Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
More -- story about new developments breaking moments ago on our top story the Washington Post reported last night.
The Fox News chief Washington correspondent James Rosen was targeted.
For department by the Department of Justice.
Rosen was part of the criminal conspiracy.
In order to get clearance to read his email.
-- -- phone records and track his movements.
Moments ago Republican senator Marco Rubio issued a statement saying he is quote concerned by reports the Obama administration.
Targeted -- Fox News reporter for possible criminal prosecution.
For doing what appears to be normal news gathering protected by the First Amendment.
Joining me now Brit Hume our Fox News senior political analyst at least we'll is also here to answer a couple of legal questions where she's a Fox News contributor Fox's legal analyst and former federal prosecutor.
Brit -- -- run with -- earlier and this is exactly the angle that you had raised the one that Marco Rubio just raise witches.
It's not unusual to -- BD OJ invest it interested.
When something relating to national security gets leaked to be reporter what is unusual is to going to court suggested the court that reporter.
Is somehow a criminal.
Well and that's -- that's exactly what happened in FBI agent filed with the court an affidavit which is the basis of this story.
We all now have copies of it is 36 pages long.
And it describes the activity of the person suspected of being a leaker.
Who is in fact there's that is the case been brought against him and it describes the activity of our colleague -- we've now learned that he's blacked out at some of these references but it's James Rosen.
Our colleague here for our senior Harris.
Senior Washington -- -- question correspondent.
And -- what's fascinating is the list of things that are cited that he did allegedly that are in furtherance of this conspiracy for example.
The reporter S solicited and -- mr.
Kim to disclose sensitive United States internal documents and intelligence information about the foreign country in question.
The reporter did so by employing flattery and playing to mr.
-- is vanity and ego I don't know.
Much like an intelligent dogs are run a clandestine intelligence it was a report a -- of mr.
-- On a corporate communications is put in other words they both use different email accounts and you know only news.
And then an -- and exciting things that but that did James Rosen said at one point that they think you particularly troublesome.
What I -- is -- as you might expect is breaking news ahead of my competitors.
I want a report authoritative bit ahead of my competitors on new initiative -- shift in US policy events on the ground what intelligence is picking up -- -- That's a crime.
I don't know what's left of the protections afforded by the First Amendment of -- that is can be cited is being in furtherance of a criminal conspiracy.
Look at -- Bret Rosen.
He's got criminal written all over when you're the managing it editor down at Fox News Washington US I had -- in your office so fast and say no gathering.
Trying to -- competitors.
-- -- James.
We did a thorough background object -- a check on -- mega famous claim.
I and then all of this of course was to do.
What we now know they did do which was -- thing that's most disturbing about this.
Is not the fact that they tracked his movements by using the State Department Baghdad's information their possession they presumably -- looked at it.
And there's all this stuff they did to find out what the what the alleged source of the information is doing that's perfectly within their purview.
But they went into court to get back -- -- it was a subpoena it was a search warrant for the emails -- -- -- from Google because it was a paid a yeah Gmail account.
And they didn't want.
The Rosen to find out about it.
So they went and asked the judge to do two things that was to grant the search warrant also -- Google to keep quiet about it.
Exactly so we didn't find out about it but it and in the course of doing that they allege that this activity which we call cultivating sources.
And reporting the news.
-- suggested that James was at that he had broken the law and then I was in receiving this information at the very least this is quoting from the affidavit either right as an -- a better.
And or co conspirator exact of interest to the core and a courtside got from this -- least I mentioned before.
It's so much easier in court to get the court to sign up for what you want of course -- there's no lawyer representing the other side -- Not a lawyer there with -- -- and there's a a not just the First Amendment making this is so troubling because there's a privacy protection act the protects journalists for exactly this kind of thing.
And the only exception -- the probable cause exception if someone is actually involved in an ongoing crack what was the crime here make -- what was the crime that he was receiving information.
That was a crime that's all they can come up -- -- -- course no criminal charges have been -- so I mean this is just so beyond troubling it's it's just.
This coming right after the heels of the -- investigation which we know that they did not go through DOJ procedure they did not.
Get with subpoenas signed off on -- did not contact AP they did not contact the media source they're supposed to negotiate with the media source whether it's Fox News or AP they'd done none of that.
Right and that and that and what we hurt Eric Holder last week was.
With the AP the story where they monitored he had -- to when he reporters and over a hundred phone lines they set in total basically and and and reporters would come in and -- -- phone lines for two months without -- against ours was.
This was one of the worst two or three weeks I have seen in my career that's the reason.
Was so bad that's the reason why we didn't notify -- -- -- -- went into court on our own and got this subpoena.
And now we find out a couple days later they did it to us Jill was this one of the worst weeks ever.
So -- -- pick it up with you on the legal front because -- last week what we discussed was yes the DOJ can get your private records without giving you -- without giving your -- -- If it's a matter of national security but how big.
Is that exception to the rule it's a very very limited exception it's not supposed to be applied all the time -- -- -- it seems to have been here in the last couple weeks and we're just hearing about it.
It's very very limited not exploited that often make it.
In fact -- -- -- federal prosecutor I mean we pitches rarely rarely sought -- to happen again and again and again where there's really no.
Meat to it and there's just you just roll that out there national security with no example -- no real -- -- And that the proof in and that is no criminal charges have been filed -- right.
-- Eric Holder even last week went out and said you've got a long way to go before you try to prosecute the press.
For publication of leaked material in and yet we see -- -- -- you know the FBI alleging that James committed some crime -- I want to ask you about the chilling effect.
The HP's been talking about this on reporters and their sources in the wake of these revelations will of course that's for -- With but I don't see how could failed to have a chilling effect -- and if you're worried that any communication you might have.
With a sources gonna be a matter of record for the government.
That your emails to us to a from a source may be read by the government.
This is this is naturally -- to simply practical reasons -- one of the things you do.
And it's considered within our business a sacred obligation to protect the identity of your sources.
If you can't do that or if -- sources believe you can't do that you're not you're going to be severely hampered in your ability to get information the government doesn't want out and one more thing make.
Classified information is often classified for very good reasons it's it is secret and should remain so.
But an awful lot of material reams of material are classified Willy Nilly and for the sake of protecting a government from embarrassment.
Reporters since time memorial and memorial have gone after this stuff and -- often and often plummet from very valuable information the public needed to know.
So simply because it was classified doesn't mean should come out.
Absolutely right I threatening thank you both.
Filter by section