I recall someone telling me at Netroots Nation that the Justice Department had appointed two prosecutors to investigate recent leaks over the Predator drone program, the foiled Underpants Bomb II attack and cyberwarfare against Iran. I wondered how the prosecutors would go about arresting the PR agent for the President’s “tough on national security” re-election campaign. Would they just barge into the national campaign headquarters in Chicago?
For all of the President’s righteous indignation (“The notion that my White House would purposely release classified national security information is offensive”), for all Jay Carney’s protests, the unifying feature of all these leaks recently is that a) they position the President as ruthless in protecting the homeland and b) it’s an election year. I guess the third long article with the quotes from 30 Administration officials sort of made it hard to keep up this charade. Then there’s the point that the prosecutors aren’t independent:
Q: The charges that — given that this investigation will be led by two U.S. attorneys who then report to the Attorney General of the United States, that it’s not an independent investigation.
MR. CARNEY: I think there are very capable people in the Department of Justice and I would refer you to them for that matter. The Attorney General has spoken on this.
I can certainly see why Congress would be upset about this. You have a one-way funnel of information, where certain secrets get the friendly Big Media treatment, and on other secrets, the ones that don’t put the Administration in the best light, not even the relevant oversight committees can get to the material. Mike Rogers and Dianne Feinstein, the respective heads of the Intelligence Committees, say they will watch vigilantly over the investigation. This time that might actually happen, but they ought to go further. They ought to force declassification of a lot of this stuff.
Overall, I’m in the same place as Conor Friedersdorf over this, although this has been a slippery slope toward sanctioned leaks for the purposes of self-promotion for at least a couple recent Presidents.
Forget the White House generally. President Obama himself has purposely disclosed “national-security information” — the existence of the CIA drone program — that his own Justice Department and press secretary treat as classified. I’m glad he’s done so. The notion that the United States government should wage ongoing war in multiple countries while keeping it secret from its own citizens is noxious. By my lights, the CIA drone program’s existence should not be a state secret. Obama ought to declassify it.
But he hasn’t. And he purposely spoke about it publicly, precisely in order to defend himself against criticism [...]
As Harvard Law School’s Jack Goldsmith notes, when it comes to drones and the Bin Laden killing, “It has been obvious for years that senior national security officials, including White House officials, regularly and opportunistically leak details to the press (or urge subordinate agencies to do so).” Goldsmith goes on to add that “Dan Klaidman’s new book confirms this. In connection with the CIA killing of Baitullah Mehsud in August 2009, Klaidman reports, in direct contradiction of the President: ‘Though the program was covert, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel pushed the CIA to publicize its covert successes. When Mehsud was killed, agency public affairs officers anonymously trumpeted their triumph, leaking colorful tidbits.’”
I’m going to step back and say that at a certain level, the American public wants this kind of detail. They want to see the White House as it gets depicted in movies, they want the juicy insider tidbits about mass killing. They want a real-life episode of Homeland. The problem is that none of this should really be a secret. If we live in a democracy, we have a right to know who is being killed by what in our name. The New American Way of War, to do it all with covert operations and in secret, deeply wounds the Constitutional process. It also makes it hard for those carrying out the operations to trumpet their successes without violating the covert status. So it’s this shift of war from DoD to CIA that’s the root problem. The self-aggrandizing leaks are just a symptom.





23 Comments


Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
At one of the national security panels at NN12, Marcy Wheeler asked the panelists their views on the anti-democratic implications of having unaccountable people, such as John Brennan, with or without the President’s overt authority, conducting “secret” and undeclared wars in various countries. Although the “secret” is sorta out there, by design, there’s not much push back in Congress, the media or public to the fact this means they’re behaving as a rogue executive with zero democratic accountability. None of the panelists dealt with her question very well.
Picky, picky, picky…
If the administration would spend a fraction of this energy going after the rampant criminality on Wall Street, perhaps we could start to solve the nation’s economic problems. Then again, “leakers” don’t hand out campaign contributions. (As an aside, the term “leakers” smacks (comically, even) of the Nixon years.) Plus ca change, and all that…
They have only themselves to blame. For the last 11 years Congress has shirked its war responsibilities and given the Executive branch unprecedented power. Now they want to cry about it?
“(“The notion that my White House would purposely release classified national security information is offensive””
But not nearly as offensive as expanding the Fuehrerprinzip established by George W. and continuing the torture and murder of people who won’t roll over for the demands of the empire. War crimes aren’t offensive. Talking about them is.
Congress picks its outrage carefully in order to increase Presidential power to keep things secret and conduct covert wars. And McCain leads the charge. Again.
The state secrets privilege was one of those things that crept into precedents like corporations as persons, without clear thought of the consequences.
Plus also too, all the dead people we see being made into so much campaign fodder. I could not really see how this would help the campaign, but maybe it is some kind of deflection against the “Muslim in the WH” doing this to “his own.” The kill list just did not work for me.
I recall during various “conflicts” and including the Nicaragua intrigues, how we knew the CIA was doing these operations, and we demanded some accountability. The slope was slippery, and now it is more CIA than less. The transfer has been underway a long time.
To tell the truth, drones cannot be all that secret. RC airplanes have been around for what, 50 years? Who hasn’t participated in these activities without thinking, even casually, about equipping these with weapons? Also, there is a company in Oregon which builds and sells this technology that advertizes openly for engineers and others to join them, crowing about how cool this stuff is.
It was all a matter of time.
Yes, and soon coming to the airways near you. I read that OWS had their own drone in lower Manhattan, low-tech, but so.
If they want to keep these drones secret, they shouldn’t have them flying around, overhead, whenever Obama gives a speech.
BTW, if you want to know all about drones, just pick up a copy of the Pakistani Greensheet.
“Buy a newspaper to read. Read a Greensheet to buy.”
I used to like amd respect McCain. He should a quit while he was ahead.
Spoken like a technological determinist. Values determine what technology gets rolled out on a massive scale with lots of money financing it. And right now we are heavy on war and light on alternative energy sources in our values.
Drones are destabilizing weapons. They can be put together by folks who don’t have diplomatic missions, and they lower the cost of warfare both in terms of risk and outlays. A major power like the US should never have been the first users.
I think if you go to the Raytheon website, they have an online sales brochure with an order form.
I know we had covert activities in WWII and Korea. B ut it seems to me that Vietnam was where the CIA came entered their heyday with Cambodia and Laos. Now, under Bush and now Obama, our government seems to take it fo granted. “If the president does it it’s not illegal.” Thanks Dick.
Each of us who are American citizens have one share in the American Corporation. I for one want to know every single detail about everything that the board of directors is doing, no matter by what means, and no matter whether I ever get to digest each one of those details. This is my country too. What the hell do I care who spilled the beans? I want to know.
“The notion that the United States government should wage ongoing war in multiple countries while keeping it secret from its own citizens is noxious.”
Noxious?! It represents nothing less than the destruction of representative democracy and the elimination of the requisite checks and balances between citizens and government. Noxious?! It is the fucking hallmark of tyranny.
Then there’s the stark illegality of the whole thing–whether you talk about it or not.
“Targeted assassinations violate well-established principles of international law. Also called political assassinations, they are extrajudicial executions. These are unlawful and deliberate killings carried out by order of, or with the acquiescence of, a government, outside any judicial framework.
“Extrajudicial executions are unlawful, even in armed conflict. In a 1998 report, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions noted that “extrajudicial executions can never be justified under any circumstances, not even in time of war.” The U.N. General Assembly and Human Rights Commission, as well as Amnesty International, have all condemned extrajudicial executions.”
http://www.marjoriecohn.com/2011/05/targeted-assassination-of-osama-bin.html
x2.
“If we live in a democracy, we have a right to know who is being killed by what in our name. The New American Way of War, to do it all with covert operations and in secret, deeply wounds the Constitutional process.”
IF we live in a democracy. We do not. And to the extent that we live in a representative democracy, it represents those with the money to buy politicians. US citizens don’t even have the “right” to habeas corpus or the rule of law much less the “right” to know what the government does. Secret, illegal war does not deeply wound the Constitutional process. It dispenses with it altogether. That’s the whole point.
Drones have uses other than indiscriminate killing. There doesn’t seem to be any technology that doesn’t have someone trying to figure it’s applications for war. no wonder, great customer, no bid ,cost plus, no requirement that the technology actually work, no deadlines, etc.
It’s not the drones, it’s the love of war.
Americans had to be cajoled into entering both world wars.
The change in attitude of the American citizen towards foreign wars, is one of the most remarkable PR accomplishments.
When has international law ever stopped the US from doing anything?
We’re the exception. The rules don’t apply to the US. And increasingly they don’t apply to US politicians either.
Thank Richard Nixon and Joe McCarthy for that PR job.
They stampeded Harry Truman into doing the dirty work for them.
Obama may come to wish he never heard of drones. Progressives oppose the indiscriminate killing and the conservatives are looking for the reason to accuse him of leaking secrets and may try to find a way to impeach him. First comes the independent counsel then we are off to the races. Good going Obama. Give your enemies the weapon to take you out. Oh wait, there is also some problem with the economy too. Are you doing better today than four years ago? Oh yeah !! Way to go ,O.
“The change in attitude of the American citizen towards foreign wars, is one of the most remarkable PR accomplishments.”
Indeed. I keep coming back to polls that indicated that 70% of the US public thought Iraq was behind 9-11 and 90% thought George W. was doing a bang up job in the wake of the attack. Remember all the televised speeches that went, “Terrorism, terrorism, terrorism–meanwhile, in Iraq–terrorism, terrorism, terrorism”? (Cheney was the master at these.) You make that association enough times in public with no alternative perspective and goddamn if almost 3/4 of the population think Iraq helped give us 9-11. And that you-are-either-with-us-or-against-us meme worked even better.
Watch the CNN coverage of war. Forget about the words they speak or what talking heads are behind the desk, just watch the pictures associated with us versus them–TV is about pictures, not words. US generals, weapons and soldiers are bathed in masturbatory Red, White and Blue. Middle Easterners are depicted in the most two-dimensional, irreconcilable, violent, sinister ways. And the footage of “The Terrorists” that runs on an ahistorical, non-chronological loop is not information. It is nothing but the same symbolic iconography for the depiction of Evil that one sees in any children’s movie.