The DOJ is now, after a week, trying to claim that they sent notices of a subpoena for five phone numbers related to James Rosen and News Corp, Fox’s parent company. News Corp and its attorney claim they have no record of this. Must be like Eric Holder’s recusal decision-we know he claims it, just isn’t any record of it. Can we get some in Congress to pursue this lie of the recusal? A recusal has to be formally made in writing, just like a subpoena does.
This, of course, only pertains to 5 numbers, not the 30 some odd numbers from which they grabbed information, nor for Rosen’s email which they surveilled without cause or notification as well.
Sounds a bit like an effort to muddy the waters, when they are so clearly in the wrong…
(Reuters) – News Corp said on Monday it is still reviewing whether it has any record of a notification from the United States government involving a subpoena for a Fox News reporter’s phone records.
The media conglomerate was responding to the Justice Department, which said it told News Corp about the seizure of phone records for James Rosen, a reporter with Fox News, in August 2010.
“While we don’t take issue with the DOJ’s account that they sent a notice to News Corp, we do not have a record of ever having received it,” said News Corp spokesman Nathaniel Brown, who added the company is looking into the matter.
Fox News, which is owned by News Corp, has said it never received a notification from the government.
Lawrence Jacobs, the former worldwide general counsel at News Corp during 2010, told Reuters he had no recollection of ever receiving it nor had News Corp found any evidence when it combed through Jacobs’ emails.
“I have no memory of it,” he said.
A law enforcement official who asked not to be named said in a statement Monday that “In the investigation that led to the indictment of Stephen Kim, the government issued subpoenas for toll records for five phone numbers associated with the media. Consistent with Department of Justice policies and procedures, the government provided notification of those subpoenas nearly three years ago by certified mail, facsimile, and e-mail.”