spring wife's
on the phone is pleasure to welcome to the program James Goodell he is the
author I love fighting for the press the inside story the pentagon papers
and other battles welcome to the program James
thank you for inviting me %uh now
before we get into certain the some other the things you experience during
that time in their implications for now but but why
why write this book where forty years out now from the anniversary in a couple
months I guess
I from the anniversary of the release to the pentagon papers
I tell us why now well
why now there a many lessons in this book
for all of us but particularly for Obama
and the principal lesson without getting into too much detail
is don't believe
them all when they tell you is gonna damage
on national security and number two if you're president United States
don't get tied too closely to defending national security every turn
because it will up and you and
I would argue that a Obama hasn't learned the lessons
and he's a all I'll bogged down
with the holes series %uh
leaks which if he'd read my book he wouldn't be
well I let's start I wanna first who is the them
when you say don't listen to them well but them
are the it I would highly inspiring be the bureaucracy the National
I love defense establishment on the national defense establishment
is there before your president and will be in office
after year president and national defense establishment has views with
respect to classification
up information and unless you listen to them carefully they'll tell you
absolutely everything is classified and any disclosure it will damage national
security
mean that's a lesson in the pentagon papers case after case after case
are the most ridiculous examples above a classification
what what do you think me what is it that drives
that a that certify guess
ongoing bureaucracy to to seek to classify more and more and more
well I think it's a confusing between trying to protect confidentiality
have information and protecting secrecy over information
I think that all others who have
organizational responsibility release I did with respect to
institutions have a desire to protect
confidentiality information and
it's inappropriate desire but it doesn't mean just because
you want to protect something that's confidential that it's no secret that
its own publishes it
or Lee said they go to jail and I don't think the
them that i've talked about the National a
security establishment can tell the difference anymore if they ever could
between what is confidential which they want to keep themselves
and one secret for which they seek criminal punishment and to answer it and
Indus I assume is the is the lesson love the book that had the
the president read your book I should say fighting for the press
the the lesson that he would have learned that that key
notion that the national security establishment
will always project a level
love above I guess for
I musta grandiosity in terms of their secrets as opposed to other secrets
you know that's correct payment there
they would say that everything is a good example from my book
I the a
pentagon papers contained speeches
love then above president eisenhower
and President Kennedy and they were classified
and the judge asked the person who is responsible
the classifications that mean that they can't be released
answer know they can be released the classified
so you you get a a mindset a
lacks rationality in its easy to pass that on
to a new boy that's the new president who
than this one president Obama has not served in the military
and I think that he's over impressed
with that type of thinking interesting I so let's
let's talk a little bit about a about your
specific experience at the times I mean
when well tell us about
the how you you you first
came to hear love above the papers
what they represented to you and
a know what you'd do what you actually did what was the mechanism at that point
once you are were made aware of them
well you gotta work it up
n/a newspaper appreciate the fact that where you're at a
public van which I was in
the managing editor key editor says to a
we got some classified papers then turns on a seal walks away
to understand he's telling you go figure out the law which is the way it
happened and I went and look up the law you know
no one any law and there isn't anyone today even though you wouldn't know it
by reading a paper it's been made up over the last ex
here so you go up there you go look at the law I concluded the law
didn't exist and Napa
under the First Amendment no one should be published so that was the
the first happen then second step is clearing it with the
people alone the organization the owners are the news
a New York Times their outside lawyers
and in my case a running up against her stonewall
and so a part in the book is describing how I
move that stonewalling the
drama that I resulted from our because
the Pentagon Papers casesa remind your
your viewers was as amazing case that started one day
and and and one day in June and then it done
17 days later in this in the supreme court so
a that's about best I can do is a short answer
which is really a long question well the meat so when you say the law
I mean what you're talking about is any type of law that speaks to
the I I guess the the liability
I love a publishing enterprise
for publishing secrets media are classified documents yeah that's right
so
so what you do is have your lawyer uses you have that sort of
little NYJ had a public event you
look up the law leaks and so I look up Lola leaks
01 any any law there that is either
a said what the liable was for the leaker
or as you point out to the newspaper The New York Times which is a leaky
you look up the lawn and then there was nothing there
the so that really surprise me
and I began to realize is in bees too much for a surprise
because we do our first amendment in this country which permits people
Speaker I pretty much as they please and Matt
the the first amendment got in the way of Congress
passing any such a law and so
now at that point you look up to the law to see with the liability is
the new york times as a as a leaky as you call them
and were a between
the that time and you begin to
make this case internally I as to
the the right love the new york times to publish this material
I appointed you actually
see the material a I
it what impact it would have on you because part I love
work a.m. a I know is part of this story is that you
your background was such having a background intelligence
allowed you to see to see what this material was
in terms of I its
its potential danger to the national security the United States
right well this material is semana very a
to a lot of other intelligence material was a role in my office in supermarket
basket you know those things are wrong for for receiver
forty seven volumes I open the first by am
and I started reading it and I could see I think I've heard this before
I put footnotes and the material that I was reading had been published in the
New York Times
performance at all lingo because I answer for
a period of time for six years in the
and talents reserve actually writing
forever when I say practice
paper is very much like the pentagon papers so I knew
with the mindset was you gonna look to
material it's already been published you rei
format and then you put classified stamp on it
its classified and I said holy moly I thought I was just
practicing I didn't know they really did this in real life that there was
the government had done just what I had done servers a practice
reservist so I said this is but to Bologna
you can take something that's already been published
you know member re say it again your own way
and snap staff classifier you know if you want to do that
to go back to my first point to keep things confidential
I'll be my guest but don't think that your view
confidentiality is gonna stop me from talking
to someone on the radio as I am now or
putting it in the newspaper and end but then of course that wasn't
I mean all of the the I mean the more talking thousands of pages of documents
obviously but
I that was not necessarily indicative all the information
in in the a.m in the pentagon papers no it wasn't indicative i mean area other
sources
up information change but you have to start somewhere
so if you know for example you can reprint what you were reprinted as say
native New York Times said stops economic care what they say
I can print that then you move along and you get the document said look more like
what
snowden has released well you know
documents that instruct people how to do this
and do that and their the judgment becomes more
difficult because you have to make a
common sense judgment with the release of that information
is gonna damage national security loan
lo and behold and is even true in stones case by the way
a when you start researching some other documents the look
scary you find that the
they've been books written about Parchin so forth and so on
in stones case I know the stones material actually been
release previously a in the New York Times
not in great detail but and becomes a
a point in which you wonder whether there are any quote
secret secrets gonna damage your weather with a slogan and
at at confidentially but the if your point is
it gets more difficult when you start leaving the reprinted in the new york
times
becomes more difficult but not impossible and so
when a internally you ahead had made the argument that that
the times with it which is within its rights to publish this material
he goes ahead the to to begin the process
literally have actually above par publishing it by by that I mean
the presses are rolling at that point the nixon administration
I a files an injunction and
a what then became
their a legal a
I guess charger rationale in terms of that injunction
in and how did that play into the Espionage Act in with that
the first time that that
that that act had been invoked or or
I i should say within
I guess modern if the modern era if if you will
it was at the first time that that a that had been invoked
yeah Welwyn we here today about the Espionage Act
and we hear this stone a
may be a spy in on a patriot and the reason we hear that today was because
way back then
for the very first time the government decided to use the Espionage Act
to stop publication and I had looked at that act and decided it didn't apply
because guess what applies to aspin eyes and doesn't apply
to publishing in a newspaper espionage is when you go directly
with the information any given to the enemy
with the intent to damage
United States F now what happens when people publish so the government
use this law which they found I mean it was the first time
anyone and found it it was a 19-17
law and I thought it was ridiculous so when I saw the government
coming in using it after I breach that earlier decision
I said well they just kept up the creek on this one
the court isn't going to paying attention to them
which was true they the court did not so the issue became it is no law
we're back to that first amendment so their case after they
a were told they could use the Espionage Act
really became a cases says OK First Amendment says you can publish
but you can't publish material the damage is now security
%um that's our injunction and that's how they got to the Supreme Court
with the new york times in joined by the way in the
washington Post which had published more or less the same time
was not so that was the issue before the Supreme Court
and then in that case was New York Times company verses United States
and dow that it was a 6-3 decision
just tell us that mean what what what that just characterize that decision for
us and what its implications should be today because I want to move into
a you know where we are today with these
with this stuff okay so what the what the
this is said look under the First Amendment
you can't come in here an ass to stop the presses because if you stop the
presses
they can't speak the First Amendment says you can speak there is an exception
yes the material you're talking about government
is going to and really damage
national security in a media
horrible way we will stop the presses
but that's going to be very wary example and it's certainly not
in the pentagon papers so in the real world
the case says the First Amendment says you can't stop people from publishing
and lets your policy if Tomic secret during
Second World War lessor is up in the real world you get you gotta pay you
gonna pass
now a when we think about
today we're thinking about the Internet age
and material gets published quickly so the issue becomes
can you get punishment I love
wiki leaks the New York Times anything that's on the net
after its been published and whether that very same first amendment
protect you an abscess a the
area that is a little unknown because but did digital age is
so new but you gotta realize with with material that goes out so fast
%uh digitally you can't move to stop it Brea
accurate very effectively the way it did
years ago when his hand newspaper so
the digital age is made the whole issue
more round then we get more leaks and for me
it's all very exciting because the in a sense I'm reliving
what's in that book with everything happens today text