Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: The AP's being investigated by a grand jury for who they coordinated with in Congress over the leak. [View all]DevonRex
(22,541 posts)32. Hahaha!!!!
Well, just look at you, with your infantile perfect grammar and spelling! Best leave the investigating to the professionals.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
170 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
The AP's being investigated by a grand jury for who they coordinated with in Congress over the leak. [View all]
msanthrope
May 2013
OP
This is going to circle right back to a Republican leaking classified information, yet once again.
Ikonoklast
May 2013
#1
The House of Reps AP phone wasn't subpoenaed for nothing...and why won't they release the 'letter?'
msanthrope
May 2013
#4
I am starting to wonder when the Republicans in Congress will start screaming in unison
Ikonoklast
May 2013
#7
Here's something interesting--it wasn't done by National Security Letter....
msanthrope
May 2013
#19
No Patriot Act or NDAA--plain old DC grand jury....and here's the thing on the letter
msanthrope
May 2013
#24
Yep. I'm willing bet there are some Republican undies getting fudged right about now.
Ikonoklast
May 2013
#29
Yep. And the MSM will suddenly decide this story isn't "news worthy". n/t
bushisanidiot
May 2013
#38
I think you got it - all with due process - AP's cred will go down with the pubbies.
freshwest
May 2013
#128
Well, if I was an investigative journalist, I might ask why a major news organization
msanthrope
May 2013
#6
It will show just how far in the tank the AP is for them, sucking up to Republicans
Ikonoklast
May 2013
#9
Yes--on the rest of thread there is a bit of a debate about that. I would like it answered, and
msanthrope
May 2013
#133
You know, we have investigative journalists on this board. I want some answers. nt
msanthrope
May 2013
#11
I have a confession--dyslexia forces me to use the spell check. When I don't,
msanthrope
May 2013
#33
The bad economy, the failure of Occupy, etc. has made for some understandable disgruntlement, IMO.
randome
May 2013
#26
This is one of those scenarios in which I think I know only 50% of the relevant information
LanternWaste
May 2013
#16
Facts are good, and one might wonder why the AP isn't showing a major one---the
msanthrope
May 2013
#22
The letter from the government to the AP would have the code section under which
msanthrope
May 2013
#27
OP claims "letter" is actually a Grand Jury Subpoena in a nat'l security case. Says AP can't
leveymg
May 2013
#36
Well, wait a second--has the AP said it isn't legally releaseable? Why are they being
msanthrope
May 2013
#45
Ah, but gang of 8 means the Majority and Minority Leaders plus Chair and Ranking Members of Intel Co
hedda_foil
May 2013
#95
Somehow, I don't see Boehner in that role, but Cantor? Wouldn't surprise me. n/t
winter is coming
May 2013
#109
They could redact it or they could state it is a GJ matter. Or they could say they can't say.
randome
May 2013
#52
I believe the OP is incorrect. Fed Rule of Cr P 6(e) states that a witness can reveal info re FedGJ
leveymg
May 2013
#64
Here's the AP email address: [email protected]. Unless someone knows of a better one.
randome
May 2013
#28
I'm trying to find Gary Pruitt's...there's a 2nd letter he's not releasing, and
msanthrope
May 2013
#35
People have worked themselves into such a conspiracy frenzy about this President
Voice for Peace
May 2013
#49
Let's hope this tidbit settles down all the freakazoids calling for Holder's head
railsback
May 2013
#47
More interesting is the role of the AP in this--if the leaker is a Republican, then
msanthrope
May 2013
#53
Looks like a vaible timeline, and points directly at a Republican operation.
Ikonoklast
May 2013
#60
Between this and the story about the Repubs deliberately falsifying emails re: Benghazi
Number23
May 2013
#70
I am giving this a standing ovation. Very good news that is fit to print!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Anansi1171
May 2013
#57
OP- Please cite a source for your claim that a subpoenaed witness cannot publish an subpoena
leveymg
May 2013
#63
It's possible there's a sealed indictment that may have sealed records including subpoenas (Rule 6).
leveymg
May 2013
#83
If there's a sealed indictment, the subpoenas may also be sealed. The witness can talk about their
leveymg
May 2013
#106
You're conflating a few different things ...but again, why haven't they published?
msanthrope
May 2013
#110
When an indictment is sealed, the court docs - including the subpoenas - normally are, as well.
leveymg
May 2013
#126
Like I said....you are conflating a few different things. But you seem to have conceded the point
msanthrope
May 2013
#134
No...I mean I cannot hotlink off this friggin' phone. If you are in Lexis, though,
msanthrope
May 2013
#146
In addition to the absence of support for such a claim, it seems that there is an absence of
AnotherMcIntosh
May 2013
#68
My dear former IRS lawyer...would you care to look at 6e (3)(B)(5) in the DOJ handbook
msanthrope
May 2013
#74
Then they should be upfront about that -state that they cannot publish because of that reason.
randome
May 2013
#78
Msanthrope, I'd take one of you over 5 dozen of the Hair on Fire Brigade any damn day of the week
Number23
May 2013
#69
The title of the OP makes a concrete claim (AP's being investigated by GJ) then doesn't back it up.
cherokeeprogressive
May 2013
#88
If it's a fact that the AP is the object of a GJ investigation I apologixe.
cherokeeprogressive
May 2013
#92
Actually, thank you for proving my point--where is that letter? They keep referring
msanthrope
May 2013
#105
No, comrade, I am not a "Party official." Seriously, though, I do work for various
msanthrope
May 2013
#137
There are some Party people on this site. I think it's up to them to say who
msanthrope
May 2013
#165
Absolutely no wiretap. This is a subpeona of certain business records, allowed
msanthrope
May 2013
#159
Perhaps we, the public, should start demanding that the AP release the letter. Produce the letter.
Skidmore
May 2013
#148
I remember Romney's smirk when he jumped on the Benghazi event with mostly wrong information. nt
patrice
May 2013
#155