Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
-- senior judicial analyst judge entered a -- -- -- the current head of the NSA general Keith Alexander or lied to congress.
During yesterday's intelligence here.
About whether the agency was -- -- phone calls and reed army emails now hang on.
You're about to get three questions and three -- I want you to listen specifically.
And carefully to question number two.
And answer number two and then listen to the rest of it and we'll talk about it here we go.
NSA on private.
As defined under these two programs.
We are not.
Is the NSA have the ability to listen to americans' phone calls or read their emails under these two programs.
No we do not at that authority.
Does the technology exists that the NSA to flip a switch by some analysts to listen to americans' phone calls or read their emails now.
All right here that second question.
Does it have the ability to listen to our phone calls -- read our emails he said no.
We do not have that authority.
Abilities one thing authorities and other.
You get that.
There's more to judge entered -- -- -- I was here our senior judicial analyst.
Do you sir have the ability to listen to or read our our listen to our phone calls a reader emails no.
We do not have that authority and in my courtroom or in any courtroom in the United States -- American responsibly general.
Answer the question answer the question that was asked of -- which is not what he did it now I don't know what's in his head so I don't know if that's a -- but it's immaterial.
It's giving the impression.
That they don't have the ability because he starts out by saying no that they don't have the ability.
To read emails -- -- the phone calls.
He modifies that by saying we don't have the authority to we know they don't have the authority to we know the statute doesn't give them the authority.
That's not our concern our concern is that they have Graham get these phone calls and -- these emails and have the temptation to listen to them and read them.
Whether they have the authority to.
Or not or that they're there for some other person who may be in some position of authority or some other person who might get a hold of this stuff.
Would that person have the authority wouldn't really matter when it.
And the third part of that of that question and answer was can you basically flipped the switch and listen in a read and maybe there's no switch but there right no doubts.
They can do that there -- 009.
Not a little fraction of a percentage if there's no doubt 0%.
They can do a 100%.
Fox News has.
Been in contact with former NSA agent sent staffers who have pushed back aggressively.
On the general's answer to that last question.
And have argued without giving specifics.
That they have the ability to listen to phone calls it without going to the facility where the phone calls -- Yet here's the thing judge as a reporter what you try to do is ask questions of all the people involved -- assessment subject on which your report.
And as a reporter when you ask one question of one person and then it's another question.
And then you ask a question like that flips switch.
And then there's a -- about it and then you have somebody else and then someone else in charge like maybe the top person in charge of everything says this is transparent.
When it's not trade's parent their checks and balances but it is by definition not transparent -- you just get all of these.
Untrue things along the way then you start to wonder.
What's going on here well you know an inning in a courtroom.
The people asking the questions are generally professional cross examiners hope Mike Rogers ought to be -- professional and asked her he he ought to be he's a former -- that -- goods and he probably knows the answers to these questions before he's asking them he has a duty.
To follow up on the on the question.
If what he likes the answer the question or not how could you ask someone a question like do you have the ability to that's what he wants to know do you have the ability no.
We do not have that authority sir that's not what I asked you do you have the ability the answer to that question is yes.
Yes what did what -- why is everybody involved with this I am not a crazy conspiracy theorists and I've never have -- I'm a journalist.
These things add up.
Seven and seven does not make 400 well that's why it doesn't necessarily take a professional cross examiner.
To ask these questions a journalist knows a person that understands the English language and can hear ordinary plain words knows that ability.
And authority are two different things we are talking about -- popularly elected.
Government in a free society.
Spying on more than half the people on the country.
And the chief spy is being asked a question under oath he has a duty and -- moral obligation to be crystal clear and not to mislead and to answer the questions put to him.
They want transparency in there should be a debate.
Transparency means questions asked and questions answered.
By the employer that's us and our representatives.
And the employees.
Bet you the one be paid to do this stuff for us.
And instead it.
You get half truth obfuscation and something called transparency.
Being called the exact same thing -- checks and balances those are different things.
All the checkers and all the bouncers seem to be in cahoots with a lack of transparency and truthfulness and -- the the clear distinct impression is left.
That the testify -- wants to leave and that is at odds with the history and the truth.
It's not over.
No no it's not a little holes and turned on it though they convince the American people while it's fine coat.
Well we'll wake up we'll we'll see where it goes on to wake up.
Listen sum it -- -- stations half truths asking one question answering another question.
This is not how you get the bottom of things this does not serve the American people well and they went and I told the truth not -- had not seen as NATO war they don't know when I did this a couple weeks ago I don't remember who the test of fire was it was exact same thing.
Somebody getting a slightly different answer to the question they just let it go correct nobody followed everybody follows up -- act.
Thank you judge -- President Obama again defended those surveillance programs today saying lives have been saved you know what judge they said that they foiled a plot.
To bomb the stock exchange.
First of all that plot was in the very early talking stages and then the you know the plot to bomb the stock exchange is not even part of the final.
Of the final document that they went to prison for wasn't even part of the charging document -- Wasn't included.
That that's a bailout that out that's the problem that little detail that's the problem with letting this agency decide what it's gonna reveal and what it's gonna keep secret of course it's gonna reveal that which makes it look good to court and of course it's gonna keep secret that which doesn't make it look open -- -- no way to to check and balance of course there is no transparency yet.
Filter by section