officer Gary Pruitt has written a letter to Holder objecting to the spying, noting that “[t]here can be no possible justification for such an overbroad collection of the telephone communications of The Associated Press and its reporters.” I would be equally upset with the mere fact of the spying as opposed to its breadth.

The spying may be part of a criminal investigation into a May 7, 2012, AP story about a foiled terror plot. AP agreed to hold the story after an objection from the Administration but ultimately ran the story disclosing a CIA operation in Yemen that stopped an al-Qaida plot to detonate a bomb on an airplane bound for the United States. While working with the Administration in holding the story, the Administration apparently was moving to spy on five reporters and an editor who were involved in the story.

Holder would have to have personally approved the subpoenas under Justice Department regulations.  However, it is not enough to again criticize Holder (who has assembled one of the most abusive records on civil liberties in our history).  Obama is well aware of the objections by civil libertarians and personally approved such decisions as promising CIA officials that they would not be investigated for torture and the kill list policy.

What is most striking about this story is the sense of complete immunity and lack of concern shown by the Administration. That sense of impunity has developed over four years as Democrats have gone into radio silence over abuses by the Administration from Obama’s “kill list” policy to other rollbacks on civil liberties. There will come a day when this president is no longer in office and many Democrats and Liberals will be faced with the imperial presidency that he created in the hands of someone they do not revere. When that day comes, it will be hard to climb over the mountain of hypocrisy to find a principled ground for criticism.

Source: CNN

289 thoughts on “Nixonian or Obamaesque? Obama Administration Spied On Associated Press Editors and Reporters”

  4. Pingback: BENGHAZI DIVERSION:DOJ ERIC HOLDER CONFESSED EAVESDROPPING AP PHONE RECORDS LAST YEAR; WHY OBAMA ADMINISTRATION SUDDENLY CONFESSING ITS OWN CRIMES | katenews2day

  5. “I debated the “analogy than euphemism” use but settled on euphemism as an innocuous way of suggest something unpleasant … going deeper, if you will.”

    I suspected that was where you were headed with that, but I did feel the need to clarify as you know I have a stated preference against euphemistic language. The unpleasant should be spoken of with clarity for if one does not clearly and accurately define a problem, one will never find a maximal solution.

    “Interestingly enough … Varys is a eunuch …”

    But Lord Burghley wasn’t. What is important about Varys being a eunuch isn’t his being a eunuch proper. It’s a rather clever contrast Martin provides. Varys being a eunuch is important because it is in part a large reason for his ability to act with detachment in a court full of characters who seemingly and often to think with their groins first and their heads later. Robert Baratheon, Jeoffrey Baratheon, Stannis Baratheon, Cirsei Lannister, Jaime Lannister, Tyrion Lannister, Robb Stark, even Ned Stark, all made decisions based on desire over forethought and it has cost them and others dearly. Even Baelish is blinded by his desire although his is for power not flesh. The other character who sought power at all cost, Theon Greyjoy, meets a most grisly fate while Baelish leaves a path of death and destruction in his wake. Contrast this with the characters more able to act with detachment, specifically Lord Varys and Tywin Lannister. Neither is exactly noble, but they do what they do in the service of something greater than themselves, Varys the realm and Tywin his legacy of House Lannister. To be the spider requires both detachment and a knowledge of both the necessity and value of sacrifice.

  7. “Interestingly enough … Varys is a eunuch …

    rat-a-tat-tat … take it”

    Okee, this had me spitting up coffee!

  8. Gene,

    I debated the “analogy than euphemism” use but settled on euphemism as an innocuous way of suggest something unpleasant … going deeper, if you will.

    Interestingly enough … Varys is a eunuch …

    rat-a-tat-tat … take it

  9. Yesterday, the President incorrectly referred to the IRS as an “independent agency”, whereas in actuality it is an agency in the Executive branch, which he heads. Now today, the President’s press secretary, Jay Carney, repeatedly asserted that the President could not interfere with “independent” investigations being conducted by inspectors general within various executive agencies. Then, immediately following, Atty Gen Holder, explained that he recused himself from the investigation into the IRS because his contact with the media, would have precluded the DOJ from performing an “independent” investigation.

    The above represent three instances where executive officials (or their proxies) have attempted to insulate themselves from culpability by the claim of “independence”. But that contention simply doesn’t hold up under scrutiny. The fact is, the inspector general of ANY executive agency serves ENTIRELY at the pleasure of the president. They are either directly appointed by the president, or are appointed by the heads of agencies which are, in turn, appointed by him (while noting that all presidential appointees are additionally subject to senate confirmation). Thus none of these investigations (or investigators) are truly independent, but are rather “internal” in nature. This Orwellian redefinition of the notion of independence that the Administration is trying to promote is false and is only being promulgated to provide political cover for the President and agency heads. Any truly independent investigation can only be conducted “externally”, by an entity outside of the Executive branch, such as by a special prosecutor appointed by the Legislature.

  10. One lives to be of service, Blouise, although technically that’s more analogy than euphemism. I think it very accurately portrays the fundamental differences in both kinds of political creatures, the spider and the snake. Both understand machinations, but Varys like Machiavelli realizes that a prince must give back utility and value to society or else face the wrath of society whereas Baelish like Ayn Rand only seeks what’s best for him and damn the consequence. As Varys once said of Baelish, “He would burn the realm to the ground if he could be King of the ashes.” We have far too few Varys in public service these days and far too many Baelish. It’s a consequence of corporatism which has no legitimate ethical basis and rewards sociopathic behavior. And that is the terminus est, the line that divides, being simply a political creature and being a political monster. For historical comparison, consider William Cecil, 1st Baron Burghley as the spider and Henry Kissinger as the snake.

  11. AY,

    Wouldn’t it be cool if McCullough/Meacham/Chernow got together and wrote a “What If” novel?

  12. “Republicans, meanwhile, are calling on Holder to resign following news of the probe.” (from SwM’s link above)

    Of course they are … they want another Ashcroft/Gonzales

  13. “Machiavelli versus Ayn Rand.” (Gene)

    Still my favorite “Euphemism by Howington”

  15. Tony C.,

    Not to worry, I’m not a Green Lanternist by any means … Introducing Hillary into the mix always stimulates the blood and raises the stakes.

  16. A few salient thoughts from Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism, by Robert Jay Lifton (1963):

    Milieu Control

    The most basic feature of the thought reform environment, the psychological current upon which all else depends, is the control of human communication. Through this milieu control the totalist environment seeks to establish domain over not only the individual’s communication with the outside (all that he sees and hears, reads or writes, experiences, and expresses), but also – in its penetration of his inner life – over what we may speak of as his communication with himself. It creates an atmosphere uncomfortably reminiscent of George Orwell’s 1984.

    Such milieu control never succeeds in becoming absolute, and its own human apparatus can – when permeated by outside information – become subject to discordant “noise” beyond that of any mechanical apparatus. To totalist administrators, however, such occurrences are no more than evidences of “incorrect” use of the apparatus. For they look upon milieu control as a just and necessary policy, one which need not be kept secret: thought reform participants may be in doubt as to who is telling what to whom, but the fact that extensive information about everyone is being conveyed to the authorities is always known. At the center of this self-justification is their assumption of omniscience, their conviction that reality is their exclusive possession. Having experienced the impact of what they consider to be an ultimate truth (and having the need to dispel any possible inner doubts of their own), they consider it their duty to create an environment containing no more and no less than this “truth.” In order to be the engineers of the human soul, they must first bring it under full observational control.

    Not only does the U.S. government look to Communist China for loans to fund the ruinous global militarism that U.S. taxpayers cannot financially afford, but the U.S. government also looks to Communist China for the best means of monitoring and controlling all human communications of the citizenry.

  17. “To any U.S. Attorneys reading this blog, it is now your time to act. Find the courage, or quit.”

    Yep.

  18. The contest continues!
    Varys versus Baelish.
    Spider versus snake.
    Machiavelli versus Ayn Rand.

    You sure know how to bring a smile to my face, Blouise. 😀

  19. anonymously posted 1, May 14, 2013 at 11:50 am

    “Until we get rid of the Patriot Act, this kind of abuse will never cease…”
    -rafflaw

    Agreed.
    ==============================
    Agreed too.

  20. Gene says, “Grand juries have been mentioned here before and like you I think it’s a good idea,…”

    What is most fascinating is the state of Vermont’s view that should GWB for DC cross the state line, they will be arrested and questioned over matters of war crimes, and how this has attracted the attention of zero U.S. Attorneys. Not even a little bit curious? How does such abject blindness exist in the digital age?

    In other words, what are the threats against anyone who acts?

    To any U.S. Attorneys reading this blog, it is now your time to act. Find the courage, or quit.

Comments are closed.