SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
For Immediate Release
May, 16 2011, 02:18pm EDT
Contact:
Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; or David Zupan, (541) 484-9167
The New Yorker's "Damning" Investigation of NSA Whistleblower Case
The Government Accountability Project released a statement today: "This week, GAP client Thomas Drake is prominently featured in the May 23 issue of The New Yorker magazine, in an explosive article on widespread corruption and wrongdoing within the National Security Agency.
WASHINGTON
The Government Accountability Project released a statement today: "This week, GAP client Thomas Drake is prominently featured in the May 23 issue of The New Yorker magazine, in an explosive article on widespread corruption and wrongdoing within the National Security Agency. The piece, 'The Secret Sharer,' highlights Drake's legal and proper attempts to expose massive NSA waste, mismanagement, and illegality regarding the agency's use of a data collection program that was more costly, more threatening to American citizens' privacy rights, and less effective than a legal alternative.
"The article describes several areas of widespread gross waste, fraud, abuse, and illegality at the NSA, including: the implementation of a warrantless, domestic surveillance and data mining system; the agency's attempt to hide information about the surveillance from Congress and the Supreme Court; the squandering of billions of taxpayer dollars on an undeveloped data collection program that violated American privacy rights; the NSA's failure to give other intelligence agencies critical information it had obtained prior to 9/11; and the overreaching prosecution of Drake."
The New Yorker article was written by Jane Mayer: "The Secret Sharer: Is Thomas Drake an enemy of the state?"
JESSELYN RADACK, via Lindsay Bigda, lindsayb at whistleblower.org
GAP Homeland Security and Human Rights Director Radack said today: "It is abhorrent that the Obama administration, which routinely pledges openness and transparency, is prosecuting brave federal employees who stand up against wrongdoing inside government agencies. Tom Drake went through all of the appropriate channels for bringing information to Congress and the Defense Department Inspector General. Drake did not leak classified information to the media and, tellingly, is not charged with disclosing classified information to the media.
"Drake has been charged under the Espionage Act with retaining, not leaking, allegedly classified information. His trial is slated to begin June 13. GAP represents Drake on whistleblower issues. He has a separate criminal defense team.
"Drake's prosecution sends a chilling message to would-be national security and intelligence whistleblowers: Not only can you lose your career for reporting corruption, but also your very liberty."
Radack just wrote the piece "The New Yorker's Damning Dissection of 'Leak' Prosecution of Thomas Drake."
A nationwide consortium, the Institute for Public Accuracy (IPA) represents an unprecedented effort to bring other voices to the mass-media table often dominated by a few major think tanks. IPA works to broaden public discourse in mainstream media, while building communication with alternative media outlets and grassroots activists.
LATEST NEWS
‘Grossly Irresponsible’: $1.5 Trillion Trump Military Budget Would Explode Debt by $7 Trillion
"The truth is, there are not enough factories, or skilled workers, or materials to effectively spend such a huge increase," said one expert. "It will be a recipe for waste, fraud, and abuse."
Apr 03, 2026
The budget document that President Donald Trump's White House is set to release Friday calls for $1.5 trillion in military spending for the coming fiscal year, an unprecedented sum that—if approved by Congress—would add nearly $7 trillion to the US national debt over the next decade.
The Wall Street Journal's editorial board, which got an early look at the president's fiscal year 2027 budget, reported that the plan includes roughly $1.15 trillion in baseline US military spending as well as $350 billion in supplemental funding "that Republicans could pass in a party-line budget reconciliation bill." The Journal doesn't specify the purpose of the proposed supplemental funding, but the Pentagon has asked Congress for at least $200 billion for the Iran war.
The budget, which would boost total US military spending by more than 40% compared to the current fiscal year, also reportedly calls for investments in Trump's so-called Golden Dome missile defense system, a project that critics have derided as an absurd boondoggle.
Earlier this week, Trump suggested the US federal government can't afford to fund childcare and other domestic social programs because it is "fighting wars."
William Hartung, a senior research fellow at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, wrote in an analysis of the budget proposal ahead of its official release that "whatever vehicles the administration chooses to promote this huge increase, it will be doubling down on a failed budgetary and national security strategy."
"If passed as requested, $1.5 trillion in Pentagon spending—in a single year–will make America weaker by underwriting a misguided strategy, funding outmoded weapons programs, and crowding out other essential public investments," Hartung argued. "The Pentagon doesn’t need more spending, it needs more spending discipline. Spending billions of dollars on a Golden Dome system that can never achieve the President’s dream of a leak-proof missile defense system is sheer waste, as is continuing to lavish funds on overpriced, underperforming combat aircraft like the F-35, or multi-billion dollar aircraft carriers that are vulnerable to modern high-speed missiles."
"The truth is, there are not enough factories, or skilled workers, or materials to effectively spend such a huge increase," he added. "It will be a recipe for waste, fraud, and abuse."
In anticipation of the White House proposal, a broad coalition of nearly 300 advocacy organizations sent a letter to members of Congress on Thursday demanding that they reject Trump's request and any other proposed budget increases for the Pentagon, which recently failed its eighth consecutive audit.
"We must invest in critical human needs programs in our communities. Instead, we have cut those programs massively," the groups wrote, pointing to the record Medicaid and nutrition assistance cuts that Trump and congressional Republicans approved last year.
"The Pentagon is unaccountable to American taxpayers, having never passed an audit, while more than half of its budget (54 percent) is paid to corporate military contractors, whose profits are rising. Further gigantic increases would be grossly irresponsible," the groups continued. "Funding an unaccountable Pentagon by more than $1 trillion while underfunding human needs programs undermines our security by preventing us from investing in the shared prosperity that comes from more housing, health care, climate and public health protections, ending hunger, and providing quality public education."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Spews 'More Threats of War Crimes' as Iran Says It Shot Down US Fighter Jet
"Just pointless forever war, death and destruction—a flailing, furious, rapidly declining superpower," one analyst wrote of the Trump administration's assault.
Apr 03, 2026
US President Donald Trump late Thursday threatened more illegal attacks on Iranian civilian infrastructure, including bridges and power plants, as Iran's military said it shot down an American fighter jet over Tehran, with state-affiliated media publishing apparent photos from the scene.
An Iranian official told Drop Site's Jeremy Scahill that Iran's forces hit an F-15 warplane, causing the jet to crash and sparking "an intense fire." The unnamed Iranian official said the pilot could not have evacuated due to the "nature of the strike," but "no remains have yet been found."
The US Central Command had not commented on the purported downing of an American fighter jet as of this writing. Last month, a US F-35 was forced to make an emergency landing at an air base in the Middle East after reportedly being struck by Iranian fire.
🚨 BREAKING | An Iranian official told Drop Site News that a U.S. F-15 warplane struck by Iranian forces went down over southern Tehran Province, with intense fire reported at the crash site.
The official said the nature of the strike prevented the pilot[s] from ejecting before… https://t.co/iUKD0AqRQQ pic.twitter.com/BI4TzolmZY
— Drop Site (@DropSiteNews) April 3, 2026
Iran's claim on Friday came as Trump issued more belligerent threats on his social media platform, declaring that the US military "hasn’t even started destroying what’s left in Iran."
"Bridges next, then Electric Power Plants!" the president wrote, shortly after bragging about the US military's destruction of an Iranian highway bridge. "New Regime leadership knows what has to be done, and has to be done, FAST!"
Brian Finucane, senior adviser to the US Program at the International Crisis Group, characterized Trump's message as "more threats of war crimes as POTUS flails and seeks to coerce an exit to his own self-inflicted, unnecessary, and ill-conceived war."
Trump's renewed threats came amid reports of US-Israeli attacks on a century-old Iranian medical research center, pharmaceutical facilities, residential buildings, and other civilian infrastructure—and on emergency responders aiding those wounded by the attacks.
"War crime after war crime after war crime," US Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-Ariz.), the lone Iranian American member of Congress, wrote early Friday. "Now’s the time to speak up if you’re against this reckless war of choice. The consequences will be vast and catastrophic."
Ben Rhodes, a political analyst who worked in the Obama administration, wrote that the US military's recent actions have "nothing to do with nuclear or helping Iranians."
"Just pointless forever war, death and destruction—a flailing, furious, rapidly declining superpower," Rhodes added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Patient Advocates Warn Trump Pharma Tariffs Could 'Drive Up Costs and Create More Uncertainty'
One campaigner urged the administration to "focus on real solutions to support more transparent and diverse supply sources and make targeted investments for the supply of key medicines."
Apr 02, 2026
On Thursday, the one-year anniversary of President Donald Trump's so-called Liberation Day, US advocacy groups sounded the alarm about his new tariffs targeting "patented pharmaceuticals and their ingredients under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 to bolster American national security and public health."
The administration announced a year ago that the US Department of Commerce would conduct a related investigation under that law. The resulting report was recently sent to the president, and although the findings have not been made public, Trump's executive order summarizes key takeaways and Secretary Howard Lutnick's recommended actions.
According to the order, the secretary's recommendations included "continuing to negotiate onshoring agreements related to most favored nation (MFN) pharmaceutical pricing agreements; imposing significant tariffs on pharmaceuticals and pharmaceutical ingredients, so that such imports will not threaten to impair the national security of the United States; and granting preferential treatment to those companies that commit to onshore production of pharmaceuticals and pharmaceutical ingredients."
Citing an unnamed Trump administration official, The Washington Post reported Thursday that "the White House has reached agreements with 13 drugmakers and expects to soon conclude an additional four." As part of these deals, companies are planning to invest at least $400 billion in new US plants.
The Post also pointed out that "some imported drugs will face much lower tariffs under trade deals Trump negotiated with five US trading partners. Goods from the European Union, Japan, South Korea, and Switzerland will face 15% levies, while drugs from the United Kingdom, which was the first to sign a deal with Trump, will be hit with a 10% tariff."
Thanks to Trump's new order, brand-name pharmaceuticals made in other countries could be hit with tariffs as high as 100%.
Merith Basey, CEO of Patients for Affordable Drugs, warned in a statement that "while these tariffs aim to pressure pharmaceutical corporations into US manufacturing and most favored nation agreements, the current MFN deals remain opaque and voluntary, and have not delivered meaningful savings for the vast majority of American patients. There's a real risk these tariffs will drive up costs and create more uncertainty for millions of patients already struggling to afford their medications."
Experts at Public Citizen, another advocacy group that has sued to expose the secretive MFN agreements, were similarly critical.
"By announcing these tariffs without even producing the evidence from the investigation that supposedly justifies them, Trump is continuing his pattern of grabbing headlines by using the word 'tariff' while engaging in secretive ongoing negotiations and opaque exemptions processes that are ripe for corporate corruption," said Public Citizen Global Trade Watch director Melinda St. Louis—who also wrote a broader takedown of Trump's trade policy published Thursday by Common Dreams.
"While strategic tariffs can be used to support domestic manufacturing and good jobs, they must be paired with real public investments and support for workers' rights, which Trump has systematically undermined," she said. "Instead, he's bullying other countries like the UK into paying more for medicines, which will lead to windfall profits for Big Pharma and do nothing to reduce US prices."
Peter Maybarduk, director of Access to Medicines at Public Citizen, stressed that "Trump's tariffs will be either ineffective or harmful for what people need, which is a reliable, plentiful, affordable supply of medicine."
Also taking aim at the "secretive arrangements that allow Trump to claim specious victories on manufacturing and high drug prices," Maybarduk explained that "in reality, many manufacturing commitments claimed under the deals were part of previously planned projects and the drug pricing commitments appear designed to largely spare drug company profits rather than earnestly address affordability concerns."
"Meanwhile the administration has given drugmakers perks like lucrative vouchers to accelerate FDA review of their medicines and a promise from the Trump administration that it will bully other countries into adopting higher prescription drug prices, using tariffs as leverage," he continued, referring to the Food and Drug administration.
"If the administration wants to fix problems like medicines shortages and fragile supply chains," he argued, "it should focus on real solutions to support more transparent and diverse supply sources and make targeted investments for the supply of key medicines."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular