« Happy Birthday, USMC | Main | Code Pink Witches Taunt Children of Military Families »
November 10, 2009
Indymedia Moonbats Feel the Heavy Hand of Big Government
Posted by Van Helsing at November 10, 2009 9:35 AM
Even some moonbats are getting unnerved by the Obamination Administration's intrusiveness, hyper-politicization of the media, and aggressive contempt for the First Amendment:
In a case that raises questions about online journalism and privacy rights, the U.S. Department of Justice sent a formal request to an independent news site ordering it to provide details of all reader visits on a certain day.
The grand jury subpoena also required the Philadelphia-based Indymedia.us Web site "not to disclose the existence of this request" unless authorized by the Justice Department, a gag order that presents an unusual quandary for any news organization.
Kristina Clair, a 34-year old Linux administrator living in Philadelphia who provides free server space for Indymedia.us, said she was shocked to receive the Justice Department's subpoena. (The Independent Media Center is a left-of-center amalgamation of journalists and advocates that — according to their principles of unity and mission statement — work toward "promoting social and economic justice" and "social change.")
The subpoena (PDF) from U.S. Attorney Tim Morrison in Indianapolis demanded "all IP traffic to and from www.indymedia.us" on June 25, 2008. It instructed Clair to "include IP addresses, times, and any other identifying information," including e-mail addresses, physical addresses, registered accounts, and Indymedia readers' Social Security Numbers, bank account numbers, credit card numbers, and so on.
Clair turned to the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which dug into whether Big Government is supposed to be able to behave like this.
Under long-standing Justice Department guidelines, subpoenas to members of the news media are supposed to receive special treatment. One portion of the guidelines, for instance, says that "no subpoena may be issued to any member of the news media" without "the express authorization of the attorney general" — that would be current attorney general Eric Holder — and subpoenas should be "directed at material information regarding a limited subject matter."
Still unclear is what criminal investigation U.S. Attorney Morrison was pursuing. Last Friday, a spokeswoman initially promised a response, but Morrison sent e-mail on Monday evening saying: "We have no comment." The Justice Department in Washington, D.C. also declined to respond.
Kevin Bankston, a senior staff attorney at the San Francisco-based Electronic Frontier Foundation, replied to the Justice Department on behalf of his client in a February 2009 letter (PDF) outlining what he described as a series of problems with the subpoena, including that it was not personally served, that a judge-issued court order would be required for the full logs, and that Indymedia did not store logs in the first place.
Morrison replied in a one-sentence letter saying the subpoena had been withdrawn. Around the same time, according to the EFF, the group had a series of discussions with assistant U.S. attorneys in Morrison's office who threatened Clair with possible prosecution for obstruction of justice if she disclosed the existence of the already-withdrawn subpoena…
For more info on this alarming example of applied Obamunist Transparency:
Bankston has written a longer description of the exchange of letters with the Justice Department, which he hopes will raise awareness of how others should respond to similar legal demands for Web logs, customer records, and compulsory silence. "Our fear is that this kind of bogus gag order is much more common than one would hope, considering they're legally baseless," Bankston says. "We're telling this story in hopes that more providers will press back and go public when the government demands their silence."
Hopefully liberals who believe in at least some of the fundamental principles of liberty that make America America will awaken soon to the nature of what they have wrought by allowing the Moonbat Messiah and his gang of skeevy neo-Marxists into the White House.
On a tip from nancz.
Comments
The subpoena (PDF) from U.S. Attorney Tim Morrison in Indianapolis demanded "all IP traffic ... times, and any other identifying information," including e-mail addresses, physical addresses, registered accounts, and Indymedia readers' Social Security Numbers, bank account numbers, credit card numbers, and so on.
Wonder how our resident trolls will defend this?
Oh right: "BUT GEORGE W LISTENED IN ON THE CELL PHONE CALLS OF ISLAMIC JIHADISTS WHO WERE PLEDGED TO KILL ALL AMERICAN INFIDELS!!!!!!1111!!!"
Either that, or dead silence.
From the Leftist playbook: Deflect, Deny, or Discredit the opposition.
Posted by: Anonymous at November 10, 2009 10:39 AM
But on the bright side - score another for Glen Beck! Woohoo!
Posted by: Rob Banks at November 10, 2009 10:48 AM
Its all Bush's fault!
Posted by: Bad Robot! at November 10, 2009 10:59 AM
It almost looks like someone there at the DoJ was trying to pull a massive identity theft scam. And then when called on it Obama's new DoJ covered it up. I wouldn't be surprised... when you hire unsavory people, like Lefists, you get a lot of felonious minded scum-bags.
This needs an investigation. A big investigation.
Posted by: Kevin R. at November 10, 2009 11:25 AM
In fairness, I have seen it alleged that someone on the site was threatening terrorism against workers (and their families) constructing a highway. (You know how nuts this eco-whackos can be, so this is entirely plausible. And Indymedia is basically lunatic HQ, so that's plausible as well.)
If true, full marks to Holder & Co. for following through on this.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at November 10, 2009 11:34 AM
I'd love to see the government issue a subpoena for my small business about my customers, I'd print it out and give a copy to every single customer. Who the hell do they think they are? This isn't some African hellhole where you order people around at gunpoint. People here FIGHT BACK and we don't take this crap!
Posted by: Jay B at November 10, 2009 11:42 AM
Whenever you are ready leftist toads...
Posted by: TED at November 10, 2009 11:46 AM
Posted by: TED at November 10, 2009 11:50 AM
Posted by: TED at November 10, 2009 12:29 PM
The leftist playbook strategy is simple as ABCD
Attack
Bluster
Conceal
Deny.
ABCD
Posted by: Jim at November 10, 2009 12:44 PM
This sounds like a request made possible by The Patriot Act. Little did we know all those namby-pamby liberals opposed that legislation so vigorously because, deep down, they knew their own kind would be most likely to use it against the U.S. citizenry. Irony's a bitch, ain't it?
Posted by: brent at November 10, 2009 2:10 PM
Posted by: brent at November 10, 2009 2:10 PM
Convenient how quickly you forget that Obama was (s)elected to be the Anti-Bush and repeal everything that GWB allegedly messed up.
So if your side cares so much about individual privacy, then why HAVEN'T you repealed the Patriot Act? Why does your side need all that PRIVATE information? Why does your side want to know how its union members vote (ie, "card check")?
Hmmm?
Look in the mirror, moonbat, at everything your side slings at ours.
Posted by: Anonymous at November 10, 2009 2:43 PM
ERIC HOLDER is the jerk who called americans cowards on race issues he is as vile and the rest of obamas cabnet of reptiles
Posted by: Spurwing Plover at November 10, 2009 2:44 PM
This is just the beginning. The libs know that if they don't get a total strangle-hold on the "alternate" media (i.e. the 'net and talk radio), their goose is cooked. Don't misunderstand, the subpoena may have had nothing to do with squelching the media per se, but their "BE SURE AND SAY NOTHING" edict sure does!
IF there was a legit reason for such a subpoena, then (a) it wouldn't have been kept secret and (b) it wouldn't have been withdrawn.
This has nothing to do (brent) with the Patriot Act. This has everything to do with leftist / progressives wanting to finally have complete control over "the message", the media and everyone's lives.
2010, baby!
Posted by: Wyatt's Torch at November 10, 2009 3:27 PM
Well, you asked for a response. The best response I can offer is to link to a PDF of the actual subpoena. Here it is:
Scroll down to the signature on page one.
Notice the date: January 23, 2009. Three days after Obama was sworn in.
Kind of hard for Attorney General Eric Holder to sign off on this since he was confirmed on February 2.
Nice try.
Posted by: Lao at November 10, 2009 4:34 PM
"Kevin Bankston, a senior staff attorney at the San Francisco-based Electronic Frontier Foundation, replied to the Justice Department on behalf of his client in a February 2009 letter (PDF) outlining..."
The above quote is from your own post. Click on the February 2009 Letter link and you will see that link confirms date of the "January 23, 2009" subpoena.
It always helps to actually click the links in the piece you cut and paste, particularly if they call the veracity of your entire "Obama is bad" theme into doubt.
Posted by: Lao at November 10, 2009 4:41 PM
It's not about Obama you idiot... it's about BIG GOVERNMENT. Moron.
Posted by: Gregory of Prescott at November 10, 2009 5:44 PM
Do tell? Here's the first line of the thread:
"Even some moonbats are getting unnerved by the Obamination Administration's intrusiveness, hyper-politicization of the media, and aggressive contempt for the First Amendment".
Posted by: Lao at November 10, 2009 6:00 PM
It's been said that a conservative is a liberal that's been mugged. Well, a bunch of liberals just got mugged by the thugs residing in DC.
How does it feel to be mugged, liberals?
Posted by: Son of Taz at November 10, 2009 6:16 PM
Kind of hard for Attorney General Eric Holder to sign off on this since he was confirmed on February 2.
Last time I checked, today is November 10th. This has been festering around the DoJ since Holder was confirmed, and strangely, he refused to stand in the way.
Since the subpoena is from January, and Federal bureaucracy takes time to work, chances are whatever precipitated this could have plausibly happened in December or November.
Holder had no problem dismissing a case of voter intimidation against armed Black Panthers patrolling an election site in November 2008.
This same tired refrain of "BLAME BUSH" has passed the point of absurdity. Obama is the president, now, so responsibility for what happens in the executive branch rests firmly on his shoulders, seeing as he has had ample time to correct any blatant faults requiring ongoing action in the affirmative.
You liberals tried to pull that excuse with the 2009 Omnibus pork bill. The lousy Bush excuse fell flat then.
Posted by: Anonymous Countermoonbat at November 10, 2009 6:28 PM
Uh-huh. We have a Department of Justice investigation that you admit, must have been initiated during the tenure of the previous administration.
That didn't stop Van Helsing from editorializing:
"Hopefully liberals who believe in at least some of the fundamental principles of liberty that make America America will awaken soon to the nature of what they have wrought by allowing the Moonbat Messiah and his gang of skeevy neo-Marxists into the White House."
Now you suggest, that the "fundamental principles of liberty" that the previous administration violated, must be upheld by Obama.
In other words, yet again, Obama has the responsibility to clean up the mess the Bush administration left behind.
Liberals are aware that in the priority scheme of things, the Obama administration will deal with this in their own good time.
Posted by: Lao at November 10, 2009 6:40 PM
Uh-huh. We have a Department of Justice investigation that you admit, must have been initiated during the tenure of the previous administration.
In other words, yet again, Obama has the responsibility to clean up the mess the Bush administration left behind.
Obama is simply accelerating the pace at which Big Government metastasizes.
I'm still waiting on leaders to clean up the Constitutional mess that FDR left behind.
Liberals are aware that in the priority scheme of things, the Obama administration will deal with this in their own good time.
Liberals seem to share the view of Big Government that the First and Fourth Amendments are negotiable suggestions.
Posted by: Anonymous Countermoonbat at November 10, 2009 7:17 PM
(a) Liberal / progressives LOVE to parse words, manipulate minute details (which they seem to have a trillion of at their fingertips at all times) and avoid the point (in this case, intrusive big government).
(b) They are strangely silent when they get caught with their pants down. "If it isn't convenient, ignore it."
Hey Lao. Get this will you: WE ARE NOT BUSH-BOTS. He hosed it in many ways, and we're not about to make excuses for things done wrong. He wasn't our "leader" or messiah, he was a (sometimes) conservative politician. When he was off base (Dubai ports, Harriet Meirs, amnesty for illegals, "stimulus" 1) we called him on it.
Tomorrow is Veteran's Day. Maybe you should go to a Vet's memorial service in your town and chant anti-war slogans at the families of the fallen. That should make you feel like the tolerant, inclusive, broad-minded liberal hero that you are.
Posted by: Wyatt's Torch at November 10, 2009 11:20 PM
You should look at how someone on YOUR side dishonored a tribute to the troops and used name-highjacking to try to smear me on the "Honor our Servicemen and Servicewomen" thread.
Check out the videos I linked to see where I stand as opposed to your silly assumptions.
Posted by: Lao at November 11, 2009 9:54 AM
a) I had never heard of this investigation until yesterday. As I already pointed out, "intrusive big government" is not the issue that Moonbattery presented, it is "intrusive big OBAMA government".
Sorry that a "small detail" like the date the subpoena was issued, 3 days after Obama took office, blows that theory out of the water. Sorry that your anti-Holder message is likewise destroyed since he wasn't attorney general yet.
b) Um, doesn't this exactly describe how you yourself just responded when I happened to expose this theory as being phony, with facts, the lead thread itself provided?
I am willing to accept you all are not "Bush-Bots". I have no problem whatsoever in understanding that there is a range of opinion on the right, about every different issue.
You should try to grasp that the same thing applies to the left.
Posted by: Lao at November 11, 2009 10:05 AM
