AP blasts feds for phone records search
By Matt Smith and Joe Johns, CNN
updated 9:47 PM EDT, Mon May 13, 2013
AP CEO: 'no justification' for seizure
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
- NEW: There'd better be a "damned good explanation" for subpoenas, Boehner spokesman says
- NEW: Federal review of AP phone records is unprecedented but looks legal, Toobin says
- The AP calls the subpoenas a "massive and unprecedented intrusion"
- It says federal agents collected records from bureau and personal phone lines
(CNN) -- The Justice Department secretly collected
two months of telephone records for reporters and editors at The
Associated Press, the news service disclosed Monday in an outraged
letter to Attorney General Eric Holder.
The records included
calls from several AP bureaus and the personal phone lines of several
staffers, AP President Gary Pruitt wrote. Pruitt called the subpoenas a
"massive and unprecedented intrusion" into its reporting.
"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," wrote Pruitt, the news agency's CEO.
The AP reported that the
government has not said why it wanted the records. But it noted that
U.S. officials have said they were probing how details of a foiled bomb
plot that targeted a U.S.-bound aircraft leaked in May 2012. The news
agency said records from five reporters and an editor who worked on a
story about the plot were among those collected, but it said none of the
information the government has shared with it suggested agents listened
in on any reporters' calls.
Abrams: That's not America at its best
Issa: Justice probe into AP is 'disturbing'
The news immediately raised questions among members of Congress.
"The First Amendment is
first for a reason," said Michael Steel, a spokesman for House Speaker
John Boehner. "If the Obama administration is going after reporters'
phone records, they better have a damned good explanation."
The subpoenas were
disclosed to the news agency on Friday, Pruitt wrote. In all, federal
agents collected records from more than 20 lines, including personal
phones and AP phone numbers in New York; Hartford, Connecticut; and
Washington, he wrote.
"We regard this action by
the Department of Justice as a serious interference with AP's
constitutional rights to gather and report the news," he told Holder.
Pruitt demanded that the department return all records collected and
destroy all copies.
The U.S. attorney's
office in Washington responded that federal investigators seek phone
records from news outlets only after making "every reasonable effort to
obtain information through alternative means." It did not disclose the
subject of the probe.
"We must notify the
media organization in advance unless doing so would pose a substantial
threat to the integrity of the investigation," it said. "Because we
value the freedom of the press, we are always careful and deliberative
in seeking to strike the right balance between the public interest in
the free flow of information and the public interest in the fair and
effective administration of our criminal laws."
CNN legal analyst
Jeffrey Toobin said the Obama administration "has been incredibly
aggressive" about prosecuting leakers, and there's no privilege in
federal law that allows reporters to protect their sources. But he said
past administrations have avoided going that far.
"I have never heard of a
subpoena this broad," Toobin said. "It's legal, as far as I can tell.
The administration isn't violating the First Amendment. But they are
certainly doing more than has ever been done before in pursuing the
private information of journalists. And we'll see if there's any
political check on them, because there doesn't appear to be any legal
check on what they're doing."
The White House was unaware of the subpoenas, spokesman Jay Carney told reporters Monday night.
"We are not involved in
decisions made in connection with criminal investigations, as those
matters are handled independently by the Justice Department," Carney
said.
Holder announced in June
2012 that he had assigned two U.S. attorneys to lead investigations
into the possible leaking of state secrets, and members of Congress have
complained about disclosures of electronic warfare campaigns against
Iran, U.S. drone attacks overseas and Obama's personal involvement in
"kill lists" of militants in Yemen and Pakistan.
But Pruitt wrote that
most of the records collected from the AP "can have no plausible
connection to any ongoing investigation," and the American Civil
Liberties Union called on the Justice Department to explain its actions.
"Obtaining a broad range
of telephone records in order to ferret out a government leaker is an
unacceptable abuse of power," Ben Wizner, the head of the ACLU's Speech,
Privacy, and Technology Project, said in a written statement. "Freedom
of the press is a pillar of our democracy, and that freedom often
depends on confidential communications between reporters and their
sources."
In a statement issued
Monday night, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy said, "I
am very troubled by these allegations and want to hear the government's
explanation."
"The burden is always on
the government when they go after private information -- especially
information regarding the press or its confidential sources," said
Leahy, D-Vermont. "I want to know more about this case, but on the face
of it, I am concerned that the government may not have met that burden."
And Rep. Darrell Issa,
R-California, told CNN that the Justice Department already has the
ability "to listen, very transparently, to all the government phones and
government activities."
"You can imagine if
Congress wanted to know about leaks that obviously came out of the
administration that ended up in the press, they would be outraged if we
tried to get that information," said Issa, a member of the House
Judiciary Committee and a leading critic of Holder. "But that's exactly
what they're doing. They're looking at what is considered to be
confidential."
