7 House Dems knew of spying 4 yrs. ago (kept info to themselves)

[donsu]

http://www.alternet.org/story/30600/

Bush's Unlikely Co-conspirators
At least seven House Democrats learned about the NSA's secret spying program four years ago. So why didn't anyone blow the whistle?


President Bush deserves plenty of blame for secretly authorizing domestic spying by the National Security Agency. But some of the president's fiercest critics in Congress gave him the political cover to do so. The question why they did so says much about the nation's brittle democracy and how Democrats have covertly joined with Republicans to restore the imperial presidency and effectively remove any checks on the executive branch of the U.S. government.

-snip-

Indeed, at least seven Democrats in the House were briefed by the Bush administration on the spy program as far back as four years ago. Among those briefed include Nancy Pelosi, House Democratic leader. Last week, Pelosi released a previously classified letter documenting some of her concerns about NSA spying. The question that went unanswered is why Pelosi -- and the other Democrats, including former South Dakota Sen. Tom Daschle and West Virginia Sen. Jay Rockefeller -- never blew the whistle publicly on the program.

Pelosi, Daschle and Rockefeller each privately expressed dismay over the spying program -- in secret. They didn't go public with their concerns because they were bound by rules governing classified briefings of congressional members. These classified briefings were launched more than 20 years ago as a reform in the oversight of the nation's spy apparatus. But like many other reforms, classified briefings have become perverted and, in the hands of President Bush and Vice President Cheney, have become gags that prevent Congress members from doing their job.

-snip-

The failure of these Democrats to risk personal censure for the greater public good can give the impression there is actually only one political party in the U.S., and that opposition and dissent on issues of security in Washington are only a mirage.
-snip-
---------------------------------------


america is doomed

[endarkenment]

1. My understanding is that the risk went beyond personal censure.

I could be wrong. However, since the 80's classified information access has came with disclosure penalties that go beyond personal censure. At a minimum every one of these representatives would have lost all future access.

That said, I agree that in this case the fact that what they were briefed on was a direct violation of both statutory and constitutional law, one or more of them should have stood up and spoken out.

[gratuitous]

2. Curious omission from the account

"At least seven Democrats in the House were briefed by the Bush administration." What, exactly, does that mean, "briefed"? Were they told some general outline of the program, merely told that it existed, or given a detailed report on who was spied on, what information was gathered, what information was discarded, who was spied on in error, and what the targets and objectives of the program were? I submit that these are rather important distinctions.

Additionally, in briefing Democrats only in the House in 2001, the administration was telling people who couldn't do anything in terms of getting more information, because as the minority party, Democrats aren't allowed to call committee hearings, issue subpoenas, or take the sworn testimony of anyone. And because of the classified nature of whatever these House members were briefed on, they couldn't go to their colleagues in the Senate and suggest that someone in the majority there call a hearing or send out subpoenas.

This allegation of "briefing" sounds to me like the merest window dressing, done as a hedge against this very day, when the news of the illegal domestic spying program inevitably leaked out as a way of putting powerless Democrats on the hot seat with a lawless administration. I am content to investigate this program thoroughly, find the wrongdoers, try them in court, convict them if the evidence warrants it, and lock them up for a term commensurate with their crimes. Let's get those guys first. Later on, we can sort out the other who knew what whens.

[KittyWampus]

4. Daschle already said those briefings were incomplete. DU'ers take the bait

every time. And, apparently some editorialists.

[William769]

5. It's what some people here live for.

And we are suppose to be the free thinkers. Makes one wonder sometimes.

[KittyWampus]

3. They HAD To Keep Info To Selves. What A STUPID Article

completely counterproductive.

Redirect your anger to the right target for a fucking change.

[donsu]

6. they "HAD" to ?

nt

[KoKo]

7. They had to wait until the public was ready to hear it. Remember that

it's only recently Bush has taken any big hits to his ratings. If they had come out earlier they would have been "Swift Boated" and the important issue would have been swept under the rug.

I'm one of those DU'ers who has accused our Dems over and over of being spineless...saying they should have walked out of the Senate and House when these bils were pushed through. They should have taken a stand together and made an uproar. But, given the extent of the "Crime Family" which is worse than most of us even imagined (and we DU'ers have believed some pretty bad stuff) it's only now that we can see some of WHY they couldn't stand together. The public wouldn't have accepted it and more than Anthrax would have been in the mails to them.

I'm sure they have been intimidated, spied on and perhaps some have been blackmailed because of the NSA spying program. Better for it to come out NOW when the unraveling of Abramoff/DeLay/Christian Right/PlameGate and the
AIPAC Spy case has a chance of getting some traction.

On this one, I can't trash them. They WERE sworn to secrecy. I just hope that a huge lesson is learned from this and we can dismantle the IMPERIAL PRESIDENCY...before there's nothing left that we can recognize.

[ProSense]

8. They were bound by law not to disclose the information

div class="excerpt"]
But membership also has its burdens. The "gang" — Republican Sen. Pat Roberts of Kansas and Rep. Peter Hoekstra of Michigan and Democrats Rockefeller and Rep. Jane Harman of California — is virtually gagged from discussing anything from meetings with anyone outside the group — not even other senators, staffers or lawyers with security clearance on the intelligence committees. “You can't discuss it with anybody as long as you live,” Rockefeller said Monday.

And for Rockefeller and Harmon, the senior Democrats on the Senate and House intelligence committees, respectively, membership can be even more problematic. If they want to object to anything the administration is doing, they're forbidden from doing so publicly.

[cindyw]

9. Gotta love the Blame the Dems First crowd.

Repubs were also briefed on this and probably agreed with it, did not dissent and are now on TV defending it. Now somehow this scandal is Bush and his Dem "cp-conspirators"? Crap.