Transcripts For LINKTV Democracy Now 20140214

Edward snowden, the former spinector who displayed a operettas. Well speak with stewart bader Stewart Baker. The search for ever greater protection for Civil Liberties does have a cost than we do not know what the cost will be paid. We will be joined by Daniel Ellsberg. He leaked the pentagon papers in 1971. Helped to end the war in that helped to end the war in vietnam. I believe firmly that Edward Snowden is no more a traitor than i am or that i was, and i am not. Today, Daniel Ellsberg versus Stewart Baker on spine hyena. All of that coming up here at coming up. Now,me to democracy democracynow. Org, the war and peace report. Im amy goodman. The massive storm that blanketed the east coast in up to 18 inches of snow is expected to ease today after four days. The storm was blamed for at least 18 deaths, mostly in traffic accidents in the south. In new york city, mayor bill de blasio faced criticism for a decision to keep the schools open. The mayor says he acted mindful that many parents rely on school for child care, and many lowincome students rely on school for their lunch. We have made abundantly clear that we know the city is functioning and city agencies are doing their job, it is not something you do lightly. United nations envoy lakdar brahim met with top u. S. And russian envoys on thursday in a bid to save the faltering syrian peace talks from collapse. Brahimi says he won pledges from both sides to push for a breakthrough between the assad regime and syrian rebels, but declined to offer specifics. Have kindly reaffirm their support to what we are trying to do, and promised that they will help both here, and in toir capital and elsewhere unblock the situation for us because until now we are not making much progress. Human rights activists say syria has endured its deadliest violence so far in the three weeks since peace talks began, with an average of 236 People Killed per day. At the united nations, emergency relief cordinator valerie amos warned both sides are flouting their humanitarian obligations. That fournacceptable months since the member of that counsel demanded Action International you military and law continues to be consistently and flagrantly violated by parties to the conflict. All parties are failing in their responsibility to protect civilians. We understand that a war is going on, but even worse have wars have rules. Afghan President Hamid karzai has rejected u. S. Objections to his governments latest release of prisoners. A group of 65 inmates were released from bagram on thursday, a prison formerly run by the u. S. Occupation. The Obama Administration has lobbied intensely against the prisoners release, accusing them of attacks on afghan civilians and u. S. Troops. At a news conference, karzai said the u. S. Shouldnt interfere in afghan affairs. Afghanistan is a sovereign country. If the judicial authorities decide to release a prisoner, it is of no concern to the u. S. , and should be of no concern to the u. S. , and i hope that the United States will stop harassing afghanistans procedures and judicial authority, and i hope that the United States will now begin to respect afghan sovereignty. U. S. A statement, the military said the newly released prisoners pose a threat to afghan civilians and foreign soldiers. Bahrain has arrested scores of people ahead of todays third anniversary of a prodemocracy uprising there. Opposition activists began protesting the u. S. Backed sunni regime on february 14, 2011, amidst popular uprisings in egypt and tunisia. The protests have been crushed by martial law and a u. S. Backed invasion of Saudi Arabian forces. Bahrain is a key u. S. Government ally in the gulf, hosting the navys 5th fleet. Activists have defied a government crackdown to hold protests throughout the week and more rallies are expected today. More than 200,000 people are being evacuated in indonesia after a major volcanic eruption. Dangerous ash and rocks have spewed from java islands mount kelud, threatening residents in at least 36 villages. At least two people have been killed so far. The National Security agency has a has said it has forced out civilian staffer and nongraded two others. Says he used the fire employee the fired employee passwords. We will host a debate on Edward Snowden after headlines. A federal judge has struck down virginias ban on samesex marriage. On thursday, judge Arenda Wright of u. S. District court said virginias law violates gay peoples constitutional right to due process and equal protection. Allens ruling has been delayed pending an appeal. Virginias attorney general announced last month the state would stop defending the ban in court. The social media giant facebook has expanded gender options available to identify users. From 10n now choose options including transgender, intersex, and fluid. Plant int a volkswagen chattanooga, tennessee are in their final day of voting on whether to form a union. The United Auto Workers is seeking to represent the plants 1,550 eligible employees in what would be its first presence at a u. S. Plant owned by a foreign company. The union push has faced intense opposition from republican lawmakers and outside groups. This week republican senator bob corker claimed he had been assured that volkswagen would reward the plant with a new car to build if its workers reject unionization. Volkswagen has denied corkers claim and critics say hes engaged in scare tactics. On thursday, corker doubled down on his statement, saying his information is even more credible than volkswagens top local executive, who himself said there is no connection between the vote and the companys plans. Also this week, state senator bo watson said future legislative incentives for volkswagen could have a quote a very tough time if the workers unionize. Rightwing groups have also weighed in. The dcbased americans for tax reform has purchased over a dozen local billboards urging workers to vote no. At a uaw news conference, plant worker john wright criticized what he called outside interference. Outside groupsse from washington, d c, and other areas trying to influence politicians and employees. They are an outside party. A do not know anything about volkswagen itself, did not know anything about us, and really, we see it as interference. Consumer advocates and reform groups are speaking out against a planned merger between comcast and time warner. Comcast has announced plans to givinge warner cable, them a virtual monopoly in 19 of the largest 20 media markets. , freedia reform group press, says the deal is unthinkable while the former fcc commissioner said it is so overthetop it should be dead on arrival at the fcc. It could take the fcc more than one year to review the deal. Stage ais expected to lobbying blitz the similarly to what one approval to when it nbc universalor purchase. And those are some of the headlines this is democracy now, democracynow. Org, the war and peace report. Im amy goodman. I am juan gonzalez. Welcome to the viewers around the world. Today, we host a debate on former National Security Agency Contractor Edward Snowden and his disclosure of the massive spying apparatus the nsa operates in the United States and across the globe. Snowdens leaks to the guardian and other Media Outlets have generated a series of exposes on nsa surveillance activities from its collection of americans phone records, Text Messages and email, to its monitoring of the internal communications of individual heads of state. The latest revelations based on the leaks were reported by journalists Jeremy Scahill and Glenn Greenwald with first look media. They show how the nsa has secretly assisted in u. S. Military and cia assassinations overseas by using metadata analysis and cellphone tracking technologies. The unreliable tactic that has resulted in the deaths of innocent or unidentified people. Well, the nsa has defended its activities as essential in the fight against terrorism. In january, director of National Intelligence James Clapper attacked snowden while speaking before the Senate Intelligence committee, and called for him to return all stolen documents to the nsa after causing what he major harm to u. S. Security. Clapper also suggested that the journalists who have published snowdens leaks are his accomplices. Edward snowden claims that he has one and his mission is accomplished. If that is so, i call on him and his accomplices to facilitate the return of the demeaning stolen documents that have not yet and exposed. What i want to speak to is the profound damage that his disclosures have caused and continue to cause. As a consequence, the nation is less safe and its people less secure. What he has stolen and expose has gone way beyond his professed concern with socalled domestic surveillance programs. Meanwhile snowden has repeatedly maintained hes no longer in possession of any of the documents he took from the nsa. Having passed them on to journalists to report at their discretion. The editors of the New York Times recently urged clemency for snowden, writing quote considering the enormous value of the information he has revealed, and the abuses he has exposed, mr. Snowden deserves better than a life of permanent exile, fear and flight. He may have committed a crime to do so, but he has done his country a great service. Partly as a consequence of the governments response to snowdens leaks, the United States plunged 13 spots in an annual survey of press freedom by the independent organization, reporters without borders. Snowden now lives in russia and faces espionage charges if he returns to the United States. In his First Television interview to german channel ard late last month, snowden talked about how perceptions of the leaks among Us Government officials had changed. In response to the revelations was sort of a circling of the wagons of government around the National Security agency instead of circling around the public and their rights. The Political Class circles around the Security State and protected their rights. What is interesting is though that was the initial response, since then, we have seen a softening. We have seen the president acknowledged that when he first are no abuses, we have seen him and his officials admit there have been abuses, thousands of violations of the National Security agency and other agencies authorities every single year. Edward snowden speaking to german tv last month. Well, to discuss the significance and implications of snowdens leaks, we host a debate. In washington, dc, we are joined by Stewart Baker, former general counsel of the National Security agency, and assistant secretary for policy at the department of homeland security. He is a partner at the law firm steptoe johnson. Baker is the author of skating on stilts why we arent stopping tomorrows terrorism and here in our new york studio, Daniel Ellsberg is a former pentagon and Rand Corporation analyst and is perhaps the countrys most famous whistleblower. Ellsberg leaked the pentagon papers in 1971, exposing the secret history of the u. S. Involvement in vietnam, prompting Henry Kissinger to call him the most dangerous man in america. The papers were published in several newspapers, including the New York Times and the Washington Post, and were later published as a book. They were only officially declassified and released in 2011. Welcome both of you to democracy now Stewart Baker, i am sorry you are snowed in at home. Why dont we begin with you. Can you talk about what Edward Snowden did, and if you think he is a traitor . Washat Edward Snowden did quite deliberately change jobs to gather as much, perhaps documents, from as many places as a kid around the National Security agency and other agencies as well as he could around the National Security agency and other agencies as well read he stored them as well. He stored them on a computer and handed them out to journalists, it is likely that sophisticated agencies have been them, andt access to allow them to be disclosed at the journalists discretion with more or less guidance from Edward Snowden. The result of that has been a massive disclosure of classified intelligence gathering that has hurt our ability to catch terrorists, keep an eye on iranian, north korean, chinese operations, and it has been great diplomatic damage as well. I think frankly the way those disclosures have occurred it is hard to do that as anything other than the intended results of him gathering information and disclosing it as he did. He certainly disclosed information that sparked a debate in the United States. He did that in june, but he has continued to disclose documents for months thereafter, which have no obvious policy value in terms of a debate or a concern that the United States public should have, but which have done enormous damage. He is a minimum, i think somebody that has violated u. S. Law, done great damage, and should go to jail for it. Traitor . It remains to be seen. There have been people that make the case, and in some cases persuasively, that his leaks serve the interest of the country where he is located, and either waiting me or because he or tricked wittingly because he was tricked into it, he may be serving russias interest. The argument that given the extensive nature of the surveillance that was being conducted without the knowledge hethe American People that had a moral responsibility to speak out and at least spark this debate. Obviously, if you cannot do intelligence gathering in the sunlight. You cannot tell the American People everything you are doing in their name because the process of telling them also tells your targets, hezbollah, al qaeda, the north koreans, the iranians, the russians, and the chinese exactly what you are doing, and you cannot do that and continue to gather the intelligence. So, there has to be a limit on what the public debates here. There also has to be a limit on what the several Million People theyave clearances feel are free to disclose because they decided there is a problem with the program. At the end of the day, all that Edward Snowden says he did was make some brief remarks to wouldors thinking this look good in the Washington Post if it were known, and then he decided to release 2 million documents. N there are whistleblower protections in u. S. Law more than any other countries law, but you need to go to the authorities, congress, and raisetor general, and your concerns there. He did none of that. That this was illegal has turned out to be highly questionable. All of that said, yes, he has spurred a debate on that one program and he could have with one document, the document that he released the first. Everything he has done since then has simply doesnt done damage, and the number of spurred,hat have been and certainly the number of serious proposals for changing the current intelligence law is close to zero. That is Stewart Baker, former general counsel with the National Security agency. Your assessment of Edward Snowden, and do you feel he is a traitor or a patriot . I feel confident that he is no more a traitor than i am, and i am not. The notion that he joined the thator the ci say cia, he did that with the intent to either harm the interest of the United States, or release information, or to harm the nsa i do not think there is evidence for that and i think it is entirely false. He came to believe, as i did, posts made those originally, and the promises of nondisclosure, which are contractual agreements, which he later violated, as i did, he made those in good faith by everything known to me, and came to realize, eventually, that a nondisclosure agreement in this case and secrecy conflicted with oath to defend and support the constitution of the United States, and was superseding authority there with a responsibility to inform the public because as he said, he could see nobody else would do it. He saw the head of the nsa but also the director of the intelligence National Intelligence who was quoted lied to congress, and what he is mostly revealed in particular is not that mr. Oathper was violating his in the sense of trying to deceive congress, but that he knew that the false statements that they were not collecting data on millions of americans were false, and he knew congress knew they were false that, the people that he was talking to. What we saw is that we could not rely on the Oversight Committee of congress to reveal, even when they knew they were being lied to, and that is because they were bound by secrecy, nasa secrecy and nsa secrecy and their own rules. It has totally corrupted the checks and balances on which our democracy depends. Enam grateful to edward snowd for having given us a constitutional crisis, a crisis instead of a silent coup, as after 9 11. He has confronted us. He has revealed documents that prove that the oversight process, both in the judiciary and in the secret court and secret committees in congress who keep their secrets from them, even when two them, widen and udall felt these were unconstitutional, but did not feel they could inform their colleagues or staff of this. What Edward Snowden has revealed is a broken system and he has given us the opportunity to get it back, to retrieve our Civil Liberties, the more than that to retrieve the separation of powers on which our democracy depends. Daniel ellsberg, what about mr. Bakers remarks that he could have released one or two documents, and that would be sufficient to spurred the debate. You talk about he talked program,ealing on one but the way you put it, when i put out four thousand pages to the newspapers, and 3000 other pages to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee there was no Intelligence Committee at that time which i did not get time, newspapers at that when i saw the effects of that it gave me a moral that i have been saying for 40 years, and i have been asking people, do now do do not do what i did. Do not wait until bombs are falling, until thousands more have died, before you tell your truth. I would also say by now do not tell it only to congress it i gave it to congress one year and a half before it came out. Senator fulbright failed to bring the hearings on the ground or he would be deprived of secret information that you waited for me to do it. If i did not do it, he waited for me to do it. If i did not do it, it would not happen. What i said is i want someone to put out enough documentation to make the case irrefutable. Memo, 10t all one memos, you hear that it was recent then rescinded the next day. The pentagon papers, unfortunately were only history, as i did not have current documents, but what they did show is that this was a pattern of decisionmaking that went over four different president s and was being repeated today. That took hundreds of thousands thousands of pages to reveal and many did not reveal anything of great significance. I wanted to be very clear that i had not censor them. I had not taken out the one good reason for the war. Did, which inowden admire very much, is put out enough material to show an entire pattern of behavior, and not just on one program, but a number of programs with the implication that there were many more and that Congress Needs to look into this, and not in the way the intelligence communities have done. They have been thoroughly corrupted by this process. There has to be a new congressional investigation with new people and that has to be pressed by the public. It will not happen by congress alone. We are talking to dan danberg and Stewart Baker, ellsberg, perhaps most famous whistleblower. He released the pentagon papers in 1971. Stewart baker. We will continue this debate in a moment here at moment. [music] the paper soldier by the famous russian poet, novelist, singersongwriter, bulat okudzhava. This is democracynow, democracynow. Org, the war and peace report. We are joined by Stewart Baker. He is a partner at the law firm steptoe johnson. Baker is the author of skating on stilts why we arent stopping tomorrows terrorism Daniel Ellsberg is a former pentagon and Rand Corporation analyst and is perhaps the countrys most famous whistleblower. Ellsberg leaked the pentagon papers in 1971, exposing the secret history of the u. S. Involvement in vietnam, helping to end the vietnam war. Stewart baker, do you think that dan ellsberg was a traitor . Know, but i think he is shockingly misrepresenting the facts, and a stating of a opposition that in has no place in democracy. Said, i had pointed out that he had changed jobs specifically to steal more documents. Daniel ellsberg says that is false. I do not know where he gets this. Edward snowden says he changed jobs so that he could get more documents. To come on the program and simply look into the camera and say that is false, calling me a liar when the record is clear suggests that he is either neither paying attention or he does not care what the facts are. Let him respond to that. Let me give the benefit of the doubt to mr. Baker that he is not listening to what i am saying. Of course, it is the case that he has said he went he said booze that he went to allen. That false . Ou call you accuse me of lying. When he first worked as a , it was not with with no intention of disclosing documents, and the turning point came later. I heard you say that, and i accept that that is a storyline that is not implausible, it may be true or something that he made up. I am agreeing with you. You started the discussion by saying what mr. Baker says is false, and then told a different story. Why are you accusing me of lying when in fact what i said is true , not false. I have not accused you of lying. Statement was false. I said he did not join the cia with the intention of putting out documents. Will you lay off for a minute . Play back what he said . I heard him say the statement was false. Let me say right away the statement is correct that i have known he joined booze and to get documents he could not have gotten otherwise with the intent of putting out. It was something i did not do, and in a way i regret it, i did not go back to washington with the intent to get more documents and put them out. Anyway, i agree with your point, i have not accused you of lying. To the question about just how much you know about the damage he asserted. Me addresshat, let that you are trying to explain you did not mean to say the statement was false, even though you said it, to your broader theory, if i understand it right, is that all of these documents should have been released because they allow for a broader story, and that you cannot give it to congress because they feel there are certain points let me address that point. [indiscernible] people change because they nationalide to protect security rather than blow the whistle, so every person who breaks into the government gets to make the decision for themselves how many confidential, classified, and very important programs should be disclosed to the people you are targeting . Let me go to the point you are discussing. Lets let dan ellsberg respond. Would you let me finish . Lets let dan ellsberg respond. Let you finish your filibuster. We have a certain amount of time. Let me address an important point of what else he could have done or should have done. Learned, not only from me, and from chelsea manning, by the way, but from the experience of four or five nsa senior leavy, andcurt lewis, tom drake, and bill bening, who between them have 30 average, years of experience at the nsa at the highest levels. Each of them separately and together did what you and the president has suggested they should have done, went to their afterors in great detail 9 11, after you are out of the nsa, by the way, was unconstitutional, dangerous, and unnecessary and should be modified or changed or dropped. They got no response from that. Their recommendations were simply ignored. They went to the Inspector General, and i believe some of them went to the Inspector General of the defense department. They went to staff of the Congressional Office on a classified basis to complain about these, and offered to testify. The result was not only no change to programs they knew were more protective of Civil Liberties and more effective at capturing terrorists and could well have prevented 9 11, rather than the programs that we were in. The effect of her doing that was to be suspected wrongly was of having leaked all of this information to the New York Times for the revelations for which they got the pulitzer prize. They had not. I would say they should have considered that. Anyway, they had not done that. Instead they followed these channels. The result of that was Early Morning raids by the fbi on each of them in suspicion that they might be the leaders of this important information, and in fact one of them, and hell bening, a diabetic with an educated leg, first learned of the suspicion when there was a knock on his shower door and he opened the door to find an fbi head pointing a gun at his , followed by eight hours of interrogation, and the removal computers and thumb drives with no charges ever pressed against them. Tom drake, as a result, was subject to a spurious, punitive prosecution with no valid basis, which led essentially to an apology from the judge in the end after he had been bankrupt. Looking at that experience specifically, edwards noted new it would be foolish and hopeless for him to call attention to this within the channels. He did exactly right, and others should follow the same, not just when they disagree or object with policy, as the president suggested, when they feel it is unconstitutional, criminal, as, nsahe way, the years of warrantless spying from 20012006 with no legal basis for criminal, unconstitutional, and delete essentially by no one with documents. What Edward Snowden has done is provide documents to prove that what was done in the past was clearly illegal and that put into question the whole oversight procedure, and the good faith of nsa in binding itself to the constitution. So, i think he did what he should have done as all four of those nsa people who did not do it have said now he did it right, our approach was hopeless. Well, i have served the government off and on for a long time at the senior levels, and that i havef times not persuaded the government to do things i should not do, even things that are morally or legally compelled to do, are pretty substantial. This is the way government works, the way democracies work. Individual Government Employees did not get to say i think this is wrong, and therefore it must stop. It, and there are plenty of circumstances and stories of people who have raised issues and have been investigated and they have led to changes. I do not know the specifics of the case is that you are talking about. They were mistreated as a result of suspicions aroused by what they did internally, but the fact that not every one of their complaints was validated is not surprising. Gets one government they want, not even the president. To say i did not get what i want, so i will arrest this operation by disclosing it is a remarkable and fundamentally antidemocratic view. The president has called a narcissistic. I think that is not wrong. There comes a point in which you say i have done what i can to raise this, and i have been assured that this is not a legal. The things that he had been beenaining about had through court and congress. We could argue about whether they are legal or not now, or whether they should be. It is fair to say they were blessed by the courts at the time, the things that he disclose that were news as opposed to the things that were history. Mr. Baker were not unlawful at the time. It is pretty clear that congress and the courts approve those things. They might become changed as a result of this debate, but that is different than saying i am doing something illegal. Let me address both of those questions. When it comes to being called names, knossos cystic, megalomaniac, narcissistic, megalomaniac, and traitor, which is much more serious, i have had. Hose names called if you are not willing to be called names, you cannot carry out your responsibilities to the constitution. Getting to that, if you are telling me that there have been times when you dutifully with your agreement on secrecy accepted without exposing to anyone else policies that as i heard you were immoral, and you may have said he legal, but lets just say illegal, i respectfully say you are mistaken in your judgment. You were acting as nearly all bureaucrats and officials do, they protect their jobs, careers, clearances, and their promise to keep secrets, and they do not think twice about what their responsibility Mike Beebe Issa beyond what the responsibility is to the agency or the president. If you say youre not familiar with those four nsa names, my first comment would be you have not followed this closely, and the Second Thought would be they have not testified before congress because this light there extreme expertise in this despite ofcause their extreme expertise in the field, no congressman has wanted to hear from them under oath. If they are mistaken, let them be let that be exposed. That thiss they found was unconstitutional. I think they now feel they did not do all that they should have, and if you were in a similar position, i have to say to you like most people in that position, you did not do ierything you could, just as did not. I did not do everything i could because some of the things i could do would be profoundly damaging to the United States, and i have said what i have i have done what i can inside of the system to raise this issue, and it is going to be resolved. It is resolved by people that have made calls that are different than mine, what who are closer to the fact. Sometimes you have to make a decision because the alternative is to say no secret as safe. It makes them feel better. Mr. Baker he disclose as far more than one secret. He disclose massive amounts of sparked nohave debate at all, but nonetheless do great damage to the United States. How could that possibly have been the right outcome . Mr. Baker, as a former nsa general counsel, you say that you did raise some concerns during your tenure. I am not suggesting i youre misinterpreting what i said. Wass not saying that when i nsa general counsel i saw things that i thought were illegal and inside and it did not go outside. There are many calls, and i have been in government many times, many calls that are made by people above you in government where you wonder if they are doing the right thing, and you have to recognize you do not always have all of the facts that they have, and i have done it since i have been out of government. Mr. Baker, let me ask my question to you. From what you have seen since the Edward Snowden disclosures, and what you know of the operations of the nsa when you were there, is there anything that has been disclosed that raises questions to you about whether your government, our government, was properly conducting surveillance, its surveillance responsibilities . No. I think that the agency has an incredible commitment to following the law, a commitment they have had since the 1970s, the last set of reforms that were adopted. They might have done things that in retrospect some courts would but they haveper, almost always done those things with careful legal analysis and with the approval, where appropriate, of the courts, so, people can disagree about what or courts got it right wrong, but i think nsa has acted in a fundamentally, lawabiding way, and the institution that i knew and that i still see is committed to that because they recognize that the powers they have are extraordinary and need to be used in democratically legitimate ways. They have worked very hard to do that. Blown thoseden has things without any regard for the law. We will be back. Our guests are Stewart Baker, former nsa general counsel, and diana Daniel Ellsberg, who leaked the pentagon papers in 1971. He leaked the papers first to the New York Times. This is democracy now. We will be back in a minute. [music] this is democracy now, democracynow. Org, the war and peace report. Im amy goodman with juan gonzalez. Before we continue our debate, what Edward Snowden did and what should happen to him, i have some breaking news on a person we have been covering over the past week. Karim khan, who has been missing, has been released. His brother and son were killed by a drone in 2009. The legal Charity Reprieve says. E was replaced released you can go to our website at democracynow. Org to see our weekse from this broadcast. Now we continue our debate between Stewart Baker, former nsa general counsel. He was appointed to the nsa by president george h. W. Bush, and georgerved, appointed by w. Bush, to the department of homeland security. Were also joined by Daniel Ellsberg, former pentagon and Rand Corporation analyst who inked the pentagon papers 1971, exposing the secret history of the u. S. Involvement in vietnam. Ellsberg, Stewart Baker says, in response to one juan s question, surprised by what was exposed by Edward Snowden, and on the issue of edwards noting continuing to release information, according to edward Edward Snowden continuing to release information, according to Edward Snowden, he gave the documents to journalists. He said when he went to russia he did not have the documents and he is not the one continuing to release them, but the journalists who have access to them are one by one writing stories in various papers come in delving into what is in these documents. Dan ellsberg. A couple of things first of all, the 1. 7 million figure, which is possibly far more than he possibly could have looked at , is a government statement. They do not know what he journalists,he neither mr. Baker nor i actually informed that it is wrong by at least an order of magnitude tenfold. Which way . Which way, very good. Than 10 ofsed last what they talked about, and everything he released was something he had formed a judgment that they had to have it, and he did not have to have it on their judgment alone. He couldve put it on the web themselves. He said over and over i am not releasing a single document. He said every document should have the judgment of trained journalists. Every, in every case of story that has appeared so far, and apparently mr. Baker believes there has been great damage from those already, for which the journalists would also be responsible, every story has been checked with nsa by both the guardian, and the Washington Post. In every case, they have made and in every case printed they have followed objections as to sources and methods that would damage the United States or our interest. Edward snowden said he had knowledge of clandestine whereabouts of listening posts, and he neither copy them or given them to journalists, which he could have a cousin could have harm the security and intelligence apparatus because he believes in the intelligence and security apparatus. I understand that Glenn Greenwald has demanded an agreement to every newspaper source that they check their stories with nsa for sensitive material. Now, when mr. Clapper im baker says over and over that there has been great damage here, i ask him how he knows that . Based on what . Possibly he is still reading classified material as a consultant, or maybe not. My guess is he is just that excepting at face value the statements of mr. Clapper or others. Why would you do that . I have two questions for mr. Baker, which are both susceptible of yes or no questions, they are short, and i hope you will not filibuster. He was general counsel at nsa in 9 11, when before the nsa was observing what they called the first amendment, commandment, thou shall not spy on americans, listen to americans, or collect material without an individual court order with probable cause, and the observed that. Years years of their 70 in existence they were within the law, not earlier under johnson or nexen, and not later, so the questions are, mr. Baker might have an idealized picture havingthis works for experienced it before 9 11. Here are the questions if he had been general counsel to mr. Clapper when he faced congress and was asked are we collecting any data at all on millions of americans, would he have encouraged mr. Clapper to give the answer that he did give, and no, which clapper later explained was the least untruthful answer he couldve given, or would he have advised him otherwise, and the second is if he had been general counsel of the nsa in 20012006, and during which there was no legal warrantless, what would his judgment have that, and if he had been overwritten, would he have accepted that like colleagues, or might he have considered telling someone other than intelligence communities. Committees. Stewart baker, those are questions for you. I do not want to be accused of filibustering, but some do require more context. I think everyone would agree clappers answer to that question was not the right thing to say. It was a question designed quite specifically to result in the compromise of the 215 program. That is to say there was nobody asking or answering the question that did not already know the answer to the question, but what they could not do was tell al qaeda or the American People about it without telling al qaeda. What he should have said is something that dodged the question, but it was cleverly designed by senator widen, so that when he asked the question, to say i can only answer that in classified session answers the question as well. Refused to answer without exposing the program. He came up with a compromise that was trying, i think, to interpret the notion of you spying onare americans which he thought he could comfortably say we are not, except for we have court orders or we have inadvertently collected the information. I think when you read the transcript, it is hard to see that as a response of answer, and he did not even gracefully do that. I think it is fair to point out that this was not some campaign of lying. It was a campaign of exposure by senator widen and a meldrick effort to avoid that question. 2000 sixion of the warrantless wiretapping, i certainly agree with 2006 warrantless wiretapping, i certainly agree that it is hard to square that with the statute. Ith fisa that direction was given, and the legal conclusion was reached that the president had the authority to order that isa, and thereg f has been a longstanding view that the president has the authority to do this without the but iement of the courts, think a passage of the skies act made that much harder to do. That said, the court at that point and utterly disgraced itself. , what forced a bunch of it turns out, were illegal requirements in the name of andl liberties on the fbi the Intelligence Community that helped in a significant way to make it difficult to respond to the news that there were hijackers or terrorists in the United States before 9 11. Fisat not been for the policies,extra legal it was pot it is possible the hijackers could have been caught. 9 11, the court insisted on those illegal policies enforced the government to make its first appeal ever to the fisa review court, which suggested the court was not actually interested in protecting americans, but had a goal that nobody else in government shared, which was to maintain this wall between intelligence and law enforcement. I can understand why they did it, but i have to say as a lawyer it is hard to judge testify. Mr. Baker, we have about one minute left. Well have dan ellsberg respond. I have not called mr. Baker a liar, i do not regard them as patriotic,her than but he said demonstrates the opposite. He is referring to a case i would like to assume he knew. You have 30 seconds. The hijacker went into the pentagon. Prensa,own by pre9 11 intelligence methods to the cia. Their choice, deliberate not to give it to the fbi had nothing to do with firewalls. I cannot believe you do not know that, i am sorry, mr. Baker. Inyou are joining me criticizing the court. We will have to leave it there. Stewart baker, former nsa general counsel, and dan ellsberg, perhaps the countrys most famous whistleblower. Papers inthe pentagon 1971. Democracy now is looking for feedback from people who appreciate the closed captioning. Email your comments to outreach democracynow. Org or mail them to juan gon i think, to be elected president these days is, you need a lot of money. Money and publicity. A few thousand dollars. Maybe 10,000. After giving you money, people want you to do things for them. Millions of dollars. It has strings attached. And now youre gonna have to pay it all off, and. Yeah, so thats a problem. Female announcer major funding for priceless was made possible by