The Motley Fool Discussion Boards
Retirement Discussions / Retire Early CampFIRE
|Subject: More on DOJ and AP||Date: 5/16/2013 1:59 PM|
|Author: arrete||Number: 682159 of 762870|
>> Well, it turns out national security might not have been why the subpoenas were obtained in secret:
"For five days, reporters at the Associated Press had been sitting on a big scoop about a foiled al-Qaeda plot at the request of CIA officials. Then, in a hastily scheduled Monday morning meeting, the journalists were asked by agency officials to hold off on publishing the story for just one more day.
The CIA officials, who had initially cited national security concerns in an attempt to delay publication, no longer had those worries, according to individuals familiar with the exchange. Instead, the Obama administration was planning to announce the successful counterterrorism operation that Tuesday.
AP balked and proceeded to publish that Monday afternoon. Its May 2012 report is now at the center of a controversial and broad seizure of phone records of AP reporters’ home, office and cellphone lines. Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. said the unauthorized disclosure about an intelligence operation to stop al-Qaeda from detonating explosives aboard a U.S. airliner was among the most serious leaks he could remember, and justified secretly obtaining records from a handful of reporters and editors over a span of two months."
That’s right, boys and girls. That sound you heard was the “national security” justification going POOF! The AP dutifully held back on reporting the story in order to protect national security and the Obama administration screwed them anyway. The AP reported the story only after it was made clear that the information wasn’t sensitive anymore. The information was going to be used for PR purposes by the Obama administration and the AP essentially stole their thunder. ,/b> <<
- See more at: http://www.therightsphere.com/2013/05/why-did-the-doj-get-ap...
|Copyright 1996-2015 trademark and the "Fool" logo is a trademark of The Motley Fool, Inc. Contact Us|