Techdirt is on holiday this Thursday and Friday. We'll be back with our regular posts on the weekend!Hide

Former Intelligence Officials Break Clapper's Media Gag Order To Complain About Clapper's Media Gag Order

from the security-through-obtusity dept

James Clapper's order forbidding both current and former employees from discussing almost anything with the media has raised more questions than it's answered. It appears to have been written as a response to the Snowden leaks (as well as various unnamed officials' responses to those leaks), but its restrictiveness does nothing to prevent document leaking and has created a whole lot of confusion.

To begin with, the very definition of media/press is impossible to pin down. According to the original order, anything from major networks to officials' own social media accounts were off limits. A clarification issued shortly thereafter offered nearly nothing in the way of clearing things up.

Now, former officials -- the same ones who have been forbidden from discussing almost everything without prior approval -- are offering up plenty of discussion on the policy itself, assuredly without prior approval. Shane Harris at Foreign Policy has collected a great deal of irritated statements from former intelligence officials who have a ton of problems with Clapper's gag order.

One former intelligence official who now works in the private sector said he declined five recent requests to discuss national security issues on television news shows because he was afraid of having his security clearance revoked or being fined for breaking the rules. Ironically, the former official said, he only learned about new restrictions on talking to the press from Gen. Keith Alexander, the former director of the National Security Agency, when he discussed it with comedian John Oliver for his new HBO talk show.
Much like many legislators and government officials learned of the NSA's activities from outside sources, former officials are learning more about a policy affecting their press interactions from other former officials interacting with the press.

Meanwhile, Clapper's office claims this policy has always been in place, despite the reactions that clearly indicate otherwise. It also should be noted that this "there all along" policy hasn't prevented various unnamed intelligence officials -- some of them still currently employed -- from offering their opinions on the NSA's programs over the past several months.

It also hasn't prevented former NSA head Michael Hayden from acting as the agency's biggest cheerleader, apparently appearing at any press venue that will have him.
Several sources cited Michael Hayden, the former director of the NSA and the CIA, as a prime example. Hayden writes a regular column for the Washington Times. Does that mean Hayden is now a journalist, some former officials asked? If so, are they prohibited from talking to him, too?
(The same question could be asked of Stewart Baker, the former NSA counsel who has written pieces for several venues, including regular appearances at the Volokh Conspiracy blog, now hosted by the Washington Post.)

Spokespeople for the agency claim Hayden runs everything by the agency first, but if that's true (something that seems unlikely given the number of appearances, including a live debate with NSA critics), that makes him the minority. Other former officials claim that if Clapper's going to pretend this policy isn't new, they'll just continue to route around his office, just as they did before the supposedly "not new" policy went into force.
The former intelligence official who said he first learned of the policy by watching HBO said he's reluctant to call Clapper's office because he thinks it'll only invite more scrutiny. Another said that until he hears otherwise, he will continue to clear articles through his former agency, not the ODNI. And, he predicted, his colleagues will do the same.
The policy, which "isn't new" but still comes as a surprise to many former officials, is typical of the NSA's responses over the past several months -- long on indignant righteous fury and short on substance. That this supposedly pre-existing policy needed both a clarification and a declaration that nothing has ever changed is also indicative of the agency's clumsy attempts to embrace transparency place one tentative arm a few inches above transparency's shoulder: needlessly convoluted and ultimately useless.

Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1. icon
    Nigel (profile), Jun 11th, 2014 @ 5:00pm


    Is not going to treat this fellow well. If the fucking media could pull its head out of its ass for second "it" would realize the dude is a lying sack of shit.


    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 11th, 2014 @ 5:20pm

    They are very much afraid. This is the reason for all the inability to tell the truth on what they have a choice on. This is the reason why whistle blowers are being treated the way they are. Only by secrecy can this crap continue and many have had enough, more will follow.

    What happens when the entire spy network has had enough? They can't arrest them all. Doing so would eviscerate their operations. Not everyone knows the all the ingredients to the 'secret sauce' but enough know a bit and piece here and there the picture could be assembled without inner access.

    One Snowden is driving them mad dog, paranoid crazy. A thousand would bury them or bring out the troops.

    The public discontent grows stronger by the day. This isn't going to end well.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 11th, 2014 @ 6:13pm

    It's already headed for the compost pile. And, according to Snowden, the best is yet to come. Should be fun!

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 11th, 2014 @ 6:41pm

    That explains a lot about Hayden and Baker. Since they are now both journalists, they are prohibited from speaking to themselves. If you had to comply with an order like that, you'd go crazy too. Especially Hayden, since he's admitted that "everyone is a journalist" he's really fucked. No wonder they babble on and on incoherently.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5. identicon
    Anonymous Anonymous Coward, Jun 11th, 2014 @ 7:01pm


    They are so screwed up they have to lie about their own rules about lying. Sheesh!

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 12th, 2014 @ 4:09am

    if Clapper wants to get everything 'cleared' first, then he's afraid there will be even more information let loose on the public! if the agency wasn't up to naughty stuff all the time, there wouldn't be any problems, would there!

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 12th, 2014 @ 9:30am

    agency's clumsy attempts to place one tentative arm a few inches above transparency's shoulder

    Actually the agency is naked and has both hands on transparency's shoulders.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jun 12th, 2014 @ 11:01am

    Abc agencies, created outside the scope of "government" bypasing accountability, circumventing restriction upon said "government"

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9. identicon
    Zonker, Jun 12th, 2014 @ 2:29pm

    The current administration apparently believes that transparency means that you can't see what they are doing. Transparency makes them invisible, just like the Emperor's clothes.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10. identicon
    askeptic, Jun 12th, 2014 @ 6:07pm

    Clapper, et al

    Please try to remember that the United States does NOT have an Official Secrets Act!, and does have a First Amendment!

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
Insider Shop - Show Your Support!

Hide this ad »
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Chat
Techdirt Reading List
Hide this ad »
Recent Stories
Hide this ad »


Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.