Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

kpete

(71,986 posts)
Sat Jun 15, 2013, 12:41 PM Jun 2013

PATHETIC! - Only 47 of 100 senators attended the 2:30 NSA Spy briefing








Senators skip classified briefing on NSA snooping to catch flights home



Read more: http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/305765-senators-skip-classified-briefing-on-nsa-snooping-to-catch-flights-home#ixzz2WItSf3il


A recent briefing by senior intelligence officials on surveillance programs failed to attract even half of the Senate, showing the lack of enthusiasm in Congress for learning about classified security programs. [...]

The Senate held its last vote of the week a little after noon on Thursday, and many lawmakers were eager to take advantage of the short day and head back to their home states for Father’s Day weekend.

Only 47 of 100 senators attended the 2:30 briefing ...



http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/305765-senators-skip-classified-briefing-on-nsa-snooping-to-catch-flights-home
62 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
PATHETIC! - Only 47 of 100 senators attended the 2:30 NSA Spy briefing (Original Post) kpete Jun 2013 OP
maybe this is why Congress express surprise about the facts. KittyWampus Jun 2013 #1
Exactly, Ma'am The Magistrate Jun 2013 #11
This ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ L0oniX Jun 2013 #32
absolutely utterly exactly precisely most assuredly Voice for Peace Jun 2013 #35
Plausible deniability. This is why DirkGently Jun 2013 #23
Incompetence. kentuck Jun 2013 #2
+++ yup yup yup Voice for Peace Jun 2013 #36
Maybe they already are in the private sector. AnotherMcIntosh Jun 2013 #52
Unless they were a bank executive, of course. dixiegrrrrl Jun 2013 #56
This will turn out to be the best thing about Snowden BeyondGeography Jun 2013 #3
"Too bad it takes a kid ruining his life" to shed light on HardTimes99 Jun 2013 #55
I really wish someone would out the senators who didn't attend the meeting. n/t demmiblue Jun 2013 #4
Yes. The story is an absolute waste without the names of the people who skipped it. n/t cherokeeprogressive Jun 2013 #15
Now that's oversight. Autumn Jun 2013 #5
They don't care. They don't have to. tblue Jun 2013 #6
Now they can say they were not briefed still_one Jun 2013 #7
exact kpete Jun 2013 #10
They did the same thing during the run-up to the Iraq. Most of those who ended up voting for sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #20
Hey sabrina 1. timdog44 Jun 2013 #49
Hi Timdog44. Thanks for your comment, I agree with completely, and I like the idea of them sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #54
I didn't see a list there. MH1 Jun 2013 #8
Well, that pretty much puts the lie to Congressional over-site WestStar Jun 2013 #9
Yes, it does. And we don't know how many other briefings they missed. We know this only sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #22
53 cannow deny knowing because nobody told them. Progressive dog Jun 2013 #12
Which 47 attended? AND in their defense, some deliberately won't go now because Catherina Jun 2013 #13
Good points. Then they need to declassify as much as possible so our Reps can actually represent us. sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #24
No, Congresspeople aren't so muzzled. jeff47 Jun 2013 #28
funny, my representative who unlike YOU is actually in Congress, disagrees cali Jun 2013 #30
Yeah, they have no incentive to cover up for missing briefings. jeff47 Jun 2013 #34
if there's one thing I know about Peter (and I do know) it's that he's not lazy cali Jun 2013 #48
Well, there's this other little problem with your theory jeff47 Jun 2013 #62
Questions I do not know the answers to karynnj Jun 2013 #14
1) Yes jeff47 Jun 2013 #31
On 2), I was assuming that ONE copy would be held by the people who did the briefing karynnj Jun 2013 #41
Briefing SamKnause Jun 2013 #39
Yep. "Congressional oversight" consists of a very few DirkGently Jun 2013 #16
Why would Congress care about the level of spying on the 99%?? rhett o rick Jun 2013 #17
I figured this was the reason Politicalboi Jun 2013 #18
Our Tax Dollars At Work... NOT WillyT Jun 2013 #19
The rest of them SCVDem Jun 2013 #21
Non story NaturalCommunist Jun 2013 #25
OFFS! Enjoy your stay. L0oniX Jun 2013 #29
The NSA isn't spying? Then what the fuck are we paying them for? magellan Jun 2013 #37
Collecting data is spying? NaturalCommunist Jun 2013 #40
Thank you, NaturalCommunist! Iliyah Jun 2013 #42
Of course it is. magellan Jun 2013 #45
Can I have your Social Security number? secondvariety Jun 2013 #53
If you only have 5 posts, I would recommend that you sit back and listen tavalon Jun 2013 #47
The 53 who missed need to issue statements on why they missed.... steve2470 Jun 2013 #26
Well ...they are not afraid of being fired. What else would you expect. L0oniX Jun 2013 #27
Makes the earlier 'surprised' reactions look like political theater BenzoDia Jun 2013 #33
It was a propaganda effort by the NSA to try and tell Congress what to say TakeALeftTurn Jun 2013 #38
Not only pathetic but pathological! These people are sick, sick, sick! VPStoltz Jun 2013 #43
They're too busy fundraising or is that the House? octoberlib Jun 2013 #44
Message auto-removed Name removed Jun 2013 #46
They Get Everything They Want To Know From WorldNetDaily n/t DallasNE Jun 2013 #50
Is every briefing on Friday afternoon? treestar Jun 2013 #51
The briefing was on Thursday Tx4obama Jun 2013 #58
They said on the news that Rand Paul skipped the briefing... also... Tx4obama Jun 2013 #57
Which, Again, Ma'am, Is Part Of the Problem The Magistrate Jun 2013 #59
and the other 53 maxrandb Jun 2013 #60
Wonder if Sanders or Warren were there? Hmmmm? michigandem58 Jun 2013 #61

The Magistrate

(95,247 posts)
11. Exactly, Ma'am
Sat Jun 15, 2013, 12:56 PM
Jun 2013

It throws into sharp relief many expressions of 'surprise' by various congress-critters....

The most likely reason for any Representative or Senator expressing surprise or shock at revelation in this matter is that the person was simply not doing their job, being overwhelmed by a tight schedule of fund-raising calls, intercession on behalf of constituents seeking funds from the government, photo-ops and similar publicity stunts, and so just not having the time to attend to the business of governing....

DirkGently

(12,151 posts)
23. Plausible deniability. This is why
Sat Jun 15, 2013, 01:31 PM
Jun 2013

it rings false when the President uses the notion that NSA spying is subject to Congressional oversight to defend it.

There really is none.
 

AnotherMcIntosh

(11,064 posts)
52. Maybe they already are in the private sector.
Sat Jun 15, 2013, 03:30 PM
Jun 2013

Collectively, we can't pay them as much as the rich and the super rich. When they are motivated by money, why should they work for us instead of those who have even more money?

BeyondGeography

(39,370 posts)
3. This will turn out to be the best thing about Snowden
Sat Jun 15, 2013, 12:46 PM
Jun 2013

Too bad it takes a kid ruining his life to shed light on congressional delinquency.

 

HardTimes99

(2,049 posts)
55. "Too bad it takes a kid ruining his life" to shed light on
Sat Jun 15, 2013, 04:32 PM
Jun 2013

national intel functions farmed out to the private sector.

Jesús H. Christ on a cracker!

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
20. They did the same thing during the run-up to the Iraq. Most of those who ended up voting for
Sat Jun 15, 2013, 01:28 PM
Jun 2013

it 'did not see' the entire Intelligence Report, despite the fact that it was made available to them. At least one Senator who did see it, actually changed his mind.

timdog44

(1,388 posts)
49. Hey sabrina 1.
Sat Jun 15, 2013, 02:43 PM
Jun 2013

I am the guy you spanked earlier today about things I have said about this whole fiasco.

This is disgraceful for our elected officials, especially the senate, who are supposed to be the level headed ones, to have less than a 50% attendance rate at an important meeting of the type. I would like to see a list. The only thing I have seen is that dear ole Rand Paul was seen walking out of the meeting, so now we have 46 who sat in. And he has been so vocal about all this. Hypocrite.

And I see what you were telling me about the run up to Iraq, with these guys not attending the meetings they were elected to be in attendance. One reason I would like to get rid of the congressional building and make these guys "rule" from home. They would be, then, in my back yard and I could make my feelings known. There needs to be some kind of way to this and make them be visible and transparent. I have not fleshed this out yet, but I will.

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
54. Hi Timdog44. Thanks for your comment, I agree with completely, and I like the idea of them
Sat Jun 15, 2013, 04:10 PM
Jun 2013

staying in their districts where they have to face those who elected them rather the lobbyists for Big Corporations who seem to have unlimited access to them. They could have maybe four of five trips to the Capitol Bldg every year, where they should be videotaped so we know what they are doing.

Even now we could check their donor lists and then look at how they vote. Eg, how many of them received contributions from Booz Allen, the 'security Corportation that hired Snowden and has our Constitutional rights in their hands?? Money is at the root of all of this. The only way to make the government more representative of the people, is to take the money out of politic because the people cannot compete with the money that Corporations use to bribe them to pass laws that benefit them.

I think then, we see more of them abiding by their oaths to 'defend and protect the CONSTITUTION. Right now, they completely ignore it as these multi billion dollar Security corporations would not get all those billions in funding to spy on the American people etc, IF our Reps were actually doing the job they swore to do.

 

WestStar

(202 posts)
9. Well, that pretty much puts the lie to Congressional over-site
Sat Jun 15, 2013, 12:52 PM
Jun 2013

and the FISA judges that were rubber stamping the 90 day renewals put the lie to Judicial over-site.

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
22. Yes, it does. And we don't know how many other briefings they missed. We know this only
Sat Jun 15, 2013, 01:29 PM
Jun 2013

because the story is in the news right now.

Progressive dog

(6,900 posts)
12. 53 cannow deny knowing because nobody told them.
Sat Jun 15, 2013, 12:58 PM
Jun 2013

Short days are a hell of a lot more important than knowing government stuff.

Catherina

(35,568 posts)
13. Which 47 attended? AND in their defense, some deliberately won't go now because
Sat Jun 15, 2013, 12:58 PM
Jun 2013

if you go and are briefed on a classified subject, you're muzzled. Whereas if you don't go, you can talk all you want.

I'm not defending them but that needs to be taken into account too.



CHRISTOPHER PYLE: Well, we all want to protect the security of the country. We all want to protect the Constitution. But when government agencies are totally unaccountable, we can’t do that. Members of Congress do not go to those briefings, even if they’re offered, because once you go to the briefing, then you can’t talk about what you’ve been told, because it’s classified. So the briefing system is designed to silence Congress, not to promote effective oversight.

http://www.democracynow.org/2013/6/13/chris_pyle_whistleblower_on_cia_domestic

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023010041

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
24. Good points. Then they need to declassify as much as possible so our Reps can actually represent us.
Sat Jun 15, 2013, 01:31 PM
Jun 2013

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
28. No, Congresspeople aren't so muzzled.
Sat Jun 15, 2013, 01:38 PM
Jun 2013

First, they literally make the rules. If they want to talk, they can. Because if a rule gets in the way, they can change it.

Second, if they want a program to stop because it's wrong, they don't have to say a damn thing. They control the government's money. They can forbid money to be spent on the program without discussing the program. Ta-da! Program over.

The "they skipped the briefing so they can talk" crowd are searching for an excuse for their favorite congresspeople, who abandoned their oversight duties.

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
34. Yeah, they have no incentive to cover up for missing briefings.
Sat Jun 15, 2013, 01:44 PM
Jun 2013

Why, they'd never ever spin that failure to be their problem. Instead, it's those other evil people who are causing the problem!

Keep voting for me, and I'll keep skipping briefings....er....fighting those evil people!

(ETA that doesn't mean they did not have a good reason for skipping the occasional briefing. But I have a hard time believing they managed to have a good reason to skip 30 briefings)

Congress created the classification system through the National Security Act of 1947. You are claiming they can make the system, but can not alter the system at all.

 

cali

(114,904 posts)
48. if there's one thing I know about Peter (and I do know) it's that he's not lazy
Sat Jun 15, 2013, 02:40 PM
Jun 2013

and yeah, I'm claiming that my rep can't alter the sytem.

I know my rep. I know him from when he served in the Vermont Senate. I know him from talking to him. I know him from the town meetings he frequently holds.

Yep, I trust my rep and both my Senators, Bernie and Pat over the crap that you're spewing.

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
62. Well, there's this other little problem with your theory
Sun Jun 16, 2013, 01:18 AM
Jun 2013

If Peter has a security clearance, it doesn't matter if he's briefed or not.

Leaking is not declassification. As a result, Peter is required to treat the information as classified no matter how he got it.

So it doesn't matter if he gets an official NSA briefing, or gets the information from Greenwald. The law requires him to treat the information the same way.

So no, briefings can not apply a muzzle. Because they are already muzzled.

karynnj

(59,503 posts)
14. Questions I do not know the answers to
Sat Jun 15, 2013, 12:59 PM
Jun 2013

1) Were there earlier briefings in the last 6 years that covered the same stuff? Were some of those who went home Senators who saw them?

2) Was the briefing taped and available for Senators to view when they return?

I assume that many had already scheduled flights that they could not easily change and they could have have had events planned in their states. The question I have is why was a time after the scheduled end of votes chosen. It would be interesting to see the list. It makes a difference if some who claimed they were never briefed - missing something like 22 briefings - were the ones missing.

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
31. 1) Yes
Sat Jun 15, 2013, 01:42 PM
Jun 2013

The executive branch says there were more than 30 briefings before Snowden's leak.

2) Probably not. Since it's classified, recording the briefing, storing the recording and providing copies of it at the whim of congresspeople is not easy.

I assume that many had already scheduled flights that they could not easily change

Most of them fly home every single week. They've spent so much money the airlines would cheerfully change their tickets.

Not to mention the airlines don't want to emphasize to Congress just how badly they're screwing consumers. That might make congresspeople think they should do something about it.

karynnj

(59,503 posts)
41. On 2), I was assuming that ONE copy would be held by the people who did the briefing
Sat Jun 15, 2013, 02:03 PM
Jun 2013

and they would have to go to the NSA to view it there. Giving them their own copies would be a recipe for disaster.

Your last point is well taken. Charging the exorbitant fees for changing could create consumer friendly legislation when the charges are well beyond the reasonable cost.

SamKnause

(13,101 posts)
39. Briefing
Sat Jun 15, 2013, 02:01 PM
Jun 2013

1) It is their job to stay up to date on important issues. Things have changed in the last 6 years. The way the law is being interpreted has changed. The way bills are being interpreted has changed.

2) I don't care one little bit what plans they have, or if they had flights scheduled. I have had to work forced overtime many times in my life. Christmas Eve, Christmas Day and Thanksgiving. They work for us. They need to earn their pay, benefits and perks. Some of those esteemed politicians are working on getting rid of the 40 hour work week and overtime pay.

Are you aware they are scheduled to work 126 days for the 2013 calendar year ? Can you imagine that in your wildest dreams ?

Why are people who are elected, and their salaries paid for with our tax dollars, so coddled and held in such high regard ?

If this is what passes for government, then the U.S. has little, or no government. I can count on 1 hand the politicians that work hard for and represent 'we the people'.

Did you watch the 24 minute video that Alan Grayson gave ?

He explained this matter in detail.

I hope you watch it and enjoy it.

Have a great weekend.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
17. Why would Congress care about the level of spying on the 99%??
Sat Jun 15, 2013, 01:27 PM
Jun 2013

Many people right here in DU City dont care. Trying to stifle attempts at investigating this further. They want to lynch Snowden, close up the NSA box and go back to watching "Dancing with the Stars(?)"

 

Politicalboi

(15,189 posts)
18. I figured this was the reason
Sat Jun 15, 2013, 01:27 PM
Jun 2013

They weren't briefed. They are LAZY. Besides, it's almost summer break.

 

SCVDem

(5,103 posts)
21. The rest of them
Sat Jun 15, 2013, 01:29 PM
Jun 2013

are honing their bullshit talking points for the Sunday Morning Funnies!

We need hard hitting questions and the Sunday losers are worthless!

NaturalCommunist

(15 posts)
25. Non story
Sat Jun 15, 2013, 01:34 PM
Jun 2013

Maybe that's because 53 understand that this is a non story and NSA isn't really "spying".

Of course if the NSA wasn't stopping terrorist attacks, then the attendance numbers might be different.

magellan

(13,257 posts)
37. The NSA isn't spying? Then what the fuck are we paying them for?
Sat Jun 15, 2013, 01:52 PM
Jun 2013

Also, can you provide evidence for your claim that the NSA is stopping terrorist attacks? Like the methodology and data used to uncover the plots? The devil's in the details.

NaturalCommunist

(15 posts)
40. Collecting data is spying?
Sat Jun 15, 2013, 02:02 PM
Jun 2013

Give me a break. The Obama administration stated that it has stopped countless attacks.

Perhaps we should be grateful for the people we vote for rather than opposed just because some alarmist got your attention.

The job of the Federal government is to protect the country. That includes against people here plotting to do us harm. I for one think we're much safer with the program. Although I have nothing to hide. Perhaps that is the issue for many?

Iliyah

(25,111 posts)
42. Thank you, NaturalCommunist!
Sat Jun 15, 2013, 02:15 PM
Jun 2013

Its also noted that many senators and house reps, mostly GOPers refuse to attend meetings of any sort be it economics 101, jobs, educational, unemployment issues, social issues, et al.,

magellan

(13,257 posts)
45. Of course it is.
Sat Jun 15, 2013, 02:24 PM
Jun 2013

Are you telling me that if someone followed you around all day every day, taking notes of where you go, who you talk to, what you buy, what interests you, and heaven knows what else, you wouldn't accuse them of spying on you? Don't be foolish.

How quaint that you trust the word of the government without proof. Your 'nothing to hide' comment is quaint too. So glad to see you're on board with the idea that everyone's guilty until proved otherwise. Tell me, do you regularly let the police rifle through your computer and perform a cavity search on you and your loved ones to prove you've nothing to hide?

You may feel safer letting the government violate your rights, but that isn't your -- or THEIR -- choice to make.

tavalon

(27,985 posts)
47. If you only have 5 posts, I would recommend that you sit back and listen
Sat Jun 15, 2013, 02:35 PM
Jun 2013

Otherwise you might be mistaken for a shit stirring troll. Wouldn't want that to happen. But don't worry, if you haven't done anything wrong, you won't get tombstoned. Or some variation of the same.

NSA isn't really spying! Thank you for my morning laugh. Have you considered stand up comedy? There might just be a future for you.

Now, this is the sit back and listen portion of our discussion. In other words, I'm going to teach you and you are going to shut up and listen. The NSA has always been spying. When they started focusing so closely on our own citizenry is the question being discussed. Kind of like Watergate - who knew and when did they know? You know about Watergate, right?

Hmmm, your post doesn't give me enough information to know if you are a high information or low information person. So, I guess I'll go with the lowest common denominator. Back in the early 70's, the President at the time (Nixon) was becoming increasingly paranoid and had some of his colleagues bug his "enemies", except that they got caught. It was a big scandal and that President had to resign because he was going to be impeached and possibly imprisoned. No worries, though, his VP pardoned him immediately. Anyway, enough of the past.

Let's head forward into another administration. It was the GW Bush Administration. They made Nixon look like a choirboy. That's when the domestic data sweeping began. Now, were the NSA spying on Americans before that? Of course they were, but this was all new! An opportunity to gather every bit of stuff electronically transmitted. That part is not secret. Well, it was supposed to be but that administration was so inept, it had to come out. It was called TIA or Total Information Awareness. Remember when we found out that AT&T had a back room where they were storing all of our calls, both outside and inside the US? 2006 was when we found out about that one.

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/2013/06/07/u-s-never-really-ended-creepy-total-information-awareness-program/

The American people made a big stink about it and supposedly they closed the program. I didn't believe they did, but notice, I say believe, rather than know. But the revelations of last week support my belief. Sure, its name is changed (because that makes it all better - ask PNAC. Don't know PNAC? Google them) but its intent and purpose is the same, blanket surveillance (spying) on the American people.

Now, your last sentence is also a really, really funny one. Whether the NSA was or was not stopping terrorist attacks has nothing to do with the attendance numbers of the Senators because you see, they aren't actually as Godlike and omniscient as you've made them out to be. They are, for the most part, fully compromised politicians who only care about getting elected for whatever strange reasons they have. Most of them have no interest in governing, so why they picked public service is beyond me.

Let's go on another tangent, shall we? Public servant. Interesting phrase. Let's take it apart. Public = us, We The People. Servant = one who serves, in this case, one who serves us, We The People.

So why in the world did I just go on a long spiel responding to someone who likely won't be here to see it? No reason except the tiny, tiny chance that you aren't a troll and actually can use some of this information. This is the stuff you need to seek out and read. Don't respond or argue, just read and think. If you do that enough, I'll be congratulating you in a few years on your 1000th post and you will be far more educated in politics than many if not most of your fellow Americans.

steve2470

(37,457 posts)
26. The 53 who missed need to issue statements on why they missed....
Sat Jun 15, 2013, 01:37 PM
Jun 2013

I'd like to hear the reasons. Perhaps some really had an overriding reason to miss, but I'd like to hear it.

 

L0oniX

(31,493 posts)
27. Well ...they are not afraid of being fired. What else would you expect.
Sat Jun 15, 2013, 01:38 PM
Jun 2013

You didn't expect them to do their jobs did ya?

BenzoDia

(1,010 posts)
33. Makes the earlier 'surprised' reactions look like political theater
Sat Jun 15, 2013, 01:44 PM
Jun 2013

Even if some of the missing bad been briefed before.

Response to kpete (Original post)

treestar

(82,383 posts)
51. Is every briefing on Friday afternoon?
Sat Jun 15, 2013, 03:02 PM
Jun 2013

Do they always have this kind of attendance? I don't think this one instance should be used to claim they don't know what they are doing at all times. Showing lack of enthusiasm sounds like a jumped to conclusion.

Tx4obama

(36,974 posts)
58. The briefing was on Thursday
Sat Jun 15, 2013, 05:34 PM
Jun 2013
Senators Skip NSA Briefing: Only 47 Meet With Top Officials On Surveillance

-snip-

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) made a point of recessing the Senate for an hour on Thursday, saying it was so no one would have an excuse for missing the briefing.

-snip-

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/15/senators-skip-nsa-briefing_n_3446446.html

Tx4obama

(36,974 posts)
57. They said on the news that Rand Paul skipped the briefing... also...
Sat Jun 15, 2013, 05:31 PM
Jun 2013

Last edited Sat Jun 15, 2013, 06:18 PM - Edit history (1)


also they said that some Senators in the past have said that they don't go to the briefings because they are afraid that they might let something that is classified slip out when they are talking in the future.

That's some crazy shit!


Edited to fix typo.

The Magistrate

(95,247 posts)
59. Which, Again, Ma'am, Is Part Of the Problem
Sat Jun 15, 2013, 05:38 PM
Jun 2013

Give a general briefing to Congress, and you might as well call a news-conference and show a video, and follow up with full texts from the Printing Office and posts on You-Tube....

"Any three people can keep a secret, providing two of them are dead."

maxrandb

(15,324 posts)
60. and the other 53
Sat Jun 15, 2013, 05:47 PM
Jun 2013

will be the first to run to the cameras to tell you "we're just like Nazi Germany or Stalinist Russia"

Hmmmmm...makes me wonder if this NSA issue is not quite "Big Brother" or "1984". Maybe, just maybe the point of this NSA outrage is to try to make sure the "wrong" people stay away from the polls in 2014.

You give un-checked power to folks like Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Pat Robertson and the Tea-vangelist, well, then you'd better start worrying about re-education camps.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»PATHETIC! - Only 47 of 10...