Obama Admin Also Spied on JOURNALISTS. A Special FISA Was Developed Just For Them. :-)

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

False. The media guidelines already stated the AG had to sign off.

True, but the memo stated the review of those applications were to be done at a "higher level".

They increase the frequency at which the applications are reviewed and potentially renewed.

That is the extra "step".

This is circumventing the media guidelines not adding to them.

How, exactly? Please be specific. The Columbia source stated that the extent at which it was used was unclear. So I'd like to see the sources you have that the do not.

They made fisa harder for journalists, but circumvented most of the protections they created for journalists in the media guidelines. Your evidence of them adding the AG signing off is actually evidence against you because that was already in the media guidelines.

I did not say anything about them adding the AG signing off.

It has very little to do with the journalist, and everything to do with their source IMO>

If the source isn't too big of a "national security threat", than they took the approach of compelling journalists to reveal who gave them leaked information. That proved to take a lot of time an effort, while displaying to the public the lengths our government was willing to go through like with James Risen. (James Risen with NYT, not to be confused with James Rosen of Fox news).

I think they needed a different approach to getting what they needed and quick, queue in FISA.

Problem is OP did set up a spin that muddied the waters right off that bat in a wrong way.

Sure the specific FISA warrant for journalists at least appears to have extra steps, but FISA shouldn't be used to find the name of a source via journalist to begin with.

Journalists have no leverage on gaining information if everyone knows the government can just tap them.

It was a well played hand by the Obama admin in dealing with their leak problems.

a reply to: introvert

Occam is right. The Media Guidelines that were enacted in 2015 and were supposed to make it hard to monitor journalists don't apply to FISA or NSLs. Instead those use their own guidelines which are less stringent than the Media Guidelines.

Unfortunately, I don't see a lot of people discussing why the Media Guidelines don't apply in all cases. Instead they seem to be focusing on the fact that there were special rules that applied to journalists for FISA applications. Ignoring that these rules made it harder to obtain a FISA warrant on a journalist than anyone else.

a reply to: introvert

Yes and it was a way to sugar coat them not using the media guidelines they established.

They used fisa to circumvent the guidelines. This is what actual attacks on the press look like, and it's not Trump, but Obama who did it over and over again.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Exactly the story isn't whether the fisa applications were made harder, it's that the media guidelines they created we're circumvented.

Yes, media fisa were a little tougher, the special rules were slightly more stringent.

But compared to media guidelines established after the scandal of the government spying on the media we now have a real concern the government pulled a bait and switch and kept on doing what they were doing.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: introvert

Thanks for proving me right yet again.

The Media Guidelines are far from perfect, however, in their protection of journalists. One persistent criticism is that they do not apply to the use of National Security Letters (NSLs) or surveillance conducted under FISA.

Media guidelines do not apply to fisa. Exactly what I was saying.

Yes, the guidelines lay out standards for the process leading to the FISA surveillance and the reapplication for such surveillance. It does not address the specifics of the surveillance itself.

That is not proof they circumvented the guidelines or FISA standards, nor is it proof that it does not apply to FISA. It does not apply to the surveillance, but does in the application approving or denying the surveillance.

a reply to: introvert

No, it doesn't. The guidelines have nothing to do with fisa and fisa circumvents them. Your source stated as much, stop being obtuse.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Unfortunately, I don't see a lot of people discussing why the Media Guidelines don't apply in all cases. Instead they seem to be focusing on the fact that there were special rules that applied to journalists for FISA applications. Ignoring that these rules made it harder to obtain a FISA warrant on a journalist than anyone else.

To elaborate, I think the media guidelines were for if a journalist was a target rather than the leak source.

If it was the leak source, the journalist was just a stepping stone and the FISA was probably (bolded for speculation) framed and aimed at the source, not the journalist.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: introvert

Occam is right. The Media Guidelines that were enacted in 2015 and were supposed to make it hard to monitor journalists don't apply to FISA or NSLs. Instead those use their own guidelines which are less stringent than the Media Guidelines.

Unfortunately, I don't see a lot of people discussing why the Media Guidelines don't apply in all cases. Instead they seem to be focusing on the fact that there were special rules that applied to journalists for FISA applications. Ignoring that these rules made it harder to obtain a FISA warrant on a journalist than anyone else.

Yes, the guidelines do not seem to apply in the carrying-out of the FISA, but instead touch on the application and re-application for FISA approval.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

I really think this is all about sources. Obama went to great lengths to attack whistle blowers and journalists who were critical of him.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Yes and it was a way to sugar coat them not using the media guidelines they established. They used fisa to circumvent the guidelines. This is what actual attacks on the press look like, and it's not Trump, but Obama who did it over and over again.

The guidelines are in place for the application and re-application of the FISA.

Again, how did they circumvent the guidelines if the guidelines do not apply to the FISA surveillance to begin with?

a reply to: introvert

No, I quoted your own source. Guidelines Don't touch fisa at all anywhere. Fisa circumvented them.

a reply to: introvert

It's circumvented because using the regular courts the government has to follow them. So they decided to not use regular courts and use fisa.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: introvert

No, it doesn't. The guidelines have nothing to do with fisa and fisa circumvents them. Your source stated as much, stop being obtuse.

The guidelines have everything to do with FISA.

From my source:

The first, from January 2015, issues secret guidance for targeting journalists under FISA. The guidance states that the Attorney General “determined that review of FISA applications targeting known media entities or known members of the media should occur at even higher levels than otherwise permitted by FISA and existing Attorney General orders.”

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: introvert

No, I quoted your own source. Guidelines Don't touch fisa at all anywhere. Fisa circumvented them.

So did I. It talks specifically about FISA.

It's circumvented because using the regular courts the government has to follow them. So they decided to not use regular courts and use fisa.

Source, example?

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

It is certainly troubling, but to claim that it is only an issue with the Obama administration comes across as partisanship. FISA has existed since 1978. That's a lot of Presidents that could have used it monitor journalists. And that includes Trump. Unfortunately we don't know how many journalists, if any, have been monitored using a FISA warrant and which Presidents did so.

I'll admit I won't be surprised if Obama did considering his surveillance of the media. I also won't be surprised if Bush did so considering we know that he used NSLs to monitor certain journalists. Trump's hatred of the media and his desire to root out leakers also makes him a strong contender.

If you want to condemn the Obama administration for using the Media Guidelines to give themselves good optics while still having an easy route to spy on journalists through FISA and NSLs then go for it. But if your actual concern is about the free press in relation to FISA then it is a much bigger issue than just Obama. It is one that extends from Carter all the way to today.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: CriticalStinker

I really think this is all about sources. Obama went to great lengths to attack whistle blowers and journalists who were critical of him.

In all fairness, it wasn't just sources that were critical of him, and this didn't start under Obama. James Risen is one of the most notable public cases where the government tried to get him to flip on his source. It started under the Bush admin, and then was continued under Obama.

At a time when journalists' roles in covering different, critical conflict zones have been under the microscope, renewed attention has come to the case involving James Risen. He is the New York Times journalist who has been fighting efforts by two different Departments of Justice — under Presidents Obama and George W. Bush — to compel him to identify sources from a 2006 book that reveals a secret CIA plan to sabotage Iran's budding nuclear program.

For the past five years, he has battled the Obama administration's Justice Department, which in 2009 took a rather unprecedented step of renewing a subpoena scheduled to expire that year.

link

I don't see this trend ending, because more citizens are willing to argue the partisan end rather than the fact that both parties build off of the precedence set. We see that in this thread. Many people purely take the angle to go after a politician, which I understand, but there are many people who are complicit in this being aloud, many of whom were not elected but still play along.

Let's be clear, it's government agenda vs the people. We had every right to know our governments intentions with Iran, and lets be honest... none of us were surprised.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

I never claimed Obama is the only one to do this. But he's known for it and new guidelines were created due to his abuse.

It's now legal for Trump because Obama made sure it could be abused.

I want it stopped.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: introvert

No, it doesn't. The guidelines have nothing to do with fisa and fisa circumvents them. Your source stated as much, stop being obtuse.

The guidelines have everything to do with FISA.

From my source:

The first, from January 2015, issues secret guidance for targeting journalists under FISA. The guidance states that the Attorney General “determined that review of FISA applications targeting known media entities or known members of the media should occur at even higher levels than otherwise permitted by FISA and existing Attorney General orders.”

My guess is that is for if the journalist is the end target, and not their source.

a reply to: introvert

I quoted your source. Read it.