Hume leveled false attack on USA Today call-tracking report, suggested NSA has access only to Americans' phone numbers
SUMMARY: Fox News' Brit Hume leveled a false attack on USA Today's May 11 report on the National Security Agency's collection of the phone call records of tens of millions of Americans, claiming that "[n]ot until page 5 in a sidebar, however, does the paper report the following, quote: 'Phone customers' names, addresses and other personal information are not being collected as part of this program.' " In fact, while that quote did appear in a sidebar article on page 5A, the same information also appeared on page 1A, in USA Today's main article.
During the "Grapevine" segment of the May 11 edition of Fox News' Special Report, host and Fox News Washington managing editor Brit Hume leveled a false attack on USA Today's May 11 report that "[t]he National Security Agency has been secretly collecting the phone call records of tens of millions of Americans." As Hume noted, USA Today reported that the NSA "reaches into homes and businesses across the nation by amassing information about the calls of ordinary Americans." Hume then told viewers: "Not until page 5 in a sidebar, however, does the paper report the following, quote: 'Phone customers' names, addresses and other personal information are not being collected as part of this program.' " In fact, while that quote did appear in a sidebar article on page 5A, the same information also appeared on page 1A, in USA Today's main article.
Moreover, Hume did not tell viewers that in the very next sentence of its article, USA Today explained that "the phone numbers the NSA collects can easily be cross-checked with other databases to obtain" names, addresses and "other personal information."
The Washington Post noted on May 12 that "the government has many means of identifying [telephone] account owners, including access to commercial databases from ChoicePoint and LexisNexis."
From the May 11 USA Today article, as it appeared on page 1A:
With access to records of billions of domestic calls, the NSA has gained a secret window into the communications habits of millions of Americans. Customers' names, street addresses and other personal information are not being handed over as part of NSA's domestic program, the sources said. But the phone numbers the NSA collects can easily be cross-checked with other databases to obtain that information.
From the USA Today's May 11 sidebar on page 5A:
The NSA collected "call-detail" records. That's telephone industry lingo for the numbers being dialed. Phone customers' names, addresses and other personal information are not being collected as part of this program. The agency, however, has the means to assemble that sort of information, if it chooses to do so.
In two separate segments on Special Report, chief White House correspondent Carl Cameron and chief Washington correspondent Jim Angle also emphasized USA Today's report that the information collected by the NSA does not include names, addresses, and other information. Cameron reported that the records being obtained by the NSA "include only the numbers of dialed and received calls" and not "customer names, addresses, or anything about the actual call content." Similarly, Angle reported that "the NSA is reportedly collecting nothing more than phone call records, without any names or addresses."
Neither Cameron nor Angle reported that, according to USA Today, such information can be "easily" obtained by cross-referencing the NSA database with other databases.
Later, during the "All Star Panel" segment of Special Report, Hume said that the NSA "do[es] not collect the names." In response, one of the panelists -- either Roll Call executive editor Morton M. Kondracke or Weekly Standard executive editor Fred Barnes -- said off-camera, "But they can get the names." NPR national political correspondent Mara Liasson added, "The names are easy to get."
Hume continued, "They might have to go another step, presumably with a warrant, to get the names or whatever." Liasson then explained that "they wouldn't have to use a warrant; they could just do a cross-referencing. It's easy to get a name once you get the phone number."
From the May 11 edition of Fox News' Special Report with Brit Hume:
CAMERON: Mr. Bush was responding to a front-page USA Today report that Verizon, AT&T, and BellSouth are cooperating in the war on terror by providing call-data records to the National Security Agency for analysis. Data records include only the numbers of dialed and received calls, which can be used to detect patterns and suspected links to terrorism. The data records that the NSA is obtaining do not contain customer names, addresses, or anything about the actual call content.
[...]
ANGLE: But others of both parties said this is far different and far less intrusive than actually listening to suspected terrorist communications. In this case, the NSA is reportedly collecting nothing more than phone call records, without any names or addresses.
[...]
HUME: Today's front-page USA Today story on the NSA's database of information on domestic phone calls reports that the agency, quote, "reaches into homes and businesses across the nation by amassing information about the calls of ordinary Americans." Not until page 5 in a sidebar, however, does the paper report the following, quote: "Phone customers' names, addresses and other personal information are not being collected as part of this program."
[...]
HUME: What struck me about the story was also the fact that apparently what they are doing is they are collecting these numbers so in case they, for example, I suppose, pick up a terrorist's phone number, they can find out what numbers were called in the U.S. But they do not collect the names, unless, I suppose, and until --
OFF-CAMERA PANELIST: But they can get the names.
HUME: They can get the names.
LIASSON: No, but the names are easy to get.
HUME: Well, maybe so, but the fact is that's not what this program does yet. They might have to go another step, presumably with a warrant, to get the names or whatever.
LIASSON: Yeah, it's to do -- well, no, they wouldn't have to use a warrant; they could just do a cross-referencing. It's easy to get a name once you get the phone number.
always glad to see that these guys seem to have more information on this secret program (that only the president and a few of his administration know of) than the rest of us people!
And then stating with a straight face that it is a fac (ie the president says so) that it only monitors calls.
Connect the number gathering with no oversight on listening in and targeting gay and peace groups within the US by the CIA.
This is bigger than Watergate and should concern all, especially because after a lot of investment this program does not seem to track down terrorists within the US. Were that the case, our administration would come up with clear evidence in the few terrorist cases that we have had so far. Evidently, they had no recorded info whatsoever. Guess what the numbers can be used for instead, again without the oversight it should have.
The project itself is not bad, the lack of independent or bipartisan oversight is, including that again our president has signed his ok for the project.
Yeah take that USA Today. They'd have to open up a whole new screen on there computer to get your name and address. And if they've go a wicked game of spider solitare going it will be even more difficult. Tell it like it is brother Hume.
Hume: "But they do not collect the names, unless, I suppose, and until --
How does Hume know they don't have another database with the names. We have a secret government. We didn't know that it was collecting American phone records until this week. And how do we know they aren't doing more spying on Americans than this? How do I know they are tracking my food store discount card that gets scanned, my air miles...
at least. What is the surprise here? This has been public knowledge for months. I wish I could find the picture I think it was an AT&T took of the equipment in San Fran or somewhere out west.
Datamining is one of the least intrusive forms of hunting terrorists ever invented. They get just as much info on you if you use your credit card.
This story is months old and you still desperately defend this unconstitutional power grab? I am so surprised!!!
When the full details of this program come out in the next few days and it becomes apparent that it involved much more than just collecting phone numbers, will Hume retract or just pretend he never said what he said?
C-SPAN had some wonderful footage late last night of assorted senators, both Republicans and Democrats, waving USA Todays and waiting impatiently to be recognized so they could say how alarmed they were by it.
I didn't catch whether it was a committee or the full Senate, but if the latter can you imagine Cheney chairing that?
I'm amazed that I'm still amazed that these Foxnuts still dress up like newsmen every night and can collect their paychecks. The complete lack of conscience is stunning. I don't think they're great actors, so I have to assume they believe themselves, not necessarily the details of their lies,but that they're doing the right thing. Can anyone of you (if anyone's still on this thread) imagine being employed as a JOURNALIST (that's what these guys write under "occupation". I guess)in the U S of A, a nation famous for its press as govt watchdog, and going on TV every night and explaining why thw very pro-corporate gov. is being persecuted by the "other" press? Can you imagine trying to sit there with a straight face and tell your audience that the white house logging your phone calls is nothing to worry about, that they're protecting you? Trying not to laugh right in the camera when you think to yourself that, after 5 years of this, almost 1/3 of the people in the country haven't caught on yet?? YIKES!
By the way, my favorite shtick from anchorman Impersonator Brit Hume : when he has on a Repub. guest, and they both pretend to be on the other side of the issue from the Prez.(i.e., the right side of the issue, not the RIGHT side), then they gradually debate each other into agreeing with the Republicans.Watch for this, it's fun. it's sorta like this;
Hume: So the administration is going around taking dumps on Americans front lawns? This just sounds wrong!
Neocon guest: It looks bad, Brit! There are confirmed reports of Dick Cheney and Rummy actually defecating on lawns in Oregon and Vermont.
BH: Well. I'd imagine that there will be some punishment for these acts.
Guest: That's the interesting part, Brit. some People say that the water saved by not flushing is actually making us safer against terrorists.
BH: so you're saying that people are saving on fertilizer, on top of their Bush tax cuts, and troop morale is higher than ever??
Neocon zombie guest: That's right. Brit. Most Americans find it a refreshing change from the indecency of the Clinton white house.
BH: I'm going to have to concede this one. You've convnced me. We'll keep an eye on this story.
He does this almost every night, it's great. It's like O'Reilly & Hannity claiming they criticize the prez. All together now: "On immigration, for example"
what's scary-- the fact that I can't even be complacent about getting rid of these guys. A big chunka this country is a pipe bomb or a gay adoption away from voting for these eejits again. again, Yikes !!
You know it's getting bad for Bush, Inc.