Snapped Shot

Always Watching the All-Seeing Eye

 


Voting has begun! | See my Photoblog | Live my Photoblog

The Associated Press Loves Stolen Evidence

By Brian C. Ledbetter · Thursday, September 18. 2008 10:23
Thanks for the link, Michelle!

(BTW for all of my fellow Malkin fans:—We've got a Photoshop contest going on that you just might be interested in. There's still much fun to be had!)


A political candidate's personal e-mail is hacked and sent to my mortal enemy. They, in turn, are contacted by the U.S. Government, who is investigating what is essentially a Federal crime. To nobody's surprise, my mortal enemy decides not to cooperate.

What is surprising is to see that the Associated Press doesn't think that it's a violation of Corporate Ethics to use stolen evidence to promote a new "scandal":

The Secret Service contacted The Associated Press on Wednesday and asked for copies of the leaked e-mails, which circulated widely on the Internet. The AP did not comply. (Actually they were probably asking for WHO hacked and leaked the emails and where AP got them).

The disclosure [i.e., the STOLEN E-MAILS] Wednesday raises new questions about the propriety of the Palin administration's use of nongovernment e-mail accounts to conduct state business.


For the record, I would fully support it if the Secret Service felt it was necessary to completely shut down the AP's corporate headquarters until this case is investigated. The press, after all, is not above the law.

(h/t captainfish, btw!)

See-Also:

Gateway Pundit, JammieWearingFool, Sweetness & Light, The American Pundit
· permalink · Daily Fodder · Comments (6) · Trackback (1)
 
Snap.com Popups

If they're driving you crazy, please click here to disable them on this website.




Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry

Richard on 2008-09-19 01:29 #8250

MSM Already Circling the Wagons

When Contacted by the US Secret Service about what it knew about, what I have termed Emailgate, AP has refused any cooperation. What a shocker. Read here

Comments [RSS]
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

Here is what a handful of random people think about this article. But first, the fine print:
The opinions expressed here, even where approved for display, do not necessarily reflect the opinions of this website, the management, or any other entity or organization, with the exception of the Vast Zionist Conspiracy. Those opinions we represent in style, yo. Please keep the language in these comments clean, as this is intended to be a family-friendly, work-friendly website. Comments not compliant with this policy will be edited for content where necessary. Abusive or otherwise illegal comments will be reported to the proper authorities, up to and including the aforementioned Vast Zionist Conspiracy. The Management cannot and will not be held responsible for commenters making a spectacle of themselves, even if The Management are the said commenters in question. In other words, don't take yourself so seriously, folks. We're all here to discuss the news, and more importantly, to have fun. Now go get yourself into some OCD treatment program—you obviously need it if you actually read all of this mess.

captainfish on 2008-09-18 13:17 #1
*They need to be sued and sued often. Secret Service and the DOJ needs to go in and shut them down and put people in jail if they refuse to cooperate!!

This has nothing to do with Freedom of Press.

This was my last clinging straw with them. To take one side and refuse to cooperate with Secret Service, and then on the other to actively go after people in the emails and harass them with questions. And then claim that this is a news story.... BAH!! It is purely a concerted and pointed attack on a political candidate for the presidential administration.

But, once again, we hear hardly a whisper from the "republican attack machine". And, has Pres Bush said anything? You know Pres Clinton would be all over the airwaves wagging his finger.
Reply  
Anonymous on 2008-09-18 15:03 #2
Congrats captainfish! You've won the Internet retard of the day award! Maybe we should sick the DOJ on you!
Reply  
captainfish on 2008-09-18 15:29 #3
*Hello Mr. San Jose, CA.,

ouch.. that really hurt. Care to explain your inductive logic to us simple retards? oh, excuse me, INTERNET retards?
Reply  
Fred on 2008-09-18 15:41 #4
*Congratulations, anonymous, this is your 10,000,000th lame message on the internets. How do you find the time?
Reply  
Cletus on 2008-09-18 22:41 #5
*That hacking was an epic fail. It would cause way more uproar and garner way more attention if anonymous (the group that did the hacking, not the douchebag poster) hacked Obama's email, and attention is exactly what they are after.
Reply  
Rebecca on 2008-09-19 21:38 #6
*Keeping in mind, Anonymous isn't really a group. There are a 'group' of people who tend to read SnappedShot, and maybe comment here, regularly. If Brian posted a suggestion that we all email some politician about some particular issue, and lots of people actually sent emails, then we could accurately say that the emails were sent by the SnappedShot "group". Not every regular would necessarily participate, nor would every participant necessarily be a regular, but the overall description would be accurate.

The so-called hacker posted at the board frequented by the anonymous gang, but at least one person there didn't like what he'd done, and the board moderators quickly made their disapproval known.

Maybe this could be an 'anonymous' action, but it clearly didn't enjoy the massive support that was evident in the Scientology attacks. It could well have been one stupid wannabee, trying to impress the big boys and launch a partisan attack with one stroke.
Reply  

Add Comment

HTML-Tags will be converted to Entities.
Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (*word*), underscore are made via _word_.
Standard emoticons like :-) and ;-) are converted to images.
BBCode format allowed
Gravatar/MyBlogLog/Favatar/Pavatar author images supported.
E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications

To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.
CAPTCHA