|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
May 14, 2013, 09:59 PM | #1 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 20, 2012
Location: Sweet Home
Posts: 886
|
Trampling the First Amendment
Two interesting news stories this week that if true show an abuse of power by the current administration in violating the First Amendment.
The rules of political scandal are simple: - Act Surprised - Deny all responsibility - Make counter accusations The first case centers around using the IRS to target of political enemies and organizations: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013...han-initially/ Perhaps as many as five hundred organizations were targeted by the IRS for investigation for no other reason than that they were opposed to the current administration and were vigorously exercising their First Amendment rights. The naked attempt to curtail their activity was at the very least: "unconscionable and appalling", possibly illegal and very likely a wide spread violation of civil rights. Such a wide pattern of misconduct would seem to indicate nothing other than a top led effort. The next case is the secret court order of wiretapping of AP offices in an attempt to find leaks in the administration. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013...phone-records/ This might actually bring down the AG. I think this best sums it up: Quote:
My question are: - Are these civil rights violations? - If so how serious? - Do those effected have ground for a suit?
__________________
Tomorrow is the most important thing in life. Comes into us at midnight very clean. It's perfect when it arrives and it puts itself in our hands. It hopes we've learned something from yesterday. Last edited by Evan Thomas; May 15, 2013 at 11:43 AM. Reason: removed extra m. |
|
May 14, 2013, 10:35 PM | #2 |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,470
|
IMHO these are violations of Federal law. I don't know that either could be considered a "civil" right, since both actions were directed at organizations rather than individuals. Nonetheless, immoral, unethical, and IMHO illegal and unconstitutional.
I also thought it was interesting that, when the news about the IRS targeting first broke, the Obama team tried to ... (wait for it, it's coming) ... BLAME IT ON BUSH! |
May 14, 2013, 10:57 PM | #3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 26, 2005
Location: The Bluegrass
Posts: 9,142
|
Let's keep the facts straight. The DOJ did not wiretap the phones, they subpoenaed phone records. This would show telephone numbers and lengths of conversations but not the conversations themselves. Still, one has to be concerned about the scope of the subpoenas.
Did you notice Eric Holder "recused" himself. This was simply away to avoid responsibility. He is good at that. On the IRS scandal, the administration is trying to minimize it by relatively low level employees in one office (Cincinnati). Again, trying to place blame on the underlings. Where have we seen that before? |
May 14, 2013, 11:03 PM | #4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 7, 2008
Location: Upper midwest
Posts: 5,631
|
Just to keep the record straight, the DOJ didn't wiretap anyone at AP -- it obtained phone records from more than 20 telephone lines used by the journalists who were "of interest," including office, home, and cell phones.
That said, it remains to be seen if any laws were broken; as Glenn Greenwald notes in the Guardian, it's impossible to evaluate this when the DOJ hasn't said what legal authority these actions were based on, nor what, if any, legal process was invoked. He goes on to say: There are numerous instruments that have been vested in the DOJ to obtain phone records, many of which do not require court approval, including administrative subpoenas and "national security letters" (issued without judicial review); indeed, the Obama DOJ has previously claimed it has the power to obtain journalists' phone records without subpoeans using NSLs, and in its relentless pursuit to learn the identity of the source for one of New York Times' James Risen's stories, the Obama DOJ has actually claimed that journalists have no shield protections whatsoever in the national security context.The Obama administration has shown itself willing to go to more or less any lengths to pursue, intimidate, and punish whistleblowers, and anyone who leaks classified information -- although the administration itself regularly does so when it perceives leaks to be advantageous. It would be great if this incident produced enough outrage for Congress to act to rein in these abuses of power, but I'm not holding my breath.
__________________
Never let anything mechanical know you're in a hurry. |
May 15, 2013, 07:44 AM | #5 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 17, 2007
Location: Cowtown of course!
Posts: 1,747
|
Quote:
__________________
NRA Chief Range Safety Officer, Home Firearms Safety, Pistol and Rifle Instructor “Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life......” President John F. Kennedy |
|
May 15, 2013, 07:55 AM | #6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 20, 2012
Location: Sweet Home
Posts: 886
|
A number of the articles did say wiretap. However it appears so far all they have confessed to is obtaining phone records.
__________________
Tomorrow is the most important thing in life. Comes into us at midnight very clean. It's perfect when it arrives and it puts itself in our hands. It hopes we've learned something from yesterday. |
May 15, 2013, 11:17 AM | #7 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 26, 2012
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 779
|
I would say this is only scratching the surface.
On a TFL "firearms-related" note, this sort of policy makes me curious if other news agencies were subpoena'd that were very pro-2A. AP was never exactly a huge enemy of the Obama administration.
__________________
I told the new me, "Meet me at the bus station and hold a sign that reads: 'Today is the first day of the rest of your life.'" But the old me met me with a sign that read: "Welcome back." Who you are is not a function of where you are. -Off Minor |
May 15, 2013, 11:41 AM | #8 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 7, 2008
Location: Upper midwest
Posts: 5,631
|
The DOJ's obtaining AP reporters' records is a significant issue in terms of constitutional rights, in terms of both the First and Fourth Amendments; this makes it a suitable topic for L&CR. A "firearms-related" component isn't necessary here.
The administration's major goal here is the intimidation and prosecution of anyone who releases information it would prefer to keep secret. Among other things, the current administration has prosecuted six people under the Espionage Act; this is more than in the entire previous history of the Act, going back to 1917. In addition, in at least one case, it has retroactively classified information in order to justify firing someone who released it while it was unclassified. In other words, this is about the suppression of free speech, under the guise of "national security." I doubt that the administration has an interest in discouraging the media from reporting on Second Amendment issues: the latter are, among other things, a convenient way to distract people from serious abuses of power.
__________________
Never let anything mechanical know you're in a hurry. |
May 15, 2013, 11:52 AM | #9 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,059
|
Quote:
Now that it directly affects journalists, Katie bar the door. Piers Morgan was fuming yesterday, and in a fit of utter irony, he had former Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer on. You may remember him as the guy who suggested allowing straw-puchased weapons to cross into Mexico for interdiction by SSP in February of 2011. Acting Director Kenneth Melson and Attorney General Jason Weinstein both resigned when the Office of the Inspector General released his report on F&F, and I doubt it's much coincidence that Breuer resigned early this year. I guess he's sore that the AG threw him to the wolves. Holder is deflecting blame now like he did then, claiming ignorance and dumping it in the lap of Deputy AG Cole. Despite being found in both civil and criminal contempt of Congress, this man still has his post. Even though F&F is pretty much a dead letter, removing Holder from office over this would bring at least some sort of closure to the issue.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
|
May 15, 2013, 11:56 AM | #10 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 20, 2012
Location: Sweet Home
Posts: 886
|
For those curious I reviewed the rules for this section prior to posting this thread:
Quote:
Anyone who thinks that the Bill of Rights is not all in one place for a reason might want to examine that belief. Here is the DAG response to the AP: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/inte...en-cole-to-ap/ No explanation at all as to why they could not work through the agency.
__________________
Tomorrow is the most important thing in life. Comes into us at midnight very clean. It's perfect when it arrives and it puts itself in our hands. It hopes we've learned something from yesterday. |
|
May 15, 2013, 12:00 PM | #11 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 15, 2013
Location: South Jersey
Posts: 1,416
|
Fast & Furious, Bengazi, and now the IRS the AP thing....this administration keeps on stonewalling and lying.
Is this the same government that we're supposed to trust when they say "Nobody's going to take away your guns"? |
May 15, 2013, 12:23 PM | #12 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
Every administration in recent years shades the truth and cannot be trusted. So let's stay on the OP topic. The gun issue is already known to be untrue.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
May 15, 2013, 01:08 PM | #13 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 9, 2010
Location: live in a in a house when i'm not in a tent
Posts: 2,483
|
AS
Quote:
Ironically, i was watching the move "All the president's men" the night before this story broke. Now THAT was a complicated mass of details to look over initially. This might also be more complicated, but in the end, the obviousness of the violation(s) against the AP is stunning. I can't imagine that they'd let this go lightly. Conversely, I"m not sure that people's eyes won't glaze over about this as well.
__________________
I'm right about the metric system 3/4 of the time. |
|
May 15, 2013, 01:11 PM | #14 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 21, 2010
Location: Central Georgia
Posts: 1,863
|
I just find it appalling that it took something of this magnitude to wake up the major media outlets to the fact that the current Administration does some questionable things.
Sickening.
__________________
NRA Life Member Read my blog! "The answer to any caliber debate is going to be .38 Super, 10mm, .357 Sig or .41 Magnum!" |
May 15, 2013, 01:15 PM | #15 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
Quote:
Last hint on this.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
|
May 15, 2013, 01:40 PM | #16 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 5, 2011
Posts: 350
|
Certainly there's room to argue the moral ramifications of these acts, but as far as legal repercussions? AFAIK nothing serious ever happened when Bush 43's administration was targeting liberal groups and anti-war organizations. I don't expect that anything major will happen this time.
|
May 15, 2013, 02:39 PM | #17 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 20, 2012
Location: Sweet Home
Posts: 886
|
Quote:
The AG gave a bunch of essentially "no comments" before congress today. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013...-hearing-says/
__________________
Tomorrow is the most important thing in life. Comes into us at midnight very clean. It's perfect when it arrives and it puts itself in our hands. It hopes we've learned something from yesterday. Last edited by Alabama Shooter; May 15, 2013 at 02:45 PM. |
|
May 15, 2013, 08:55 PM | #18 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 20, 2005
Location: Indiana
Posts: 10,446
|
Quote:
For example, if we let the IRS get away with targeting conservative groups now, what happens when the shoe is on the other foot and, under a conservative administration, the same agency begins targeting liberal groups on purely political grounds? Likewise, if the media gives the administration a pass on the AP scandal now, how could they retain credibility when they go after a conservative administration for doing the same thing later. Basically, I think everyone understands that such egregious abuses of power cannot be swept under the rug because, if for no other reason, it would make one look (and rightly so) like a whiny hypocrite when they take issue with another administration doing the same thing in the future. |
|
May 16, 2013, 08:03 AM | #19 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: December 20, 2012
Location: Sweet Home
Posts: 886
|
I can't speak to the motivations of the press corp. The media love of the current administration has been widely panned for years I doubt this will change it much.
The "acting head" of the IRS has resigned slightly ahead of schedule: Quote:
Which brings up another issue of these "acting heads of everything". Without conflating it may point to the usefulness of some over sight of the executive branch leadership. Regardless this is a fairly meaningless gesture and indicates no action being taken to reduce the unethical (possibly illegal) activity. The blogosphere is lit up with this rather interesting note: Quote:
Again, there is no indication yet that these were "taps" just phone records. However, it follows perfectly that since politicians and their people speak to the media all the time that there would be records showing this contact. It is unclear whether he meant that House records were taken or the AP records included conversations with the House. Correlating the data on the taps to various legislation on the floor this has the potential to lead all kinds of places.
__________________
Tomorrow is the most important thing in life. Comes into us at midnight very clean. It's perfect when it arrives and it puts itself in our hands. It hopes we've learned something from yesterday. |
||
May 16, 2013, 09:57 PM | #20 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 26, 2005
Location: The Bluegrass
Posts: 9,142
|
I think the Congressman misspoke. A spokesman later clarified there was no wiretapping. There were subpoenas for records at the House Gallery (see the update at the end of the story) -- http://www.theatlanticwire.com/polit...oakroom/65287/.
|
May 16, 2013, 10:24 PM | #21 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 22, 2009
Location: Washington State
Posts: 1,037
|
From both stories it would appear that DOJ's search for the source of the leaks extended to subpoenas for telephone records for phones used by Congressional representatives - whose phone conversations (and with whom they speak) might be more sensitive than many other conversations.
The concept that their phone records were examined by DOJ is unlikely to sit well with any number of Congressmen and women. Not only will they likely be no happier than the AP reporters at the prospect, but unlike the reporters the Congressmen likely can do something about it.
__________________
Treat everyone you meet with dignity and respect....but have a plan to kill them just in case. |
May 16, 2013, 11:21 PM | #22 | |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,660
|
Hokey Dokey.
I started a conversation with the Staff, earlier this morning, about this thread in particular. Mostly because I could see no way we could actually discuss the goings on, whether it be the IRS targeting or the subpoenaed phone logs, without delving into the politics of the actions. So, we will open this thread, and this thread only, to such politics. I will quote Tom Servo as to the scope of the political discussion: Quote:
|
|
May 17, 2013, 05:39 AM | #23 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,470
|
To me the fundamental issue isn't whether or not the .gov can find a suitable scapegoat to throw under a bus, it's the fact that it could happen at all. The AP "investigation," in particular, seems to me to offer a demonstration of yet another increment in the inexorable march toward micro-parsing words while ignoring the intent of the Constitution.
What does the 1st Amendment say? Quote:
The same argument holds regarding the IRS using audits to stifle political dissent. The Congress didn't pass a law saying "Thou shalt not be a conservative," so on the literal level there's no Constitutional violation. On a wider, moral/ethical level, if the intent of the 1st Amendment was to protect political speech from government retribution, then the current government (regardless of who is sitting in the Casa Blanca) is perilously close to the point of no return. |
|
May 17, 2013, 08:04 AM | #24 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: December 20, 2012
Location: Sweet Home
Posts: 886
|
Quote:
Unless whatever they were publishing regarded: Quote:
Seems unlikely since the government won't even say what it was. If people were placed in peril over the publication then they should have approached the editors and worked through them. This looks like something else. With the IRS case it appears to be a much broader and more clear case of suppression. They fired the current head of the IRS Non-profit group. Another meaningless gesture. He had been there eight days. The old head is now in charge of the tax office for Affordable Health Care Act. Quote:
While I understand this issue is highly political it is also bipartisan. If one side allows the other to openly abuse the office of the executive the other shoe will drop eventually.
__________________
Tomorrow is the most important thing in life. Comes into us at midnight very clean. It's perfect when it arrives and it puts itself in our hands. It hopes we've learned something from yesterday. |
|||
May 17, 2013, 11:14 AM | #25 | ||
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
Quote:
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper |
||
|
|