Leak probe has chilled sources, AP exec says

[Bonobo]

This goes directly to the issue of what kind of an environment has been created in the US surrounding whistleblowers and the free press. The unprecedentedly large numbers of prosecutions of whistleblowers by the current administration and the recent revelations about the increasing NSA surveillance programs strongly suggest that an environment of fear and paranoia is being created.
------------------------------------------
http://edition.cnn.com/2013/06/19/politics/ap-leak-probe

Washington (CNN) -- The Justice Department's sweeping collection of Associated Press phone records as part of a national security leak investigation has had a chilling effect on sources, the news agency's top executive said on Wednesday.

"Some of our long-trusted sources have become nervous and anxious about talking to us -- even on stories that aren't about national security," AP Chief Executive and President Gary Pruitt said at the National Press Club.
"In some cases, government employees that we once checked in with regularly will no longer speak to us by phone and some are reluctant to meet in person," he said.

"If reporters' phone records are now open territory for the government to secretly monitor, then news sources will be intimidated from talking to reporters. The AP is not going to be intimidated, but our sources will be," Pruitt said.

"This chilling effect is not just at AP. ... Journalists from other news organizations have personally told me (the DOJ's seizing of AP's phone records) has intimidated sources from speaking to them," he said.

[ProSense]

1. AP Editor:

AP Editor: Do Not Describe Edward Snowden As A 'Whistleblower'
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022989251

[Bonobo]

2. Irrelevant.

Like saying their is no global warming because my freezer is still cold.

[ProSense]

3. It's very relevant. n/t

[Bonobo]

5. What an AP editor call Snowden is not relevant to the larger issue.

I DO think he is a whistleblower in any rational sense of the meaning of the phrase.

But that too is irrelevant.

What is at issue here is a discussion of the environment being created, probably intentionally, to put fear into the hearts of those who would reveal uncomfortable truths -and the end results of that environment of fear.

It can ONLY result in a less free press and therefore a less free society with a less informed populace.

[NoOneMan]

10. Do you think that waging this PR war against Snowden on DU has any real-world impact?

Serious question. Its a lot of effort to post endlessly about this person in an effort to smear them. In your honest assessment, how many minds do you think you have changed on DU regarding:

1. John Snowden
2. Government Spying
3. How it reflects on Obama

Do you feel this PR war has any measurable benefit in the real world, even assuming it has any here? If not, why the effort?

Im just curious. Im not trying to be mean. Im just trying to understand a bit about it on a human level. Maybe I am wrong, but it seems like an immense amount of effort for very little effect in any measurable way (so I wouldn't exactly engage in it). I really wonder how much DU is just a bubbled echo chamber that has any bearing in reality. Its nice to be able to walk away a few months, or come back and laugh at ridiculousness--that's a nice freedom.

[ProSense]

12. No,

Do you think that waging this PR war against Snowden on DU has any real-world impact?

Serious question. Its a lot of effort to post endlessly about this person in an effort to smear them. In your honest assessment, how many minds do you think you have changed on DU regarding:

1. John Snowden
2. Government Spying
3. How it reflects on Obama

Do you feel this PR war has any measurable benefit in the real world, even assuming it has any here? If not, why the effort?

Im just curious. Im not trying to be mean. Im just trying to understand a bit about it on a human level. Maybe I am wrong, but it seems like an immense amount of effort for very little effect in any measurable way (so I wouldn't exactly engage in it). I really wonder how much DU is just a bubbled echo chamber that has any bearing in reality. Its nice to be able to walk away a few months, or come back and laugh at ridiculousness--that's a nice freedom.

...you're not "serious." You're upset that all the posts on DU aren't pro-Snowden.

Whatever I post has as much "real-world impact" as the other posts.

Poll: Majority Says Snowden Did A Good Thing, But He Should Be Prosecuted
http://election.democraticunderground.com/10023008441

Pew poll: Public Split over Impact of NSA Leak, But Most Want Snowden Prosecuted
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023036390

[99Forever]

21. Wow...

... you should check into reality once in a while.

[NoOneMan]

23. The entire thing is comical to me

And I personally only post here (on non-environmental issues) to make witty retorts that amuse me. I took an honest break in the comedy to ask a real serious question and I am not "upset" about anything really.

Whatever I post has as much "real-world impact" as the other posts.

Which is probably none. On a personally level, I get some entertainment and amusement. Some people may find it cathartic.

You don't look like you are having fun though, working overtime on this one. Are you? What are you getting out of it?

[ProSense]

34. LOL!

"You don't look like you are having fun though, working overtime on this one. Are you? What are you getting out of it?"

Yup, you're not serious.

[NoOneMan]

38. So you are having fun with the PR campaign against Snowden?

?

[graham4anything]

39. My view hasn't changed. I support the President 100%. I don't stand with Rand.

no ones rights have been curtailed

and LOL we are posting on an international board and as long as we are civil to each other, we say whatever we want


yet tens of millions post every little piece of info of their lives on facebook, which a couple of guys started solely as a
way to compile list of eligible dates for themselves while they were in school, and of which there is zero privacy.
(at least according to the stories about facebook and the movie about them).

It is all yet another smear, once a week since 1/17/2009 that started with the birthers, then Rev. Wright and all the others.

Meanwhile, the polling is the same as it was two months ago (except for the poll firm that insists Mitt Romney is now President).

But actually more people are talking about James Gandolfini and wellness (so much so that flags are flying half massed in New Jersey in honor of Mr. Gandolfini) and its the first day of summer and the NJ shore is back after Hurricane Sandy, who would have ever
thought the tens of thousands of regular people whose lives depend on the summer business would have that job this year, but
they do.

But its all about the special senate election on Tuesday in Mass, and the votes on guns and immigration
and the BushPaulfamilyinc attempting to cull democratic voters to vote for them.
Like in 1952 1956 1968 1972 1980 1984 1988 2000 and 2004.

[NoOneMan]

43. This isn't isn't about your preferred dance partner

Why stand with anyone? Stand by principle and judge issues based on reasoned rationale (not who supports them).

[graham4anything]

46. I do. I stand with the Principles of Barack Obama and trust the people I HIRED with MY Vote.

RAND and Ron has ZERO principles and NOTHING I would want to imitate.

I know Rand only won by spending all that more than his democratic opponent by like 33%.

Which is another irony as Rand and Ron say they hate money, yet gladly take it to finance their life and campaigns.

(and while Jim Bunning wasn't on my side of the issues, he was 100 times better for Kentucky than Rand Paul and they treated
Jim so horribly to get his seat from him (I saw him pitch back when Jim was a baseball player though I am not a fan of his politics).

[NoOneMan]

48. You don't have your own principles?

Seriously, the dance partner stuff is pretty lame. Rand, Ron, Obama, Snowden mean little to nothing on the core issue regarding government intrusion. You don't need to evoke any of their names when you say you are for or against it....it sort of devalues your opinion as partisan drool. We are better than that, right?

[Union Scribe]

60. "I stand with the Principles of Barack Obama" also

I just wish Barack Obama still did.

[panzerfaust]

66. I stand with the constitution and a free society.

Not with a, however soft, totalitarian state.

Heck, I recall in the 50's one of the reasons we were told to hate the USSR is because they spied on *gasp* their own citizens.

[Monkie]

17. the link about how obama was protecting whistleblowers would of been much more on topic

remember the one from that whistleblower site?
there was also this story of financial journalist for RW sites being paid?
they investigated one of those guys im sure i remember that, or few years back one about RW financial journalists buying and selling the stocks they recommended?

if you had tied those together with some blue links and a word or two about how obama was really protecting the world from corrupt right wing profiteers pretending to be journalists you would of had a real and cohesive point to make, or at least one that looked like some intelligent thought had gone into the framing of the issues.

[Arctic Dave]

4. A trademark of all authoritarian governments.

What a huge disappointment.

So much time and money wasted on him.

[Thinkingabout]

7. Guess this is the answer for the importance of Sniwden, he is a huge disappointment and

Money spent investigating, court time and sentencing is going to cost but it has to be done.

[Arctic Dave]

8. If the government has nothing to hide then what's the big deal.

Of course our government is lining up to look like a gang of thugs looking out for the elites.

If we are lucky more Snowdens will bring sunlight to the scum that is the spy apparatus.

[Bonobo]

9. Ha ha ha. Perfect!

So fucking perfect!

[Thinkingabout]

11. They have not been hiding this, it has been known for some time. Knowing we have spies

In the NSA is a big deal and the thief needs to do his time.

[Bonobo]

16. So if it was not being hidden, what was the leak? Why the heavy hand?

Are you kind of getting a hint of why your position is so preposterous and contradictory? Kinda?

[Thinkingabout]

28. Heavy handed, Snowden stole files from the NSA, did he hide the fact he was stealing those

Files, yes and then released information to a foreign news media. Did he have a warrant to copy the files, no then what or who gave him this authority. He hid the fact he was working for the cause, why did he hide this fact?

[Bonobo]

35. Better question. Why is the government hiding the massive size of the surveillance?

You may be interested in why Snowden his something from his corporate bosses.

I am more interested in what my democratically elected government is doing.

[Arctic Dave]

29. Then what's the big deal.

Why would Snowden need to do time for stating the obvious. Makes no sense.

I think they need to have a huge open house day and invite everyone to snoop throughout the place.

[Thinkingabout]

36. Do you open your doors for everyone to come in and take what they want?

[Arctic Dave]

45. Snowden was allowed in.

He passed all checks.

That's like saying no one should have said anything to the public about the nut who had the women in his basement since he kept the "locked up".

Crimes are crimes.

[Thinkingabout]

50. He may have passed checks but do you think he was told to take what he wanted?

He was also under a Code of Ethics but he still was a spy and stole the files. I would not want the like of Snowden for an employee, he is a thief.

[Arctic Dave]

55. I think you are wanting to see things that aren't there.

You have no proof whatsoever he was spying, except in the context of his job, which makes your accusation all the more ironic.

Did the government ask for all the information it is stealing from us?

[Thinkingabout]

59. What are they stealing from you, nothing. They are collecting data. He had security clearance, he

worked for the Nation Security Administration, this is national security, he copied files or so he says. He worked under a Code of Ethics which simply means he was not supposed to be talking about what he did or any information he had access. He used his position to spy on the agency he which he worked. He has released information therefore he has been charged with a crime. I am not reading anything into this, the facts are the facts. If what he has been saying is not true then he still should not be talking about his work while at NSA. They know which files he has copied, every keystroke he made while there. He gave this information to a foreign new media source. Ironic, I doubt it was ironic he put himself into a position to gather information in which he should have kept quite about. According to him he had the ability to out your every call, guess that would be just fine with you.

[Arctic Dave]

61. I did not give them any data nor did I ask them to store or monitor it.

Their "ethics" mean all of jack shit, they are scum and will be referred to as such.

Criminal scumbags.

[Thinkingabout]

62. When you use the services you are putting your information out. Don't want any

Information gathered then don't use the services. The phone call records are gathered whether you personally approve or not. A general warrant has been issued by FISA Court which covers the Fourth Amendment requirement to get the records. By the constitution this is allowable. Don't like our Constitution then you will need to make other arrangements. You can call the NSA scum all you want but this gathering is constitutional. When Snowden decided he should over rule the Constitution he became a criminal.

[Arctic Dave]

63. The fourth Amendment is being circumvented and the Constitution is being disregarded.

No where does it state that the government can do anything it says it is able to do, on the contrary, it says the exact oppsosite.

And, yes, they are scum.

[Thinkingabout]

64. You must not read the Fourth Amendment as it is written. The Constitution is being followed and

with a warrant evidence can be gathered. Where in the Constitution are you speaking about not allowing information to be gathered with a warrant?

[nadinbrzezinski]

31. So, in your mind we should just drone his silly ass

And be done with it?

I mean he is guilty and all, and if all this was so well known...why is the government charging him for letting the cat out?

[Catherina]

6. There's that freedom of the press we hear so much about n/t

[uponit7771]

13. Good, they put people in danger for sake of a good story...not whistleblowing

[Bonobo]

18. Ummm, who was put in danger? Seriously, who? nt

[uponit7771]

24. The agent in Yemen

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/05/15/184274166/leaks-bombs-and-double-agents-more-on-that-ap-story

[Bonobo]

33. Ah, I thought you were speaking of Snowden's leak.

In any case, I don't think AP intentionally revealed the agent in question. He certainly was not named nor did they suggest that he "handed" the bomb over to anyone. In fact, the story says the CIA seized it from him. Again, he was not identified in the story and AP waited, they say, until the operation was over.

They published the story just one day before the official WH announcement.

I am not convinced that that justifies the kind of blanket wire-tapping that was done to AP. Not one bit.

[Cali_Democrat]

26. You should read up about the Yemen bomb plot leak

That's the one that led to the AP phone record seizure. Intelligence sources were compromised and US allies were pissed.

[Bonobo]

37. I have.

Have you fully read up on it?

Did AP reveal the name of the agent?

Did AP KNOW the name of the agent?

What EXACTLY did AP do wrong? Do you really know?

[Cali_Democrat]

41. Just because an agents name isn't revealed...it doesnt mean their cover can't be blown

In the case of the Yemen leak, the intelligence community determined the source could no longer be used once the disruption of the plot was leaked.

[Bonobo]

53. Agents getting accidentally revealed

does not indicate the need for freezing up and impeding the process of a free press.

[whistler162]

49. Half right.... rarely a good story!

[Bonobo]

54. What was "half right" about it? nt

[Cali_Democrat]

14. Unfortunately there has been an exceptional number of leaks the last 5 years

There has to be a balance. I think what's happening here is that some folks in the news media and some leakers thought Obama and this DOJ was timid and could be pushed around, but now they are feeling the wrath in a big way. The amount of prosecutions for leaks is very high. Perhaps it is overkill.

There needs to be a balance. Perhaps some sources should stop leaking so much information and perhaps the DOJ could cool it on some leak investigations.

[Triana]

15. All this, and labelling protesters and environmental activists "terrorists"

Silencing reporting, whistleblowing, truth-telling, dissent. It's all so goddamned fascist.

[Lasher]

19. Free Press? Please, the US corporate media is no such thing.

They started selling us out years ago and they've never turned back since. They deserve no special consideration whatever.

[Bonobo]

22. Was it from this point? Or was this just a milestone?

[nadinbrzezinski]

51. New Palestine Hotel during the take ver of Baghdad

Many here will not remember. Outside of very few places this did not make the news.

[nadinbrzezinski]

30. You are starting to see is a war

I think, in the shadows.

[kelliekat44]

20. The Justice Department did not chill sources...The MSM reporting about the surveillance did it. nt

[Bonobo]

25. Yeah, if only the reporters would stop reporting news...

Knowledge is a terrible and dangerous thing.

[nadinbrzezinski]

27. I gotta give you props for originality

[graham4anything]

44. BINGO!!! you make a great point, thanks. The ones arguing AGAINST the President...

they cannot have it both ways, they are arguing against this president with either AND or
instead of either or.

isn't the argument made that there is no terrorists, so now there is no sources?
If there are no terrorists, what do they need sources for?

It's ironic that they are fighting the President using the exact opposite rationale for fighting the President

One can't have both

So, that is important- because now they are saying indeed, there are terrorists, and bad people internationally that are looking
to harm America, so in fact, the AP (who so heavily led to Iraq in the first place with that Ron Fournier who worked for them)
wants it both ways.

Thanks to them for admitting, YES there are bad international terrorists that we need to be protected from

(hey, Mitt Romney ruined all his credibility he never had in debate one using every single side of the argument too
)

[Bonobo]

56. As always, I am heartened to see you on the other side.

It is an absolute guarantee for me that I am seeing things correctly.

[DeSwiss]

58. And if only they'd kept their mouths shut, none of this would have ever happened.

- Proving again that for most people ignorance is bliss. Or as close as some people will ever get....

[silvershadow]

32. So, then, it had the intended effect? nt

[marmar]

40. Some of the responses in this thread are positively frightening......

...... The embrace of authoritarianism, as so long as it has a -D after it. This is not Team Edward v Team Jacob people -- these are our most fundamental rights.

[nadinbrzezinski]

42. Yup. I will tell you the difference

You and I suspect...elect representatives. Those can and do have feet held to the fire and we are expected to be informed citizens. A few here, more than a few...elect leaders. Those are above reproach because well, they know better.

It is psychological make up. Pols prefer the later.

[kenny blankenship]

47. All going to plan: "most transparent ever"

very fucking transparent.

[MotherPetrie]

52. Imagine the outrage if this happened during the BUSH regime?

If Bush's DOJ intimidated the press and its sources into not reporting the ugly truth about it?

The outrage here would be justifiably off the charts. There would be no equivocation about it. It would be seen for what it is - a brazen grab for more and more power, with fewer and fewer demands made to answer for it.

Just because this is happening under a Democratic regime doesn't make it less heinous. It makes it even MORE heinous.

[DeSwiss]

57. I'm sure that the Eleventy-Dimensional Chessmaster......

...can explain how all this is REALLY A GOOD THING!

- So don't you go complaining now. Because only a racist would do that!

K&R

[center]
"Every nation gets the government it deserves." ~Joseph de Maistre, 1811[/center]

[JoeyT]

65. Well yeah, that's kind of the point.

You don't drop the hammer on whistle blowers and people that help them to stop that leak. That horse has left the barn and isn't coming back. You do it so the next one is too afraid to speak out against wrongdoing.