I never realized the extent to which legal dissent is monitored in this country.
I am a Communication Strategist integrating video, web, ITV and print. About a month ago I was traveling to L.A. for meetings re two initiatives I've been driving: GTV progressive cable TV network and DemSpeak.com, a new progressive thinktank. A friend & colleague invited me to come that evening to a small "new media" business networking dinner at a trendy restaurant. "Tell people what you're up to, you might meet someone who could be interested." I did, it was an enjoyable evening, eclectic conversations, I left with a few business cards, and that was that. Had about 4 more days of meetings, then flew home.
The next morning I was visited at my home by two Secret Service special agents. "Do you know why we're here?" "No, I haven't a clue." "Do you mind if we speak to you?"
(Note: This diary entry was initially a long comment I posted to an unrelated thread last night. Though totally tangential there, I was asked to re-present it here. Let me say in advance that I won't be able to monitor often, so I ask forgiveness in advance from the infamous 'Diary Police' :) )
I never realized the extent to which a perfectly legal, non-inflammatory dinner conversation amidst strangers at a business networking meeting, where I expressed a partisan political preference and a desire to rid the country of the Bush administration, using thinktanked strategic media messaging and a new network -- would be taken as a direct lethal threat against the life of the President of the United States.
This speaks to AMERICANS and their amped up fears and intolerance for even the most pedestrian dissenting views about those in charge and the direction they are leading this country -- such that they would feel some kind of civic duty to report the conversation to the U.S. Secret Service.
This was not the case of my life being monitored by Homeland Security -- at least not THEN, but certainly now. This was a case of the degree to which conservatives have been badgered into questioning the allegiance to America "libberrulls" have... and the degree to which they are seemingly completely detached from the very documents and precepts that represent the highest ideals of this country's democracy -- the Bill of Rights. Apparently someone -- I still do not know who -- chose to interpret my desire to get the Bush administration out of office... by way of a Democratic Strategic Thinktank I had started up ( http://www.DemSpeak.com ) which would be focusing on framing, messaging, and media ... as a threat against the life of the President. I mentioned that I was going to Washington DC to meet with the head of Dean's DFA organization, as well as with a senior member of the Transition Team at the DNC.
In other words: Not only was I expressing my rights as a citizen to partake in the electoral process, but I was actually meeting with -- I mean think about this! -- a guy who was but one notch down from the head of the Democratic Party itself -- and the subject matter of the meeting was to be the Democratic Party itself, and its need for an overarching new and more authentic strategy. Let's review: I want the Bush crew out of office. I am using media messaging as a methodology. And I am collaborating with none other than the actual vessel prescribed by the U.S. Constitution -- one of the two major political parties -- as the means by which we, the people, effect change via the electoral process in the United States of America.
And I was told this person sent an anonymous email to none other than the U.S. Secret Service. I was going to Washington DC and I wanted to get the Bush people out of office. This was seen by this good citizen as a serious threat to the life of the President.
Think about the implications of that. The Republicans won. Yet you'd never know it by the size of the anger they show every single day, and by their sworn mandate to bulldoze every last progressive gain made over the course of the past 30 years. They control all three branches of Government, and arguably the fourth estate as well. And yet that is not enough. Instead of seeking to represent ALL of the people, they seem to believe it is a god-given right they have been given to finally rid the earth of this thing called "the Democratic party" thereby liberating our nation from this oppressive force that interferes with their freedom. Their rights. Their values. Their Christian faith.
Keep in mind I had no inkling of anything that was generated by my statement of what I was doing (thinktank), what my goal was (get Bush's neocons out of office), where I was going (to Washington DC), and who I was meeting with (the Democratic party itself). It was two sentences at a business networking dinner where I was asked to introduce myself with "tell us a bit about what you're doing".
The next morning after I arrived back at home --- and two days before I would be traveling to D.C., I was paid a visit at my home by two Secret Service agents who showed me badges from United States Dept of Homeland Security, U.S. Secret Service division and asked if they could speak to me. I said sure. The friendly "vocal one" (as opposed to the silent no-smile "bad cop" for psychological intimidation purposes) immediately asked "Do you know why we're here?" I answered "No. Not a clue." And I didn't. Never in a million years would I have anticipated that a comment like that which I made -- in PARTICULAR one that involved my going to meet with the Democratic party of all institutions or organizations! -- would have set off alarm bells as some intent to kill the President. (Is your jaw open?)
Their badges looked authentic and I said sure, and asked if they'd like to talk inisde my home. They said that would be helpful. What followed was a 90 minute interview and I let them see everything -- my flight information, my hotel, my itinerary, the people I would be meeting with, the DFA "Grassroots Advisory Council" I had formed and would be meeting with in DC for strategic planning sessions. I had no reason not to cooperate fully. If anything, why would I want a permanent mark on my record that someone thought I was threatening to go to Washington DC to kill the President.
I asked what else did this anonymous email say (because I truly had no idea -- no idea at all who amidst the 15 people or so around this table at a Restaurant had read my statements as a lethal threat) -- and the agent, again, very friendly -- and if anything apologetic in tone that they are required by law to investigate any threat upon the life of the President -- read from his notes "He said you had a nervous laugh after you said that, and looked uncomfortable throughout the dinner". Me: "Anything else?" "Yes, that you had all sorts of anti-Bush paraphrenalia all over your walls in your home."
I gestured to the empty walls "Well, feel free to look around...." then I added "It's awfully peculiar to me that not only did I live in a city an hour or so by jet away from where the dinner took place, but also, not one of the people there have ever been to my home, including "Steve" (not his real name), my friend who had invited me to the event and who had asked me to introduce myself."
At this point even "bad cop" seemed to have a slight crack in his stoney demeanor as if to maybe suggest "well there's clearly no evidence of paraphrenalia on the walls..." -- since there was nothing but two paintings on the walls.
I know this sounds bizarre, but the agents were very very nice -- and when I said to them "Well I am going to of course tell my colleagues on the Grassroots Advisory Council that I am being investigated by the Secret Service and will be watched while I am in Washington DC which meant they all might be watched as well ", they were neutral about that didn't dispute what I said, so I took that as "yes that's correct". But when I added neutrally what I also expected was to be the case: "And I'm going to need to tell them that our Yahoo Group and all our emails are going to be monitored; they should know that", they both spoke, quiet-agent for the first time. And nice-agent even waved his hands "No, that's not correct." He said very clearly and definitively "That is not the case. We will not be reading any of those emails."
I said "Oh come on, I know about Carnivore, of COURSE we are going to be monitored", and he replied "We do not do that, and you need to know that. I want you to understand that very clearly. That is not within the scope of what we do."
(As I was processing all of this in my head in real time, I was trying to imagine what it would be like to be investigating someone who was about to go to Washington to meet with one-notch-down-from the official head of the entire Democratic Party -- and allegedly this guy was threatening to kill the President -- and he was going to be telling his colleagues that they were now going to be monitored due to my being monitored as a threat to the President -- and what a terrible news story that would make if this person were to go on TV and say "I was visited by Secret Service because I said I wanted to get rid of the Bush crew and that I was going to Washington to meet with top staff at the national Democratic Party" ..... I mean how more over the top would one have to go to say "Hunh. There seems to be a tad bit of a problem with expressing political dissent in America when you can be investigated for working within a political party to oust the current Administration..."? )
I just want to be clear. Those guys were doing their job. I had no problem with that at all. And they said "we are not here in any partisan way. I mean two days ago Hillary Clinton was here and we received a threat and investigated that fully as well. That's our job." And within 24 hours I was supposedly no longer considered a threat, after they checked leads and corroborated information. They said they were just waiting for their report to be signed off at national headquarters.
So I was cleared. But if anything, I asked THEM "What am I supposed to do with now having a permanent record because someone sent in some spiced up "tip" to you guys? Don't I have a right to face my accused?" Nice-agent said "We don't know who it is." I said "Oh come on, all you need to do is trace the header information". "Nope. It was sent by an anonymizer which stripped out the headings." I said "Well fine but I know about Carnivore and you guys could easily get that information". He said, and this is, I have to say, a bit reassuring that we still apparently have SOME legal rights:
"Only if we subpeonad the ISP, and we aren't going to do that" (as in: "This is a closed case; we have no need to pursue this further.") (He said they spend time every day on dozens of these kinds of things, so they have to filter the wheat from the chaff.) I actually liked these guys. They were nothing like the stereotypes in movies. They weren't even in suits.
FOOTNOTE: I did consult with my attorney who referred me to their "white collar crime" specialist (under which category of law this falls) in the Big City and he corroborated the whole response pattern of the agents, and in particular the part about their not at all authorized in any way to monitor the list emails... Now my OWN emails, probably so. I asked "So now what? I have a permanent record and will be on watch lists everywhere?" He said "No. But you will have a permanent record within the Secret Service files which no other agency ever knows about or has access to (hmmm. well, I don't know about that...). And so you're not watched and the record is meaningless -- unless some time in the future you were to be considered a threat, at which time they'd pull that record and it could be used against you."
This is but one example of the face of Dissent In These Times. My concern was not the Secret Service doing their job. It's the rampant paranoia that's been injected into the GOP rank and file.