Senate Intel Committee Blocks Former Staffer From Talking To Press About Oversight Process

The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence has taken the unusual step of actively blocking a former committee aide from talking to TPM about congressional oversight of the intelligence community. At issue isn't classified sources and methods of intelligence gathering but general information about how the committee functions -- and how it should function. The committee's refusal to allow former general counsel Vicki Divoll to disclose unclassified information to a reporter was the first and only time it has sought to block her from making public comments, based on her experience as one of its most senior aides, since she left Capitol Hill in 2003.
...
The fact that the Committee is so sensitive about disclosing not only sensitive national security information, but also the nature by which elected officials are allowed to oversee the intelligence community, is a testament to the extreme levels of secrecy tied to the entire process. link

I think anyone who believes a secret government program that has the ability to record data, isn't, is pretty damn naive.

They tapped the big four because they believe terrorists are exchanging terrorist plot messages using family plans on Tmobile ?  Seems to me they would be more likely to be on some no-name carrier with an phone that doesn't require identifying oneself.  Why collect data on providers, who for the most part, cater to law abiding citizens that provide identification.

And lastly, if their original claim that the program has to be secretive to be effective is true, then it can no longer be effective and should be shut down.  More likely, they lied about, like they do with so much, claiming secrecy which allows them little oversight.  

The man who admitted leaking classified documents about U.S. surveillance programs purportedly went online live on Monday to declare the truth would come out even if he is jailed or killed, and said President Barack Obama did not fulfill his promises and expanded several "abusive" national security initiatives.

According to the Guardian newspaper, Edward Snowden answered questions in an online chat about why he revealed details of the National Security Agency's secret surveillance of U.S. citizens.

Snowden said he did so because Obama campaigned for the presidency on a platform of ending abuses. But instead, he said Obama "closed the door on investigating systemic violations of law, deepened and expanded several abusive programs, and refused to spend the political capital to end the kind of human rights violations like we see in Guantanamo, where men still sit without charge."

Snowden also wrote that he had to get out of the United States before the leaks were published by the Guardian and Washington Post to avoid being targeted by the government.

"Congress hasn't declared war on the countries," he wrote. "The majority of them are our allies, but without asking for public permission, N.S.A. is running network operations against them that affect millions of innocent people."

So apparently he believes that the United States shouldn't engage in spying except for countries with which it is at war. Of course, we're not at war with any countries right now, only with Al Qaeda and its allies, so that would mean shutting down all non-terror spying activities.

Also, consider this, from Rayne at emptywheel:

The truth is this:

•  Others before Snowden tried to go through so-called chain of command or proper channels to complain about the National Security Agency's domestic spying, or to refuse the NSA's efforts to co-opt them or their business. These efforts did not work.

•  They were obstructed, harassed, or punished for their efforts. It did not matter whether they were insiders or outsiders, whistleblowers or plaintiffs, the results were the same for:

•  William Binney,
  
•  Thomas Drake,
  
•  Mark Klein,
  
•  Thomas Tamm,
  
•  Russell Tice,
  
•  and J. Kirk Wiebe,
  
•  as well as Joseph Nacchio.

•  The effort to spy on Americans, violating their privacy and taking their communications content, has been underway since before the Bush administration. (Yes, you read that right: BEFORE the Bush administration.)

•  Three presidents have either failed to stop it or encouraged it (Yes, including Bill Clinton with regard to ECHELON).

•  The program has been growing in physical size for more than a decade.
  

If you have time, read the excerpt she provides from the Amended Complaint in the Groundbreaker lawsuit...and if you have more time, read the complaint itself.

Finally, I don't think someone who hates America says that this country is worth dying for, which Snowden says in the Q & A.