Department of Justice quietly took notes on the phone and tried to get emails from three Washington Post reporters, most notably citing the former US-Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Russia’s role in the 2016 election, according to officials and government correspondence highlighted by note.
Department of Justice rules mandates that the media be notified when registering the article. However, even though Trump’s administration did well in the election, it appears that officials have left a legacy of information for Biden’s administration to deal with. I guess he hasn’t reached that point yet. It is also possible to get too involved in inciting terrorists and trying to overthrow the presidential election.
In three May 3 letters to journalists Ellen Nakashima, Greg Miller, and former journalist Adam Entous, the Justice Department stated that “they have been informed that compliance with the United States Department of Justice has received reports on the law. April 15, 2017 to July 31, 2017, ”according to the Post. The list included Miller’s work, Entous phone numbers, and Nakashima’s work, mobile phone number, and home phone numbers. from phone calls and the length of each call but did not disclose what was said.
According to the letters, the Post claims that the plaintiffs also obtained a court order to obtain “unconnected documents” from the journalists’ e-mail accounts, which may disclose who sent the e-mails sent but not the content. However, officials eventually did not find these records, he said.
“We are deeply saddened by the use of state power to use the media,” said Post Executive Officer Cameron Barr. “The Department of Justice should clearly state the reasons why journalists are performing their duties, which are protected under the First Amendment.”
Sadly, the characters do not seem to fit in how The Department of Justice has picked up this. A spokesman for the department told the letter that the idea to do so was made in 2020 under the Trump administration. (It should be noted that former President Donald Trump has made it clear that he hates the media and those who bring out the governments that give them the opportunity.)
Based on the time mentioned in the letters and the media coverage in recent months, the Post says their views on investigating Sessions and being disrupted by Russia are probably why the department wanted to put their phone on the data.
During this time, the three journalists published story to explain the federal letters that show up at the time — Sen. Alabama shares discussed Trump’s 2016 campaign with Sergey Kislyak, Russia’s ambassador to the US at the time. Immediately, the press he also wrote about how Obama’s administration has struggled to deal with Russian interference in the 2016 elections.
Sessions, who later became Trump’s attorney general from 2017 to 2018 press conference in August 2017, just four days after the time mentioned in these letters, when they volunteered to fulfill their aspirations for the benefit of the incumbent government.
“This dripping culture needs to stop,” Sessions said at the time.
In order for the Department of Justice to provide media coverage, it must have exhausted all possible means of obtaining this and obtaining a lawyer, in accordance with the agency’s rules. Friday, Department of Justice A spokesman for Marc Raimondi told the Post that the ruling was considered a last resort which the commission does not take lightly:
“In spite of this, the Department adheres to the legal framework for obtaining payment for calls and unsolicited emails from journalists as part of investigating illegal cases involving information. The objectives of this investigation are not those of journalists but especially those with access to information. security which they provided to the media and therefore failed to protect them as they wished. ”
However, the issue strongly criticized the media, which said that the Department of Justice could violate the First Amendment. Bruce Brown, executive director of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, called it “necessary” for the Department of Justice to articulate its views and why the commission was notifying it several months after the Post’s ruling.
“It is important for the new leadership of the Department of Justice to explain when the protesters took the reports, why they are only informing the Post, and why the Department of Justice decided to refrain from notifying them in advance of its instructions. words was released on Friday.