NSA

On NSA Spying, National Security Advisor Susan Rice Doubles Down on Stupid

|

Susan Rice
U.S. Government

60 Minutes followed up on the stellar kneepad work it did for the National Security Agency last week with an interview with National Security Advisor Susan Rice that touched on spying issues. This time, though, even the media's flaccid 300, holding the hot public relations gate on behalf of every stupid and intrusive policy the administration can conjure, seemed to have a tough time swallowing Rice's absolutist stance against whistleblower Edward Snowden, and her defense of surveillance policies that creep out people around the world, offend America's allies, and drive billions of dollars of business away from U.S. corporations

From CBS News:

Lesley Stahl: Edward Snowden. You know, Snowden is believed to have a million and a half more documents that have never been released. Given that, would you, would the president, consider granting him amnesty in exchange for him never releasing any more documents?

Susan Rice: Well, Lesley, we don't think that Snowden deserves amnesty. We believe he should come back, he should be sent back, and he should have his day in court.

Lesley Stahl: But if what he's released so far has been so damaging and he has a million and a half more documents, how important is it that he not release those? And what would we offer him, nothing?

Susan Rice: Lesley, you know I'm not going to get into a negotiation with you on camera about something that sensitive–

So Edward Snowden is still absolutely a bad guy, and never mind that he's revealed a vast and chilling surveillance state so that we can finally debate its (lack of) merits. The National Security Advisor sticks to the White House party line that Snowden deserves no consideration as a whistleblower with broad, popular support. Even Lesley Stahl seems to find Rice a tad…rigid and unrealistic. Maybe it was the federal court ruling that NSA spying is very likely unconstitutional that turned the tide. Or maybe it was the review board's recommendations—however tepid—that the NSA be reined-in just a bit.

This past week, a federal judge ruled that the NSA's bulk collection of American phone records, revealed in Snowden's leaks, "almost certainly" violates the Constitution, while a panel of intelligence and legal experts urged the president to impose new restrictions on the NSA.

Lesley Stahl: According to an article in the New Yorker, every time there's been a question about putting restraints on the NSA up to now, the president has sided with the intelligence community.

Susan Rice: What the NSA and our intelligence community does as a whole is designed to protect Americans and our allies. And they do a heck of a good job at it.

Lesley Stahl: Officials in the intelligence community have actually been untruthful both to the American public in hearings in Congress and to the FISA Court.

Susan Rice: There have been cases where they have inadvertently made false representations. And they themselves have discovered it and corrected it. 

Lesley Stahl: But when you have so many phone records being held, emails, heads of state's phone conversations being listened in to, has it been worth our allies being upset? Has it been worth all the tech companies being upset? Has it been worth Americans feeling that their privacy has been invaded?

Susan Rice: Lesley, it's been worth what we've done to protect the United States. And the fact that we have not had a successful attack on our homeland since 9/11 should not be diminished. But that does not mean that everything we're doing as of the present ought to be done the same way in the future.

Rice could be adhering to that old saying about how being in government means never having to say you're sorry. Or maybe she's looking forward to a John Bolton-ish career of appearing on news shows just to call for the execution of enemies of the state.

NEXT: Susan Rice: Snowden Doesn't Deserve Amnesty

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. “Lesley Stahl: Officials in the intelligence community have actually been untruthful both to the American public in hearings in Congress and to the FISA Court.

    Susan Rice: There have been cases where they have inadvertently made false representations. And they themselves have discovered it and corrected it.”

    Let’s play a game called skirt around the word lying.

    1. Must be comforting to the likes of, say, Martha Stewart and Scooter Libby.

    2. They’ve mastered the ability to politely say “Fuck you, that’s why.”

    3. It’s not a lie if you believe it when you say it.

      1. Where have you been?

        Merry X-Mas and Happy New Year.

    4. Did Susan Rice ever correct her inadvertent false representations regarding the ‘protests’ over a ‘youtube video’ at a ‘consulate’ in Beghanzi?

      ?

      “”Speaking in 2012 on multiple TV shows four days after the Benghazi attacks killed four, Rice hewed to the initial White House line that the attacks were a spontaneous response to protest an anti-Muslim video. “This is not an expression of hostility in the broadest sense toward the United States or to U.S. policy,” Rice said at the time.””

      “CBS host Lesley Stahl pressed on whether Rice ever wished she hadn’t taken the interviews.

      ….”If you hadn’t taken those interviews, I’d be calling you madam secretary,” Stahl said.

      “You can call me Susan,” Rice shot back, ending questions on the incident for which the former U.N. ambassador has become most known.

      So, to recap = “Got Caught Lying?” = FALSE CONTROVERSY. Move along, nothing to see.

  2. Susan Rice is a fucking piece of shit.

    OTOH, reading this, I heard her voice as that of Cartman’s mom, which was pretty funny…

    1. “You’re just going to have to put up with our unconstitutional spying, Poopykins.”

  3. And the fact that we have not had a successful attack on our homeland since 9/11 should not be diminished. But that does not mean that everything we’re doing as of the present ought to be done the same way in the future.

    Yes, once the other Team is in charge it will be time to consider some sort of accountability.

    1. And the fact that we have not had a successful attack on our homeland since 9/11 should not be diminished.

      What exactly were the Boston marathon bombings?

      1. An incident of entertainment-place violence.

      2. Apparently Rice does not consider Boston part of her homeland.

      3. Need to define “attack”. Any act of unprovoked violence could be called an attack.

  4. But, but, but…. NINE ELEVEN! YOU WANT ANOTHER NINE ELEVEN? WHY DO YOU WANT ANOTHER NINE ELEVEN?!?

    1. Clearly because we hate the children.

  5. I’m failing to find the slightest bit of difference between this Rice and a certain other Rice.

    And if one ever needs evidence about how TEAM trumps principles, Susan Rice can easily be Exhibit A.

    1. Condi for Exhibit B? Or can they share Exhibit A status?

      1. Condi is a card carrying NeoCon so she’s not an Exhibit. Sue is an Exhibit because she two is a NeoCon, yet she’s embraced by the Left solely because of TEAM.

        Under BOOOSH, probably the best TEAM exhibit was Paulson, whose actions were textbook Fascism but yet TEAM meant they were all A-OK.

        1. Paulson’s TARP was opposed by most Team Red voters and more than half the Team Red congressman. A few Team Red Senators (and congressmen) have lost elections or quit after supporting his policies. What was W’s approval rating again at his exit?

          There was no TEAM support for TARP and that is what led directly to the Tea Party.

          Other than the Occutard’s pathetic pleading of “where’s my bailout?” TEAM BLUE seemed just fine with Bush/Paulson’s actions.

          1. God knows I’m no Dem apologist, but the Dems controlled the House when it voted TARP down the first time. The strongest opposition came from the left.

            Only after the MSM went on a 24/7 campaign about the world blowing up if TARP didn’t pass did the opposition die down somewhat.

            1. You’re supposed to use the “bo” handle when you make factually-unsupported revisionist claims:

              That same day, the legislation for the bailout was put before the United States House of Representatives and failed 205?228, with one not voting. Democrats voted 140?95 in favor of the legislation, while Republicans voted 133?65 against it

              First TARP vote (the one that failed) Speaker Nancy Pelosi delivered 140 Democrat votes for it while Boehner could only muster 65 GOP Congressmen to “take one for the TEAM”.

              You’re a lying sack of shit, Tulpa.

    2. This one doesn’t have nearly the yards after catch.

    3. You better not be talking shit about Jim Rice!

  6. I think Susan Rice and the NSA are missing a page on their calendar. Didn’t two radical Islamists set off a bomb at the Boston Marathon, without anyone from the NSA knowing about it?

    1. Of course not!

    2. It should probably be 2 pages, because their shooting a cop several days later ought to count as part of their attack.

      1. I thought the cops shot the other cop.

        1. All cop shootings are blamed on the “perp”.

          They charged that guy in NY for all the bystanders who caught bullets when NY’s Finest were emptying their magazines into a crowded street, after all.

        2. No the Tsarnaev brothers shot and killed one cop.

          Then the local police departments rioted and shot several more cops. Fortunately, the cops are shitty shots, so all the people they shot lived.

    3. Maybe the NSA knew about it, but they butted out due to professional courtesy for the FBI’s failed sting operation.

    4. Maybe the NSA knew about it, but they butted out due to professional courtesy for the FBI’s failed sting operation.

    5. And the Fort Hood shooting.

      And the shoe bomber who was foiled not by the NSA but by another passenger.

      And the undie bomber who was foiled by not knowing what he was doing.

    6. That was a non-overseas contingency operation.

  7. In a more civilized world, these people would be spending the holidays in stocks.

    1. You’re right. I’d prefer gibbets but then I guess I am not that civilized.

      1. I’m willing to settle for public humiliation and loss of fingers/toes from frostbite.

  8. How is she worth so much? About 45 million.

    1. She’s a corruptocrat from the Daley machine.

  9. Even if, in exchange for what Snowden has, Barack Obama were willing to give him amnesty, a new motorcycle, and any kind of doughnut he wants, every day, for the rest of his life, Susan Rice should never admit any of that on television.

    Before the game yesterday, when the media asked Payton Manning how badly he wanted the single season TD record, Manning stated that he respected the history of the game, Tom Brady’s contribution to that, and the importance of his offensive line in his success this year. Then he stated that the most important thing was to win that day’s game and secure the Broncos’ position in the playoffs.

    When talking to the press, I expect Susan Rice to be at least as smart as Payton Manning. Maybe some people think that makes me naive, but then I think people who expect public officials to tell us the truth about their hole cards when being interviewed on television are being a little naive.

    1. Not sure how “secret amnesty” would work. Say Snowden wanted to go to the UK or somewhere else not ruled by Vlad Putin, how does the UK (and all the countries whose airspace would have to be traversed) know not to stop him?

  10. when an inteview makes Leslie Stahl appear as the sober and rational participant……

  11. I’ve got a rock that keeps away tigers – maybe I should sell it to Obama.

  12. Lesley, it’s been worth what we’ve done to protect the United States. And the fact that we have not had a successful attack on our homeland since 9/11 should not be diminished.

    The fact that we haven’t been invaded by space aliens should not be diminished! See? Government works!

  13. Susan Rice: Well, Lesley, we don’t think that Snowden deserves amnesty. We believe he should come back, he should be sent back, and he should have his day in court.

    Sentence first. Trial afterward.

    OFF WITH HIS HEAD!

  14. Susan Rice: Well, Lesley, we don’t think that Snowden deserves amnesty. We believe he should come back, he should be sent back, and he should have his day in court.

    …before we hang him.

  15. By the way, over at right-wingish statolatry channel, the important story derived from the 60 Minutes interview is that Rice called the Benghazi kerfuffle a “false controversy.”

    1. I thought it was a substandard act of work place violence?

  16. Lesley Stahl: According to an article in the New Yorker, every time there’s been a question about putting restraints on the NSA up to now, the president has sided with the intelligence community.

    “And has the President ever mentioned any discomfort in relation to having the intelligence community’s hand up his ass manipulating him like a cheap puppet imported from Taiwan?”

  17. Lesley Stahl: But if what he’s released so far has been so damaging and he has a million and a half more documents, how important is it that he not release those? And what would we offer him, nothing?

    There is nothing (NOTHING!) that the U.S. government wouldn’t do to prevent the release of more of the embarrassing Snowden documents. And that includes amnesty.

    The reason they won’t grant him amnesty is simply because they know that the documents are no longer solely under Snowden’s control. On top of that, they are afraid that granting him amnesty would encourage other whistle blowers to expose other abuses of power. The only thing currently preventing that is the government’s perpetual threat that anyone doing so will be destroyed, which is precisely what makes Snowden the hero that he is. He went into this knowing that he would pay a huge price, which makes him stand out among all those who the media routinely tag as heroes but who really just pissed away their lives for nothing.

  18. I have had almost daily BMs since 9/11 and no one else has flown airplanes into buildings since then. Except for the guy into the IRS building in Austin. But other than that…

  19. 9/11 will never happen again because anyone on a plane that is being hijacked will assume they themselves are already dead and will take the plane back. Our biggest concerns should be nukes, bio/chemical weapons, water supply poisoning, etc. If the weapon can simply cross the border then I’m not sure how much the NSA meta collection will help as detonating a bomb doesn’t really require wide use of communications. Spying on countries of suspect seems quite reasonable, but attempting to prevent a 9/11 scale disaster using airplanes is really no longer a significant worry.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.