[quote=all][quote=bearishgurl]
Isn’t the CIA part of the Justice Dept??
[/quote]
No.
It does disseminate justice, but it is not a part of the Department of Justice.
[quote=bearishgurl]
If not, which Department is it under…
[/quote]
CIA is an executive agency and reports directly to the Director of National Intelligence.
The Director of National Intelligence (DNI) is the United States government official – subject to the authority, direction, and control of the President.
[quote=bearishgurl]
… and does the US Atty General work for them?
[/quote]
AG does not report to the Director of National Intelligence, no.
[quote=bearishgurl]
Did you think the CIA had subpoena powers on their own?
[/quote]
I don’t know. Maybe it does, maybe it does not. In this particular case it was not the CIA.[/quote]
No, the US AG is part of the Presidential Cabinet. Under normal circumstances, an entity or person wishing to subpoena phone records would be required to send a “Notice to Consumer” or similar notice to the entity or individual for whom records were being sought a certain number of days in advance of the deadline for those records to be produced. This is to give the individual or entity served enough time to file a motion to quash the subpoena duces tecum.
This wasn’t done in this case. I don’t know what special powers the US AG’s Office would possess in order to get around this procedure.
Perhaps the semi-well-versed-in-Constitutional-law Pigg SK in CV can shed some light on how/why the AG got the AP to cooperate with their (improper?) SDT in the absence of proper notice, since Pigg scaredycat/Walter has been ignoring us of late.
Certainly the AP has permanent counsel chained to their ankle. There is much to learn here as to why Holder is seemingly large and in charge … but um, really isn’t.
Holder’s Lackey, Cole, stated that two months of phone records were obtained from the AP by subpoena
It is CLEAR here that the US AG was “representing” the CIA in the “acquisition” of the AP’s phone records of 20 of its reporters.
