US Dept of Justice doesn't want "another Twitter backlash"

DoJ doesn't want "another Twitter controversy"; voices of the masses DO make a difference.

The US Department of Justice tells Google it's forbidden to tell Wikileaks volunteer Applebaum that his emails are being turned over to the DOJ.

...the Justice Department asserted that “journalists have no special privilege to resist compelled disclosure of their records, absent evidence that the government is acting in bad faith,” and refused to concede Appelbaum was in fact a journalist.

Which is it? Journalists can't protect their sources or this guy isn't a journalist? Doublespeak.

The Intercept
firstlook.org...

The Intercept asserts the real reason for the DoJ's strong-arming Google into not alerting the email account holder:

The Justice Department wanted to keep the surveillance secret largely because of an earlier public backlash over its WikiLeaks investigation. In January 2011, Appelbaum and other WikiLeaks volunteers were notified by Twitter that the Justice Department had obtained data about their accounts. This disclosure generated widepread news coverage and controversy; the government says in the unsealed court records that it “failed to anticipate the degree of damage that would be caused” by the Twitter disclosure and did not want to “exacerbate this problem” when it went after Appelbaum’s Gmail data.

It's important to note that when the public is aware, the government is made uncomfortable. The DoJ claimed that the disclosure of its Twitter data grab “seriously jeopardized the [WikiLeaks] investigation” because it resulted in efforts to “conceal evidence” and put public pressure on other companies to resist similar surveillance orders.

THAT'S WHY IT IS IMPORTANT TO KEEP GOVERNMENT IN THE SUNSHINE! Or rather, drag it there, kicking and screaming.

a reply to: kkrattiger

Keep them in the light....sound advice.

a reply to: kkrattiger

The government, or more appropriately named, The Obama administration, failed to foresee how pissed off the public would be when subjected to even more lies and deceptions involving the rights people DO assume they have under the fourth amendment, and in fact the entire bill of rights they attempt to violate on a daily basis..The embarrassment of knowing the public knows just how corrupt they are when attempting to do most every kind of business they do, by the way they hide, obfuscate, and lie their way through federal courts, paid off judges, and threats against anything that impedes their end goals and agendas, is the reason they try to hide what they are doing, because of the backlash it has already generated against them.

Government and cockroaches like to stay in the shadows especially when they know they can be caught ...

a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

It's not so much about the administration during a given presidency, as much as it is the nature of the security services, and the way they interact internationally.

The surveillance methods and systems operating in the world today, although it is the US security services who come under some of the most stringent scrutiny from world media, are actually an interconnected series of systems, controlled ostensibly by national governments, but more accurately by the Five Eyes group of intelligence agencies, operating as a gestalt whole, rather than as security services beholden to and sworn to the defence of individual nations.

The Five Eyes as a title for the agencies concerned as a whole, is misleading in and of itself, because there are fourteen nations who regularly contribute to the data pool from which those agencies strip meaning and actionable data. I must be clear with you. These agencies operating as a single unit, have more power than any one, and perhaps any two, three, or four national governments put together. They possess, monitor, and control data, and data is quite literally knowledge, and trite as it may sound, knowledge is power.

When the intelligence agencies covered by the moniker I am referring to, act as a whole, they do so largely without the oversight of the national governments with which they are normally associated. When GCHQ and the other various branches of the British intelligence services operate within the structure of government here, they are under parliamentary orders. When they do it on behalf of Five Eyes interests, that is not always the case, and this sets a dangerous precedent, allowing for essentially a global network of what amounts to autonomous intelligence gathering organisations, beholden to no nation, government, or people, other than the overarching structure of the network itself.

What I am trying to get across by explaining all this, is that the situation would be the same no matter who was in government, because the intelligence agencies who are causing these media storms by their outrageous behaviour, are not under the control of government, the DoJ or any other oversight body within their nations of origin. Who happens to be president is not important. Who happens to be sitting at the top table in the Five Eyes however, is relevant to this discussion, but finding that out from outside the circles they move in, is somewhat like trying to see into the core of the sun using a basic telescope, in that it is unlikely to work, and even the most sturdy attempt will probably end in getting ones retina seared out.

a reply to: kkrattiger

Used correctly Twitter is a weapon against the oppressors, use it smartly & wisely and you'll find it to be a great venting tool also haha.

a reply to: 727Sky

Trouble today is that even when the government is "caught" (consider Senate report on torture), nobody is arrested or punished for their crimes.

What's worse, the trouble today is also the people becoming used to the govt not being "punished"... and all these apathetic people sittin around being armchair pundits but not forming a cogent point on Who to Vote for in elections (municipal, on up).
a reply to: Salander

what a great thread.

You not only brought us a good story, but you pointed out that part that mattered.

Thats right. Drag those bastards kicking and screaming into the light.

THANK YOU for saying that BigFatFurryTexan! It feels good to have validation from ATSers who "know the drill"
As in, you're a regular here, so that means a lot.
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan
I like it when the link is provided but I don't HAVE to go there because the juicy tidbits are presented along with the "take" on the matter. Thanks for the props, it made my day (maybe I'll work on my ego, it apparently REALLY responds to ATS kudos).

e