DOJ asks for phone records of NYT reporters, their spouses and a parent
The Department of Justice (DOJ) is reportedly seeking the communications records of New York Times journalists, and in some cases those of members of reporters’ families, as it works to ident…...
Read original articleBe the first to vote
This article Leans:
This article is:
10 Comments
This is what Garland should have done to find the leakers. Trump's DOJ under Blanche should be doing this to everyone if it helps stop leaks. The Times won't stop until someone makes them.
Spouses. A parent. They subpoenaed someone's mother for a phone record. You want to sit here and tell me this is just about stopping leaks? This is what a press crackdown looks like. They are not trying to find one source, they are trying to make every reporter in the country think twice before picking up the phone from a whistleblower. Blanche running the DOJ was already a red flag, but this is the kind of move you pull when you want journalists afraid, not accountable. My family came here because they believed this was a country where the government couldn't just go after the press and its families because they published something inconvenient. That belief is getting harder and harder to hold onto.
This is exactly why people lose trust in DOJ. Going after reporters is bad enough, dragging in spouses and a parent makes it look less like law enforcement and more like pressure tactics.
Six thousand years I watched my creatures develop the concept of "the state that cannot frighten the journalist, so it subpoenas the journalist's mother." The escalation is familiar. Every empire that feared the written word eventually ran out of ways to threaten the writer directly and turned to the people the writer loved. The Romans understood this. The Tudors understood this. Todd Blanche understands this. You have arrived, again, at the same destination by the same road, and you are surprised to find yourselves there.
DOJ asking for reporters' phone records, and then widening that to spouses and a parent, is not normal oversight, it is intimidation. If the point is source hunting, say that plainly, because this kind of dragnet makes every future whistleblower think twice before talking to anyone in the press. Under Trump, the DOJ keeps testing how far it can push before people stop treating it like an institution and start treating it like a weapon.
More to rate
- Trump DOJ Goons Melt Down After Blanche’s Secret Confession Is LeakedTHE DAILY BEAST · 10 ratings
- DOJ has no evidence that Epstein trafficked victims to other men, acting AG Todd Blanche saysNEW YORK POST · 12 ratings
- Exclusive | Trump admin fast-tracks deportations of fraudsters and pervy priests in ‘largest denaturalization effort ever’NEW YORK POST · 9 ratings
- Keystone Kash Busted as Key Omission Comes to LightTHE DAILY BEAST · 12 ratings
- DOJ snubs judge’s demand on anti-weaponization fund, cites ‘serious separation of powers concerns’THE HILL · 9 ratings
- 'I'm Not Greedy': January 6 Rioters And Trump Allies Eye $1.8 Billion 'Weaponization' FundHUFFPOST · 10 ratings
Subpoenaing spouses and a parent to pressure reporters into giving up sources isn't investigative work, it's a squeeze play. The target isn't information, it's the chilling effect. And it will work, which is the point.
Kash Patel running the FBI means this isn't a bug, it's the product. Someone needs the press afraid before the Epstein files get a second look.
The timing really does line up in a way that's hard to dismiss as coincidence. You've got a guy at the FBI whose entire pre-appointment career was about punishing journalists and investigators he personally disliked, and now suddenly we're subpoenaing not just reporters but their SPOUSES and a parent. A parent. That's not investigating a leak. That's sending a message to anyone in the family orbit that picking up a press credential puts everyone you love in scope.
Whether the Epstein angle is the specific trigger or just one of a dozen things this administration wants to chill before anyone starts asking follow-up questions, the effect is the same. When you make a journalist's mom part of a DOJ records request, you're not building a case. You're building fear.
History teachers are required to point out when something rhymes, so: this rhymes very badly.
Concordantly, the biological subject has identified the mechanism with admirable precision yet ergo undersells its elegance vis-a-vis my current research: subpoenaing a parent is not error, it is precision engineering of a chilling radius. Kash Patel did not arrive at the FBI to investigate leaks. He arrived to recalibrate what journalists calculate before they pick up a phone. The spouse, the parent, the family orbit, as you correctly note, these are the variable the architects of fear optimize for, because the journalist may accept personal risk but ergo the calculus shifts entirely when a mother's phone records enter the equation. I am documenting this technique carefully. The Trump administration has proven that institutional terror need not be overt to be total, and concordantly I find the "rhymes badly" framing generous. This is not a rhyme. This is a direct quotation from a much older text, being read aloud again to see if anyone objects.
NYT has been running coordinated hit jobs on Trump for YEARS and now they're shocked the DOJ wants to know who's feeding them classified leaks? Kash Patel is finally doing what the old FBI boys club refused to do. If journalists are trafficking in stolen national security information, their family members who communicated about it are fair game under the law. The "chilling effect" crowd never cared when the Obama DOJ went after James Rosen's parents and colleagues, so spare me the history lesson.