Hello, friends. Welcome to the show. This episode of the podcast is Brought to you by Woop Woop is a device that we are wearing all throughout sober October, and it comes with an awesome application. It's a fitness device, a wearable device with state of the art software that helps you improve recovery, training and sleep and make better lifestyle choices with riel time feedback on your body. I'm incredibly impressed by this thing, particularly with when it tells you how much sleep you got. But that's a fucking eye opener, will. This month I'm wearing Woop 24 7 to understand the impact sobriety has on my body, but more importantly to me, it's it tells me it works on something. Call the heart rate variability, so it tells your heart rate while you're exercising.

But it also tells you where you're at in terms of your body's recovery. Gives you detailed analytics. It's very, very comprehensive, and you could follow along with me. Tom Segura, Bert Corregidor and Ari show fear. Ah and our Woop team joined Woop and get on the team. Get a woop strap 3.0 for free when you join Goto Woop dot com. That's W h 00 p woop dot com, and use the code sober October to get 15% off your order. Woop works with the best from the NFL, two Navy seals and stand up comedians. But the insights apply to all of us, so see how your body responds to stress is good and bad and then adjust to live better get a whoop. Check out our team at woop dot com.

Go sober and watch what happens. We're also brought to you by the motherfuckin cash up the cash app, the number one app in finance in the APP store, and it also comes in something called the cash card. Cash card is the only debit card in the known universe that offers you, offers you instant rewards and comes packed with premium features that not even a credit card can offer you like boosts with boosts. You get up to 10% off your entire purchase a door dash, and you could even save money. Every time you shop at whole foods or target and a bunch mawr of your favorite places. Check out all the boost available to you right now from your app, and you can use them instantly when you swipe your cash card swipe and also you can use them unlimited. That's not like coupon. You can only use it once. It's like unlimited coupons. Use them over and over and over and over again. The cash card has no fees,

and a credit check is not required to get one. Just instant savings when you add a boost, the cash ops also the easiest way for you to buy, sell and deposit Bitcoin. Most Bitcoin exchanges take days for a bank transfer to become investable, but through the cash app, it takes seconds. Investors. Little is $1 boom, you're in the Bitcoin business. Download the cash up now and get your cash card for free. Visit the APP Store or the Google Play Store now. And, of course, when you do download the cash app, enter the referral code.

Joe Rogan All one word. You will receive $10 in the cash Apple. Send $10 to Justin Rennes Fight for the for gotten charity building. Wells for the Pygmies in the Congo were also brought to you by Squarespace. Squarespace is the host of Joe Rogan dot com, and it is an amazing resource for you if you need a website. A lot of people think you need to go somewhere and get a website built by someone else. You do not no longer not anymore. With squarespace, you can make a beautiful professional website yourself, and you don't need to know how to do much. If you know how to move files around on your desktop, that's all you need to know. Squarespace has an easy, simple to use drag and drop user interface and beautiful designer templates that allow anyone, including me,

to make a fucking banging website. You can sell products and services of all kinds. You can provoke your physical or online business. You could announce a upcoming event or a special project. Each website comes with a free online store. You get a free domain name if you sign up for a year. Everything is optimized for mobile right out of the box, and you get the ability to customize the look, the feel of settings of products and mawr with just a few clicks. It's fucking so easy. It's nothing to patch or upgrade ever free and secure hosting 24 7 award winning customer support. Jesus. What are you waiting for, People? You don't have to wait for anything. You don't have to wait for another thing.

Maybe maybe someday I'll get a website now. You will do it now and you'll do it. How about this? You try it for free. What? Yes. You don't even need to use your credit card. You can try it for free. Head on over to squarespace dot com slash joe for a free trial. Then when you are ready to launch your new beautiful website, use the offer Code Joe to save 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain So that squarespace dot com slash joe for the free trial and then use the offer Code Joe to save 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain, you can't go wrong and last but not least, were brought to you by my all time favorite underwear. I'm wearing me undies right now. I wear them all the fucking time there The Onley underwear I wear because they're better. They're made out of something called micro mode.

All it is a sustainable fabric made from beech trees that's three times softer than cotton. I don't know how the fuck they measured it, but I believe them and me on these. They're just the softest, most comfy things that have ever graced my junk. They have unique prints. They have Halloween prints, the new ones for this month. Because it's October. They're very spooky. Who and me and ease is coming out with a variety of festive prints to put the boo in booty. Get it? Ah, me undies can up your Halloween costume game, folks. The unique prints are designed to be mixed and matched and turned into the most guaranteed first prize at a costume contest costume.

And if you don't feel like leaving your house, that's cool to just wear your Halloween costume onesies and you could pass out candy. But don't be creepy. Me and he's has a great offer for listeners, is podcast For any first time listeners, you could get 15% off the best fucking under where you're ever gonna wear and free shipping. It's a no brainer because they have a 100% satisfaction guarantee. What? Yes, they come in every size from extra small toe. Four X l soft for all and 100% satisfaction guaranteed. That's how you know they have fucking amazing underwear. They will give you your money back. You don't like him? What? To get 15% off your first pair free shipping and a 100% satisfaction guarantee.

Goto me andis dot com slash Rogan. That's me, Andes dot com slash Rogan. Okay, my guest today. This is a complicated one, folks, because we did this one remotely. It's one of the rare. The only other time I did a remote podcast. I believe it was only one other one. Um, and that was with John Anthony West, the late, great John Anthony West. Who else?

John McAfee. That's right, when he was on the lam running from the fucking fuzz. That's right. So 22 times change. Thank you, Jamie. Um, but this one is probably more interesting. Ah, his name is Edward Snowden, and he's on the lam as well. So please

give it up. Fred Stone. Theo Appearing way. Okay, That'll just be very professional. You know, people are like, uh, how do you live and things like that. They're taking money from the Russians and Of course, the answer is no. But I I do this for a living. Like I speak. I don't have a YouTube channel that where it's, you know, I'm Joe Rogan, but I give speeches at universities and things like that. I do a lot of interviews, and so

we're recording now on my own set up. Is it possible that you could do a YouTube channel with that work? Yeah, like I mean,

if you introduce me So, like I get followers,

Yeah, we could do that. But I'm all in that That could absolutely happen. Do you want to do that? Is that something you want to do?

No. I mean, this is a big question. So I I came on because I just written a book called Permanent Record, which is the story of my life, because that's what publishers make you doing when you're writing your first book. But it's more than that, because I didn't just want to talk about me. It's actually about the changing of technology on the changing of government in this sort of post 9 11 era, which in our our generation just sort of happened to be growing up during on. I was at the CIA and the NSA and all this stuff. But the day that the book came out, the government hit me with a lawsuit on and they hit the publisher of the books with A with a lawsuit because they don't want to see books like this get written. They especially don't want to see books like this get red. And so the big thing was, you know, we didn't know where this is going.

We didn't know what was gonna happen on. And my publisher, of course, wanted me very badly. Toe let people know this book existed in case the government leaned hard and harder, harder. We didn't know where where that's going. The government is still pursuing that case quite strongly. They're more focused on the financial censorship side of it, basically taking any money that I made from it kind of a warning to the others and getting ah legal judgment against the publishers, saying, You know, you can't pay this guy that kind of thing more so than taking the book off the shelves. But that's not because they're okay with the book being on the shelves. It's because thankfully we've got the First Amendment, and so they can't on.

That's very rare and and good thing. But anyway, it in the context of that, um they were like, Well, what about Joe Rogan? And you know, I I had heard about you a to this point. But, you know, uh, the only thing that I had really seen that I really understood had familiarity with was like you talking to Bernie Sanders. Which, by the way, I very much appreciated, uh, hearing that because ah, lot of people don't give the guy time to talk.

Yeah, t hear him in those sound bites. You don't really get an understanding of who he actually is,

right? And this is the other thing. Like they're like, Well, you know, you could go on all these major network shows, and I did a couple of them. I did like a morning show. I did Brian Williams. Um, but broadly, the media, the sort more corporatized media, as we might say, is exactly what you just described right. They want you to be able to answer in light 8 15 seconds or less. Um,

and when we're talking about big massive shifts in society we were talking about the power. We're talking about technology and how it controls and influences us in the future. You can't have a meaningful conversation within those constraints. And someone said, these guys all want to say Repeat these long discredited sort of criticisms and, you know, I'm sure you'll ask the same thing and that's okay. They're there for questions. But it's like we can't have the conversation if we can't have this space to think and breathe and have that this sort of discussion. So anyway, they mentioned you on and I was like, Chill broken jaw broken, jaw broken. Where do I know this name from before? Bernie Sanders. Um,

and I looked back for my and my Twitter mentions. And the funny thing is, your fans have been harassing me to death for, like, the last year's wonderful people. Wonderful people, uh, but like going Jill Rogan going Jerome and I remember, like after I had just made a Twitter account, Neil DeGrasse Tyson actually helped me get on Twitter. Um gave me that little initial boost, and, uh, they said Joe Rogan, and so they like, links you and you know,

I mouse over your name because I use a desktop, not mobile for this cause security reasons and it pops up and I get your avatar, man. And, like, I have to say, your logo is the worst thing in the world for people who are, like, trying to be, like, politically serious. And, you know, they're worried about the national security adviser condemning because, like this bald guy with his maniacal grinning like the third eye on his forehead, and I'm like,

Oh, man, that's show, You know, that doesn't look good, but it's actually like you watch, you know when when you watch what you do. It's great stuff, man. It's great. But that first impression, like this'll, almost didn't happen. But everyone who has talked to you, everybody who watches your show, I think they get a very different impression on how your pain and for me it's a wonderful thing because nobody understands that better than I do right. Like the government ran a smear campaign against me endlessly for six months. When I came forward in June of 2013. I know we got way off topic here.

Oh, I'll get back to it. Fine. There's no such thing as a top it we could do. You can talk about whatever.

Great. Great. Okay, So for for those people first off who have no idea who the hell I am, Um I'm the guy who was behind three The revelations of global mass surveillance in 2013. I worked for the CIA. I worked for the NSA as a contractor, the staff officer, the CIA. I was undercover working at embassies, but and I talked about the difference between this in a book and contractor and government official and how it it's all sort of lost its meaning. Uh, but I saw something wrong, and I saw basically, the government was violating the law on do what I believed to be the Constitution of the United States and more broadly, human rights for everyone in the United States and around the world. There were domestic surveillance programs.

There were mass surveillance programs that worked internationally, basically everything that they could monitor. They were monitoring. And this is actually like people. Isn't that obvious? Isn't that what they're supposed to? And this is weird. But the answer actually is no. Under the framework of our constitution, governments only supposed to be monitoring people that it has a individualized, particularized suspicion of wrongdoing for right, this is we think about this in the investigative means, right? Like all those TV shows where they're, like, go and get a warrant.

The reason they have to do that like we fought hate a revolution over this Ah, a couple 100 years back is the idea that when we had, you know, kings, when we had governments of absolute power, they could simply go in your home and go, you know, is this guy pot smoker get his diary, You know, whatever it is. And just like if you find evidence of a crime, you march him off to prison, and it's all good. You found evidence their criminal where you didn't find evidence. Well, no harm,

no foul. You're just doing what government does. Um, we were trying to build a better system where it went. Yes, the government has extraordinary capabilities, but it only uses them where they're they're necessary, right where they're proportionate to the threat that is presented by this person. You know, like we shouldn't be afraid of the person who's got like, a baggie of weed in their dresser or something like that. That is not a threat to national security. That is not a threat to public safety. Um, but what happened in the wake of 9 11 was a whole bunch of government officials got together behind closed doors on this was actually led, interestingly enough,

by the vice president of the United States changing everybody remembers that name. Or hopefully I can look that name up. Dick Cheney and his personal attorney, sort of the Giuliani of Dick Cheney. Um ah, guy named David Addington and this lawyer, David Addington. I wrote a secret legal interpretation no one else was allowed to see. It was kept in the vice president's safe with White House. They weren't giving this even when they told people, and it was just a couple people in Congress. Uh, Nancy Pelosi was one of them on a couple of these other folks when they talked to the heads of the agency, the NSA and the CIA and the FBI and all this stuff, they told them the White House in the Office of Legal Counsel. And you know this this the president's attorneys.

All of these guys had decided this would be legal to do. But we can't tell you why we can't show you the legal authorization where you just got to take our word for it. And so they did this. And this became a mass surveillance program called Stellar Wind, which they said was supposed to monitor the phone calls and Internet communications emails when things like that of everybody in the United States and around the world who they could get access to for links Al Qaeda. Because if you remember, in the wake of the September 11th attacks, they were singing, um, we thought there could be sleeper cells of Al Qaeda That was just, you know, peppered all throughout the country. There, just spring up in any moment. Of course, it like weapons of mass destruction.

It just didn't exist. It was all the power grab. But on that basis, they started doing this in secret, and it was completely unconstitutional, was completely illegal, even under the very loose requirements of the Patriot Act. Um, but they did it for so long that they got comfortable with him. They thought this is you know, this is a really powerful capability. What have we started using this first stuff that was other than terrorism because it wasn't finding any terrorists because there weren't any terrorists in this context that we're looking for them on the ones who where there were terrorist, the problem wasn't affected because these were guys in Pakistan that weren't using, you know, email and phone calls. They were getting on a moped head with their cousin,

who was a courier who was bring a letter to his guy. You know who runs the food stand or whatever. Um, but bit by bit, over time, this grew and grew and grew and there were scandals. And if you want to drill down on these later, all going to him. But what happened was step by step. By step, um, our constitutional rights were changed and we weren't allowed to know it. We were never granted a vote on it, and even the many members of Congress right 535 in the United States. They were prohibited from knowing this, and instead they told only a few select people.

In the original case, there were only eight members of Congress called the Gang of Eight who knew about this Then there were the people on the intelligence committees, both in the Senate and the House, who were told about this. But they were only told partially about it. They weren't told the full scope of it on. Now that they have been told about it because they had security clearances and things like that, they weren't allowed telling. But he else even if they objected to. And we had one Senator Ron Wyden. I'm in another one. I believe Tom Udall was name who did object to this and who wanted something happened. But because they couldn't tell anybody that was having they were sort of doing these weird Lassie barks to the press where they were like We have grave concerns about the way these programs have been carried out. But nobody knew what they were talking about it. So journalists were like, You know,

they've got concerns. What is that last thing? What are you trying to say? 10 years and well, but they were getting it wrong. They couldn't tell what was happening. So what had happened was that we, the American people, had sort of lost our seat at the table of government. We were no longer partner to government. We had simply become subject to government. I think everybody who's in the world today who is aware of what's going on, whether it's under this administration, last administration, the one before that, right?

They have seen a constant kind of shift. Where we have we, the public have less say in less influence over the policy of government. With each passing year, there's kind of a new class that's being created, a government class and the public civil class that are held to different standards of behaviour. When we start talking about leaking and whistleblowing, this becomes even more clear. And so what I did was I wanted to clarify that kind of lassie Mark, right? I just wanted everybody to know what was going on. I didn't want to say the government can't do this. I didn't want to say This is how you guys have to live because that's not for me to say. But I do believe that everybody in the United States and more broadly, people in the world who are having their rights violated by a government, should have at least understanding how that is happening,

what the authorities sort of the policies and programs that are enabling that are so that they can protest them so that they can cast a vote about them so that they can say, You know what? You guys say this is OK, but I disagree. This is not okay. I object, and I want things to change. And so I gathered evidence of what I believe to be criminal around constitution activity on the part of government. Um, and I gave this to char lists right now. I gave this to journalists under a very strict condition here, which was that they published no story in this archive of information simply because it was interesting, right? No, Clickbait, not anything.

Just because they thought it would make news, it would get him awards. They would Onley publish stories that they were willing to make an institutional judgment and stand behind on this was three different newspapers, Um, that it was in the public interest to know. And so then beyond that, there was additional because if you could see sort of what I was doing here, what had happened? What had led us into this pitfall was that, um, the system of checks and balances that's supposed to self regulate. Our government had failed. The courts had abdicated their role in policing the executive in the Congress because terrorism was such a ah hot argument. At the time, they were worried about being criticized and blamed If something went wrong, attack did go through and they didn't have access to the information that the programs were ineffective.

So they were just taking the government's word for it. They didn't want to wait in Congress. Most of them didn't even know, right, Um, and the ones who did know it was the same thing. They were getting their pockets stuffed with money by the defense contractors that were getting rich for building these systems that were violating the rights of each of us. So they benefited by just saying nothing and then the executive themselves. Whether we're talking about Bush, right, whether we're talking about Obama or whether we're talking about Trump now, all these guys were okay with a constantly growing surveillance state because they're the ones whose hands were on the lever at the time. They got to aim it. They got to use it if you had a little search box in front of you. They would give you the email history. And you know of everybody in the United States anybody you want.

If you could pull up their text messages anybody you want, if you could see anything they ever typed into that Google search box, right, Joe, what is the worst thing you've ever typed into that search box that lasts forever? Right? And they have a record that they can get that from Google. And so this was this was the whole thing. How do we correct for death? So when you have somebody who wants to inform the public of something on, we're getting the proper channels arguments later. Um, but you can't go through the institution to get these corrected because the institution knows it's wrong and is doing anyway, right? That's the whole origin of the program is they want to do something that they're not allowed to do. Ah,

what do you do? Right? And so I didn't want to say I'm the president. Secrets. I didn't want to just put this stuff on the internet and I could have on the technologist. Right. Um, I worked with the journalists and then that to create an adversarial step, right? Someone who would argue against what I believed and hopefully with the journalists believe once they consulted the documents and basically authenticated them. Um, can we get the government to play that role? And so before the journalist published any story, this is a controversial thing. People still criticize me for this. Actually,

they say I was too accommodating. Government think they could be right? Um, is that the journalist would go to the government and give them warning. Say we're about to run this story about this secret program that says you did X, Y and Z. Bad thing one is that right? And the government always go over. No comment to is this don't cause harm. Is anybody gonna get hurt? Is this program effective? Is there something we don't understand right now? Is there something Snowden doesn't understand? It is this guy. Just not get it right. Are these documents fake?

Whatever you want say we shouldn't run this story in every case I'm aware of, that process was followed. And that's why, right, because there's a lot of people out there who don't like me who criticized me, who go. This was unsafe has caused harm to people or whatever we're in 2019 now I came forward on these stories, won the Pulitzer Prize for public service journalism starting way back in June of 2013. Uh, we've had six years to show bodies. We've had six years to show harm, and you know as well as I do now the governor's happy delete things when it's in their interest. Nobody has been hurt as a result of these disclosures because everyone who was involved in them was so careful. We wanted to maximize the public benefit while mitigating the potential risks. I I I think we did a pretty good job just to get back to the main thing on the original thing that got us off on that trail when I came forward in June of 2013 and I gave one interview to the people who were in the room with the documents Laura Poitras, Glenn Greenwald,

Ewan McCaskill and I said who I was. I said, why I was doing this. I said what this was about, why it matters on that we were constructing a system of turnkey tyranny, and even if you trust that toe Obama, you never know who's hand is gonna be on that key. Next and only have to do is turn it, and there's nothing we can do to stop it. The only thing that's restraining these programs really is his policy, more so than law and the president at any time can sign a napkin and those policies change. Uh, well, after that, I went six months without giving any interviews because I didn't want people talk about me. I wanted them to talk about what actually mattered.

Government, of course, was trying very hard to change the conversation as they always do, to be about Who is this guy. What have they done, right? What's wrong with them? One of their problems. Who is this? This loony guy? Eso they can controversial eyes of source of a story rather than having toe confront the story itself. Uh, and that's why I said it. I really kind of appreciate ah, your take on the media and everything like that, because when you don't tell your story,

you know, other people will tell it for you. They'll say so many things about you, and they'll have these misimpressions like I did. Because if something is stupid is as the avatar that you were using on Twitter, right where I think it's a certain kind of show with a certain kind of guy. And it's this crazy stuff. But when I actually listen to you when I actually look at the facts right, and when I hear you just speak, I go. Actually, this is a thoughtful guy. Actually, this is somebody who does care. Who does want to look at these things deeply on appearances at our first impressions can be very misleading.

I work hard on that. Try to mislead people. It's good works to my doing a good job, man. Thank you. Um, I want to bring it back to when you first started with the N s A. You started as a contractor, right? What was your initial impression? And when did you know that things were really squirrely with the

programs they are inserting? So I'm not saying this to put put you on the spot. I know you've been a busy guy. I don't know. You haven't done. Uh uh. I think shows recently you come back from break right, but have you read the book? Because it'll just help me, Your friend if you haven't got a chancery,

you No, no, I have not read your book. Got a copy of it. Okay,

well, I will send you a signed copy, brother. Beautiful. I hope you'll read it. And I hope you enjoy it. But all right, so, uh, I had a really weird, um, history in the intelligence community. I grew up in a federal family, Um, in the shadow. Fort Meade, right.

All these little suburban communities in Maryland where basically the entire industry of the state is the federal government of all these different agencies and then all the subcontractors, all the defense industries that serve that government really are kind of our war making machine are our system of control for the country and the world. Broadly, all that stuff spreads on, you know, a couple 100 mile radius out of D. C. Uh, my mother worked for the district court's rather than federal courts, and it's kind of funny because she still works there. And those are the courts that are trying to throw me in jail for the rest of my life. Now, my father worked for the Coast Guard retired after 30 years. My grandfather was an admiral, and then he worked for the FBI. Um,

as far back as it goes, my, my family, my whole line of family, even generations back. I was working for the government, so it was pretty ordinary. Pretty expected for me. Toe go into the same kind of work. Now I started and I wasn't super successful in school. Um, because, uh, it I felt, you know, this is the most arrogant thing in the world than anybody says,

Um uh, that I had more to learn from computers than I did from, you know, biology class. Um, and so I spent more and more time focusing on technology than I got mono on. I dropped out of high school. Um, and now it's like, All right, how do I make this up? I I said, drop out of high school, but I'm actually going to community college. Right? They called it concurrent enrollment where I'm not taking any classes in high school.

I'm going to community college instead. Um and I'm not doing that great there either. Like it? It's fine, you know, I'm enjoying it. But, you know, school is school. I want I can't wait to be grown Your aboard. I think a lot of people have felt that. But I ran into somebody at the community college who ran their own home based business doing web design, and they could see I was kind of technical. And they went, Hey, do you want to work for me?

And I was like, That sounds great. And so I started doing web design. Really, really Early on. This is like, uh, national No, probably 1998 vintage, um, during the big boom and then the collapse that followed. And the funny thing is, she worked, Uh, she was married to an N s A analyst. Ah,

linguist, right. And so she lived on Fort Meade and she ran her business out of their home on Fort Me. That's right up the street from the NSA. So before I'm even working there, I'm driving past this building all the time on trying to figure out you know what the next step is gonna be. And I I enjoy this. It's it's a good thing for me and it like it works well and I start getting trained and certified all these little industry stamps you've got to get as a technologist to say, Oh, you know, this program or whatever and just start climbing the ladder. But then 9 11 happens. Uh, and I'm on Fort Meade when 9 11 happened. I'm just going to work. And I tell this, uh, in the book in some detail, and I think it's very much worth reading for. People don't know this because this forgotten history

How old were you at there, buddy?

Uh, hush. I was I was born in 83 eso I was probably 18 years old. Um and, uh, yeah. Uh, yeah, I just turned 18 a couple months before, um, and what people forget, um, is who knew what was going on before anybody else on September limit the intelligence community. Um, And what did they dio, right? Did they give out a public mourning?

Did they tell you guys evacuated? They say do this Saturday. That No, no, um not for everybody. Not for a long time, but at the N s. A. Then director of Michael Hayden. He was a general. He later became director of the CIA, ordered the entire campus evacuated off thousands. Tens of thousands of people actually just said Go home, Right? The C I A did the same thing. They were running on skeleton crews at the moment.

The country needed them more than they ever had. Right? Uh, and I get a call. Um, well, I hear a call That's from my boss's wife, her husband to her. He's calling from the n s A and saying, Hey, you know, I think heads should leave for the day because I'm the only employee this business besides her, because I think they're gonna close the base down. I'm like, This is crazy. It never closes down.

We don't know what timing. Then we start checking the news, which is through websites, right, Because we're doing all this stuff. And suddenly it's the big story everywhere on and you know, nobody understands how big it is. Yet most of us are like, Oh, it's gonna mess with our work day. Oh, it's gonna mess with our commute. But when I'm leaving, I hear car horns all over the base. It's the craziest thing, cause this is military base,

right? It's right outside the NSA and I entered. Just this absolute state of pandemonium is I go past Canine Road, which is the road that travels right and pat in front off Thean, NSA's headquarters. And it's just a parking lot. As far as you can see, they have military police out under the stop lights directing traffic because it's this mass evacuation, and I still have no idea what's happening. Like the story is still developing, Um, but I will never forget that image. Uh, why did these people have so much power and so much money and so much authority that if at the moments we need them the most, they're the first ones in the country that air leaving their buildings And, you know,

later on, they said on this is ah covered in ah, book, I believe. I think it's James Bamford who interviewed that director Vanessa gave that order about what was happening. He was going well, you know. He called his wife and he was asking where their kids were and everything like that. And then after that, he wanted Teoh Think about what? Where could these other planes that they knew were in the air? It hadn't struck it where could they be headed? And this sort of shows how self centered the intelligence community is. Uh, this is the D C. Metro area,

right? Thinking at the White House, they could hit Congress. Think it is the Supreme Court right now. Oh, they're gonna fly their planes into CIA headquarters. They're gonna fly their planes into the NSA headquarters on. Of course, it was never realistic that these would be the targets, but on that basis, they were like, Let's get our bacon out of the pan. But I don't say this.

I'm sorry, but just in the interests of what wasn't it possible that they could have attacked those places Mean they attacked the Pentagon? They, you know, they knew that

Look, it's absolutely possible they could have attacked your Denny's, right, you know, But it's a question off risk assessment if you have planes in the air. If you believe there is an ongoing terrorist attack that's happening in the United States right now and if you have built history's greatest surveillance agencies, right, the most powerful intelligence forces in the history of the species, you are gonna take those off the board, or at least the majority of their personnel off the board, then in a chance that you have no, uh, sort of grounds for substantiate ing that they could be talking you to begin with simply because they could. Well, somebody else will get hit with those. As you say, it's gonna be the Pentagon,

right? It's gonna be the World Trade Center. It's gonna be someone somewhere. And the more minutes you're in front of that desk, the higher the chances. Even if it's a very small chance, even if it's somebody who doesn't work on terrorism, right? Maybe if it's somebody who normally works finance in North Korea, right, But they go look, this is emergency. Everybody understands. You don't need to explain this. You just go stop what you're doing. Look at financial transactions related to who purchased these plane tickets.

Do this. You just go full spectrum, go. Anything you can do right now, if the building gets hit, we get hit. That's what we signed up for. Nobody wants that right. That that's not the desired outcome. If they had asked the staff to do, then they all would have agreed. That's what these people signed up to do And yet the director goes now, you know, we're just just know we're not gonna take that right. And this is I think it says so much about the bureaucratic character of how government works, right?

The people who rise to the top of these governments. Um, it's about risk management. For them, it's about never being criticized for something. And this is Look, if we want to get really controversial, this is something that that'll haunt me because people will bring it up again and again and again people ask about, you know, people still criticize me

in the book.

You know, I talk about aliens and chem trails and things like that. In fact, there there's no evidence for that. I went looking on the network, right. Um, and I I know Joy. I know you want there to be aliens. Ah, dude, I know Neil DeGrasse Tyson badly wants there to be aliens on there. Probably are. Right. But the idea that that were hiding him if we are hiding them I had ridiculous access to the networks of the NSA, the CIA and the military. All these groups,

um, I couldn't find anything, right? So if it's hidden and it could be hidden. It's hidden really damn well, even from people who are on the inside. But the main thing is conspiracy theories, right? Everybody wants to believe in conspiracy theories because it helps Life makes sense. It helps us believe that somebody is control in control, right that somebody is calling the shots that these things all happened for a reason. This that and the other, uh, there are really conspiracies, but they're not. Typically,

you know that they've got tens of thousands of people working on them. Unless you're talking about the existence of the intelligence community itself, which is basically constructed on the idea that you can get. I think there's four million or 1.4 million people in the United States who hold security clearances, and you can get all of these people toe not talk. Ever the journalists in this, that or the other. Um, but when you look back at the 9 11 report and when you look back at the history of what actually happened, what we can prove right, not what we can speculate on, but what are at least two commonly agreed facts, but it's very clear to me as someone who worked in the intelligence community. Not during this period. Of course I was too young. But very shortly thereafter,

um, that these attacks could have been prevented. And in fact, the government says this too. But the government goes the reason that they these attacks happen. The reason that they weren't prevented is with the call stovepiping right There was there was not enough sharing. They needed toe break down the walls and the restrictions that were changing these poor patriots A to the NSA and the CIA and the FBI from all working on the same team and to some extent there, They're correct on this, right? There were limits on the way agencies were supposed to play ball with each other. But I worked there, and I know how much of this is bullshit. And how much is this is not, um, those are procedural on policy limits. In some cases,

legal limits on what can be shared without following process about doing this, that or the other without basically asking for permission without getting a sign off or anything like that. If the FBI wanted to send absolutely everything they handed the CIA. They could have done so with CIA. Wanted to send everything they had. The FBI they could have done. So they didn't and people died as a result. Now government goes bureaucratic. Procedural realism was responsible. And it's because we had too many restrictions on the intelligence community. And this is what led to the world Post 9 11 where all of our rights sort of evaporated, was they went well. Restrictions on what these agencies can do are costing lives. Therefore, naturally, we just have to unchain these guys and everything will be better,

right? And if you remember that post 9 11 moment, you can understand how that actually could come off his persuasive. How that might be a kind of thing to go. You go. All right. Well, that makes sense. Because everybody was terrified, right? Um, there were people quite quickly who got their heads back on their shoulders the right way. There were some of them who never lost their heads at all. Onda, who protested the Iraq war at the same time my dough himself was signing up to go fight it, volunteering for the army,

and we'll get into that a minute. Um, but everything that has followed in the decades passed came from the fact that in a moment of fear, we lost our heads and we abandoned all the traditional constitutional restraints that we put on these agencies. And we abandon all of the traditional political restraints and just social constraints, ideological systems of belief about the limitations that the secret police should have in a free and open society. And we won't look, you know, terrorists. We created shows like 24 Jack Bauer, where he's, like threatening knife people's eyeballs out if they won't tell him too sad or the other. Not. And we entered this era of increasingly unlimited government as a result. And now, in hindsight,

we go, We shouldn't been surprised. But at the time, everyone and everyone panicked, Right? But if you go back to did that help And we know the answer now is in fact no, it did not. It made things worse. Uh, I don't think any historians gonna look at the Bush administration and go this improve the position of the United States in the world. Um, but if you go back, you know, wind back the tape to that pre 9 11 moment. Wind back the tape to those silos in those walls that they said needed to come down because that was restrained government instead of the rules. That said,

Well, you can share these things, but there's gotta be basis. There's gotta be a justification. You've gotta go. Why are we trading people's information like baseball cards and all of this stuff? It's super easy as an intelligence officer to justify sharing information about a suspected terrorist who you think is planning to kill people or is even just in a country they shouldn't be replaced. They shouldn't be doing something. You don't think they should be with another agency because no one's gonna question a judge Isn't gonna question any judge in the world will stand that warrant without even thinking about it and go to bed that night. Um, you know, without a care in the world, because you're not spying on a journalist, you know, spying on a human rights defender, right?

This is not an edge case. This is someone that you believe to be associate with al Qaeda or whatever. Now, this is all a lot of preamble to say that essential fact. Um, government agrees. Everyone agrees the tax probably could have been prevented if information had been shared. So why wasn't the information shared? Government says information wasn't shared because of these restrictions. And it's half true because every important lie has has some Colonel Truth to it on. And there were these Berries. But the reality is, why would those barriers respected in the case of a major terrorist plot, why wasn't the c I A sharing information with the FBI while I was in the FBI sharing information with the NSC wipers? The an essay sharing information with the CIA in the case of married major terrorist plot? And if you've worked in government,

if you worked in the intelligence community, if you worked in any large institution you know, if you work at a company that sells batteries, you know that every office is fighting the other office for budget for clout, for promotions, and this is the sad reality of what actually happened. Um, every one of those agencies, I wanted to be the guy who busted the plot. They wanted to be the one who got credit for it, and they didn't realize how serious it waas until it was too late because they were competing with each other rather than cooperating.

That's exactly what I was gonna ask you if that was the issue. The competition between these agencies because they are very proud of the CIA A accomplishing something with the FBI, accomplishing something, and they want toe be the one to take credit for that.

Yeah. I mean, I think it's important, like in their defense, because nobody else here is gonna provide a defence for them is that that's actually, uh, darkly human again. This happens in every industry. This happens in every sort of big corporate thing because you want to get promoted and you know, everybody is putting in there like achievements at the end of the year for what they did. If you're the guy who does that, you're going straight to the top,

but their solution instead of the So we We have a weird delivered here for folks who are listening. So their solution, instead of having someone be responsible for bridging the gap in providing that information to each individual agency, their solution was mass surveillance. Well, not there. There,

there, different things this is, uh, 9 11 is what woke these guys up basically. And they went well, we screwed up, and Americans died as result. Um, we really don't want to take the hit on that. And to be honest, the government had no interest in putting the hit on them. To be honest, the public had no interest in putting the hit on them that at the time. Um, because everybody understood terrorism is a real thing. There are bad people in the world. And that's true,

right? That will always be true. There's always gonna be criminals. There's always gonna be terrorists. Whether they're at your church, whether they're across the ocean, there are people out there who are angry, they're disenfranchised, they're violent, and they just want toe harm something. They want to change something, even in a negative way, that because that's what they feel is all they have left, which these air criminals, right? These are people that we don't need to pity.

But if we ever want to stop it, we do need to understand it. And where those things come from, where there's there's drives come from in the first place, but not basically everybody went all right. How do we stop this? Because nobody wants to feel on safe. Nobody wants to feel like the building's gonna come down. Then the next time you go in it. And so everybody just went, Um I don't care who does it. Stop it. And they said this to Dick Cheney, which is a historic mistake, but caused a dick. Cheney knows how government works.

He was the person in that White house who was best placed to all the levers of government on the interagency cooperation where we were strong, where week what we could do, what we were not allowed to do. And what he did was he took that little dial on what were not allowed to do. And he changed it all the way until it broke and snapped off. And then there was nothing that we couldn't do anymore.

And you were in here. Why this is happening. This was

this? No, I was I was Not again. This is Ah, 2001. Um, I was I was 18 years old. I was working on the base, I drove past the building, but that was it is all hindsight. This biography. This is documented history, but this is not, you know, the gospel of Edward Snowden. I I don't know this right? This is public record.

This is what we all know. Um, what we have the reason that I bring this up is this is a teachable moment because there's so many people right now in the Trump administration. Uh, who Go look, This guy has too much power. He's abusing it against immigrants. He's abusing it against domestic opponents. He's doing whatever. He's trying to hurt political rivals in the next election. All of this stuff. And, you know, we could get into the stuff later if you want in detail. But the bottom line is there going This is a guy who's in the White House, has thrown elbows,

right? He doesn't really what he wants to hurt people a za long as he can convince the Americans that those are the bad guys, right? That's the enemy. Doesn't matter if they're far away. It doesn't matter if they're close at home. Um, whoever he's against, he's gonna harm. And the dark thing is, this is actually why he was elected, um, in moments of fear where the world starts falling apart, and this happens in authoritarian country after country. This is why you have Vladimir Putin in Russia who's been there for 20 years, right president?

Basically 20 years. Think about that. You know, he sort of skipped in the middle there because he had to dodge the fact that presidents can only serve so many consecutive terms, dropped down a prime minister and then came back as president. But I think about that. How do you get that kind of political longevity? And it's because of you know, anything about Russian history, which, you know, even I don't know that much about the nineties after the collapse of the Soviet Union were an extraordinarily dark time. If you look at Russian cinema, all they had were gangster movies, right? All they had were the disintegration of society,

how things are dark and broken. No one trusts each other. Pensions were no longer being paid. Social Security is not there anymore. Like there's nothing to buy. There's nothing to do. There's no job. No one had a future. And so they went. If there's somebody who can lead us out of this, that there's somebody who will fix this. Who will find us an enemy and defeat the enemy to restore prosperity will put them in office. We see it happened in Turkey with Erdogan, right? We've seen it happen successively with bad governments, even in Western democracies.

We see it happening sadly, Um, in places like Poland and Hungary, you could even argue it's happening in the United Kingdom. Right? And now there are a lot of people arguing. That's exactly what we're seeing with Donald Trump's White House in the United States. And this is the lesson that we didn't learn from 2001 is when we become fearful, we become vulnerable right to anyone who promises they will make things better, even if they have no ability to make things better, even if they will actively make things worse, even if they will make things better for themselves and their bodies by taking from you. But if they tell you that they will make things better and you believe them in a moment of fear, that typically leads to unfortunate outcomes. So sorry. Let me let me turn this back over to you cause we got way off track there.

No, that's all right. I want to bring it back to the initial question. So you're working for the N S? A. When do you realize there's a huge issue? And when you feel this responsibility toe let the American people know about this issue. Like when? When do you contact these journalists? And what was the thought process regarding this? Like what? What steps did you go through Once you realize that this was in violation the Constitution and that even with the laws of the Patriot Act in the Patriot Act, two things had changed so radically that you knew this was wrong and you had to do something about it. You felt a responsibility to speak out. Okay,

So since we gave so much historical preamble, let me just give the cliff notes version. Can't get us up to that. Um, so after September 11th I'm a little bit lost. I'm doing my technical stuff, but it doesn't really feel like it matters anymore. Like I'm making more money. I'm becoming more accomplished. But the world's on fire, right? You remember there was a crazy mood of patriotism in the country because we were all trying to come together get through it. You remember like people were sticking Dixie Cups in the top of every chain link fence on every overpass. It was like stand together. You know, never forget united.

We stand flags on every car.

Exactly. And, you know, I was a young a young guy who is not especially political. Right. Um, and I come from military background, federal family, all that stuff. So that means I'm very vulnerable to this kind of stuff. I see it on the news and Bush in all his sort of cronies air going Look, uh, it's Al Qaeda. It's terrorism terrorist organization. They have all these international connections. There's Iraq, you know,

dictators, weapons of mass destruction there holding the world of ransom. You got Colin Powell at the U. N. Dangling little vials of, like, fake anthrax. Um, and so I felt an obligation to do my part. And so I volunteered to join the army. You probably can't tell from from looking at me, but I'm not gonna be at the top of the M m a circuit any time soon. Eso It didn't work out. I joined a special program. It was called the 18 X Ray program where they take you in off the street and they actually have a shot at becoming special forces soldier. Eso you train harder and special platoons,

you go further. And I ended up breaking my legs basically. So they put me out of your discharge. Yeah, it was basically what it was. They were shin splints that I was too dumb to get off, right? So I kept marching underweight. I'm a pretty like guy to begin with. I had a 24 inch waist when I when I joined the army girls a jealous my I think I weighed, like, £128. I got I was in great shape, you know, in boot camp, cause I came up really quick because it was,

you know, all I could do was gain. Um, but it was just too much of my friend, because I wasn't that that active. And so when you keep running on a stress injury, right and you're running underweight with, like, rucksacks and things like that, you're running in, like, boots on, and then you're doing exercises. The army is like a whole chapter in the book. Uh, you got your battle,

buddy, right? Cause they never allow you to be alone. It's gotta have somebody watching you. They thought it was funny to put me the smallest guy in the platoon that the drill sergeants did with the biggest dude in the platoon who is like amateur bodybuilders, like 232 160. Something like that was a big fella. And so you know he would. Ah, when we're off in the woods doing these these marches and things like that, we have to practice Buddy carries like the fireman's carry and things like that. He throws me around his neck, you know, I'm like a towel. He's just skipping down like it's nothing on. Then I gotta put him on me and I'm just like,

Oh, God dying. And it was It was It was weirdly fun. I I enjoyed it, but it was no good for my body. And so the land navigation movement I stepped off a long because I was on point on the other side of the law because it's the woods and George on it. Sandhill, Um, I see a snake. So in my my memory, you know, it's like time slows down because North Carolina, you know where I grew up. You think all snakes are poisonous?

Sorry. That way we're good. It's completely fun. No, we're fine. I just There was something that happened in the screen. I wanted to make sure it was okay.

No, that's just so

FBI joining the chat. That's what I was wearing about second opened up here.

Yeah. So anyway, I try to take a much longer step, admit air Land badly. Um, and it's it's just one leg is like fire. I'm limping on limping and limping, but, you know, everybody says don't go to sick call because you go to sick call, you lose your slot, you'll in a general infantry, regular infantry. Uh, and so I go back. I just tough it out. I get my rack in the next morning when I get out of the rat,

which is the top bunk bed. Right? Um, I jumped in my legs. They just give out underneath me on I try to get up in it. I just can't get up. And so I go to sick call and I end up going to the hospital and they end up X Ray and me. And they also extra my battle buddy. Because I gotta go. There was somebody else, and he has a broken hip where they had to bring him to surgery. And in the book, there's a lot more detail, but it was cut a dramatic moment, but for me, they just said I had bilateral tibial fractures,

right? All the way up my legs. They said I had spider wimps. And the next Fred phase of the training was jump school. Right where you gotta jump out of a plane. And the doctor, you know, I was like, Son, if you jump on those legs, they're gonna turn into powder. He's like, I can hold you back. Um, you know, we can put you for,

like, six months. You stay off them, then you can go back through ah, through the whole cycle. Ryan, start basic from scratch, but you'll lose your slot in the Special Forces pipeline because of the way these things are scheduled and everything like that on. Then you'll basically be re signed in the needs of the army. Yeah, which probably meant I was going back to i t which was when I joined the Army to kind of escape. Um, or you could go out on this special kind of discharge that's called an administrative discharge, right? Normally got honorable discharge, dishonorable discharge,

things like that. This is something for people who have been in for, I think, less than six months where it's like annulling a marriage. It's as if it never happened. Is is if you never joined. Um, and at the time, I was like, Well, you know, that's very kind of him to do that on I took it. You know, they sent me to sit call, uh, or started to Sick bay where you're like the medical platoon and you do nothing for,

uh, I think about a month, Um and then then they let you out once the paperwork all finishes. But in hindsight, I realized that if you take an administrative discharge, it exempts the Army for liability for your injuries. So, actually, what I thought was a kindness was just you know, now if I had future problems with my legs, they wouldn't have to comfort her health insurance, any of those things, and it was just a funny thing. But anyway, I get out of the army. And here,

uh, I'm on crutches for a long time and just sort of tryingto figure out. All right. Well, what's next in life? Um, because I had gotten a basic security clearance just for going through signing up for the military process. I applied for a security guard position at the University of Maryland because it said you had to get a top secret clearance, which was a higher clearance than I had a time on. Guy went Well, that sounds good, because I knew if I combined my i T skills, which for now, suddenly much more relevant again to my future with the top secret security clearance because of the way it works. If you have a top secret security clearance and tech skills, you get paid a ridiculous amount of money for doing very little work.

So I was like, All right, well, you know, I can basically make twice what I would be making in the private sector working for government at this level at this face. Because what we talked about earlier with September 11th and how the intelligence community change, they no longer cared that I hadn't graduated from college, right? And I had gotten a g e d just by going in and taking a test. So for government purposes, it was the same as if I was a high school graduate. So now, suddenly it was like these. These doors were open. Now, this University of Maryland facility turned out to be an N s A facility.

It was called a castle, the Center for the Advanced Study of Language at the University of Maryland College Park. And all I was was literally a security guy walking around with with a walkie talking, making sure nobody breaks in at night managing the electronic alarm system and things like that. Uh, but once I had my foot in the door there, I could start climbing ladder step by step, and, uh, I applied for I went to a job fair. Actually, that was on Lee for people who had security clearances. And I ended up going to the table for one of the technical cos it was a little tiny subcontractor nobody's ever heard of. Um, and they said, uh,

you know, we've got tons of positions for somebody like you. Are you comfortable working nights and I was like, Yeah, you know, I wake up in the middle of the day anyway, that's fine with me. Uh, and suddenly I've gone from working for the NSA through a university in a weird way, where it's like the N s a holds the clearance. But I'm formally on employee of the state of Maryland of the college, and this is government, Man. It's all these weird dodges and boondoggles for how people are employed there. Now, suddenly,

I'm working at CIA headquarters, right the place where all the movie show you swoop over the marble seal and everything like that. I'm the king of the castle right there at the middle of the night when no one else is there. The lights are on motion sensors. It's three creepiest thing in the world. There's like flags on the wall that air just like gently building in the air conditioning like ghosts. The hallway lights up as you walk alongside it, because it's like a green building on. They disappear behind you. Uh, and there's there's no one that I could go down to the gym at, like 20 clock in the morning at the C. I. A and it's, like, not see a soul on the other side of the building.

Then go all the way back. Um, and this kind of thing was was my end because they were like, Look, it's the night shift. Nothing that bad is gonna happen. No, but it was on a very senior technical team. Um, and that was basically handling systems administration for everybody in the Washington metropolitan area. Right? So every basically CIA server, uh, this is a computer system that, like, data is stored on.

The reporting is stored on the traffic has moved on all of this stuff. Uh, suddenly me, this is ah, circa 2005. I think, um, I'm in charge of and it's just me and one other guy on the night shift. And if you're interested in the book, there's a lot of detail on this, Uh, but I get sort of scouted from this position because they realized I actually know a lot about technology. They were expecting me. Just, uh, basically make sure the building doesn't burn down.

All these systems don't go down overnight and never come back up. Um, but they go well. Are you willing to go overseas. And to a young man at that age that's actually like, Hey, that sounds kind of exciting. You know who who doesn't want to go work overseas for the CIA? Andi, there's Ah, A lot of people listening to podcasts were, like, not me. Um, wait. The CIA is the bad guys,

right? Yeah, exactly. There. Like what? You're gonna go overthrow a government somewhere. But you have to understand that I'm still very much a true believer. The government is like the living compressed embodiment of truth and goodness and light. You know, the Shining City on the hill. So I want to do my part to spread that to the world I didn't have skepticism is really what I'm trying to establish here on. So I signed up and I go through this special training school like people here and movies about the farm which is down and can't period. Virginia, I'm sent. That's actually much more secret facility called the Hill, which isn't Warrenton,

Virginia. Um, and, uh, this is event covered a few times and open source media, but I think this is one of the few book length discussions of what happens there. in permanent record. Um, but yeah. So I go through training, and then I get assigned overseas, and I end up in Geneva, Switzerland. Undercover is a diplomat, right? I think,

uh, my formal title for the embassy is like something super blandly diplomatic attache. And what I am is about forward deployed tech guy. They send you through this school to make you into kind of a MacGyver, right? Yes. You can handle all the computers, but you can also handle the the connections for the embassies Power systems, right. The actual electrical connections. You can handle the H vac systems, right? You can handle locks and alarms and security systems. Basically anything that's got an on button on it, a de embassy that secure now you're responsible for. And I traveled from Geneva to other countries in Europe for sort of assignments,

and it was like it was an exciting time. I actually still enjoyed it. But this was where I first working with intelligence, started to get doubts. And the story's been told many times, so I won't go over in full detail here. Um, but the CIA does primarily. It's not the only thing they dio what's called human intelligence Now there are many different types of intelligence the intelligence community is responsible for, um, the primary ones are human intelligence and signals intelligence. You want to think of signals intelligence, right as tapping lines, hacking computers, all of these sort of things that provide Elektronik information, anything that's,

Ah, digital or analog signal but that could be intercepted, then turned into information. Human intelligence is, you know, all that fun stuff we've heard with C I. A. Doing for decades and decades, which is where they try to turn people. Basically, they say, Look, we'll give you money If you sell out your country, they don't It's not even your country. A lot of times that you're like organization. These guys could be working for a telecommunications provider on,

and they want to sell customer records or they work in a bank, which was the thing that I saw and we wanted records on the bank's customers. So he wanted a guy on the inside, but anyway that that's sort of how it works and what I saw was they were way more aggressive for the lowest stakes than was reasonable, responsible. They were totally willing to destroy somebody's life just on the off chance they would get some information that they wouldn't even be a tremendously valuable. And so, you know, ethically that that struck being, um, is a bit off. But I let it pass because what I what I've learned over my life? Um, short, though it's it's been, you know,

uh, it is that skepticism is something that needs to build up over time. It's a skill, something that needs to be practiced, or you can think of it as something that you develop through exposure, and I kind of like a radiation poisoning. But in a positive way, it's when you start to realize inconsistencies or hypocrisy. Ease that war lies, Um, and you notice them and you know, you give somebody the benefit of the doubt or you trust them, or you think it's all right. But then over time you see it's not an isolated instance. It's a pattern behavior, and over time that exposure two inconsistency builds and builds and builds until it's something that you can no longer ignore Now,

after the CIA, I went to the NSA in Japan, where I was working there in Tokyo on then from there are a couple of years later, I went Teoh the C I a. Again. Now I was working as private employees for Dell, but I was the senior technical official on Dell's sales account. The CIA, you know, people, these big companies, they have sales accounts to the CIA. And so this means I'm going in. And now it's crazy because I'm still a very young man. But I'm sitting across the table from chiefs of these enormous CIA divisions. I'm sitting across from their chief technology officer for the entire agency,

or the chief intelligent, our chief information officer for the entire C I. A. And these guys are going. Look, here's a problems. Here's what we want to do and it's my job to pitch them a system, right? And I've I'm paired up with the sales guy, and the whole thing is just go. How much money can we get out of the government, right, that as the whole goal and we'll build them? What we were pitching was a private cloud system, right? Everybody knows about cloud computing now.

It's like why your Gmail account is available wherever you go. It's why Facebook has this massive system of records for everyone everywhere. The government wanted to have this these kind of capabilities to Del ended up getting beat out by Amazon people. Some people aren't familiar with as many of them are. But Amazon runs a secret cloud system for the government. I forget what they've rebranded it now. But this is just there is this massive connection between industry and government in the classified space that just goes deeper and deeper and deeper and deeper. But at this point, I was already I had misgivings because of what I'd seen in Japan about government. But I was just trying to get by. I was trying to ignore the conflicts. I was trying to ignore the inconsistencies on. I think this is a state that a lot of people, uh, in these large institutions, not just in our country but around the world,

a struggle with every day, right? They got a job, they're gonna family. They got the bills that they were just trying to get by. And they know that some of the things they're doing are not good things. They know some of the things they're doing are actively wrong. But they know what happens to people who rocked the boat. Eventually. Um, I changed my mind. And when I had gone to Hawaii, which was the final position in my career with the intelligence community, um, I was because of an accident of history here. I wasn't supposed to be in this position at all.

I was supposed to be a group called the National Threat Operations Center and Talk, but because of the way contracting works and again this is covered in the book. Um, I end up being reassigned to this little rinky dink office that nobody's ever heard of in a like called the Office of Information Sharing. And I'm replacing this old timer who's who's about to retire. Really, really nice guy. But he spent most of his days just reading novels on doing nothing. Andi, letting people be content to the fact they're letting people forget that his office existed because he was the only one in it. There's there's a manager who's like over him, but it's actually over a larger group, and he just looks over him as a sort of a favor. So now I come in and now I'm the sole employee of the Office of information Sharing. But I'm not close enough to retirement that I'm okay. Just doing nothing at all.

So I get ambitious and I come up with this idea for a new system called the Heartbeat on what the heartbeat is gonna do His, uh, connect to basically every information repository in the intelligence community, both at the NSA and across network boundaries, which you normally can cross. But because I had worked about the C i A and the N S A. I knew the network well enough both sides of its sides that normal workers of the NSA would never have seen because you have to be in one or the other. I can actually connect these together. I could build bridges across this kind of network space and then draw all of these records into a new kind of system that was supposed to look at your digital I d basically your you're sort of i d card that says, this is who I am. I work for this agency. I work in this office thes air, my assignments thes air, my group affiliations. And because of that, the system would be able to eventually aggregate records that were relevant to your job that were related to you.

And then it could provide them. And basically, you could hit this site. It would be a nup date of what we used to call read boards, which were manually created. There we go. Look, you work in Ah, uh, network defense, right? These are all things that are happening on network defense you work on, I don't know, economic takeovers in Guatemala, you know, if this is what's going on for you there.

But in my off time, I helped the team that sat next to me, which was a systems administration team for foreign Does networks because I had been Microsoft Certified Systems engineer, which means basically, I knew how to take care of Windows networks. Um, and this was all those guys did, and they always had way too much work, way too much work. And I had basically no work that I need to do it all because all I was supposed to do with share information, which was not something that was particularly, um, in demand, because most people already knew what they wanted, what they needed So it was basically my job was to sit there and collect a paycheck unless I wanted to get ambitious. And so I did some side gigs for these other guys,

and one of them was running what were called dirty word searches. Uh, now a dirty word. Searches are Let me let me dial this back, because I know we're, uh, sort of this is hard to track. Everything that the NSA does, uh, in large part, is classified. Everything the CIA does in large part is classified. Um, if I made lunch plans with other people, my office, it was classified.

That was the policy. It's dumb. This overclassification problem is one of the central flaws in government right now. This is the reason we don't understand what they're doing. This is why they could get a long way. This is why they can get away with breaking the law. But we're violating our rights for so long, you know, five years, 10 years, 15 50 years before they see before we see what they were doing. And it's because of this routine classification, right? But every system computer system has a limit on what level of classified information is supposed to be stored on it on. We've got all these complicated systems for code words and caveats, Uh,

that established a system of what's called compartment ation. And this is the idea. When you worked at the CIA when you worked at the NSA, you're not supposed to know what's happening in the office next to you, right? Because you don't have need to know right there getting that thing from the movies. Um, and the reason they have this is they don't want one person to be able to go and know everything right and tell everybody everything. They don't want anybody to know too much, particularly when they're doing lots of bad things. Because then there's the risk that you realize they're doing so many bad things that it's past the point that we can justify that they might develop sort of an ideological objection to that. Well, in the office of information sharing on actually, in basically every part of my career Before that, I had access to everything. Um,

I had what was called Ah, special caveat on my access is called priv AC, which brings privileged access. What? This means you're kind of Super User. You know, most people have all of these controls on the kind of information that can access. But I'm in charge of the system, right? People who need information, they have to get it from somewhere. They don't even the director of the CIA right now, he says, I need to know everything about this. Well, he doesn't know where to get it.

He's just a manager. Somebody has to be able to actually cross these thresholds and get those things. That guy was me. And so dirty word searches were these kind of automated queries that I would set up to go across the whole network and look at all of the different levels of classification and compartment ation and exceptionally controlled information. That's kind of you could think of. It is above top secret in the special compartments, right where you're not even supposed to know what these compartments are. Four. You only know the code word. Uh, unless you work in them unless you have access to them. Unless you read into them. One day I get a hit on the dirty word search for a program that I've never heard off called Stellar wind. It came back because the the, uh, little caveat for their called handling caveats,

which is like, you know, you can think of like burn after reading or for your eyes only. But this one's called STL W, which means stellar wind. Unless you know what stellar wind is. You don't handle it. All I knew was it wasn't supposed to be on my system, and this is a little bit unusual. And turned out this document was placed on the system because one of the employees who had worked on this program years before had come to Hawaii. This person was a lawyer, I believe on. They had worked in the inspector general's office and they had compiled a report, part of the inspector general's report, which is when the government is investigating itself, um,

into, uh, the operations and activities of this programme. Well, this was the domestic mass surveillance program that I talked about in the very beginning of our conversation that started under the Bush White House. Stellar wind was no longer supposed to be really an operation. Um, it had been unveiled in a big scandal in December 2005 in the New York Times by journalist James Risin on Die. I'm not gonna name because I don't want to get wrong. Another journalists. You can look at the by line now if you want to see their movement, But, uh, and there's there's a lot of history here, too. But what they found was,

of course, the Bush White House had constructed a warrantless wiretapping program. If you remember the warrantless wiretapping scandal that was affecting everyone in the United States, um, well, the Bush White House, uh, was really put in a difficult position by this scandal. They would have lost the election over this scandal because The New York Times actually had this story in October 2004 which was the election year they were. They were ready to go, um, with it. But at the specific request of the White House, talking to the publisher of The New York Times, Sulzberger and Bill Keller than the executive editor of The New York Times, the The New York Times said,

We won't run the story because the president just said, If you run this story a month before the election, that's very tight margin. If you recall, um, you'll have blood on your hands. And it was so close in 2001 The New York Times just went You know what fine Americans don't need? No, the Constitution violated. They don't need to know. Ah, that the Fourth Amendment doesn't mean what they think it means. If the government says it's all right and it's a secret, you should know about it. That's fine now December 2005. Why did that change?

Why did The New York Times suddenly we're on this story? Well, it's because James Risen, the reporter who found this story, had written a book and he was about to publish this book, and The New York Times was about to be a very uncomfortable position of having to explain why they didn't run this story and how they got scooped by their own journalists. And so they finally did it. But it was too late. Bush had been re elected, and now it was sweeping up the broken glass of our lost rights. So Congress, the Bush White House was very effective in, as I said, before telling a very few select members of Congress that this program existed, and they told them this program existed in ways that they wouldn't object to but made them culpable for hiding the existence from the program, the existence of the program from the American people.

And this is why someone like Nancy Pelosi you wouldn't exactly think would be Buddy Buddy with George Bush was completely okay in defending this kind of program, in fact, and you know later she said, Oh, well, she had objections to the program that she wrote in a letter The White House, but she never showed us the letter. She went home. Well, that was that was classified right? And this is not a bag on her individually. It's just she's a great example in here and not named example, everyone knows off how this process works. The White House will implicate certain very powerful members of Congress in their own criminal activity and someone when then, when the White House gets in trouble for it, the Congress has to run cover for the White House.

And so what happened was Congress passed an emergency law in 2007 called the Protect America Act, which should have been our first indication. This is a very bad thing because they never name a law. Something like that. Unless something terrible and what it did, was it retroactively immunized A with the phone companies in the United States that had been breaking the law millions of times a day by handing your records over to the government, which they weren't allowed to do simply on the basis of a letter from the president saying, Please do this, Uh, and these companies went, Look, now that we've been uncovered, now that we've been shown that we're breaking or now that, uh, these journalists have shown that we've broken the law and violated the rights of Americans and on a staggering scale that could bankrupt our companies because we can be sued for this we will no longer cooperate with you unless you pass a law that says people can't sue us for having done this. And so we get the Protect America Act,

which they say is, you know, is an emergency thistle public history to you can look this up on Wikipedia, you know, um and so then Ah, they, um they go. It's an emergency law. We have to pass this. Now we have to keep this program active. Bush is going to end the warrantless wiretapping program and continue it under this new authority, where it's gonna have some special level of oversight in these kind of things eventually. But for now, we just have to make sure people are safe again. They go to fear. They said,

We don't have this program terrorist attacks. We'll continue. You know people will die. Blood on your hands, Blood on your hands, blood on your hands. Think of the Children. Protect America. Act passes the companies get off the hook. The Bush White House gets off the hook. The Congress that was then sharing in criminal culpability for authorizing or rather, letting these things go by without stopping them, then passes in 2008. Thief Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Amendments of 2008 This is called the F A a FISA Amendments Act of 2008. And rather than stopping all of the unlawful and sort of unconstitutional activities that the intelligence agency was doing, they continued it in different ways simply by creating a few legal home hoops for them to jump through.

Now, this is not to say you know, these things aren't helpful at all. It's not say they're not useful at all. Uh, but it's important. Understand, when the government's response to any scandal in this applies to any country is not to make the activities of the person who was caught breaking the law, comply with the law but instead make the activities of the person who is breaking the law legal right They make the law comply with with the agencies want to do rather than making the agencies comply with the law? That's a problem. And that's what happened here now, Uh, the intelligence community's powers actually grew in response to this scandal in 2008 because Congress was on the hook and they just wanted to move on and get this over with. There were objections. There were people who knew this was a bad idea, but it didnt passed on.

Now, what the public took away from this because a part of these laws was a requirement that the inspector general off all of these different intelligence community elements and the director of national intelligence submit a report saying, Ah, this is what happened under that warrantless wiretapping program. This is how it complied with the law how it didn't comply with the law and basically looked back and how this program was constituted, what it did, what the impacts and effects were. And that was supposed to be sort of the Truth and Reconciliation Council. Right now, why am I talking about all this ancient history? Well, I'm sitting here in 2012 with a classified Inspector General's report draft report from the N s A. That names names that says Dick Cheney. That says, David Addington, This is Nancy Pelosi that says all of these people who are involved in the program the tic tac of how it happens.

It says the director of the N S a. That guy who is evacuating the building at the beginning of our podcast here, Um, that guy was asked by the president the United States, if he would continue this program after being told by the White House and the Department of Justice. These programs were not lawful, that they were not constitutional. And the president said, Would you continue this program on my say so alone, knowing that it's risky knowing that it's unlawful? And he said, Yes, sir, I will if you think that's what's necessary to keep the country safe. And at that moment, I realized these guys don't care about the law.

These guys don't care about the Constitution. These guys don't care about the American people. They care about the continuity of government. They care about this state, right? And this is something that people have lost. We hear this phrase over and over again. National security, national security, national security. And we're meant to interpret that to mean public safety. But national security is a very different thing from public safety. National security is a thing that in previous generations we refer to as state security. National security was a kind of term that came out of the Bush administration, um, to run cover for the fact that we were elevating a new kind of secret police across the country.

Um, and what does it mean when again, In a democracy in the United States, the public is not partner to government. The public does not hold the leash of government anymore, but were subject to government, right? We are subordinate to government, and we're not even allowed to know that it happened Now in the book, I tell the fact that I had access to the unclassified version of this report back in Japan, and what's interesting is the unclassified version of a report. And we've all seen this today with things like the Muller reporting all of the intelligence reporting. It's happened in the last several years when the government provides a classified report, the public. It's normally the same document, the unclassified version,

the classified version of the same thing. Just the unclassified version has things blacked out or redacted that they say, Oh, you're not allowed to know this sentence of this paragraph of this page or whatever. The document that the public had been given about the warrantless wiretapping program, um, was a completely different document. It was a document tailor made to deceive and mislead the Congress and the public of the United States. And it was effective in doing that. And in 2012 when I realized was this is what really world conspiracies look like, right? It doesn't have to be, uh, smoking men behind closed doors, right? It's lawyers and politicians.

It's ordinary people from the working level to the management level. Uh, who go. If we don't explain this in a certain way. We're all gonna lose our jobs. Ah, or the other way they go. We're gonna get something out of this if we all work together. Civilization is the history of conspiracy, right? What is civilization but a conspiracy for all, All of us to do better by working together. Right? Um, but it's this kind of thing that I think too often we forget because it's boring as hell. I want all your listeners right to go to The Washington Post's,

because this document that I discovered that that really changed me has been published courtesy of The Washington Post. It's called the Inspector General's Report on on Stellar Wind. Um, and you can look at the actual document that I saw there was unredacted, right? I add no blacked out pages on mine. Um, And what I believe it shows, uh, is that some of the most senior officials in the United States elected and unelected, uh, worked together to actively undermined the rights of the American people to give themselves expanded powers. Now, in their defense, they said they were seeking these powers for good and just and noble cause, right?

They say they were trying to keep us safe. But that's what they always say. That's what every government says. That's no different than what the Chinese government says or the Russian government says. Um, and the question is, if there truly keeping us safe, why wouldn't they simply just tell us that? Why wouldn't they have that debate in Congress? Why wouldn't they put that to a vote? Because if they were and they could convince us that they were, um, they'd win the vote. And particularly, we all know, like the Patriot Act passed more the worst pieces of legislation in modern history past um,

why didn't we get a vote on? I think if you read the report the answer we clear. So I'm sorry. Joy, I went on for

very know is amazing. It's act. Don't don't apologize at all. It's just completely fascinating that the continuation of this policy came down to one man and the president having this discussion that is

so well, it's much. It's much,

much more, much more but right, right, literally the president

at the heart of it, Yes, at the heart of it, in every expression of executive power, right and by executive we mean the White House here. The C i a D n a, say the FBI, the DOJ right? These guys exist as a part of the executive branch of government. In a real way. They work for the White House. Now there are laws and regulations and policies that are supposed to say they're supposed to do this, and they're supposed to say they're not supposed to do that. But when you look at federal regulations, when you look at policies as an employee of government, when you violate these policies, the worst thing that happens to you is you lose your job because there's no criminal penalty for the violation of of these laws.

And so it's very easy. Um, for for people who exist in these structures, particularly the very top levels of these structures to go look, we have a given set of lawful authorities, and these are defined very broadly. T give us leeway to do whatever it is we think is proper and appropriate. Just now, take that proper, inappropriate just from the perspective of any given individual right and given president now intersect that with what's good for them politically, Uh, and that's where problems begin to arise. Now, the safety measure that's supposed to protect us from this in the U. S. System and in a democracy broadly is these people are supposed to be what are called public officials.

That means we know their decisions. That means we know their policies. That means we know their programs and prerogatives and powers like what they are doing both in our name and what they're doing against us and because they are transparent to us. We, the people can then police their activities, weaken, going, disagree with this. We can protest. We can campaign against it, right? We can try to become the president, do whatever they are public officials. And we are private citizens. They're not supposed to know anything about us, right?

Because we in relative terms, hold no power, and they hold all the power. So they have to be under the tightest constraints we need to be in the freest circumstances. And yet the rise of the state secrets doctrine, right, this whole classifications system that goes all the way back to last century about the middle of the last century, I believe is, is when it really started getting test in court. And I think you know more about this in many cases than I do when you start talking about what happened. Uh, the FBI and the CIA and the NSA is sort of old dirty work, Um, in the 20th century is ah, they abused their powers repeatedly and continuously. They did active harm to domestic politics in the United States.

The FBI was spying on Martin Luther King and trying to get Martin Luther King to kill himself before the Nobel Prize was going to be awarded. In fact, after em okay, gave his I have a dream speech. Two days later, the FBI classified him as the greatest national. I think it was the greatest national security threat in the United States on get This is the FBI. This is the group that everybody's applauding today, saying all these these wonderful patriots and heroes. Now, I'm not saying everything. The FBI's bad. I'm not saying anybody. Everybody, the CIA and NSA is bad. I'm saying that you don't become patriot based on where you work.

Um, patriotism is not about a loyalty toe government. Um, patriotism, in fact, is not about loyalty to anything uh, patriotism is a constant effort to do good for the people of your country, right? It's not about the government, it's not about the state. Ah, and this is we'll get into loyalty later because, you know, I think one of the big criticisms against me that should be talked about his undergo Look, this guy is disloyal. He broken oath.

You did whatever, uh, a loyalty. Loyalty is a good thing when it's in the service of something good, but it is on Lee good. When it's in the service of something good. If your loyal to a bad person, if you're loyal to, ah, bad program. If you're loyal to a bad government, that loyalty is actively harmful, I think that's overlooked. But, yeah, when you get back into this whole thing about sort of where it came from,

uh, why it happened, how it could come out of just this small group, and then they could slowly kind of poison by implication, by complicity by bringing them into the conspiracy and then having them not say anything about it. Wider and wider broad body of people. And then once you've got enough people in on it, it's much easier to convince other people that it's legitimate because they can go. Look, we got 30 people who know about this, and none of them have objected to it. Why are you gonna object to this? Uh, all of this derives from the original sin, which is in a democracy, creating a system of government that is,

in fact, a secret government body of secret law. Body of secret policy. It is far beyond what legitimate government secrets could be. This is not say like government hasn't can have no secrecy. Dole if the government wants to investigate someone without having them respond, right? We're talking traditional law enforcement. Sure. You know, I gotta tell this mobster Hey, you know, we're going to start investigating you. We, the public don't need to know the names of every terrorist suspect out in the world. Right?

Uh, but we do need to know again the powers and programs, the policies, that government is asserting at least the broad outlines of it. Because otherwise how can we control it? How do we know if the government is applying its authorities that are supposed to be granted to it by us? If we don't know what it is that that they're doing. And so this is the main thing. And really, the story behind the title permanent record, um, is Look, Joe, when When you were a kid. You know, when I was a kid,

when you were a teenager, right wing, what's the worst thing you ever said? Uh, you know, did you say anything? You weren't proud? Did you do anything that you weren't proud of? Something that today in, like the locust of Twitter land you would get in

trouble for, I'm sure. And that's by the horrible things about kids growing up today is that they do have all this stuff out there on social media forever, and they can be judged horribly by something they did when they were 13.

It's exactly that, um, our worst mistakes, our deepest shames, were for gotten right. They were lost. They were ephemeral. Even the things we did get caught for they were known for a time. Maybe they're still remembered by people who are closest to us whether we like them or dislike them. Um, but there were people connected to us now were forced to live in a real way naked before power. Whether we're talking about Facebook, whether we're talking about Google, whether we're talking about the government of any country, they know everything about us or much about us rather and we know very little about them and we're not allowed to know more. Everything that we do now lasts forever, not because we want to remember,

but because we're not allowed to forget. Just carrying a phone in your pocket is enough for your movements to be memorialized, because every cell phone tower that you pass is keeping a record of that and 18 t keeps those records going back to 2008 under program called Hemisphere. If you search for hemisphere in 18 T, you'll get storing the daily beast about it. 18. He keeps your phone records going back to 1983. If any of your listeners were born after 1983 right born after May or it might be 1987. Excuse me, 1987. If they were born after 1987 and a teensy customer or their calls cross eighties network eighteens, he has every phone call they ever made. Rather the record that it happened not in to serve the contents on the phone call. And so I mean, let me turn this around for you because I feel like I've just been given a giving a speech. Um,

when you look at this stuff right when you look at what's happening with government, when you look at what's happening with Trump White House, the Obama White House, the Bush White House you could see this trend happening when you look what's happening with Facebook when you look at what's happening with Google when you look the fact that you go to every restaurant today and you see people looking at phones, you get on a bus, you get on a subway. You know, you see somebody sitting next to you in traffic. You see people looking at funds. These devices are connected all the time. Now people again, Alexa. Right now people have ah OK, Google. They have, you know,

Siri on the phones that in their house they've always got these connected microphones. Um, where do you think this leads and what is it that gives you sort of trust in the system, faith in the system, like how? Just just so we can start a conversation here. What strikes you about this?

Well, it's completely alien and its new. This is something that's unprecedented. We don't have a long human history of being completely connected via technology. This is something we're navigating right now for the first time, and it's probably the most powerful thing that the human race has ever seen in terms of the distribution of information. There's nothing that even comes close to it in all of human history. And we're figuring out as we go along, and what you exposed is that not only are we figuring out as we go along, but that to cover their ass thes cell phone companies in cahoots with the government have made it legal for them to gather up all of your phone calls, all of your text messages, all of your emails, and store them somewhere so that retroactively, if you ever say anything they don't like or do something they don't like, They can go back, find that and use it against you, and we don't know who they are.

We don't know why they're doing it, and we didn't know they could do it until you exposed it. The connection of human beings via technology is, is both amazing and powerful and incredible in terms of our access to knowledge but terrifying in terms of the government's ability to track our movements, track your phone calls, track everything and under the guise of protecting us from terrorists, protecting us from sleeper cells, protecting us from attacks like they really are attacked, protecting us from these attacks. That's great. But there's there's no provision in the Constitution that allows any of this, and this is where it gets really squirrely because they're making up the rules as they go along and they're making up these rules the way you're describing it, it is step by step. This has happened to sort of protect their ass and keep themselves from being implicated in what has been of violation of our rights. And our privacy is in the Fourth Amendment.

Yeah, I mean, I think I think one of the things that everybody needs to understand when you look at these things Onda reason, you know, we talked about before when I got this information, why I didn't just put it on the Internet and people criticize me for this they go. I didn't share enough information because the journalists there gate keeping right, They've got a big archive and they haven't published everything from it. And I told them not to publish

everything. Why? Why did you instruct? Why did you do that?

Because so again, And get back to legitimate secrets and illegitimate secrets. Some spying from my perspective. Career spy is okay, right? Agree If you have hacked a terrorists phone, right and you're getting some information about that useful Agreed. Yeah, if you're spying on ah, Russian General in charge of ah rocket division useful. Right? But there there are lines and degrees in that where it's not useful. Now, the examples that I just gave you these air targeted This is where you're spying on an individual. They're known named person, that is being monitored for specific reason that is related

from

a lot of people, right, Well, even for foreign intelligence and some indications you don't need a warrant strictly. Although I think they should have warrants for all of these investigations because they established a court for precisely this reason called the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. Right. And there's not a judge in the world who wouldn't stamp a warrant saying, Hey, spy on Abu Jihad over here, Right? And if you want to Ah, spy on another guy, Boris Bad and off of the rocket division, right? That that's okay. They're gonna go with that. Um,

but then you look it. Ah, These edge cases in the archive that I provided to journalists have been stories that have come down where they've spied on journalists, right? They've spied on human rights groups and these kind of things, I think people miss. I'm gonna throw up some slides here, so forgive me if this gets weird and I put up the wrong ones. Uh, but since I came forward, this foreign intelligence surveillance court that the government says authorized these programs 15 different times was overruled by the first Open courts to look at the program. These of federal courts here, Right? That said no. Actually, these programs are unlawful.

They likely unconstitutional. When you start looking at the facts, you see, even within the context of the very loose restrictions and laws that apply to the N s A and surveillance, they say they broke their own laws in 2776 times in a single year. And then you and it's about that thing that motivates me. Like why I came forward. Um, we had been trying as a country before. I came forward to prove the existence of these programs legally, uh, because this is our This is our means of last sort. Of course, in our system, right, We get the executive.

We got the legislature. We got the judiciary, right? Uh, so Congress makes the laws the executive supposed to carry them out. The courts are supposed to play referee. The executive had broken the laws, Congress was turning a blind eye to laws, and the courts were. And this is just months before I came forward going Well, it does appear, uh, the A, C L U and Amnesty International, like all of these human rights groups and non governmental organizations, uh,

had established that, you know, these programs are likely unlawful. They likely exist there, Simply classified. But the government responded with this argument that you just saw saying that Well, it's a state secret. If they do exist, you The plaintiffs don't have hard concrete evidence that they do exist, and the government is saying legally you have no right to discover evidence from the government. Right documents demand documents of demanding answers from the government as to whether things thes as to whether or not these things exist, because the government's just gonna give its standard with a gold glomar response, We can neither confirm nor deny that these things exist, which leaves you out in the cold, which leaves the courts out in the cold. The courts go.

Uh, look, the government could be breaking long here. Look, they could be violating the Constitution, but because you can't prove it on because the government doesn't want to play ball and the government says, If we were doing this, it would be legal, and it would be necessary for national security. Whatever. The court can't presume to know national security better than the executive because the courts aren't elected. And so this leads to this fundamentally broken system where okay, the only way to have the court's review. The legality of the programs is to establish the programs exist, but the programs are classified, so you can't establish they exist unless you have evidence.

But providing that evidence to courts to journalists to anyone is a felony right? That's punishable by 10 years per count under the Espionage Act. And the government has charged every source of public interest journalism who's really made a significant difference in these kind of cases since Daniel Ellsberg Really going back to that under the same espionage act. It's always the same law on this is there's no distinction to government between whether you've sold information to a foreign government for private benefit, right or whether you provided information on Lee to journalists for the public interest, and then that's, ah, fundamentally harmful thing. I think when you look at things that have come in the wake of this, we're talking about the post 2013 court rulings that found what the government was doing was unlawful. Um, you see the courts saying, actually that that leaks or air quotes leaks can actually be beneficial. Uh, leek is used in the government's and this, you know,

this is from a federal court. These are not exactly my biggest supporters. They're recognizing that although leak implies harm, it implies something that's broken it. It's actually helpful. It's a leak that's letting in daylight in this context. That is the Onley thing that allows, um, the system to operate in a context where, uh, one year before I came forward, we had the n s a saying this kind of stuff didn't happen. We had, uh, hang on this famous exchange, which,

more than anything, made me realize this was a point of no return. Because I've told you this. You've heard this, but if you haven't seen it, uh, you might not believe me, right? Maybe I'm a sketchy guy. Whatever. Um, one of those senators I told you that objected to this stuff that was doing the Lassie barks For all those years, Ron Wyden was confronting the most senior spy in the United States, General James Clapper, who was then the director of national Intelligence. Right.

There's no guy higher than him. The buck stops with him when it comes to intelligence. He's testifying under oath in front of Congress right now, but more broadly, in front of the public, this is televised. And Ron Wyden asked him a very specific question about a program mind you that Ron Wyden knows exists because he has security clearance. He sits on the Intelligence Committee uh, and he knows there's domestic mass surveillance, and this is how it goes. This is how the top spy responds under oath.

So when I wanted to see is if you could give me a yes or no answer to the question, does the n s a collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans? No, sir, it does not. Not wittingly. There are cases where they could inadvertently perhaps ah, collect, but not not wittingly.

So that was a lie. Wyden knew it was a lie. Clapper knew it was a lie. He actually admitted it was a lie after I came forward, you know, three months later. Ah, but he said it was the least untruthful thing he could think of to say in the context of being in the hot seat there. But what does it mean for a democracy when you can lie under oath to Congress on the congressman even knows you're lying to them. But they're afraid to correct you on widen. By the way, it wasn't a surprise. Widen gave him those questions 24 hours in advance, and he wrote a letter afterwards asking for Clapper to amend his testimony right now, not even in a press conference. But just say this was incorrect, whatever.

So he could go through the legal process and show his fellow congressmen that there was a problem. And then you do it. But all of that was refused to us. All of it was denied to us. And here I am, sitting at the NSA. Next, my buddies who I talked to about these programs, you know, I've gone Look at this and they're laughing at you. No, I'm laughing at it and it's not. It's not that we go. Ha, ha! He's getting away with it.

It's like, What are you gonna do? These guys air, You know, their their bullshit, er's that the system is built on lies that even many people, many experts who have studied this no are lies. But if you can't prove their lies, how do you move beyond that? And that's really a question that has never been more relevant than I think it is today under the current White House.

So you're in this position where you have this information and you know that these surveillance systems are in place and they're unconstitutional. And you feel this deep responsibility, toe. Let the American people know about this. What? What makes you take the leap?

So this is, um, covered extensively in the book because it took a long time. I would imagine people people, you know. Yeah, exactly. People like to think it's like a cinematic moment where I find this golden document like this stellar wind report. And that's the closest thing to a smoking gun, right that that exists. But look, if you found that you can read that later, look at that. And, like, imagine yourself being like, Oh,

I'm gonna go outside on the courthouse steps and wave this thing, Burn my life to the ground, burn my family to the ground. I'm never going to work again. I'm going to jail for the rest of my life. Um, the question is, what would it take for you to light a match and burn your life to the ground? Um, for a long time. Ah, too long. Um, the answer was nothing. And I'm ashamed of that. It took me,

uh, so long to get over that home because I was waiting for somebody else to do it. When I saw people like Ron White on this, when I saw people like the court case that I should before where people were actively challenging these programs, right, journalists had the scent of it on. And, you know, there are a lot of people who are gonna be in, you know, the YouTube comments or whatever. So I knew this was happening.

No, you did well, Bill Bimini. You had He will be built. Excuse me. Bill Binney. He initially was the one that came out and spoke about this issue. And so

Yeah, Bill Benny Eyes, uh, part of, shall we say, the group of early NSA whistleblowers who came with Thomas Drake. Bill Binney. Kirk, we be I believe in Ed Loomis on these guys. All got their doors kicked in. You know, they got harassed by the FBI. Tom Drake, who was a senior executive at the NSA. This guy who had a lot to lose was charged under the same lie was the espionage act. And these guys were doing it earlier during the Bush administration. Some of them were talking to the journalists that,

you know, maybe it's alleged I want to put them on the spot. Maybe they deny it. Maybe they don't leave that to them. Um, but, uh, somebody, somewhere was informing this reporting right, that got into the New York Times about the Bush era warrantless wiretapping program. And eventually journalist put this out there. People knew these capabilities existed. But then there's the person in the YouTube comments of, like, all we knew all about. This is nothing new.

And the thing is, you can know about some programs and not know about others. You can have a suspicion. You can know with certainty that this stuff is capable is possible. The capability exists. You can know that the government has done this stuff in the past. You could know they're likely to do it again. You can have all these indications you can have, like the Jewell vs n s. A case that's run by the E FF, which is about the 18. It's about a T and t setting up secret rooms in there. Ah, telecommunications facilities where they basically drag all the fibers for their domestic Internet communications and like phone communications into a room that's purpose built for the N S. A and then they bring it out. But 18 NYSE,

it's the N s A. The NSA denies that these things happen or that they're done it all right. And so this is the context you say, you know, and you don't let put it the other way. Maybe you do know, right? Maybe you are on academic researcher, maybe your technological specialist. Maybe you're just somebody who reads all the reporting and you actually know you can't prove it. But you know this is going on. But that's the thing in a democracy, the distance between speculation. In fact, the distance between what you know and what you can prove to everybody else in the country is everything in our model of government, because what you know doesn't matter.

What matters is what we all know. And the only way we can all know it is if somebody can prove it. If you can prove it And if you don't have the evidence, you can't prove it. And, of course, when we talk about the earlier stuff, right like this Ah, amore corporatized media. They've got 1000 incentives not to get involved in this stuff. They need access to the White House. They need these officials to sit down with them on and give interviews, right? That's constant content that they need. That's access that they need. They need to be taken seriously.

They need to be a, you know, admitted to briefers. It is a co dependent relationship. And yet, uh, rather, and so the on leeway to make sure people understand this broadly is if we all work together, right? If we collectively can establish a corpus of evidence, right, a body of facts that is so large and so persuasive, it overcomes the natural and understandable resistance of the these more corporatized media groups. It overcomes the political and partisan sort of loyalties that all of these political factions in the country do. Where they go, you know,

it's it's my president. Even if I don't like this stuff. Even if I don't agree with this stuff, I don't want to say it exists. I want to deny it until it's proved, you know, in HD on video, you know, signing the order to do this, that or the other because otherwise there's a chance my guy might not get re elected, and that's the only way this kind of stuff can happen. And the sad fact is the opportunities that we have to prove this, like the moments in history where we do prove something, anything beyond a reasonable doubt are so few on and so rare that they almost always on Lee come from whistle blows on. And I think that's, uh, one of the problems that we have, particularly the climate movement Did t Look, go

ahead. I'm sorry. Did you take any comfort from knowing that Obama when he was running for office and in his hope and Change website, he had provisions to protect whistleblowers and provision Teoh to reward people, right? I mean, do you remember all that mean it was eventually redacted? Eventually deleted it from the website, disappeared it from? Yes, but that was a big part of his program. What he was running on was that when people were exposing unlawful activity, he was gonna protect those people. Did that? Did you take any confidence?

Campaigned well, but Obama, also during his campaign, said he campaigned actively against the warrantless wiretapping the Bush administration because remember bushes in the scandal. In the height of this in 2007. You know the elections coming up right after and he's going Obama saying, Ah, you know, that's not who we are. That is not what we do. And yet, within 100 days of him becoming president now he's sitting in that chair. Rather than extinguishing these programs, he embraces them and expand.

Why do you think that,

Warren Trench? I think it's actually again what we talked about earlier. First thing. Every time a new president comes into the White House, they get their clearance. Since right, they get read into all this stuff during the campaign, they get clearance, isn't get rid in on stuff. But when they find that come, president right now, they're the only people who consign what these air called the covert action findings and things like that, which are basically, you know, the intelligence community wants to assassinate somebody. They want to run this illegal program here, there or everywhere on day.

Can't do it because their executive agencies, without that top level executive sign off find, said they gotta open the vest, right? They've got to get these guys on side. Um, and basically every president, uh, since Kennedy, they have been successful in what they call fearing up where as soon as they come in, they lead. You read you the litany of horribles and they go, These are all the threats that we're facing and let's be really it is a dangerous world. It's not just all made up bs. Some of it is right where it's inflated. It's not that it's completely false,

but they make it sound more serious than it actually is. But there are real bad people out there who are trying to do really bad things. And you have just gone through a hellish election because our our electoral politics or so diseased, Um, and now, after you've crawled through fire, you're already thinking four years ahead. You know how. How do I stay in this seat? And these guys are basically saying, If you don't do X, Y and Z, this is gonna fall on your lap And the implication which I and I don't think they actually say what every president knows is these guys can undermine you to death. If you've got the icy against you, right, they can stonewall you.

They can put out stories that are gonna be problematic for you everyday, your presidency and it's It's not that it's necessarily gonna gonna catch you out of the White House. But it's a problem that is, president. You very much don't want eso In the most charitable interpretation of this. You've got a new guy coming in Obama's case, this is a pretty young guy. Doesn't focus in this kind of national security foreign policy stuff there at his earlier career, he's more interested in domestic policy and always has been. That's actually one of the positive things to say about Barack Obama. Um, he's just trying to make things better home. And now suddenly they go. Look, you need to worry about this country. We need to worry about this group that you've never heard of you need to worry about.

You know this technology, you do all this stuff and the Onley reason we can tell you this stuff and the Onley things dividing America and the abyss are these terrible, terrible, terrible, terrible programs right that are, in fact, wonderful things because they keep back the darkness. And so here's here's the real problem. Every president here is that every president, first off, they've got so many other things to do is they just kind of nod their head and they go, I'll deal with this later in my administration. And this is one of the ironies when I come came forward in 2013. This is now Barack Obama, second term president. Uh,

one of the responses that they had to the mass surveillance scandal was yes, we think they went a little too far. This is after the initial thing where they went. Nobody's listening to your phone calls, you know, data, right? Nobody. Nobody can have. Ah, perfect privacy. And also have perfect security. So we got ah, sort of divide a line here between the Constitution, and you know what the government wants to do. But they said,

uh, we were gonna get to it. We knew these programs were problematic, but if they just gave us more time, we would have fixed them. Maybe it's true, right? So seems awful convenient in hindsight that throughout the entirety the first

time Well, it seems like what you would say if you got caught. Right?

Right, right. Right. Um but look in if we're being the most generous that we are here, the president is briefed on riel and legitimate threats, and they scared the hell out of him. I'm sure, um and we can We can all imagine being there, right? Those those of us who remember what the world was like post 9 11 Fear is a powerful thing. But the guys who are doing that briefing, they're no longer scared of it because they've been dealing with this for years is the oldest thing they've given this briefing times before. You know, when we talk about people talk about the deep state, right? They talk about it like some conspiracy of lizard people. It's not that it's something much simpler.

The deep State is simply the career government. It's the people who are in the same offices who outlive and outlast presidencies, Right? They've seen Republicans. They've seen Democrats. They don't really care. Uh, and they give that same briefing again and again, and they get good at it. They know what they want. They know what this person saying. Where is the president? And so they don't know who these people are. Uh, these people have been there before. The president,

they're gonna be there after the president and so they give this very effective, very fear inducing speech. And then they followed up with their asks, which are really demands. Um, just politely provided. And anyone in that position who is not an expert on this stuff who is not ready for this, Uh uh, sort of trade off and who you have to understand is a career politician is entirely used to the horse trading game. Right? And go on. I'll deal with this later or not now or what are the this? The cost benefit here and the intelligence community goes, If you give us what we want, no one will ever know about it because it's classified. It's obviously the easy answer on.

Maybe Barack Obama honestly did want to get to this later. But what we can say today is, uh uh, for all the good that may have been done in that White House. This is an issue where the president went for two full terms and did not fix the problem but in fact made it worse.

Well, it seems like the president has a job that's absolutely impossible. And if you come across someone who has been in the position like you know, someone who is the head of an intelligence agency for a long time and is very persuasive and has some legitimate credentials that show that is very good at his job. But he tells you this is important for national security. We need to keep these things in place. It doesn't seem like any one person can run the country and be aware of every single program that every single agency is implemented. It seems completely unrealistic. And the job itself, it just it doesn't seem like any person can do it adequately. And when it comes to something like this mass surveillance state, I could see a president being persuaded by someone who comes to him and says, This is why we need to do this.

Yeah. I mean, one of the things that I think is, uh the underlying problem in everything that you just described as the president has too much power, right? Um, and because they have too much power, that means they have too much responsibility. And I don't think people understand if they haven't lived outside the United States, that they haven't sort of traveled or studied broadly. Just how exceptional the American presidency is most countries don't have a single individual with this level of power. Um, it's really only the super states, Andi. That may be, uh, by design.

Perhaps that's why there they're super states. But when we look at, uh, sort of complex, advanced democracies that are more peaceful, they tend to have a more multilateral system that has more people involved in smaller portfolios. And a lot of this derives from just the size of the government. Like you said, you know, the president is responsible for basically everything Executive branch, and the executive branch is basically every agency that actually doesn't work. Um, and so how do you How do you correct for that without breaking it up, where you have smaller ministers and ministries and things like that that have different levels of responsibility having a smaller government overall? You know, back in 17 76 the federal government,

you know, it was pretty much a dream. We weren't even interested in having standing armies. The idea of an army that existed from year to year was terrifying, forbidding thing. Um, and then when you moved to this idea that we have a president that they have these extraordinary powers. It's okay, because the government very small. The federal government, especially, is seen as sort of this small in toothless and weak thing.

He paused for one second Spain, pause for one because my airpods are about to die, and I'm gonna swap over to another pair. These stocks shares a good for a couple hours, but we're two hours and 15 minutes here. Well, we'll have a little bit of a weird audio issue with the last half of it, but Jamie Jamie will take care of it. I wanted to talk about you like where you are right now in your life and how you're handling this Because you've been in exile for how many years now?

It's been more than six years. 66 June of 2013. Yeah. I mean, well, actually, I I left May.

So what is life like? I mean, are you in constant hiding? I mean, what are the issues like in

in the beginning? Um, my operational security level, Aziz, we would call it was was very high. I was concerned about being recognized, was concerned about being followed. I was concerned really about very bad things happening to me because the government made it very clear that from their position I was the most wanted man in the world. They literally brought down the president Bolivia his aircraft and would not let it depart eyes. It tried to cross the airspace of Europe, not even the United States. Uh, they wouldn't let it leave until they confirmed I was not on board. So, yeah, that that made me a little bit nervous. But you can't live like that forever.

And although I was careful as I could be, um, I I still lived, uh, pretty happily because I was an indoor cat to begin with, right? I've always been a technologist, have always been pretty nerdy. So as long as I have a screen and Internet connection, I was pretty happy. Um, but in the years past, my life has become more and more open. You know, now I speak openly. I live openly, I go out our ride, the metro, I go to restaurants. I go,

you know, for often the rex night.

So this is Ah, funny thing is, I'm almost never recognized one of those things. I don't give Russian interviews because I don't want my face all over the news. Um, which is nice because it just allows people toe sort of forget about my face. Um, and I can go about my life, but it's one of the weird things that I'm recognized a couple times a year. Even when I'm not wearing my glasses in a museum or a grocery store or something like that are out on the street just by somebody who I swear like these people are. You might have read a story about him like Super recognizes. The people just have a great memory for faces because I can be like a wearing a hood and like a jacket. It can have a scarf around my face like the winner, and it like you can barely see my face and they'll come up to me and they're like, Are you Snowden? And I'm like, Whoa,

that's what you see is pretty impressive. Let's say, Yeah, it's nice to meet you. And yeah, it's I've never had a negative interaction from being recognized, but for me, because I'm a privacy advocate like, I would much rather go unrecognized like I don't want to be a celebrity course. But the other thing is I'll get recognized in computer stores. And I think there's just like a mental association where people are like the brain when it's cycling through faces that recognizes it's going through, like the subset of nerdier people or something like that when you have a computer store. Because for whatever reason, I'm recognized much more frequently when there's some kind of technological, like locus.

So you're living freely. Did you had to learn Russian? Did you learn it?

Yeah. I mean, my my my Russian is still pretty crappy. Took to my great shame, because all of my life, all of my work, is primarily an angry right. Right

now you've talked about returning home. If you could get a fair trial, Is that a feasible thing, A fair trial for someone like you? Is that such a well, is that? Is that even

a good question? I mean, look, if we're being frank, I think all of your audience knows the chance of me getting a fair shake in the Eastern District of Virginia, a couple miles from the headquarters of the C. I. A. Is probably pretty slim because that's where they draw the jury pool from right. Um, but, uh, my objection here is on a larger principle. What happens to me is less important, right? If I spend the rest of my life in jail, that's less important than what I'm actually requiring the government to agree to,

which is a single thing, right? They say, Face the music, face the music. And I'm saying, Great, let's pick the song. Um, the thing is the law that I've been charged under the one that all these whistleblowers have been charged under Thomas Drake, Daniel Ellsberg, Chelsea Manning. Daniel Hale, the drone whistleblower who is in prison right now, going through a trial that is precisely similar to what I would be facing. Uh,

his lawyer, uh, is asking the court or telling the court that we want to tell the jury why he did what he did. That the government is violent. Laws of government is violating human rights that these programs are immoral, that they're unethical. Um, this is what motivated this guy to do it, and the jury should be able to hear why he did what he did. And the jury should be able to decide whether that was right or wrong. And the government has responded, you know, to this whistleblower argument basically saying We demand the court forbid this guy from breathing the word whistleblower in court. He cannot talk about what motivated him. He cannot talk about what was revealed, why it was revealed,

what the impacts and effects were. And he can't talk about whether the public benefited from it or was harmed by it. Because it doesn't matter now, despite surprised a lot of people because to a lot of us, we think that's what a jury trial is. We think that's what a fair trial is. But the espionage act that the government uses against whistleblowers, meaning broadly here the sources of journalism, um, is fairly unique in legal system in that it is what's called a strict liability crime, a strict liability. Crime is what the government considers to be basically a crime worse than murder. Because if you if you murdered somebody like if you just don't beat Jamie with the microphone stand right now, um,

you

would be able to go to the court and say it was self defense, right? You you felt threatened. You were in danger for your life. Even if you weren't even you obviously weren't. Even if you are on tape, you could still argue that. And the jury could go you full of crap, right? And they could convict you. But if you were, in fact acting in self defense, if the jury did, in fact believe you, they could take that into consideration in establishing the verdict, right? Strict liability crimes forbid.

Then the jury is not allowed, uh, to consider why you committed a crime they only allowed to consider. If you committed a crime, they're not allowed to consider if the murder was justified. There are only allowed to consider if the murder took place. And the funny thing in this case is that the murder that we're talking about is telling the truth. The Espionage Act in every case, is a law the government exclusively uses against people who told the truth right like that. That's what it's about in the context of journalism. They don't bring the espionage act against people who lied. Then they would use fraud or some other statute. They say the government is arguing in the context of whistleblowing that telling a telling a important truth to the American people by way of a journalist is a crime worse than murder? And I believe, and I think most Americans would agree this is fundamentally in defensively wrong. And so my whole argument with the United States government since the very beginning was bent.

I'll be back for jury trial tomorrow. But you have to agree to permit, uh, whistleblowers a public interest defense. It doesn't matter whether they are a whistleblower, not it's just, they argued. It's the jury that decides whether they are a whistle blower or not. They have to be able to consider the motivations of why someone did what they did. The government says we refuse to allow that because that puts the government on trial and we don't trust the jury to consider those questions.

Wow, So you have had these conversations then? So this has

been discussed? No, this is This is from the Obama administration. There's been no contact since since the Trump administration because the government, basically when they got to this point, they went We have no good argument against this on. We will never permit this to happen, and again, I just want to make clear this is not speculation. This is not be thinking. This is actively happening. In the case of Daniel Hale right now, I hope you guys can pull up. Ah, graphic for because this story just the papers, like, two or three weeks ago. I'm saying the government is forbidding this guy from from making this argument.

So your situate years, you're seemingly in a state of limbo. Then your they're not actively pursuing you. It seems if you're able to move around freely, they haven't discovered where you are. You're just free to live your life. You?

Well, yeah. It's one of these things where you know, whether they know where I am, whether they don't know where I am. Where I put my head on the pillow doesn't matter so much. I'm in Russia, right? And then we should lean into that because I think people they hear Russia, particularly the context of today's news. And you see, like what people are saying about Tulsi Gabbard and things like that. Uh, any kind of association, any any time. Your name appears in the same sentence in paragraph. Same story is the word Russia.

It's considered a negative thing now, um, and don't get me wrong. I've been a long time critic of the Russian government. I just actually had a major story written about me in Russian state news outlet called Rian Novosti. You guys could could probably pull it. It's only in Russian, though. Um, and that's saying because I spoke favorably about a member of the Russian opposition Alexey Navalny, Um, which I wasn't even speaking positively about. This guy was saying, Look, I think people have a right, uh,

to express their opposition in a country, and they should be able to do that without fearing retaliation the future. Because the background here is this This opposition figure has been a long time thorn in the Russian administration side, and they've just suddenly magically been accused of being foreign agents or something like that on DSO. Everyone connected to this, which is like a big civil society body, had their doors like simultaneously kicked in across the country, and they're being investigated for some kind of corruption or something, and it doesn't even matter. Um, and you know, I said I opposed that, just like I was tweeting. You know, footage of ballot stuffing in the Russian elections. Just like I've criticized the Russian president.

My name. I've criticized Russian surveillance laws s so many things again and again and again and again and again. But yes. Oh, look it. It does not make my life easier to be trapped in a country that I did not choose. People don't remember this. I was actually on route to Latin America when the U. S government cancelled my passport, which trapped me in Russia and for those were interested again. I wrote an entire book that has a lot of detail on this. Um, but ah, yeah, it's difficult to be basically engaged in civil opposition to policies of the United States government at the same time is the Russian government Um and it za hard thing. You know,

it's not a happy thing, but I feel like it's a necessary thing. The problem is, nobody wants to talk about that. Nobody wants to engage in that kind of nuance. Nobody wants to consider it those kind of conversations in the current world, people believe, and this section where the worst things that Western media does in the context of discussing Russia is they create this aura of invincibility around the Russian president. They go, you know, this guy's calling all the shots he's pulling on the strings. You know, this guy's in charge of the world. Um, and that's very useful for the Russian government. Broadly,

because they can then take that and replay there on their domestic media, and they're gonna go Look how strong we are. You know, the Americans are afraid of us. The Chinese are afraid of is that everybody is afraid of us. The French are afraid of us. Uh, we're strong, right? Um, there's no question that Russia is gonna be interfering in elections. There's no question America is gonna be interfering in Russian elections, right? Nobody. Nobody likes to talk about this. And again,

I need to substantiate that. Now that I've said that, I've got an old note that I've signed a 1,000,000,000 times. Um, the New York Times published a story in the wake of you know, this contest in 2016 election, where they looked into the history of electoral interference in Russia and the Soviet Union, and they found in ah, roughly 50 years, 36 different cases election interference by Russia or the Soviets, right is not a new thing. This is something that always happens, because that's what intelligence services do. That's what they think they're being paid for, which is a sad thing. But it's,

ah, it's a reality because we aren't wise enough to separate covert action from intelligence gathering. But in that same study that they found 36 different cases by the Russians in the Soviets, they found 81 different cases by the U. S. On this was published by a Scot chain in The New York Times and both of The Washington Post as well. But this is This is the thing like there's a way to criticize the Russian government's policies without criticizing the Russian people who are ordinary people who just want to have a happy life. They just want to do better. They want the same things that you do right, And every time people go all Russia, Russia, Russia, every time people go Russia bad every time they go, Russia's doing this, they go. Russia's doing that Russian people who have nothing to do with the government feel implicated by that,

like, do you feel like you're in charge? of Donald Trump. Like do you want to be? Have Donald Trump's legacy around your neck and then people go Oh, well, you know, you could overthrow Donald Trump. You know, you could overthrow Putin. Can you really like? Is that how it works? Eso Yeah. I mean, look, I have no affiliation. I have no love for the Russian government. It's not my choice to be here. And I've made it very clear I would be happy to return home.

Is there any concerns that they would deny you visa? I mean, how how are you staying there?

It's It's a good question. So I have permanent residents. People think I'm under asylum, but I'm no longer honor just like a green card. Now it's gonna be renewed every three years. Eso Yeah, sure, It's possible they could kick me out. And this was what the story I was telling you about before in Russian media was they were saying, you know, the Russian government should take some action against me. O r shouldn't be welcome here. I should go home because why is he criticizing the Russian government right when they hear the people?

Is that like the Russian winters. Blocks e have over that.

I don't know enough about Russian media to tell you. I think it's supposed to be more like a Reuters or Associated Press. But the hell if I know. Um, but the thing is this what's the alternative, right? Yes. The Russian government could screw me, but they could screw me even if I didn't say anything now. And so should I. Shut up and be quiet in the face of things that I think are injustices because it makes me safer. Well, a lot of pragmatic people say, Yeah, they say you've done enough. They saying you've done your part. You know,

they say whatever, be safe. Live long. Be happy. Um, but I didn't come forward to be safe. If I wanted to be safe, would still be sitting in Hawaii making a hell of a lot of money to spy on all of you. Right on. Nobody ever would have known about this. The system would have gotten worse. But the system, the world, the future gets worse every day that we don't do something about every day that we stay silent about all the injustices we see the world gets worse, things get worse. And,

yeah, it's risky. Yeah, it's uncomfortable, but that's why we do it, because if we don't, no one else will. All those years I was sitting hoping for someone else to come forward, and no one did right. That's because I was waiting for a hero. But there are no heroes, right? There's only heroic decisions. You are never further than one decision away from making a difference. It doesn't matter where there's a big difference. Doesn't matter if it was a small difference,

because you don't have to save the world by yourself. And in fact, you can't. All you have to do is lay down one brick. All you have to do is make things a little bit better in a small way so other people can lay their brick on top of that war beside and together, step by step, day by day, year by year, we build the foundation of something better, but yet it's not gonna be safe, but it doesn't matter, because individually it's not. You know me, whoever you are, that's the Iron Man. I don't care if you're the biggest doomsday prepper with cans,

full beans, If the world ends, it's gonna affect you. We make things better. We become safe together, right collectively. That is our strength. That is the power of civilization. That is the power that shapes the future. Because even if you make life great for you, you're gonna die. Someday you're gonna be for gotten someday. Your cans of beans are gonna rot. Someday you can make things safe. Her, uh you can be more careful,

right? You can be more clever, and there's nothing wrong with that. But at the end of the day, you have to recognize if you're trying to eliminate all risks from your life, what you're actually doing is eliminated all possibility from your life. You're trying to collapse the universe of outcomes such that what you've lost his freedom. You've lost the ability to act because you're afraid that's a That's what got us into this mess. That's

a beautiful way to put it. Um, are you aware at all of the current state of surveillance And what, if anything, has changed since your revelations?

Yeah. I mean, the big thing that's changed since I was in 2013 is now. It's mobile. First, everything um, mobile was still Ah, big deal. Right. Um, and the intelligence community was very much grappling t get its hands around it and to deal with it. But now people are much less likely to use laptop than use a desktop than than you, you know, got any kind of wired phone. Then they already use a smartphone on both apple and Android devices. Unfortunately, uh huh.

Are not especially good in protecting your privacy. Think Right now, um, you got a smartphone, right? You might be listening to this on a train somewhere in traffic right now. Were you job right now? You got a phone somewhere in the room, right? Uh, the phone is turned off for at least the screen has turned off. It's sitting there. It is powered on. And if somebody sends you a message, the screen burl blinks to life. How does that happen?

But how is it that if someone from any corner of the earth dials a number your phone rings and nobody else's rings? How is that? You can dial anybody else's number and only their phone rings, right? Uh, every smartphone, every phone at all is constantly connected to the nearest cellular tower Every phone, even when the screen is off, You think it's doing nothing. You can't see it because radio frequency emissions are invisible. Um, it's screaming in the air saying Here I am here on him. Here is my I m e I I think it's individual manufacturers equipment identity on I m e I individual manufacturers subscriber identity. I could be wrong on the break out there, but the acronyms three i m e i in the I s I and you can search the for these things there, too.

Globally unique identifiers that Onley exist anywhere in the world in one place, right, It's makes your phone different than all the other phones. Uh, the I m e I is burned into the hands of your phone. No matter what sim card you change to, it's always gonna be the same. And it's always gonna be telling the phone network it's this physical handset. The I M. E. S. I is in your SIM card, right? And this is what holds your phone number, right? It's that basically the key the right to use that phone number.

And so your phone is sitting there doing nothing you think, but it's constantly shouting and saying, I'm here who is closest to me. That's a cell phone tower and every cell phone tower with its big years eyes listening for these little cries for help on going. All right, I see Joe Rogan's phone. I see Jamey's phone. I see all these phones. They're here right now and it compares notes with the other network towers and your smartphone compares notes with them to go. Who do I hear? The loudest and who you hear the loudest is a proxy for proximity for closeness. Distance right they go. Whoever I hear more loudly than anybody else that's close to me. So you're gonna be bound to this cell phone tower, and that cell phone tower is gonna make a note. A permanent record,

Uh, saying this phone. This phone handset with this phone number at this time was connected to me, right? And based on your phone handset and your phone number, they can get your identity right, because you pay for this stuff with your credit card and everything like that on. Even if you don't, it's still active at your house overnight. It's still active, you know, on your night stand when you're sleeping, it's still whatever. Uh, the movements of your phone are the movements of you as a person, and those are often quite uniquely identifying.

It goes to your home. It goes to your workplace. Other people don't have it. Sorry, Um, and anyway, it's constantly shouting this out, and then it compares notes with the other parts of the network, and when somebody is trying to get to a phone, it compares. Notes of the network compares notes to go. Where is this phone With this phone number in the world right now? And to that cell phone tower that is closest to that phone, It sends out a signal saying We have a call for you. Make your phones start ringing so your owner can answer it, and then it connects it across this whole path.

But what this means is that whenever you carrying a phone whenever the phone is turned on, there is a record of your presence at that place that is being made and created by companies. It does not need to be kept forever, and it's fact there's no good argument. Four to be kept forever. But these companies see that is valuable information, right? This is the whole big data problem that we're running into in all this information that used to be ephemeral, right. Where were you when you were eight years old? You know, somewhere, Where'd you go after you had a bad break up, you know, who did you spend the night with? Who'd you call?

After all this information used to be ephemeral. Meaning it disappeared, Right? Like like the morning dew. It would be gone. No one would remember it. But now these things are stored. Now these things are saved. It doesn't matter what your doing. Anything wrong? It doesn't matter where. Your most ordinary person on earth. Because that's how bulk collection, which is the government's euphemism for mass surveillance works. They simply collected all in advance in hopes that one day it will become useful and that I was just talking about how you connected phone network. That's not talking about all those APS on your phone.

That air contacting the network even more frequently. Right. Uh, how do you get a text message? Notification. How do you get an email? Notification? How is it the Facebook knows where you're at. You know all of these things. These analytics, uh, they are trying to keep track through location services on your phone GPS through even just what wireless access points you're connected to. Because there's a global, constantly updated map. There's actually many of them of wireless access points in the world because just like we talked about, every phone has a unique identifier that's globally unique.

Every wireless access point in the world, right? Your cable modem at home, Whether it's in your laptop, every device that has a radio modem has a globally unique identifier in it. Um, and this is standard term. You can look it up, and these things can be mapped when they're broadcasting in the air. Because again, like your phone says to the cell phone tower, I have this identify the cell phone tower, responds and says, I had this identify and anybody who's listening they can write these things down and all those Google Street view cars that go back and forth right there keeping notes on whose WiFi is active on this block, right? And then they build a new giant map.

So even if you have GPS turned off right? As long as you connect the WiFi, those APS can go. Well, I'm connected to Joe's wife, I But I can also see his neighbor's WiFi here and the other one in this apartment over here and the other one department here. And you should Onley be able to hear those four globally unique WiFi access points from these points in physical space. Right? The intersection in between the spreads, the domes off all those ah wireless access points as a proxy for location, and it just goes on and on. What? We could talk about this for four more hours. We don't have that kind of time.

Can I ask you this? Is there a way to get any of this? Personally, I mean, is me Shutting your phone off doesn't work, right.

Well, so it it does. In a way, it's yes and no. The thing was, shutting your phone off that is a risk is how do you know your phones actually turned off? Used to be, uh, when I was in Geneva, for example, working for the CIA, um, we would all carry, like, drug dealing phones. You know, the old smartphones are sorry.

Old dumb phones, they're not smartphones. And the reason why I was just because they had removed over out of backs where you could take the battery out right, and the one beautiful thing about technology is if there's no electricity in it, right, if their fears no go juice available to it if there's no battery connected to it, it's not sending anything because you have to get power from somewhere. You have to have power in order to do work. But now you're phone is all sealed, right? You can take the batteries out so there are potential ways that you can hack a phone where it appears to be off, but it's not actually off. It's just pretending to be off, whereas in fact it's still listening in and doing all this stuff. But for the average person that doesn't apply, right?

And I got to tell you guys they've been chasing me all over the place. I don't worry about that stuff, right? Um, it's because of their applying that level of effort to me. Dale probably get the same information through other routes. I am as careful as I can, and I use things like fair to cages. I turn devices off. But if they're actually, uh, manipulating the way devices display, it's just too great a level of effort, even for someone like me to keep that up on a constant basis. Also, if they get me,

I only trust phones so much so there's only so much they can derive from the compromise. And this is how operational security works. Um, do you think about what are the realistic threats that you're facing that you're trying to mitigate? And with the mitigation that you're trying to do is what would be the loss will be the damage done to you If this stuff was exploited much more realistic than worrying about these things that I called voodoo hacks right, which are, like, next level stuff and actually just Ah shaddup for those of your readers who are interested in this stuff, I wrote a paper on this specific problem. How do you know when a phone is actually off? How do you know what it's actually not spying on you with a brilliant, brilliant guy named Andrew Bunny Huang? He's an m I t ph. D. And I think electrical engineering. Um,

uh, called the introspection engine that was published in the Journal of Open Engineering. You can find it online. Um, and it'll go is deep down in the weeds, I promise you, if you want, we take an iPhone six. Thats was back when I was fairly new on we modified it so we could actually not trust the device to report its own state, but physically monitor its state to see respondent. But for average people, write this academic. That's not your primary threat. Your primary threats are these bulk collection programs. Your primary threat is the fact that your phone is constantly squawking to these cell phone towers. It's doing all of these things because we leave our phones in a state that is constantly on.

You're constantly connected, right airplane mode doesn't even turn off. WiFi really anymore just turns off the cellular modem. But the whole idea is we need to identify the problem and the central problem with smartphone use today. Did you have no idea what the hell it's doing at any given time, like the phone has a screen off, you don't know what it's connected to. You don't know how frequently is doing it. Apple on IOS, unfortunately, makes it impossible to see what kind of network connections are constantly made on the device and two intermediate them going. I don't want Facebook to be able to talk right now. You know, I want Google to be able to talk right now. I just want my secure messenger app to be able to talk. I just want my weather app to be able to talk.

But I just checked my weather and now I'm done with it. So I don't want that to be able to talk anymore. And we need to be able to make thes intelligent decisions on not just a nap by at basis, but a connection by connection basis. Right you want, Let's say you use Facebook because, you know, for whatever judgment we have, a lot of people might do it. You want it to be able to connect to Facebook's content servers. You want to be able to message a friend you want to be able to download Ah, photograph or whatever, but you don't want to be able to talk to an ad server. You don't want to talk to an analytic server that its modern in your behavior right? You don't want to talk to all these third party things because Facebook crams their garbage and almost every app that you download, and you don't even know what's happening because you can't see right.

And this is the problem with the data collection used today is there is an industry that is built on keeping this invisible, and what we need to do is we need to make the activities off our devices, whether it's a phone, whether it's computer, whatever mawr visible and understandable to the average person, and then give them control over it. So, like if you could see your phone right now and at the very center of is a little green icon, that's your, you know, handset or it's a picture, your face, whatever and you see all these little spokes coming off of it. That's every app that your phone is talking to right now, or every app that is active on your phone right now, and all the hosts that it's connecting to and you can see right now wants every three seconds.

Your phone is checking into Facebook, and you could just poke that app and the boom. It's not talking to Facebook anymore. Facebook's not allowed Facebook speaking privileges have been revoked. Right? You would do that. We would all do that. If there was a button on your phone that said, Do what I want but not spy on me You would press that button right? That one is not does not exist right now. And both Google and Apple unfortunately, apples a lot better at this in Google, Uh, but neither of them allow that button to exist. In fact, they actively interfere with it because they say it's a security risk and from a particular perspective,

they they actually aren't wrong there. But it's not enough to go. You know, we have to lock that capability off from people because we don't trust that would make the right decisions. We think it's too complicated for people to do this. We think there's too many connections being made well, that is actually a confession off the problem right there if you think people can't understand it, if you think there are too many communications happening, if you think there's too much complexity in there, it needs to be simplified, just like the president can't control everything like that. If you have to be the president of the phone and the phone is this complex is the United States government. We have a problem, guys, this should be much more. Some process.

It should be obvious and the fact that it's not and the fact that we read story after story zero after years saying all your date has been breached here. This company is spying on you here. This company's manipulating purchases or your search results over there hiding these things from your timeline not were there influencing you are manipulating in all of these different ways. That happens as a result off a single problem. And that problem is inequality. Off available information. They can see everything about you. They can see everything about what your device is doing, and they could do whatever they want with your device. You, on the other hand, owns the device, but rather you paid for the device. But increasingly these corporations on it. Increasingly, these governments own it.

And increasingly, we're living in a world where we do all the work right. We pay all the taxes, we pay all the costs, But we own less and less, and nobody understands this better than the youngest

generation. Well, it seems like our data became a commodity before we understood what it waas. It became this thing that's insanely valuable to Google and Facebook and all these social media platforms. Before we understood what we were giving up, they were making billions of dollars. And then once that money as being earned. And once everyone's accustomed to this situation, it's very difficult to pull the reins back. It's very difficult to turn that course around

precisely because the money then becomes part right, right? The information that becomes influence.

That also seems to be the same sort of situation that would happen with these mass surveillance states. Once they have the access, it's going to be incredibly difficult for them to relinquish that.

All right, you know, you're you're exactly correct. And this is the subject of the book. I mean, this this is the permanent record, and this is where it came from. This is how it came to exist. Um, the story of our lifetimes is how intentionally by design a number of institutions, both governmental and corporate, I realized it was in their mutual interest to conceal their data collection activities to increase the breadth and depth of their sensor networks that were sort of spread out through society. Rumor Back in the day intelligence collection in the United States even its Cygan used to me sending an FBI agent right to put alligator clips on an embassy building were sending in. Ah, somebody disguised as a workman and they put a bug in a building or they built the satellite listening site. Right? We call these foreign set were foreign satellite collection,

but where on the desert somewhere they built a big parabolic collector, and it's just listening to satellite emissions, right? But the's satellite emissions these satellite links were owned by militaries. They were exclusive to governments, right? It wasn't affecting everybody broadly. All surveillance was targeted because it had to be. What changed with technology is that surveillance could now become indiscriminate. It could become a dragnet. It could become bulk collection, which should become one of the dirtiest phrases and language if we have any kind of decency. But we were intentionally, um this was intentionally concealed from us, right? The government did it.

They used classification companies did it. They intentionally didn't talk about it. They denied thes things were going. They said you agreed to this and you didn't agree to nothing like this. I'm sorry, right? They go. We put that terms of service page up and you click that you clicked a button that said, I agree because you were trying to open an account so you could talk to your friends. You were trying to get driving directions. You were trying to get an email account. You weren't trying to agree to some 600 page legal form. Even if you read, you wouldn't understand. And it doesn't matter even if you did understand, because one of the very first paragraphs and it said this agreement could be changed at any time unilaterally,

without your consent by the company, right? They have built a legal paradigm that presumes records collected about us do not belong to us. This is sort of one of the core principles on which mass surveillance from the government's perspective in the United States is legal. And you have to understand that all the stuff we talked about today government says everything they do is legal, right, and they go, So it's fine. Our perspectives of public should be. Well, that's actually the problem, because this isn't okay. The scandal isn't how they're breaking the law. The scandals that they don't have to break the law and the way they say they're not breaking the law is something called the third Party doctrine. Third party doctrine is a legal principle and derived from a case. And I believe the 19 seventies called Smith vs Maryland.

Um, and Smith was this knucklehead who was harassing this lady, making phone calls to her house on when she would pick up. He just I don't know that there heavy breathing whatever. Like classic creeper. Um, and, you know, it was terrifying, this poor lady. So she called the cops on, says one day I got one of these phone calls and I see this car creeping past my house on the street and she got a license plate number. So she goes the cops and she goes, Is this the guy and the cops again? They're trying to do a good thing here. They look up his license plate number on,

they find out where this guy is, and then they go. What? Phone numbers registered to that house and they go to the phone company. And they said, Can you give us this record? The phone company says, Yeah, sure. And it's the guy the cops got there, man. Right. So they go arrest this guy and then in court, His lawyer brings all this stuff up and they go. You did this without a warrant. That sorry.

That was That was the problem was they went to the phone company that got the records without a warrant. They just asked for They subpoenaed it, right? Some lower standard of legal review. And the company gave it to him and they got the guy. They march more jail. Uh, and they could have gotten a warrant, right? But it was just expedience. They just didn't want to take the time. Small town cops. You can understand how it happens. They know the guy's the creep. Really Just want to get him off to jail. Um,

and so they made a mistake, but the government doesn't want to let go. They fight on this and they go, uh, it wasn't actually, they weren't his records. And so because they didn't belong to him. He didn't have 1/4 Amendment right to demand a warrant be issued for them. They were the company's records, and the company provided them voluntarily. And hence no warrant was required because you can give whatever you want without a warrant, as long as it's yours. Now, here's the problem. The government extrapolated, Ah,

principle in a single case of a single known suspected criminal who had they had real good reasons to spend a suspect was their guy, Um, and use that to go to a company and get records from them and establish a precedent that these records don't belong to the guy they belong to the company. And then they said, Well, if one person doesn't have 1/4 Amendment interest in records held by a company, no one does. And so the company then has absolute proprietary ownership of all of these records about all of our lives. Remember this speck in the 19 seventies? You know, the Internet hardly exists in these kind of context. Smartphones, you know, don't exist. Modern society, modern communications don't exist.

This is the very beginning of the technological era. Uh, and flash forward now for years Uh, and they are still relying on this president about this one, you know, perfect creeper to go. Nobody has a privacy, right for anything that's held by a company, and so long as they do that cos they're gonna be extraordinarily powerful on they're going to be extraordinary, abusive. And this is something that people don't get. They go. Oh, well, it's data collection, right?

They're exploiting data. This is data about human lives. It is state about people. These records are about you. It's not data that's being exploited. Uh, it's people that are being exploited. It's not, um, data that's being manipulated. It's you that's being manipulated. And these this is this is something that I think a lot of people are beginning to understand now. The problem is, the companies and governments are still pretending they don't understand or disagreeing with this. And this is fry my eggs me of something that one of my old friends, John Perry Barlow,

um, who served with me at the free of the Press Foundation on the President aboard uh, used to say to me, um, which is you can't awaken someone who's pretending to be asleep, he said. It's an old native American saying That's a

great expression. That's a good way. I think that's a good way to end this. Um, Ed, thank you very much for doing this. I really appreciate it. Please tell everybody the title of your book, and it's it's available right now.

Sure, yes, it is. It's on shelves everywhere. At least until the government find some other way to ban it. It is called, Ah, permanent record. Um, and I hope you will read.

I will read it. And I I think what you've done is incredibly brave. And I think you're a very important part of history. I think when all is said and done, what you did and what you exposed is gonna change the way we view. Mass surveillance changed the way we view government oversight and changed the way we view the distribution of information. I really think it's very, very important. And it was an honor to talk to you, man. Thank you.

It was my pleasure. Thank you so

much for him. Take care yourself, man. Stay safe. No, no, no, no, no, no, no. Don't stay. Since they say open space days free. Open to possibilities. Take care, Take care. Thank you,

everyone for tuning into the show and thank you to me undies. The all time greatest under where the world has ever known I'm wearing them right now are where Every fucking day and they are gonna hook you up. You get 15% off and free shipping and a 100% satisfaction guarantee. That's how strong their belief in their underwear is to get your 15% off your first pair free shipping and a 100% satisfaction guaranteed, go to me. Undies dot com slash Rogan That's me undies dot com slash Rogan. Thank you also to square space, the host of joe Rogan dot com and your place to go. If you need a website, it is a shit. It's so easy to make a beautiful, banging professional website and the let you try it for free, Go to squarespace dot com slash joe for a free trial. Then, when you are ready to launch, use the offer Code Joe to save 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain were also brought to you by the motherfuckin cash ab the cash out folks the number one app in finance in the APP store for a good goddamn reason.

I said, If you're religious, I say got down with the team. So don't worry about it. Download the cash up. Now get your cash card for free, visit the APP Store or the Google Play store now. And, of course, when you download cash up, enter the referral code. Joe Rogan All one word. You will receive $10 in the cash. Apple said $10 to Justin Rennes Fight for the for gotten charity And last but not least, we are brought to you by Woop All throughout Sober October I'll would be wearing this wearable device that combines with state of the art software to help me know what the fuck is going on my body while mouth they're getting after it. Get the woops dropped 3.0 for free when you join goto Wouk dot com and use the code sober October to get 15% off your order,

get a woop check out our team at dot com, go sober and watch what happens. Thank you, my friends. Thanks to an end much love to you all. Bye bye,