Posted on 07/30/2013 7:57:59 AM PDT by mandaladon
A journalist and a researcher have sued the Justice Department for access to the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s records on the late journalist Michael Hastings.
The lawsuit follows the FBI’s failure to respond to separate Freedom of Information Act requests for records on Hastings submitted by journalist Jason Leopold of al-Jazeera and Massachusetts Institute of Technology researcher Ryan Shapiro.
Agencies are required by statute to notify applicants about whether it will fulfill their requests within a 20-working-day period of the initial application.
In the hours before his death, which was ruled an accident by the Los Angeles Police Department, Hastings emailed Wikileaks’ lawyer Jennifer Robinson that he was being investigated by the federal government.
Staff Sgt. Joseph Biggs — who knew Hastings when he was embedded with Bigg’s unit in Afghanistan — told KTLA Hastings had blind copied him on an email sent 15 hours before his death, notifying colleagues that federal officials were interviewing his “close friends and associates.”
Leopold, a personal friend of Hastings, wrote in a piece published on the Freedom of the Press Foundation’s website that a government investigation into Hastings would not be a surprise.
“Given the nature of Hastings’s investigative work and the revelations that have surfaced about the government’s interest in journalists’ sources it wouldn’t come as a surprise to me if some agency was looking into Hastings’s journalistic activities,” said Leopold
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
Start a thread about those and maybe I’ll answer you. This thread is about Michael Hastings, not every conspiracy theory we may or may not believe in.
It has direct relevance as to whether you are following lawful orders.
What compels any supposed logical inquisitor to give ANY benefit of doubt considering the conspicuous preponderance of collective circumstantial evidence?
Moreover, what of the tapestry of lies and "accidental" deaths from within the 0bama Administration, and the motive to shut up and shut down ALL witnesses that MUST be considered?
I've a feeling you'd put a band-aid on a decapitated head and call it a "flesh-wound". Your handle now makes all the sense in the world, friend.
You are = one is
THAT is gonna leave a mark. (you ferreted out your answer)
I tell you what, before you start insulting FReepers, why don't you produce the original blue prints to this car and show that they are not manufactured or third party additions for custom siding?
German monkeys, evidently :).
Maybe they mean the saddle was inverted, but in any case, it stretches on both sades of the driveshaft. So on whatever side you punch the car, you get the tank.
And shots like that are not that hard, if you have an undisturbed shoot and know the target is coming.
Which has no relevance, that I can see, to the topic at hand, which is whether there is any evidence that Michael Hasting’s death was something other than an accident.
*shrug* At least the Nuremberg defendants were following lawful orders.
How much weaker a defense is following unlawful orders from an illegitimate commander you had every reason to suspect was not in a Constitutional position to have the authority to give them?
Blueprints??? You’re stretching ;).
Not necce. Mercedes have all those answers for you, it seems they’re supplied at several places. Mercedes Benz, ask.com.. the list goes on.
Just looking for the facts ma'am/sir ;)
“What compels any supposed logical inquisitor to give ANY benefit of doubt considering the conspicuous preponderance of collective circumstantial evidence?”
Circumstantial evidence doesn’t amount to anything unless you can establish that an actual crime occurred. You see, first, you determine that a crime occurred, THEN you can build a case on that circumstantial evidence to try to pin the crime on someone. What some are doing here in trying to craft a conspiracy theory is putting the cart before the horse. Not to mention, some of this so-called “circumstantial evidence” has turned out to be based on flat out wrong assumptions from armchair internet detectives, and most of the rest is pretty much unverified speculation.
“Moreover, what of the tapestry of lies and “accidental” deaths from within the 0bama Administration, and the motive to shut up and shut down ALL witnesses that MUST be considered?”
What of them? Obama lies about some things, therefore he must be lying about this thing too? That’s not proper logic.
Also, if he is so hellbent on shutting up witnesses, then why are there so many witnesses who have already testified to malfeasance in his administration that are just walking around alive today? What was so special about Hastings, or any of your other “suspicious” deaths, that Obama would assassinate them, but leave so many other loose ends hanging about? If Obama has a “death squad”, they must be extremely lazy or incompetent.
“I’ve a feeling you’d put a band-aid on a decapitated head and call it a “flesh-wound”. Your handle now makes all the sense in the world, friend.”
Meh. Attacking a poster’s handle is usually the last resort of those who can’t come up with a decent argument.
Proper logic, Boog, is that something had so scared the bejeepers out of Hastings that he was making an effort to go underground, and in fact he said as much.
Whoever killed him gets a shortlived respite, however, because he did actually take some backup measures.
Strange all these Freepers so concerned about “reckless speculation” ;).
.
.
Explain this then: Notable Murder Convictions Without a Body
If you don't have a body, how do you establish a body let alone murder?
Not saying I agree, just pointing out it's happened.
It's also why Casey Anthony was not convicted. There was no proof of a crime, ergo she was rightly found NOT GUILTY, even though we all know she was culpable.
First of all, that Cart" is full; Bodies are falling off by the wayside IF one is playing attention.
Secondly, this isn't a court of law; It's a forum where participants do NOT possess the legal avenues or access to "evidence". But what we DO possess is enough information from which to process logic, ability to connect dots, and sense and consideration of the tendencies and credibility of the accused. Not only that, we must also sift though those whose words and deeds appear to give the impression of performing damage-control while insisting the witness-free "coincidences" are necessarily just that.
"Move along -- nothing to see" and all that. Is that your mission here? Seriously?
What of them? [the tapestry of lies and “accidental” deaths from within the 0bama Administration...shutting up and shut down ALL witnesses]
Obama lies about some things, therefore he must be lying about this thing too? That’s not proper logic.
Uh, no. 0bama lies about EVERYTHING. You tripped up there, Comrade. And so do his loyal minions. Of course you would strongly disagree my assessment. But as a reminder to others, that "tapestry" happens to provide a rich historical profile of a rogue regime.
Also, if he is so hellbent on shutting up witnesses, then why are there so many witnesses who have already testified to malfeasance in his administration that are just walking around alive today?
Kinda hard to to be Germany, 1940 YET. The testimony and potential damage of witnesses of this regime are employees whose info is limited by either threats, coercion, deemed "classified", OR dismissed by corrupt, co-opted Hearing members. In your world, the regime is...all-benevolent.
Victims of "accidents" and "incidents" appear thus far to be private citizens or military performing duty outside of continental USA, and obviously deemed "imminent threats to our regime" today rather than tomorrow.
What was so special about Hastings, or any of your other “suspicious” deaths, that 0bama would assassinate them, but leave so many other loose ends hanging about?
I guess we may never know, eh? "Funny how that worked out!" say the ghosts of Breitbart, Breitbart's coroner, Hastings, and Seal Team 6.
Meh. Attacking a poster’s handle is usually the last resort of those who can’t come up with a decent argument.
Next time choose a less conspicuous handle than 'Boogieman'.
As they say in Central America- Hecky Durn.
Without ridicule; there is no, methodical scientific inquiry, ms. mcsoup.
We’re keeping our two 1996 Chevy Impalas, our 1984 Trans Am, and our 1973 Pinto.
In the case of an EMP, that Pinto will be the only working vehicle for miles around.
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.