‘I Am Not Your Enemy’

posted in: All news | 0

The following is excerpted from I Am Not Your Enemy: A Memoir, out September 16 from Spiegel & Grau. It is reprinted with permission of the publisher, © 2025.

It began like any other day. I woke around 4:30 a.m., took Mickey outside for a few minutes, and, no later than 5:30, drove to work from my rental house in Augusta, Georgia, while listening to a podcast about national security called Intercepted. I arrived at work around 6:00, and several hours later, I had a coffee mixed with protein powder. It was my usual morning routine. But on this day, I took fateful steps to share some of America’s classified national security secrets with the public. 

Why that day? Why that document? I spent years in a prison cell asking myself that question. And the truth is, I don’t know. Everything that has happened because of and since that action, the trauma and upheaval and melodrama, has merged to make some of my reasoning mysterious to me. A blank spot exists where my precise motivations should be. I wish I could say that my actions were grandly deliberate and thoughtfully strategic. But my plan wasn’t even really a plan. My actions were more spontaneous and poorly organized than your average trip to the grocery store. 

That’s one of the many sad ironies of the government’s portrayal of me as a calculating criminal mastermind, intent on doing whatever she could to reveal America’s most vital information to the Taliban and al-Qaeda. If only I had been that careful and farsighted! Rather, my crime proceeded in disconnected stages. I took small actions, each one seemingly harmless on its own, that added up to something appearing coherent and dramatic—and that was irreversible when all the elements were combined, like ingredients that only when mixed in exact quantities can produce a bomb. Except that my explosion never endangered, let alone hurt, anyone but myself. Not even close. 

Before that day, I had not planned to leak a classified report or do anything else out of the ordinary. I was working as a contractor for the National Security Agency, the Defense Department’s arm tasked with monitoring and processing information for foreign and domestic intelligence purposes. The NSA is a behemoth that vacuums email, text, and phone conversations from around the world. Its budget is so big, its eavesdropping capabilities so vast, that if it were a corporation, it would be one of the biggest in the world, up there with Apple, Microsoft, Walmart, and Amazon. As with those businesses, hundreds of millions of Americans come into frequent contact with the NSA. 

Unlike with those companies, Americans don’t much know about when, how, and why the NSA is involved in their lives. 

I liked getting to work early, and on the morning of May 9, 2017, I enjoyed the quiet and solitude. Then I opened a news website, the top-secret one available to people working in intelligence, and found a bombshell: a five-page document, listed as the most read “article” on the site, about an enormously controversial subject of public interest. The document contained newly uncovered details about events that had taken place a year earlier. I stared at it, stunned that such a thing existed. By that point, I was jaded, but this jolted me out of my seat. This will be leaked by Friday, I thought. It’s too damning to stay secret. Everything leaks. 

The media then was filled with leaks, as though the American government was a broken pipe and information was dripping right to newspapers and journalists. Soon, then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions would say in a press briefing that “in the first six months of this administration, [the Department of Justice] has already received nearly as many criminal referrals involving unauthorized disclosures of classified information as we received in the last three years combined.” A study by the Federation of American Scientists found that the astounding numbers of secrets being published in the press showed that “leaks of classified information are a ‘normal,’ predictable occurrence.” And the New York Times observed, “Journalism in the Trump era has featured a staggering number of leaks from sources across the federal government.” 

A July 2017 report by the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs found that a majority of the leaks “concerned the Russia probes, with many revealing closely-held information such as intelligence community intercepts, FBI interviews and intelligence, grand jury subpoenas, and even the workings of a secret surveillance court.

I believed that these leaks were an inevitable response to an undeniable crisis: American institutions were collapsing. I was twenty-five years old and had already spent five years of my life at the NSA in various roles, and I angrily wondered why the agency had not delivered any public response to the Trump administration, which had been constantly disparaging us. When he wasn’t ignoring our work, the president denigrated the intelligence community as being part of “the deep state” intent on subverting the will of the public. Far worse, the administration lied daily with impunity, and the heads of our institutions responded publicly with only silence. Public life then was surreal. Just hours later that day, Trump would fire FBI director James Comey, who was heading the investigation into Russia’s interference in the 2016 election. It seemed like an attempt to silence anyone looking into what had happened. Trump seemed capable of virtually anything. Envisioning him ordering that an NSA report be disappeared was not difficult.

If it vanished, I thought, people would wonder whether it had existed at all, or if they had just imagined it, an example of the Mandela effect, a phenomenon in which false memories are shared by large groups of people. I decided to print the article so that at least one copy would be preserved, even if Trump’s henchmen otherwise eliminated it. 

But when I went to print it, my nonexistent tech skills proved problematic. This was one of the many ways in which I differed from Edward Snowden, the NSA employee who had handed over thousands of pages of documents to reporters at the Guardian, a news website specializing in national security issues. “If you see something,” the publication posted on their web page detailing how to contact them, “leak something.” Later, Snowden and I were often grouped together, but our motivations, our methods, and the consequences of our actions were very different. He planned his leaking months and possibly a year in advance. He contacted journalists before he leaked anything, to gain their assurances, guidance, and cooperation. He was a tech wizard who used encrypted emails and a code name. He was intent on bringing down the out-of-control national security state. He saved an estimated 1.5 million documents on a thumb drive. 

By contrast, I spontaneously tapped the print button on a five-page document involving intelligence from the previous year without giving the whole thing much thought. And, like an actor in some slapstick comedy, I immediately realized that I didn’t know where in the office the report would be printed out. I began a frantic search, hoping to hear some noises reassuringly indicating that a printer was spitting out the pages. There was no legitimate work reason for me to be looking at that document, let alone printing it out. As boring as my job was, I didn’t want to lose it. If a security supervisor grilled me, I would not be able to explain the reasons for my actions, because even I was unsure of them. Despite what the FBI would later claim, I am a terrible liar, unskilled in the arts of deception. My anxiety usually leads me to drop my poker face, after which someone takes all my chips. 

Before I was unable to locate the printer, I had not been nervous about what I was doing. At the time, I was emotionally numb, mourning my father’s recent death and suffering from general loneliness and spiraling despair about the state of the country and the world. Trump had been sworn into office in January and already was wreaking havoc. He severely restricted immigration from seven Muslim-majority countries. His national security adviser, Michael Flynn, stepped down after just twenty-two days when it was revealed that he had lied about his paid lobbying work on behalf of Turkey. Trump also was threatening to destroy North Korea. And that’s just a short list. 

Or perhaps I wasn’t nervous simply because I knew that the NSA was filled with other bored introverts who spent much of the time goofing off—we weren’t going around glancing at one another’s computer screens. 

With faux casualness, I walked from printer to printer looking for my papers. Nope, not that one. Nope, not that one either. Jesus, I’m an idiot. After checking three printers, I returned to the first one and found the report lying there.I snatched up the pages, placed them face down on my desk, and reassured myself that the problem had been averted. 

And with that, I went on with my day. Nobody would know or care that the report was on my desk. I left it there when work ended and I departed for the gym. That evening, I checked the news to see if the report had been leaked, if any policymakers were talking about its contents—it was, I believed, crucial information that could further illuminate the accumulating understanding of the president’s ties to Russia. Everyone at work had been discussing it, saying it would pop up in the news sooner rather than later. But no.

The reader should know that my plea deal prevents me from verifying the report’s contents. But you can find the entire thing online with a simple Google search, and it was later summarized by the New York Times as “describ[ing] two cyberattacks by Russia’s military intelligence unit, the G.R.U.—one in August against a company that sells voter registration-related software and another, a few days before the election, against 122 local election officials.”

To be honest, I don’t think I knew what I was going to do with the document before I did it. But around 2:00 p.m. on the day after I printed it out, I folded it in half and placed it in my lunch box. Later I took the folded document from my lunch box and slipped it into my pantyhose. 

Normally, at the end of my shift, getting out of the building through security wasn’t hard. And sure enough, that afternoon was no different: they let me leave through the door after doing the routine bag checks. I walked straight to my car, relieved. My common sense was strong enough to discourage me from removing the document from my pantyhose in the parking lot. Instead, I drove to the gym, parked, took out the pages, and wedged them between the seat and the center console. I went to exercise and thought more about the guy I was breaking up with than the top-secret document in my car. 

Two days later, I bought a white envelope, scribbled the Intercept’s New York City address on it, placed the report inside, and stuck a stamp on it. I drove to yoga, where I taught a class as a substitute teacher, after which I dropped the envelope into a mailbox across the street. No return address anywhere, no name or any other identifying details. What mattered were the contents. This is going to be big. Maybe help save this country. And nobody will ever know it was me. Or if they do find out, everyone will be grateful.

Things didn’t go exactly as I had hoped. Instead of being the public’s anonymous good Samaritan, I spent more time in prison than any whistleblower in American history. 

Sometimes people like to group me with other individuals who have leaked classified national security information. Daniel Ellsberg, Edward Snowden, John Kiriakou, Thomas Drake, and Chelsea Manning are the best known. Often, these comparisons are unflattering. According to analyst Tom Nichols at the Atlantic, “All of these cases . . . are bound by the thread of narcissism,” the product of “a protracted epidemic,” which “is on the rise, in the United States and around the world.” Diagnosing people with personality disorders on the basis of their portrayals in the press is a curious thing. Actual mental health professionals refrain from such diagnoses because they understand that any person is far more complicated than a context-free sound bite. Unlike Nichols and uncurious keyboard psychologists like him, I have spoken with Ellsberg, Drake, Manning, and other whistle-blowers at various points in my post-leak life. The leakers I have spoken with have different personality types and come from radically diverse backgrounds. There are only two things we have in common. The first is that we revealed secrets, but we have plenty of company in that. The other thing uniting us, which is far less common, is that we got caught. 

One of the first whistleblowers to step forward in support was Thomas Drake, who had been a top official at the NSA and served in the Air Force and Navy. Like him, I deeply believed in America’s national security system; I never wanted to destroy it. Following my six years in the military, I received the Air Force Commendation Medal for “provid[ing] over 1,900 hours of enemy intelligence exploitation and assist[ing] in geolocating 120 enemy combatants during 734 airborne sorties [air missions].” 

Exactly what I did to earn that commendation is something I am unable to reveal for legal reasons. I can only quote this NSA-approved Commendation Medal certificate: “She facilitated 816 intelligence missions, 3,236 time sensitive reports, and removing more than 100 enemies from the battlefield. Furthermore, while deployed to support Combatant Commander’s requirements, Airman Winner was appointed as the lead deployment language analyst, producing 2,500 reports, aiding in 650 enemy captures, 600 enemies killed in action and identifying 900 high value targets.” 

That’s a lot of military-speak, so I’ll translate: I helped kill a lot of human beings. Hundreds, possibly thousands. I developed post-traumatic stress disorder doing it. As a child and young adult, I dreamed of receiving awards for helping people, or saving them. But that wasn’t how it turned out. I helped the United States government kill people. I was good at it. So good that they gave me an award for it. But then I shared some information with the American people, and the U.S. government felt that was a much worse thing to do than killing scores of people. They decided I was an enemy.

My Pokémon-loving, yoga-practicing, vegetable-subsisting complex personality got erased. To quote my mother’s sardonic comment to a reporter about the chasm separating who I really am from the traitor the government claimed I was: “The world’s biggest terrorist has a Pikachu bedspread.” Well put, Momface.

The post ‘I Am Not Your Enemy’ appeared first on The Texas Observer.

Watch live: Patel faces Senate amid questions over probe into Charlie Kirk’s killing and internal FBI upheaval

posted in: All news | 0

By ERIC TUCKER, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — Kash Patel will confront skeptical Senate Democrats at a congressional hearing Tuesday likely to be dominated by questions about the investigation into Charlie Kirk’s killing as well as the recent firings of senior officials who have accused the FBI director of illegal political retribution.

The appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee represents the first oversight hearing of Patel’s young but tumultuous tenure and provides a high-stakes platform for him to try to reassure wary lawmakers that he is the right person for the job at a time of internal upheaval and mounting concerns about political violence inside the U.S.

Patel will be returning to the committee for the first time since his confirmation hearing in January, when he sought to reassure Democrats that he would not pursue retribution as director. He’ll face questions Tuesday about whether he did exactly that when the FBI last month fired five agents and senior officials in a purge that current and former officials say weakened morale and contributed to unease inside the nation’s premier federal law enforcement agency.

Three of those officials sued last week in a federal complaint that says Patel knew the firings were likely illegal but carried them out anyway to protect his job. One of the officials helped oversee investigations into the Jan. 6 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol and another clashed with Justice Department leadership while serving as acting director in the early days of the Trump administration. The FBI has declined to comment on the lawsuit.

Republican lawmakers who make up the majority in the committee are expected to show solidarity for Patel, a close ally of President Donald Trump, and are likely to praise the director for his focus on violent crime and illegal immigration. They are also likely to try to elicit from Patel fresh details about the investigation into Kirk’s assassination at a Utah college campus last week, which authorities have said was carried out by a 22-year-old man who had grown more political in recent years and ascribed to a “leftist ideology.”

Patel drew scrutiny when, hours after the killing, he posted on social media that “the subject” was in custody even though the actual suspected shooter remained on the loose and was not arrested until he turned himself in late the following night.

Related Articles


Georgia Supreme Court declines to hear Fani Willis’ appeal of her removal from Trump election case


Trump files $15 billion defamation lawsuit against The New York Times


Senate approves White House economist to serve on Fed board


Appeals court rejects Trump’s bid to unseat Federal Reserve governor Lisa Cook ahead of rate vote


Trump wouldn’t call Minnesota governor after Democrat was slain but now blames him for raised flags

Patel has not explained that post but has pointed to his decision to authorize the release of photographs of the suspect, Tyler Robinson, while he was on the run as a key development that helped facilitate an arrest. A Fox News Channel journalist reported Saturday that Trump had told her that Patel and the FBI have “done a great job.”

Robinson is due to make his first court appearance in Utah.

Another line of questioning may involve Democratic concerns that Patel is politicizing the FBI through politically charged investigations, including into longstanding Trump grievances. Agents and prosecutors, for instance, have been seeking interviews and information as they reexamine aspects of the years-old FBI investigation into potential coordination between Russia and Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign.

Patel has repeatedly said his predecessors at the FBI and Justice Department who investigated and prosecuted Trump were the ones who weaponized the institutions.

Retail sales up 0.6% in August from July even as tariffs hurt jobs and lead to price hikes

posted in: All news | 0

By ANNE D’INNOCENZIO, Associated Press Retail Writer

NEW YORK (AP) — Shoppers increased their spending at a better-than-expected pace in August from July, helped by back-to-school purchases, even as President Donald Trump’s tariffs are starting to hurt the job market and lead to price hikes.

Retail sales rose 0.6% last month from July, when sales were up a revised 0.6%, according to the Commerce Department’s report.

Related Articles


How much for matcha? Prices for the popular powdered tea soar due to global demand


What to know after US says it has reached framework deal with China to keep TikTok in operation


McDonald’s plans $200 million investment to promote regenerative practices on US cattle ranches


Nvidia violated antimonopoly laws, China says


Shipping companies support a first-ever global fee on greenhouse gases, opposed by Trump officials

The performance, announced Tuesday, was also likely helped by the continued efforts by Americans to keep pushing up purchases ahead of expected price increases. Moreover, higher prices could be bolstering the number as well.

The increases followed two straight months of spending declines in April and May.

Excluding auto sales, which have been volatile since Trump imposed tariffs on many foreign-made cars, retail sales rose 0.7% in August.

The data showed solid spending across various stores. Business at electronics and appliance stores up 0.3%, while online retailers had a 2% increase. Business at restaurants rose 0.7%.

Robert Redford, Oscar-winning actor, director and indie patriarch, dies at 89

posted in: All news | 0

Robert Redford, the Hollywood golden boy who became an Oscar-winning director, liberal activist and godfather for independent cinema under the name of one of his best-loved characters, died Tuesday at 89.

Redford died “at his home at Sundance in the mountains of Utah — the place he loved, surrounded by those he loved,” publicist Cindi Berger said in a statement. No cause of death was provided.

After rising to stardom in the 1960s, Redford was one of the biggest stars of the ’70s with such films as “The Candidate,” “All the President’s Men” and “The Way We Were,” capping that decade with the best director Oscar for 1980’s “Ordinary People,” which also won best picture in 1980. His wavy blond hair and boyish grin made him the most desired of leading men, but he worked hard to transcend his looks — whether through his political advocacy, his willingness to take on unglamorous roles or his dedication to providing a platform for low-budget movies.

His roles ranged from Washington Post journalist Bob Woodward to a mountain man in “Jeremiah Johnson” to a double agent in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and his co-stars included Jane Fonda, Meryl Streep and Tom Cruise. But his most famous screen partner was his old friend and fellow activist and practical joker Paul Newman, their films a variation of their warm, teasing relationship off screen. Redford played the wily outlaw opposite Newman in 1969’s “Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid,” a box-office smash from which Redford’s Sundance Institute and festival got its name. He also teamed with Newman on 1973’s best picture Oscar winner, “The Sting,” which earned Redford a best-actor nomination as a young con artist in 1930s Chicago.

Film roles after the ’70s became more sporadic as Redford concentrated on directing and producing, and his new role as patriarch of the independent-film movement in the 1980s and ’90s through his Sundance Institute. But he starred in 1985’s best picture champion “Out of Africa” and in 2013 received some of the best reviews of his career as a shipwrecked sailor in “All is Lost,” in which he was the film’s only performer. In 2018, he was praised again in what he called his farewell movie, “The Old Man and the Gun.”

“I just figure that I’ve had a long career that I’m very pleased with. It’s been so long, ever since I was 21,” he told The Associated Press shortly before the film came out. “I figure now as I’m getting into my 80s, it’s maybe time to move toward retirement and spend more time with my wife and family.”

Sundance is born

Redford had watched Hollywood grow more cautious and controlling during the 1970s and wanted to recapture the creative spirit of the early part of the decade. Sundance was created to nurture new talent away from the pressures of Hollywood, the institute providing a training ground and the festival, based in Park City, Utah, where Redford had purchased land with the initial hope of opening a ski resort. Instead, Park City became a place of discovery for such previously unknown filmmakers as Quentin Tarantino, Steven Soderbergh, Paul Thomas Anderson and Darren Aronofsky.

Related Articles


Luigi Mangione due in court as he seeks dismissal of state charges in UnitedHealthcare CEO’s killing


ICE crackdowns intensify across Boston as sanctuary cities face Trump’s latest operation


Today in History: September 16, massacre in Sabra and Shatila refugee camps


Suspect in Charlie Kirk shooting likely to face charges Tuesday before first court hearing


Trump explains away not ordering half-mast flag honors for Melissa Hortman

“For me, the word to be underscored is ‘independence,’” Redford told the AP in 2018. “I’ve always believed in that word. That’s what led to me eventually wanting to create a category that supported independent artists who weren’t given a chance to be heard.

“The industry was pretty well controlled by the mainstream, which I was a part of. But I saw other stories out there that weren’t having a chance to be told and I thought, ‘Well, maybe I can commit my energies to giving those people a chance.’ As I look back on it, I feel very good about that.”

Sundance was even criticized as buyers swarmed in looking for potential hits and celebrities overran the town each winter.

“We have never, ever changed our policies for how we program our festival. It’s always been built on diversity,” Redford told the AP in 2004. “The fact is that the diversity has become commercial. Because independent films have achieved their own success, Hollywood, being just a business, is going to grab them. So when Hollywood grabs your films, they go, ‘Oh, it’s gone Hollywood.’”

By 2025, the festival had become so prominent that organizers decided they had outgrown Park City and approved relocating to Boulder, Colorado, starting in 2027. Redford, who had attended the University of Colorado in Boulder, issued a statement saying that “change is inevitable, we must always evolve and grow, which has been at the core of our survival.”

Redford was married twice, most recently to Sibylle Szaggars. He had four children, two of whom have died — Scott Anthony, who died in infancy, in 1959; and James Redford, an activist and filmmaker who died in 2020.

Redford’s early life

Robert Redford was born Charles Robert Redford Jr. on Aug. 18, 1937, in Santa Monica, a California boy whose blond good looks eased his way over an apprenticeship in television and live theater that eventually led to the big screen.

Redford attended college on a baseball scholarship and would later star as a middle-aged slugger in 1984’s “The Natural,” the adaptation of Bernard Malamud’s baseball novel. He had an early interest in drawing and painting, then went on to study at the American Academy of Dramatic Arts, debuting on Broadway in the late 1950s and moving into television on such shows as “The Twilight Zone,” “Alfred Hitchcock Presents” and “The Untouchables.”

After scoring a Broadway lead in “Sunday in New York,” Redford was cast by director Mike Nichols in a production of Neil Simon’s “Barefoot in the Park,” later starring with Fonda in the film version. Redford did miss out on one of Nichols’ greatest successes, “The Graduate,” released in 1967. Nichols had considered casting Redford in the part eventually played by Dustin Hoffman, but Redford seemed unable to relate to the socially awkward young man who ends up having an affair with one of his parents’ friends.

“I said, ‘You can’t play it. You can never play a loser,’” Nichols said during a 2003 screening of the film in New York. “And Redford said, ‘What do you mean? Of course I can play a loser.’ And I said, ‘OK, have you ever struck out with a girl?’ and he said, ‘What do you mean?’ And he wasn’t joking.”

Bob Thomas, a longtime Associated Press journalist who died in 2014, was the principal writer of this obituary.

Related Articles


Polly Holliday, theater star famous as the tart waitress Flo on sitcom ‘Alice,’ dies at 88


Sharon Anderson, a colorful thorn in the political eye, dies at 86


Motorcyclist killed in I-94 crash was former East Ridge hockey player


Obituary: Steven Kent Lockwood, 79, turned Park Square Theatre into a St. Paul arts institution


‘Devastating news’: 2 St. Paul police officers die, 1 from heart attack, another from cancer