Atlantic Monthly Contributors's Blog, page 898

The Intelligence Community Does Not Like Being Thrown Under the Bus by Obama

As more and more allegations that the United States has been surveilling foreign officials come to light, President Obama has sought to distance himself and his administration from the activity by claiming they knew little or nothing of such activity. But such strong denials fly in the face of claims from other intelligence officials that Obama signed off such activity, and his supposed reluctance to admit as much is frustrating the intelligence community.

Per a new report from the Los Angeles Times, if a foreign leader was targeted by the NSA, both the respective U.S. ambassador and National Security Council staffer would be given regular reports on the matter. Obama might not have been given detailed specific on the matter but:

If U.S. spying on key foreign leaders was news to the White House, current and former officials said, then White House officials have not been reading their briefing books.

Some U.S. intelligence officials said they were being blamed by the White House for conducting surveillance that was authorized under the law and utilized at the White House.

"People are furious," said a senior intelligence official who would not be identified discussing classified information. "This is officially the White House cutting off the intelligence community."

Any decision to spy on friendly foreign leaders is made with input from the State Department, which considers the political risk, the official said. Any useful intelligence is then given to the president's counter-terrorism advisor, Lisa Monaco, among other White House officials.

While legislators like Senate Intelligence chair Dianne Feinstein have come out unequivocally against spying on foreign leaders—though she did claim that Obama was unaware—the other parties in question have given less definitive answers. Both the White House and National Security Council have promised to review their policies, which doesn't really mean a whole lot.

       

Snyder Will Meet with NFL Commissioner Goodell over Redskins Name

Washington Redskins owner Dan Snyder will reportedly meet with NFL commissioner Roger Goodell this week over the team's controversial name. Snyder, who has more or less
    

Bezos Wants More Woodward at the Washington Post

After a bittersweet reaction to the sale of the Washington Post to Amazon's Jeff Bezos, celebrity investigative reporter Bob Woodward is now spending a lot more time at the Posts's office. That, according to a Huffington Post report, is in large part due to Bezos's courtship efforts. "I think he’s really serious," Woodward told the Huffington Post of Bezos, adding, "I think those of us who have been around, like myself, and have clearly benefited from our association with the Post, we want to redouble, triple our efforts." 

Until recently, Woodward's contemporary involvement at the paper has been peripheral at best — he's officially an associate editor there. Woodward takes a symbolic salary of $25 a month while he continues to write book after book, racking up just a handful of bylines in the paper itself over the past few years, as the Huffington Post explains. Soon after the sale was finalized, however, Bezos and Woodward had a meal together. The journalist presented Bezos with a "14-point" plan on the future of the Post, which the two discussed. Apparently, the discussion went well. Woodward's symbolic salary will continue, but Woodward will be around a bit more: 

Since Amazon chief Jeff Bezos completed his purchase of the paper earlier this month, Woodward has met with reporters and editors and has temporarily set up shop near the Post’s investigative team on the fifth floor, according to staffers. On Thursday, Woodward co-wrote a front-page drone story based on “top-secret CIA documents and Pakistani diplomatic memos.”

That front-page story detailed secret agreements between U.S. and Pakistani intelligence services on the American drone program. The collaboration was previously reported by McClatchy, and more recently by the National Journal. The Huffington Post story implies that we'll be seeing more of Woodward's byline in the future. But Woodward's public presence has, of late, been mixed up with a bit of controversy, sometimes overshadowing the kind of astonishing 17 books he's written. The reporting icon, for instance, misrepresented the tone of some White House emails he got earlier this year in response to a debate on the sequester, in order to make a point about toughness. And his more noteworthy recent media statements have been along the lines answering questions about whether various government scandals are potential Watergates or not. 

But even part-time Pundit Bob Woodward is still Bob Woodward, and his presence in the newsroom could make sense for Bezos's overall approach to running the Post. Bezos would like to usher in a "golden age" at the paper, and he's said that his plan to do that will rely on the work of staffers, and not his own interventions: “If we figure out a new golden era at The Post . . . that will be due to the ingenuity and inventiveness and experimentation of the team at The Post,” he said, adding. “I’ll be there with advice from a distance. If we solve that problem, I won’t deserve credit for it.”

       

White House Announces Six-Week Extension on Obamacare Sign-Ups

As expected, the Obama administration officially granted a six-week extension for Americans to sign up for health insurance through the exchanges. Effectively, Americans can now sign up for health insurance up until the end of open enrollment on March 31st, without facing a penalty. Before the change, those seeking insurance needed to get in their applications by February 15th to avoid new tax penalties. The extension follows widespread problems with the Healthcare.gov website.

The one-time extension will apply to 2014 only, and is being framed by the administration as a resolution to an existing "disconnect," rather than as an extension. Others, as the AP noted, are calling for a longer delay of up to a year for the tax penalties in the wake of high-profile issues with the exchange sites and enrollment process. According to the Department of Health and Human Services, the six-week extension will function more like a grace period for Americans who don't enroll by February 15th. Practically speaking, anyone applying after that date won't get coverage until April 1st. But as written, the tax penalty goes into effect for all Americans not covered by March 31st, or the end of open enrollment. The AP explains: 

The administration "has determined that it would be unfair to require individuals in this situation to make a (penalty) payment," the Health and Human Services department said in guidance issued Monday evening. As a result, the department is creating a special one-time hardship exemption for people who get covered by March 31. And they won't have to file additional paperwork to apply for the exemption.

But a provocative NBC report out on Monday will surely attract more attention than the change of deadline. Based on interviews with health insurance experts, the report promotes a conjecture that the Obama administration must have known that a high percentage of Americans would have to buy new health insurance plans despite assurances otherwise years ago. Here's, in part, why: 

The law states that policies in effect as of March 23, 2010 will be “grandfathered,” meaning consumers can keep those policies even though they don’t meet requirements of the new health care law. But the Department of Health and Human Services then wrote regulations that narrowed that provision, by saying that if any part of a policy was significantly changed since that date -- the deductible, co-pay, or benefits, for example -- the policy would not be grandfathered.

The White House argues that many of the Americans receiving "cancellation" notices in the mail will be able to buy comparable, Obamacare-compliant plans on the exchanges, with increased costs offset by subsidies. As we explained in some depth earlier today, those subsidies are still a variable for a lot of Americans seeing higher premiums in their future, as Healthcare.gov site continues to put up road blocks for those who are trying to enroll. 

       

Apple Earnings Beat Estimates, and Wall Street Is Unhappy — as Usual

Apple’s earnings for the last quarter of its fiscal year are out, and the company has disappointed Wall Street once again by doing better than most analysts predicted.

MORE FROM QUARTZ How Ownership of Twitter Was Initially Divvied Up Believe It or Not, France May Be Losing its Appetite for Taxes How the US Is Boosting Natural Gas Production with Fewer Wells

The consensus estimate for Apple’s earnings was around $36.7 billion, and Apple earned $37.5 billion. But the company’s stock is down about 3.75% in after-hours trading.

Part of that reaction may have to do with Apple’s guidance for its current quarter. The company is forecasting gross margins of 36.5% to 37.5%, which would continue that metric’s steady fall. Apple’s overall profit in the fourth quarter, which it reported today, slipped to $7.5 billion, from $8.2 billion a year prior.

Apple’s revenues were helped by the sale of 33.8 million iPhones, beating expectations of about 31 million.

       

Stop Writing Epitaphs for the 'Religious Right'

"Today, after more than three decades of activism, many in the religious right are stepping back from the front lines," proclaimed a Wall Street Journal piece published last week, documenting an apparent "trend" of evangelical Christians stepping away from politics. The piece, framed as a profile of a "new" approach to activism by the Southern Baptist Convention's lead mouthpiece, Russell D. Moore, is just one of many pieces attempting to answer in the affirmative to a popular question: Is the religious right dying? As the current fight over Texas's controversial abortion laws indicates, the answer to that question is almost certainly no. But in the wake of Tea Party's plummeting post-shutdown approval ratings, it's certainly a tempting one, once again. 

Last Thursday, for instance, Buzzfeed framed an otherwise good piece about evangelical uneasiness towards Pope Francis around the hyperbolic idea of "How The Pope Could Tear Apart The Religious Right." Aside from that, it's really an interesting piece, and you should read it for a quick history lesson on the tenuous relationship between conservative American Catholics and the politically-engaged power players of the evangelical right. Andrew Sullivan also took up the eulogy for the right in "The Decline And Fall Of Christianism," which takes some encouragement from the Journal profile and the Pope's recent comments against a political focus on issues like abortion and homosexuality. His conclusion: 

We do not yet know what a more apolitical, Gospel-centered, life-centered Christianity will achieve, how popular it may be, or whether it will lead to higher levels of commitment to God than at present. But I suspect even Pope Benedict finally realized it is the only way forward – hence his resignation in the face of his papacy’s near-total failure. What matters now and always is truth, not usefulness, faith, not politics. The next generation gets this.

As we've urged before, it's always a good idea to pump the brakes on statements from religious conservatives on stepping away from politics, or issues like abortion and homosexuality. Because unless the speaker is specifically announcing a dogmatic shift, those statements are rarely what they seem to be, espeically to liberal ears. After all, even as Pope Francis tells Catholics to focus on poverty, and not politically popular social issues, he still affirms the church's unchanged conservative stance. And his statements don't represent an actual shift on the ground: American Catholic organizations are far from pulling out of the state-by-state fight on contraception, abortion, and homosexuality. Both religion journalist Sarah Posner and Washington Monthly's Ed Kilgore have sounded alarms of caution for liberals over recent reports of the Religious Right's demise. Posner, for instance, writes that even evangelicals like Moore, currently calling for a lighter political touch "still see these as cultural issues, and still see their essential role as engagement in the public square as witnesses for (their view of) Christ’s teachings."

Likewise, the SBC's Moore disputes the Journal's characterization of his remarks. His response in the Christian Post is extremely useful here. "If anything, I'm calling for more engagement in the worlds of politics, culture, art, labor and so on," Moore writes. "It's just that this is a different sort of engagement. It's not a matter of pullback, but of priority." Moore goes on to outline that he's looking for Christian social engagement to become more like current evangelical anti-abortion activism, which has attracted substantial youth involvement: 

What I'm calling for in our approach to political engagement is what we're already doing in one area: the pro-life movement. Evangelicals in the abortion debate have demonstrated convictional kindness in a holistic ethic of caring both for vulnerable unborn children and for the women who are damaged by abortion. The pro-life movement has engaged in a multi-pronged strategy that addresses, simultaneously, the need for laws to outlaw abortion, care for women in crisis pregnancies, adoption and foster care for children who need families, ministry to women (and men) who've been scarred by abortion, cultivating a culture that persuades others about why we ought to value human life, and the proclamation of the gospel to those whose consciences bear the guilt of abortion.

In other words, Moore is calling for Christians to circle back to a familiar concept: hate the sin, love the sinner. It's an idea heard more in evangelical church sermons than in heated political debates on controversial topics, and it's much more PR-friendly. Rather than asking Christians to dial down activism on social issues, Moore is asking adherents to take on a different tone, even while continuing to advocate for, say, the same controversial laws restricting women's access to abortion. This is the same attitude that pushed a wave of anti-abortion restrictions in the wake of the Kermit Gosnell trial: by relying on a Gospel-based approach, evangelical activists are hoping to set an example that the rest of America will take up. Moore, along with the rest of the religious right, is still hoping and pushing for a pretty literal "come to Jesus" moment, where the evangelical view on these issues becomes the only one. It's similar to a recent comment on the abortion fight by Paul Ryan: "our task isn't to purge our ranks. It's to grow them....We don't want a country where abortion is simply outlawed. We want a country where it isn't even considered," he said. 

Even if Moore did speak for the entire Religious Right (which, as Posner notes, he most certainly does not), his take on evangelical engagement is far from a retreat. To hear that in Moore's remarks merely indicates the power of progressive wishful thinking. 

       

Feinstein: White House Will Stop Spying on Allies. White House: Not So Fast

Update: Maybe Feinstein spoke too quickly on the administration's plans to deal with NSA surveillance on allies: 

SAO says Feinstein statement that WH told her intel collection on allies will not continue is "not accurate"

— Rosie Gray (@RosieGray) October 28, 2013

SAO: "we have not made across the board changes in policy like,for example, terminating intel collection that might be aimed at all allies."

— Rosie Gray (@RosieGray) October 28, 2013

Original Post: After a week of reports on the NSA's surveillance programs targeting the communications of foreign leaders, the Obama administration will stop the diplomatically awkward spying. Senate Intelligence Committee chair Dianne Feinstein said on Monday that she was planning a "major review" of U.S. intelligence collection, adding that the administration would halt any remaining efforts to collect data on world leaders.

Feinstein, one of the early defenders of the NSA's PRISM program in the midst of a series of earlier stories based on Edward Snowden's NSA leaks, released a critical statement of the NSA's programs targeting friendly foreign leaders: 

Unlike NSA’s collection of phone records under a court order, it is clear to me that certain surveillance activities have been in effect for more than a decade and that the Senate Intelligence Committee was not satisfactorily informed. Therefore our oversight needs to be strengthened and increased...Unless the United States is engaged in hostilities against a country or there is an emergency need for this type of surveillance, I do not believe the United States should be collecting phone calls or emails of friendly presidents and prime ministers. The president should be required to approve any collection of this sort.

Feinstein adds that the "White House has informed me that collection on our allies will not continue." Her statement is no doubt partially in response to a Sunday story in The Wall Street Journal indicating that President Obama just learned of the world leaders spying program this summer. According to documents from Edward Snowden, the U.S. has targeted German Chancellor Angela Merkel's communications for about a decade, meaning that Obama was in the dark about the NSA's activities for about 5 years. The NSA has also targeted dozens of other world leaders, not to mention millions of citizens in friendly nations, for surveillance. According to the Journal, the president told the NSA to stop spying on American allies once he was aware of it. Over the course of the past few months, that order was only partially implemented. 

       

So Elvira and RuPaul Went on a Drive One Day ...

We realize there's only so much time one can spend in a day watching new trailers, viral video clips, and shaky cellphone footage of people arguing on live television. This is why, every day, The Atlantic Wire highlights the videos that truly earn your five minutes (or less) of attention. Today:

So in an attic somewhere, there is an old, decaying picture of Cassandra Peterson a.k.a. Elvira, because, well, look:

For what it's worth, Ohio State's marching band is like the coolest marching band in the land: 

This is a much more family-friendly version of Hithcock's The Birds: 

And yes, here are 65 seconds of kittens in witch hats. Happy almost-Halloween:

       

NSA Didn't Get Court's Approval for Constitutionally-Iffy Location Gathering

According to documents released by the Director of National Intelligence, the NSA's collection and processing of location data from Americans' cell phone records appears not to have included prior legal approval from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. That's particularly problematic given the uncertain constitutional domain in which location tracking exists.

The location data was acquired by the NSA as part of its regular, constant ongoing collection of metadata on Americans' phone calls. When you place a phone call with a cell phone, your service provider receives information about the cell tower used to make the connection. Almost always, multiple towers receive that signal, allowing for accurate triangulation of a user's location. (It is not clear if this was the sort of calculation conducted by the NSA to provide a CIA drone with location data on a target in Pakistan.)

As had been suspected for some time, the NSA earlier this month admitted that it had run test analysis of that location data. The data used in the test was eventually destroyed and the testing reportedly discontinued.

But according to a memo created by the NSA for the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence in 2011, the agency didn't seek the permission of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, the body tasked with providing legal authority for NSA surveillance, before conducting those tests. The relevant section of the memo is below, with highlighting added.

[image error]

In other words, the Department of Justice told the Court that NSA was going to analyze the data, instead of getting the FISC's approval first. That is problematic. When The New York Times reported on the previous location tests earlier this month, it noted that Director of National Intelligence James Clapper (whose office released the documents on Monday) assured a congressional committee that it would seek the FISC's approval if the NSA chose to track such information in the future.

There's good reason for that: the constitutionality of tracking location information — unlike collecting other metadata on calls — isn't certain. Some jurisdictions have allowed that data collection under the Fourth Amendment, but, as The Times noted, in a 2012 decision, "five [Supreme Court] justices suggested that any long-term, automated collection of a person’s publicly displayed actions might raise Fourth Amendment issues." The stipulation presented to the Senate committee suggests that the Department of Justice decided the tests were allowed because the data had been acquired under the phone records collection. That's precisely the issue over which the Court has expressed uncertainty.

Mark Rumold, staff attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, was blunt in the privacy organization's assessment of the report.

What I find particularly startling is that neither NSA nor DOJ thought it was important to alert the FISC before collecting cell site location information. That's either evidence of a complete disregard for the FISC or a complete disregard for the sensitivity of the information they were collecting — and it's probably evidence of both.

Photo: Clapper. (AP)

       

Sigourney Weaver Goes Sci-Fi Again

Today in show business news: Sigourney Weaver has joined Neil Blomkamp's latest film, Noomi Rapace is going to play seven different people in one movie, and Cinemax renews Strike Back one more time.

Sigourney Weaver has starred in four Alien movies, two Ghostbusters movies, Galaxy Quest, and Avatar, and yet she is not tired of science fiction. Far from it, in fact! She wants to do more. And so she is, having just signed on to appear in Neil Blomkamp's next feature, Chappie. It's unclear what role she'll play, but the movie is about a "gifted robot, Chappie, who’s kidnapped by two criminals during birth." Aha! Maybe she plays the robot's mom? I know she's maybe a little old for the whole giving birth thing, but who knows how robots are born. Nobody knows! Neil Blomkamp is just straight-up making it up. So Sigourney could totally be a robot's moms. Here's hoping she is. [Deadline]

Speaking of sci-fi actresses, Noomi Rapace seems to be a fan of the genre too. She's just signed on to star in the sci-fi drama What Happened to Monday?, in which she will play septuplets. Yep, seven different characters! All played by one Noomi. The part was originally envisioned as a man, but director Tommy Wirkola liked Noomi. Yeah, the movie is being directed by Tommy Wirkola, who most recently made the positively dreadful, borderline unwatchable Hansel and Gretel: Witch Hunters, so we shouldn't get too excited about this. But this is an indie kind of a thing, a more serious project, so there's some hope. I mean it's seven Noomis for the price of one Noomi! That's a pretty good Noomi bargain. [Variety]

Boom! Cinemax has renewed its rollicking action series Strike Back for a fourth season. The British co-production is a blood 'n' boobs-riddled extravaganza, brash and pigheaded and maybe just the teensiest bit politically troubling in its rah-rah cheering for British and American involvement in various international intrigues and espionage. But, whatever, it's a ludicrous blast, so a new season is good news. Though, sadly, it will be its last. Better make it a good one, boys. Also, maybe next time don't make the show's only gay person a murderous terrorist nightmare. Thanks! [Entertainment Weekly]

David Arquette has signed on to play the infamous Canadian serial killer Keith Hunter Jesperson, nicknamed the Happy Face Killer, in a new movie from Lifetime: Television For Terrifying Women About Murderers. So first he plays a guy trying to catch a serial killer, then he plays a serial killer.  You know what comes next. That's right, David Arquette is going to solve a real-life serial murder case. And then, of course, he'll become a murderer himself. That's just how Hollywood careers work. Life imitates art, etc. [Deadline]

Here, for no reason really, is a slideshow of CBS head Les Moonves's screening room. His screening room at his mansion. It includes a "powder room," a lounge, and a wet bar. That's what Julie Chen comes home to after a long day at Big Brother and The Talk. She and Les just sit down in a corner of their big, echoing mansion and watch a movie or something. How nice for them. [The Hollywood Reporter]

Here is a trailer for 47 Ronin, an action epic that stars Keanu Reeves as a white man who is living in ancient, mystical Japan for some reason. Rinko Kikuchi is the villain, and Hiroyuki Sanada, from Lost, is his spiritual guide or something. The movie long-delayed and looks kinda silly. Oh well. Keanu's back!

And here is another promo for HBO's True Detective, a moody Southern miniseries about a serial killer. Oh and it stars Matthew McConaughey and Woody Harrelson! It looks... moody. That's all there really is to say about it. It's moody. Will it be good? We'll all find out in January.