Skip to comments.
Federal Source to ABC News: We Know Who You're Calling
ABC News ^
| May 15 2006
| Brian Ross and Richard Esposito
Posted on 05/15/2006 8:33:11 AM PDT by jmc1969
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 181-197 next last
1
posted on
05/15/2006 8:33:13 AM PDT
by
jmc1969
To: jmc1969
If only we WERE doing this.
2
posted on
05/15/2006 8:33:57 AM PDT
by
Peach
To: jmc1969
Other sources have told us that phone calls and contacts by reporters for ABC News, along with the New York Times and the Washington Post, are being examined as part of a widespread CIA leak investigation.Please, let this be true!
3
posted on
05/15/2006 8:35:23 AM PDT
by
frogjerk
(LIBERALISM: The perpetual insulting of common sense.)
To: jmc1969
Spread a little more paranoia in the media. I like it when they foam at the mouth.
4
posted on
05/15/2006 8:35:38 AM PDT
by
Brilliant
To: jmc1969
To: jmc1969
If they were buiilding profiles on the traitorous MSM, I'd be happy as a clam, as long as it were followed by prosecutions for treason.
6
posted on
05/15/2006 8:36:52 AM PDT
by
pissant
To: jmc1969
I wonder if the Justice Depart can subpoena the call records for criminal investigations, such as who called a NY Times reporter to provide leaks of National Security Info?
To: Peach
8
posted on
05/15/2006 8:37:53 AM PDT
by
rlmorel
("Innocence seldom utters outraged shrieks. Guilt does." Whittaker Chambers)
To: jmc1969
"It's time for you to get some new cell phones, quick," the source told us in an in-person conversation. The media told Bin Laden to get a new cell phone, because the feds were on to him.
Now a mole in the government tells the media to get new cell phones, because the feds are on to them.
We need treason trials. Some government officials, and, I think, some media people, need to be in the cells near Massaoui.
9
posted on
05/15/2006 8:38:08 AM PDT
by
ClearCase_guy
(Never question Bruce Dickinson!)
To: jmc1969
I'd be happier if the "sources" claimed that "phone calls and contacts" of certain Senators and their staff to be included in the examination.
10
posted on
05/15/2006 8:38:13 AM PDT
by
digger48
To: jmc1969
I know the MSM's number. 1-800-Dem-ocrat.
11
posted on
05/15/2006 8:39:32 AM PDT
by
heights
To: jmc1969
I bet there are some HIGH TENSION PUCKER STRINGS hooked on media spoilers and their sources!
12
posted on
05/15/2006 8:39:39 AM PDT
by
lawdude
(Liberalism is a mental illness!)
To: Peach
it would be interesting to see how many NYT and WaPo reporters carry around prepaid cell phones - activated, paid for with cash, not traceable to them.
my guess is - alot of them do.
To: jmc1969
The Media is as paranoid as left-wing Hollywood...
SARANDON: "I think the worst thing is when they pick on your kids. And you understand why nobody else wants to go through that, really. But at the same time you can't not ask the questions. . . . [My kids] were terrified. Our phone was tapped. But at least I think they know in hindsight when this will be history that you do what you have to do."
14
posted on
05/15/2006 8:40:47 AM PDT
by
frogjerk
(LIBERALISM: The perpetual insulting of common sense.)
To: pissant
If they were buiilding profiles on the traitorous MSM, I'd be happy as a clam, as long as it were followed by prosecutions for treason.Fast forward four years:
Since we're building profiles on the traitorous Freepers, I'm happy as a clam...
President Hillary Clinton.
15
posted on
05/15/2006 8:41:00 AM PDT
by
dirtboy
(An illegal immigrant says my tagline used to be part of Mexico)
To: jmc1969
Is it my imagination or does every episode of
Law and Order and every other cop show have the investigators pulling the suspect's phone records about four times an hour?
The leaks are criminal cases. If classified information makes it into print then, barring an accident, somebody broke the law. It's a criminal case. You can pull a suspect's phone records. Get over yourselves, ABC, you're only the mouthpieces.
To: martin_fierro
How many times does it have to be said that Smith v. Maryland does NOT answer the question of this program's legality? That case concerned the constitutionality of pen registers. It had nothing to do with the legality of this program with respect to several federal laws. (Something doesn't have to violate the Constitution to be illegal you know.)
17
posted on
05/15/2006 8:42:50 AM PDT
by
NinoFan
To: martin_fierro
There's also that pesky little 1979 Supreme Court case, Smith v. MarylandAnd in that case, investigators had clear evidence that Smith was engaging in harassing calls. That is the problem with the government database - it gets calling data for everyone, not just those with suspected ties to terrorism. And a pen register is a very limited device - whereas modern data mining can do a lot more within the context of a searchable database and the ability to daisy-chain call linkages.
18
posted on
05/15/2006 8:42:57 AM PDT
by
dirtboy
(An illegal immigrant says my tagline used to be part of Mexico)
To: oceanview
it would be interesting to see how many NYT and WaPo reporters carry around prepaid cell phones - activated, paid for with cash, not traceable to them. my guess is - alot of them do.
And if they don't, they are pretty stupid.
19
posted on
05/15/2006 8:43:22 AM PDT
by
NinoFan
To: NinoFan
How many times does it have to be said that Smith v. Maryland does NOT answer the question of this program's legality?You'll have to keep saying it because people will keep repeating that talking point.
20
posted on
05/15/2006 8:43:36 AM PDT
by
dirtboy
(An illegal immigrant says my tagline used to be part of Mexico)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 181-197 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson