Showing posts with label confidential sources. Show all posts
Showing posts with label confidential sources. Show all posts

Sunday, May 28, 2006

"Judge Says Time Magazine Reporters Must Turn Over Some Documents to Former White House Aide"

~~ Seems reasonable to me , as Libby is the source ,, so there no "source" for the reporter to protect in this case. A fine line ,as the reporter has rights too.

But in this case I do not see the reporter 's note protected.

Anyone-- even Libby --
must be given wide latitude in obtaining
ANY information that could prove they are
innocent.~~` TP
===========================
=================


Time Ordered to Give Documents to Libby,
Judge Says Time Magazine Reporters Must Turn Over Some
Documents to Former White House Aide - CBS News:

"Judge says Time magazine reporters must turn over some documents to former White House aide"


WASHINGTON, May. 27, 2006
By TONI LOCY Associated Press Writer"

"U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton limited the scope of subpoenas that Libby's lawyers had aimed at Time, NBC News and The New York Times for e-mails, notes, drafts of articles and other information.

But in a 40-page ruling, Walton rejected the news organizations' argument that they have a broad right to refuse to provide such information in criminal cases."

Friday, May 26, 2006

Apple Loses Bid to Unmask Bloggers' Sources :The Sixth District Court of Appeals on Friday

~~ This makes me happy.!! ~~ TP
---------------------------------------------


"Apple Loses Bid to Unmask Bloggers' Sources"
by Ryan Singel and Kevin Poulsen
Friday, 26 May 2006

"A California appeals court has smacked down Apple's legal assault on bloggers and their sources, finding that the company's efforts to subpoena e-mail received by the publishers of Apple Insider and PowerPage.org runs contrary to federal law, California's reporter's shield law, and the state Constitution.

The Sixth District Court of Appeals on Friday roundly rejected (.pdf) Apple's argument that the bloggers weren't acting as journalists when they posted internal document about future Apple products. 'We decline the implicit invitation to embroil ourselves in questions of what constitutes 'legitimate journalis(m).' The shield law is intended to protect the gathering and dissemination of news, and that is what petitioners did here,' the court wrote.

'Beyond casting aspersions on the legitimacy of petitioners’ enterprise, Apple offers no cogent reason to conclude that they fall outside the shield law’s protection".

Source:
©
Copyright 2006, Lycos, Inc.
Lycos is a registered trademark of Lycos, Inc.
All Rights Reserved.

Your use.... constitutes acceptance of the Lycos
Privacy Policy and Terms & Conditions !!! "
=============================

Monday, May 22, 2006

: Supreme Court Developments on Yahoo! News

Print Story: Supreme Court Developments on Yahoo! News: -- Yahoo! News

Supreme Court Developments

By The Associated PressMon May 22, 4:24 PM ET

Highlights of actions taken Monday by the Supreme Court. The justices:

_Ruled unanimously that police do not need a warrant to go into a home to break up a bloody fight, in a case involving a 'melee' that Brigham City, Utah, police officers saw through a window.

_Rejected an appeal from Tennessee death row inmate Abu-Ali Abdur'Rahman, who wanted the court to declare that the drug protocol used in most executions amounts to cruel punishment.

_Refused to hear an appeal in the case of a mentally ill man, Andrew Goldstein, whose conviction was overturned in the death of a woman pushed into the path of a subway train in New York.

_Said they would not consider the case of convicted murderer James Hamm, who graduated from law school and is being thwarted in his efforts to become a practicing attorney in Arizona.

_Delayed a decision on whether to take up a fight over reporters' confidential sources, apparently because a former government scientist's lawsuit that prompted journalist subpoenas may be settled.

_Declined for the second time to get involved in a child custody fight between a San Diego woman and and her former [female] partner."
============

Sunday, March 26, 2006

Proposed FEC Rules Would Exempt Most Political Activity on Internet

~`Clearly good news for Internet Political Junkies like me. Bring on the Elections!!
I predict now that in 2008 it will be Sen. McCain vs . Sen Clinton for the POTUS.
And that McCain will win.
{ I also picked the New York Jets to win last year's Super Bowl brfore the
last season started, just so you know .}

~~ TP
-----------------

Proposed FEC Rules Would Exempt Most Political Activity on Internet:

by Zachary A. Goldfarb and Thomas B. Edsall Washington Post Staff Writers

Saturday, March 25, 2006; Page A04

"The Federal Election Commission last night released proposed new rules that leave almost all Internet political activity unregulated except for the purchase of campaign ads on Web site"

Sunday, March 12, 2006

Chicago Tribune | Internet blows CIA cover

~~~ QUESTION: How do we know if the names discovered by the Tribune
are not plants by the CIA ?


ANSWER: Because we know the Bush / Cheney  CIA is not that smart.~~ technopolitical
--------------------------------------------------


Chicago Tribune | Internet blows CIA cover: "Internet blows CIA cover
It's easy to track America's covert operatives. "
All you need to know is how to navigate the Internet.

By John Crewdson
Tribune senior correspondent
Published March 12, 2006
"

Sunday, January 29, 2006

US plans to 'fight the net' revealed . BBC NEWS | Americas

~~~ This is well worth the read. ~~ ~ TP
------------
-------------


BBC NEWS | Americas | US plans to 'fight the net' revealed:
By Adam Brookes
BBC Pentagon correspondent

"A newly declassified document gives a fascinating glimpse into the US military's plans for 'information operations' - from psychological operations, to attacks on hostile computer networks."

The declassified document is called "Information Operations Roadmap". It was obtained by the National Security Archive at George Washington University using the Freedom of Information Act.

Wednesday, December 21, 2005

"Spy Court Judge Quits In Protest:" : washingtonpost.com

~ This Spy-gate thing is going to be serious news for a while. When both Democrats & Republican Senate leaders are expressing civil liberties concerns, all citizens should be concerned. Nixon -- and those Presidents before him -- walked over civil liberties regularly. No one wants to go back to those times , with Presidential Enemy lists , covert wire taps, & etc. The Bush Team must feel the Power of Checks and Balances here.
Hopefully Congress is up to the job ~~ TP
-----------------------------

"Jurist Concerned Bush Order Tainted Work of Secret Panel"


By Carol D. Leonnig and Dafna Linzer
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, December 21, 2005; Page A01

"A federal judge has resigned from the court that oversees government surveillance in intelligence cases in protest of President Bush's secret authorization of a domestic spying program, according to two sources. U.S. District Judge James Robertson, one of 11 members of the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court,, sent a letter to Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. late Monday notifying him of his resignation without providing an explanation".


"Word of Robertson's resignation came as two Senate Republicans joined the call for congressional investigations into the National Security Agency's warrantless interception of telephone calls and e-mails to overseas locations by U.S. citizens suspected of links to terrorist groups. They questioned the legality of the operation and the extent to which the White House kept Congress informed."

"Sens. Chuck Hagel (Neb.) and Olympia J. Snowe (Maine) echoed concerns raised by Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, who has promised hearings in the new year."

"Hagel and Snowe joined Democrats Dianne Feinstein (Calif.), Carl M. Levin (Mich.) and Ron Wyden (Ore.) in calling for a joint investigation by the Senate judiciary and intelligence panels into the classified program."

Tuesday, December 20, 2005

F.B.I. Watched Activist Groups, New Files Show - New York Times

~~~ Not that this is really surprising. When i worked for GreenPeace in during the Reagan years, we knew that we were being monitiored. Strange thing is we had nothing to hide,, I mean we were publicity-hound-political-activists, who telegraphed to the media most everything we did or said. Why non-violent groups need to be "monitiored" is still really beyond me.

Either way the Bush Team is in trouble. If these domestic spying games the Administration is playing are found to be more than just unethical, but also to be illegal, some heads are going to have to roll. Being Scooter Libby already got indicted, maybe Dick Cheney is next, as he is the main powerplayer. { Don't tell me you really think Bush is in charge of this complicated stuff ! } ~~ ` TP
----------------------------

F.B.I. Watched Activist Groups, New Files Show - New York Times: "the documents, coming after the Bush administration's confirmation that President Bush had authorized some spying without warrants in fighting terrorism, prompted charges from civil rights advocates that the government had improperly blurred the line between terrorism and acts of civil disobedience and lawful protest.

One F.B.I. document indicates that agents in Indianapolis planned to conduct surveillance as part of a 'Vegan Community Project.' Another document talks of the Catholic Workers group's 'semi-communistic ideology.' A third indicates the bureau's interest in determining the location of a protest over llama fur planned by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.
The documents, provided to The New York Times over the past week, came as part of a series of Freedom of Information Act lawsuits brought by the American Civil Liberties Union. For more than a year, the A.C.L.U. has been seeking access to information in F.B.I. files on about 150 protest and social groups that it says may have been improperly monitored."

Friday, December 16, 2005

Bush Lets U.S. Spy on Callers Without Courts - New York Times

~~~ The NY Times has an extensive article today on the Bush team again forgetting that a Democracy is a place where the Government does not spy on its citizens with out first getting a Court order. This is major news , but unless Congress raises a stink and starts hearings , it will pass under the radar of most voters.

I have to keep saying to myself -
-- "Just three more years,, Just three more years".

Anybody will be better than the Bushies in 2008. 
{ Assuming that Team Bush does not find 
some way to cancel the 2008 American elections.] ~~~ TP
-----------------------------------------


Bush Lets U.S. Spy on Callers Without Courts
By JAMES RISEN and ERIC LICHTBLAU

"WASHINGTON, Dec. 15 - Months after the Sept. 11 attacks, President Bush secretly authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the United States to search for evidence of terrorist activity without the court-approved warrants ordinarily required for domestic spying, according to government officials"

Tuesday, November 08, 2005

President Bush's Walkabout - New York Times

~ ~ Pretty heavy words from the NY Times editorial page.

I really do not like agreeing with NYT's editorials. Doing so often leaves me haunted that I may be mis-informed on the issue at hand.

But in this case, there is no mistake -- the Bush Presidency is a ticking time bomb of more disasters.

We are in a war that seems to have been engineered from even before Bush II took office. { I saw Jimmy Carter say that on TV , to promote his new book .}

A very serious change of both staff & policy is needed from the Oval Office before there are more wars & ill-handled natural disasters..

May G-d help America !!~~ ` TP
-----------------------------------------------------------

"After President Bush's disastrous visit to Latin America, it's unnerving to realize that his presidency still has more than three years to run."

"An administration with no agenda and no competence would be hard enough to live with on the domestic front.

But the rest of the world simply can't afford an American government this bad for that long."

========================================

from :


President Bush's Walkabout - New York Times:

"Published: November 8, 2005

Wednesday, February 16, 2005

Reporter's shield bill introduced in House , © 2005 The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press

~ ~ ~ The Court ruling that reporters
can be compelled to reveal their
sources is bad news. Luckily,
Congress can fix the situation
A Republican and a Democrat
co-sponsoring a much need
piece of legislation. ~~ TP

Reporter's shield bill introduced in House
© 2005 The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press

Journalists would be shielded from
being forced to reveal confidential
sources under the
"Free Flow of Information Act."
Reporters must testify in CIA leak probe

BY TOM BRUNEWASHINGTON BUREAU

February 16, 2005

WASHINGTON -- A U.S. appeals court ruled Tuesday that two reporters must testify before a federal grand jury about their confidential sources in a probe trying to determine who in the Bush administration leaked the identity of a covert CIA officer.

In an expected ruling, a three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously upheld a lower court ruling that held in contempt Matthew Cooper of Time magazine and Judith Miller of The New York Times for refusing to testify.

Time and the Times Tuesday said
---- { what an intereresting pharse, almost poetic ~~tp ] ---- they would appeal the decision to the full circuit and possibly the Supreme Court, and would seek a stay to keep the reporters out of jail.

The publications had tried to quash the subpoenas based on the First Amendment and reporters' privilege to protect confidential sources under federal common law, which is based on practice than on statutes.

In October, District Judge Thomas Hogan ruled against them.The decision prompted calls from Floyd Abrams, attorney for both reporters, and groups such as Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, for Congress to enact a federal shield law to permit reporters to protect confidential sources.

Copyright © 2005,
Newsday, Inc.
----------------------------------