[Sub-Driver]

Is this another leak? Sheeesh.....

[pabianice]

[alice_in_bubbaland]

"clearly was referring to programs that have not been publicly revealed"

Looks that way to me!

[saganite]

The source is the NYT. Wait for Hoekstra's comments after the fact before drawing any conclusions. My guess is he's misquoted here.

[Paloma_55]

Looks like Hoekstra is the leaker too. Or one of his staffers.

[EDINVA]

these ba$tard$ never quit with the leaks, do they ?

[hellbender]

It seems the Admin. is in a bind. Being open with Congress virtually guarantees leaks from the disloyal Demonrats. Also, Congress has no Constitutional right to micromanage the conduct of war.

[lilylangtree]

Good God! Who's the Slimes leak in the Bush Administration? Someone at State? CIA? FBI?

[EBH]

Again?....drip, drip, drip, drip.

[Hamilcar_Barca]

I will not support any Republican who does not support President Bush. Give no money to the Republican National Committee any any of the generic GOP congressional fund raising groups. Contribute directly only to candidates who support the President and support defending this country again terror attacks.

[Shermy]

""A copy of the four-page letter dated May 18, which has not been previously disclosed, was obtained by The New York Times""

Translation: Hoekstra or his aide handed it to us, and in return we give him positive NY Times exposure.

[pandemoniumreigns]

OK..Is he saying that the surveillance is itself illegal or that not briefing his committee is illegal?

[Recovering_Democrat]

In a sharply worded letter to President Bush in May, an important Congressional ally charged that the administration might have violated the law by failing to inform Congress of some secret intelligence programs and risked losing Republican support on national security matters.

Who gives a SHIITE MUSLIM??? Hoekstra is not the CinC.

[HawaiianGecko]

"I have learned of some alleged intelligence community activities about which our committee has not been briefed," Mr. Hoesktra wrote. "If these allegations are true, they may represent a breach of responsibility by the administration, a violation of the law, and, just as importantly, a direct affront to me and the members of this committee who have so ardently supported efforts to collect information on our enemies."

Hmmmm... at least the accusation highlighted in red isn't a wild guess.

 

[CharlesWayneCT]

The letter says he has "heard" of some programs, which "if accurate" is disturbing because he didn't get briefed.

There is no indication from the letter that these "alleged programs" actually exist.

If there WERE programs that Hoekstra had no inkling of, that WOULD be an issue, because he's supposed to at least know about the existance of every program.

But it is quite likely that the programs he references did not actually exist, and were just attempts by anti-Bush forces in the CIA or other agencies to try to stir up trouble for the administration.

[CharlesWayneCT]

BTW, the letter itself does not seem to reference any specific programs, and it's "leak" isn't really a national security matter.

My guess is that, having received a letter like this, and being pretty sure there were no programs that were unrevealed, the administration would have sent the letter to underlings to direct them to answer the letter and provide briefings to ensure the congressman that there were no such programs.

So the letter probably was accessable by multiple enemies of the administration. And since the letter itself does NOT allege wrongdoing, there wouldn't be much problem with it -- it's the NYTimes spin that the letter is accusing the administration.

It's like the NY Times publishing a letter saying that I accused my daughter of possible wrongdoing because someone told me she had done something and I asked her if she had.

[RJL]

The President receives information from hundreds of sources. If he stopped every time one guy wasn't happy about something, nothing would get done.

I'm sure President Bush discussed the legal aspects of this with the appropriate folks.

This is nothing more than the treasonous NYT attacking the President once again.

[Hartmann]

And you can be sure the NY Times is sending its reporters ferreting around, trying to discover just what those programs are so that they can publish the details for the terrorists to see. I can just hear the pant pant.

They figure revelation of terrorist tracking programs and the ensuing terrorist attacks will sell newspapers. After 9/11 they published an additional section for months with biographies and pictures of the victims. Their circulation went up and they got some Pulitzers. Isn't this called "yellow journalism"?

[okie01]

He added: "The U.S. Congress simply should not have to play Twenty Questions to get the information that it deserves under our Constitution."

Congressman, the fact that this direct quote from your letter appears in the New York Times should explain WHY you must play "twenty questions".

Simply stated, certain members of your committee (or staff) can't keep their mouths shut.

[The Old Hoosier]

Mr. Hoekstra, who was briefed on and supported the National Security Agency's domestic surveillance program and the Treasury Department's tracking of international banking transactions, clearly was referring to programs that have not been publicly revealed.

But don't worry, we'll reveal them soon enough!

[mrsmith]

Strange, now the headline is "Ally Told Bush Project Secrecy Might Be Illegal ".

It should be "Ally's Concerns Answered" since, near the end, the article says Hayden had responded about the programs.

Funny the article doesn't mention the part of Hoekstra's letter about the Democrat cabal in the CIA and Valerie Plame.
'All the news that fits our agenda' LOL!