New York Times, CNN And Associated Press Heads Refuse To Meet With Eric Holder 'Off-The-Record'

By Susan Duclos

Attorney General Eric Holder wants to meet with Washington bureau chiefs of several major media outlets in an off-the-record powwow on Thursday and Friday, to discuss guidelines into how the Department of Justice handles news leaks and the media organizations that report them.

This follows the major scandal rocking Washington that has seen calls from both sides of the political spectrum calling for Holder's dismissal or resignation after phone records from the Associated Press were seized, then a Fox News reporters tracked with his emails monitored and multiple phone records obtained with warrant to do so, personally signed by Eric Holder.

A number of media organizations are refusing to attend the meeting as long as it is off-the-record.

The Associated Press issued a statement Wednesday objecting to plans for the meetings to be off the record. "If it is not on the record, AP will not attend and instead will offer our views on how the regulations should be updated in an open letter," said Erin Madigan White, the AP's media relations manager.

The New York Times is taking the same position. "It isn't appropriate for us to attend an off-the-record meeting with the attorney general," executive editor Jill Abramson said in a statement.

Like the New York Times and the Associated Press, CNN will decline the invitation for an off-the-record meeting. A CNN spokesperson says if the meeting with the attorney general is on the record, CNN would plan to participate.

The Huffington Post's Washington bureau chief, Ryan Grim, also said he will not attend unless the meeting is on the record. "A conversation specifically about the freedom of the press should be an open one. We have a responsibility not to betray that," Grim told CNN.

Unsurprisingly, the liberal leaning Politico has agreed to attend. Fox News has not decided whether to attend Friday's session which they were invited to.

Via TV Newswer: DNC spokesman Brad Woodhouse lashed out against that trend on Twitter, saying that refusing to meet with Holder "kind of forfeits your right to gripe," drawing incredulous reactions from reporters; Dylan Byers from Politico just responded, "Jesus, Brad."

Don Surber from Charleston Daily Mail responds to Woodhouse's ridiculous assertion with "@woodhouseb "forfeits your right" -- the motto of this administration."

John Podhoretz from Commentary Magazine tweets his answer to the DNC spokesman"Your literacy incredible. Your lack of verbs wonderful. Your position untenable. Your self-awareness negligible."

BuzzFeed's Andrew Kaczynski tweets "I suppose they can just find how they feel via subpoenaed email and phone records.... ... .. ."

Reactions to Woodhouse continue to pour in, they can all be seen here.

Journalists meet and have off the record discussions all the time, but in a case dealing with an all out attack on the media and freedom of the press, the last thing any decent journalist wants is have their readers see them allow the Obama administration to muzzle them on that very issue.

[Update] Huffington Post has the tally so far on who is in and who is out.

Not going: New York Times, AP, Huffington Post, McClatchy, CNN, CBS News, Fox News and Reuters.

Going: The Washington Post, Politico, and ABC News.

Undecided: NBC News.

AG Eric Holder Investigated For Lies Told Under Oath To Congress About Attacking Free Press

By Susan Duclos

The House Judiciary Committee is launching an investigation into whether Attorney General Eric Holder lied under oath in his May 15, 2013 testimony, when he claimed "In regard to potential prosecution of the press for the disclosure of material -- this is not something I’ve ever been involved in, heard of, or would think would be wise policy."

Video below is of the exchange with  Representative Hank Johnson (D-Ga.), the quoted assertion above comes at the 5-minute mark.



It was subsequently reported by NBC and others, that Holder personally signed off on the warrant which labeled Fox News reporter James Rosen, "an “aider, abettor, and/or co-conspirator," for reporting information given to him by a source.

Via The Hill:

Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (Wis.), the second-ranking Judiciary Committee Republican, told The Hill that Holder should resign.

He accused Holder of misleading the panel during the investigation of the Fast and Furious gun-tracking operation, and again when he claimed to not know about the AP probe.

“As we saw in Fast and Furious and are seeing now, Attorney General Holder refuses to hold himself accountable,” he said. “He misled the Judiciary Committee under oath when he said he had not heard about Fast and Furious and he misled us again when he claimed to be unaware of the AP scandal. The head of DOJ should be someone the American people can trust. Attorney General Holder should resign.”

Not only did the NBC report contradict, then confirm, that Holder lied under oath in his testimony, but Barack Obama has charged Holder with investigating the wrongdoings to which Holder was personally involved in.

Question to ponder: If Eric Holder would lie, under oath, to Congress, does anyone other than Obama, really trust him to investigate himself?

Eric Holder's Fake 'Remorse' And Why Shield Law Wouldn't Have Prevented DOJ Attack On Free Press

By Susan Duclos

Cartoon by Chip Bok, via Towhall

According to The Daily Beast, unnamed aides claim that Attorney General Eric Holder started feeling "a creeping sense of personal remorse," as he read a Washington Post article detailing the exact nature of the DOJ's role in attacking the free press, reporting on the affidavit which Holder himself signed off on and approved, calling a Fox News reporter " at the very least ... an aider, abettor and/or co-conspirator" in the crime, for doing nothing more than his job.

DOJ officials, realizing the issue could turn into a press feeding frenzy, went into damage-control mode. Over the weekend they scrambled to prepare their response, including readying a press statement assuring that Justice had no plans to indict Rosen.

But for Attorney General Eric Holder, the gravity of the situation didn’t fully sink in until Monday morning when he read the Post’s front-page story, sitting at his kitchen table. Quoting from the affidavit, the story detailed how agents had tracked Rosen’s movements in and out of the State Department, perused his private emails, and traced the timing of his calls to the State Department security adviser suspected of leaking to him. Then the story, quoting the stark, clinical language of the affidavit, described Rosen as “at the very least ... an aider, abettor and/or co-conspirator” in the crime. Holder knew that Justice would be besieged by the twin leak probes; but, according to aides, he was also beginning to feel a creeping sense of personal remorse.

The sweeping seizure of the AP phone records had thrown Justice on the defensive. But at least in that case Holder had some personal insulation; having been interviewed by the FBI, he’d recused himself from the investigation and, thus, had not personally signed off on the subpoenas. In the Fox case, however, Holder knew he bore a direct measure of responsibility. He had approved a search-warrant application that equated a reporter’s newsgathering activities with criminal conduct. That put Holder at the center of the brewing controversy, all while the Obama administration was being buffeted over allegations that the IRS had targeted conservative groups and by the continuing Benghazi tempest.

That is when Holder and even Barack Obama started pushing the red herring of the "Shield Law."

By week’s end, Holder knew he had to be proactive in stemming the criticism and restoring the department’s credibility with the press. He and his advisers began exploring ways to reform the Justice Department’s internal guidelines for investigating leaks to safeguard the media against overly intrusive tactics. (Obama announced a review of the guidelines during a major speech on counterterrorism last Thursday.) Meanwhile, on Friday, Holder made a round of calls to Capitol Hill in an attempt to mollify concerned lawmakers. In calls to Sens. Charles Schumer (D-NY), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), and Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Holder said he understood why there had been such an outcry over his department’s actions. As one of Holder’s advisers put it, the message was: “Look we get it. We understand why this is so controversial, and we’re ready to make changes to find the right balance.” At the same time, Holder enlisted their help to get a media-shield law passed in Congress. (On Sunday, Schumer announced the formation of a bipartisan “gang of eight” to press for the legislation.)

Yes, about that Shield Law......

Perhaps the most significant structural flaw in the current system, however, is that the fox is guarding the henhouse. Prosecutors whose main interest is catching and convicting leakers call the shots on how aggressively to pursue reporters as part of their investigations. That is why, Holder believes, there is ultimately no better solution than passing a media-shield law that would place those decisions in the hands of an independent federal judge......

Would a Shield Law have prevented the Obama Department of Justice from zealously attacking the Associated Press by seizing their phone records without notification? Or protected James Rosen at Fox News from the being monitored and having his phone records and email account secretly monitored?

Washington Post reports the answer... no.

Under the shield legislation, the DOJ could still delay notification of a covered journalist of a subpoena — but only if a judge, not the administration, decided that disclosure would pose a substantial threat.

“The difference is that instead of DOJ unilaterally making that determination,” the department would “have to convince a judge that this was the case,” said University of Minnesota Law Professor Jane Kirtley.

The reason the "Shield Law" is a red herring, specifically being used right now as a way mitigate the damage, look no further than some of the original reporting by The New Yorker's Ryan Lizza, who clearly outlines how Obama's DOJ shopped around for a judge that would give them what they wanted after two judges had already denied them.

The new documents show that two judges separately declared that the Justice Department was required to notify Rosen of the search warrant, even if the notification came after a delay. Otherwise: “The subscriber therefore will never know, by being provided a copy of the warrant, for example, that the government secured a warrant and searched the contents of her e-mail account,” Judge John M. Facciola wrote in an opinion rejecting the Obama Administration’s argument.

Machen appealed that decision, and in September, 2010, Royce C. Lamberth, the chief judge in the Federal District Court for the District of Columbia, granted Machen’s request to overturn the order of the two judges.

All the Shield Law would have done is give the Obama administration and Eric Holder someone else to throw under the bus when their antics became public.

Then we have the matter of the "exception" in the Shield Law, which Obama himself pushed for in 2009, again it would have prevented the law from protecting the media:

The bill contains a large exception for national security, a compromise Obama pushed for back in 2009. In classified leak cases, a subpoena could not be quashed if the information would help prevent or mitigate an act of terrorism or other harm to national security. In a non-classified case, the reporter is not protected in those cases and if the information could help identify the perpetrator of an act of terrorism.

No doubt a federal media Shield Law would be a good thing, but it would not have prevented the abuses perpetrated against the media, by the Obama administration, in these two cases. It is more of a "look something shiny over that way," red herring, to distract from the very nature of those abuses.

Anonymous DOJ Source Said Fox Notified Of Subpoenas, Fox Says No Record Of Being Informed

By Susan Duclos

Earlier it was reported that an anonymous source claimed that Fox News had been notified of subpoenas issued for Fox News phone records, which made no sense since it was already confirmed that the DOJ actively pleaded with the courts, lost, appealed, then won the right to monitor a Washington correspondent James Rosen indefinitely, without notification.

A reminder from yesterday's news:

Machen insisted the investigation would be compromised if Rosen was informed of the warrant, and also asked the court to order Google not to notify Rosen that the company had handed over Rosen’s e-mails to the government. Rosen, according to recent reports, did not learn that the government seized his e-mail records until it was reported in the Washington Post last week.

The new details indicate that the government wanted the option to search Rosen’s e-mails repeatedly if the F.B.I. found further evidence implicating the reporter in what prosecutors argued was a conspiracy to commit espionage.

[...]


The new documents show that two judges separately declared that the Justice Department was required to notify Rosen of the search warrant, even if the notification came after a delay. Otherwise: “The subscriber therefore will never know, by being provided a copy of the warrant, for example, that the government secured a warrant and searched the contents of her e-mail account,” Judge John M. Facciola wrote in an opinion rejecting the Obama Administration’s argument.

Machen appealed that decision, and in September, 2010, Royce C. Lamberth, the chief judge in the Federal District Court for the District of Columbia, granted Machen’s request to overturn the order of the two judges.

Today:

The Justice Department has signaled that it notified News Corporation on Aug. 27, 2010, that it had seized the phone records of a Fox News reporter — who turned out to be the Washington correspondent James Rosen — after one of his articles had included details of a secret United States report on North Korea. 

The seizure was part of the department’s case against Stephen Jin-Woo Kim, a State Department contractor investigated in connection with the North Korea leak. Mr. Kim has pleaded not guilty to leaking information and is awaiting trial. Fox News has denied that it knew about the subpoena, while Justice Department officials have said they sent notification 90 days after obtaining the records. 

A law enforcement official said on Sunday that in the investigation that led to the indictment of Mr. Kim, “the government issued subpoenas for toll records for five phone numbers associated with the media.” This person, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, added, “Consistent with Department of Justice policies and procedures, the government provided notification of those subpoenas nearly three years ago by certified mail, facsimile and e-mail.”

 News Corp says they never received notification.

Lawrence A. Jacobs, who was News Corporation’s chief legal officer until he left in June 2011, said he never saw a notification about the phone records. 

“I would have remembered getting a fax from the Justice Department,” Mr. Jacobs said in an interview Sunday. “These are not the kinds of things that happen every day.” 

He added, “The first thing I would’ve done would be to call Roger Ailes.” 

News Corporation said it had conducted a thorough search of its legal records, including, Mr. Jacobs said, a scan of his e-mails and other relevant materials, and has found nothing related to the investigation. “The inference that I sat on this and didn’t share it with Roger couldn’t be further from the truth,” Mr. Jacobs said.

At this point there are not many media personalities willing to give an anonymous DOJ source the benefit of the doubt considering the recent attacks against journalists at the AP and Fox News and possibly even New York Times, according to some reports.

In fact, just the opposite, the consensus seems to be, even from the left, that had Fox News knew about the subpoenas, they would have screamed it from the rooftops. 


Related:

Obama's DOJ Fought For Indefinite Secret Monitoring Of Reporter's Communications

A Member Of The Left FINALLY Gets It - 'Fourth Branch Of Government' Is Dangerously Off Kilter

By Susan Duclos

Pigs have sprouted wings and started flying this week.

First we have members of the liberal media stepping up and speaking out in defense of a Fox News reporter.

Democratic politicians sounding the alarm about the IRS targeting conservatives, warning "a lot more" is to come out."

Pundits from the left and the right agree on something, that being that Attorney General Eric Holder must go.

Now, Jonathan Turley, leftist and professor of  public interest law  at George Washington University Law School, suddenly discovers what he calls "the rise of the fourth branch of government," meaning federal administrative bureaucracy, and decides "it is dangerously off kilter."

Ya think?

There were times this past week when it seemed like the 19th-century Know-Nothing Party had returned to Washington. President Obama insisted he knew nothing about major decisions in the State Department, or the Justice Department, or the Internal Revenue Service. The heads of those agencies, in turn, insisted they knew nothing about major decisions by their subordinates. It was as if the government functioned by some hidden hand.

Clearly, there was a degree of willful blindness in these claims. However, the suggestion that someone, even the president, is in control of today’s government may be an illusion.

The growing dominance of the federal government over the states has obscured more fundamental changes within the federal government itself: It is not just bigger, it is dangerously off kilter. Our carefully constructed system of checks and balances is being negated by the rise of a fourth branch, an administrative state of sprawling departments and agencies that govern with increasing autonomy and decreasing transparency.

Amazing.

Conservatives have been warning consistently for decades that the bigger the government gets, the more corrupt and dangerous it is to liberty and freedom.

When you have a president, like Obama, constantly claim he learned of the corruption and failures within his own administration from news reports as he did with Fast and Furious, the IRS scandal, the out-of-control DOJ attacking the free press, the denial for additional security in Benghazi... etc..... then it should be obvious that there is a problem.

Yet Turley acts like he just discovered America... hey, look, I found something!!!!

Kudos to Turley for finally seeing the light, but I would ask, what took so long?

(Changes made to the headline for accuracy)

Obama's DOJ Fought For Indefinite Secret Monitoring Of Reporter's Communications

By Susan Duclos

This week we found out that Attorney General Eric Holder personally signed off on the secret warrant for Fox News reporter James Rosen's personal emails, which was enough for calls from the left and the right for Holder's dismissal.

It gets worse.

Ryan Lizza at The New Yorker dug a little deeper and found that Obama's Department of Justice also fought. lost, then appealed, and finally convinced a judge to allow them indefinite monitoring of Rosen's communications without notifying Rosen of the search and seizure of his e-mails.

The new details are revealed in a court filing detailing a back and forth between the Justice Department and the federal judges who oversaw the request to search a Gmail account belonging to Rosen, a reporter for Fox News. A 2009 article Rosen had written about North Korea sparked an investigation; Ronald C. Machen, Jr., the U.S. Attorney who is prosecuting Stephen Jin-Woo Kim, a former State Department adviser who allegedly leaked classified information to Rosen, insisted that the reporter should not be notified of the search and seizure of his e-mails, even after a lengthy delay.

E-mails, Machen wrote, “are commonly used by subjects or targets of the criminal investigation at issue, and the e-mail evidence derived from those compelled disclosures frequently forms the core of the Government’s evidence supporting criminal charges.”

He argued that disclosure of the search warrant would preclude the government from monitoring the account, should such a step become necessary in the investigation. Machen added that “some investigations are continued for many years because, while the evidence is not yet sufficient to bring charges, it is sufficient to have identified criminal subjects and/or criminal activity serious enough to justify continuation of the investigation.”

Machen insisted the investigation would be compromised if Rosen was informed of the warrant, and also asked the court to order Google not to notify Rosen that the company had handed over Rosen’s e-mails to the government. Rosen, according to recent reports, did not learn that the government seized his e-mail records until it was reported in the Washington Post last week.

Allahpundit at Hot Air does a great job in reminding folks exactly who Ronald C. Machen, Jr. is:

“Machen,” by the way, is U.S. Attorney Ronald Machen. If his name sounds familiar, that’s because he’s the guy who was charged with deciding whether to pursue the House’s contempt citation against his boss, Eric Holder, over Fast & Furious. Holder’s deputy, James Cole, wrote a letter to Machen — before he’d even received the citation — to let him know that the Department determined Holder had done nothing wrong and therefore shouldn’t be prosecuted. Machen also happens to be leading the FBI investigation into the leak that involved the DOJ subpoenaing AP reporters’ phone records. The man who authorized those subpoenas was, of course, James Cole, acting as AG after Holder recused himself. Machen’s a loyal soldier, in other words, with a track record of aggressively pursuing access to journalists’ private data to sniff out leaks.

A reminder of what Barack Obama said on Thursday- " Journalists should not be at legal risk for doing their jobs. Our focus must be on those who break the law. That is why I have called on Congress to pass a media shield law to guard against government over-reach. I have raised these issues with the Attorney General, who shares my concern. So he has agreed to review existing Department of Justice guidelines governing investigations that involve reporters, and will convene a group of media organizations to hear their concerns as part of that review. And I have directed the Attorney General to report back to me by July 12th."

As The Daily Caller headlines "Obama asks Holder investigate Holder's investigation."

Remember it isn't just Rosen from Fox News, but the DOJ had also named 30 phones numbers in their warrant, main lines at Fox News as well as Rosen's parents. In a separate leak investigation they seized the Associated Press phone records, including five locations where 100 reporters worked.

This is not limited to one organization and what is chilling is this is just what has become public.

How many other reporters, news organizations, media outlets, etc, are being spied on by the Obama administration, right now?

Via The Washington Post editorial board:

What did the journalist do to become a potential criminal co-conspirator? According to the FBI agent, he “asked, solicited and encouraged” his source to disclose sensitive information. The reporter did this “by employing flattery” and playing to the “vanity and ego” of Mr. Kim. In other words, the journalist was doing what reporters do. Unfortunately, a judge signed off on this flimsy search warrant.

 Exactly.

There must be a special prosecutor assigned, one completely independent, to investigate what Obama's DOJ has done and how far they have gone.

Anybody who laughed at the expression of "Big Brother Is Watching You," and waved it off as paranoia, shouldn't be laughing anymore.

Related:

Far Left, Far Right Finally Agree- AG Eric Holder Must Go

Far Left, Far Right Finally Agree- AG Eric Holder Must Go

By Susan Duclos

With the breaking news that Attorney General Eric Holder personally signed off on the warrant that allowed the Justice Department to search Fox News reporter James Rosen's personal email, the far left and the far right and pretty much everyone in between, finally found an issue they can all agree on..... Attorney General Eric Holder must go.

Sarah Palin certainly qualifies as the far right and she asks on Twitter "Where is the apology and resignation of your attorney general, Mr. President? http://fb.me/MZDSVlXQ

Huffington Post, who qualifies as the far left, headlines with "Time To Go: Holder Ok'd Press Probe"

 

Even before this latest revelation, far lefties like Daily Kos and Esquire were calling for Holder's resignation and/or his firing.

Then you have the whole lying to Congress thing going on and it is pretty clear Holder has got to go, but as of May 16, 2013, Barack Obama was still saying "I have complete confidence in Eric Holder as attorney general. He does his job with integrity and I expect he will continue to do so."

Duuuuuude, there is thing called a dictionary, which states clearly that "integrity" includes "soundness of moral character and honesty"...Look. It. Up. 

Then again on Thursday, May 23, 2013, Barack Obama says:

Journalists should not be at legal risk for doing their jobs. Our focus must be on those who break the law. That is why I have called on Congress to pass a media shield law to guard against government over-reach. I have raised these issues with the Attorney General, who shares my concern. So he has agreed to review existing Department of Justice guidelines governing investigations that involve reporters, and will convene a group of media organizations to hear their concerns as part of that review. And I have directed the Attorney General to report back to me by July 12th.

Are you kidding me? That is like asking a pedophile to babysit your children. (It is analogy, not saying Holder is a pedophile)

I suppose like the Benghazi attack, the AP phone records seizure, the IRS targeting conservatives scandals, Fast and Furious, and Solyndra, etc....Obama will again claim he knew nothing about it, until he read the NBC report about Holder personally signing off on the warrant against Rosen?

Note to Obama- Plausible deniability only works when it is, you know, plausible!

Obama's 'War on Journalism' Unites Liberal And Conservative News Outlets and Bloggers

By Susan Duclos

It is a rare day when you see the ultra-liberal New York Times editorial board unite and speak up in defense of Fox News...a rarer day when far left progressive liberal bloggers do the same, yet that day is today, that scandal is the Obama Department of Justice's out of control, over the top, attack against the free press and treating reporters as criminals.

A limited amount of outrage followed the initial reports that Obama's Justice Department had seized the phone records of Associated Press reporters, to later find out that it included 21 phone lines, at five offices, where 100 reporters worked.

Liberal, conservative and outlets ranging in between, all exploded in outrage when the news broke that Fox News reporter, James Rosen, was tracked by the DOJ, his personal email obtained by the DOJ, and in the warrant 30 different phone lines were included and Rosen was named "an aider, and abettor, and / or co-conspirator” in violating the Espionage Act," for doing nothing more than every journalist does, which is report the news by getting sources to talk to them.

Just today, reports show that Rosen's parents' phone was included in the invasion of privacy by Obama's DOJ.

A screen shot of Huffington Post's front page, May 22, 2013, captures the essence of what the White House is facing over this scandal:

Starting with the New York Times' editorial board, headline "Another Chilling Leak Investigation,"which begins with "With the decision to label a Fox News television reporter a possible “co-conspirator” in a criminal investigation of a news leak, the Obama administration has moved beyond protecting government secrets to threatening fundamental freedoms of the press to gather news."

James C. Goodale, who represented The New York Times in the Pentagon Papers case, takes to the opinion pages of the New York Times to declare "Only Nixon Harmed a Free Press More."

The search warrant filed to investigate the Fox News reporter James Rosen proved as many had suspected: President Obama wants to make it a crime for a reporter to talk to a leaker. It is a further example of how President Obama will surely pass President Richard Nixon as the worst president ever on issues of national security and press freedom. 

 Washington Post's Dana Milbank headlines with "In AP, Rosen investigations, government makes criminals of reporters," then proceeds to explain the seriousness of this scandal over the rest that are rocking the Obama administration at the moment.

To treat a reporter as a criminal for doing his job — seeking out information the government doesn’t want made public — deprives Americans of the First Amendment freedom on which all other constitutional rights are based. Guns? Privacy? Due process? Equal protection? If you can’t speak out, you can’t defend those rights, either.

Beyond that, the administration’s actions shatter the president’s credibility and discourage allies who would otherwise defend the administration against bogus accusations such as those involving the Benghazi “talking points.” If the administration is spying on reporters and accusing them of criminality just for asking questions — well, who knows what else this crowd is capable of doing?

Washington Post's Eugene Robinson comes down heavily on the Obama administration.

In other words, since there is no law that makes publishing this classified information illegal, the Justice Department claims that obtaining the information was a violation of the Espionage Act.

Rosen has not been charged. Every investigative reporter, however, has been put on notice.

The Daily Beast's Nick Gillespie addresses Obama's attempt at using  "Shield Law"support in order to bypass the very real criticisms and outrage that are being leveled at him, his administration and his DOJ:

The First Amendment is all the shield law any American needs, especially when it’s supplemented by the protections offered by the Fourth and Fifth Amendments. What we really need is a president who lives by the Constitution more than he nods to it.

That is simply the tip of the iceberg on the liberal media outrage over the Obama administration's attack on the free press in it's "war on journalism."

More surprising is Obama's base supporters, the far left, progressive, liberal blog sites that have absolutely no love for Fox News, yet are uniting with conservatives in shredding the Obama administration and the DOJ for this unprecedented level of disdain for America's free press.

One example is FireDogLake (FDL), which writes "The attack by the Obama Administration on basic journalistic practices could have long lasting impact on the American media, particularly the labeling of a journalist talking to a source of information as “co-conspiracy” in a crime. Even more astounding is the hyper-vigilance being shown against minor leaks of information to journalists when compared to the Justice Department’s blase attitude towards crime on Wall Street which brought actual instability to the country in 2008 or, rather, is a genuine threat to National Security.

Not to mention the White House leaks information to the press constantly. Was Isikoff a co-conspirator? Or is this attack on journalism about something else?"

Glenn Greenwald:

 This newfound theory of the Obama DOJ - that a journalist can be guilty of crimes for "soliciting" the disclosure of classified information - is a means for circumventing those safeguards and criminalizing the act of investigative journalism itself. These latest revelations show that this is not just a theory but one put into practice, as the Obama DOJ submitted court documents accusing a journalist of committing crimes by doing this.

Other liberal journalists' outraged Twitter reactions can be seen at this post, where I embedded them.

The New Yorker's Ryan Lizza actually changed his Twitter profile so it now reads "Washington Correspondent for The New Yorker, Contributor for CNN, aider, abettor and/or co-conspirator."

I seriously doubt when Barack Obama promised to "unite" the country, he meant unite them all against him, yet that is what this attack against free press has done.


Related:

Video- Obama's DOJ Goes After Reporter's Parents!!!

DOJ Out Of Control Attacking Freedom Of Press!! Targeted 30 WH, Fox News Reporters' Phone Records 

Was CBS News Reporter Sharyl Attkisson Targeted By Obama's DOJ Too?

AP Phone Record Seizure Scandal: DOJ Subpoena Covered Phone Lines Where 100 Reporters Worked

Obama's DOJ Tracks Reporters Movements, Obtains Personal Emails; Journalists Unite Against DOJ

Video- Obama's DOJ Goes After Reporter's Parents!!!

By Susan Duclos

I said last night Obama's DOJ is completely out of control in their attacks against free press in what is being dubbed the "Obama's war on journalism."

Reports on the Obama administrations attack on the free press just keeps on coming, as The New Yorker's Ryan Lizza obtains documents showing that the Justice Department went further than reports showed yesterday in tracking and obtaining the personal emails of Fox News reporter James Rosen, then the update that up to three Fox News staffers were targeted, but now, "lawyers for Justice Department seized phone records from two staffers at the White House and five Fox News reporters, bringing the total to 30 people overall."

But this...... truly is over the top.

Bret Baier reveals Obama's DOJ phone records seizure includes the parents of Fox News reporter James Rosen.

[WATCH]



As I pointed out last night: This is on top of the AP phone record seizure scandal already rocking the Obama administration, where 21 phone lines, in five different offices were covered by the overly broad Department of Justice subpoenas. Four of those offices held a total of 100 reporters.

 Bonus video- National Public Radio’s Cokie Roberts, on MSNBC's Morning Joe, blasts the Obama administration calling the whole thing "an attack on the American press... big time."

[WATCH]



Related:

DOJ Out Of Control Attacking Freedom Of Press!! Targeted 30 WH, Fox News Reporters' Phone Records 

Was CBS News Reporter Sharyl Attkisson Targeted By Obama's DOJ Too?

AP Phone Record Seizure Scandal: DOJ Subpoena Covered Phone Lines Where 100 Reporters Worked

Obama's DOJ Tracks Reporters Movements, Obtains Personal Emails; Journalists Unite Against DOJ

  

DOJ Out Of Control Attacking Freedom Of Press!! Targeted 30 WH, Fox News Reporters' Phone Records

By Susan Duclos

Reports on the Obama administrations attack on the free press just keeps on coming, as The New Yorker's Ryan Lizza obtains documents showing that the Justice Department went further than reports showed yesterday in tracking and obtaining the personal emails of Fox News reporter James Rosen, then the update that up to three Fox News staffers were targeted, but now, "lawyers for Justice Department seized phone records from two staffers at the White House and five Fox News reporters, bringing the total to 30 people overall."

In all, Ronald C. Machen, Jr., the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, has seized records associated with over thirty different phone numbers. In the filing that included the new information, the last four digits of each telephone line targeted by the Obama Administration are redacted. Two of the numbers begin with area code 202 and the exchange 456, which, according to current and former Administration officials, are used exclusively by the White House. (The phone number for the White House switchboard is (202) 456-1414.)

At least five other numbers targeted by the government include the area code 202 and the exchange 824. The phone number for the Fox News Washington bureau, which is publicly available, is (202) 824-0001. Rosen’s work phone number at Fox News begins with the same area code and exchange.

William Miller, a spokesman for the U.S. Attorney, told The New Yorker this afternoon, “Because that information is sealed, I can’t confirm the owner or subscriber for any of those records.” Asked if the phone numbers of any reporters had been targeted in the Kim investigation, Miller said he could not comment.

 More:

But e-mail and phone records were not the only information collected about journalists. According to another document in the case, “the United States has also produced a CD containing voluminous [Department of State] badge records for media personnel for the period March 1, 2009, through September 30, 2009.”

Rosen declined to comment on the case. Asked if the phone numbers of any reporters had been targeted in the Kim investigation, a spokesperson for Fox News said they were not familiar with the new information regarding Fox’s phone records and directed The New Yorker to a statement released yesterday by Michael Clemente, the executive vice-president for News at the cable channel: “We are outraged to learn today that James Rosen was named a criminal co-conspirator for simply doing his job as a reporter. In fact, it is downright chilling. We will unequivocally defend his right to operate as a member of what up until now has always been a free press.”

See the list of phone numbers and the document obtained by Lizza at The New Yorker.

This is on top of the AP phone record seizure scandal already rocking the Obama administration, where 21 phone lines, in five different offices were covered by the overly broad Department of Justice subpoenas. Four of those offices held a total of 100 reporters.

The Obama administration and his Justice Department are completely out of control in their unprecedented widespread attack against America's free press.

Pew: Plurality Believe Obama Administration Involved In IRS Decision To Target Conservatives

By Susan Duclos

Pew Research polled the different controversies rocking the Obama administration, including the AP phone record seizure and the Benghazi investigation, but the numbers on the IRS scandal where IRS officials deliberately and systematically targeted conservatives groups like the Tea Party, Patriot groups and 9/12 groups, among others,  show that a plurality of those paying attention to the scandal, believe the Obama administration was "involved in the decision to target conservative groups."

Overall, 42% say the Obama administration was involved in the decision to target conservative groups. Fewer (31%) say that the decision to target conservative groups was made by IRS employees without administration involvement, while 27% offer no opinion.

Not surprisingly, opinions about this are highly partisan. Nearly seven-in-ten Republicans (69%) say the administration was involved in the IRS’s decision to target conservative groups, compared with just 12% who say the decision was made by IRS employees. By contrast, just 21% of Democrats say the administration was involved, while 54% say IRS employees made the decision to target conservative groups. By a 44% to 28% margin, more independents say the administration was involved in the IRS decision than say it was not.

Those who followed the IRS story at least fairly closely (50% of the public) express similar views about the administration’s involvement: 49% say the administration was involved while 35% say it was not. But partisan differences are wider among this attentive segment of the population; fully 78% of Republicans who have followed the story believe the administration was involved in the decision to target conservative groups, while 63% of attentive Democrats say the decision came from IRS employees.

One would expect the level of distrust for the Obama administration by Republicans to be as high as it is, as they would also expect the level to be as low from Obama's own party, the Democrats.

The level of distrust by Independents who believe the Obama administration was involved in the decision to target conservatives, 44 percent overall and 48 percent among Independents following the story very or fairly closely, is quite high.

While some recent polls show the same type of distrust, they assert that Obama's overall approval rating hasn't suffered, but since the IRS and AP scandals were brought to light just a couple weeks ago and there have been continuous new revelations each week, sometimes daily revelations, that approval will undoubtedly start dwindling when the public becomes more aware of  those newly revealed details.

Was CBS News Reporter Sharyl Attkisson Targeted By Obama's DOJ Too?

By Susan Duclos

Considering what has been revealed so far with the Obama Department of Justice (DOJ) seizing the Associated Press' (AP) phone records and their secret subpoena of 21 phone lines, covering five offices where 100 reporters work and the recent news that a Fox News reporter was tracked and his personal email account obtained by the DOJ, the timing of the computer breaches of Emmy-award winning CBS News investigative reporter, Sharyl Attkisson, is suspicious, to say the least.

Attkisson told WPHT that irregular activity on her computer was first identified in Feb. 2011, when she was reporting on the Fast and Furious gun-walking scandal and on the Obama administration's green energy spending, which she said "the administration was very sensitive about." Attkisson has also been a persistent investigator of the events surrounding last year's attack in Benghazi, and its aftermath.

Attkisson, nor CBS News, is accusing the DOJ of this breach of her personal and work computers, but are diligently investigating to determine who is behind them.

"I can confirm that an intrusion of my computers has been under some investigation on my end for some months but I'm not prepared to make an allegation against a specific entity today as I've been patient and methodical about this matter," Attkisson told POLITICO on Tuesday. "I need to check with my attorney and CBS to get their recommendations on info we make public."

In an earlier interview with WPHT Philadelphia, Attkisson said that though she did not know the full details of the intrustion, "there could be some relationship between these things and what's happened to James [Rosen]," the Fox News reporter who became the subject of a Justice Dept. investigation after reporting on CIA intelligence about North Korea in 2009.

The timing of her Fast and furious reports, along with White House officials screaming and cursing at her for exclusive, damning reports about the gun-walking operation, along with the recent attack on the freedom of press by the Obama administration, makes the headlined question valid and appropriate.

 "Was CBS News Reporter Sharyl Attkisson Targeted By Obama's DOJ Too?"

IRS and AP Phone Scandals: Video - Piers Morgan Admits Obama Admin Showing Tyrannical Behavior

By Susan Duclos

I am a little late posting this video but after watching the 3:12 minute clip there are a few points made that are noteworthy.

First Morgan admits that despite his laughing at Second Amendment supporters when they say the right to bear arms is inherent to the ability to protect against governmental tyranny, because he used to think that was a "ridiculous" argument, the IRS scandal where the agency deliberately targeted conservatives (the list is still growing) and the AP phone scandal where the DOJ seized reporters' phone records, is "vaguely" and "bordering" on tyranny.

There is more, like the discussion on how liberals say "the Republicans are going to be all over this," then admitting they should be as should every Democrat.

[WATCH]



Makes you wonder if Morgan has the integrity to call each and every one of those people he "laughed at" and called "ridiculous" when they spoke of protection against tyranny, and apologize for his arrogant dismissal of their very real points.

Maybe making a public apology for comparing Tea Party supporters to "Hitler and Mussolini" followers?

Heh, yeah, those were rhetorical questions because that would take some kind of honor.

AP Phone Record Seizure Scandal: DOJ Subpoena Covered Phone Lines Where 100 Reporters Worked

By Susan Duclos

You know journalists are outraged when you see liberal media outlets rallying around Fox News as evidenced in my previous piece and they were already annoyed, to put it mildly, before that, when the mainstream media became aware that the DOJ had secretly seized some Associated Press phone records.

Well these next two little tidbits should make their heads explode.

First, Open Channel at NBC News reports that the initial reports of the DOJ seizing the phone records of a few reporters, severely understated the scope of the DOJ seizure and in reality 21 phone lines, in five different offices were covered by the overly broad Department of Justice subpoenas. Four of those offices held a total of 100 reporters.

The Justice Department’s secret subpoena for AP phone records included the seizure of records for five reporters' cellphones and three home phones as well as two fax lines, a lawyer for the news organization tells NBC News.

David Schulz, the chief lawyer for the AP, said the subpoenas also covered the records for 21 phone lines in five AP office lines -- including one for a dead phone line at  office in Washington that had been shut down six years ago. The phone lines at four other offices – where  100 reporters worked — were also covered by the subpoenas, Schulz said.

Although AP had given general information about the subpoenas last week, it provided new details Monday about the number of cell and home phone records as it considers possible legal action against the Justice Department.

The next tidbit updates the news that set journalists off this morning about the DOJ tracking the movements of a FOX News reporter, James Rosen as well as obtaining his personal email account, with a breaking report that in reality, three news staffers, two reporters and one producer all had their emails show up in a IG report regarding Fast and Furious.

Fox News reports that three Fox staffers, two reporters and one producer, were targeted by Barack Obama's Justice Department. Fox doesn't have all the details yet on reporter William La Jeunesse and producer Mike Levine, but their emails showed up in a IG report regarding Fast and Furious. Either their emails were leaked by the Justice Department officials they were sent to, or the email accounts of both were subpoenaed and invaded by government investigators.

The IG report does say that subpoenas were issued to obtain emails. Whose email was targeted is not yet known.

 Fox News and Associated Press...... reporters from every news outlet have to wondering about now if any of their sources are safe, if their privacy was invaded and if they too will become a target of the Obama administration.

Hell of a thanks for all they have done for Obama, huh?

Prominent Liberal Radio Host Calls For Attorney General Eric Holder's Dismissal

By Susan Duclos

Liberal talk radio host, Bill Press, described by The Hill as a "prominent" liberal voice, is calling for the ouster of Attorney General Eric Holder, over the AP phone record scandal, just one of the scandals that seems to be rocking Washington DC this month.

What "breach of national security" are we talking about re the AP story? It's BS and Holder should be fired.
— Bill Press (@bpshow) May 16, 2013

With his tweets, Press becomes one of the first prominent liberal voices to call for the dismissal of Holder over the records seizure.

The Justice Department said in a letter to The Associated Press on Friday that it had gathered records on at least 20 office, cell phone, and home phone numbers — including the AP's desk in the House of Representatives press gallery

This puts Mr. Press in the same boat as Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus, who also called for Holder's dismissal.

“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," said Priebus in a statement.

"Because Attorney General Holder has so egregiously violated the public trust, the president should ask for his immediate resignation. If President Obama does not, the message will be unmistakable: The President of the United States believes his administration is above the Constitution and does not respect the role of a free press,” he added.

According to Michael Sneed, at Chicago Sun-Times, plans to oust Holder in a way that leaves his "reputation intact," is already being discussed at the White House and Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick's name is being bandied about as a possible replacement for Holder.

As evidenced by the recent headlines and the shredding of White House spokesman Jay Carney at Tuesday's White House press briefing, the media has abandoned their "circle the Obama wagon" mentality, for now, and another article from The Hill reports that Barack Obama is attempting to "win back" the press by "wooing" them.

To bolster President Obama’s free-press credentials, the White House announced Wednesday it had asked Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) to reintroduce a press shield law that would allow media organizations to challenge subpoenas of phone records and offer legal protections for protecting confidential sources.

Will it work or is it too little, too late?

More importantly, why did it take going after one of their own, the AP, for the mainstream media to start doing their job?

The IRS, AP Phone Scandals Show The Bigger Government Gets, The More Tyrannical it Becomes

By Susan Duclos

Tyranny- Oppressive power exerted by government--- Merriam Webster dictionary.

It has been a very, very bad month for Barack Obama and his big government ideology as scandal upon scandal pile upon each other in fast succession, two of which clearly provide ample evidence of what conservatives have been attempting to communicate to voters for decades.

The bigger government gets, the more tyrannical it gets.

Even before the release of the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration report, segments of the report were being doled out, and with each new revelation, the scope of the IRS targeting of conservatives grew bigger and bigger.

It isn't paranoia if they really are after you.........and liberals can no longer claim that the specific targeting of conservative groups by the IRS, while fast tracking approval for liberal groups, is all in the minds of those paranoid conservatives.

Right smack dab in the middle of the leaked information about the IRS targeting, before the actual investigative report was released, came another shocking revelation.

Obama's Department of Justice had seized a broad swath of Associated Press phone records, which many consider a massive violation of the First Amendment right to free press.

Before both these events blew up into the scandals they are becoming with each new revelation, the Benghazi hearings provided live coverage of whistle-blowers, and their testimony about failures on the part of the Obama administration before and during the 911/12 terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya, which resulted in death of four Americans.

Making it worse, their testimony and leaked talking points emails, shows that Obama and his officials lied to the American public about the attack, to which Obama, according to Washington Post's The Fact Checker, is still lying to the American people about.

All this is happening at the same time that Barack Obama and liberals are trying to convince the American public that government should also be in control of their healthcare, as the roll out of Obamacare marches along.

Oh and let's not forget how entwined Obamacare is with the IRS, as the irony of the next headline shows "Obamacare: Taxpayers Must Report Personal Health ID Info to IRS."

Politico, in a four-page article, manages to capture this perfect storm and how Barack Oama is standng right in the middle of it:

The narrative is personal. The uproars over alleged politicization of the IRS and far-reaching attempts to monitor journalists and their sources have not been linked directly to Obama. But it does not strain credulity to suggest that Obama’s well-known intolerance for leaks, and his regular condemnations of conservative dark-money groups, could have filtered down to subordinates.

The narrative is ideological. For five years, this president has been making the case that a growing and activist government has good intentions and can carry these intentions out with competence. Conservatives have warned that government is dangerous, and even good intentions get bungled in the execution. In different ways, the IRS uproar, the Justice Department leak investigations, the Benghazi tragedy and the misleading attempts to explain it, and the growing problems with implementation of health care reform all bolster the conservative worldview.

Not only is scandal roiling through the Obama administration, but the mainstream media who insulated him and protected him when Solyndra and Fast and Furious became front page news, do not seem so inclined to protect him now that Obama's DOJ has attacked one of their own.

Take a look at some of the headlines coming from the media now.

New York Times- "Spying on The Associated Press"

Politico- "Obama's dangerous new narrative"

The Hill- "Rangel: Obama hasn't fully explained DOJ phone records seizure"

Washington Post- "Obama, the uninterested president"

USA Today- "IRS approved liberal groups while Tea Party in limbo "

ABC News- "IRS Asks for Reading List, Tea Party Group Sends Constitution"

That is just a small sample from Memeorandum.

The media isn't the only entity distancing themselves, for the moment, from Barack Obama.

Seems establishment Democrats, not to be mistaken with progressive liberal Democrats, are also turning against him as Politico points out with the headline "D.C. Turns On Obama"

The town is turning on President Obama — and this is very bad news for this White House.

Republicans have waited five years for the moment to put the screws to Obama — and they have one-third of all congressional committees on the case now. Establishment Democrats, never big fans of this president to begin with, are starting to speak out. And reporters are tripping over themselves to condemn lies, bullying and shadiness in the Obama administration.

Flashback- "Oh I think that, you know, as president I bear responsibility for everything--to some degree. "--- Barack Obama, 60 Minutes

[Update] Townhall has the video of Obama, last week, telling The Ohio State University graduating students:

"Unfortunately you've grown up hearing voices that incessantly warn of government as nothing more than some separate, sinister entity that's at the root of all of our problems. Some of these same voices do their best to gum up the works. They'll warn that tyranny is always lurking just around the corner. You should reject these voices. Because what they suggest is that our brave and creative and unique experiment in self rule is somehow just a sham with which we can't be trusted."

You think he might have had an inkling of the firestorm that was about to hit his administration?

Video- Eric Holder Recuses Himself From Leak Investigation; Update- RNC Calls For Holder's Resignation

By Susan Duclos

Attorney General Eric Holder recused himself from the decision to subpoena phone records of Associated Press journalists.

Watch the press conference below:



[Update] RNC reaction:

Today, RNC Chairman Reince Priebus called on U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder to resign after the revelation that he allowed the Justice Department to monitor Associated Press reporters’ phone conversations in a direct violation of the First Amendment:

“Freedom of the press is an essential right in a free society. The First Amendment doesn’t request the federal government to respect it; it demands it. 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. Because Attorney General Holder has so egregiously violated the public trust, the president should ask for his immediate resignation. If President Obama does not, the message will be unmistakable: The President of the United States believes his administration is above the Constitution and does not respect the role of a free press.

Other headlines: (Via Memeorandum)

The Hill- Holder recused himself from DOJ decision to seize AP records

TownHall- BREAKING: Eric Holder Recuses Himself From Leak Investigation

Associated Press, via New York Times- Facing Controversies, White House Dodges Queries (Changed Headline- Justice Dept. Opens Criminal Inquiry Into I.R.S. Audits)

The Hill- Carl Bernstein: AP phone subpoena ‘outrageous, totally inexcusable’

Fox News- Holder says AP probe handled by deputy after he recused himself

New York Times- Phone Records of Journalists Seized by U.S.

BuzzFeed- The Panopticon President

Obama Administration Secretly Seizes Phone Records of Associated Press Reporters

By Susan Duclos

Obama's Justice Department secretly seized "two months of telephone records of reporters and editors for The Associated Press in what the news cooperative's top executive called a "massive and unprecedented intrusion" into how news organizations gather the news," according to an AP report.

The records obtained by the Justice Department listed outgoing calls for the work and personal phone numbers of individual reporters, for general AP office numbers in New York, Washington and Hartford, Conn., and for the main number for the AP in the House of Representatives press gallery, according to attorneys for the AP. It was not clear if the records also included incoming calls or the duration of the calls.

In all, the government seized the records for more than 20 separate telephone lines assigned to AP and its journalists in April and May of 2012. The exact number of journalists who used the phone lines during that period is unknown, but more than 100 journalists work in the offices where phone records were targeted, on a wide array of stories about government and other matters.

In a letter of protest sent to Attorney General Eric Holder on Monday, AP President and Chief Executive Officer Gary Pruitt said the government sought and obtained information far beyond anything that could be justified by any specific investigation. He demanded the return of the phone records and destruction of all copies.

"There can be no possible justification for such an overbroad collection of the telephone communications of The Associated Press and its reporters. 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," Pruitt said.

Between outright lying to the American people about Benghazi, using IRS to specifically target conservative groups and now this unprecedented intrusion into a media that is supposedly free, the Obama administration is completely out of control.

AP President and Chief Executive Officer Gary Pruitt's letter to Eric Holder embedded below:

Letter to Eric Holder Tcm28 12896 uploaded by Susan Duclos

AP Can Lie About Illegal Immigrants, But It Doesn't Stop Them From Being Illegal Immigrants

By Susan Duclos

Dictionary.com seacrh term "Illegal Immigrant"

Definition: Noun:

1. a foreigner who has entered or resides in a country unlawfully or without the country's authorization.

2. a foreigner who enters the U.S. without an entry or immigrant visa, especially a person who crosses the border by avoiding inspection or who overstays the period of time allowed as a visitor, tourist, or businessperson. 

Merriam-Webster, example of illegal used as a noun:

1. an illegal immigrant - First known use 1939

Legal dictionary, illegal immigrant, noun:

1. illegal immigrant n. an alien (non-citizen) who has entered the United States without government permission or stayed beyond the termination date of a visa

Therefore it is pretty astounding that journalists and media outlets would deliberately misrepresent what an illegal immigrant/alien is to their readers or viewers, by refusing to use the actual dictionary definitions to refer to those that are in the country illegally, hence being  illegal immigrants.

The AP:

The AP Stylebook today is making some changes in how we describe people living in a country illegally.

Senior Vice President and Executive Editor Kathleen Carroll explains the thinking behind the decision:

The Stylebook no longer sanctions the term “illegal immigrant” or the use of “illegal” to describe a person. Instead, it tells users that “illegal” should describe only an action, such as living in or immigrating to a country illegally.

Why did we make the change?

The discussions on this topic have been wide-ranging and include many people from many walks of life. (Earlier, they led us to reject descriptions such as “undocumented,” despite ardent support from some quarters, because it is not precise. A person may have plenty of documents, just not the ones required for legal residence.)

 So, earlier they rejected undocumented because it was "not precise?"

Yet now they are changing their rules and refusing to use the precise, dictionary definition....

Hey AP... here you go... Precise, dictionary definition:

1. definitely or strictly stated, defined, or fixed:

Then for them to attempt to deliberately lie to their readers, and claim that "illegal" should describe only an action, when dictionaries show clearly that it is also used as a noun, makes the AP dishonest. For a media organization to be perceived as deliberate liars and dishonest in their reporting, ruins any an all credibility they might have had left.

Just because the AP and other media outlets don't like a term, doesn't make the term any less accurate.

But refusing to use the correct terminology as defined does make the AP less accurate.

Instapundit Busts AP Changing News Article To Protect Obama

(Quote in question found at the 3:55 mark in the video above)

“Obama needled one questioner who asked about gas prices, now averaging close to $3.70 a gallon nationwide, and suggested that the gentleman consider getting rid of his gas-guzzling vehicle.”-- AP quote, then removed to protect Obama.

The Associated Press is up to their antics again, writing an article then rewriting the article and removing a quote by Barack Obama that makes him seem callous in the face of a concerned citizen over gas prices.

Luckily, Instapundit's Glenn Reynolds saved a screen shot of the original article before it fell through the memory hole.

Obama's exact wording from the original article was "If you're complaining about the price of gas and you're only getting 8 miles a gallon, you know, you might want to think about a trade-in".

Not only did the AP rewrite the article, but they changed the headline from "Obama says little short-term help for gas prices" to "Obama seeks re-election help from Sharpton's group."

They didn't cover their tracks well though because the actual URL reflects the original tittle. (http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Obama-says-little-shortterm-apf-1680912387.html?x=0&.v=4 )

.