The Legal Examiner Mark The Legal Examiner Mark The Legal Examiner Mark search twitter facebook feed linkedin instagram google-plus avvo phone envelope checkmark mail-reply spinner error close
Skip to main content

The last several weeks have revealed a number of issues surrounding this President's administration—issues that raise questions for all of us, but perhaps more so for Obama supporters.

Earlier this month it was revealed that the Obama Department of Justice (DOJ) had secretly obtained phone records of journalists. “The Associated Press is reporting that the Justice Department secretly obtained two months’ worth of its phone records in what it calls a “massive and unprecedented intrusion” into its newsgathering process.” (Washington Post 5/13)

The White House reportedly took action as a result of government leaks regarding issues of national security. The journalists in question were reporting on the May 2012 story about the CIA and the terror threat in Yemen. The larger, more troubling issue is the reversal in Obama’s pre-election commitment to respect and preserve civil liberties. Many of us voted for this president because of his marked dedication to preserving the rights of citizens, coming after aggressive use of the Patriot Act and other ‘big brother’ like actions taken by past leadership.

It’s not unusual for news media to have records subpoenaed. There has always been a need to protect national security and to curb leaks that might damage our country, our people and our reputation. Jay Carney, White House press secretary, summed up the situation, “The president feels strongly that we need the press to be able to be unfettered in its pursuit of investigative journalism”. He went on to add, “He is also mindful of the need for secret and classified information to remain secret and classified in order to protect our national security interests.” (Washington Post 5/13) Here we have two opposing thoughts in the course of a one-minute video clip. Are journalists to be unfettered or bound by a fluid interpretation of ‘secret and classified’? I am not sure how I would interpret that as a reporter. It feels like uncertain ground, like the goal posts can be moved whenever needed to protect national security. Perhaps that is the way it must be, but we must rely upon others' definitions of "national security" and "security interests". The latter may have many variables at play, and when do those determinations of national security trample on civil liberties and the United States Constitution? It is, indeed, an uneasy tension.

The effects on reporters is already beginning to take effect as indicated in this recent article in The New York Times, Press Sees Chilling Effect in Justice Dept. Inquiries. Reporters are on edge and looking at ways to report on national security topics without endangering their careers or their sources. Jane Mayer, a staff writer with The New Yorker compares the recent investigation to the Bush administration’s hard stance on reporters, “the surprise has simply been that Obama’s administration has continued, and even accelerated the crackdown on leaks.” The former Army Officer in me agrees with the President here, but the lawyer in me has a lot of questions about how far and how zealous these "crackdowns" are going.

The seizure of journalist phone records isn’t the only suspect action involving the White House and Department of Justice in recent weeks. It comes on the heels of the IRS revelation about targeting conservative political organizations and the use of drones for counterterrorism efforts. And, all at a time, post-Boston Marathon, when we’re not feeling as safe as we did on Election Day 2012.

Some Presidents walk that fine and subtle line of carrying out election promises and initiatives with a deft political touch, and do it well; some bulldoze through, following their own political agendas. Many thought the last President was of the bulldozer mentality, and certainly did not expect the same out of the current occupant of the Oval Office. These recent actions and revelations are certainly not what we expected when we voted for a second term for President Obama.


  1. Gravatar for Tate Rehmet

    This is indeed a troubling revelation. It's another example of campaigning in poetry and governing in prose. I don't understand the government has a responsibility to try to stop national security threats, but this seems above and beyond.

  2. Gravatar for Greg Webb


    Correct. I find it very troubling, especially if it is the beginning of a slippery slope. I suspect many would agree, of all political stripes. Thank you for commenting.

    Greg Webb

  3. Gravatar for Michael

    This administration will use the terms "national security" and "security interests" to justify anything that they want to do, especially when it is beyond the boundaries of civil liberties. Sadly, the average person doesn't get it and actually "gives up" their freedoms for perceived "security". It is a very sobering time for American's and people really need to be paying attention to what the government is doing.

  4. Gravatar for Greg Webb


    Unfortunately, I find it hard to argue with your assessment, at least at present. Hopefully, there will be change - change in the correct direction. If enough light is shone on the conduct, perhaps the conduct will change. We always have "Hope", do we not?

    Greg Webb

  5. Gravatar for Michael

    Ahh yes...Hope...

    I am hopeful, but continue to be very watchful as well. It's the only way to stay aware of the direction we are going in. While none of us can say exactly what American is going to look like in the next five years, we can keep a close eye on the governments behavior, it’s actions and compare it to history and similar actions of other governments in order to "try" and be in the best possible position.

    Investing is about being at the right place at the right time. Although we are not all professional investors, we all make investments when we are planning and prepare for the future. Planning to take out a student loan to finish a degree or open a savings account for my two year old are investments. However, some investments are better than other and since the economic climate and conditions change (often by government actions), what is oftenc ommonly considered a "safe investment" may actually be a bad one.

    With that said, it might not do me any good as an financial investor to gain or "call it right" with a particular financial instrument, only to suffer a greater loss due to the government destroying civil liberties and robbing it's citizens through crooked legislation. It’s a real balancing act. One has to keep a healthy, positive and optimistic perspective about the future, while at the same time observing the sobering and often very alarming actions of a government.

    My sister once asked me: “What can we do about it?” Well…I think knowing what’s going on around you is a start. We definitely still have some good guys out there in politics and by maintaining awareness, together with hope and persistence, not only can we make better investment decisions, we can make a difference in the lives of others in some way. To me, that is real success.

Comments are closed.

Of Interest