Holder Went Judge Shopping For Fox Subpoena

Uh oh...

How Prosecutors Fought to Keep Rosen’s Warrant Secret

Posted by Ryan Lizza


1963



The Obama Administration fought to keep a search warrant for James Rosen’s private e-mail account secret, arguing to a federal judge that the government might need to monitor the account for a lengthy period of time.

The new details are revealed in a court filing detailing a back and forth between the Justice Department and the federal judges who oversaw the request to search a Gmail account belonging to Rosen, a reporter for Fox News. A 2009 article Rosen had written about North Korea sparked an investigation; Ronald C. Machen, Jr., the U.S. Attorney who is prosecuting Stephen Jin-Woo Kim, a former State Department adviser who allegedly leaked classified information to Rosen, insisted that the reporter should not be notified of the search and seizure of his e-mails, even after a lengthy delay.


E-mails, Machen wrote, “are commonly used by subjects or targets of the criminal investigation at issue, and the e-mail evidence derived from those compelled disclosures frequently forms the core of the Government’s evidence supporting criminal charges.”

He argued that disclosure of the search warrant would preclude the government from monitoring the account, should such a step become necessary in the investigation. Machen added that “some investigations are continued for many years because, while the evidence is not yet sufficient to bring charges, it is sufficient to have identified criminal subjects and/or criminal activity serious enough to justify continuation of the investigation.”

Machen insisted the investigation would be compromised if Rosen was informed of the warrant, and also asked the court to order Google not to notify Rosen that the company had handed over Rosen’s e-mails to the government. Rosen, according to recent reports, did not learn that the government seized his e-mail records until it was reported in the Washington Post last week.

The new details indicate that the government wanted the option to search Rosen’s e-mails repeatedly if the F.B.I. found further evidence implicating the reporter in what prosecutors argued was a conspiracy to commit espionage.

According to recently unsealed documents in the case, the Obama Justice Department sought an extensive amount of information from Rosen’s e-mail account. In addition to Rosen’s correspondence with Kim, the government wanted to know about Rosen’s contacts with other government officials, including “records or information relating to the Author’s communication with any other source or potential source of the information disclosed in the Article.”

The government, which accused Rosen of being an “aider, abettor, and/or co-conspirator” in the Kim case, cast a wide net in its search of Rosen’s e-mail. Among other things, the search warrant requested access to:


—“Records or information related to Stephen Kim’s or the Author’s knowledge of laws, regulations, rules and/or procedures prohibiting the unauthorized disclosure of national defense or classified information.”

—“Any classified document, image, record, or information, and any communications concerning such documents, images, records, or information.”

—“Any document, image, record, or information concerning the national defense, including but not limited to documents, maps, plans, diagrams, guides, manuals, and other Department of Defense, U.S. military, and/or weapons material, as well as sources and methods of intelligence gathering, and any communications concerning such documents, images, records, or information.”

—“Records or information related to the state of mind of any individuals seeking the disclosure or receipt of classified, intelligence and/or national defense information.”

In addition, the Justice Department searched the account for any Internet services Rosen may have accessed and records of “data transfer volume,” suggesting the government was looking for evidence that Rosen downloaded large quantities of potentially classified information.

The new documents show that two judges separately declared that the Justice Department was required to notify Rosen of the search warrant, even if the notification came after a delay. Otherwise: “The subscriber therefore will never know, by being provided a copy of the warrant, for example, that the government secured a warrant and searched the contents of her e-mail account,” Judge John M. Facciola wrote in an opinion rejecting the Obama Administration’s argument.

Machen appealed that decision, and in September, 2010, Royce C. Lamberth, the chief judge in the Federal District Court for the District of Columbia, granted Machen’s request to overturn the order of the two judges.

Rosen was not indicted in the case. Kim was indicted for making unauthorized disclosures of national defense information and for making false statements to F.B.I. agents about his contacts with Rosen.

Yesterday, hours after President Obama said, in a speech at National Defense University, that he had asked Attorney General Eric Holder to review the Justice Department’s policies concerning investigations of the media, NBC News reported that the warrant to search Rosen’s e-mail account was personally approved by Holder.


Then you have this...


DOJ confirms Holder OK'd search warrant for Fox News reporter's emails

The Obama administration's crackdown on leaks could have chilling implications for the journalists who cover the White House. NBC's Michael Isikoff reports.

By Michael Isikoff
National Investigative Correspondent, NBC News

The Justice Department pledged Friday to to review its policies relating to the seizure of information from journalists after acknowledging that a controversial search warrant for a Fox News reporter’s private emails was approved “at the highest levels” of the Justice Department, including “discussions” with Attorney General Eric Holder.

The statement, confirming an NBC News account of Holder’s role, defended the secret warrant to obtain reporter James Rosen’s emails as a legitimate step to obtain evidence as part of an investigation of Stephen Kim. A former intelligence analyst, Kim has since been indicted under the Espionage Act for leaking classified information to Rosen about North Korea. He has denied the charges.

In a 2010 affidavit in support of the search warrant, an FBI agent named Rosen as a possible “co-conspirator” in the case because he “asked, solicited and encouraged” Kim to give him information.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

“After extensive deliberations, and after following all applicable laws, regulations and policies, the Department sought an appropriately tailored search warrant under the Privacy Protection Act,” said a department official, referring to a federal law that governs under what circumstances information can be subpoenaed from the news media. “And a federal magistrate judge made an independent finding that probable cause existed to approve the search warrant.”

Nevertheless, said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, Holder “understands the concerns that have been raised by the media and has initiated a re-evaluation of existing department policies and procedures.” The official said the department must strike “the appropriate balance” between preventing leaks of classified information and “First Amendment rights,”adding that passage of a new media shield law “and appropriate updates to the department”s internal guidelines” will help achieve that.

The statement comes amid a firestorm of criticism from news media groups over the Rosen search warrant and a secret subpoena for the phone records of AP reporters. It also comes one day after President Obama addressed the issue in a major speech on counter-terrorism policy, saying "I am troubled by the possibility that leak investigations may chill the investigative journalism that holds government accountable," Obama said. "Journalists should not be at legal risk for doing their jobs."

Then you have the fact that Holder testified to Congress that he had no knowledge of any efforts to investigate reporters. Just like he had no knowledge of Fast & Furious.

So, it looks like Obama's Attorney General lied under oath. In other words, perjured himself.

Isn't it awesome that we have Attorney General that lies under oath?

We should get a pool going on how long he lasts in office and whether he quits or is fired by Obama.

Originally posted by KilgoreTrout15
We should get a pool going on how long he lasts in office and whether he quits or is fired by Obama.

Interesting read by a Non Repub / Non Conserv.

'FIRE ERIC HOLDER'

http://jonathanturley.org/2013/05/29/fire-eric-holder/

Originally posted by KilgoreTrout15
We should get a pool going on how long he lasts in office and whether he quits or is fired by Obama.

Originally posted by utherpendragon
Interesting read by a Non Repub / Non Conserv.

'FIRE ERIC HOLDER'

http://jonathanturley.org/2013/05/29/fire-eric-holder/

Originally posted by whodey
I heard that Holder is being considered as a running mate in 2016 with Anthony Wiener. It will be the "Weiner/Holder" ticket. 😵

Originally posted by sasquatch672
Uh oh...

How Prosecutors Fought to Keep Rosen’s Warrant Secret

Posted by Ryan Lizza


1963



The Obama Administration fought to keep a search warrant for James Rosen’s private e-mail account secret, arguing to a federal judge that the government might need to monitor the account for a lengthy period of time.

The new details are reve red himself.

Isn't it awesome that we have Attorney General that lies under oath?

Originally posted by no1marauder
I see no evidence that Holder committed perjury in this matter. The relevant testimony is as follows:

"With regard to potential prosecution of the press for the disclosure of material, that is not something that I have ever been involved in, heard of , or would think would be a wise policy."

Republicans are making the claim that because n Congressmen is here: http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/sections/news/Letter_to_Holder.pdf

Originally posted by KilgoreTrout15
Nobody...anywhere...agrees with your interpretation.

Where were you when Nixon was going down the toilet and what were your feelings?

Originally posted by KilgoreTrout15
Nobody...anywhere...agrees with your interpretation.

Where were you when Nixon was going down the toilet and what were your feelings?

Originally posted by KilgoreTrout15
Nobody...anywhere...agrees with your interpretation.

Where were you when Nixon was going down the toilet and what were your feelings?

The post that was quoted here has been removed