Mike Rogers attacks Glenn Greenwald: "He doesn't have a clue how this thing works"

[Enrique]

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/mike-rogers-attacks-glenn-greenwald-for-nsa-expose-he-doesnt-have-a-clue-how-this-thing-works/

Mike Rogers Attacks Glenn Greenwald For NSA Expose: ‘He Doesn’t Have A Clue How This Thing Works’

Michigan Representative Mike Rogers, the Chairman of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, joined a chorus of lawmakers and intelligence officials in condemning Glenn Greenwald’s multiple revelations of government surveillance programs, saying Greenwald and his source released information that could be dangerous to national security, and should be prosecuted.

“Someone did not have authorization to release this information,” Rogers said. “Why that’s so important is they didn’t have of all of the information. I know your reporter that you interviewed, Greenwald, says that he’s got it all and now is an expert on the program. He doesn’t have a clue how this thing works, and neither did the person who released just enough information to literally be dangerous.”

“There’s other methods,” Rogers said of the whistleblower. “He can come to the committees if he has concerns. We have IGs they can go to in a classified way, if they have concerns. Taking a very sensitive, classified program, that targets foreign persons on foreign lands, and putting just enough out there to be dangerous, is dangerous to us, it’s dangerous for our national security, and violates the oath which that person took. I absolutely think they should be prosecuted.”

Dianne Feinstein, head of the Senate Intelligence Committee, agreed that the leak should investigated.

Watch the interview here, via ABC:

video at link

[graham4anything]

1. I like Dianne Feinstein and trust her to know what she is talking about.

[ForgoTheConsequence]

4. Of course you do.

Any other war profiteers you admire?

[graham4anything]

9. If the choice is trusting a decades long historic senator or an altmedia writer, well,I pick Senator

maybe if the altmedia writer ran for office, it would mean something.
I never trusted Bob Woodward or Tim Russert either.
The day Al Franken ran for office and did hard work, was the day I trusted him as opposed to the job he had prior.

[Luminous Animal]

12. Hee hee. The Guardian! Altmedia!

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

13. LOL. The Guardian has been published since 1821 and is a bit more Historic than DiFi.

[graham4anything]

14. And the NY Times hired Jayson Blair and Judith Miller. I think I will back Sen. Feinstein.

I don't back writers with ulterior motives looking to sell future books and have as Andy Warhol described it,
15 minutes of fame.(where everybody knows their name).

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

18. And, I'll stick with The Guardian over a politician with ties to the MIC.

[Fumesucker]

22. "Hillary is a monster" -Samantha Power, Obama's designate for UN Ambassador

[ForgoTheConsequence]

30. But politicians with ulterior motives are a-ok.

I get it now.

[ForgoTheConsequence]

17. Hahahaha.

You have no idea what "alt media" is. You're the best troll Graham, keep on keeping on.

[stillwaiting]

54. I find your thought processes at this time in our nation's history both fascinating and disturbing.

You truly are a Good American.

[villager]

27. +1

n/t

[premium]

7. DiFi is nothing more than a Dino

and a fucking tool for the corps..

[MNBrewer]

42. Do you also like Mike Rogers and trust him to know what he is talking about?

I mean, after all, he's a REPUBLICAN!!!!!11!11

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

2. Alternate headlimne: Roaches leave woodwork to complain about the light.

[BenzoDia]

3. Anything more substantial in the video? The text doesn't say a whole lot.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

5. Standard attack the messenger rather than deal with the message

I am glad these programs are being exposed to daylight, as they should be in a democratic state.

[stevenleser]

6. Greenwald did an extremely poor job of journalism here laying out 15% of the facts people need to

know to understand this story.

If you think/know the President is being unfairly criticized, you need to check out my radio show tonight. Even if you don't think he is being unfairly criticized but you want all the facts, you need to check out my radio show tonight. I do a complete coverage of the issue. I have let some folks pre-screen the show who were upset at the President over this issue and the show changed their minds completely. The facts are with the President on this.

If there is one episode of my radio show to hear, it's this one. Please listen and spread far and wide. It airs at 7pm tonight (Sunday) eastern time on blogtalkradio.com and the full archive is available anytime after 8pm in perpetuity.

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/lesersense/2013/06/09/making-sense-with-steve-leser--nsa-spying-war-on-women

It also airs on the NBC Radio affiliate KCAA 1050am in Inland Empire California Monday at 2pm Pacific Time

[graham4anything]

10. +1

[jazzimov]

20. +1

[MNBrewer]

43. You've got the other 85%???

[stevenleser]

64. Yep. Talked about it during my show and posted transcript here. nt

[MNBrewer]

65. So, how do you feel about classified interpretations of laws being used as the basis

for public policy?

[flamingdem]

45. +1

[Number23]

50. Steven, will you have a transcript of your show available?

[stevenleser]

55. Yep, its right here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/110210510

[BenzoDia]

52. Will you provide some cliff notes later?

[stevenleser]

56. Transcript is right here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/110210510

[BenzoDia]

57. Thanks! Sorry I didn't check the post above mine.

[treestar]

59. That broadcast was very informative

There was a stupid thread earlier claiming Nixon didn't do as much - as you pointed out, there were no rules in Nixon's time to constrain the President and the FISA was enacted to put some safeguards in.

[Hekate]

63. +1

[sabrina 1]

8. I thought it was 'old news' so no one should have been excited about it at all, Greenwald was

just trying to get attention for himself, or something. So it wasn't old after all?

And if they have done nothing wrong, they have nothing to worry about, right?

[Luminous Animal]

11. Actually, Greenwald openly and freely admits that he is no expert. But how does Rogers know

that the leaker isn't an expert?

[kentuck]

16. And how do we know that the leaker is not out of the White House?

or recently out of the White House? How do we know it is not a Republican. The press is allowed to keep whistleblowers secret while the government is not allowed to keep illegal or questionable programs secret? Does that sound fair to you? If you say no, you need to think just a little deeper.

[Luminous Animal]

19. Huh? I don't quite understand your response. Sorry.

[kentuck]

24. You asked, how does he know that the leaker is not an expert?

And I said, how do we know that the leaker is not out of the White House. We don't really know where the leak came from. However, if it was first printed in the Guardian paper, maybe the leaker is British? Haven't the two countries been sharing the information? Seems I read that someplace?

[Luminous Animal]

25. My remark about the leaker was not serious. And Greenwald reports for Guardian US

which is incorporated in the U.S. and has offices in NY City.

[jeff47]

58. Well, as the the Chairman of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence

He might have some idea of what the rest of the details are.

[treestar]

60. Then what the hell is he going on about it for, then?

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/lesersense/2013/06/09/making-sense-with-steve-leser--nsa-spying-war-on-women

So as to be more informed than Greenwald in just 20 minutes.

As we will see increasingly often, Greenwald has developed at this point what we might call "Obama Tourette's," repetitively dropping the President's name into every negative context possible, whenever possible, no matter how tenuous the justification. A single disappointment with a single federal institution in the first three weeks of the Obama Presidency drove him off the Deep End, and he's been there ever since.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/03/08/1192256/-The-Final-Word-on-Glenn-Greenwald

[Luminous Animal]

61. You have an opinion. Are you and expert?

[ForgoTheConsequence]

15. "He doesn’t have a clue how this thing works"

That's because you made it a secret, dumbass.

[hughee99]

21. Leak? Yesterday this was "old news". Defenders need to get together and get their story straight.

You can't "leak" what's been known for years.

[Enrique]

23. this actually is a new one

now this guy is saying Greenwald didn't leak enough of the program.

Here is the progression so far:
1.Greenwald is making it all up
2.Greenwald is leaking old news
3.Greenwald is leaking very dangerous secrets
4.Greenwald isn't leaking enough of the secrets

[KoKo]

28. kind of sums it up...

nicely put. Sounds like desperation on Govt. and naysayers side that there's something "real" there than citizens need to know about and needs to be addressed by Congress in some legislation tightening things up on the side of citizen protection.

[Octafish]

31. Big Picture

Made Clear.

[hughee99]

32. That sounds like a good summary... the 5th step is acceptance.

I saw at least one thread today saying that it's going to happen anyway, so we should just accept it and move on.

[suffragette]

48. Good summary of the progression of response/spin

You forgot 'Greenwald is a meany-face,' but maybe that would be placed at 1.a, 2.a, etc.

But really, nice succinct summary of the response so far.

[giftedgirl77]

26. I agree 100%

with everything he said & hope not only do they find the person who leaked this info but prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law.I have been listening to all of the ranting & raving going on not only around here but all over since this story & it's just nuts. Two silly ass documents have been published without any additional supporting evidence or corroborating documentation.

While yes there is a warrant that allows the government to data mine the phone numbers of the telephone carriers what is not being noted is the fact that it is essentially a giant dumping ground where a computer is simply sorting them to detect a pattern. If a pattern is detected (i.e. repeated dialings to a foreign # or something else that warrants further investigation) then a warrant must be obtained for that # with & there has to be probable cause for that warrant. In one of the many stories that has circulated it was even discussed what occurred if the wrong number was accidentally searched. The warrant is voided & the search is considered illegal &all the docs have to be destroyed within a certain amount of time.

As far as the emails & such it is the same theory & works in the same manner. Nobody is reading through all of these documents, it is a computer set up to ping on certain words.

As far as the surveillance of American citizens there are many laws other than the 4th Amendment that protects US citizens from having surveillance conducted on them.Many of these are laws specifically designed for the intelligence community to protect Americans from unnecessary surveillance.

I know I am going to get slammed for this but I finally had to vent on this because at this point I feel like misinformation is tearing this country apart & this is just crazy.

This is not surveillance, the government is not spying on us, nor are they tracking our every move, listening in on your phone calls, or liking your favorite cat pictures.

As far as the whistle blower he/she deserves whatever they get & I hope Greenwald or whatever his name is goes with him.

[KoKo]

33. If what you say is true why are they going after people who report what they

are doing if its all so innocent that there's nothing we need to be concerned about.

Do you truly believe everything our Government tells us because you feel it's there to protect us? Do you know the history of what some have done in our Government to violate people's privacy? Do you know who J. Edgar Hoover was and Joseph McCarthy?

Why do you feel so safe from over-reach by those in positions of power? A free press is necessary to help keep the citizens informed. Checks and Balances are necessary

[randome]

34. Because law enforcement NEVER reveals their methods to potential enemies.

Some of them aren't too smart.

And the 1950s is so...last century. I get tired of seeing comparisons to Hitler, 1984, McCarthyism, the Founding Fathers, etc. Whatever operations the NSA is performing should be judged in terms of the here and now.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[Luminous Animal]

37. Well, the NSA here and now sucks.

[randome]

38. I have more respect for that point of view!

But supposedly none of the data collection efforts target Americans. If we decide not to trust the NSA, then what would it take to make us comfortable enough to trust them?

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[giftedgirl77]

39. I feel safe because I know the regs & laws

I have seen them & know what they are. Everything about the warrants is in the articles but the other regs that govern the intell gathering of US citizens & they are classified but I have the experience to know. I work as legal in Intell.

There are checks & balances, I explained them in my previous post regarding the warrants. That is all public knowledge & has been reported in regards to if they decided to do a more through search of someone's phone records. Then a warrant must be obtained for that specific number& probable cause must be shown.

There is a difference in a free press & an individual who violates federal law by leaking classified information. Especially when they pick and choose what to release to suit their purpose.

I have questioned the federal gov on many aspects of what they do, but when I see ppl flying off the handle based on misinformation, I feel it is necessary to add some professional hindsight to the discussion.

Now that we know who the leak is & no he is not protected by the Whitsle Blowers Act, he should be prosecuted.

[pnwmom]

44. Is this a serious question?

When someone who is supposed to be protecting classified documents breaks their vow and leaks it, they should be prosecuted. That should be the default position, or anyone will free to leak anything without consequences.

There could be exceptions decided after the fact, that a particular leaker was justified, but the initial response should be to prosecute. Then there should be a trial and if the leaker was justified, he can be found not guilty.

[KoKo]

49. You know as well as I that it doesn't work that way anymore. And, Yes..it was

a "Serious Question."

[Frustratedlady]

40. Well, our unemployment rate would be zero if they hired enough spies to

listen to/read our communications. Even if it were by machine, someone has to run/analyze/build/repair those.

Who was the guy from China that visited Obama the other day?

[giftedgirl77]

47. Just because someone has access to a drive

Doesn't mean they have access to an entire database. There are permissions that are granted & without those permissions you can't gain access to the data. Like everything that has been put out at this point it's numbers & nothing more. In order to gain further access into anyone's records they would still need a search warrant which they would need probable cause & get gets a whole lot harder when wanting to do Intel on a US citizen. Hell even if they think someone is a US citizen they have to error on the side of caution & assume that they are.

[pnwmom]

41. +1

[BeyondGeography]

29. But his twitter follower count is through the roof

Get with the program, Congressman.

[graham4anything]

46. twitter numbers mean nothing at all. Bots can increase that as can psynchophants

as has been proven many times when singers say their #s.

For that matter, an entire corporation can have all their workers sign up and like someone or follow someone

It is as they say a statistically unimportant number that has zero meaning of accuracy.

[roamer65]

35. How can you tell Mike Rogers is lying?

His lips are moving.

[Octafish]

36. Amway Affiliate and pawn of Erik Prince and Dick DeVos.

Lovely to see how much, eh, buy-partisan support he manages to engender.

http://downwithtyranny.blogspot.com/2011/04/why-i-want-rematch-with-mike-rogers-in.html

[think]

51. yipers..../nt

[BenzoDia]

53. He's a politician?

[GeorgeGist]

62. As long as we're shooting messengers ...

Mike Rogers is a Republican.