
Sen. Mark Udall: I knew about the NSA spying, did everything but leak to stop it - lawnchair_larry
http://blogs.denverpost.com/thespot/2013/06/06/sen-mark-udall-i-knew-the-nsa-was-spying-did-everything-but-leak-classified-information-to-stop-it/97025/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
======
dkulchenko
This really is the way to stop this. Support representatives like Mark Udall
and Ron Wyden and vote everyone who's supporting PATRIOT and warrantless
wiretapping out of office.

Civil liberties should be as big of an issue (if not bigger) during elections
as the economy.

~~~
bilbo0s
Easy to say...

Hard to do...

The original PATRIOT Act passed the Senate by a vote of 99 to 1 I think. The
Senator from Wisconsin was the only one to vote against it. Feingold I
believe.

He was replaced by a more "law and order" type Senator. I still think to this
day it was because he threw wrenches into all of these programs whenever he
had a chance. (And sometimes even if he didn't have a chance, he would
sabotage the machinery.)

The thing is ... the people of Wisconsin voted him out. Now you can argue that
they didn't understand what they were doing... but you can't argue the vote.
And this illustrates the problem.

In a nutshell...

There is little political profit in fighting these programs.

THAT, is what we need to find some way to change.

EDIT:

BTW, just a point of fact I think may be relevant here...

Wyden voted YEA for the PATRIOT Act.

Just Sayin'.

~~~
suredo
[http://www.ted.com/talks/lawrence_lessig_we_the_people_and_t...](http://www.ted.com/talks/lawrence_lessig_we_the_people_and_the_republic_we_must_reclaim.html)

------
anigbrowl
I have to say I find this oddly disingenuous. Senator Udall is surely aware
that he could have offered up this knowledge in a speech on the Senate floor
and enjoyed _total_ legal immunity under the US Constitution, with Supreme
Court precedent to back him up:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speech_or_Debate_Clause>

~~~
DoubleCluster
... all Cases, except Treason ...

~~~
anigbrowl
This interpretation may be incorrect, but my reading is that treason is one of
the very few cases that allows the Executive Branch to take a Congressman into
custody in the course of carrying out his duties, but the speech or debate
clause is a separate provision.

IOW if I am a Congressperson and and (say) sell secrets to Iran, and the
attorney-general obtains sufficient evidence to bring charges (testimony of
two people etc.), I can be arrested while traveling to/from, or even while
working in, the Capitol. But if I stand up during a debate and reveal
information that would be useful to Iran without having had any actual traffic
with the Iranian government or a representative, that's quite different.

------
rollo_tommasi
If he had access to documents showing the extent of this program he should
have read them into the Congressional Record, like Mike Gravel did with the
Pentagon Papers.

~~~
notaddicted
The only reason Mike Gravel had a copy of the Pentagon Papers is because
Ellsberg sought him out, so Gravel wasn't himself the "leak", and Gravel knew
that the NYT and others already had a copy (they were publishing parts).

~~~
rollo_tommasi
Right, but the documents were still classified at the time so he could have
prosecuted for publicly disclosing them had he not taken advantage of his
position to read them into the record. The point is that there is a
Constitutionally guaranteed mechanism for Congressmen to disclose alarming
classified information they have access to.

------
nhebb
Leon Panetta leaked classified info to the makers of _Zero Dark Thirty_ , and
there were no repercussions (hell, he even got promoted to Secretary of
Defense). I really doubt there would have been repercussions if Udall had
leaked this information. While I'm glad that Udall is fighting for civil
liberties, this doesn't exactly seem like material fit for an updated version
of _Profiles in Courage_.

~~~
questionmark
The idea of the Panetta leaks were to promote a positive view of the US war on
terror.

Speaking of _Zero Dark Thirty_ : I always wondered about the relation between
its director Kathryn Bigelow and Robert Bigelow. Is there a connection?

~~~
revelation
So? The seemingly random enforcement of laws is a hallmark of dictatorships.

~~~
pyre

      A walrus eats food. Obama eats food. Obama is
      therefore a walrus.
    

Can you find the flaw in this logic?

~~~
deepdog

      Your neighbor committed a crime. Hitler committed
      a crime. Your neighbor is literally Hitler.
    

This is your analogy.

~~~
pyre
I'm responding to someone that was indirectly saying:

    
    
      - Dictatorships randomly enforce laws.
      - The US Government is randomly enforcing laws.
      - The US Government is therefore a dictatorship.

~~~
saosebastiao
The US is acting dictatorial.

~~~
pyre
So...

    
    
      - A walrus eats food.
      - Obama eats food.
      - Obama is acting like a walrus.
    

The real issue is that the idea that only dictatorships have some selective
enforcement of laws is unsubstantiated.

~~~
saosebastiao
So...

\- A grocer who uses plastic bags within the city of Seattle is breaking the
law

\- A mass murderer is breaking the law

\- A mass murderer is acting like a grocer who uses plastic bags within the
city of Seattle

Magnitude matters.

------
cgag
Everything but actually bringing it to public attention.

~~~
jaekwon
Sen. Mark Udall cannot be held accountable. Look at how Bradley Manning is
being treated for leaking classified documents.

~~~
lizzard
I am looking at it, admiring it, and I'd do the same in a heartbeat.

~~~
jaekwon
woot. our numbers are swelling now.

------
josephlord
If you are on the Inteligence Committee and you leak stuff it is a very risky
strategy as:

1) you will get thrown off the committee and someone more trusted by the
agencies will replace you.

2) even after throwing you off the committee they may keep more secret
information from the committee and justify it by the risk of the members
leaking it as in this example.

You need to try to ensure leak is big enough to break the current system and
INCREASE the oversight rather than further reduce it OR to have reached a
point where you aren't actually doing any good on the committee in the first
place.

------
suredo
"... was broadly securing tens of thousands of Americans’ phone records ..."

make that millions?

------
wavefunction
Then he did not do enough. Step up as an American, sir.

------
fatjokes
Read: did everything but risk himself to stop it.

