‘Liberal Activist’ Admits to Bugging Mitch McConnell’s Office

Spread the love

Loading

Daniel Harper:

Writing for Salon, Curtis Morrison, a self-titled “liberal activist,” admits to bugging Mitch McConnell’s office. He claims to have been inspired by Julian Assange and claims, “If given another chance to record him, I’d do it again.”

“Earlier this year, I secretly made an audio recording of Sen. Mitch McConnell, the most powerful Republican on the planet, at his campaign headquarters in Kentucky. The released portion of the recording clocks in at less than 12 minutes, but those few minutes changed my life,” writes Morrison.

I leaked the recording to Mother Jones, which published it with a transcript and analysis in April, and over the days that followed, blogs and cable news shows lit up with the revelations from that one meeting. At the time, McConnell was prepping for a race against the actress Ashley Judd — it was “the Whac-a-Mole stage of the campaign,” McConnell said smugly — and the recording captures his team in some Grade-A jackassery, including plans to use Judd’s history of depression against her.

But also up for debate was the the ethics of the audio recording itself. Here’s the latest: An assistant U.S. attorney, Brian Calhoun, telephoned my attorney yesterday, asking to meet with him next Friday as charges against me are being presented to a grand jury.

In a technology age marked by vigilante heroes like Julian Assange and Anonymous, the line between journalism and espionage has grown thin. McConnell was quick to frame himself as the victim of a crime, which was to be expected. It was the guilty repositioning of a politician who has been caught being craven.

Here’s how describes himself: “I’m a liberal activist in Kentucky. I’m also a citizen journalist — at least I used to be — because I don’t subscribe to the lie that activism and journalism can be separated.

Read more

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
52 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Look at his ”rationale.”
It shows, beyond a doubt, that transference is a disease in Liberals that has put down deep roots.
Notice how he slying implies that Fox’s Rosen has crossed some “espionage,” line thus justifying him and his parents being wiretapped?
He is the one who broke the law, not Rosen.
And, while he’s made his admission, what actions are the Obama/Holder DOJ bringing against him?

PS, since when is it in any way wrong to look into a political opponent’s background?
I recall a young Obama using mysteriously leaked divorce papers to beat his early state senate opponent.

Some people were quite a bit more understanding when the person attempting to bug a member of Congress’s office was James O’Keefe.

In the case of Curtis Morrison, the “bugging” reportedly involved recording a conversation with a cell phone while standing outside an office door. In other words, Morrison recorded what could be overheard from a public hallway. If that’s the case—and it has been demonstrated how easily it could have been done—it wasn’t really “bugging” at all.

O’Keefe and his motley crew were actually attempting to plant an electronic listening device that could be picked up from a block away. That is illegal wiretapping.

Hopefully McConnell is somewhat more cautious when he’s discussing classified national security information.

Greggie still working overtime to defend the illegal actions of the left, I see.

For there to have been illegal actions, something illegal has to have been done—as in the case of Mr. O’Keefe’s bungled efforts.

James O’Keefe is still eating out the heart of the Left.
In CA a few Dems have introduced a Homeless Bill Of Rights that, if passed and signed by Gov. Moonbeam, would give all homeless people the right to stand, sit, lie and sleep, even pee and poop where ever they want in CA.
Oddly, then, when James and a few of his cadre of grassroots reporters dressed as homeless men and tried to simply lean on a tree on the streets where these men lived, those two-faced ”liberals” called the cops on them!
Apparently, where ever they want only means else where, not by MY house!

Since Halloween obviously doesn’t come often enough for him, maybe James should consider a career in theater. He could still put on costumes and impersonate people, and might actually earn an honest living doing so.

@Greg, @Greg, and @Greg:

1: In the case of Curtis Morrison, the “bugging” reportedly involved recording a conversation with a cell phone while standing outside an office door. In other words, Morrison recorded what could be overheard from a public hallway. If that’s the case—and it has been demonstrated how easily it could have been done—it wasn’t really “bugging” at all.

…snip…

2: Here’s what was recorded:

…snip…

3: For there to have been illegal actions, something illegal has to have been done—as in the case of Mr. O’Keefe’s bungled efforts.

1: From your own link, Greg:

With the campaign’s permission, WHAS11 tested whether an iPhone voice memo program could successfully record a conversation by placing the phone’s mouthpiece at the bottom door opening.

Playback of the test recording confirmed that it captured the voices of campaign workers meeting behind the door. The workers had been advised of the recording test.

As an FBI investigation continues, it is not yet known if anyone will be charged in “WattersonGate.”

Some legal analysts suggest that if the closed door meeting could be heard from the hallway, the recording might not be a crime. During the WHAS11 visit, some voices could be heard, without electronic assistance, from the hallway.

The first clue here should be that if you were simply standing outside the door, the clarity of the conversion would be considerably less than if you were laying on the ground, with your ear to the door’s gap.

The iPhone’s built in microphones are the typical cardiod pickup pattern, and generally on par with a standard concert vocal mic like the Shure 57 (and that’s on the optimistic side…). Neither one would be worth a crap thru a closed door, and the hallway noise – people walking by, voices, movement by those in the hallway etc – would would drown out the fainter voices leaking thru a doorway. It’s as simple as this – primary sounds vs more distant and muffled sounds.

Let me put it to you this way. If you went to a concert, do you think you could audibly tell the difference between a vocalist standing 7-8 feet away from the microphone on stage, singing… from a vocalist who was behind a door on stage singing? Your ear, alone, should be able to note the difference. In fact, you’d likely complain that the vocalist’s audio was substandard for what you are used to because he is so far away from the mic.

An exception to this would be various shotgun microphones. But these have a disadvantage for the narrow sound they would pick up. Imagine that your ear follows your eyes, and you can narrowly zero in a longer distance to hear what you are looking at. These mics phase out the wider areas around that focus so that you can isolate that target for intelligibility. For this reason, they aren’t very handy as spy microphones but in rare circumstances. You can only pick up perhaps half a conversation. So a wider directional microphone is needed. The recording belies any shotguy mic being used because you can hear the other voices in the room.

Microphone pick up patterns work similar to your ear but with greater flaws, Greg… because they impose arbitrary phasing out of sound that your ear will not do in real life.

In order for the iPhone to pick up the McConnell office conversation with the clarity demonstrated on the recorded conversion, one of two things had to have happened:

a: The iPhone, itself, would have be be laid on the floor at the door’s gap, or
b: An external microphone, feeding the iPhone, at the door’s gap was used.

Either scenario precludes any possibility that is was a casually overhead conversation, outside of a closed door, that would fall into a public domain argument.

I was in the pro sound business for over 27 years, Greg. The recording is consistent with a standard room microphone with nominally wide pickup pattern and appropriate room noise. You can tell when the voices get louder that that microphone sounds like it’s *in* the room (as opposed to being behind a door) – altho not directed right on any particular source – and sounds nothing like what you’d hear through a closed door.

2: Don’t care about the content. None of it sounds like what wouldn’t also be said behind opposition political closed doors. Private conversations should be that… private. Politics is dirty business, and has always been that way. No biggie, and no negative reflections on McConnell because of the content.

3: INRE James O’Keefe and Landrieu, he deserved to be charged, and he was… with attempts to tamper with the phone system. At least he understood the limitations of microphone pickup patterns. In the case of this Progress Kentucky guy, he also needs to be charged with illegal recording. To even the most novice of those with professional sound experience, it is obvious.

Dare I suggest that you should be condemning both equally.

@MataHarley, #8:

I’m sure you’re right that a microphone would have to have been down at the gap between the door and floor to get an intelligible audio recording. “Standing” was more figurative than literal. I agree, too, that any sleaze gap is a narrow one, turning on little more than legal technicality. I just couldn’t resist mentioning Mr. O’Keefe in response to the current “bugging” outrage.

I’m an amateur musician, btw. I occasionally record acoustic guitar with an Audio-Technica AT2020 USB condenser mic. I isolated it from vibration with a Sampson spider mount for another 30 bucks. I run the mic into Audacity freeware. It’s a nice, inexpensive recording setup for home use. Quite good fidelity.

@MataHarley:

Rather nice of Curtis Morrison to provide a written confession to his crime, don’t you think. It should be well received by the prosecuting attorney.


Digital Media Law Project:

From a legal standpoint, the most important question in the recording context is whether you must get consent from one or all of the parties to a phone call or conversation before recording it. Federal law and many state wiretapping statutes permit recording if one party (including you) to the phone call or conversation consents. Other states require that all parties to the communication consent.

Secretly recording McConnell’s private closed-door conversation is patently illegal:

Federal law permits recording telephone calls and in-person conversations with the consent of at least one of the parties. See 18 U.S.C. 2511(2)(d). This is called a “one-party consent” law. Under a one-party consent law, you can record a phone call or conversation so long as you are a party to the conversation. Furthermore, if you are not a party to the conversation, a “one-party consent” law will allow you to record the conversation or phone call so long as your source consents and has full knowledge that the communication will be recorded.

In addition to federal law, thirty-eight states and the District of Columbia have adopted “one-party consent” laws and permit individuals to record phone calls and conversations to which they are a party or when one party to the communication consents. See the State Law: Recording section of this legal guide for information on state wiretapping laws.

Morrison is in a heap of trouble. Maybe he’ll be able to get G. Gorden Lilly’s old cell. McConnell will no doubt be able to collect damages, and turn around and use that money to finance his reelection campaign.

@Greg:

Hate to burst your bubble Greg, but the amateur musician knows exactly Jack-squat about microphones and recording compared with sound business professionals.

@Ditto, #10:

There has to be more is involved than that, otherwise the one-party consent law would severely constrain routine audio and video news gathering. I suspect whether a setting is public or private is an important legal question. In this case, legality or illegality probably depends on the question of intrusion into a private space; on whether the conversation could be heard outside in the public hallway.

I’m no lawyer, but I’m guessing Morrison can’t be prosecuted.

Hate to burst your bubble Greg, but the amateur musician knows exactly Jack-squat about microphones and recording compared with sound business professionals.

I don’t claim any particular technical expertise in that area either, but I assure you that I can distinguish a high quality audio recording from one that isn’t. I have a musician’s ear, and 45 years of experience as an acoustic guitarist who mostly plays a classical instrument. Subtle shadings of sound are my entire focus. Such people generally know a bit about the practical side of microphones and recording technology, just as any serious non-professional will know about their areas of particular interest.

I wasn’t trying to one-up MataHarley. I thought she might find my observations about a particular USB condenser mic of interest. It was a momentary digression from politics.

Greg: I’m no lawyer, but I’m guessing Morrison can’t be prosecuted

I’m no lawyer either, but I’m guessing exactly the opposite. If he had a believable case that he was picking up that recording just standing in the hallway, casually holding his phone in hand – and not recorded by placing his phone or a remote mic down at the door’s gap – you might have a case. They’ll have a hard time proving that quality of recording was made any other way than a deliberate attempt to mic that room from that gap. Couldn’t be any more simple than duplicating the moment, recording similar amplitude conversations behind closed doors with both methods for comparison. Intent to prove intelligible recording vs “standing in the right place at the right time” overhearing will prove to be his undoing.

The better question is *will* he get charged? Much might depend upon what McConnell wants to do. The intrusion is offensive. What he captured on the recording? Ho hum.

OT… INRE your personal music fun. that’s a creative outlet and great hobby. Things like that keep a body sane.

If you want a more “live” sound, and assuming your aren’t playing in the equivalent of a padded cell… that’s a joke, son, LOL!…and have some live reverberation in the room with reflective walls, put up a room mic when you play/record, and then mix the two together. (I’m assuming you have multitrack capabilities) You’ll have to experiment with the placement if it’s an omnidirectional since you don’t want a lot of extraneous room noise (air conditioning, computer fans, etc). So pay very close attention to the pickup pattern of the mic you’re experimenting with. But it’s the optimum way for a live ambient sound, and natural reverb/delay. And I’m assuming you are close mic’ing the guitar to get the nuances of strings and full body sound. So this technique would complement each other in a single recording.

If you have a spare cardioid and a mic stand, place it about 5-7 feet away, and aiming at the body of your guitar and see how that works for one effect. Not as “live” and roomy, but also good results. You also might want to check into the PZM mics. Love those for room sound. I remember when they first came out via small indy manufacturer. Then they sold to to the bigger audio manufacturers. Glad to see they are still around. Amazing when used properly, innovative and compact design. Especially wonderful for mic’ing pianos in a live (in the acoustic sense) room. Extremely realistic “ears”. What you hear is generally close to what you get on the recording.

Pickup patterns are not the same thing as the transducer technology.. i.e. condenser vs dynamic, ribbon, tube, etc. Personally I love the ribbon and tube mics.. especially in the digital recording age. However both are more fragile and less forgiving for amplitude and frequency peaks. Choices of mics, and their design, are wholly dependent upon environment and the instrument you are attempting to record. Ergo, “condenser” mics, which require power supplies, are not necessarily superior to dynamic or other design mics. They just have better uses in particular environments at a given moment in time.

@Greg: I think what this boils down to is that you believe anyone who doesn’t have your political views is not entitled to the same rights as those who do. Had someone done the exact same thing to a left leaning politician, you’d be screaming bloody murder. You do realize that if you were dong any type of a research paper and used Mother Jones as a reference, you’d probably be given an ‘F’ even by a liberal professor.

@another vet, #13:

If the conversation was audible to a microphone that was positioned in what is technically a public location, I imagine successful prosecution would be very difficult. If the microphone would have to have intruded into the private space of the office to make the recording, they might have a shot at it.

I doubt if they’ll bother. They would risk looking silly, could raise all sorts of issues regarding the reporting of information collected in public spaces, and could give the appearance that the recorded conversation is more significant than it actually is.

@Greg:

There has to be more is involved than that, otherwise the one-party consent law would severely constrain routine audio and video news gathering…

I’ve taken film and broadcasting in college, and they cover this:

It really depends what you are doing. Usually, when recording for news gathering, the parties are full aware that they are being recorded. Whenever possible, broadcasters and film makers will have everyone who appears on camera sign a release form. Interviewing public figures in public locations, (such as you see with reporters running public officials down to ask them questions,) is perfectly legal and the reporters do not have to get the political office holder to sign a release form.

As for “hidden camera” type recording, it depends on whether the location is considered “private” or “public.” It is usually illegal to film in places such as locker rooms, bathrooms, a person’s bedroom etc. without the express permission (and it better be documented,) of everyone recorded. It is also illegal to record a private conversation without the permission of at least one party involved in the conversation.

In the case of programs like the old Candid Camera program, those filmed were asked to sign releases before it aired but even if they didn’t this would have been covered because the production staff included one party of on air talent to set up the situation.

In the case of the Acorn sting recordings, those individuals with the hidden camera were one party of the conversation. Had the film makers secretly hidden a camera, recorded private conversations between two other parties, and then recovered the recording and released it, then they would have committed a crime.

I also have professional experience mixing in recording sessions and live performance sound reinforcement.

Not trying to slam you Greg, but I’ve worked with far too many musicians who think that because they have “a good ear,” that they know what they are talking about when it comes to sound. What sounds good on your computer speakers or headphones may sound “off” on higher quality equipment. Professional musicians learn to trust their audio engineers. Mata gave you some good advice on in-home recording. I might suggest using a 16/32-band equalizer and “ringing the room” to set a base flat acoustical response for optimal recordings, but that can be a trial and error process and tough for the novice to get right. I’ll add that the quality of a recording is very dependent on the quality of the equipment used, and it’s proper use. Expensive doesn’t always mean better, but cheap equipment almost always guarantees poor quality, as can good equipment set-up by someone who doesn’t really know what they are doing. Pay close attention to equipment reviews by recording professionals when selecting equipment. (I’d also suggest subscribing to Front of House magazine.)

@MataHarley, #12:

The PMZ mics look interesting. If I get more serious at some point I’ll check them out. Presently I’m recording primarily as a means to attend to my playing technique more critically. I’m impressed with the performance of my Audio-Technica condenser mic set up, but that might just be because what I had before was a unusually inferior piece of equipment.

Audacity has basic digital multi-tracking capabilities. It’s nice software for the price. (Free.)

@Greg:

If the conversation was audible to a microphone that was positioned in what is technically a public location, I imagine successful prosecution would be very difficult. If the microphone would have to have intruded into the private space of the office to make the recording, they might have a shot at it.

The recording was made inside McConnell’s campaign headquarters in Kentucky. That means it was not a public location. Under the law, the entire campaign office headquarters are considered private not public, and that includes the hallways within. No “party of the conversation “inside that office were made aware by Morrison that they were going to be secretly recorded, nor did they sign a release. Morrison committed a crime.

how freaking are those shameless LIBERALS,
they are hunting for the opposit party to find negatives,instead of doing their jobs,
it’s a BRAIN DEFECT they are stuck with,
send them in prison for a while and fire them where ever they work,
they did it to another, they will do it for you,
stay away from them.

This is what the Kentucky law says:

http://www.lrc.ky.gov/KRS/526-00/CHAPTER.HTM

Notice under installing an eavesdropping device, location means nothing. It clearly states, “in any place”.

@another vet:

526.010 Definition.
The following definition applies in this chapter, unless the context otherwise requires: “Eavesdrop” means to overhear, record, amplify or transmit any part of a wire or oral communication of others without the consent of at least one (1) party thereto by means of any electronic, mechanical or other device.

526.020 Eavesdropping.
(1) A person is guilty of eavesdropping when he intentionally uses any device to eavesdrop, whether or not he is present at the time.
(2) Eavesdropping is a Class D felony.

526.030 Installing eavesdropping device.
(1) A person is guilty of installing an eavesdropping device when he intentionally installs or places such a device in any place with the knowledge that it is to be used for eavesdropping.
(2) Installing an eavesdropping device is a Class D felony.

526.060 Divulging illegally obtained information.
(1) A person is guilty of divulging illegally obtained information when he knowingly uses or divulges information obtained through eavesdropping or tampering with private communications or learned in the course of employment with a communications common carrier engaged in transmitting the message.
(2) Divulging illegally obtained information is a Class A misdemeanor.

526.080 Forfeiture.
Any electronic, mechanical or other device designed or commonly used for eavesdropping which is possessed or used in violation of this chapter, is forfeited to the state and shall be disposed of in accordance with KRS 500.090

So, Morrison is clearly and admittedly guilty under Kentucky law of two Class D Felonies for the violation of Kentucky eavesdropping laws, and a Class A Misdemeanor for every instance whereby he released the illegally obtained recordings to the press.

That’s without even looking at the Federal laws he broke:

Title 18, Section 2511 of the United States Code, it is a felony to record a conversation unless at least one party to the conversation consents. The crime is called eavesdropping, and a person found guilty can be sentenced to 5 years in prison and fined $250,000.

The statute reaches beyond conversations. It is against the law to use any device to intercept wire, oral, or electronic communications, as well. For example, recording a phone conversation or copying computer data such as email is eavesdropping, and subject to criminal penalties.

18 USC 2511 applies to face-to-face conversations, telephone conversations (including cell phones), email, instant messaging, text messages, phone records, voicemail, data saved on a server, and any other electronic communication.

A conversation between two people is protected except where it occurs in public. In public, the law says that neither party to the conversation has a reasonable expectation of privacy, and therefore, the conversation is not protected.

Federal Statutes Governing Wiretapping and Electronic Eavesdropping

Electronic Communications Privacy Act
Title III

Prohibitions
: In Title III, ECPA begins the proposition that unless provided otherwise, it is a
federal crime to engage in wiretapping or electronic eavesdropping; to possess wiretapping or
electronic eavesdropping equipment; to use or disclose information obtained through illegal
wiretapping or electronic eavesdropping; or to disclose information secured through court-
ordered wiretapping or electronic eavesdropping, in order to obstruct justice.
Wiretapping
: First among these is the ban on illegal wiretapping and electronic eavesdropping
that covers: (1) any person who (2) intentionally (3
) intercepts, or endeavors to intercept (4) wire,
oral or electronic communications (5) by using an electronic, mechanical or other device, (6)
unless the conduct is specifically authorized or expressly not covered,
e.g.
(a) one of the parties to
the conversation has consent to the interception, (b) the interception occurs in compliance with a
statutorily authorized, (and ordinarily judicially supervised) law enforcement or foreign
intelligence gathering interception, (c) the interception occurs as part of providing or regulating
communication services, (d) certain radio broadcasts, and (e) in some places, spousal wiretappers.
Unlawful Disclosure
: Title III has three disclosure offenses. The first is a general prohibition
focused on the products of an unlawful intercep
tion: (1) any person [who] (2) intentionally (3)
discloses or endeavors to disclose to another person (4) the contents of any wire, oral, or
electronic communication (5) having reason to know (6) that the information was obtained
through the interception of a wire, oral, or electr
onic communication (7) in violation of 18 U.S.C.
2511(1) (8) is subject to the same sanctions and remedies as the wiretapper or electronic
eavesdropper. When the illegally secured information relates to a matter of usual public concern,
the First Amendment precludes a prosecution for disclosure under §2511(c). Moreover, the
legislative history indicates that Congress did not intend to punish the disclosure of intercepted
information that is public knowledge. Finally, the results of electronic eavesdropping authorized
under Title III may be disclosed and used for law enforcement purposes and for testimonial
purposes.
Title III makes it a federal crime to disclose intercepted communications under two other
circumstances. It is a federal crime to disclose, wi
th an intent to obstruct criminal justice, any
information derived from lawful police wiretapping or electronic eavesdropping. A third
disclosure proscription applies only to electronic communications service providers “who
intentionally divulge the contents of the communication while in transmission” to anyone other than sender and intended recipient. Violators would presumably be exposed to criminal liability
under the general disclosure proscription and to civil liability.
Unlawful Use
: The prohibition on the use of information secured from illegal wiretapping or
electronic eavesdropping mirrors its disclosure counterpart: (1) any person [who] (2) intentionally
(3) uses or endeavors to use to another person (4) the contents of any wire, oral, or electronic
communication (5) having reason to know (6) that the information was obtained through the
interception of a wire, oral, or electronic communi
cation (7) in violation of 18 U.S.C. 2511(1), (8)
is subject to the same sanctions and remedies as the wiretapper or electronic eavesdropper. The
criminal and civil liability that attend unlawful use of intercepted communications in violation of
paragraph 2511(1)(d) are the same as for unlawful disclosure in violation of paragraphs
2511(1)(c) or 2511(1)(e), or for unlawful interception under paragraphs 2511(1)(a) or 2511(1)(b).
Possession of Intercept Devices
: The proscriptions for possession and trafficking in wiretapping
and eavesdropping devices are even more demanding than those that apply to the predicate
offense itself. There are exemptions for service pr
oviders, government officials, and those under
contract with the government, but there is no exemption for equipment designed to be used by
private individuals, lawfully but surreptitiously.

What Penalties can Morrison expect?:

Consequences of a Violation:

Criminal Penalties: Interception, use, or disclosure in violation of Title III is generally punishable by imprisonment for not more than five years and/or a fine of not more than $250,000 for individuals and not more than $500,000 for organizations. In addition to exemptions previously mentioned, Title III provides a defense to criminal liability based on good faith.

Civil Liability: Victims of a violation of Title III may be entitled to equitable relief, damages
(equal to the greater of actual damages, $100 per day of violation, or $10,000), punitive damages,
reasonable attorney’s fees, and reasonable litigation costs. A majority of federal courts hold that
governmental entities other than the United States may be liable for violations of §2520 and that
law enforcement officers enjoy a qualified immunity from suit under §2520. The cause of action
created in §2520 is subject to a good faith defense. Efforts to claim the defense by anyone other
than government officials or someone working at their direction have been largely unsuccessful.
Finally, the USA PATRIOT Act authorizes a cause of action against the United States for willful
violations of Title III, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or the provisions governing
stored communications in 18 U.S.C. 2701-2712. Successful plaintiffs are entitled to the greater of
$10,000 or actual damages, and reasonable litigation costs.

So you see Greg, Morrison has indeed admitted to violation Federal and Kentucky Law. This is a slam dunk case that a fledgling lawyer could win. With his heavily publicized confession, Morrison can only plead guilty and throw himself on the mercy of the court.

Ditto
that is a complete lesson we are learning from you.
thank you for taking the time to give it to us,
I find it complete to say that ERIC HOLDER is in big troubles.
bye

@Ditto: You are missing one key point- even though it may be illegal it is okay because McConnell is still considered to be a conservative and therefore he has no rights. Do the same to Feinstein, Pelosi, or Reid and you would then have a serious crime.

@Ditto, #17:

The recording was made inside McConnell’s campaign headquarters in Kentucky. That means it was not a public location.

The conversation took place inside McConnell’s campaign office. As I understand it, the recording was made outside in a public hallway, where the conversation was audible owing to a door vent and a gap beneath the closed door. Therein lies the rub, for anyone hoping for a successful prosecution. Unknowingly, their conversation was carrying into a public space. All of the definitions and laws cited have to with intrusion into private spaces or private lines of communication.

One couldn’t pin a private memo up on a bulletin board in plain view through a window from a public sidewalk, and then make a successful legal argument that no one had any right to read it and publicly report what it said.

You’re sounding pretty desperate here, Greg. Were this to make it to a court, you’d look like a fool trying to spin that it was casually overheard, and didn’t include some unnatural body contortions to get legible audio thru the “the keyhole”, so to speak.

I’ll invite you to do what I suggested originally… both O’Keefe (INRE Landrieu) and Morrison should be equally condemned for similar acts.

@Greg:

Greg, you are desperate, floundering and it tells. The conversation was not in public, it was inside McConnell’s campaign headquarters, in a private campaign strategy meeting held behind closed door.

Morrison: ““The front door to the office building was unlocked, and there was no one behind the reception desk,” writes Morrison. “Walking down the hall of the second floor, I recognized McConnell’s voice. He was talking about Sen. Rand Paul’s strategic use of the Tea Party in procuring his 2010 election.”

So, Morris entered into McConnell’s privately leased campaign office building and went surreptitiously snooping around. That’s trespassing, mate.

Veteran Louisville attorney Thomas McAdam:

Part of Morrison’s motivation for penning this bit of self-aggrandizing drivel seems to be the fact that his little escapade is being presented to a federal grand jury next week, and the likelihood of his indictment for a felony appears to be as close to a Sure Thing as one can find here in Derby City.

BUSTED: The Case Against McConnell Bugger, Curtis Morrison

A lot has been written about whether Morrison violated the law when he sat outside an office and recorded the conversation going on inside. Luckily for us, Morrison incriminates himself in his Salon.com article today. Here is the key part:

“At the time, I wasn’t clear exactly what I had captured on tape. It wasn’t until I listened back to the recording that I heard the entirety of what was taking place…”

Continued:

Luckily for us, Morrison incriminates himself in his Salon.com article today. Here is the key part:

The front door to the office building was unlocked, and there was no one behind the reception desk. Walking down the hall of the second floor, I recognized McConnell’s voice. He was talking about Sen. Rand Paul’s strategic use of the Tea Party in procuring his 2010 election.

“The voices were coming from the other side of a nearby door, which had a window. I pulled out my Flip camera and started to record.

And as I held my Flip up to the window, that’s what I was hoping for, but I soon realized that the video I was capturing was the back of a projection screen, and only the audio was of value. So I held the Flip closer to the door vent instead of the window, and began recording the 11:45 minutes of footage later released by Mother Jones.

I was sweating. My heart was racing. I tried to record backup audio on my phone, but my cheap replacement phone would only let me record voice memos of one minute in length. Every time the minute was up, the phone would beep, which was excruciating for the person crouching by a door vent. When a gentleman walked out of the campaign headquarters and into the hall, I put my Flip and phone back in my pocket, and headed to the elevator.

Shawn was already there. We made our escape.

At the time, I wasn’t clear exactly what I had captured on tape. It wasn’t until I listened back to the recording that I heard the entirety of what was taking place.

The parts I emphasized prove Morrison is guilty of bugging the office and that most of the conversation wasn’t audible in the hallway until he listened to the tape later….

There’s been some debate about whether the people in the office had a reasonable expectation of privacy. Morrison cedes this point by saying he didn’t fully know what he was recording until after he left and listened to the tape. He couldn’t hear it clearly so he inadvertently admits the only way he could hear the conversation was through the listening device.

Busted.

The FBI was called in to investigate, and U.S. attorney, Brian Calhoun has contacted Morrison’s attorney to inform his client that charges against Morrison are being presented to a grand jury this coming week.

Morrison has been fired for this and Progress Kentucky (aka ProgressKY) want’s nothing more to do with Curtis. Rep. Questioned about this about this bugging of McConnell’s offices, John Yarmuth (D-Ky.) calls ProgressKY and Morrison “an embarrassment to politics.”

@Ditto: In the minds of the left, the end justifies the means.

@Ditto, #24:

So, Morris entered into McConnell’s privately leased campaign office building and went surreptitiously snooping around. That’s trespassing, mate.

McConnell didn’t lease an office building. He leased an office in a building. Outside that office door is a public hallway.

@MataHarley, #26:

I doubt it will make it to court. It will be interesting to see what happens if it does.

In my opinion O’Keefe and Morrison have engaged in equally sleazy behavior. I think their actions would be viewed quite differently by a court, however, owing to the technicalities of applicable laws. I imagine the “Liberals bugged my office” meme will be played by McConnell’s people for all it’s worth, but only up to the point where the story would be legally tested. Going further carries a risk that a politically useful story will blow up in their faces. I suppose they might manage that situation by claiming that the Obama administration pulled strings—yet another outrage!—but no one would believe it but current choir members.

I think the assertion at the start of this article effectively reduces the whole thing to it’s most basic level of silliness. Maybe the message would work better if the words and background were flashing in alternating red and green.

GREG.. is there ANY ACT a LIBERAL can do, that you WOULDN’T DEFEND????

@Hankster58, #28:

The political orientation of the person who made the recording isn’t a factor. Attempting to prosecute someone for recording a conversation that was audible to a microphone situated in a public space isn’t likely to be successful. Any reasonable judge or jury member will likely grasp the legal problem very quickly. There’s no general prohibition against the operation of recording devices in public settings. If a public figure wants his or her words to remain private, they should speak them where they cannot be overheard from a public space.

We are both wrong, after researching the location of the crime, I admit that it is a multistory office building complex. You Greg are wrong when you claim that McConnell only leased an office. McConnell leased a number of offices on the second floor of the Watterson Towers Office Park. You are also wrong in your continued claim that the hallway is public:

Generally, well-known public figures have an expectation of privacy when they speak in their homes or other private retreats. The law prohibits bugging a room, secretly monitoring telephone conversations or intercepting computer communications. However, the publishers, in this case Mother Jones, may disseminate illegally taped conversations if they didn’t break any law in getting the recording.

McConnell opened his campaign headquarters on Feb. 2 on the second floor of the 10-story Watterson Towers, on the west side of Louisville. About 75 people attended.

To get to McConnell’s office, visitors must pass by a security guard to get to the elevator. The main entrance into McConnell’s suite has a half-inch gap between the bottom of the door and the floor.

The fact that you must pass a security guard and receptionist desk indicates that the office building is a controlled access complex. Controlled access means that the lobby personnel are supposed to monitor entry and ensure that only those there on business are allowed entry. In these cases all the areas beyond the lobby are common areas, not public, any more than the hallways in your home or the Pentagon are “public”.

Morrison admits his nervousness on he and Reilly were slipping in during a security lapse of the lobby. That shows that they were well aware that this was a controlled access office complex, and Morrison and Reilly knew that they were not supposed to be skulking around, much less listening at office doorways.

Nor should we consider that Morrison’s colleague in crime Reilly was just a small time Democratic activist. We now have a connection between between the Obama White House and Reilly:

Obama’s chief fundraiser attended White House meeting with Progress Kentucky leader

According to White House visitor log records, Obama’s chief fundraiser Matthew Barzun was among those in attendance at the Dec. 5 White House meeting that also included Shawn Reilly, the Kentucky politico who is accused of secretly bugging a campaign meeting held by U.S. Sen. Mitch McConnell.

Longtime journalist and Louisville Courier-Journal editorial board member Keith Runyon was also there.

These facts, along with other emerging details, further undermine the narrative that Reilly and his colleagues were nothing more than quixotic rogues who got out over their skis.

Appearing on Fox News, DNC communications director Brad Woodhouse sought to distance his party from the group, telling Megyn Kelly he “never heard of” Progress Kentucky or Riley — an assertion that seems less plausible as more facts are known.

To its credit, BuzzFeed recently reported:

“The head of a group accused of illegally taping private meetings of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s campaign visited the White House days before the group’s Twitter account began actively attacking the Kentucky Republican, according to White House visitors logs.”

Bumbling idiots and keystone cops don’t usually receive prestigious invitations. As a source close to the McConnell campaign told me, “You don’t just show up at the White House from Louisville — unless somebody wants you there.” Philip M. Bailey, WFPL’s political editor, echoed this sentiment on Twitter, noting: ”This all occurred before @ProgressKy was founded. But shows [Reilly] wasn’t a “nobody” in #Kentucky Democratic circles.”

You are grasping at straws Greg. Yet you still deny the “Nixon-ian” activities of the Obama administration.

@Greg: The house speaker in KY, who is a Democrat by the way, referred to Morrison’s group as an extremist group. Morrison’s cohort, Shawn Reilly, wasted little time in going to the FBI to distance himself from Morrison as well. So apparently you are supporting someone who according to your own party belongs to an extremist group and whose accomplice, who has already secured legal counsel, is claiming he had nothing to do with the eavesdropping which would be an indication that his lawyers may have concluded that Morrison broke the law.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/senate-races/293501-progress-kentucky-director-denies-illegal-activity-in-mcconnell-bugging-case

@Ditto: Check out his legal defense fund. Notice how he is setting himself up for a claim of a mental disorder.

http://www.gofundme.com/2lkkw4

I wasn’t aware of the claims that McConnell had used federal employees to gather information to be used in his political campaign. I suppose that might explain why the McConnell people have gone totally nuts over the revelation of what seems like a relatively trivial backroom conversation. They might hope to preemptively discredit Morrison, and render his tape inadmissible as evidence.

@another vet:

I saw that. I suppose being a far left extremist might be considered a mental disorder. Maybe he and Greg can be ward buddies. Meanwhile, Greg in typical Alynski tactics, tries to change the subject with an attack on the victim of Morrison’s political espionage.

Don’t be silly. If I were trying to change the subject, I probably would have said something about Michelle Bachmann’s ethics investigation, and then segued into an observation that they’re all a passel of hypocrites. But I didn’t. I am showing a commendable degree of restraint, if I do say so myself. *S*

@Greg:

Spare us your ridiculous, disingenuous protestations. The subject is not what was discussed in the conversation that McConnell was having with his campaign staff, but the criminal act of illegally recording a private conversation. Just as the subject of the Watergate break in was never about what was in the documents that the burglary was to obtain. Your arguments in support of Morrison are in trouble so you are unsuccessful trying in desperation to change the subject to what was recorded. We aren’t going to let you wiggle off the hook.

@Ditto:

He KNOWS.. and Recording from outside or UNDER a CLOSED door etc, is the same as bugging.. and any SANE person would get that.. so we know what Greg isn’t…..

@Greg:

526.010 Definition.
The following definition applies in this chapter, unless the context otherwise requires: “Eavesdrop” means to overhear, record, amplify or transmit any part of a wire or oral communication of others without the consent of at least one (1) party thereto by means of any electronic, mechanical or other device.

526.020 Eavesdropping.
(1) A person is guilty of eavesdropping when he intentionally uses any device to eavesdrop, whether or not he is present at the time.
(2) Eavesdropping is a Class D felony.

WHAT PART OF THIS do you NOT UNDERSTAND Greg????? Why is it, you LIBS, will never simply ADMIT, when you BREAK THE LAW???? Cowards? Or is it a Mental issue? Narcissism?? Feel YOU are somehow ABOVE the laws WE have to follow?? What?

@Ditto: They could have plotting someone’s murder and it wouldn’t make a difference as to the eavesdropping. We’ll see what the grand jury decides. If they don’t indict him, the prosecutor probably needs to find another line of work.

@Hankster58:

Why is it, you LIBS, will never simply ADMIT, when you BREAK THE LAW???? Cowards? Or is it a Mental issue? Narcissism?? Feel YOU are somehow ABOVE the laws WE have to follow?? What? Why is it, you LIBS, will never simply ADMIT, when you BREAK THE LAW???? Cowards? Or is it a Mental issue? Narcissism?? Feel YOU are somehow ABOVE the laws WE have to follow?? What?

The other option is complete control over others. The mindset is essentially the same as past monarchs and dictat5ors who believed they had to control everyone for the good of the state. James I of England writing in “The Law of a Free Monarchy” believed that nobles should not be held accountable under the law whereas “subjects” should. Thomas Hobbes writing in “Leviathin” believed that people had to surrender their liberties to the state in exchange for security and once they gave them up, they couldn’t get them back. Fast forward to the 20th Century and there was an obvious difference in applying the law in Nazi Germany and the USSR. Party members had one standard and everyone else had another. That is what the left truly desires. Their ideals are deeply rooted in philosophers such as Hobbes, Engels, and Marx. Put into practice and those philosophies become the governments of the Lenins, Hitlers, Stalins, and Mussolinis of the world. While they may not advocate mass killings of political opponents, they definitely advocate controlling or even suppressing their rights in order to consolidate their power. They have made it quite clear that we are a threat to them and are therefore their enemies.

another vet
adding to it and they are also our enemies and they proved it openly
with their SCANDALOUS ACTIONS,
SEE BENGHASI MASSACRE still not punish accordingly, , SEE THE IRS outrageous spending and vicious threat to the good AMERICANS FAMILY with questions fit for HITLER REGIME toward the CONSERVATIVES
who want to follow the LAWS OF AMERICA and demanding their rightful deductions on the TAXES,
SEE THE JOURNALIST being check in his back like hypocrite HOLDER is who made him look like a SPY,
while he lies to his teeths.
see the MILITARY at a war zone being denied a hot meal, and being threatened and order to hide their CHRISTIANITY,
see the VETS in hospital being cut SERVICES BY WORKERS PUT ON FURLOW,
see THE VETERAN BACKLOG ONTHEIR DUE MONEY WHO ARE DELAYED 5YEARS,
what money are they suppose to use,

@ilovebeeswarzone: You are correct, they are using as many means as possible to silence any and all opposition to the Party. I was just talking to a DoD civilian from the Reserve unit that I last went to Iraq with and the civilians there are having their work week cut by one day without pay. I’d like to know if they are cutting people belonging to a federal employees’ workers’ union by one day a week. They do heavily support the Party you know.

@Ditto, #36:

Spare us your ridiculous, disingenuous protestations. The subject is not what was discussed in the conversation that McConnell was having with his campaign staff, but the criminal act of illegally recording a private conversation.

McConnell’s people should go ahead and prosecute. Then we’ll see what all the subject becomes.

I’ll say the same for the IRS issue. Go ahead and start pulling threads, and we’ll see what all unravels. If the IRS really was engaging in politically motivated scrutiny, they may also have taken very close looks at members of Congress and their major supporters. Do you think it would be possible to focus public attention on such close looking, while simultaneously keeping totally under wraps what it was they were looking at?

People are so damn sure the Obama administration is corrupt top to bottom, while their own side is lily white and pure as newly fallen snow. I don’t think that’s the way things are. I don’t think that even comes close.

@Greg: Using your argument, there never should have been an investigation into Watergate, the Iran Contra Affair, or the lead up to Iraq War because the Dems aren’t lilly white either. There is a thing called checks and balances. That was a premise behind this country having three distinct branches of government. You don’t want it applied to your side. See my comments in #40 because this type of mindset is part of what I was referring to.

Old Greg.. reduced to trying to protect to most rotten Administration there ever was……
As to “prosecuting”.. well, since Obama has HIS people “investigating themselves” (Holder vs Holder! LOL!) and REID there to STONEWALL anything like an Impeachment… you know it’s darn near impossible… don’t you you worthless troll…
Hiding behind the LOOPHOLES, that they themselves DETEST.. well, when it’s AGAINST them anyways!! LOL!!! TWO FACED LIBS……
Gee, you guys HATED Wall Street during the Campaign.. Now you PRAISE IT, as “proof” Obama is going good…. LOL!! TWO FACED yet again!!
I could go on, but with a oh so willing to pucker up troll like you… what’s the use…. REALITY, could walk up, introduce itself to you, then punch your lights out, and you’d STILL say it didn’t happen…
Greg, you’re a pathetic Joke… Done with you.. why don’t you hang with people more your IQ level…. I hear Romper Room has a seat open….

@another vet: #44 AGREED!!! Greg here.. will SWEAR Nixon should have gone down.. BUT.. will give OBAMA a free pass for the SAME ACTIONS….. two faced libs.. sick in the head.

@another vet: #40….You see it clearly….

@Greg: McConnell’s people should go ahead and prosecute. Then we’ll see what all the subject becomes.

The issue will remain what the charges are, Greg. Unlike any socialist “end worth the means”, our courts don’t work that way and you’re smart enough to know that. You know very well that evidence for any unrelated supposed crime, achieved/collected via illegal means (i.e. original crime), is thrown out.

I’ll say the same for the IRS issue. Go ahead and start pulling threads, and we’ll see what all unravels.

Please don’t tell me you are attempting some moral high ground here, Greg. The Dems and their sundry non profits.. and that most especially includes Organizing for America.. are just as nervous about IRS close scrutiny. That is why most are on board with the concern about the IRS power. They know that it can be turned against them in the future, with any established precedent.

The sooner that you figure out your best allies are your fellow citizens, and not your elected officials, the more all of us will accomplish.

@Greg:

McConnell’s people should go ahead and prosecute. Then we’ll see what all the subject becomes.

As I already informed you, the FBI has notified Morrison that they are presenting charges against him to a Grand Jury. The FBI does not have a habit of assembling a Grand Jury unless they are rather confident that the suspect will be indicted. McConnell and his staff were the victims. Are you so ignorant about the Federal Courts system that you think that Mitch’s lawyers would serve as prosecutors? They will certainly be there to participate if called on, yet their main presence would be to prepare for the civil lawsuit that would follow a conviction.

I’ll say the same for the IRS issue. Go ahead and start pulling threads, and we’ll see what all unravels. If the IRS really was engaging in politically motivated scrutiny, they may also have taken very close looks at members of Congress and their major supporters. Do you think it would be possible to focus public attention on such close looking, while simultaneously keeping totally under wraps what it was they were looking at?

The IRS issue is not even remotely relevant to this conversation. I suggest you post that in one of the discussions about the IRS scandal. I am not going to follow you along on your pathetic distractions.

People are so damn sure the Obama administration is corrupt top to bottom, while their own side is lily white and pure as newly fallen snow. I don’t think that’s the way things are. I don’t think that even comes close.

Again, not relevant to this conversation.

@Ditto, #49:

McConnell and his staff were the victims.

Yeah, I see Mitch hobbling around doing his broken wing display. Anything to draw attention away from the unflattering content of the recorded conversation.

The GOP’s bigger problem is how to draw attention away from the fact that they’ve generally been worse-than-useless for the past four years, and show every indication of remaining worse-than-useless for the foreseeable future. Their single-minded obsession with getting Obama is beginning to look like some sort of mental disorder. Haven’t they figured out that it’s not working? If they don’t snap out of it, it’s probably going to cost them another national election. Which, at this point, is fine by me. I shudder to think what would happen to the country if these bozos were given free rein.

I’ll be amazed if this goes to court. I honestly hope it does. Otherwise we’ll have to listen to claims that the proper functioning of the judicial system has somehow been compromised by the Obama administration.

Greg
the REPUBLICANS ARE NOT IN POWER, stick to the DEMOCRATS they WON
and always poke the REPUBLICANS in the eye to cover their willing malfeasance
and their failure to advance the quality of life of the AMERICANS,
they instead make it worse for the PEOPLE who pay their earning and don’t even get to
have their say in determining the amount and who is worthy to get paid,
the OBAMA REGIME took over the GOVERNMENT and block the CONSERVATIVES on any
incentives for the citizens to profit, while they demonize them and blame them for his failure,
is that a way to run a COUNTRY UNIQUE LIKE AMERICA with the most TOLERANT AMERICANS
who give him a chance, too many times.

@Greg:

Yeah, I see Mitch hobbling around doing his broken wing display. Anything to draw attention away from the unflattering content of the recorded conversation.

McConnell is going on about the duties of his office. and has said very little about the case, leaving that to the FBI.

Morrison on the other hand is whining like a baby about how he lost his job and needs financial help to defend himself. “Bwaaaaah!!!” He even set up for people to donate. I wouldn’t be surprised if you already chipped in a few bucks.