Libertarian ping! Click here to get added or here to be removed or post a message here!
(View past Libertarian pings here)
Posted on 06/11/2009 7:28:24 PM PDT by Gomez
Michael Scott points us to the fact that US Attorneys have requested data on anonymous commenters who commented on an article in the Las Vegas Review-Journal. From the description, it sounds like the feds are fishing for a lot more than they should be allowed to get. The subpoena requested:
"full name, date of birth, physical address, gender, ZIP code, password prompts, security questions, telephone numbers and other identifiers ... the IP address," of everyone who commentedSeem a bit excessive? It's not entirely clear what the feds are fishing for, but one indicator? Some of the comments were quite critical of (you guessed it) a federal prosecutor. As Thomas Mitchell, the editor of the Review-Journal notes:
These comment posters are not reporters; they have no shield law protection, especially since Congress has yet to pass the pending federal shield law. A grand jury can subpoena just about anyone for any reason.We've been seeing a lot of similar stories lately -- with gov't officials getting upset at what's being said about them online, and pushing the (or crossing) the boundaries of the law in order to try to find out who is behind those comments.
But what time, effort and tax-funded expenses are being expended by the U.S. attorney's office to track down a bunch of posturing blowhards squandering their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination?
....
What the prosecutors don't appear to understand is that we don't have most of what they are seeking. We don't require registration. A person could use a fictitious name and e-mail address, and most do. We have no addresses or phone numbers.
To add prior restraint to the chilling effect of the sweeping subpoena, we were warned: "You have no obligation of secrecy concerning this subpoena; however, any such disclosure could obstruct and impede an ongoing criminal investigation. ..."
“I don’t think Adams or any of our wise men could have foreseen that the pirates and slavers of their day would become the rulers and masters of this country today.”
On this, we disagree; however, I agree with everything else you wrote. Our country has been usurped but by whom and for why? That seems to be the crux of the disagreement between the left and the right. The why is obviousto me. Money and power. the who is less obvious but I think Jackson called it right even back then, it’s the organized “money power” operating from its “secret conclave”. We have only ourselves to blame. We ignored our forefathers. We should not have.
No, publishers are protected. It's called freedom of the Press, not freedom of the notepad. But the rest of us come under Freedom of Speech, or we used to BO, Before Obama.
btt
Freedom of the press is constitutionally protected.
Perhaps by joining FR one becomes an “Official Journalist” We could receive a special card saying “Journalist.”
My NAFP (National Association of Furum Posters) card is up to date. My real name is DB Cooper. No, not THAT DB Cooper. I’m the other one ... from Muleshoe.
Not a bad idea at all.
What's the definition of a "journalist?" Is it someone who researches or writes or speaks about the news in a dissemination medium? Well that's us.
It can't be the fact that the "journalist" is trained or has a degree, that's not universally required. It can't be that they get a paycheck for doing it, there's lots of volunteer "journalists."
This would make a great court case if we could find a competent conservative lawyer with the required... courage.
This would make a great court case if we could find a competent conservative lawyer with the required... courage.
I have always thought that all Freepers should carry a camera and vidio and audio equipment so we can post quickly. I think that we are now going to need it more than ever.
HMmmmmmmm......
Might not be a good idea to have a special card with the letters OJ on it.
That's not why it is called the Secret Service, and their activities (such as 'visiting' suspects) are well publicized.
I exercise my right to free speech each and every day, and am doing so right now. So what's the problem ?
You know exactly what I meant, and you are just skirting the issue.
In counter to the DNA sample, I would offer to personally provide a fresh urine sample, should the President require it.
Would like to give it to him myself, in the same manner I have been getting it.
In a limited, and sometimes censored way, and there are efforts to put it under government control.
But, here, and now, yes.
(HI KIMMY!!!)
Most of us recently got a thumb in the asset.
p.s.
Cheers to you as well. Thanks for the response.
Thank you for bringing up that distinction. It does make a difference.
The word "reporter" is not found in the constitution, and the word "press" is found exactly once.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
I know, I know, "precedent" has been set in court rulings. But when I read that amendment, I see this....
Congress shall make no law
- respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;(that is an individual liberty)
- or abridging
--the freedom of speech, (that is an individual liberty)
--or of the press; (that is extending the previous liberty so speech is truly free, not limited)
--or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. (that is an individual liberty)
Now where does it say in there that reporters have more protection than me? IMO, every American has the same right to free speech. In order to secure those individual rights, that protection is extended beyond just a person talking, to that person talking through the broadcast medium of a newspaper, or radio station, or TV Station, or internet (the press).
If I am standing on the street and say "I think Federal prosecutor John Doe is a complete imbecile.", the US Constitution affords me protection of freedom of speech and extends that freedom to be broadcast through the press. Of course, the common sense limitations of slander, public safety, etc. apply.
Yeah, but they are usually cops posing as underage girls.
ABC,NBC, and CBS.
Years ago when I first got online & was on aol chats there were lots of liars & frauds.
Efforts...yes, but they would have to redraft our constitution and the BOR to take them away- people won’t stand for it—
note:protesters...
HI backatcha! LoL haven’t been called that since I was like oh 5yrs old. :)
How are you doing?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.