from washington the mclaughlin group the american original. for over three decades the sharpest minds, best sources, hardest talk. >> issue one, our man in hong kong. >> my name is ed snowden. i'm 29 years old. i work for booz allen hamilton as an infrastructure analyst for nsa in hawaii. i sit in my desk and certainly have authority to wiretap anyone from you or your accountant to a federal judge to even the president if i had a personal e-mail. >> edward j. snowden was a security contractor with top secret clearance until tuesday

of this week had he was sacked. three weeks ago mr. snowden triggered a federal manhunt after he had begun communicating via e-mail with both the washington post and the guardian, a british newspaper. snowden disclosed to the papers details of a top secret surveillance program called prism operated by the national security agency, the nsa. last week snowden surfaced in hong kong via video to explain his actions. snowden denied any intent to harm u.s. security. he claimed he blew the whistle on the nsa to prompt a public debate about the program's legitimacy and propriety. he said he had taken refuge in hong kong, the same city and territory of the people's republic of china. snowden is resisting extradition to the united states, so damage assessments are already underway in the nsa and the cia, the central

intelligence agency and the department of homeland security and in other federal agencies whose secrets show -- snowden is positioned to compromise. besides snowden's decision to put himself under the jurisdiction of hong kong, the timing of the disclosure is of particular interest, so close to the critical summit between president obama and premier xi jinping of china. snowden's current revelations are seen as a major ongoing diplomatic embarrassment to the u.s. and a serious undercutting of president obama's negotiating posture vis-a-vis china. question, what is more egregious, what snowden did to the nsa or what the nsa is doing to american citizens? pat buchanan? >> john, snowden broke his contract. he violated his oath.

he betrayed american secrets and i think he damaged the security of the united states and i think he ought to be prosecuted. the national security agency has spent decades and its leaders have spent decades defending this country. we learned they have access to aol's and verizon's records and yahoo's records and all the rest, but they can only access these records if they have found some communication to a terrorist and if they go to a fisa court and say we need to access those records. by and large, the guys working at the nsa are american patriots who put in decades in the silent service and i think there's a wholesale exaggeration. the potential for evil doing is huge as it is in the irs, but there is no single example yet that this has been abused. >> what's a fisa court? >> that's the foreign intelligence security agency court which authorizes -- >> what kind of court is that? >> it's a federal court which

authorizes warrants to go in -- >> is that an invisible court? >> it is invisible because it's got one or two -- >> why are you talking about an invisible court? >> because that's the court that the national security agency goes to to get authority -- >> how come the national security agency doesn't have cabinet rank? >> it's sort of like the -- >> is it -- >> it's under clapper, the whole umbrella, the head of national security overall over the cia. >> reporting to whom directly? >> he reports directly to the nsc and the president. >> where is his office, at the white house, right at the president's elbow? >> it's in a secret place. >> is it in the white house? >> no. >> he's the director of national security. i don't think he is in the white house. >> please continue. >> i have to say i agree with pat buchanan and i disagree with whatever little conspiracy you're trying to lay out here. >> i'm trying to identify the players for the public at

large. >> exactly. >> go ahead. >> director of national intelligence is probably a fairly newly created spot because during the bush years we realized that a lot of the intelligence agencies were operating under their own steam and there wasn't enough coordination. i believe this position was created. there's nothing nefarious about it and the fact they don't sit in the cabinet doesn't take away from their authority at all. >> we do know who is on the court if you check carefully enough. you can find out who the head of the court is and so forth. >> the fisa court was established in 1978 to provide oversight so the government doesn't run amuck, but to get back to the original question, edward snowden is a loner, a libertarian. i don't think he's guilty of treason because he has no evident intent to betray at least that we know about. he believes he was doing the right thing in alerting the american people this kind of surveil was going on.

what's new here is the -- surveillance was going on. what's new here is the extent of the surveillance. i think people understood this is what the national security agency was created to do. now he's brought this out to the open and i think that's fair enough. let's have a debate. >> this is a very nice gloss of this young man's reputation and i think he'll be very grateful to you. >> maybe he will be. i believe he will be prosecuted under the espionage act. >> privacy no more. >> get a warrant. go after a murderer, terrorist or rapist but don't troell through a billion -- troll through a billion phone records every day. that is unconstitutional and invades our privacy and i'm going to see if i can challenge this at the supreme court level. >> senator rand paul wants to challenge government spy programs to determine whether they are constitutional. the fourth amendment to the constitution says this. "the right of the people to be secure in their persons,

houses, papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated." we now know that the nsa gathers data from billions of u.s. phone records and vacuums the databases of nine of the largest u.s. internet companies including microsoft, google, apple, yahoo and facebook. under the foreign intelligence surveillance act, that's fisa, and sections 215 and 702 of the patriot act, this data collection is legal and many political figures disagree with senator paul including mike rogers, congressman, fellow republican, former fbi special agent and chairman of the house intelligence committee. chairman rogers says this. >> the national security agency does not listen to america's phone calls and it is -- americans' phone calls and it is not reading their e-mails. none of the programs allow that

and part of the 7002 patriot act says it is express -- 702 patriot act says it is expressly prohibited by law. >> question, who wins on this issue, senator paul or representative rogers? >> i think senator rand paul wins on this one. people are walking around their houses covering up the little computers' cameras right now. talk about an unreasonable search. you're in your house looking at your computer and the government can be watching you at least according to snow snowden so they can tap in and -- snowden so they can tap in and listen to your phone calls and read your e-mails. the whole idea of feeling secure using your telephone and computer in your own home is the heart of this issue. >> he can go right into the computer and see what's there? >> that's what the claim is. we don't really know. they're using the big word the meta data word.

we're just gathering this stuff up and not really looking at it. how do we know that and who is looking at it? we have government contractors now who seem to have access to a lot of personal things belonging to million of americans and they're not directly working for the government. it seems like there's no real control over the information coming in and who has access to it. that is a big scooter issue. >> what do you think -- security issue. >> what do you think, mortimer? >> i think the head of national security has basically indicated dozens of terrorist attacks have been interdicted as a result of the information and intelligence we got out of that and given the world we live in we have to see whether there's a way of preserving that access. now they are not listening to conversations or looking at the material. it goes through a special court with independent judges and congress has approved it. this is something in this modern day in age we have to find some way of dealing with, which is the levels of terrorism that we have never

before experienced. >> that's right. you'll have smart people creating algorithms, so you look for patterns when you collect all this data. >> excuse me. when you buy something online, do you notice you get lots of ads related to what merchandise you were looking at? corporations are doing the same sort of snooping. >> if you haven't covered the camera on your computer, you should have done it a lot time ago. >> hold on. i want to get this end to show the extremity to which this subject moves, mad data. to capture all these e-mails internet searches, phone records and other information in industry art called meta data, the nsa based in ft. meade, maryland has built a 1 million square foot data center in utah at a cost of $1.72 billion. the utah data center stores and

captures data in yoda beet byte which is equal to 500 quadrillion pages of text. the stack of paper would reach to the moon and back 66 million times round trip. let's move that out a little bit and take an example of meta data. amazon's kindle reports back every page you read, how long it took to read it, what passages you underline and everything you read on kindle. it's as if ceo jeff bezos is snooping over your shoulder. is that an invasion of privacy '. >> no. look, this enormous -- privacy? >> no. look, this enormous data exists. verizon, all these other things and he goes into this huge pool

and nsa can access it if they've got a reason to believe someone is connected with terrorism. >> they can also turn it over to a law enforcement agency. then they can go in. >> with a warrant. >> there is no privacy. >> the question is can nsa access it? it already exists. >> it exists and if they want to go further and target in on someone, they have to go to this court and present enough evidence. >> the fisa court. >> and get essentially what amounts to a warrant. >> this is the mystery court we don't know who is on. >> we do know who is on if you really want to look. >> that's why we can have the luxury of having this conversation is because we feel pretty safe and maybe we shouldn't. >> oh, god bless america. >> they penetrate every part of your life, your medical records, too, i imagine. is there anything that cannot be found in the light of these developments? >> it is possible there is very

little that cannot found, but the bombs that went off in boston the day of the marathon, there was information in intelligence that we might have been able to find out about these people in advance and we didn't do it as it happened, okay? we're in a different kind of world today and we have got to find a way to protect ourselves. otherwise this society is going to break down in ways we can't even predict. it's a moderate price to pay for the level of security we now know. >> you don't mind that the fourth amendment to the constitution is shot full of holes. >> i don't know i agree with you. >> who is violating whose rights? >> it is a balance here of protecting the country versus giving up your rights to privacy as an american. everyone is so willing to just say okay, fine, government. look at me. take all this data. i trust you. really? >> whose fourth amendment rights have been violated? if somebody went into any computer and got into my e-

mail, i'm going say you s.o.b., i'm going to kill you. >> if our government holds onto that much of our personal data, is that in itself an erosion of our constitutional right, namely to privacy under the fourth amendment? >> no. use cata already exists, john. they move it from here to there. >> that's right and they look for patterns and i want to quote david simon, former reporter creator of the wire on hbo. he likens this to not only trying to find the needle in the haystack. this is trying to find the needles before they're placed in the haystack. this is what this information makes possible. we don't want to surrender that. there have been no documented abuses. >> i feel better now. >> none that we know of. this thing is so secretive and we're all so willing to accept it. >> what would you do, susan? destroy all this information? >> not much of a secret anymore. >> how do you reaffirm, reestablish, reroute privacy in

this country? how do you do it? >> i don't feel my privacy has been violated. i would feel my privacy had been violated if i was in a subway and the thing blew up. sorry. >> so safety rules. >> yeah. you want to change the whole mood of this country? have a couple terrorist attacks that go off without the ability to stop them. >> you're so trusting. they weren't even able to track down the guys in boston despite their reams of information. >> they can take it to all the elements of your appetite vast as they may be. >> i'm a vegan, so they won't have much. issue two red lining. on thursday the white house announced the obama administration has concluded that the assad regime has used chemical weapons "multiple times" in syria in the last year resulting in the deaths of

100 to 150 people. the white house also announced in response it would "increase the scope and scale of assistance that we provide to the opposition." question, is president obama making the same mistake with syria that bush made with iraq, being drawn into a middle eastern quagmire? i ask you, mort? >> i don't think so. i think if he doesn't do anything, he will have a middle eastern quagmire because what's happening in syria is there is an absolute moment when there could be a transformation of a, what's going on in jordan, for example, because you have a shiite sunni operation, but what is going on there, assad now is clearly winning. the rebels are clearly losing and the reason is because we did not supply them with the kind of ammunition they need. that would be a huge change in that region and to the detriment of our interest in that region. >> so we have to remember that

shiites and sunni are located in different countries. >> that's right. >> and anything that affects their population within syria is going to be reflected on a massive scale possibly causing eruptions over in those countries, correct? >> that is possible, but if assad and his forces wipe out the opposition, okay, there will be implications directly. jordan in particular and other countries, so whatever happens here you have implications that go to the whole region. >> hold on one moment. let's assume bashar al assad, head of syria, himself authorized the chemical weapon deployment "five distinct conflicts have become tangled together in syria." a popular uprising against the dictatorship between sunnies and a regional struggle between shiite and sunni which is a decades old conflict between an iranian led grouping and iran's

traditional enemies and at another level there is a reborn cold war confrontation, russia and china versus the west. the quagmire is turning out to be even deeper and more dangerous than it was in iraq, so says war correspondent patrick coburn in the current london review of books. the fanned out impact of this. >> we're putting the united states now militarily into a war where our side has al-qaeda people, jihaddists on its side. the war there is being lost. we have no plans to win it, to end it, to get out. you're right, it's a sunni shiite war throughout the entire middle east. we're getting ourselves into a conflict. iran, russia has bala on one side and us, qatar and arabia on the other side. >> first the tonkin gulf was a

made up incident. >> he thinks this was made up. >> i don't believe the sarin gas is made up. secondly, bush wasn't drawn into iraq. he actively sought it out. he wanted to overthrow the regime here and have a demonstration of american power in the middle east. this president doesn't really want to get involved. he's got one foot on the brake every step lang the way. >> that's the problem -- along the way. >> that's the problem. >> the idea in this increased military aid is an attempt to balance the power on the ground. assad is winning and you don't want to go into this peace conference they hope to hold in the summer with assad winning. that's what this is about. >> susan, you want to amplify that nasty crack you made. >> the problem is he's giving them some weapons.

>> who is he? >> the president decided to help out a little bit in syria after they crossed this red line. it's not enough to really do any good. it's going to escalate things with russia as you say and increase this cold war situation. >> why did the president? >> i think it was political. >> what do you mean? >> for a number of reasons. >> he has effectively controlled the content of the sunday tv programs. >> he's called a -- >> he does not want to talk about war. >> your theory is the wag the dog theory that they're trying to divert attention to something else right now. >> other than what? the irs. >> we got to keep it on the front page. >> the irs is the last thing. >> i don't think that's why he's doing it, believe me. if there is a collapse of all our allies in that region, it will be a huge foreign policy and that's a security defeat for the united states.

saudi arabia is our ally. in their own way they are helping out. >> where are the turks? >> i don't know where the turks are. >> they're three times as large. you've got a reluctant warrior taking us into war halfway. >> you're right. will president obama rue the day he made chemical weapons used by assad's regime a red line, yes or no? >> this could really damage, cripple and end his presidency on a horrible note. >> that is way overstated. >> will he rue? >> no. >> no rue? >> no. the fact that the hezbollah fighters at the direction of iran are now in syria makes this a proxy war that superpowers cannot sit on the sidelines completely. >> susan quickly. >> he made a political move to send over light weapons and it's not going to damage him. >> i think it was essential for the united states. i don't think he'll rue the day or the night.

issue three, immigration impetus. >> this week the senate will consider a common sense bipartisan bill that is the best chance we've had in years to fix our broken immigration system. there's no good reason to play procedural games or engage in obstruction just to block the best chance we've had in years to address this problem. there's no reason chong can't get this done by the end of the summer. >> the president may get his wish. on tuesday the most sweeping immigration reform bill in 30 years passed a critical test. the fullest senate voted to take up the bill meaning debate and amend it and proponents hope pass it. the legislation would allow some 11 million illegal immigrants now in the u.s. to apply for u.s. citizenship. before gaining citizenship, however, immigrants who apply would gain temporary legal status first for at least 10 years. over that time immigrants must pass a background check, pay

back taxes, pay application fees, pay at least $2,000 in fines. they must also learn english. the bill also provides $6.5 billion to boost security along the 2,000-mile u.s./mexico border. also employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants will pay fines. also visas for specialized workers will be increased. interestingly republican house speaker john boehner green lighted priority status and passage of immigration overhaul. >> immigration reform is probably at the top of that list. >> signed into law i think by the end of the year we could have a bill. >> question, is speaker boehner's prediction correct? susan. >> i think right now the speaker is undecided about what he wants to do. i don't think it's guaranteed the house will take up any kind of comprehensive bill. there's a lot of pressure on him from both sides. a lot of republicans feel they have to do a comprehensive

bill, that the fate of the party rests on that path to citizenship, but many other republicans think this is an ill fated move and will damage the party permanently, eternally as you have said pat and boehner is in the middle of it. everybody is watching him. whoever is trying to guess what he's going to do now may as well flip a coin. >> do you think the house may turn to a series of bills rather than one? >> they're doing that now. that's their backdoor escape. they have a series of bills that they can say is dealing with the guest worker and escapes the whole quandary of path to citizenship. >> this will tear the republican party apart between the traditionalist populists going to the wall and the big corporate guys. agribusiness and corporate america wants this. they want cheap labor. i think the congresswoman, ms. bachmann, is pretty right.

she says republicans in the house will pass a really good bill from a conservative standpoint. it will go to conference. the good stuff will be wiped out and you'll get a liberal bill. senate will pass it and the key question is whether the house will pass it. >> what are the major differences between the house bill and the senate bill? >> the major thing is the path to citizenship. the senate is not going to pass a bill with that and the house is really resistant to that. >> what the republicans are going to do is argue for securing the border. that is a big issue and that will be the issue around which the republicans will rally, okay? >> in having a trigger. >> and the question is will that be enough to satisfy them? if they get what they want on that -- >> they want to assure themselves the border is secure by spending what, 4 or $5 billion? >> it's going to be more than that. >> it boils down to this idea

of a trigger. at the very end of this it will conference and be up to the speaker and whether he moves it to the floor or not will hinge on this trigger meaning you don't get this path to citizenship unless it's confirmed. >> paul will lead the battle against the syrian intervention. >> tea party republicans in an effort to kill the farm bill will stereotype and make racial comments about food stamps which is a big element. >> the public becomes increasingly complacent about data gathering. >> immigration overhaul legislation will pass and become law by december 31 of this year. happy father's day. bye bye.

governor terry brown and lawmakers have approved a safe budget. it includes more money for schoolers with english learners and some new funding for programs for the poor. the u.s. supreme court says no to the patented of naturally occurring genes sending ripples through the biotech industry. it could lead