HOLDER LASHES OUT: AG Calls Rep 'Shameful' Amid Scandal Questioning

Published May 15, 2013

FoxNews.com

• 

  Attorney General Eric Holder testifies on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, May 15, 2013, before the House Judiciary Committee.AP

WASHINGTON –  Attorney General Eric Holder repeatedly told the House Judiciary Committee Wednesday that he could not answer any questions related to claims the Justice Department infringed on the First Amendment rights of The Associated Press when it secretly collected telephone records of its reporters and editors over a two-month period last year.

Holder said he had recused himself last year from any involvement in the investigation of national security leaks and therefore could not answer any questions related to the case. 

When pressed to provide additional comment, Holder said: "I am not familiar with the reasons why (the subpoena was issued). I am simply not a part of the investigation."

Instead, he said actions taken by the Justice Department were being made by Deputy Attorney General James Cole.

On Monday, AP President and CEO Gary Pruitt disclosed the government’s action in a letter to Holder that was made public. In it, Pruitt called the collection of phone records at four AP bureaus a “massive and unprecedented intrusion” of the news agency’s freedom of press rights granted under the U.S. Constitution.

The AP case immediately sparked bipartisan outrage, leading members of both parties to publicly question the government’s actions.

Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus said the attorney general should resign over the issue, adding: "Freedom of the press is an essential right in a free society."

On Wednesday, New York Sen. Charles Schumer said he plans to reintroduce legislation that would protect journalists from revealing their sources. The bill, which was brought up in 2009, has since stalled in Congress.

The Obama administration has been very aggressive in going after government workers leaking classified information. To date, the White House has brought indictments against five workers. The Defense Department is pursuing a sixth case against the U.S. Army soldier accused of sending classified documents to the anti-secrecy online group WikiLeaks.

Under Holder’s command, the Justice Department has prosecuted more government officials for alleged leaks under the World War I-era Espionage Act than all of the AGs who came before him – combined.

View the original article here

HOLDER IN HOT SEAT: AG Says Deputy Handled AP Probe, Amid Call to Quit

• 

  FILE - In this April 18, 2013 file photo, Attorney General Eric Holder testifies on Capitol Hill in Washington. The Justice Department has secretly obtained two months of telephone records of journalists for The Associated Press in what AP's top executive says is an unprecedented intrusion into newsgathering. (AP Photo/Molly Riley, File)

URGENT: Attorney General Eric Holder said Tuesday that his deputy "ultimately authorized the subpoena" to secretly obtain phone records from The Associated Press, and said he had recused himself early on in the related investigation into leaks of sensitive information that "put the American people at risk."

Word that Deputy Attorney General James Cole is directing the FBI probe came as the White House expressed confidence in Holder and the department following revelations that it had seized phone records involving as many as 20 AP reporters and editors in an effort to find out who leaked confidential information to it. 

Holder said Tuesday that the leak in question, which the AP has suggested involved a foiled terror attack originating in Yemen, was "very, very serious," but declined to elaborate. He said it was among the most serious he'd seen in his career and that it "required very aggressive action."

"It put the American people at risk," he told reporters during a press conference Tuesday. 

Holder said he recused himself to avoid a conflict of interest. He said the investigation followed "all of the appropriate Department of Justice regulations."

"As the Attorney General testified in June 2012, he was interviewed by the FBI in connection with the investigation into the unauthorized disclosure of classified information," a DOJ official told Fox News earlier.  

"To avoid any potential appearance of a conflict of interest, the Attorney General recused himself from this matter," said the official, who spoke on background. "Since that time, this investigation has been conducted by the FBI under the direction of the U.S. Attorney and the supervision of the Deputy Attorney General, who has served as the Acting Attorney General overseeing this investigation.  The decision to seek media toll records in this investigation was made by the Deputy Attorney General consistent with Department regulations and policies."

The year-long Justice Department probe included the seizure of two months’ worth of what the AP said included cellular, office and home telephone records of individual reporters and an editor; AP general office numbers in Washington, New York and Hartford, Conn.; and the main number for AP reporters covering Congress. 

The Obama administration has been aggressive in going after leaks of classified information, prosecuting six officials - more than under all previous administrations combined.

In a letter to Holder, AP President and CEO Gary Pruitt, accused the Justice Department of seeking information beyond what could be justified.

“There can be no possible justification for such an overbroad collection of the telephone communications of The Associated Press and its reporters,” Pruitt wrote to Holder. “These records potentially reveal communications with confidential sources across all of the newsgathering activities undertaken by the AP during a two-month period, provide a road map to AP’s newsgathering operations, and disclose information about AP’s activities and operations that the government has no conceivable right to know.”

The White House said Tuesday that it had no knowledge of the investigation and referred all inquiries to the Justice Department.

"The president is a strong defender of the First Amendment," White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said during a press conference. "He also of course recognizes the need for the Justice Department to investigate alleged criminal activity without undue influence."

"I cannot, and he [President Obama] cannot, comment specifically on an ongoing criminal investigation," Carney said. 

Republicans, meanwhile, are calling on Holder to resign following news of the probe.

"Freedom of the press is an essential right in a free society," RNC Chairman Reince Priebus said in a statement.

"The First Amendment doesn’t request the federal government to respect it; it demands it," Priebus said. "Attorney General Eric Holder, in permitting the Justice Department to issue secret subpoenas to spy on Associated Press reporters, has trampled on the First Amendment and failed in his sworn duty to uphold the Constitution."

Mike Levine contributed to this report. 

View the original article here

Sen. Paul Declares Victory After Holder Gives Assurance on Drones

It's one of the few remaining issues that can bring Democrats and Republicans together -- fear of unchecked government drones. 

Sen. Rand Paul's historic 13-hour filibuster has drawn renewed attention to a technological expansion that would have been unthinkable a decade ago, and new legislation that's meant to rein it in. 

While the Obama administration increasingly employs armed drones as a pivotal counterterrorism tool overseas, domestic law enforcement agencies are also moving to broaden the use of surveillance mini-drones over the next several years. The Federal Aviation Administration projects as many as 10,000 licensed systems by 2017. 

The lethal drones used in Pakistan are a far cry from the unarmed eyes in the sky used in America. But Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., and a host of other lawmakers see constitutional pitfalls across the board -- namely focusing on how armed, and unarmed, drones might someday be used against American citizens. 

Paul and the senators from both sides of the aisle who joined him on the floor Wednesday described a bleak future where an unscrupulous government might use drones against its own population if left unchecked. 

"Your notification is the buzz of propellers on the drone as it flies overhead in the seconds before you're killed. Is that what we really want from our government?" Paul asked. 

Despite the filibuster, a vote on the nomination of John Brennan for CIA director -- whom Paul was technically holding up with his speech -- is expected to proceed as early as Thursday. 

But lawmakers have already started pushing legislation to rein in the drone program -- legislation that might get a second look after Paul's dramatic performance Wednesday, and into early Thursday morning. 

Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., and Ted Poe, R-Texas, last month introduced a bill to regulate domestic drones much like the government regulates wiretaps. 

It would require officials to obtain a warrant in order to perform many kinds of surveillance with those drones. Further, it would prohibit law enforcement drones from being equipped with firearms or explosives in U.S. airspace. 

"As we enter this uncharted world of drone technology, Congress must be proactive and establish boundaries for drone use that safeguard the constitutional rights of Americans," Poe said in a statement last month. 

The use of armed drones in U.S. airspace fueled Paul's lengthy filibuster Wednesday. Before he took the floor, Paul announced that he had received a letter from Attorney General Eric Holder which opened the door, in extremely rare circumstances, to using a drone to kill someone within U.S. territory. Holder said "catastrophic" attacks such as the Sept. 11 attacks or the attack on Pearl Harbor are examples of circumstances where the president could conceivably feel such an action is necessary. 

Testifying on Capitol Hill on Wednesday, Holder agreed that it would be unconstitutional to use a drone on American soil against a U.S. citizen and suspected terrorist who did not pose an imminent threat. 

Paul, during his filibuster, said he wanted a formal assurance from the administration that it would not use drones to kill noncombatant Americans. 

Aside from the legislation in the House, members of the Senate Intelligence Committee have floated the idea of establishing a sort of drone court to screen potential targets -- much like a court screens surveillance of foreign targets in the U.S.

View the original article here