>> major: today on "face the nation." a look back at the story of the year. surveillance in america and look ahead to what to expect in 2014. >> the conversation occurring today will determine the amount much trust we can place both in the technology that surrounds it he and government that regulates it. >> edward snowden says his job is finished, many say he won the year by disclosing the most secret. some sahl him a traitor others a hero. we'll hear from both sides of the issue. we'll talk about the future of towner terrorism with former nsa and cia boss general michael hey den and snowden's advisor and nsa former employee. we'll hear from reporters who broke the snowden news. mark gellman of the "washington

post." then return the technology and privacy, 2013 set the report for internet usage on smart phones. what's next in 2014 we'll he ask a panel of experts. the year in surveillance and new technologies will change our lives, it's all ahead on "face the nation." captioning sponsored by cbs from cbs news in washington, "face the nation" with bob schieffer. substituting for bob schieffer cbs news chief white house correspondent major garrett. >> good morning again, welcome to "face the nation." we start today with what may be the biggest story of the year, it began back in june when national security agency contractor edward snowden began leaking top secret documents, disclosed government programs involving surveillance on every from ordinary americans to our closest international allies. joining us now is general

michael hayden former head of the national security agency and cia is now a principle of the chertoff group here in washington. before we get to nsa and surveillance a lot of ground to cover there there is story in the "new york times" this morning talks about month long investigation conducted in to the benghazi attack. there's no clear linkage is central command al qaeda that there was a much messier situation on the ground than originally disclosed by administration or thought by most observers. your reaction. >> i think that has -- these kind of events are not more nuanced than we'd like them to be looking back at them in retrospect. when the attack happened on this network a few days afterwards i was asked who did it. and i said, well, you know, al qaeda divided in three layers, formerly affiliated. at the time i said this was probably high end like-minded or low end affiliated.

i think the time bears that out. >> you mean locals who have anti-american sentiment, al qaeda sort of passions in their vein? >> and a -- consistent with the al qaeda. >> these are the locals who united states thought they had a relationship it turned sour then deadly. >> we had relationship with some locals. obviously with other locals we did not. and frankly also offer the view that we had plenty of warnings, strategic warnings. benghazi was not a safe place. if you were waiting for tactical warning that an event would happen at this day and this time, you weren't waiting for intelligence. >> next question on this, if it doesn't have a strong centralized link to al qaeda what does that tell us about the nature of terrorism and terrorist threats. >> that the al qaeda movement has changed. that is probably the better word. but the al qaeda movement now you see al qaeda from al qaeda prime in pakistan and

afghanistan and westward all the way to the west coast of africa. and the identity, make up of those al qaeda groups shifts a bit as you move westward. a little less al qaeda prime and global and local circumstances and local groups. those groups don't really consider us to be the prime. our problem is what do we do about that? do we wait until they gathered more strength there for are a threat to us. or do we move now and perhaps turn a movement that really wasn't mad at us in to an enemy of the united states. tough decision. >> evolving story. let's get to where we are with the nsa, disclosures, surveillance and some court rulings. i want to read to you one segment of a ruling handed down by judge richard leon here in washington, u.s. district judge who said, it's one thing to say that people expect phone companies to occasionally

provide information to law enforcement. it's quite another to suggest that our citizens expect all phone companies to operate what is effectively a joint intelligence gathering operation with the government. what do you respond to that? >> first of all, i would respond that the judge leon was looking at the acquisition of the data and not how the data was used. so this is not a broad fishing expedition, granted. billions of phone records a day are acquired by the national security agency, but what follows is really important. what happens to that data. how often is that data touched. the truth is, it's touched two to three hundred times per year and only based upon a reasonable articulate suspicion that that number is affiliated with terrorism. >> judge leon also talks about as you said the acquisition of this data, underlying supreme court precedent dates back to case from 1979 in no way imagined this world that we're

currently living in. let me read it again. this is the words, they're interesting. the almost orwellian technology to store the metadata is unlike anything that could have been conceived of in 1979. notion that the government could collect similar data on hundreds of millions of people and retain that data for five-year period updating it with new data every day in perpetuated was it best in 1979, the stuff of science fix. americans, general, are legitimately alarmed by the scope and stature of this collection, retention and storage. >> our history as a people allow we be concerned about this. but our concerns should be governed. our thinking should be focused on the facts of the case not the emotion of the case. again, what happens to the data. judge leon ignored precedent, ignored smith versus maryland the case that you cited.

the 15 judges on 30 occasions that upheld the lawfulness of this. then judge pauly in the 7th district of new york within a week issued another warning saying -- saying that this was inherently constitutional. and judge pauly relied on precedent. judge leon relied on exclamation points throughout his judgment not precedent. >> also said this is likely unconstitutional. this collection violates the 4th amendment, you disagree? >> i do. i'm not a judge, i'm not a lawyer i do know there is one controlling supreme court case, smith versus maryland, in which the court has said in 5-3 decision that there is no reasonable expectation of privacy over this kind of data. >> once you hand your data over to a third party. >> right. >> now it's also been explored that tapped fiber optic cables abroad, circumvented or capped encryption codes and covertly

included code. all that have is -- >> against people not protected by the 4th amendment to the constitution, the constitution doesn't tore in to the conversation. >> what are your thoughts currently on edward snowden? have they evolved in any way. >> not at all. >> what do you think he is? >> i used to say he was a defector, there's a history of defection to moscow. he seems to be part of that string. i'm now kind of drift ink the direction of perhaps more harsh language. >> such as? >> such as traitor. >> based on what? >> the past two weeks, in open letters to the german and brazilian government he has offered to reveal more american secrets to those governments in return for something. and in return was for asylum. i think there's an english word that describes selling an american secrets to another country it's traitor. >> is the nsa stronger or weaker?

>> infinitely weaker. this is the most serious hemorrhaging of american secrets in the history of american espionage. we've had other spice, we can talk about hanson and all anchorage. their damage was very limited. even though both those cases human beings lost their lives. but there were specific sources. there's reason we call these leaks, if you extend the metaphor, hanson and ames we can argue whether that was a cup of water that was leaked or bucket of water. what snowden is revealing, major, is the plumbing. he's revealing how we acquire this information. it will take years if not decades for us to return to the position that we had prior to his disclosure. >> are you afraid of more disclosures? >> well, actually that's a great question. because i saw in your lead in you had mr. snowden saying, my work is done. does that mean all the stories based upon the information he's given to the press will stop? he says he's accomplished his

objective. i've already won. yet will the stories stop? i don't think so. >> what are you most afraid of if the stories continue? >> what i'm most afraid of we'll reveal our sources our methods, tactics, techniques, procedures, to people around the world that will bring the american people harm. >> is it your attention that these techniques, these tactics, these surveillance mechanisms are legitimately legally but also more important because of the atomized nature of the terrorist threat and affiliated groups with al qaeda? >> actually that's a great point, major. because the 215 program, the metadata program that we're talking about that is more ideally suited against that granular, one individualized attack. it's probably a little less useful than traditional al qaeda attack that slow moving, ponder

russ plot with multiple threads designed for mass casualties against an iconic target. i'm not saying 215 isn't valuable. i'm saying enough other threats that we could pull perhaps learn about those traditional plots. now we get plot like a drive-by shooting and what happened at boston and lots like shooting up fellow soldiers in texas. >> good to have you with us. happy new year to you. >> and to you. >> we'll be back in one minute with the other side of the nsa surveillance issue. [ male announcer ] here's a question for you: the energy in one gallon of gas is also enough to keep your smartphone running for how long? 30 days? 300 days? 3,000 days? the answer is... 3,000 days. because of gasoline's high energy density, your car doesn't have to carry as much fuel compared to other energy sources. take the energy quiz.

energy lives here. >> garrett: now to talk more about edward snowden what he revealed i'm joined by the government accountability project and is a snowden legal advisor. and thomas, a former nsa employee turned whistle blower who beat charges of espionage over his work revealing problems with the previous nsa surveillance program. great to have you with us.

i want to give you chance to react to what you just heard from general hayden, nsa surveil stance legal this country and towner terrorism techniques are infinitely baker because of snowden. >> in terms of them being legal there is a conflict between two federal court judges on this issue. and what general hayden neglected to bring up that judge leon's opinion finding the tougher vail answer mechanism to be likely unconstitutional also ineffective mirrors very much the white house review panel's internal recommendations that found much of the same thing. i feel very much that that vindicates snowden as a whistle blower. it's very rare that a whistle blower has that the federal determination corroborating all that he has disclosed. >> garrett: thomas, you are

aware of the criticism of edward snowden he should have followed the procedures. she have worked through inspector general, gone to congress, gone to supervisors, you did all of that and prosecuted by this federal government and you ultimately saw that case trumped down to misdemeanor. how dowry act to the general's characterization of traitor. >> i don't consider him a traitor at all. it's unconstitutionality the fact that we're losing huge amounts of trust overseas in terms of nsa supposed to be protecting the rights of citizens but also the united states, liberty and freedom and rights is clearly losing out in the court of world opinion. >> garrett: those who may in the future think of themselves as whistleblowers you have the snowden case, you have your case. what would you tell them based on your experience? >> well, lawyer up, that's the first thing. whistle blowing now is extraordinarily dangerous.

it ends up your first amendment rights are criminalized being exposed ex national national security agency matters. somehow the security trumps the constitution. it trumps the rule of law and trumps what i believe most americans believe, we have to revisit this expectation of privacy simply because provide data to a third party. >> garrett: you've met with edward snowden, what is his frame of mind? >> he would love to be back in this country. he is patriotic american, he loves his homeland. and would love to come back if the conditions were right. >> garrett: what do you mean by that? >> by that, i mean people like general hayden would not be making threats to put him on the kill list and two former cia chiefs would not be saying that he should be hung from a tree. >> garrett: the president of the united states made it clear that he would be afforded every

protection under criminal justice system in this country and i think it's fair to say that he would have a wrath of grade a attorneys waiting with open arms to take his case were he to come back to this country. why not come back? >> the very fact that he's been charged under the espionage act would not be a fair process, those trials take place largedly in secret. all sorts of measures people have to go through, it's over charging and as evidenced from drake's case you don't use a law meant to go after pies to go after whistle color blowers. >> garrett: what do you mean kill list? >> general layden and michael, joked about -- >> garrett: joked. >> joked about putting him on a list. and one of them being -- >> garrett: are you suggesting edward snowden took that to heart and believes it? >> of course. i think he certainly has concerns for his safety and even

last week was having morell. >> garrett: former deputy cia director. >> and like michael hayden a former nsa and cia director not only joked they weren't joking, he should be hung from a tree by his neck. which conjurors images of lynching not a fair trial. i think guarantees that he would not be tortured setting the bar really low. i don't think he could get a fair trial here. i don't think he should have any trial because he's been granted asylum because he has a reasonable fear of political persecution predicated on the very espionage act charges with which he is faced paige you were charged under that act, it was then moved and all pled down to misdemeanor. do you believe edward snowden could get a fair trial and why not come here put the justice system, his actions, to the test in public court of law. >> no. not at all.

stay in russia. ironically enough, history is a lesson. we went to visit edward snowden back in october presented him with the sam adams intelligence award. no, he have to escape the united states to keep his freedom. >> garrett: it's -- all of this is avoidable. the united states the bedrock of this country street is defending liberty. we sacrificed any number of lives for the sake of liberty. we have the technology, very best of america, can solve this problem, go after the threat of intelligence, protect the rights of citizens. but as all rejected by nsa. >> garrett: that's one of the reasons you became a whistle blower. >> one of the reasons they came after me. >> garrett: let me read to you from the other opinion, from judge william pauly, every day people voluntarily surrender personal and private information to transnational corporations to exploit that data for profit do

you think twice about it even though it is far more intrusive than bulk telephoney metadata done by the nsa. hand it over willingly. >> i think it's very different if i choose to give personal data to facebook to keep my family members up to date than giving personal information to the government which is back dooring twitter and facebook all of these social media. i think judge pauly's opinion turns on the idea that we collected more data we're doing less targeting but that infers the constitutionality of the fourth amendment which requires individualized suspicion and probable cause and targeting in order to surveil someone. >> garrett: i have to stop you right there. very good to have you with us. thomas drake, we'll be right back. over the next 40 years the united states population is going to grow by over 90 million people, and almost all that growth is going to be in cities.

what's the healthiest and best way for them to grow so that they really become cauldrons of prosperity and cities of opportunity? what we have found is that if that family is moved into safe, clean affordable housing, places that have access to great school systems, access to jobs and multiple transportation modes then the neighborhood begins to thrive and then really really take off. the oxygen of community redevelopment is financing. and all this rebuilding that happened could not have happened without organizations like citi. citi has formed a partnership with our company so that we can take all the lessons from the revitalization of urban america to other cities. so we are now working in chicago and in washington, dc and newark. it's amazing how important safe, affordable housing is to the future of our society. ♪ [ male announcer ] 1.21 gigawatts. today, that's easy.

ge is revolutionizing power. supercharging turbines with advanced hardware and innovative software. using data predictively to help power entire cities. so the turbines of today... will power us all... into the future. ♪ >> garrett: we're back now with mark gellman of the "washington post" who spent time with edward snowden, like 15 hours, extensive interview. does edward snowden have more to tell the world? should the nsa be afraid? >> six months ago he handed overarchives of information to three reporters, i was one of them. he's had no role in what is disclosed since, he's added nothing to what he's disclosed. to the extent he wants to participate he wants to speak as

someone who interprets what we have learned says what he thinks ought to be done about it. whether the nsa is afraid or not is not for me to say. he has launched a global debate and an american debate about what the limits, boundaries should be of surveillance in a democratic society. that's ongoing. >> garrett: to think about conceptually this is a box, you might regard it as reporter as a treasure chest, michael hey done and others like pandora's box full of all sorts of damaging disclosures of what america surveys, why, how it accomplishes that. the box is in your hands, in the hands of others. more things may come out of that box but edward snowden will not be providing them. that's a finite amount he's given you and that's all it is. >> that's exactly right. >> garrett: what is his frame of mind? you spent a good deal of time with him, he had practical engineer's mind. is he afraid, does he have a sense of high emotion about

being either chased or pursued by the federal government? what are his thoughts of coming back and facing trial? >> he takes the kinds of reasonable precautions that a person would take when he knows he's of great interest and number of intelligence services around the world. what he's keeping his eye on is the big picture, which is that over a period of six months he has enabled a public conversation about a program that was -- or set of programs that took place entirely in secret withoutç"any public debate. not only -- you can't debate particular intelligence operations, you can debate policies, should the nsa be allowed to collect every american's phone calls, should the nsa be allowed to intercept hundreds of millions of internet address books as they flow across the pipes. or billions of location points so that it can track many of the world's cell phones in time and space. we never had those conversations because all of that took place

behind closed doors. >> garrett: when he says his job is done and he's won, what do you think he means by that? >> what i just said, he said what i -- narrowed it down to just, i won. what he means is the thing he cared about most was putting things on the public record that would allow us, as a people, to decide for ourselves what the boundaries should be. and we had no role in it up until then because we didn't know what was happening. >> garrett: does he want ally deal? does he want to find a way to come back to america? >> i can't speak for him on that. i didn't get any particularly clearance on that. i think that's for him and his lawyers to be working on. >> garrett: do you get any sense what the next six months, and time after that, he has one year of asylum then what comes next? any sense of that? >> he made clear that he would like asylum in some other country. he didn't choose russia. he was literally changing planes in the moscow airport when united states revoked his

passport. he was stuck there by that. he said from the beginning he wanted asylum in a western country, for example, iceland, that from his point of view respects rights of free speech and whistleblowers, he is not looking to live in country like russia or china. by the way, i just have to say as a matter of fact, that there is no evidence on public record that he has defected or betrayed his country. he has stated that his intention to allow his country to make decisions for itself. simply no evidence on the public record or even in private intelligence according to the officials i talked to, that he has transferred his loyalty or tried to assist a hostile power. marriage michael hayden, former nsa director said that our counter terrorism surveillance techniques are infinitely weaker as a result of these disclosures. does edward snowden have any personal remorse or will if it's learned at some date in the

future that something happened terrible in this country wasn't caught because programs were changed as a result of these disclosures? >> well, it's well aware that the reporters in who he has entrusted these decisions had held back lock of material in the archives that would disclose particular targets, techniques, particular places where certain technologies are used. >> garrett: something that you've done? >> that he wanted us to do. he asked us not to -- if he wanted to do that he would have done it himself, he was more than capableful doing it that way. posting the whole thing on the internet. wanted us to rated as big policy questions for american people and what would do too much harm, what would be harmful. we consult with every story. the nsa, director of national in tell generals knows every detail and every story before we publish it they have an opportunity to tell us what they think would be especially

harmful almost always we exceed to those requests. >> garrett: great to have you with us. happy new year. we'll be back in just a minute. : where does the united states get most of its energy? is it africa? the middle east? canada? or the u.s.? the answer is... the u.s. ♪ most of america's energy comes from right here at home. take the energy quiz. energy lives here. shhhh! shhhh. [ coughs ] i have a cold with this annoying runny nose. [ sniffles ] i better take something. [ male announcer ] truth is, dayquil cold and flu doesn't treat all that. it doesn't? [ male announcer ] nope. [ sniffles ] alka-seltzer plus fights your worst cold symptoms plus has a fast acting antihistamine to relieve your runny nose. oh, what a relief it is!

[ man ] shhhh! for fast cold and flu relief, day or night, try alka-seltzer plus day and night liquid gels. >> garrett: some of our stations are leaving us now. but for most of you we'll be right back with a lot more "face the nation." including a panel on surveillance and the future. please stay with us.

james: it is week 17 in the nfl. dan: and there's joe flacco. just four touchdowns in five games in cincinnati but he said this week that his knee's fine. bill: andy dalton, 15 t.d. passes the last four home games. he needs to have a big strong game today. shannon: ryan tannehill. in order for them to win and get win, he must play a lot better