FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Feinstein the Hypocrite

by CHRISTOPHER BRAUCHLI

It seems to me what the nine hundred ninety four dupes needed was a new deal.

A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court, Mark Twain

Gracious.  That’s all one can say.  It is simply a question of whose ox is getting gored or, in the real world, who’s spying on whom.  Dianne Feinstein (D.Calif) called him a traitor and even said that if he had simply come to the House or Senate Intelligence Committees and presented all his information to the Committee, the Committee could have evaluated it.  She said his failure to do that was an enormous disservice to the country.   She said he was not simply a whistle blower.  “He took an oath-that oath is important. He violated the oath, he violated the law.  It’s an act of treason in my view.”  She was joined in her condemnation of Edward Snowden by John Boehner who said of Snowden:  “He’s a traitor. . . .  The disclosure of this information . . . . [is] a giant violation of the law. . . . The president outlined last week that there were important national security programs to help keep Americans safe, and give us tools to fight the terrorist threat that we face.   The president also outlined that there are appropriate safeguards in place to make sure that there’s no snooping, if you will, on Americans here at home. . . .”  That was, of course, said, before Mr. Boehner and Ms. Feinstein learned that the Senate Intelligence Committee was being snooped on by the CIA and the CIA said it was being snooped on the staff members of the Senate Intelligence Committee.

Senator Feinstein had harsh words for what the CIA was doing: the same kind of words used by citizens to describe the activities of the NSA when they learned of its spying on citizens and the likes of Germany’s Angela Merkel and Brazil’s Dilma Rousseff. Senator Feinstein said the CIA may have violated the Constitution and U.S. laws by spying on committee computers being used by staff members to review CIA documents about the programs used by the CIA to interrogate terror suspects.  The CIA was  also searching internal messages and staffers’ work on other computers. Commenting on the CIA activities Senator Feinstein said:  “I have grave concerns that the CIA’s search may well have violated the separation –of-powers-principles embodied in the U.S. Constitution.” As she explained, the CIA has violated federal law and undermined the constitutional principle of congressional oversight.

Senator Feinstein referred an internal agency investigation of the CIA’s activities to the Justice Department so that it can consider criminal prosecution of the CIA for its activities.  She not only wants the activities by the CIA stopped, she wants the CIA to apologize and acknowledge that what it did was wrong. The CIA has neither apologized nor acknowledged its misbehavior and appears to have no intention of doing so.  Instead, it told the Council on Foreign Relations that the CIA had done nothing wrong.  And that’s not all the CIA did.  Not wanting to be outdone by Senator Feinstein, it made a criminal referral to the Justice Department.  It wants the Justice Department to determine if committee staff members broke the law by gaining unauthorized access (spying) to CIA computers and taking CIA documents from a secure facility.

Although he was not called on to address the pillow fight between the CIA and the Committee, Judge Richard J. Leon’s  words in a December 2013 decision about the NSA spying might well apply to the activities of all the parties involved in this scuffle.  He described the NSA spying practices as “almost Orwellian,” saying that the NSA phone snooping violates American’s privacy rights.  He said that James Madison would be “aghast” at the NSA’s activities.  After the judge announced his decision Senator Bernard Sanders (I.Vt.) chimed in saying:  “The NSA is out of control and operating in an unconstitutional manner.” They would probably have said the same things about the CIA and the Senate Intelligence committee had they known of their activities.

Not all Senators thought Senator Feinstein’s criticism of the CIA appropriate.  Senator Saxby Chambliss (R.Ga.)  said he and Senator Feinstein “have some disagreements as to what the actual facts [about the CIA activities] are.”  Senator Richard Burr (R.NC)  was critical of Senator Feinstein for discussing the dispute publicly.  Like those who thought Mr. Snowden should have kept quiet about what he knew about misbehavior by the NSA, he said:  “I personally don’t believe that anything that goes on in the intelligence committee should ever be discussed publicly.”  He is apparently of the school that believes that what goes on in government is not the people’s business, especially if  the activities being concealed affect the constitutional rights of the citizens.

Christopher Brauchli is a lawyer in Boulder, Colorado. He can be emailed at brauchli.56@post.harvard.edu

 

More articles by:

CounterPunch Magazine

minimag-edit

bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550

zen economics

February 20, 2017
Bruce E. Levine
Humiliation Porn: Trump’s Gift to His Faithful…and Now the Blowback
Melvin Goodman
“Wag the Dog,” Revisited
Robert Hunziker
Fukushima: a Lurking Global Catastrophe?
David Smith-Ferri
Resistance and Resolve in Russia: Memorial HRC
Kenneth Surin
Global India?
Norman Pollack
Fascistization Crashing Down: Driving the Cleaver into Social Welfare
Patrick Cockburn
Trump v. the Media: a Fight to the Death
Susan Babbitt
Shooting Arrows at Heaven: Why is There Debate About Battle Imagery in Health?
Matt Peppe
New York Times Openly Promotes Formal Apartheid Regime By Israel
David Swanson
Understanding Robert E. Lee Supporters
Michael Brenner
The Narcissism of Donald Trump
Martin Billheimer
Capital of Pain
Thomas Knapp
Florida’s Shenanigans Make a Great Case for (Re-)Separation of Ballot and State
Jordan Flaherty
Best Films of 2016: Black Excellence Versus White Mediocrity
Weekend Edition
February 17, 2017
Friday - Sunday
David Price
Rogue Elephant Rising: The CIA as Kingslayer
Matthew Stevenson
Is Trump the Worst President Ever?
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Flynn?
John Wight
Brexit and Trump: Why Right is Not the New Left
Diana Johnstone
France: Another Ghastly Presidential Election Campaign; the Deep State Rises to the Surface
Neve Gordon
Trump’s One-State Option
Roger Harris
Emperor Trump Has No Clothes: Time to Organize!
Joan Roelofs
What Else is Wrong with Globalization
Andrew Levine
Why Trump’s Muslim Travel Ban?
Mike Whitney
Blood in the Water: the Trump Revolution Ends in a Whimper
Vijay Prashad
Trump, Turmoil and Resistance
Ron Jacobs
U.S. Imperial War Personified
David Swanson
Can the Climate Survive Adherence to War and Partisanship?
Andre Vltchek
Governor of Jakarta: Get Re-elected or Die!
Norman Pollack
Self-Devouring Reaction: Governmental Impasse
Patrick Cockburn
The Coming Destruction of Mosul
Steve Horn
What Do a Louisiana Pipeline Explosion and Dakota Access Pipeline Have in Common? Phillips 66
Brian Saady
Why Corporations are Too Big to Jail in the Drug War
Graham Peebles
Ethiopia: Peaceful Protest to Armed Uprising
Luke Meyer
The Case of Tony: Inside a Lifer Hearing
Binoy Kampmark
Adolf, The Donald and History
Robert Koehler
The Great American Awakening
Murray Dobbin
Canadians at Odds With Their Government on Israel
Fariborz Saremi
A Whole New World?
Joyce Nelson
Japan’s Abe, Trump & Illegal Leaks
Christopher Brauchli
Trump 1, Tillerson 0
Yves Engler
Is This Hate Speech?
Dan Bacher
Trump Administration Exempts Three CA Oil Fields From Water Protection Rule at Jerry Brown’s Request
Richard Klin
Solid Gold
Melissa Garriga
Anti-Abortion and Anti-Fascist Movements: More in Common Than Meets the Eye
Thomas Knapp
The Absurd Consequences of a “Right to Privacy”
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail