Why has this story not been picked up on other services? This seems like a huge story.

This is just too much. The abuses of governmental power are mind boggling.
The fact that they are being used against reporters shows that the line about monitoring al queada is no more than a red herring to cover up domestic spying. This is an outrage.

This is so Nixonesque. Worse yet it contains the elements of facism. I would hope the American people would see in this the dangers to journalism and the checks that it serves in an open society. Makes one realize the genius of the founding fathers.

It is better save, than sorry. Who got hurt in secretly obtained phone records deal? Nobody. Let's move on, and allow the government to govern.

Since when is a reporter a terrorist? The government is trying to classify anyone who exposes those government programs that are illegal and unconstitutional as a terrorist or somehow aiding and abetting? BS! Those reporters are doing their public duty by exposing those dirty little secrets that we as citizens have a right to know. The pulitzer prizes were rightly awarded and the government officials should be censored in their attempts to gag the media.

"The FBI says its request for reporters' phone records are made in compliance with the law."

Exactly what law is that? Sounds like the kind of snooping and repression found in the People's Republic of China.

Goodbye US Constitution - the experiment of a free society was fun while it lasted - and look at the bright side - 200 years is not a bad run.

ABC NEWS IS A MOUNTH_PIECE FOR DEMOCRATIC PARTY AND EXTREME LEFT-WING MOVEON.ORG....!!!!!

I am wary of this or future administrations, whether democrat or republican, having this authority. It's only a matter of time until some corrupt official uses these unchecked taps for malicious purposes. The courts should be involved.

Interesting. How do we know that Qwest and Bell South, both of whom claim to have not provided customer pen register information to NSA, weren't served with National Security Letters to compel them to keep quiet about it?

Also, what about oversight? Is there any indication that a judicial review of these letters would be required before prosecution? With this government's use of secret detention and "rendition" prisons on foreign soil, is there any indication that the FBI intends to actually prosecute at all?

Thank goodness the government is keeping up with these terrorists. We haven't had a major attack in 4 years, and with efforts like this, I hope we never have one again. I'm glad to give up a little privacy so that we can stay safe. All of the overzealous civil rights folks need to step back and look at the big picture.

For every good intention there are hundreds of rogue cops that will use this information illegally. Then the courts will rule evidence collected to be legal as "the officer meant well." Check your homes. Make sure there is nothing in it you don't want the FBI to see. Big brother is here! Vote Libertarian!

If reporters are obtaining classified information they should be monitored, and those who are giving them the information should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. In case you haven't noticed....We are at war...and we must stop the leaks that are damaging out intel capabilities.

when the next building blows up and thousands are killed everyone will be moaning and crying about how the fbi/government didnt stop the terrorism before it happened. make up your minds do you want security or terroism?

"The abuses of governmental power are mind boggling" - Actually, since in FACT the reporters are publishing SECRET and TOP SECRET information, that they have been TOLD is SECRET and TOP SECRET, they are IN FACT violating National Security, rather than publishing unsubstantiated accounts of secret prisons in Europe (Which no one after 3 independant investigations appears to have found, or found anyone who knows of their existence) or instead of informing the ENEMY ( you know those terrorists ) about methods we are using to track them down, perhaps if they had the best interests of the United States in mind, they would have told someone to stop the damage, but because they could spin these as more 'Bush is Bad' they did everything they could to enforce that perception.

I can't believe my brother is risking his life fighting in Iraq in the name of democracy and we're losing ours.

Our Rights are being hurt by secretly obtained phone records.....or doesn't that matter to you John.....??????

All you IDIOTS who are backyard quarterbacks that really don't have a dman clue what you are criticizing will be the first to whine and cry when you butts get hurt or killed by people that are not thnkful for your bitching but see you as FOOLS as I and other Americans that use our brains to decypher truth and not CNN pukes.

Now we learn the FBI is investigation the Press in the name of fighting terrorism. All of our freedoms are slowly but surely being erroded by this administration. A free press is best and most powerful tool that feedom has in it's defense. It is time that electronic journalism as well as the print begin to live up to it's charge of remaining independent.

There are terrorists around the world and in this country who are ready to really hurt us. So what if a few of them are found by checking them out?

I suspose when we are burying the next victims of a terrorist attack,some of you are going to cry that enough wasn't done to identify them and protect us. Who cares if they check phone records or even compile files? I don't have anything to hide. Do you? The liberal media in this country will be our downfall. The next time you need protection, call one of them.

This just shows how far GWB has moved to the left.

Who got hurt because of Watergate?

Who got hurt because of the Valerie Plame leak?

Who gets hurt when Cheney goes hunting? (couldn't resit)

Let the government govern.

This isn't Nixonesque. This is Clintonesque. Nixon was an amateur; Clinton was a pro.

The president has this authority legally. Elections do have consequences. If you are concerned with the effects of government, then you must convince a enough citizens to win the election. Since Mr. Bush did convince the people to elect him, he has the right to exercise the perogatives of government.

If reporters were provided classified national security information by people breaking the law, I say go get them...put a stop to it.

Leak classified information, go to jail. That's what the left says, anyways.

President Bush and NSA don't worry me one bit. But I can't say that about some judges . . . and you want judges as a final authority?

The real story is the news media falsely reporting that the records had been turned over...just another transparent attempt to discredit the Administration with FALSE REPORTING. Next tjhing you know the broadcast networks will start sabotaging presidential addresses to the nation.

There is nothing here to complain about. Your protection as well as mine are at work here. If you are having a problem with what's transpired with phone records, then you must have something to hide. This is not our father's times. We are at risk. We need to trust our government to protect us. If you have a better idea how to intercept the information that will prevent further attacks against us, then PLEASE share it with all of us.
Thank you President Bush.

We haven't had a major attack in four years? Before 2001, how long had it been since we had a major terrorist attack on US soil?

The fact that no attack has occurred is not in thanks to the Bush administration's fascist tactics, it is just sheer dumb luck.

I'm stunned by all the people who are cheering on the government for spying on people who clearly have no links to terrorism.

Are you going to try to tell me that Al Qaeda has a cell made up of reporters from ABC, the New York Times, and the Washington Post?

Anyone can legally obtain phone records. It is not the same as listening to the actual conversation. You have no expectation of privacy in regard to your phone records especially when you are breaking the law.

Stop demagoging. Its such an old trick.

All the people whining about government abuses should keep in mind that your are whining at the wrong administration. In 1994 the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act of 1994 was passed on voice vote of a Democratic Controlled House and Democratic Controlled Senate and signed into law by Democrat President Bill Clinton. The act mandated that the phone companies would cooperate with the government in providing information. The key phrase is: "enabling the government, pursuant to a court order or other lawful authorization, to access call-identifying information that is reasonably available to the carrier."

Note besides "court orders" you have the language of "other lawful authorization" which can easily be interpreted to be a letter, or any other instrument that somebody views as "lawful." For that matter "other lawful authorization" could easily be a request from an FBI agent.

So for all the liberals whining about Bush, I think its only fair that YOU ALSO whine about the Clinton Administration and their abuses of power...unless of course you excuse that kind of behavior when your guy is in power.

I was working for a major news network in the late 60's when Supreme Court Justice Abe Fortas resigned. I scored the first interview with him after he quit.

I asked "How can you let criminals like Miranda go ... knowing they're guilty?" What he told me has stayed with me, through law school and three decades practicing media law.

"Don't worry about Miranda. He'll be back. Worry about yourself. What would you do if you're hauled off to a police station, kept overnight, not allowed to call a lawyer or tell anybody where you're at. Worry about yourself. That's what that decision is REALLY about." He was right, Miranda managed to get himself killed a few years later.

Don't buy the "only terrorists have something to fear" argument. We ALL have much to fear when a free press, the basic First Freedom, is scared to report on what our government is doing. Does anyone actually think we're better off not knowing what our government is doing in our name?

Yeah, some probably do.

For those, remember, the next President will likely be a Democrat. The precedent to wiretap, search, control has now been set. Would your answer be different if Hillary was running the US Government?

Danny knows "it is sheer dumb luck?"

Cool, Danny.

What's the Saturday Powerball?

He who gives up freedom to acquire security deserves neither.

I would rather die than give the FBI power to sieze library records.

I would rather die than give the FBI power to sieze our personal freedoms.

I would rather die than give the FBI power to conduct secert searches.

I would rather die than give the NSA power to keep my phone records.

I would rather die fighting than give into some mythical creature.

I would rather die than give the US Gov. power to sieze the sick's medicene.

I would rather die than give the FBI power to sieze our free speach.

Be cause I could not live with myself knowing all those soliders who fallen before me died for nothing.

Good!! Find them, try them, convict them and confine them..

Apparently the United States no longer believes in the "First Amendment of the United States Constitution." Whats next? Are they going to attach GPS bracelets on everyone? Hello George Orwell's 1984.

With Eschelon, does it really matter? We were done in a long time ago... how do we get out?

How can we fix it? Especially with the disunity we have? Left/Right/Religious/Nonreligious/Racial/Economic ideology/Social ideology/Moral equivalence...

A 2 party system gives us two bones, a multi-party system gives us dillusion to the point almost nobody would have voted for the winner.

Isn't "freedom of the press" one of the freedoms we are protecting from the terrorists, who our government tells us "hate freedom"? Well it seems to me that the administration is doing far more damage to the freedom of the press than the terrorists have. The constitution also requires that we citizens be protected from unwarrented search and seizure--we've all pretty much been searched when our phone records were seized.

never have I been attacked by a terrorist, however I've been arrested on a routine traffic stop for telling the cop that "yes I do have a problem with you searching my vehicle"
after I was placed in handcuffs and the officer searched my vehicle finding nothing his comment to me was the following. "you had nothing to hide so what was your concern about me searching your vehicle" He was flabbergasted when I told him the 4th amendment.
What really scares me is you government types that see no probelm with giving up essential liberties to get some security.

We are supposed to be a nation of checks and balances. If the FBI is concerned about a possible crime, get a warrant from a Judge, so there is proper constitutional oversight. Otherwise, the FBI could try to suppress the free press, which would be itself a crime.

Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.
Benjamin Franklin

I hope some of you have looked at history and seen that leaks cause people to die, look at WWII when one person from the government made the statment "the reason we have not lost very many subs is that the Japs have their depth charges set to shollow." These caused many more subs to be sunk because the Japs were reading the papers and set their charges to a deeper depth, many subs were lost along with their crews. Loose lips still sink ships.
Jake, Retired USN.,
Been their and done that.
even have the T shirt.

Give me a break. If you are REALLY concerned about private information then why not complain about the true gathers of personal data. The IRS.

This is not an easy issue. I have no desire to give up liberty for a little security. However, I am not interested in another attack on our soil, either.

But take some perspective from History. Both Abraham Lincoln and Franklin D. Roosevelt exercised broad wartime powers and severely limited the freedom of American citizens. This was understood to be a temporary necessity in a time of war. Bush's use of wartime power is not near as "draconian" as Lincoln's OR Roosevelts and we DID survive those times. Furthermore the measures then were necessary.

The mainstream media is vapor-locked in a Watergate-era time warp. Tinfoil hats all around.

If 3,500 secret letters resulted in even one legitimate arrest of suspected terrorist(s), good. More please

You, message #3. And you, #22. Oh, and you #28. But not you, #31. You are all now being investigated. Can you imagine all the things this regime is doing that we DON't know about?

Either there are 3,501 terrorists walking around freely in the US, or there are 3,501 innocent people being invaded by their own government. Either way we're screwed. We've got to get these Republican neo-con wackos out of office, and quick. They're destroying this country.

When unelected government staff, paid by we the people, illegally leak information that elected officials deem confidential or secret, said staff has broken the law. Unauthorized disclosure of secrets is illegal and can be vey damaging to the country.

Reporters who knowingly publish those secrets are willing participants in the crime and should be prosecuted.

The examples of recently disclosed secrets include all of the disclosures of the use of telephone records. I'm sure our enemies are very happy to know what techniques we have employed to catch them so they can takes steps to avoid being caught.

Find the leakers and their helpers and put them in jail.

How do you know you have nothing to hide? Ever gotten mistakenly charged for something? Are you going to be on the "right" side of every administration everytime?

watch as the karma works itself out.
I am not a Republican nor a Democrat but it is clear that we are now a corporation for hire and the "leaders" have no issue with violating the rights of Americans...yes even you who says "I have nothing to hide" as these freedoms are taken away, eventually you too will whine.
You have given up your rights to people who couldn't give a damn about you. Literally.

"The president has this authority legally. Elections do have consequences. If you are concerned with the effects of government, then you must convince a enough citizens to win the election. Since Mr. Bush did convince the people to elect him, he has the right to exercise the perogatives of government.
Posted by: Josh | May 16, 2006 7:22:16 PM"

WHAT? I was NOT aware that we "elected" a dictator. NO President has unlimited power because of his position. And if you think he does, then you really need to go back and relearn your civics.

If you think it is like Communist China now , if we get hit again , all you †hat are whining are going to be asking why didn't our Government do something.

The purpose of the Free Press was a check to the three branches of government, i.e. a voice of the people. But there have been times when the press was used to manipulate the people in U.S. history. Free Press and responsible journalism do not mean the same thing. When the gotcha mindset takes precedent over facts,, dan rather has to retire, we spend months looking for secret prisons that do not exist and Every four years in october something strange/obscure comes out about a pres. candidate. A rumor is a rumor till you can prove it, and if printed w/out proof,paper it is printed on becomes nothing more than supermarket swill.

You dolts - the Govt is not trying to peek into your bedroom window. The Govt is going all-out to make sure a mushroom cloud does not appear over Manhattan or Wash DC!

Has anyone noticed that one or two persons write most of the rabid right wing stuff on here under many different aliases? They reuse the same phrases and buzz words everytime. Its almost as if people have been assigned a duty to write venomous postings on here to give a false impression of support for a ridiculous position. Almost.

Let's all keep track of the members of Congress whose November platforms include a strong plank on abolishing collecting phone records.

Short list? No list?

The media continues to have no common sense in reporting on national security issues that hurt the security of this great country. It needs to be stopped. I have seen no proof of our privacy rights being eroded. Just a lot of speculation and media "private" sources.

Some of us still don't get it do we. I would gladly let them collect my phone numbers if it meant no more of you that are complaining will not have to see another plane hijacked or a monument fall or a mushroom cloud over your childs elementary school. Pivate businesses already track/sell and barter with your phone calls, web browsing, credit card purchases, your credit ratings, etc. Wake up...please.

I think this is great. Only those that have something to hide have something to fear.

I say hurray. They should. I demand it. They are undermining our war effort and putting out troops at unnecessary risk.

FBI Responds
May 16, 2006 12:33 PM

Brian Ross Reports:

Statement by the FBI:

The impression left by the ABC News report is misleading. In specific cases, after receiving a referral from the Department of Justice, the FBI will take logical investigative steps to determine if a criminal act was committed by a government employee by the unauthorized release of classified information. In such cases, investigators may examine the telephone records of government agencies. In any case where the records of a private person are sought, they may only be obtained through established legal process.

To paraphrase Pogo (Walt Kelly, cartoonist), "We have met the enemy, and it's our government".

I have a sincere question for all of you people claiming that anyone opposed to this will be howling for more government after a new terrorist attack:

What in the world does spying on reporters have to do with preventing a terrorist attack?

It seems to me that this administration is spending more time covering their own tracks than they are protecting the American public.

If you can come up with a correlation, please do. I am just tired of conservatives banging the drums of terrorism to drown out any dissent.

I lived through September 11th, and I'm sure if I have the misfortune of seeing another attack on my city, wishing that the NSA would spend more time spying on journalists would be the absolute last thing on my mind.

To those who are so willing to give up their freedom I say listen to one of the founding fathers.

Ben Franklin said""Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

I hate to be the one to break the news but there is no constitutional protection for records or information disclosed to 3rd parties. For example, bank records suchas checks, bank statements etc. are confidential by federal statute not because of any constitutional based right of privacy or the fourth amendment. Of course, the phone company doesn't have the right to record your conversation but they do create their own business records of the numbers you call and the length of the call. This information is owned not by you but by the phone company. By means of a 1940 Treaty, the Brits intel can operate a facility in the US and the US can operate one in England. There is no restriction on what the Brits listen to and vice versa. All this is constitutional. Moreover, it is unlikely that there is constitutional protection for a phone call beyond US territory, although the Courts may choose to expand the constitution to encompass this. It is very clear that, in the absence of a Supreme Court judicial amendment of the constitution, a foreign call into the US or a purely foreign call has no constitutional protection. Nor should it have.

When you rent a video, that record is not your record and, unless your state has a statute, it is not protected by any right to privacy you have. The video rental company can agree not to disclose it but this would be a contractual right and not a constitutional one. We do have various Legislated laws concerning disclosure of financial and other information and evne some common law rules that may cover certain types of embarassing disclosures about non public persons. If yopu want things to be totally private, do not disclose information to third parties. Otherwise, it is open to the public.

Without a free press we would all just be living under just another form of communism where the government controls everything via what they perceive to be "justifable censorship". It is the free press, without government intervention, that keeps this from happening.

For those of you who say that sacrificing freedoms are necessary because we are "at war," I say, by Bush's definition (terrorism = war) we will ALWAYS be at war(when will there not be terrorism?), therefore we have FOREVER lost these freedoms. And the government will not stop here. For all of you who think you "have nothing to hide," think of China. They control what you read (printed and internet), watch on TV, think and believe under the guise of "protection of the people." If you question their authority, you are sent to a "re-education" camp (i.e., prison).

I for one do not want to wake up one day to find that we live in a society that does not tolerate free thought. Don't trust the government (either party)...keep govenment at a MINIMAL and out of our lives.

There is nothing here to complain about. Your protection as well as mine are at work here. If you are having a problem with what's transpired with phone records, then you must have something to hide. This is not our father's times. We are at risk.

RR- You assume we are dealing with people that play by the rules. We have a president who has failed to follow the law or failed to recognize the law over 750 times!! What's wrong with you? THINK, it's patriotic.

So unAmerican to think anything about this is right. From the war, to spying on millions of Americans-it is wrong and so is anyone who supports it. READ the Constitution and Bill of Rights, again. I love those documents, why don't you?

To ensure secrecy, classify as much as you can.
To ensure obedience, produce as much fear as you can.
To ensure dominion, crush all opposition by any means.
To ensure tyrany, deny freedom.
By the November elections, Bush's illegitimate, unjust war will have killed more Americans (2,740) than died on September 11, 2001.
Do the right thing! Remove from power the destroyers of our country and our constitution. God help us.
Peace out.

In their thirst for security, Americans are drinking from a poisoned well.

I hate that the media puts out info that "they" might say the people should know. Stuff that is suppose to BE A secret. I like knowing stuff but I don't have too. I WISH THEY COULD BE LEFT ALONE TO DO THE JOB THEY ARE SUPPOSE TO DO WITH OUT INTERFERENCE OF POLITICS. I am not worried because I have nothing to worry personally. It's politics at it's worse. BOTH SIDES HAVE MADE POLITICS A JOKE. Unbelievable!!!!

Get over it, 3500 out of how many millions and millions. Open your eyes, 9-11 really happened, or have you forgoten? As Abe Lincoln said, the Constitution is not a suicide pact.

so....3,501....i'm pretty comfortable
believing i'm among the 295,000,000 (give or take) who weren't "spied" on. The FBI does not target randomly. These persons had to exhibit some suspicious behavior. Think back to the 1940's (the last time we were attacked) We aren't putting Arab-Americans in camps (nor should we) If you're not doing anything illegal, don't worry.

Lets do the math.
3,501 targets out of a population of 300 Million.
That's one in every 100,000 people.
Very scary, I think not,

It will be interesting to see how many news outlets pick up on this story. In the recent past, one has to wonder whether they even care about the First Amendment. In Saturday's Wall Street Journal, their editorial page had a piece titled "The Datamining Scare," with the following callout: "Another non-threat to your civil liberties." If media corporations are turning a profit, do they really need the U.S. Constitution? Someone should ask them that. And ask them this: Who will speak for our constitutional rights if not the press?

my personal opinion is that the journos think they are above the law .and i am sick and tired of them providing the enemies of this country with nationa security secrets.and i think a few need to be jailed for the espionage act.btw we are at war.

Wow........I can only hope that one or two neo-cons are reposting the same compost here over and over. If this really is representative of the populous as a whole, we are indeed folks, in a whole lotta trouble. Can those of you that run and hide from the "terrorists" not smell the fascism here? Have you never studied civics, or world history? If you have a problem with people leaking facts to the press, then you have lost the fundamental understanding of transparent government. Do any of you really believe the "terrorists" didn't already know we might be tapping their phones? Give me a break. Sure, the press is not always perfect, or even right. But, it's very existence and sources give our government something to fear, and we remove it at nothing short of our peril. Our great country has survived, even thrived while living by theses principles. I see NO reason to give them up now or EVER. Beware of the Pandora's box people, once opened.............

Who needs Communism,we have it already, right here at home.

Again, how can anyone twist logic enough to relate September 11th to the American government spying on journalists who are CLEARLY not involved with terrorism?

The journalists weren't doing anything illegal before the government started spying on them, and by your logic, they have nothing to worry about.

Also, please give me an example of this dangerous, classified information that journalists are leaking left and right. I don't see what sort of dangers would arise when it's revealed that the CIA kept illegal prisons forbidden by the Geneva convention. Oh, wait: I do. The danger is in having the American public figure out that they've been duped into thinking we live in a free country.

>>> so....3,501....i'm pretty comfortable
believing i'm among the 295,000,000 (give or take) who weren't "spied" on.<<<

When only ONE of 1000 sailors on a ship is crushed by a loose canon on deck, the other 999 don't say "better you than me".

They try to lock it down before they're next.

FEAR,FEAR,FEAR,FEAR...TERRORISM......Oh No, must give up freedoms for security.........

Not only are we ceasing to be the land of the FREE, We clearly are ceasing to be the home of the BRAVE....