The Wyden Siren: Senator’s Cryptic CIA Letter Follows A Pattern That’s Never Been Wrong
from the it's-blaring dept
If you’ve been paying attention to surveillance and civil liberties issues over the past fifteen years, you’ve likely learned to recognize a particular pattern. Senator Ron Wyden will occasionally send a public letter that essentially says “hey, I can’t tell you what’s happening because it’s classified, but something really bad is going on and you should all be paying attention.”
A decade ago some dubbed this the Wyden Siren. And when the Wyden Siren goes off, history tells us we should listen. Because every single time he’s done this, he’s eventually been proven right.
On Tuesday, Wyden sent a remarkably short letter to CIA Director John Ratcliffe. The entire substantive content is this:
I write to alert you to a classified letter I sent you earlier today in which I express deep concerns about CIA activities.
That’s it. That’s the whole thing. “Deep concerns about CIA activities.” He can’t say what. He can’t say why. But he’s making damn sure there’s a public record that he raised the alarm.
And if he’s done that, it means something very, very, very bad is happening.
If you’re not familiar with the Wyden Siren, let me walk you through the pattern, because it’s been remarkably consistent.
Back in 2011, Wyden and Senator Mark Udall tried to warn the public that the federal government had secretly reinterpreted the PATRIOT Act to mean something entirely different from what the text actually said. They couldn’t reveal the details because they were classified, but Wyden made the situation clear:
We’re getting to a gap between what the public thinks the law says and what the American government secretly thinks the law says.
For a couple years, civil liberties advocates were left guessing what that secret interpretation might be. Then Ed Snowden came along and revealed the NSA’s bulk metadata collection program—the exact thing Wyden had been warning about. Apparently, one of the things that reportedly pushed Snowden to leak was watching then Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, lie to Wyden’s face in a hearing about whether the NSA was collecting data on millions of Americans. Wyden knew the answer. Clapper lied anyway. Snowden had the proof.
In 2015, Wyden was at it again, this time warning about a secret Justice Department legal opinion related to cybersecurity legislation:
I remain very concerned that a secret Justice Department opinion that is of clear relevance to this debate continues to be withheld from the public. This opinion, which interprets common commercial service agreements, is inconsistent with the public’s understanding of the law, and I believe it will be difficult for Congress to have a fully informed debate on cybersecurity legislation if it does not understand how these agreements have been interpreted by the Executive Branch.
In 2017, we wrote about the Wyden Siren going off again when Dan Coats, then Director of National Intelligence, gave an answer about Section 702 surveillance that Wyden pointed out was to a different question than the one he’d actually asked:
That was not my question. Please provide a public response to my question, as asked at the June 7, 2017, hearing.
The pattern repeats. Wyden asks a specific question about surveillance. The intelligence community answers a slightly different question in a way that technically isn’t lying but is designed to mislead. Wyden calls them out. Eventually, the truth comes out, and it’s always worse than people assumed.
It’s not just surveillance, either. Wyden has used this same approach to expose ICE illegally collecting millions of Americans’ financial records through bulk administrative subpoenas—a program that was hastily shut down the moment Wyden’s office started asking questions about it. He’s caught the government gathering push notification data from Apple and Google while forbidding those companies from telling anyone about it. He’s questioned domain seizures, the FBI’s power to look at your browsing history without a warrant, and countless other government activities that were happening in secret.
The track record here is essentially perfect. When Wyden sends a cryptic letter or asks a pointed question suggesting something concerning is happening behind the classification curtain, something concerning is absolutely happening behind the classification curtain.
So what’s happening at the CIA that has Wyden sending a two-sentence letter that amounts to “I legally cannot tell you what’s wrong, but something is very wrong”?
We don’t know yet. That’s the whole point of classification—it keeps the public in the dark about what their government is doing in their name. But Wyden’s letter is the equivalent of a fire alarm. He’s seen something. He can’t say what. But he wants there to be a record that he raised the concern.
Given the current administration’s approach to, well, everything, the possibilities are unfortunately vast. Is it about domestic surveillance? Something about current ODNI Tulsi Gabbard? International operations gone sideways? Some new interpretation of the CIA’s authorities that would make Americans’ hair stand on end if they knew about it? We’re left guessing, just like we were guessing about the PATRIOT Act’s secret interpretation back in 2011.
But here’s what we do know: Ron Wyden has been doing this for at least fifteen years. And every single time, he’s been vindicated. The secret programs were real. The abuses were real. The gap between what the public thought was happening and what was actually happening was real.
The Wyden Siren is blaring. Pay attention.
Filed Under: cia, john ratcliffe, ron wyden, wyden siren
Comments on “The Wyden Siren: Senator’s Cryptic CIA Letter Follows A Pattern That’s Never Been Wrong”
The Wyden siren is almost always about something domestic-facing where the public’s assumption about how the law works differs from the interpretation being used by the executive branch.
Since this was sent to the CIA, connecting the dots means that the CIA has reinterpreted the law to allow them to be operating domestically — which lines up pretty well with Tulsi Gabbard’s forays into domestic election interference investigations, as well as things like the CIA feeding their intel into the databases ICE is using for domestic surveillance. Those are the only two items that come to mind that check all the boxes for me, but as said, there’s obviously other possibilities with this administration.
Re: Oh!
The Agency that Figured out, that While they are NOT supposed to monitor US Citizens, Domestically(while IN the USA).
Those laws change when they are Outside the USA.
I think they figured that out in the 60’s, with teh USA protests, and they NEEDED some way to Monitor persons.
Re: Tulsi Gabbard is not head of the CIA
Tulsi Gabbard is Director of National Intelligence. CIA is only one of the agencies for which she has oversight. You conflated DNI with CIA. It’s also possible she uncovered something bad at the CIA that’s been going on a long time. Why do you assume it has anything to do with the 2020 election? It could be solid proof they were running Epstein. Reagan admin and Obama admin ran weapons. Bidden allowed huge numbers of people across the border. Maybe CIA brought people in under that. Wait and see.
Re: Re:
They speculated and then you speculated and then you criticized them as if they were drawing conclusions hastily despite their final sentence stating, “Those are the only two items that come to mind that check all the boxes for me, but as said, there’s obviously other possibilities with this administration.”
What I can guarantee is that whatever it is, the administration is minimizing damage to Trump or other Republicans and/or weaponizing something against perceived outgroups and enemies.
They’ve been pushing unitary executive puppet master theories in which Trump’s personal agenda is the federal government’s agenda and all power shall be brought to bare to appease his wrath and lash out on his behalf. So a run against the 2020 election which is one of the biggest glowing red vulnerable spots on his ego seems perfectly possible if we’re considering that the CIA might be operating domestically. The conspiracy theory that Maduro supposedly interfered seems like an angle a disingenuous administration lackey might decide it’s “foreign” since it involves Maduro to investigate internal election integrity in sovereign states with sole authority to administer those elections.
Think of a conspiracy as a hidden-from-view plot or scheme meant to advance particular interests while causing harm to others. A theory, then, is a rational explanation of the conspiracy that requires evidence and is subject to disproof. A conspiracy theory becomes fact when evidence comes to light that proves the theory; think COINTELPRO or the Panama Papers. A conspiracy fantasy, on the other hand, is what we commonly think of when we think of conspiracy theories and the people who believe in them: Flat Earthers, Holocaust deniers, and 2020 election “truthers”, to name a few.
The Wyden Siren is therefore a conspiracy theory. That he’s been vindicated every time he’s raised the alarm is the proof.
Re:
Conspiracy Theory as commonly used generally refers to a quasi-religious belief in some sort of Grand Conspiracy that absolutely everything ties into. It’s essentially a Theory of Everything for paste eaters.
Actual conspiracies are commonplace but also grubby, messy, and much narrower in scope than the movie plot stuff the nutters come up with.
Re: Conspiracy vs Theory
Wyden has information we don’t, and his past “sirens” have all been vindicated by evidence eventually. I think it’s a pretty good bet that something sketchy is going on. Sure, it’s possible that since the last time, he has lost the plot or decided to throw his credibility away, but without additional evidence of that it seems unlikely (and disliking a historically unpopular president is not evidence of anything except being normal). If someone were to come up with a very specific interpretation of what he is pointing at without additional evidence, you could call that a conspiracy theory, but the idea that Wyden is most likely pointing out serious misconduct in the CIA isn’t one.
Going to take a few guesses.
The cia is abducting us citizens.
The cia is actively working to undermine our allies.
The cia is targeting non maga politicians.
The CIA also stopped publishing the World Factbook yesterday, and re-routed all existing links to the same shutdown page (I learned of this because of Wikipedia using it as a reference).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_World_Factbook?useskin=vector
https://www.cia.gov/stories/story/spotlighting-the-world-factbook-as-we-bid-a-fond-farewell/
Re:
Facts inevitably work against this administration. For example, you could go to this mirror and view the PDF for the United States.
“Government Type: constitutional federal republic”
…well, as of September 2020 it was, but one could imagine the agency were about to re-classifiy it to something more ungood.
“Economic Overview: remains the most technologically powerful economy in the world […] but its advantages have narrowed since WWII, with output now falling behind China’s, as investment in infrastructure, science, industry, and human capital have lagged”—not very convenient to the preferred narriative.
Also see the blog post relating to the above mirror, with links to other archived versions. I hope the Internet Archive will override the Wayback Machine’s default settings to prevent the site owner (the CIA) from disappearing those copies, as they’d normally be able to do.
Re: Re:
Thank you for pointing this out, and pointing to the Archive.org sit and blog (which includes a github link with the last .zip version!) – what a huge loss for reference information. The World Factbook was a great source of transparent, public information about the world: kind of the opposite of everything else about the CIA.
On the bright side, this is a rare example of “did you get the email I sent you?” as a force for good
Looks more like Wyden is fearing his classified letter has gone directly to the shredder before being read by anyone. Cannot blame him.
Re: It's not fear
Why are you bringing up shredders. Did you read a single sentence in the article?
“Back in 2011, Wyden and Senator Mark Udall tried to warn the public that the federal government had secretly reinterpreted the PATRIOT Act to mean something entirely different from what the text actually said.”
Nazis have been in charge longer than most thought
Can’t he read it into the public record under the Speech and Debate clause?
Re:
No, it’s a felony to divulge classified information (unless you are the sitting President apparently), and the clause explicitly says it doesn’t apply to treason, felony or breach of peace. See US Constitution Article I, Section 6, Clause 1 and 18 US Code §793-798.
It could be argued that 18 US Code §1924 (b) would legally protect the suggested action, but there is no precedence and that means a protracted legal action that would put Wyden out of commission as senator for the foreseeable future. Of course, the current administration may decide to just make some shit up and stick him in jail for treason.
Re: Re:
The sitting President has unilateral authority to de-classify, so it’s not that surprising. The prohibition against publishing classified information has generally not been applied to the media—see the Pentagon Papers for example, although the Supreme Court were divided about that.
Wyden should seriously consider leaking or openly publishing this data despite the potential consequences. Maybe not do it, depending on future political (or retirement) plans and what the data actually shows. But, in general, the country is gonna need brave actions in the remainder of the Trump regime.
A legal option would be to propose a bill whose public text forbids exactly the bad stuff the Agency is doing, without actually saying whether they’re doing any of those things. You know, just a thought experiment, it seems like it would be bad if the country did any of these things, so let’s forbid them in the interest of legal clarify.
Re: Re:
How does that fit in with Gravel v. U.S. (1972)? Gravel read the Pentagon Papers (including classified information) into the Congressional record, and it was protected under S&D. His agreement with the Beacon Press was not protected, but the legislative part was, I believe under the latter part of the clause “and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.”
Thus, voting by Members and committee reports are protected; and we recognize today…that a Member’s conduct at legislative committee hearings, although subject to judicial review in various circumstances, as is legislation itself, may not be made the basis for a civil or criminal judgment against a Member because that conduct is within the “sphere of legitimate legislative activity.”
I don’t know the S&D clause very well, so I could be way off base here
Re: Re: Re:
I can’t fathom I forgot about the Pentagon Papers, but that’s is certainly a precedent.
The question then becomes, would Wyden really enjoy the same protections today? I doubt it.
Re: Re: Re:
That’s a good question. I see the result was 5-4, so that could go differently today. I also don’t see any mention of whether Gravel held a clearance, which might make a difference (it seems Wyden is being officially told certain things, due to having a clearance).
Does not apply to crimes like treason, felony, or breach of the peace.
Divulging classified info is a felony and possibly treason as well, depending.
Re:
Leaving classified info in your bathroom after you’ve left office however is perfectly legal!
Here is my guess
All of FBI and White House are remarkably evasive why Tulsi Gabbard would be present at court-ordered voting record seizures in Fulton Country, Georgia.
The votes in question have been counted and recounted over and over again. There is nothing to be found there, yet Trump is certain that now is the time he will finally win the 2020 election.
Why would the CIA be involved here? They did get a few voting machines for experimenting with them beforehand.
It seems fairly obvious that the CIA has been ordered to make sure that evidence for voting fraud is to be found on site, and they are the ones most qualified to plant evidence. They are the ones tasked with making sure that the 11,780 votes Trump has been yearning for will finally be “found”.