zlacker

[parent] [thread] 14 comments
1. Turing+(OP)[view] [source] 2021-06-05 22:52:47
> President Joe Biden recently criticized the policy, saying it's "simply wrong" to seize journalists' records.

The FBI is part of DOJ, which is an executive branch department under Biden's direct authority. If he thinks it's "simply wrong", he can just order them not to do it. He's not limited to "criticizing" it.

replies(3): >>bowmes+e >>Sebgue+C >>jrockw+t2
2. bowmes+e[view] [source] 2021-06-05 22:55:07
>>Turing+(OP)
Good point. I'm not sure he's even aware of that option, unfortunately.
replies(2): >>hellow+y >>GavinM+D
◧◩
3. hellow+y[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-06-05 22:58:29
>>bowmes+e
Oh, he is. But it's good PR to make positive statements while doing whatever you want.
replies(1): >>Sebgue+J
4. Sebgue+C[view] [source] 2021-06-05 22:59:32
>>Turing+(OP)
He did:

"Going forward, consistent with the President's direction, this Department of Justice – in a change to its longstanding practice – will not seek compulsory legal process in leak investigations to obtain source information from members of the news media doing their jobs," Justice Department spokesman Anthon Coley said in a statement Saturday.

replies(2): >>tootie+2c >>mr_toa+jc
◧◩
5. GavinM+D[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-06-05 22:59:55
>>bowmes+e
Are you suggesting he's senile? Stupid? It's not clear why you'd think someone with Biden's political experience would be unaware that the President is the head of the executive branch.
replies(1): >>Superm+D1
◧◩◪
6. Sebgue+J[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-06-05 23:01:12
>>hellow+y
He literally did ban the practice, though, and the quoted line is after the reporting saying he did so?
replies(1): >>hellow+o2
◧◩◪
7. Superm+D1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-06-05 23:10:17
>>GavinM+D
> Are you suggesting he's senile?

Forgetful at the very least. Senile is unnecessarily pejorative. He's an old man who doesnt do much more than make political speeches in public.

> Biden's political experience

His team's political experience is more important, like almost all POTUS before him.

◧◩◪◨
8. hellow+o2[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-06-05 23:19:10
>>Sebgue+J
No he did not. He gave a "direction". Which, legally, means almost nothing.

> “Going forward, consistent with the President’s direction, this Department of Justice – in a change to its longstanding practice – will not seek compulsory legal process in leak investigations to obtain source information from members of the news media doing their jobs,” Anthony Coley, Justice Department spokesman, said in a statement.

They are changing a "practice".

One uses laws to prevent practices one does not like, not "directions".

replies(2): >>ncalla+53 >>colejo+34
9. jrockw+t2[view] [source] 2021-06-05 23:20:15
>>Turing+(OP)
I think the article is conflating two points. Biden banned the practice of compelling journalists to provide the identity of their sources. That is totally unrelated to this subpoena, which is attempting to get a list of people that read a certain article.

Obviously it's also wrong to seek this information, but it's not what Biden was talking about in the quote.

◧◩◪◨⬒
10. ncalla+53[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-06-05 23:27:15
>>hellow+o2
> One uses laws to prevent practices one does not like, not "directions".

If you want a law to prevent this I'm not sure why you're criticizing Biden. He is the President, no the Legislature.

If you think there should be a law, then your complaint should be for congress.

replies(1): >>hellow+WJ
◧◩◪◨⬒
11. colejo+34[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-06-05 23:38:38
>>hellow+o2
Well, considering the DOJ is under his control, it’s not a “direction”, but a “law” of sorts. Actual laws come from Congress, which Biden doesn’t control.
replies(1): >>hellow+XJ
◧◩
12. tootie+2c[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-06-06 01:10:01
>>Sebgue+C
This was not a leak investigation and they weren't after sources. The article mentions the completely unrelated change in policy regarding some other cases. The only correlation is they involve newspapers.
◧◩
13. mr_toa+jc[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-06-06 01:12:30
>>Sebgue+C
> in leak investigations to obtain source information from members of the news media

That means they won’t subpoena journalists phone records when looking for whistleblowers. It doesn’t mean they won’t go after reader’s IP when looking for other suspects.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
14. hellow+WJ[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-06-06 09:42:22
>>ncalla+53
Is there a written order from the President saying this. Is it public somewhere? If not, it's just PR.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
15. hellow+XJ[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-06-06 09:42:43
>>colejo+34
Same question to you: is there a written order from the President saying this? Is it public somewhere? If not, it's just PR.
[go to top]