You just got caught in another lie Carol, it wasn't some "lowly magistrate judge" who approved the warrant it was Chief Judge Royce Lamberth of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Appeals don't go down the judicial food chain stupid, they go up.<quoted text>
No reporter has been prosecuted for seeking information. There's cases involving targeting a suspected leaker but not journalists who report it. And no journalist will name their sources or are even expected to.
Attorney General Holder was turned down by two judges to go after Rosen and had to resort to a lowly magistrate judge in DC to sign off on illegally confiscating not only Rosen's personal emails and phone calls but those of his parents. Anyone under that kind of intensive investigation or being charged with that kind of alleged crime legally must be told beforehand.
Other employees' emails and phone calls at Fox News were also confiscated illegally.
Holder did nothing that was legal right down the line.
Why do you always keep missing the boat?
According to 18 USC 2703;
(b) Contents of Wire or Electronic Communications in a Remote Computing Service.—
(1)A governmental entity may require a provider of remote computing service to disclose the contents of any wire or electronic communication to which this paragraph is made applicable by paragraph (2) of this subsection—
(A)without required notice to the subscriber or customer, if the governmental entity obtains a warrant issued using the procedures described in the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure (or, in the case of a State court, issued using State warrant procedures) by a court of competent jurisdiction; or
(B)with prior notice from the governmental entity to the subscriber or customer if the governmental entity—
(i)uses an administrative subpoena authorized by a Federal or State statute or a Federal or State grand jury or trial subpoena; or
(ii)obtains a court order for such disclosure under subsection (d) of this section;
except that delayed notice may be given pursuant to section 2705 of this title.
So no, Carol, notice was in fact not required since a warrant was issued.
Why are you always lying?