Video: Glenn Greenwald Mocks Congressional Oversight of NSA Surveillance Programs

[Theocrat]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unj_72Gqj9w

[presence]

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/04/congress-nsa-denied-access


Members of Congress
denied access to basic information about NSA

Documents provided by two House members demonstrate how they are blocked from exercising any oversight over domestic surveillance







Glenn Greenwald (http://www.theguardian.com/profile/glenn-greenwald)
theguardian.com (http://www.theguardian.com/), Sunday 4 August 2013 08.26 EDT






http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2011/7/31/1312104779923/Capitol-Hill-007.jpg
Members of Congress are increasingly frustrated at their inability to obtain even basic information about the NSA and FISA court.
Photograph: Alex Wong/Getty Images




Members of Congress have been repeatedly thwarted when attempting to learn basic information about the National Security Agency (NSA (http://www.theguardian.com/world/nsa)) and the secret FISA court which authorizes its activities,

documents provided by two House members demonstrate (http://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2013/aug/04/documents-information-griffith-letters).


From the beginning of the NSA controversy, the agency's defenders have insisted that Congress is aware of the disclosed programs and exercises robust supervision over them. "These programs are subject to congressional oversight and congressional reauthorization and congressional debate," President Obama said the day after (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/07/nsa-surveillance-program-oversight_n_3405716.html) the first story on NSA bulk collection of phone records was published in this space (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/nsa-phone-records-verizon-court-order). "And if there are members of Congress who feel differently, then they should speak up."


But members of Congress, including those in Obama's party, have flatly denied knowing about them. On MSNBC on Wednesday night, Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Ct) was asked by host Chris Hayes (http://www.nbcnews.com/id/52641568/ns/msnbc-all_in_with_chris_hayes): "How much are you learning about what the government that you are charged with overseeing and holding accountable is doing from the newspaper and how much of this do you know?" The Senator's reply:




The revelations about the magnitude, the scope and scale of these surveillances, the metadata
and the invasive actions surveillance of social media Web sites were indeed revelations to me."


But it is not merely that members of Congress are unaware of the very existence of these programs, let alone their capabilities. Beyond that, members who seek out basic information - including about NSA programs they are required to vote on and FISA court (FISC) rulings on the legality of those programs - find that they are unable to obtain it.


Two House members, GOP Rep. Morgan Griffith of Virginia (http://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2013/aug/04/documents-information-griffith-letters) and Democratic Rep. Alan Grayson of Florida (http://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2013/aug/04/email-exchange-alan-grayson), have provided the Guardian with numerous letters and emails documenting their persistent, and unsuccessful, efforts to learn about NSA programs and relevant FISA court rulings.


"If I can't get basic information about these programs,
then I'm not able to do my job",

Rep. Griffith told me. A practicing lawyer before being elected to Congress, he said that his job includes "making decisions about whether these programs should be funded, but also an oath to safeguard the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, which includes the Fourth Amendment."


Rep. Griffith requested information about the NSA from the House Intelligence Committee six weeks ago, on June 25. He asked for "access to the classified FISA court order(s) referenced on Meet the Press this past weekend": a reference to my raising with host David Gregory the still-secret 2011 86-page ruling from the FISA court (http://www.ibtimes.com/fisc-will-not-object-release-2011-court-opinion-confirmed-nsas-illegal-surveillance-1305023) that found substantial parts of NSA domestic spying to be in violation of the Fourth Amendment as well as governing surveillance statutes.


In that same June 25 letter, Rep. Griffith also requested the semi-annual FISC "reviews and critiques" of the NSA. He stated the rationale for his request: "I took an oath to uphold the United States Constitution, and I intend to do so."


Almost three weeks later, on July 12, Rep. Griffith requested additional information from the Intelligence Committee based on press accounts he had read about Yahoo's unsuccessful efforts in court (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/14/technology/secret-court-ruling-put-tech-companies-in-data-bind.html?pagewanted=all) to resist joining the NSA's PRISM program. He specifically wanted to review the arguments made by Yahoo and the DOJ, as well as the FISC's ruling requiring Yahoo to participate in PRISM.


On July 22, he wrote another letter to the Committee seeking information. This time, it was prompted by press reports (http://www.tmcnet.com/topics/articles/2013/07/23/346638-fisa-court-renews-verizon-surveillance-order.htm) that that the FISA court had renewed its order compelling Verizon to turn over all phone records to the NSA. Rep. Griffith requested access to that court ruling.


The Congressman received no response to any of his requests. With a House vote looming on whether to defund the NSA's bulk collection program - it was scheduled for July 25 - he felt he needed the information more urgently than ever. He recounted his thinking to me:

"How can I responsibly vote on a program I know very little about?"


On July 23, he wrote another letter to the Committee, noting that it had been four weeks since his original request, and several weeks since his subsequent ones. To date, six weeks since he first asked, he still has received no response to any of his requests (the letters sent by Rep. Griffith can be seen here (http://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2013/aug/04/documents-information-griffith-letters)).
"I know many of my constituents will ask about this when I go home," he said, referring to the August recess when many members of Congress meet with those they represent. "Now that I won't get anything until at least September, what am I supposed to tell them? How can I talk about NSA actions I can't learn anything about except from press accounts?"


Congressman Grayson has had very similar experiences, except that he sometimes did receive responses to his requests: negative ones.


On June 19, Grayson wrote to the House Intelligence Committee requesting several documents relating to media accounts about the NSA. Included among them were FISA court opinions directing the collection of telephone records for Americans, as well as documents relating to the PRISM program.


But just over four weeks later, the Chairman of the Committee, GOP Rep. Mike Rogers, wrote to Grayson informing him that his requests had been denied by a Committee "voice vote".


In a follow-up email exchange, a staff member for Grayson wrote to the Chairman, advising him that Congressman Grayson had "discussed the committee's decision with Ranking Member [Dutch] Ruppersberger on the floor last night, and he told the Congressman that he was unaware of any committee action on this matter." Grayson wanted to know how a voice vote denying him access to these documents could have taken place without the knowledge of the ranking member on the Committee, and asked: "can you please share with us the recorded vote, Member-by-Member?" The reply from this Committee was as follows:

Thanks for your inquiry. The full Committee attends Business Meetings. At our July 18, 2013 Business Meeting, there were seven Democrat Members and nine Republican Members in attendance. The transcript is classified."


To date, neither Griffith nor Grayson has received any of the documents they requested. Correspondence between Grayson and the Committee - with names of staff members and email addresses redacted - can be read here (http://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2013/aug/04/email-exchange-alan-grayson).


Denial of access for members of Congress to basic information about the NSA and the FISC appears to be common.

Justin Amash, the GOP representative who, along with Democratic Rep. John Conyers, co-sponsored the amendment to ban the NSA's bulk collection of Americans' phone records, told CNN on July 31 (http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1307/31/sitroom.02.html):

"I, as a member of Congress, can't get access to the court opinions.
I have to beg for access, and I'm denied it if I - if I make that request."


It is the Intelligence Committees of both the House and Senate that exercise primary oversight over the NSA. But as I noted last week (http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jul/29/poll-nsa-surveillance-privacy-pew), both Committees are, with the exception of a handful of members, notoriously beholden to the NSA and the intelligence community generally.


Its members typically receive much larger contributions (http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/07/money-nsa-vote/) from the defense and surveillance industries than non-Committee members. And the two Committee Chairs - Democrat Dianne Feinstein in the Senate and Republican Mike Rogers in the House - are two of the most steadfast NSA loyalists in Congress. The senior Democrat on the House Committee is ardent NSA defender Dutch Ruppersberger, whose district not only includes NSA headquarters in Fort Meade, but who is also himself the second-largest recipient of defense/intelligence industry cash (http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/07/money-nsa-vote/).


Moreover, even when members of the Intelligence Committee learn of what they believe to be serious abuses by the NSA, they are barred by law from informing the public. Two Democratic Committee members in the Senate, Ron Wyden and Mark Udall, spent years warning Americans (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/16/us/politics/democratic-senators-warn-about-use-of-patriot-act.html?_r=0) that they would be "stunned to learn" of the radical interpretations of secret law the Obama administration had adopted in the secret FISA court to vest themselves with extremist surveillance powers.


Yet the two Senators, prohibited by law from talking about it, concealed what they had discovered. It took Edward Snowden's whistleblowing for Americans to learn what those two Intelligence Committee members were so dramatically warning them about.


Finally, all members of Congress - not just those on the Intelligence Committees - are responsible for making choices about the NSA and for protecting the privacy rights and other Constitutional guarantees of Americans.

"I did not take an oath to defer to the Intelligence Committee,"

Rep. Griffith told me. "My oath is to make informed decisions, and I can't do my job when I can't get even the most basic information about these programs."



In early July, Grayson had staffers distribute to House members several slides published by the Guardian about NSA programs as part of Grayson's efforts to trigger debate in Congress. But, according to one staff member, Grayson's office was quickly told by the House Intelligence Committee that those slides were still classified, despite having been published and discussed in the media, and directed Grayson to cease distribution or discussion of those materials in the House, warning that he could face sanctions if he continued.


It has been widely noted that the supremely rubber-stamping FISA court constitutes NSA "oversight" in name only, and that the Intelligence Committees are captured by the agency and constrained to act even if they were inclined to. Whatever else is true, members of Congress in general clearly know next to nothing about the NSA and the FISA court beyond what they read in the media, and those who try to rectify that are being actively blocked from finding out.

[HOLLYWOOD]

Remember exactly what Greenwald confirmed, the NSA spying is illegal and UNCONSTUTUIONAL. It violates the 4th amendment, violates the law and violates the statue. The Secret FISA court ruled and admits this, this is why the Puppet & Chief Obama, used Heir Holder and the justice department to keep the RULINGS... TOP SECRET.

The criminals are running the country...

A piece to point out from what US Senator Bumenthal said,
But it is not merely that members of Congress are unaware of the very existence of these programs, let alone their capabilities. Beyond that, members who seek out basic information - including about NSA programs they are required to vote on and FISA court (FISC) rulings on the legality of those programs - find that they are unable to obtain it.


Simply Incredible... sounds like the AP spying retention of records, Fast & Furious, Holder perjury, by the DOJ, non investigations into this by the DOJ or FBI, same goes for criminal acts in Benghazi, IRS, FEC, etc... Nazi Germany thrives by the elite few inside Washington DC

[Lucille]

1:06: One of the most amazing things in this whole episode, Martha, is there is a 2011 opinion, 86 pages long, from the FISA court that ruled that much of what the NSA is doing...is both unconstitutional--in violation of the fourth amendment--and illegal--a violation of the statute. This opinion remains a complete secret. The FISA court has said they have no objection to having it released, but the Obama admin. insists it has to be secret. ... That's extraordinary to have a court opinion ruling that our government violated the constitution and the law, and not only can't we read it but neither can our representatives in congress.

[Schifference]

Glenn Greenwald knows what he wants to say and he says it very quickly to get as much info out in the short allotted time frame.

[Theocrat]

The fact that our own representatives cannot even obtain the information that they need to research what the NSA surveillance programs are all about is very disturbing.

[enhanced_deficit]

Glenn Greenwald knows what he wants to say and he says it very quickly to get as much info out in the short allotted time frame.

He is great communicator on top of everything else.

[HOLLYWOOD]

Former NSA official on spying on America.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WsrEqC2ABlg

[presence]

He is great communicator on top of everything else.

I actually just got a chance to listen. Yes Greenwald nailed it.

[Peace Piper]

Former NSA official on spying on America.

Fantastic must see video. Great find. Should be posted everywhere.

[Legend1104]

One of the worst side effects of hyper partisanship. A republican/democrat congressman/senator would never oppose anything that a republican/democrat president. Thus, the president is able to get away with everything and the congress never tries to stop him.

[anaconda]

I actually just got a chance to listen. Yes Greenwald nailed it.

I wish Greenwald would have mentioned, near the end, Obama's campaign commitment to protect whistle blowers and their patriotic contributions. This might be something that Rand could bring up. It might rally a few more percent of the base toward objecting to the NSA program and the several national security candidates.

[Galileo Galilei]

Obama will be impeached, not even the FISA court agrees with the NSA.

[anaconda]

Obama will be impeached, not even the FISA court agrees with the NSA.

Which members of the House will vote for the articles of impeachment? And, how many? And how many will lose all of their campaign funding by doing so? Or their emails to their mistresses leaked? I'm afraid the foxes are guarding the hen house.

[Galileo Galilei]

Which members of the House will vote for the articles of impeachment? And, how many? And how many will lose all of their campaign funding by doing so? Or their emails to their mistresses leaked? I'm afraid the foxes are guarding the hen house.

Probably almost all of congress will vote for impeachment. Unlike Bush, Obama has lost the rubric of legality.

[kcchiefs6465]

Probably almost all of congress will vote for impeachment. Unlike Bush, Obama has lost the rubric of legality.
That is the funniest thing I've read in a while.

[Galileo Galilei]

That is the funniest thing I've read in a while.

not funny. The FISA court has ruled that the NSA spying is both illegal and unconstitutional. Not to mention all the lies when they said the FISA court approved it. No way Obama avoids impeachment.

PS - only one possible way out, the FISA appeals court overrode the regular FISA court, which is improbable.

[Galileo Galilei]

skeptics, also see this from June 23:

Glenn Greenwald: 80 page decision from FISA court says NSA is bulk collecting phone calls of Americans (VIDEO)


On Meet the Press, Glenn Greenwald talked about the FISA court decision that say what the NSA is doing is illegal - the NSA is bulk collecting the transmissions, the conversations of millions of Americans not involved in terrorism. The FISA court says this is a violation of the 4th Amendment and is illegal. This all comes from documents shown to Greenwald by Snowden.

WATCH VIDEO HERE:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?419135-Glenn-Greenwald-80-page-decision-from-FISA-court-says-NSA-is-bulk-collecting-phone-calls

Obama is done.

[kcchiefs6465]

not funny. The FISA court has ruled that the NSA spying is both illegal and unconstitutional. Not to mention all the lies when they said the FISA court approved it. No way Obama avoids impeachment.

PS - only one possible way out, the FISA appeals court overrode the regular FISA court, which is improbable.
All of Congress, hell even a majority, couldn't even vote to defund Prism and I am expected to believe that they will unequivocally vote to impeach Obama? This has been going on for years. The only way Obama gets impeached is if he is martyred for their cause to give a sense of legitimacy to their supposed benevolent actions. I'll add again, that that is not going to happen.

We could make bets if I were particularly a betting man, though to be honest, this would be what is called a "sure thing," but how about this, let's bump this thread come 2016 as Obama is showing around the new president. Just for kicks. I hope you are right, though if you expect Joe Biden to be better on civil liberties or the Constitution you are sadly mistaken, but if you are right it might just set a precedent. Since Obama will unequivocally be impeached what about moving down the ladder a little? He is surely not the first to violate an Oath to the Constitution and surely won't be the last. (even if he were impeached) I'm not trying to rain on your parade but Obama will be impeached when pigs fly in a frozen Hell. The rest is theatrics. Holder is still in office. Cheney is still profiting immensely off of new oil contracts. Impeached... it's becoming one of those meaningless words thrown around for the people. A bone of sorts. Business will go on as usual. How many scandals are needed swept under the rug before Americans realize that there is no D vs. R? Simply Liberty for tyranny.

Fast and Furious
Benghazi
IRS scandal
....
....
....

Not. Going. To. Happen.

[Galileo Galilei]

All of Congress, hell even a majority, couldn't even vote to defund Prism and I am expected to believe that they will unequivocally vote to impeach Obama? This has been going on for years. The only way Obama gets impeached is if he is martyred for their cause to give a sense of legitimacy to their supposed benevolent actions. I'll add again, that that is not going to happen.

We could make bets if I were particularly a betting man, though to be honest, this would be what is called a "sure thing," but how about this, let's bump this thread come 2016 as Obama is showing around the new president. Just for kicks. I hope you are right, though if you expect Joe Biden to be better on civil liberties or the Constitution you are sadly mistaken, but if you are right it might just set a precedent. Since Obama will unequivocally be impeached what about moving down the ladder a little? He is surely not the first to violate an Oath to the Constitution and surely won't be the last. (even if he were impeached) I'm not trying to rain on your parade but Obama will be impeached when pigs fly in a frozen Hell. The rest is theatrics. Holder is still in office. Cheney is still profiting immensely off of new oil contracts. Impeached... it's becoming one of those meaningless words thrown around for the people. A bone of sorts. Business will go on as usual. How many scandals are needed swept under the rug before Americans realize that there is no D vs. R? Simply Liberty for tyranny.

Fast and Furious
Benghazi
IRS scandal
....
....
....

Not. Going. To. Happen.

You don't understand what I am saying. Obama, like Nixon, violated the rubric of legality. Bush, Clinton, Reagan did not.

[kcchiefs6465]

You don't understand what I am saying. Obama, like Nixon, violated the rubric of legality. Bush, Clinton, Reagan did not.
Okay.

Well we'll see if they impeach Joe Biden day two of his presidency because they'll still be doing the same damn thing. (whether or not they subcontract out to other spy agencies makes little difference) Like I said, if they wish for a martyr to throw a bone to the public they will impeach him. (and he will be pardoned by the next president)

I am not trying to be overly cynical but you are expecting a lot. Abyan Air Strike. War Crimes. Double Taps. The man isn't getting impeached. I don't care what facade of legitimacy you say he has undone. (it has been undone for a while)

Truth be told they'd probably re-elect his fucking ass if they could.

[Galileo Galilei]

Okay.

Well we'll see if they impeach Joe Biden day two of his presidency because they'll still be doing the same damn thing. (whether or not they subcontract out to other spy agencies makes little difference) Like I said, if they wish for a martyr to throw a bone to the public they will impeach him. (and he will be pardoned by the next president)

I am not trying to be overly cynical but you are expecting a lot. Abyan Air Strike. War Crimes. Double Taps. The man isn't getting impeached. I don't care what facade of legitimacy you say he has undone. (it has been undone for a while)

Truth be told they'd probably re-elect his fucking ass if they could.

Biden is not tied to this scandal.

[Galileo Galilei]

A 2011 FISC court ruling had concluded that some of the NSA’s surveillance programs had violated sections of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, a law aimed at protecting American citizens from surveillance programs targeted at foreigners.

http://www.ibtimes.com/fisc-will-not-object-release-2011-court-opinion-confirmed-nsas-illegal-surveillance-1305023

[Galileo Galilei]

The ruling, signed by the court’s chief judge, Reggie Walton, rejected the Justice Department’s arguments that the secret national security court’s rules prevented disclosure of the opinion. Instead, the court found that because the document was in the possession of the Justice Department, it was subject to release under the Freedom of Information Act.

http://investigations.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/06/12/18925384-secret-court-wont-object-to-release-of-opinion-on-illegal-surveillance

[TER]

Greenwald wins the Pulitzer in a more perfect world. :)

[The Northbreather]

Greenwald/Snowden

http://www.eballz.com/new/images/new/buster.jpg

[anaconda]

Probably almost all of congress will vote for impeachment. Unlike Bush, Obama has lost the rubric of legality.

When do you expect articles of impeachment to be introduced?

[Galileo Galilei]

When do you expect articles of impeachment to be introduced?

between this fall and next spring.

[Galileo Galilei]

what I'm not clear on is whether Greenwald actually has the 86-page ruling. Anyone else here know?

[CPUd]

Okay.

Well we'll see if they impeach Joe Biden day two of his presidency because they'll still be doing the same damn thing. (whether or not they subcontract out to other spy agencies makes little difference) Like I said, if they wish for a martyr to throw a bone to the public they will impeach him. (and he will be pardoned by the next president)

I am not trying to be overly cynical but you are expecting a lot. Abyan Air Strike. War Crimes. Double Taps. The man isn't getting impeached. I don't care what facade of legitimacy you say he has undone. (it has been undone for a while)

Truth be told they'd probably re-elect his fucking ass if they could.

Furthermore, if it even gets close to looking like impeachment proceedings would be a reality, they have any number of people to put in front of the President to take the fall.

It would be exactly the same thing they did with Nixon- there were about half-dozen officials either got fired or resigned; until they discovered Nixon was on tape. Clinton was also on tape. Unless someone has O on tape, he'll be there until Jan. 2017.

[anaconda]

It would be exactly the same thing they did with Nixon- there were about half-dozen officials either got fired or resigned; until they discovered Nixon was on tape. Clinton was also on tape. Unless someone has O on tape, he'll be there until Jan. 2017.

Maybe Greenwald already has such a tape? ;)

http://www.bubblews.com/assets/images/news/268526148_1369004400.jpg

[anaconda]

between this fall and next spring.

I shall look forward to your analysis, then, in eleven months (or possibly sooner).