Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 28

Thread: DOJ labels FOX News Reporter James Rosen as a 'co-conspirator' in Espionage Case

  1. #1
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    19,844

    DOJ labels FOX News Reporter James Rosen as a 'co-conspirator' in Espionage Case

    Go after reporters instead of the @ssholes within your administration that are leaking them information. Makes sense.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013...ws-journalist/

    Rpt: DOJ investigated Fox News reporter in 2009 leak probeDOJ investigators seized personal Fox News reporter emailsImpact of Justice Department leak probes on American media
    A Fox News correspondent was accused in a Justice Department affidavit of being a possible criminal "co-conspirator" for his alleged role in publishing sensitive security information -- in a leak case that takes the highly unusual step of claiming a journalist broke the law.

    According to court documents, the Justice Department obtained a portfolio of information about Fox News' James Rosen's conversations and visits to the State Department. This included a search warrant for his personal emails.

    The effort follows that by the department to secretly obtain two months of phone records from Associated Press journalists as part of a separate leak probe. The department in this case, though, went a step further -- as an FBI agent claimed there's evidence the Fox News correspondent broke the law, "at the very least, either as an aider, abettor and/or co-conspirator."

    Michael Clemente, Fox News' executive vice president of news, defended Rosen in a statement issued Monday afternoon.

    "We are outraged to learn today that James Rosen was named a criminal co-conspirator for simply doing his job as a reporter," Clemente said. "In fact, it is downright chilling. We will unequivocally defend his right to operate as a member of what up until now has always been a free press."

    The case has also caught the attention of Congress. Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., said in a statement Monday he was "very concerned" about the reports of "possible criminal prosecution for doing what appears to be normal news-gathering protected by the First Amendment."

    He added: "The sort of reporting by James Rosen detailed in the report is the same sort of reporting that helped Mr. Rosen aggressively pursue questions about the Administration's handling of Benghazi. National security leaks are criminal and put American lives on the line, and federal prosecutors should, of course, vigorously investigate. But we expect that they do so within the bounds of the law, and that the investigations focus on the leakers within the government -- not on media organizations that have First Amendment protections and serve vital function in our democracy."

    In the case involving Rosen, a government adviser was accused of leaking information after a 2009 story was published online which said North Korea planned to respond to looming U.N. sanctions with another nuclear test.

    An affidavit entered by FBI agent Reginald Reyes claimed there was "probable cause" to believe Rosen -- identified only as "the reporter" -- had violated a provision of U.S. law barring the unauthorized disclosure of defense information. This is where Reyes labeled Rosen as a possible "co-conspirator" -- an allegation used to gain access to two days' worth of emails.

    The search warrant for that request was ultimately approved, the records show.

    Investigators, in pursuing the case, also obtained records of Rosen's visits to the State Department headquarters by tracking security-badge information. As first reported by The Washington Post, a court affidavit said they used the badge records to log his visits as well as the movements of the adviser, Stephen Jim-Woo Kim.

    The FBI agent said in the affidavit that the visits suggested a "face-to-face" meeting.

    According to the Post, investigators also obtained two months of phone records from Kim's office.

    Rosen said Monday that "as a reporter, I always honor the confidentiality of my dealings with all of my sources."

    He was not contacted by any government or law enforcement representative during the investigation.

    White House Press Secretary Jay Carney, asked about the case Monday, said he could not comment on the "ongoing investigation." He said President Obama is a "strong defender of the First Amendment," but also is "insistent that we protect our secrets, that we protect classified information."

    The Department of Justice said in a statement Monday that "leaks of classified information to the press can pose a serious risk of harm to our national security and it is important that we pursue these matters using appropriate law enforcement tools."

    The U.S. attorney's office for the District of Columbia also said the government, before seeking approval for the search warrant, "exhausted all reasonable non-media alternatives for collecting this evidence."

    While Kim has already been indicted, the office said no other charges have been brought. "Based on the investigation and all of the facts known to date, no other individuals, including the reporter, have been charged since Mr. Kim was indicted nearly three years ago," the office said.

    Attorney General Eric Holder said at a House hearing last week that he is not interested in prosecuting the press.

    "With regard to the potential prosecution of the press for the disclosure of material, that is not something that I've ever been involved in, heard of or would think would be a wise policy," he said on May 15.


    The seizure of records from the AP offices also spanned two months.

    AP President Gary Pruitt said on CBS' "Face the Nation" Sunday that the AP records grab was not only unconstitutional but damaging to the operation of the press.

    "It will hurt," he said. "We're already seeing some impact. Officials are saying they're reluctant to talk."

  2. #2
    Jug Head despises Fox News so they are on his enemies list.

    He's the left's version of Richard Nixon.

    Tricky Dickless....

  3. #3
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    6,929
    Quote Originally Posted by DDNYjets View Post
    Go after reporters instead of the @ssholes within your administration that are leaking them information. Makes sense.
    Actually, from an investigation standpoint, it does make sense.

    If the investigation can clearly identify the endpoint of the leak, it makes sense to start from there and work your way backwards. What's the better alternative?

    The end goal is not to "go after" or prosecute the reporter. They are simply using the little information they have to the best of their ability to try and solve the case.

    To be clear, I disagree with the overall investigations. They go too far. However, this is the reality of post-Patriot Act USA. Don't turn this into some pity party for Fox News. They did the same thing to AP, which is far from a right wing news source.
    Last edited by parafly; 05-22-2013 at 11:18 AM.

  4. #4
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    19,844
    Quote Originally Posted by parafly View Post
    Don't turn this into some pity party for Fox News. They did the same thing to AP, which is far from a right wing news source.
    I apologize but I can't change the fact that James Rosen works for FOX.

    Also there are some difference between this and the AP. Mainly the assertions that a reporter was participating in criminal activity.

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by parafly View Post
    Actually, from an investigation standpoint, it does make sense.

    If the investigation can clearly identify the endpoint of the leak, it makes sense to start from there and work your way backwards. What's the better alternative?

    The end goal is not to "go after" or prosecute the reporter. They are simply using the little information they have to the best of their ability to try and solve the case.

    To be clear, I disagree with the overall investigations. They go too far. However, this is the reality of post-Patriot Act USA. Don't turn this into some pity party for Fox News. They did the same thing to AP, which is far from a right wing news source.
    Wow.

    The very definition of a "useful idiot" position.
    Last edited by Churchill; 05-22-2013 at 12:07 PM.

  6. #6
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    6,929
    Quote Originally Posted by DDNYjets View Post
    Also there are some difference between this and the AP. Mainly the assertions that a reporter was participating in criminal activity.
    Assertions? Yawn.

    Get back to us when there are some actual criminal charges filed.

  7. #7
    A reporter can publish any information he wants as long as he didn't break in and steal it. Period.
    More intimidation by the Hawaiian and his buddies.
    Recall the Pentagon papers?

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by palmetto defender View Post
    A reporter can publish any information he wants as long as he didn't break in and steal it. Period.
    More intimidation by the Hawaiian and his buddies.
    Recall the Pentagon papers?
    Reporters need to have credible and reliable sources, vet their story. Bloggers have blurred the lines, they have reported on anything and everything without validating.

    Are the reporters being charged? The gov't employees should be charged, hence why there was an investigation.

  9. #9
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    LI
    Posts
    20,440
    Quote Originally Posted by parafly View Post
    Assertions? Yawn.

    Get back to us when there are some actual criminal charges filed.
    as of yesterday, administration officials would not say they wouldn't file criminal charges. its very disturbing.

  10. #10
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    6,929
    ...an FBI agent claimed there's evidence the Fox News correspondent broke the law...
    If this is true, then what exactly are people defending and/or outraged about?

  11. #11
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    LI
    Posts
    20,440
    Quote Originally Posted by parafly View Post
    If this is true, then what exactly are people defending and/or outraged about?
    which law, and how was it broken? We've already seen various federal govt agencies doing the dirty work that their master claims to know nothing about....

  12. #12
    I wonder if Holder will recuse himself over this as well.

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by cr726 View Post
    Reporters need to have credible and reliable sources, vet their story. Bloggers have blurred the lines, they have reported on anything and everything without validating.

    Are the reporters being charged? The gov't employees should be charged, hence why there was an investigation.


    Nonsense. Reporters publish inaccurate info all the time. The Newtown shootings - all bad info up front. Boston bombing - totally bogus info. The recent Oklahoma tornado - 51 -8- dead reported, wrong.
    It looks dumb but not illegal.
    What's dumb is Obama saying he never knew anything. Where's Benghazi? The IRS? The AP emails etc? It's Sergeant Schultz. I hear nothing, I know nothing. Perhaps he is the stupidest president ever.

  14. #14
    I wonder if Obama fans are starting to realize how this guy has performed on the job. Obama was supposed to be this above politics grand vision guy. He was their chosen one. Now we find out that his administration has been one of the most secretive and corrupt in modern times. So much lying has been going on that they are actually losing track of the lies.

    Where was Obama when America was attacked in Benghazi? He was sleeping. Where was he when the DOJ was targeting political enemies? Unaware. Where was he when the IRS was targeting political enemies? No one told him about it.

    Honestly the only reason anyone is hearing about it now is because journalists are offended that the guy they have been protecting for all these years has been targeting them as well.

  15. #15
    Reporters are only as good as their sources and if they fail to properly vet them you get inaccurate info.

    Ah, the President bashing, that always helps the discussion.

    The biggest problem about the news it's about making money, not reporting factual news. Faster doesn't mean accurate and that's why we have all witnessed the horrible news cycles. Social media, etc.......



    Quote Originally Posted by palmetto defender View Post
    Nonsense. Reporters publish inaccurate info all the time. The Newtown shootings - all bad info up front. Boston bombing - totally bogus info. The recent Oklahoma tornado - 51 -8- dead reported, wrong.
    It looks dumb but not illegal.
    What's dumb is Obama saying he never knew anything. Where's Benghazi? The IRS? The AP emails etc? It's Sergeant Schultz. I hear nothing, I know nothing. Perhaps he is the stupidest president ever.

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by cr726 View Post
    Reporters are only as good as their sources and if they fail to properly vet them you get inaccurate info.

    Ah, the President bashing, that always helps the discussion.

    The biggest problem about the news it's about making money, not reporting factual news. Faster doesn't mean accurate and that's why we have all witnessed the horrible news cycles. Social media, etc.......
    No, the biggest problem with the media is that it has left wing bias. Secular progressives run the mainstream media. Therefore, they don't report fact, they report their left wing agenda.

  17. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by NowLet'sGoEatAF'NSnack View Post
    No, the biggest problem with the media is that it has left wing bias. Secular progressives run the mainstream media. Therefore, they don't report fact, they report their left wing agenda.
    FoxNews is #1 and this is your argument?

  18. #18
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    19,844
    Quote Originally Posted by cr726 View Post
    FoxNews is #1 and this is your argument?
    #1 in cable news.

    And the "media" goes beyond news channels. It includes print, TV, online/social, etc.

  19. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by DDNYjets View Post
    #1 in cable news.

    And the "media" goes beyond news channels. It includes print, TV, online/social, etc.
    http://www.cjr.org/resources/?c=newscorp

  20. #20
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    6,929
    Quote Originally Posted by quantum View Post
    which law, and how was it broken?
    Very fair questions.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us