Former Attorney General Blasts NSA Leaks at Pepperdine Event

0
352
Former Attorney General Michael Mukasey addresses attendees at a Pepperdine School of Law symposium.

During an appearance in Malibu last week, former U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey heavily criticized National Security Agency (NSA) leaker Edward Snowden and the media for revealing information about a widespread surveillance program which he believes jeopardized U.S. intelligence-gathering practices. He also criticized President Barack Obama for failing to understand the potential consequences of drawing a “red line” against the Syrian government regarding the use of chemical weapons. 

Mukasey, who served as attorney general under Pres. George W. Bush from 2007-2009, made the comments during a keynote address and discussion at a Pepperdine School of Law symposium on Thursday. 

The criticism stemmed from security program leaks made in the last several months by former NSA employee Edward Snowden, who has disclosed details of the agency’s telephone monitoring system. Surveillance methods include ordering telephone companies to disclose customer databases in order for the NSA to track the length, source and destination of phone calls. Snowden has been granted asylum in Russia. 

Mukasey has been at the forefront in defense of the NSA’s practices, even writing a guest column in June for The Wall Street Journal entitled, “Leaking Secrets Empowers Terrorists.” 

“This is not the content of telephone calls [being monitored], it is the to, from, duration of calls that every telephone company has [provided],” Mukasey said Thursday. 

He said critics of the NSA were wrong to call for cuts to the program. 

“This pressure to defund various NSA programs could cost us tremendously,” he said. 

He also likened the NSA’s surveillance practices to a game of connect-the-dots. 

“If you don’t have the mechanism to collect dots to connect, you’re not going to be able to connect them.” 

Mukasey partially blamed a decline in newspaper popularity for pushing the media to publish news such as the Snowden leaks due to desperation, not newsworthiness. 

“Newspapers regrettably are a dying institution, and they feel … bound and determined to print whatever they can get their hands on,” he said. 

During his time as attorney general, Mukasey stressed that he did everything he could to quash leakers. 

“I wanted nothing more than to catch the people responsible and to have them punished. I think it’s a deplorable offense,” he said. 

However, many have defended outlets such as The New York Times and The Guardian for running the leaks. Peter Scheer, executive director of California’s First Amendment Coalition, called the leaks crucial news items. 

“I don’t think desperation has anything to do with it,” Scheer said in a telephone interview with The Malibu Times. “They’re running the stories because the documents Snowden has been leaking are extremely newsworthy. 

“Many traditional news organizations have downsized substantially, but that does not prevent the Washington Post or New York Times from running something like [the Snowden leak],” Scheer said.

The First Amendment Coalition is a non-profit organization that advocates for freedom of speech and government transparency. 

Thoughts on Syria 

The former attorney general did not offer his thoughts on whether the U.S. should intervene in Syria, but said if he were still in office he would offer the president stern advice. 

“Remember what comes out of your mouth is consequential,” he said. “It’s consequential beyond the day that you say it, and beyond the round of applause that attends it. When you do things like say there’s a red line, it’s awfully hard to unring that line.” 

Obama last year said Syria would be crossing a “red line” if it used chemical weapons. Last month, footage emerged from an alleged Aug. 21 chemical weapons attack by the Syrian government against its own people. 

Mukasey’s appearance was part of an all-day symposium at the Pepperdine School of Law, where academics, lawyers and business leaders gathered to discuss issues of transnational law, including whether the U.S. should recognize judgments handed down in foreign countries.