a, the, an essay and in some cases the white house itself, oftentimes the whistleblower pays for the career. and in some cases when it's freedom, i'm john curiosity and you're watching the whistleblower. 2 2 2 2 2 2 in many whistle blowing cases, the highest stakes are for national security whistle blowing. it takes a great deal of fortitude to take on the power and the authority of the f, b i the cia, the n s a. and in some cases, the white house itself, oftentimes the whistleblower pays with his career and in some cases with his freedom. national security whistleblowers are often under more scrutiny than corporate or other governmental whistleblowers because of the presence of classified information. covert programs or sources and methods and there was a blowing it's one thing to speak truth to power, but it's an entirely different thing to speak truth to power, to be fired from your job, to be prosecuted under the espionage act for it. and even to go to prison even when

you know that what you did was right, just asked chelsea manning jacelyn rate act reality winner. geoffrey sterling, daniel hale or edward snowden. i can tell you the same story. our guest today has had that very same experience. he valued as those to the constitution, any paid for it with his career. at the same time, he nearly lost his freedom. tom drake was a senior and as a officer who blew the whistle on essays dragnet, surveillance of americans in the immediate aftermath of the september 11th attacks, he was fired, arrested, prosecuted, and exonerated. and he has become one of the most important and outspoken supporters of national security whistleblowers in america. tom, welcome to the show. tom, for those of our viewers who don't know you, you were one of the 1st national security whistleblowers following daniel ellsberg release of the pentagon. papers way back in 1970. i don't believe that it's possible to, to overestimate the importance of what you told the american people,

your story starts on september 11th, 2001. tell us what happened the out as my 1st actual day reporting to my new duty station. of course, i didn't know when i arrived at o dark, 30 at and as a headquarters at fort meade, maryland. that the events of the day but unfold as, as they did. and so the horror of the, of the tower is coming down and the pentagon attack you know, it was a frozen day. i know exactly where i was and what i was doing, especially since it was my 1st actual day on the job and but then it became clear within just a few days of 911, that the failure to keep people out of harm's way was used as an excuse to massively road the 4th amendment rights of us citizen and others,

and then billions of dollars and fraud and waste as well as cover up of what turned out to be some really critical. 911 intelligence failures, all that unfolded within weeks of 911. and then really you immediately after 911, you realize that something was, was very wrong. you realized that while an essay had access to a new program that could have kept us safe at, at a reasonable price. i might add, they decided to go with something that allowed dragnet surveillance, even of american citizens. tell us about that. while it's quite a historical irony because of abuses in the past and this is something to say is let's say quite they don't like they don't like to talk about their abuses from the 50s, sixties and seventies. under the cloak and banner of mass security and secrecy. i

in fact there are, they're actually embarrassed by it, but it all came out in the 970 s. when was when i was a teenager and i certainly was well aware of all the areas that took place, particularly in congress. in fact, people are finding out that there was even an essay that existed for the very 1st time, a super secret agency. so here we are 911, just unleashed, all that, it was just, there was no guardrail. there was like, hey, you know, we can just collect at all why not, let's start doing it because we don't know where the next threats coming from. and it's understandable in that panic, right? the panic of when would the next attack occur? that they would be incentivized, i'm going to say that incentivize to bypass the 4th amendment and the existing statute at the time, the foreign intelligence surveillance act, which was actually pass in 1978. as, as a consequence of all of the abuses that had unfolded during those hearings in the

$900.00 seventy's. when you saw this evidence of wrongdoing essay you went through your chain of command, which is what we're all taught to do when we 1st enter into governmental service. in fact, you stuck closely to your chain of command. when you saw that an essay was breaking the law, you went to your superiors, you went to the inspector general. you went to the pentagon's inspector general because an essay is. busy is an adjunct of the, of the defense department, and then you went to the congressional oversight committee. now that is exactly what we are told to do. and they ended up rewarding you with more than a half a dozen felony charges, including more than several counts of espionage. of course, you hadn't committed espionage, and those charges were all dropped. but this is what national security agencies do . is there any way to explain why this was the course of events in your case? because you went through the chain of command. why weren't your complaints

addressed and investigated? because there was an active cover up of just how far we had gone off the rails in terms of the law and the constitution and the protections afforded by the 4th amendment. and in the secret world, it was, you know, it's face up that us citizens, us corporations and you know where they are. resident aliens, resident, foreigners, were protected by, by the 4th amendment. and they made a decision at the highest level of to it, including the president states, to authorize, bypassing all that. and so they were in direct violation the law. they knew it, but they actually covered it up. there was one of the deepest of the deep secrets of the now security establishment all way up to it, including president bush and vice president cheney. now it's a part, even of essays charter that it's not permitted to spy on american citizens or u. s. persons, anybody, even in the united states on a, on

a green card. but they do that every day anyway. how is that? because yeah, you get away with it. yeah, that's what this is, this is the reality is, and a lot of people are just old. how could they just break the law with no laws against breaking the law? but they did it anyways because they could and they had top cover. they had the president authorized. and it's super secret memo. did the only copy that exist? it was in the chief of staff's office and in fact, in id say, david adding to who was chief of staff to vice president cheney. that was the only copy it was that secret. insane. were you ever get charlie and say it really? it's an obvious violation of the law, but see the violation law and essence, nasty security took priority. now security was they were going to let the

constitution get away. i was actually told that it was a queen document that the pfizer couldn't keep up with the times. this i heard actually get conditions. you don't understand mr. drake. because i said, what are we doing, violating the law. and if i remember that we go back to congress and i was told i was actually told by the chief counsel in the general counsel's office. that if we go to congress, why do i want to do those? say no. now this is right after $911.00. this is before the patriot act was passed . wow. which itself really push the boundaries? but at least it was legislation formulated by congress, right? and then signed into law by the president. this is before that, this is that period before that. and so, yeah it's, it's quite something and you can imagine knowing they're violating the law wilfully and deliberately that they're going to have to cover it up. that's again,

one of the realities of, of a secrecy regime when you're incentivized to keep high, keep a hidden what you're actually doing. and the secret is system. i'll permits it when i was at the cia in the immediate aftermath of the 911 attacks. our director for counterterrorism said very plainly, we're going to start killing people, lots of people. and i remember thinking, well that's, that's against the law. we're not supposed to be able to kill people. and, and a colleague of mine said, oh, the law will catch up to us. meaning will change the law to allow us to kill people, not the law will catch up to us. if we kill people will be prosecuted for and i think the same thing happened didn't say they just decided to do whatever it is they want to do, thinking that the authorities would catch up with them. the legal and well that's the authorities were being a lawful order,

political lawful order for the president i'd states. and i think one of the ironies here, again, another irony is that it, the law would catch up meaning, but you can't, you can't pass water. ex post facto was now legalizing what was actually unlawful. and that's precisely what they did. a number of years later, when all of this started to come out, and it's the 1st inkling of it was a front page above the full article and the new york times that was published in december of 2005, 20054 years after the fact, tom were you ever given any honest explanation for why you were targeted? you didn't reveal any classified information. you didn't go to the media yet the government came down and you like a ton of bricks. did you ever learn why exactly? they wanted to make you the scapegoat. yeah, i knew too much. i mean i was in

a very senior position. i was hired in from the outside. and i just so happened to, given my position within the signals intelligence director at the primary directory dentist say, for collection and analysis. and also, you know, production dissemination of, of actual intelligence reports. and so i found out about all this, right? and i wasn't going to remain silent, you know, i, i would not have been holding truth. they've been legions to dish and if i just sort of let it go by and i was actually prime of primary eye witness to prime of face evidence regarding the violations of the 4th amendment vice. and what they call you said 18, which was the bible say that govern. it was a series of signals, intelligence, basically the protocols, by what genesis a doctor saw to not violate constitution and still collect intelligent the irony of

it. and none of this should have happened, none of it was necessarily no, he still went ahead with that. you're absolutely right. you know, you've just reminded me of something to every national security whistleblower that i've ever encountered. including you, is able to recount, taking the oath of office on his 1st day in governmental service, where we put our right hand in the air. and we swear to, to defend and uphold the constitution of the united states against all enemies, foreign and domestic. and i always say that i hate to think back on that day and think that i was the only one in the room who actually meant it. do you? you have the same experience? no, you're, you're, you're given me goosebumps, john. because i realized that i was the only one at the time. i did have other fellow, but they end up retiring and i was left alone. i was the only one that actually stood up. i was the only one that actually just said i've got to show, you know,

i became a, i became a material witness for several investigations. i also be did make people decision, but that was years later there to go to the press. right. but yeah, as like the only one in the room is i here i am and yours. what was sir real john is i found myself defending the constitution against my own government in secret? yes. it's just or william to think about it. and it wasn't necessary. we didn't actually have to go off the rails or off the range. it was not necessary. we could have stayed with in the, the, i deals. and i just the ideals, but the principles of the declaration of independence, of course, as well as the constitution, all the statutes. and if it really wasn't keeping up with the times, then you make the case with congress. you're watching the whistleblowers. we're going to take a short break and then return to our conversation with the national security agency

whistleblower tom drake. stay tuned. 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 blue ah, museums are important for preserving our history so that it is a loss to future generations. but our physical museums, places themselves a relic of the past. this is one of the best museums in the world, the human touch in saint petersburg. how rough he is, the director here, and i bet he has met ah not what is me spoken by the united states all by you when he's actually fighting a war, essentially to prove when the better done the surgeon. so crushing forward once again in, in this region and saw that is one of the limit i've was,

it is it's possible ah november 22nd 2022 outraged orthodox christians confronted ukrainian security service offices looking entrances and exits to keep the oldest monastery. they were looking for a russian spies among the monks when we mean deal of seeming a reason for the brutal crackdown. one church. his parishioners had song, a song about a long been recently enough to condemn any orthodox christian attack in prison and even kill them. a minute to figure out how many miles store and you,

when you start to grow are slightly new in your total thought. i shoot you a sample. i used to miss dod with ah ah ah, welcome back to the whistle blowers. 2 we're speaking with an essay whistleblower tom drake. i'm looking at the case of a, of daniel hale and the there are other recent whistleblowers. do you believe that there's been any progress that national security whistleblowers have made in the

last 15 years or so? or are we moving backwards? you know, daniel hale received a longer sentence reality winner received yet and even longer sentence 5 years in 3 months. i believe it was. do you think we're making any progress at all? here? the turn lines are not positive. the trend lines can cheese, you extend out the punishment or the to meet it out on whistle, particularly it's now security garment literally does not take kindly to exposure is what i call state crimes. and it is a crime against the state to do so. and that's like condra, and they, they, they ask us, act is become the go to and other variance of it's the go to, to go after next year whistleblowers. the government also knows that there is no recourse to the court system. so they can retaliate against

you and you really have no recourse there. the channels are not protected. as i said earlier, they're really exposure channels. so unfortunately, any time, any kind of whistleblower and there's been several over the years. there's always a huge car about cut out for nash security whistleblowers. they just, they don't get the same the same attention because the government clearly does not . you know, you would think the massacre whistleblower with some of the most critical public interests. whistleblowers of all the whistleblowers in the just given the nature of the secrecy system and the classification system. and yet see the word classified as sort of sacrosanct within the government space. so if they think you violated it, it's, you know, it's a lot, it's, it's a live, it's live, it's strict liability. so you can't even claim or pursue,

or present a public interest defense of any time. and there's no current legislation that permits it. tom, there's a small handful of members of congress. i'm thinking specifically of senator chuck grassley of iowa, senator ron wyden of oregon and congressmen, thomas massey, of kentucky, who take national security with blowing seriously and often help whistleblowers who are trying to navigate this really very daunting and risky system that we have. what is your experience been on capitol hill? why is it that more members of congress aren't out there demanding that the executive branch of the government obey the law in short, transparency, and respect? the constitution just seems so basic. it does seem incredibly basic and my experience with congress is, with a couple of exceptions that you've mentioned are not willing to stand up for now. security with the bars tickler because they defer to the security establishment because they, they assume that whatever the government is

a legit the could cause quote unquote, in my case you know, exceptionally great damage to the street and i states must be true. why would they have charged you otherwise? and so it's an uphill battle. even with some of the voices you mentioned in congress, my experience was not, it was not all positive. i had a private conversation with widens office and they acknowledge the reality of what even they're dealing with. but it's not the battle. and, you know, he's on the, it has been a long standing member of the senate select committee. unintelligence, the u. s. government has a whistleblower protection laws you mentioned, but the national security whistleblower is notoriously exempt from its protections . when a national security whistleblower decides to report on evidence of waste fraud, abuse or illegality, he quaintly really jeopardizes his career. what advice would you give somebody in

the national security community who's considering blowing the whistle? by the 1st thing they've got, they've got to get a lawyer, a b, a there. they've got to get a law even before the blow the whistle. just give, in my experience and others that have followed is crystal clear. the garment thinks in any way, shape or form that you, that you may have exposed, quote unquote, national defends information. or sometimes it goes like the cover for classified information. they're going to come after you, especially, and i would say there's a new verse, inversely proportional relationship between the degree to which i'll come after you and what the sensitivity is of the crimes and the wrong doing that they have committed, have covered up behind the secrecy system again, it's another one of those, sir, real things. and so you literally put your entire professional and personal white on the lie. yes. if you're going to come out and member,

the vast majority of master whistleblowers do so anonymously. this they don't do this for fame, they don't certainly don't do a for profit. it is not some, some ideological thing. it's literally because especially in the us government, you took it out. if the government violated the, oh, i mean, you would think that there is a higher standard. you would think that standard is you can't use secrecy as an excuse to commit wrong doing and then cover it up and then classify it and then hide it. because and keep hiding it because it's classified. so if you could reveal that part, that's also a violation violation to actually reveal the fact that the garment classified their own wrong doing. and i remember the penalties law and the executive order are the same for over classification. or misclassification, or the abuse classification? no one has ever been held accountable as only those like myself and others in you.

right? that's right. you have experience the blunt and instrument of the government dropping by hammer of these, these felony statutes on top of you. and it's extraordinarily difficult. my wife has never been the same since i lost my, i don't have a pension. i went into severe debt. your relationships get all messed up. you know, it's like what it, what were you thinking? what were you doing? right? why did you do it? you're one person, right? so it's very easy for the government to isolate you from from the rest of society and mit, turn you into a pariah. indeed, that's been my experience and my experience i know was, was parallel with years. what's the best way that people can help or encourage others considering becoming whistleblowers you and i are of one mind when we say

hire an attorney before you blow the whistle. hire an attorney skilled in whistleblower protection. before you blow the whistle. what other? not just any attorney. yeah. yeah, right. go ahead. yeah, not any attorney, and then carefully consider what the, what does are because even with the support of an attorney, and then i ended up with a public defender. i had an attorney, but i ended up spending all of my liquid assets, pretty much all of them went into severe debt just to pay for it. and now as before, they indicted me. so i was left indigent. i was cleared indigent by the court. i did not have sufficient enough assets. i to defend myself little, i mean, glad. i mean, that means paying for an attorney, right, i'm, and so i ended up, i ended up, i had the cast my law with the public defender's office, ironically paid for out the same ones as before. but a justice at all may yields an american tax parallel. hey,

for my defense. now fortunately, i didn't up in prison, but i came awfully close. i don't in this is something people don't fully appreciate how close i came to any up in prison. i think in part because i was for the 1st major case. yes. the 1st whistleblowers since ellsberg, the government tried everything there. there's all kinds of things they tried. i was also in maryland, i was i e e bay, which was a huge difference. and i had a judge, you realize was at stake in that i still had rights as a defendant constitution, right? that's all we have for you today. we'd like to thank our guest and se whistleblower tom drake. i'm john kerry arco, and this has been the whistleblowers. thanks for joining us. we'll see you next time. 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

ah ah with the discovery of the new world, at the end of the 15th century, there appeared at atlantic slave dre. the slave traders from european countries started building forth on the western coast of the african continent to transport the african inhabitants to america, to be forced into hard labor. until the middle of the 17th century. portugal had played the main role in this atrocious business. then great britain, france and the netherlands took the leadership for the span of 400 years of legal and illegal slave trade. about 17000000 people were forcefully shipped across the

atlantic. not including those who died on the way due to unbearable living conditions. modern historians estimate that for each slave ship to america, there were 5 who died while captured during transportation, and cruel obliteration of rebellion. this ruthless people tre practice by the leading european countries, took away tens of millions of african lives. the organisation of united nations classifies that trans atlantic slave trade as one of the gravest human rights abuses in the history of humanity. this is the biggest act of deportation of people ever seen by mankind. ah, look forward to talking to you all. that technology should work for people. a

robot must obey the orders given by human beings, except where such order that conflict with the 1st law show your identification to be very careful about artificial intelligence. at the point, obviously is to great trust, rather than fear a job with artificial intelligence. real summoning with a robot most protective own existence with oh, is your media reflection of reality in the world transformed what will make you feel safer?

isolation, whole community? are you going the right way or are you being led somewhere? direct. what is true? what is faith in the world corrupted? you need to descend a join us in the depths or remain in the shallows. i am rick sanchez, and i'm here to play with you. whatever you do, you do not watch my your show. certainly. why watch something that's so different? i was little opinions that you won't get anywhere else work of it please, or do have the state department, the c i a weapon makers, multi 1000000000 dollar corporations. choose your fax for you. go ahead. change and whatever you do, don't watch my show stay mainstream because i'm probably going to make you

uncomfortable. my show is called direct impact, but again, you probably don't want to watch it because it might just change the way you thing ah panic on social media. as on verified video footage appears to show an explosion over the us city, where a chinese surveillance balloon was previously spotted. officials the ny, any bloss happen. the g 7 nations impose a price cap on russian oil products to cot. moscow's revenue with the commission president praising the decision as a way to stabilize global energy prices. cutting off alternative voices, the youth cracked down on media. freedom forces r t d e production to see this operations in germany.