Right Before Snowden Leaks, President Obama Fired Nearly All Members On Key Intelligence Advisory

[bemildred]

Board

Remember last week's press conference, where President Obama insisted that he had already kicked off the process of a major review of the way we do intelligence and surveillance in this country -- and about how he was going to set up an "outside" review group to look all this over? The same review group that will be set up by and report to James Clapper (but, the White House assures us, not run by him)?

Right, so a few people pointed out that President Obama already has an independent group that's supposed to do that thing: called the President's Intelligence Advisory Board (PIAB). There's just one tiny, tiny problem in all of this. It now appears that, back in May, just before all the Snowden stuff started coming out, it appears that the administration basically kicked nearly everyone off of the PIAB board. It went from 14 members down to just four. And those members were basically asked to leave:

---

Hamilton's ouster is particularly interesting, given that just a month ago, he wrote an oped piece about how the NSA's surveillance efforts have gone too far. Seems like he'd be handy to have on this committee reviewing the NSA surveillance, no? So, forgive us for, once again, finding it difficult (or laughable) to believe President Obama's claims that he had a serious revamp of the NSA's surveillance activity in his priorities before the Snowden leaks happened. It seems clear that things were going in the other direction: ramping up the spying, while cutting back on the oversight and review.

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130815/16155224194/right-before-snowden-leaks-came-out-president-obama-fired-nearly-all-key-intelligence-advisory-board.shtml

[Thinkingabout]

1. Did you notice there has been several changes made on the Cabinet since the start of Obama's

Second term? It is usual to have changes like this occur. There are changes made on Congressional committees also, nothing unusual about the timing.

[bemildred]

2. The story as above is mere speculation, if that's what you mean.

An interesting factoid. But it does rsise the question as to what is being done, and why, and how long it's been going on.

[Thinkingabout]

3. Since this happens when a new president goes into office and on beginnings of second terms, on

Obama's unless he had a future reading there was going to be a scumbag leaking information there probably is not a connection. The connection which seems to be maturing is the "leaks" and libertarian movement might be running hand in hand. I really can't see where the leaks of 2005 information is going to benefit Paul in an attempted run for president.

[bemildred]

4. I think it is possible both parties will split over this.

It is a splitting issue, it cuts across normal party politics. At least that is how I see the Paulbots, they are the schismatic extremum for their party as we "leakists" are for the Blue Dogs.

I also think things are moving too fast to make predictions more than a few months ahead of much use.

[KoKo]

5. Good Catch...I wonder if anyone else will notice this? K&R!

[bemildred]

7. It's interesting, but Thinkingabout is right, it's not much by itself.

And they are slinging the bullshit with fire hoses these days, so I feel cautious. I like my factoids to have a certain amount of supportive company.

[Catherina]

6. Wow. That's some debate we were going to have. "It's time to debate NSA program"

Tracked down the article by Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton.

It's time to debate NSA program

By THOMAS H. KEAN and LEE H. HAMILTON | 7/23/13 9:31 PM EDT

...

The NSA’s metadata program was put into place with virtually no public debate, a worrisome precedent made worse by erecting unnecessary barriers to public understanding via denials and misleading statements from senior administration officials.

When the Congress and the courts work in secret; when massive amounts of data are collected from Americans and enterprises; when government’s power of intrusion into the lives of ordinary citizens, augmented by the awesome power of advanced technologies, is hugely expanded without public debate or discussion over seven years, then our sense of constitutional process and accountability is deeply offended.

Officials insist that the right balance has been struck between security and privacy. But how would we know, when all the decisions have been made in secret, with almost no oversight?

...

When the government is exercising powers that may impinge on our rights, even when justified as measures essential for national security, we must be alert. Government, once granted authority, rarely relinquishes it and often expands it. Even if its actions are well intentioned, we must consider the precedent of expansive government power to be used 10, 20 or 50 years hence, when the justification may be less compelling than safeguarding lives.

The administration says the program is tightly controlled, but unilateral executive branch action and assurances are not sufficient; we need constitutional checks and balances. The extremely low rate of denial of warrant requests and the fact that in the hearings only the government’s side is presented are troubling. The public would benefit from a better, more detailed understanding of the judiciary process.

The Congress, the courts and the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, which the 9/11 Commission recommended, each have critically important roles to play. This board is essential to balancing the impact of the government’s security measures in the aftermath of Sept. 11 with our civil liberties. It has taken a decade to get the board up and running. Now that the Senate has confirmed a chairman, it is time for the board to get to work in a transparent manner on this surveillance program.

...

Thomas Kean, former governor of New Jersey, and Lee Hamilton, a former congressman from Indiana, co-chair the Bipartisan Policy Center’s Homeland Security Project. Kean was chairman and Hamilton was vice chairman of the 9/11 Commission.

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/07/its-time-to-debate-nsa-programs-94634.html

[bemildred]

8. Yes. Even if one allows it was debated before, we can still take another look, and we should.

I remember Gov. Kean and Lee as being straight shooters, as US pols go, as in they actually wanted to govern well.