Replies

There is speculation that Senator Rockefeller may be the leaker - watch what happens to him, and if it's "bad," we will have an object lesson into why Congresspeople informed of deep secrets are reluctant to even hint at their knowledge.

Rockefeller, it's speculated, leaked to the press. That's hardly the first option of someone genuinely concerned about both the security of this country and the constitutional issues in question. If it's him, we will have an object lesson into how to play politics with national security.

I was aware of the original Harmon statement. Maybe I'm missing something but it seems to me that it was an admission of incompetence. The right to limit the congressional briefings, at least as she describes the law, is not based on complex legal or constitutional issues.

I was aware of the original Harmon statement. Maybe I'm missing something but it seems to me that it was an admission of incompetence.

I wasn't accusing you of not reading the orginal statement. I was pointing out FR threads where readers said Harman flip-flopped, when the record shows otherwise.

Since she raised the issue of non-conformity with The National Security Act of 1947 in her December 21, 2005 statement, I take that your conclusion, "admission of incompetence," refers to Harman not raising the charge before the President confirmed the existence of the NSA program.

The right to limit the congressional briefings, at least as she describes the law, is not based on complex legal or constitutional issues.

Oh? Then provide your simple analysis of the NSA activity in light of the relevant statute.

TITLE 50 : CHAPTER 15 : SUBCHAPTER III - ACCOUNTABILITY FOR INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES

A first question (I think easily answered) is, "Is the NSA program 'covert,' as defined in the accountability to Congress statute?"

A tougher matter is construction of the phrase "To the extent consistent with due regard for the protection from unauthorized disclosure of classified information relating to sensitive intelligence sources and methods or other exceptionally sensitive matters"

Rockefeller, it's speculated, leaked to the press. That's hardly the first option of someone genuinely concerned about both the security of this country and the constitutional issues in question.

What are his options? I concluded he was between a rock and a hard place in my post 2537 above.

Can raise the issue in the briefing, but so what? The briefers are determined to continue with the program regardless of opposition.
Expressing any hint, outside the briefing, that discloses even the possibility of the program, results in risk of "compromise of an effective program" and/or "compromise security of the country."