As a candidate, Obama stated that whistleblowers engaged in “acts of courage and patriotism [that] should be encouraged rather than stifled.” His platform included a call to protect whistleblowers and empower them as “watchdogs of wrongdoing and partners in performance.”
Candidate Obama further stated in regard to the Bush Administration’s use of phone companies to illegally spy on Americans, that: “We only know these crimes took place because insiders blew the whistle at great personal risk … Government whistleblowers are part of a healthy democracy and must be protected from reprisal.”
We are now in the second term of the Obama presidency and have witnessed an unprecedented number of prosecutions against government whistleblowers. The Obama administration has charged more people (six) under the Espionage Act for the alleged mishandling of classified information than all past presidencies combined. (Prior to Obama, there were only three such cases in American history, one being Daniel Ellsberg, of Nixon-era Pentagon Papers fame.)
Putting The Watchdogs To Sleep
National Security Agency whistleblower Thomas Drake was sentenced to a year of probation for a minor offense after the U.S. government dropped more serious charges that he illegally held classified material. Drake was one of several sources for a Baltimore Sun article about a $1.2 billion NSA experimental program called “Trailblazer” to sift through electronic communications for national security threats. The case was so flawed against him that the former top spokesman for the Justice Department, Matthew Miller, said that the case may have been an “ill-considered choice for prosecution.”
Additionally, the Obama administration has focused on journalists who revealed classified information. James Risen co-authored the New York Times article that exposed the Bush administration’s domestic wiretapping program and wrote a book, State of War, that described a failed government attempt to undermine Iran’s nuclear weapons program.
Both the Bush and Obama administrations investigated the sources for Risen’s stories for years before Obama’s prosecutors finally attempted to force Risen to testify against a former government official charged with revealing national security information to Risen. Ultimately, a federal judge quashed the subpoena.
John Kiriakou, a retired CIA agent who blew the whistle on the agency’s Bush-era torture program, has been sentenced to two-and-a-half years in prison. Kiriakou admitted to a single count of revealing the identity of a covert officer under a plea deal that saw prosecutors drop charges brought under the Espionage Act. He was the first CIA official to publicly confirm and detail the Bush administration’s torture program, describing the waterboarding of al-Qaeda operative Abu Zubaydah in a 2007 interview with ABC News. He also is the first CIA official to be jailed for any reason relating to the torture, even those who carried it out.
To date, not one government official has been prosecuted for the actual torture that Kiriakou was blowing the whistle on. As a matter of fact, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. announced on Aug. 30 of last year that no one would be prosecuted for the deaths of a prisoner in Afghanistan in 2002 and another in Iraq in 2003. Thereby, eliminating the last possibility that any criminal charges would ever be brought as a result of the brutal interrogations (aka torture) carried out by the CIA.
Do As I Say, Not As I Do
In May 2011 the Pentagon declared that another country’s cyber-attacks — computer sabotage, against the U.S. — could be considered an “act of war.” Then, on June 1, 2012, the New York Times reported that the Stuxnet worm had been dispatched into Iran’s nuclear facilities to shut down its computer-controlled centrifuges (essential to nuclear fuel processing) by order of President Obama and executed by the U.S. and Israel. The info had been leaked to the paper by anonymous “high ranking officials.” In other words, what once could only be considered speculation about Stuxnet, was now a confirmed fact. It was an act of war ordered by the president alone.
Likewise, we see this same sort of judicious leaking by the Obama administration in regard to his controversial “kill list.” The Times, once again, carried a remarkable story not only confirming drone killings, but also noting that Obama himself was the one pulling the trigger. He had, in effect, designated himself the final decision-maker on an eyes-only “kill list” of individuals the United States wanted to annihilate. This, clearly, had previously been classified top-secret material, and yet its disclosure was attributed directly to White House sources.
This brings us to the most profound national security leak by the Obama White House when they arranged for Hollywood filmmakers to have special access to government officials involved in the commando operation that killed Osama bin Laden.
The makers of Zero Dark Thirty were given access to top White House officials, the identity of a SEAL team member involved in the raid on bin Laden’s compound in Pakistan and were taken to the top-secret ‘vault’ where the attack was planned. These things, by definition, are considered classified information.
In the president’s world, what’s good for the goose isn’t necessarily good for the gander. If the disclosure of classified information happens to help him politically, then leaks away. The fact of the matter is the administration has no problem aggressively pursuing leaks perpetrated by 22-year-old Army privates and former CIA employees in other leaks cases, but apparently sanctions leaks made by senior administration officials for political purposes.
If You Won’t Prosecute ‘Em, Hire ‘Em
So while President Obama is discouraging and prosecuting whistleblowers who expose torture, he is selecting as head of the CIA a man who was daily briefed during the Bush administration about torture. Brennan was first elected in 2008 but was forced to withdraw from consideration amid protests over his role at the CIA under the Bush administration. Brennan has publicly supported the CIA’s policies of so-called enhanced interrogation techniques and extraordinary rendition.
Additionally, Brennan has played a key role in the expansion of Obama’s secret drone war and has been dubbed by some to be the “assassination czar.” In 2006, in an interview with Frontline on PBS, Brennan said: “The war, or the campaign against terrorism, is going to be a long one, and that the opposition, whether it be al-Qaeda or whether it be Iraq, doesn’t play by the Marquees of Queensbury rules, and therefore, you know, the U.S., in some areas, has to take off the gloves. And I think that’s entirely appropriate. I think we do have to take off the gloves in some areas, but within bounds, and at the right time, in the right way, and for the right reason, and with full understanding of what the consequences of that might be.”
Given Brennan’s track record, one could reasonably come to the conclusion that, “taking the gloves off,” in the opinion of Brennan, would be the very torture that he approved of in the Bush administration and the current President has banned. And yet, his confirmation as CIA chief seems to be all but assured. What message is the president sending when this is his choice? And why is a man, who was deemed unacceptable for the post four years ago, now the man for the job — after the illegalities of the Bush-era CIA programs have come to light?
Conclusion
If one is confused by this duplicitous and hypocritical approach to leaks and whistleblowing, they have every right to be. To be fair, President Obama was active in signing laws that protect private employees who blow the whistle on corporations in the financial and food safety sectors.
In 2010, the House and Senate passed similar bills for new whistleblower protections, but Senate Republicans placed a hold on the House version at the last moment. Obama did support the legislation, assigning his White House ethics advisor, Norm Eisen, to help craft the bill.
It is in the area of national security and intelligence whistleblowers that he has failed miserably. Those individuals don’t have any whistleblower protections and, when they have leaked information, the Justice Department under Obama has zealously prosecuted them. By charging people who sound the alarm and tell the truth and, in effect, classifying them as being enemies of the state, sends a very frightening message indeed. Once again, the Obama administration has charged more people (six) under the Espionage Act than all past presidencies combined.
The prosecution of Kiriakou, Drake and others, while simultaneously elevating individuals such as Brennan, is like letting an arsonist go free and jailing the man who fingered him for disturbing the peace because he sounded the alarm too loud.