Thomas Tamm, whose suburban Washington home was searched by federal agents last year, told the magazine he leaked the existence of the secret program to The New York Times 18 months before the newspaper broke the story.

"I thought this was something the other branches of the government and the public ought to know about. So they could decide: do they want this massive spying program to be taking place?" Tamm told Newsweek in what the magazine said were a series of recent interviews that he granted against the advice of his lawyers.

"If somebody were to say, who am I to do that? I would say, 'I had taken an oath to uphold the Constitution.' It's stunning that somebody higher up the chain of command didn't speak up," the magazine quoted Tamm as saying.

Tamm, 56, told the magazine he called the Times from a subway station pay phone in Washington.

In December 2005 the Times published a story exposing the Bush administration's warrantless wiretapping program to eavesdrop on international phone calls and e-mails of U.S. residents without court warrants.

The story cited multiple anonymous sources. Newsweek said the Times reporters who wrote the story refused to say whether Tamm was one of them.

The eavesdropping had been conducted without public knowledge and without any court approval. It has since been put under the authority of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.

Tamm, who left the Justice Department in 2006, had worked in the department's Office of Intelligence Policy and Review, a secretive unit that oversees surveillance of terrorist and espionage targets, according to Newsweek.

He told the magazine he has since struggled to make a living in private practice. Tamm has not been charged with any crimes, though the magazine said his friends and relatives have been questioned by federal agents.

The Illinois attorney general has filed a motion with the state's highest court asking justices to remove scandal-plagued Gov. Rod Blagojevich bluh-GOY'-uh-vich) from office.

Lisa Madigan took the action Friday as pressure on the governor intensified to step down. The motion challenges his fitness to serve and asks that the Supreme Court oust him.

Madigan scheduled a news conference in Chicago Friday morning to discuss the motion.

The move came as the governor prayed with several ministers in his home before heading to his office, telling them he is innocent and will be vindicated "when you hear each chapter completely written," according to one of the pastors.

Munich-based Siemens would not comment on the report.

"We're hoping on an agreement with the SEC before Christmas," a Siemens supervisory board member told the newspaper, referring to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. "If necessary, we'll meet December 23rd."

Siemens is subject to fines in the U.S. because it's also listed on the New York Stock Exchange.

Siemens, which makes everything from trains to light bulbs, was first rocked by claims of corruption in 2006. Evidence began to surface in 2007 and the company has since acknowledged dubious payments to secure business around the world of up to euro1.3 billion ($1.7 billion).

In November, Siemens said it had set aside approximately euro1 billion to be booked in the last quarter of its 2008 fiscal year for any settlements related to the case. The company's fiscal year ended in September.

Siemens has said including the provision last fiscal year, the total cost of the corruption scandal is about euro2.5 billion to date.

A three-judge panel of the Minnesota Court of Appeals on Tuesday rejected the Republican's bid to toss out his disorderly conduct conviction.

Craig still has the option of appealing to the Minnesota Supreme Court, and he said Tuesday he was considering future options.

Craig was arrested June 11, 2007, by an undercover police officer who was conducting a sting operation against men cruising for gay sex at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport.

He quietly pleaded guilty to the misdemeanor and paid a fine, but changed his mind after word of his arrest became public that August. Craig insisted he was innocent and said he was not gay. His attorney argued that the police officer misconstrued Craig's foot-tapping, hand movements and other conduct.

But the case brought widespread ridicule and effectively ended his political career.

Craig lost several GOP leadership positions in the wake of the scandal, and the Senate Ethics Committee said in February that Craig had brought discredit on the Senate. The committee members said they believed he was guilty, and that his attempt to withdraw his plea was just an effort to evade the legal consequences of his own actions.

He did not seek a fourth term in last month's election. He will be replaced in January by Idaho Lt. Gov. Jim Risch, a Republican.

Craig's attorney, Billy Martin, argued before the appeals court in September that there was insufficient evidence for any judge to find him guilty.

In its 10-page opinion, the appeals panel said that Craig failed to show that Hennepin County District Judge Charles Porter abused his discretion by denying his petition to withdraw his plea. Porter had said the plea was "accurate, voluntary and intelligent, and ... supported by the evidence."

Tuesday's opinion also said Craig failed to show that the state's disorderly conduct law was unconstitutionally overbroad.

"I am extremely disappointed by the action of the Minnesota Court of Appeals," Craig said in a statement. "I disagree with their conclusion and remain steadfast in my belief that nothing criminal or improper occurred at the Minneapolis airport." He said he and his attorneys were reviewing into the possibility of further appeals.

After the story became public, Craig had initially said that he would resign from the Senate, but he changed his mind about that, too, and vowed to fight to clear his name.

Patrick Hogan, a spokesman for the Metropolitan Airports Commission, which runs the airport, said the appellate decision again confirms that Craig knew what he was doing when he entered his plea. He said the agency hopes it's the end of the case.

France had repeatedly refused to apply a 2002 EU law that set out rules by which biotech crops could be planted in areas where other conventional crops were grown. France argued it could not adopt the rules because of violent anti-GMO demonstrations. The EU court rejected those arguments. France has applied the law since July.

The Luxembourg-based court says France's conduct was "unlawful" and said Tuesday's ruling should act as a warning to others that ignoring EU regulations has a price.