06/14/12 06/14/12 [captioning made possible by democracy now!] >> from pacifica, this is "democracy now!" >> this man is a criminal. stilling loans from the people in the small businesses cannot to the same loans. when people are being thrown out on the streets. a >> protesters confront jp morgan chase ceo jamie dimon as the testifies on capitol hill about how his bank lost up to $3 billion. lawmakers gave a warmer greeting to the man described as

washington's favorite banker. >> thank you, mr. jamie dimon. i appreciate you voluntarily coming in to talk with us. it is important talk about things happening in the industry. i think it will help us as we look forward and hopefully it will continue to best practice scenario in the industry. >> we will speak with former investment banker nomi prins, author of "black tuesday." lori wallach and how the obama administration is pushing a secretive trade agreement that could vastly expand corporate power and directly contradict a 2008 campaign promise by president obama. >> they want to elevate corporations to the same level as government and let them sue our government and a secret tribunal of three corporate lawyers -- could not make the step up -- to trade our tax dollars to pay them when they pollute. >> an outcry grows in washington

over national security leaks. could lead to an official state secret act? we will speak with former justice department whistleblower jesselyn radack. >> whistleblowers have always been treated and mercilessly in prior didn't as the ministrations. >> all of that and more coming up. this is "democracy now!," democracynow.org, the war and peace report. i'm amy goodman. amnesty international is accusing the syrian government of crimes against humanity and deliberately targeting civilian areas linked his support for opposition rebels. and in the report, amnesty said its researchers collected evidence from 23 villages and towns of indiscriminate killings by government forces and affiliated militias. an amnesty adviser said civilians are enduring massive

brutality. >> the city of population is very much at the receiving end, getting caught in the conflict, and mercilessly, been targeted by government forces who have been pounding towns and villages, going into people's homes, taking young men out of the houses and executing them in front of their families and burning down their homes. >> and mr. renewed its call for an arms embargo for the security council to refer this syrian government to the criminal court. u.s. officials backing off claims russia sent new shipments of attack helicopters to aid the syrian regime's crackdown on opposition rebels. tuesday, hillary clinton accused russia of supplying the aircraft in what amounted to the harshest criticism of u.s. to russia's syria ties today. but on wednesday, the obama administration acknowledged the

helicopters were likely sent back from syria to russia for routine repairs months ago and were now just in return. a senior pentagon official told "new york times" that clinton -- russian foreign minister accused u.s. of hypocrisy saying -- despite the partial retraction, clinton continued with their criticism of russian wednesday. >> russia says it wants peace and stability restored. it says it has no particular love lost for al-assad, and it also claims to have vital interest in the region and relationships that it wants to continue to keep. they put all of that at risk if they do not move more

constructively right now. i would emphasize that the united states has provided no military support to the syrian opposition. none. >> a bahrain appeals court has convicted nine medics who were part of an original group of 20 sentenced last year for treating demonstrators during anti- government protests. the former senior medic at bahrain's top hospital was sentenced to five years in prison while the eight others received sentences ranging from one month to three years. nine other medics have had their verdicts dismissed. the prosecution of the medics and their torture while in custody has widely been criticized. in a statement, physicians for human rights said --, "is a travesty of justice that the trials continued and that the medics are now sentenced to jail time." the u.s. military's expanding

its secret intelligence operations across africa, establishing a network of small air bases to spy on terrorist hideouts. the u.s. is reportedly deploying small and aren't aircraft described as private airplanes that record video and intercept radio and cellphone signals. the spying is overseen by u.s. special operations forces, but also involves both african troops and private military contractors. the operation comes as part of the obama administration's expanded use of special operations forces and secretive efforts to monitor and even kill militants around the world. egypt's ruling military government has expanded the powers of state forces to detain civilians just days ahead of the country's runoff elections. in a joint statement, more than a dozen egyptian rights groups said the decree effectively reimpose as martial law and reinforces suspicion the upcoming transfer of power to a civilian government "will only be phony and won't prevent the military from remaining a major

player in political life." and ed shafiq, who served as prime minister under ousted leader hosni mubarak, will square off against muslim brotherhood candidate mohammed morsi in this weekend's runoff vote. a court is ruling today on whether shafiq is eligible to run under a law banning mubarak- era officials. a lower court later ruled parts of it were unconstitutional. egyptian activists have unveiled a campaign to boycott the vote, calling it a false choice under ongoing military rule. boycott organizers said aegis military rulers have effectively rigged the election to ensure the continued dominance. >> they're trying to show is there is no other way for the revolution to continue as slept for collaborating in these elections -- except for collaborating in these elections. the results that comes out, whoever it is, works perfectly for them.

we need to reject these elections, refuse to collaborate with them, and make sure we organize ourselves. >> at least three people have been killed in the u.s. john attack and a pakistani town in north waziristan. officials said the attack targeted militants in the central market. the drone strikes have continued as the u.s. and pakistan remain at odds over the reopening of nato supply routes for the war in afghanistan. wednesday, leon panetta said pakistan's closure is costing the u.s. and additional $100 million a month. the talks have stalemated over a number of issues including the u.s. refusal to apologize for the airstrike that killed 24 pakistani troops last year. in islamabad, pakistan foreign minister denied claims of pakistani demand for higher tariff on routes is preventing an agreement. >> pakistan is not in any sort of a price gouging debate right

now. this is incorrect and wrong and must be disbursed as soon as possible. the u.s. side knows very well as to the needs and requirements for us to enable us to move in that direction, as to enable us to take that decision. i would like to keep it that. >> jamie dimon appear before lawmakers wednesday for the first time since his bank lost $3 billion. he apologized for the loss, but failed to explain how it occurred. he was repeatedly confronted by protesters. >> this man is a criminal and people need to shout out about this man and 18 other cronies that have been stealing bureau interest loans from the small people in the small businesses cannot it the same loans, when the people are deprived loans to keep their houses, when people are being thrown out on the streets become more --.

>> more to the headlines. the billionaire casino mogul and republican donor sheldon adelson has thrown his financial support behind mitt romney. he and his wife have donated $10 million to the pro-romney super pac restore our future. he initially supported newt gingrich in the republican primary, giving a pro-gingrich super pac more than $20 million. prompted gingrich to adopt an even harsher anti- palestinian stance, declaring palestinians are an invented national identity. he has already spent around $35 million. ironically, the donation by gingrich's former backer to romney came just as gingrich himself openly complained the u.s. elections are rigged in favor of the wealthy. newt gingrich was speaking in an appearance on msnbc. >> it is very hard to compete

with the billionaire if they get to spend all the money they want in the middle class candidates raising money in $2,500 units. i think the current system is rigged in favor of the wealthy. >> and new york police officer was indicted on manslaughter charges wednesday for the fatal shooting of an unarmed african- american teen who was killed in his home. 18-year-old ramarley graham was shot at close range in february after being chased into the house by narcotics detectives. he was trying into a bag of marijuana into the toilet before he was killed. the indicted officer, richard hayes, pleaded not guilty to charges that first and second- degree manslaughter charges in a bronx courtroom. after the hearing, ramarley graham's's parents spoke out. >> ramarley was only 18. we have too much of this going on and it passed to stop. -- it has to stop.

they cannot keep killing our kids. something has to come out of this. >> i keep asking why did he kill our son? why? why? why did he kill our son? 18 years old. 18. he did nothing to deserve this. >> several accused members of the prominent mexican drug cartel had been arrested in the u.s. over allegations of laundering millions of dollars in drug money through a horse breeding operation based in oklahoma. some horses allegedly owned by cartel gang members have won millions of dollars in raising prices. robo lawmakers have approved a measure that would create the nation's first homeless bill of rights. the legislation would ban discrimination against homeless people and support the right to equal access to jobs, housing,

and government services. the rhode island governor is expected to sign the measure into law as early as next week. york governor andrew cuomo is considering a plan to restrict the controversial gas drilling practice known as fracking in new york. the plan would limit fracking to economically struggling parts of new york along the pennsylvania border and allow only in communities that express support. more than 100 communities in new york have approved bans or moratoriums on fracking, which involves blasting a mix of sand, water, and chemicals into rock formations in order to extract natural gas. some environmental justice advocates criticized the plan saying it would send an environmentally polluting industry into the most impoverished communities. activist and writer sandra steingraber said in a statement -- york state regulators are expected to approve fracking in

the coming months. those are some of the headlines. this is "democracy now!," democracynow.org, the war and peace report. i'm amy goodman with juan gonzalez. >> welcome to all our listeners and viewers from around the country and around the world. jpmorgan chase ceo jamie dimon testified on capitol hill wednesday for the first time since his bank lost $3 billion in a risky speculative bet. jamie dimon apologize for the loss, but failed to explain how the money was actually lost. he also continued to voice his opposition to new banking regulations. during the hearing, he was repeatedly confronted by protesters. >> this man is a criminal and people need to shout out about this man and 18 other cronies that have been stealing bureau interest loans from the people when the small businesses cannot get the same loans, when the people are deprived loans to keep their houses, when people are being thrown out on the streets. >> while protesters attempted to confront jamie dimon, many

lawmakers on the senate banking committee warmly welcomed him and repeatedly praised the bank. this is senator jim demint of south carolina. >> thank you, mr. jamie dimon. i appreciate you voluntarily coming in to talk with us. it is important to talk about things happening in the industry. i think it will advise us, help us as we look forward and hopefully it will contribute to best practice scenario in the industry and i appreciate your of assists and continuous quality improvement. we can hardly sit in judgment of your losing $2 billion. we lose twice that every day here in washington. plan to continue to do that every day. it is comforting to know even with the $2 billion loss in a trade last year, your company i think still had a $19 billion profit. during the same time, we lost over $1 trillion.

so if we had a clawback provision, none of us would be getting paid. the intent today is really not to sit in judgment, but maybe to understand better what happened. >> jamie dimon's one of them did not come as a surprise to many on capitol hill. j.p. morgan's as $7.6 million on lobbying last year. according to the watchdog group open secrets, he has a long record of controlling campaign donations to lawmakers and the senate banking committee. recipients include a committee chaired tim johnson, a democrat mark warner, the top republican richard shelby and bob corker. at least one current staff run the senate banking committee is a former lobbyist for jpmorgan chase and at least five former committee staffers now work at jpmorgan. jpmorgan ceo jamie dimon apologize for the eggs recent $3 billion loss, but he failed to how the money was lost.

>> i think no matter how good you are, how confident people are, never, ever get complacent in risk. challenge everything. make sure people are asking questions, sharing a permission, and yet very real limits when you're taking risk. is is you can take no more than this risk in a market. in the rest of the company, we have those disciplines in place. we did not have it here. >> to talk more about jpmorgan, we're joined by the financial journalist nomi prins who formerly worked on wall street as a managing director goldman sachs and an international analytics group at bear stearns in london. her latest book is called "black tuesday," a novel about corruption and romance surrounding the 1929 stock market crash. she is also the author of, "it takes a pillage: behind the bonuses, bailouts, and backroom deals from washington to wall street." she also wrote, "other people's money: the corporate mugging of

america." nomi prins, you tweeted alter yesterday's hearing. why was jamie dimon call to speak or testify before the senate banking committee? >> as we just heard, apparently, from one senator, he was not called to sit there and be judged for the loss, how it was created, how he felt sorry but unaccountable for its creation. so that did not seem to be the purpose. what did seem to be an overriding purpose for the this hearing was a judgment on regulation of the industry where jamie dimon was sort of used as the pin for the senators talking about the need to not for the regulate or more harshly regulate the banking industry to which he falls very neatly in line, of course. and the ones that sort of were talking about regulating it, but not so much.

as you mentioned, there really was not a lot of grilling in this particular hearing. i thought it was the tamest, and there have been very tame hearings, for any of the bank leader since the crisis began in 2008. >> i want to play a clip of senator sherrod brown, democrat of ohio, asking jamie dimon how much regulators at the occ knew about the risky investments that led to jp morgan chase's $3 billion loss for the >> was the occ told about the trades taking place in your office prior to the april 6 the year rate reports? >> we tried to be very open regulators. they do get some reports. we give them what they wanted we give them the information they want. in this particular case, since we were a little misinformed, the mistake we made we passed on to them. but the sec that we found out,

the first people we were on the phone with was our regulators to explain the problem. they have deeply been engaged since then. >> nomi prins, your reaction to his explanation of how they're dealing with the regulators? >> i think my reaction was to laugh when i was tweaking. it is not really funny. it is quite sad. to interpret what he said, it is something like, we did not really tell the regulators what was going on because they did not ask. when we knew what was going on, which we were not really watching, we told them and they sort of looked into it and this all happened. throughout his testimony, he was very dismissive of the regulators doing anything. he basically said, look, we misinformed them because we were misinformed. the use of the word "we"

indicates a general "we." and one hand jamie dimon is sorry, but we collectively did not know. when we did know, we tell the regulators. a first of all, 20% of the firm's assets of the largest bank were tied up in these trades. you are not allowed as a regulator to not know, not ask every single day, every single hour what is going on. but on the side of chase, we don't know. that is what he admitted without wanting to admit, what was really going on as the trade went wrong. the trade was a substantial portion of the assets of the firm. it was not a little trade that blew up. it was not a mistake. it was a dedicated transaction for which the new derivatives way in something called a synthetic derivative is white, which is the most risky with putting on the trade there are putting on, the position they were taking, they basically lost

money by betting that north american corporate credits were going to improve over that time frame, and they did not. and the way they but that was a very expensive and risky way to do it. for jamie dimon to indicate he kind of did not know until he did now is nine -- it cannot be true. >> i want to play one of the few tense exchanges from yesterday's hearing. it is quite something there are only a few. this is oregon democrat senator jeff merkley questioning jp morgan chase's jamie dimon. >> in 2008, 2009, your company benefited from half a trillion dollars in low-cost federal loans, $25 billion in tarp loans, tarp funds. untold billions in directly to the bailout of aig that help address your massive exposure in derivatives -- with all of that

in mind, when jpmorgan have gone down without the massive federal intervention both directly and indirectly in 2008 or 2009? >> i think you were misinformed. i think that is leading to a lot of the problems we're having today. jpmorgan to target because was asked to by the secretary of treasury by the united states of america. the head of the new york fed timothy geithner, the fdic, ben bernanke. at that point we did not need to park. we were told, and correctly so, if the nine banks take this chart, we can get to the banks and stop the system from going down. we did not borrow from the federal reserve except when they ask us to. we were not bailed out by aig. we would have been ok.

>> you have a difference of opinion with many analysts who felt the aig benefit benefited you -- bailout benefited you enormously. i'm asking you to respond to questions. i also only have five minutes. >> oregon democrat senator jeff merkley questioning jp morgan chase's jamie dimon yesterday. >> first of all, it should be noted senator merkley is not one of the recipients of j.p. morgan chase's campaign contributions. that gave him, i think, the latitude we need from our senators and asking these kind of questions. second, this has been the myth that jamie dimon has perpetuated from the get go, that jpmorgan chase was the only bank somehow isolated from the interrelationship of all of the subprime assets that are basically topically created and fraudulently distributed to the global investor community on the

backs of subprime loans the were basically extracted from individuals throughout the country, and that somehow they're the only bank that was clean on this. in other words, it would not have suffered any losses, any negativity of have not been some form of bailout or guarantees from the u.s. government. the two points on that, first of all, he was not separate from the new york fed. timothy geithner was not some separate from him. jamie dimon then and now was and is a director of the new york fed. he is the new york fed in a lot of instances. but on a wider point, jpmorgan chase benefit from two very big things that senator merkley did not mention, which is they achieved an acquisition of bear stearns for which the government is still backing to the tune of $29 billion in guarantees for the assets and that acquisition, and received very favorable terms in negotiations

to acquire washington mutual. the results of the entire eriod was for jpmorgan to emerge by the help of some anythings senator merkley mentioned to become the largest bank in the united states. for him to say, this is just because i was really good and i'm taking one for the team on wall street, otherwise the arm twisted the and i had a gun to my head and could not help but had to take the money, is absolutely ridiculous. >> i want to ask about this incestuous relationship between people connected to jpmorgan chase and the senate and house committees. for instance, take childress a jpmorgan lobbyist since 2008 was also a former aide to chuck schumer who sets and the banking committee. yet now martinez, who was a senator of the u.s. and now is the jpmorgan chase executive in charge of florida, central america, and the caribbean.

you have peaked michael nelson, a lobbyist with a firm run by former senator bob bennett who is also on the banking committee. he has been retained by jpmorgan chase for help. it goes on and on. >> what we saw yesterday was a glance of how that lobbying money, as well as additional campaign money, and many meetings and phone calls from the process -- which we do not want to find those terms that have a tremendous impact on regulations and on how the industry is viewed and a particular members argued, and the power they have within the senate's, therefore, with respect to their own industry. the fact there is a revolving door is very much interested to the problem. yemen industry before -- given industry effectively policing

themselves. the senate banking committee comprised of people who have gone contributions in some manner except for six. lobbyists going back and forth. chuck schumer is an example of someone asking incredibly tepid questions. i think one of the things he said was, well, shareholders lost money the taxpayers did not. he proceeded to attack a question on to that, which was very light handed. these people really protect on the side of washington relationship with jpmorgan chase. >> nomi prins, let's talk more about the amounts of money. >> no real structural regulation of the industry. we have detailed regulation, reports that have to be filled out by the bank with the information they choose to provide. regulators are running around the offices of these banks. but in terms of structural regulations and changed to make

them more accountable, to separate the loans of individuals from these types of trades that can go on and lose billions of dollars -- or even make billions of dollars, but have that kind of risk swing is all because of the relationships monetarily and the revolving door between the banking industry and the banking regulation. >> nomi prins, i want to go to the issue of the money the senate banking committee has received, millions of dollars. michael bennett, the democrat from colorado received $2.5 million for robert menendez, new jersey, $2.3 million. charles schumer, new york, $5.6 million. richard shelby, alabama, $2.5 million. bob corker, tennessee, $3.4 million. mississippi, $1.5 million. we could go on. >> i mean, this is why there is

no line between religious leaders and bankers. and the on the millions of dollars they're getting to run the dollars to get elected in office and so forth, there is also the sort of additional value that is received by the fact jpmorgan chase is giving them money. it is not the only bank giving them money, the the entire industry. we're looking at a piece of it from the most largest and commercial powerful bank in the u.s., but this is the way it works. these people know partially why they're sitting there in those seats is, unfortunately, not because they're simply voted in but because that the money to basically market themselves and stay in and connect to their real friends, which are the banking community they're supposed to be legislating against. >> thank you for being with us, nomi prins, author of a number of books including, "it takes a

pillage: behind the bonuses, bailouts, and backroom deals from washington to wall street." she also wrote, "other people's money: the corporate mugging of america." she formerly worked on wall street as a managing director at goldman sachs and was with bear stearns in london. her latest book is a novel, "black tuesday." this is "democracy now!," democracynow.org, the war and peace report. i'm amy goodman. when we come back, lori wallach of public citizen on president obama's siccative trade deal, how it empowers corporations -- secretive trade deal, how it empowers corporations. stay with us. ♪ [music break] ♪ [music break]

>> this is "democracy now!," democracynow.org, the war and peace report. i'm amy goodman with juan gonzalez. >> we turn now to a controversial trade pact between the u.s. and eight pacific nations that until now has

remained largely secret. it's called the trans pacific partnership or tpp. a chapter from the draft agreement leaked wednesday outlines how it would allow foreign corporations operating in the u.s. to appeal key regulations to an international tribunal. the body would have the power to override u.s. law and in -- an issue penalties for failure to comply with its ruling. the agreement is being negotiated by u.s. trade representative ron kirk, appointed by president obama. but the newly revealed terms contradict promises obama made while running for president in 2008. when campaign document read in part -- >> earlier leaks from the draft trans pacific purchase agreement exposed how it included rules that could increase the cost of

medication and make participating countries adopt restrictive copyright measures. no one from the office was able to join this but in a statement they said -- for more we're joined by lori wallach, director of the public citizen's global trade watch. the leaked documents were posted on her organization's website early wednesday morning. welcome to "democracy now!" explain what the documents show and what this agreement is about. >> it has been branded as a trade agreement, that really is forcible corporate global government. the agreement requires every signatory country conform all of its laws, regulations, and administrative procedures to what are 26 chapters of comprehensive rules but only two of which have anything to do

with trade. the other 24 chapters are whole array of corporate new privileges and rights and handcuff government, limit regulation. so the chapter that leaked and is on the web, the national coalition for fair trade, that chapter is the chapter that sets of new rights and privileges for foreign investors, including their right to properly enforce public treaty by suing our government, raiding our treasury over cost of complying with the same policies that all u.s. companies have to comply with. it is really outrageous. >> there is been quite a bit of complaint, even in congress, about the secretive nature of these continuing negotiations. about 600 or so corporate advisers have access to information that even members of congress don't? could you talk about how that has come about?

>> this is how you get a tax and a potential agreement that is this outrageous. this is not just a bad trade agreement, this is a 1% power tool that could rip up our basic needs and rights. how that happens is the negotiations have been done in total secrecy. for two and a half years, until this week emerged, people have suspected what is going on. as you said, under u.s. law there are 600 officials advisers that have security clearance to see the text, and buys the u.s. position. meanwhile, senator ron wyden who is the chairman of the cherry the committee in the senate, the committee with jurisdiction over the tpp, has been denied access to the text as has his staff, who has secured a clarence, to a point where this man has supported agreements like this in the past has filed legislation demanding have the

right to sue the agreement that he is supposed to be having oversight with. he is on the intelligence committee and has clearance. he can see nuclear secrets, but not this corporate bill of rights that is trying to be swift into effect in the name of being a trade agreement. it is a very elegant trojan horse strategy. you brand it one thing, then put an agenda that could not survive sunshine into this agreement. we have been able to get some of the text patents for big format. we have an analysis on our website as well as information about how to get involved. these agreements are a little bit like dracula. you drag them in the sunshine and they do not fare well. across all of the countries involved, there are citizen movements that are basically saying this is not in our name. we do not need global

enforceable corporate rights. we need more democracy, more accountability. >> i want to read part of the college from u.s. trade representative's office when we invited them on the show writing -- lori wallach, your comment? >> the idea of transparency of the current negotiators is a one-way mirror. we can basically talk to them and do presentations. but as the leak shows, nothing the public interest organizations, and it is a huge array of organizations, nothing we have said is reflected in the

u.s. position in this negotiation, which i'm sad to say is the most extreme. the u.s. is even opposing proposals in this agreement to try and make sure countries have the ability to use financial regulation, it ensure financial stability. the u.s. position does not reflect what we have been saying, but we can talk at them. to put it in perspective, last negotiation of a big regional negotiation from the 1990's, 34 countries, very complicated agreement, the entire draft text was published officially by the government during negotiations. we're three years into this negotiation with eight countries and they will not publish a sentence for it in fact, it finally leaked they signed a special agreement not to release a draft text for four years after negotiations were done. the secrecy agreement on top of the normal secrecy. when asked, ron kirk, why, the

past has sent out a draft text past, what is going on, he was asked, he said -- well, in the past, the free trade of america's, they could not finish it. what sort of indictment is that of what they're doing behind closed doors? nearly along the public who will live with the results and congress to know what is up is going to somehow to rail the plan to lock in sand? what is really important to understand about these agreements, it is not about trade, it is like cement. once the cement dries you cannot change the rules unless all the other countries agree to amend the agreement. what we're talking about is literally a parallel system of justice. people have domestic laws and court, trying to defend our rights.

corporations would have a parallel system of private attorneys, three of them, no conflict of interest laws, the u.s. and other countries would submit themselves to the jurisdiction of this corporate candor report, and these three random attorneys would have the right to order the u.s. government to pay unlimited amounts of our tax dollars to corporations and investors who want, clamp regulatory costs need to be refunded, or two, say they're not being treated well enough, regardless of the policies they dislike of the exact same ones that apply to all of us. system, a nafta's three hitter million dollars have already been paid out -- over $300 million have already been paid out. this is a sneaky outrage. if people put a spotlight on it, we could stop it. >> you mention the eight nations

involved in the negotiations but which nations are they? also, the issue the way this is being negotiated, the number could be expanded in the future? >> the reason it is so important is agreement be exposed to is this could well be the last agreement negotiated. so many of your listeners and viewers have been involved in a sneaky way trade agreements have been used by corporations to limit regulation and to foster rates since nafta. each of these agreements has got more expensive and limited in granting of -- this could be the end. what they intended to is leave it open. once it is done, for any other country to join. this is an agreement that alternately could have a whole world and it as a set of binding corporate guarantees of new rights and privileges, and force the cash sanctions in trade

sanctions. it is not an exaggeration to say the tpp threatens to become a regime of binding global governance right at the time of the occupy movement and movements around the world are demanding more power and control. this is the fight back. in addition, the way the agreement is being negotiated, these rules would require that you not only change all of your existing laws, the good progress of loss would have to be got rid of, but in the future you do not create new laws. the agreement includes australia, brunei, new zealand, singapore, chile, peru, and vietnam as well as the u.s. plus malaysia. the agreement includes all of the nafta-stop privileges that promote offshoring. or drastically, it has all sorts of new corporate privileges.

the right to extend medicine and seat monopolies to jack up medicine prices, even the right to challenge that is a prescription group buying plans. for instance, what the obama in ministration has put in their health reform bill, there at the negotiating table behind closed doors trying to kill the right to use for other countries. or the financial rules would have just a limit. countries are not allowed to ban risky financial products or services. at the same time we are trying to issue regulations under financial reform. and the agreement even medals with how we spend our local tax dollars. for folks run the country you're doing sweat-free campaigns, living wage campaigns, green buying campaigns, this agreement says first you cannot have local preferences, so no recycling money back into state and tax dollars, no buy american, but

also conditions like a product has to have recycled content or that uniform has to be sweat- free. those kind of conditions can be challenged. it is an incredible corporate power tool. it has only got this far because it has been in secret. people in the other countries do not want it either. our country is the one largely pushing the most radical provisions, which is why it was so important for this text, which everyone can see now that tradewatch.org. >> lori wallach, the last round of negotiations on the trigger men took place in dallas. ron kirk's book at any event for the local business community. the yes men took the opportunity to present ron kirk, the former mayor of dallas, with a mock award. this is a clip. >> on behalf of the texas corporate power partnership, we are very, very pleased to

announce that the u.s. trade negotiators are the winners of our 2012 corporate power to award. [applause] we would like to personally think the negotiators for their efforts, the tpp agreement that is shaping up to be a great way for us to maximize our profits regardless of what the public of this nation or any other nation thinks is right. the next round of negotiations on tpp are scheduled over the july 4th holiday weekend. lori wallach, can you comment on this? also, what i assume would be president obama's response is talking behind the scenes like perhaps tonight when he will be at the sarah jessica parker home, raising a lot of money. the financial sector's donating $37 million to mitt romney so

far. the obama administration's hall, $4.8 million. even his own wall street supporters are going over to romney right now. so he would say he is doing better than romney would in trying to take on these guys through the >. >> i think for president obama there are two scenarios. one, he has not been on top of what these negotiators are doing. this has been under the radar. it is so in part for the attacks to come out because it sends a warning to congress, the public, etc. basically, his negotiators on the loose. there many of the same people who got us into nafta during the clinton administration. the other alternative explanation is just the money one, which it is the case that this is an agreement the 1% love. it is their fantasy. it is not just on the margins and a national government you have to keep fighting with all

your money and lobbying to try to get you want, but this would lock it in for the future. >> lori wallach, thank you for being with us. we will continue to watch this. when we come back, whistleblower jesselyn radack, a number in congress are calling national-security leaks. stay with us. ♪ [music break] ♪ [music break]

>> this is "democracy now!," democracynow.org, the war and peace report. i'm amy goodman with juan gonzalez. >> a bipartisan dispute has emerge on capitol hill over how to investigate a series of national security leaks, including disclosures about president obama secret kill list as well as the u.s.-israeli use of cyberweapons to target iran spent their program. details of the stories appeared in "the new york times." eric holder has been criticized for refusing to appoint an independent special counsel. this is republican senator john mccain of arizona. >> here we are with the very serious breach of national security, in the view of some, the most serious in recent history, and it clearly cries out for the opponent of a

spousal council. and obviously is one of the highest breaches of security this country has ever seen. >> meanwhile, democrats have rejected such calls in the two u.s. attorneys that holder appointed last week will operate independently and fairly. on friday, the president rejected suggestions the leaks may come from his in ministration to bolster his re- election bid. >> the notion that my white house would purposely release classified national security information is offensive. it is wrong. i think people need to have a better sense of how i approach this office and have people around me approach this office. >> for more we go to washington,

d.c., where we're joined by jesselyn radack, former ethics adviser to the u.s. department of justice and curley the director of national security and human rights at the government accountability project. her book is called, "traitor: the whistleblower and the american taliban." jesselyn radack, welcome to "democracy now!" talk about the significance for these calls for an investigation into security leaks. what are the leaks and what is motivating the calls? >> i think in election-year is motivating the calls for investigation i think the leaks we're talking about deal with everything from the osama bin laden raid to information and operational details about a virus to killing a american awlaki. in extremely the number of published a number of extremely

high number of leak information has hit the front pages of major newspapers in this country. yet the administration has been engaged in a brutal crackdown on so-called leakers who more often than not are whistleblowers over the past two years. so while i am gratified that congress is finally paying attention to the hypocrisy of that course of action, that being the government leaking like a sieve was going after people who actually have made a legitimate disclosures of fraud, waste, abuse, and illegality, i don't know if having more leak prosecutions are really the right answers here. >> in 2000, there was an attempt to pass legislation in congress about leaking. could you talk about the dangers

at that time in the decision by president clinton to veto that legislation? >> absolutely. back in 2000, congress did debate behind closed doors and passed by a voice vote broad anti-bleak legislation that would criminalize the leaking of any classified information. at the time, president clinton wisely vetoed that because in his words, it would unnecessarily chill legitimate activity at the heart of a democracy. fast forward ahead and the only thing between 2000 and today is 9/11. i don't think we should let 9/11 take away what is at the heart of a free and democratic society. i also think that all of these leak investigations, the answers

is not that even more investigations, the answer is to take this serious luck at what the administration dot-take a serious look at what the administration discloses, both good and bad, what should be out there for public debate. >> by rogers of michigan said it was not yet known who was behind a recent weeks but that some "committed a crime that is having serious consequences to our national security." >> suggesting the agencies were directed to expand the scope of classified and permission, they gave to the press. we know in some cases someone from, a segment of the media was present in a classified setting. recently, a group of intelligence officers has disclosed directly how many of the leaks over a period of years have made their jobs more difficult in their liaison relationships, interacting with sources, and assets around the

world who are doing great things for their own countries in the u.s. as well. >> that was republican congress member mike rogers of michigan, the head of the house intelligence committee. jesselyn radack, the difference between politically motivated leaks and whistleblowing, the republicans seem to be most concerned that these leaks are making president obama looked too good. >> i think the authorized leaks are being done for political gain. honestly, we do not need to know whether it is the newspaper or hollywood these sources and methods about the rate of osama bin laden. we do need to know about the policy behind the kill list and the assassination of americans. i agree with congress that the executive branch leaks that are

being done right now are for political gain. and that is wrong. what am concerned about is we could end up with a really bad anti-leaks law that ends up killing discussion and ends up being used primarily against whistleblowers. i am afraid that could be the unintended consequence of all these investigations. which in the end, i am not hopeful will really lead to any kind of accountability for anybody. >> jesselyn radack, it isn't a structural issue that the more our government relies on secret operations that, therefore, the realm of possible things that could be leaked grows just by the very nature of a move to greater authoritarianism in the government. in essence, you're creating a problem that you then want to

criminalize people for opposing. >> that is an excellent point and another reason that passing broad anti-lori wallac lori ww would be such an issue. during obama's first year in office classification increased by 40%. he classified 77 million more documents in his first year, making it even more likely that people could leak or disclose classified information. i think the real issue is the failure to distinguish between classified in formation that has not improperly classified but is being used to hide illegality, mistakes, or embarrassment by the administration versus leaks that are really a whistleblower disclosures of fraud, waste, and abuse and illegalities that are

covered under the was the a blower protection act. again, while there was a hunger for just desserts in saying the administration called out on leaking like a sieve for its own game, i am worried about the long-term unintended consequences that congress could end up passing a really bad anti-leak measure that i think in this administration, that obama would sign. >> jesselyn radack, thank you for being with us, former ethics advisor to the united states department of justice. her new book is called, "traitor: the whistleblower and the american taliban." democracy now! is looking for feedback from people who appreciate the closed captioning. e-mail your comments to outreach@democracynow.org or mail them to democracy now! p.o. box 693 new york, new york 10013. [captioning made possible by democracy now!]