The closing update on that link is rather intruiging. Though I’m hesitant to speak in absolutes about this situation my personal observation is that if a U.S. Attorney stepped outside of protocal on this issue it might get a tad painful

This story seems to be gaining legs:

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/11/09/taking_liberties/entry5595506.shtml?tag=mncol;txt

Found that link on Drudge’s page.

Perhaps we may be obtaining more specifics.

Watch a pc neighbourhood near you!

Well said.

I never regard this as a party thing, some will be surprised to learn. It’s a government thing. Parties may come and go but government is always there, cultivating some pretty bad habits.

I believe the acting A.G. was a conservative. Obama’s selection hadn’t been appointed yet.

If I understand this correctly, and I need to go back for a more careful reading, this subpoena was issued through a sitting Grand Jury.

My first thought, given the nature of the site, is that they were looking for a specific occurrence for a date specific…but why include requests for SS#s , etc. Items that would not be collected in this sites normal course of business.

And then a withdrawal and gag order..a gag order that they would have a hard time enforcing in any court.

It sounds like an attorney using an subpoena for a fishing expedition…and a rather frantic attempt at backtracking.

Ominous in its implications…though I’m not sure how widespread this sort of request would be.

I would like to know what happened on that ‘certain day’ and why government would be interested in it.

My God, next they’ll be telling us what we should write about on our blogs!

I’m always open to special requests.

This kind of thing must always be opposed, without exception.

I’m trying to understand the motivation. Government flexing it’s muscles? The thing I find most bothersome is the gag order. They obviously knew what they were doing, if not wrong, could be interpreted in the wrong way.