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

pnwmom

(108,977 posts)
Sat Jun 8, 2013, 08:32 PM Jun 2013

Does it make sense or is it fair for Senator Durbin to blame President Obama

for not informing the Senate about the NSA data collection on the basis that "Very few lawmakers avail themselves of such briefings. . . ."

NO!

GIVE ME A BREAK! What is Obama supposed to do to make sure they're informed? Send guards to drag them into the briefings?

If they wanted to know, they'd attend the briefings or they'd read the classified documents they're sent. Clearly, Senators like Durbin just want to complain.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/09/us/politics/officials-say-congress-was-fully-briefed-on-surveillance.html

Senior Obama administration officials, including the directors of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and of national intelligence, have held 13 classified hearings and briefings for members of Congress since 2009 to explain the broad authority they say they have to sweep up electronic records for national security purposes, a senior administration official said Saturday.

The administration, by disclosing the briefings, sought to push back on claims by Democrats and Republicans in Congress that they were either not aware of programs to mine vast amounts of Internet data and business telephone records or were insufficiently briefed on the details.

Lawmakers said that what they knew was vague and broad — and that strict rules of classification prevented them from truly debating the programs or conducting proper oversight.

In separate but identical letters sent on Oct. 19, 2011, Assistant Attorney General Ronald Weich told two of Congress’s most outspoken critics of the efforts, Senators Ron Wyden of Oregon and Mark Udall of Colorado, both Democrats, that in December 2009 and February 2011 the Justice Department and intelligence agencies provided a classified document to Congress describing the surveillance efforts in detail.

SNIP

But Senator Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, the Senate’s No. 2 Democrat, draws a distinction between the holding of such briefings and the informed consent of Congress. Very few lawmakers avail themselves of such briefings, he suggested, and only the most senior leaders are kept fully abreast of intelligence activities.

24 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Does it make sense or is it fair for Senator Durbin to blame President Obama (Original Post) pnwmom Jun 2013 OP
I expect my Congress to be proactive and vigilant. NYC_SKP Jun 2013 #1
But saying they could have gotten these briefings is different from saying there was full dkf Jun 2013 #4
It's incumbent upon the members of the various congressional committees to stay informed. NYC_SKP Jun 2013 #5
That wasn't their committee. dkf Jun 2013 #6
It's a good point, I don't know that "full oversight" refers to all 535 members or not... NYC_SKP Jun 2013 #10
Senate and House committees... dkf Jun 2013 #16
They sent written documents to Congress. pnwmom Jun 2013 #15
It's the job of the Senate to exercise the oversight. They were given the information pnwmom Jun 2013 #12
It is perfectly fair Summer Hathaway Jun 2013 #2
Obama is the All Powerful One. Naturally, he's in control of everything. freshwest Jun 2013 #20
Ha ha! Summer Hathaway Jun 2013 #21
How are they supposed to know that should be of interest? dkf Jun 2013 #3
it doesn't end because a lot of people just don't neverforget Jun 2013 #7
But aren't the words of government officials starting to look like they all need further examination dkf Jun 2013 #8
of course they do but you can't debate secrets because neverforget Jun 2013 #11
Yes they can. They can hold closed meetings to discuss secret topics. n/t pnwmom Jun 2013 #14
By reading the document they were sent? And by reading pnwmom Jun 2013 #13
Congresscritters need to stop campaigning and start working. n/t savalez Jun 2013 #9
That's the best comment in the entire thread davidpdx Jun 2013 #22
I have to say it depends dsc Jun 2013 #17
But Durbin didn't say they were deluged with information. pnwmom Jun 2013 #18
He also didn't say why they didn't go dsc Jun 2013 #24
Merkley was on Rachel Maddow's show the other night claiming the same bullshit! Liberal_Stalwart71 Jun 2013 #19
So the question for Congress is who knew what when davidpdx Jun 2013 #23
 

dkf

(37,305 posts)
4. But saying they could have gotten these briefings is different from saying there was full
Sat Jun 8, 2013, 08:42 PM
Jun 2013

Congressional oversight. Don't you think that was at least somewhat deceptive in its description? It was weasel words.

 

NYC_SKP

(68,644 posts)
5. It's incumbent upon the members of the various congressional committees to stay informed.
Sat Jun 8, 2013, 08:52 PM
Jun 2013

And, to attend hearings and meetings and avail themselves of any and all disclosed material.

It may be a distinction without a difference, but I think the burden is on congress and not on the administration, provided the admins didn't do anything to hamper the oversight.

In reality, there's enough blame to go around all three branches, no?

 

dkf

(37,305 posts)
6. That wasn't their committee.
Sat Jun 8, 2013, 08:56 PM
Jun 2013

If they wanted full congressional oversight surely there's a way to address the whole body?

 

NYC_SKP

(68,644 posts)
10. It's a good point, I don't know that "full oversight" refers to all 535 members or not...
Sat Jun 8, 2013, 09:01 PM
Jun 2013

...but I expect that it does not.

For all the various defense, energy, economic, etc., matters of critical national interest, for full disclosure to occur to all 535 would be quite a work load, and they don't work that hard.

 

dkf

(37,305 posts)
16. Senate and House committees...
Sat Jun 8, 2013, 09:08 PM
Jun 2013

Senate:
2013-2014
Dianne Feinstein, California
Chairman Saxby Chambliss, Georgia
Vice Chairman John D. Rockefeller IV, West Virginia
Richard Burr, North Carolina
Ron Wyden, Oregon
James E. Risch, Idaho
Barbara A. Mikulski, Maryland
Daniel Coats, Indiana
Mark Udall, Colorado
Marco Rubio, Florida
Mark Warner, Virginia
Susan Collins, Maine
Martin Heinrich, New Mexico
Tom Coburn, Oklahoma
Angus King, Maine

Harry Reid, Nevada, Ex Officio
Mitch McConnell, Kentucky, Ex Officio
Carl Levin, Michigan, Ex Officio
James Inhofe, Oklahoma, Ex Officio


http://www.intelligence.senate.gov/memberscurrent.html

House:


Mike Rogers, Chairman
8th District of Michigan

Mac Thornberry
13th District of Texas

Jeff Miller
1st District of Florida

Mike Conaway
11th District of Texas

Peter King
3rd District of New York

Frank LoBiondo
2nd District of New Jersey

Devin Nunes
21st District of California

Lynn Westmoreland
3rd District of Georgia

Michele Bachmann
6th District of Minnesota

Thomas J Rooney
16th District of Florida

Joe Heck
3rd District of Nevada

Mike Pompeo
4th District of Kansas

HPSCI Minority Members
C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger, Ranking Member
2nd District of Maryland

Mike Thompson
1st District of California

Jan Schakowsky
9th District of Illinois

Jim Langevin
2nd District of Rhode Island

Adam Schiff
29th District of California

Luis Gutierrez
4th District of Illinois

Ed Pastor
7th District of Arizona

Jim Himes
4th District of Connecticut

Terri Sewell
7th District of Alabama

http://intelligence.house.gov/about/hpsci-minority-members

So this is the totality of the "fully briefed" members. All 40 of them.


pnwmom

(108,977 posts)
15. They sent written documents to Congress.
Sat Jun 8, 2013, 09:08 PM
Jun 2013

Can't they all read? And if there were some documents that the Intelligence Committees chose not to share that should have been shared, shouldn't they be complaining about that, rather than about Obama?

"In separate but identical letters sent on Oct. 19, 2011, Assistant Attorney General Ronald Weich told two of Congress’s most outspoken critics of the efforts, Senators Ron Wyden of Oregon and Mark Udall of Colorado, both Democrats, that in December 2009 and February 2011 the Justice Department and intelligence agencies provided a classified document to Congress describing the surveillance efforts in detail.

"The letter said the House and Senate Intelligence Committees had been briefed “on these operations multiple times and have had access to copies of the classified” orders and opinions of the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. Members of the committee were invited to share the information with other lawmakers."

pnwmom

(108,977 posts)
12. It's the job of the Senate to exercise the oversight. They were given the information
Sat Jun 8, 2013, 09:04 PM
Jun 2013

but some of them didn't bother reading the documents or attending the meetings.

That's not Obama's fault. The program got as much oversight as the individual Senators felt like giving it.

Summer Hathaway

(2,770 posts)
2. It is perfectly fair
Sat Jun 8, 2013, 08:38 PM
Jun 2013

for Durbin to blame Obama for Durbin not doing his own job.


<<< Becoming more and more necessary hereabouts.

Summer Hathaway

(2,770 posts)
21. Ha ha!
Sun Jun 9, 2013, 03:56 AM
Jun 2013

That's become a standard joke between my husband and I. Whenever anything goes wrong, we both yell, "Thanks, OBAMA!"

 

dkf

(37,305 posts)
3. How are they supposed to know that should be of interest?
Sat Jun 8, 2013, 08:39 PM
Jun 2013

This supposed congressional oversight is beginning to look like more BS too. GOD when does it end.

neverforget

(9,436 posts)
7. it doesn't end because a lot of people just don't
Sat Jun 8, 2013, 08:57 PM
Jun 2013

give a shit or excuse it. Sad that we are so afraid of terror

 

dkf

(37,305 posts)
8. But aren't the words of government officials starting to look like they all need further examination
Sat Jun 8, 2013, 08:59 PM
Jun 2013

That can't be good. There's always so much more to the story.

neverforget

(9,436 posts)
11. of course they do but you can't debate secrets because
Sat Jun 8, 2013, 09:03 PM
Jun 2013

they're secrets. It's a nice little setup to stop debate.

pnwmom

(108,977 posts)
13. By reading the document they were sent? And by reading
Sat Jun 8, 2013, 09:06 PM
Jun 2013

the announcement of the briefings?

They have brains, don't they? They should use them.

dsc

(52,160 posts)
17. I have to say it depends
Sat Jun 8, 2013, 10:07 PM
Jun 2013

Is this a case of what lawyers often do doing discovery where they send boxes and boxes of documents and burried somewhere in all those boxes are the one or two relevant to the case or is this a case where there are meetings that are always relevent and always short. My bet is we are talking something in between.

pnwmom

(108,977 posts)
18. But Durbin didn't say they were deluged with information.
Sat Jun 8, 2013, 10:42 PM
Jun 2013

He simply said that Senators didn't go to the briefings that the administration officials gave, and acted as if that was Obama's fault somehow.

dsc

(52,160 posts)
24. He also didn't say why they didn't go
Sun Jun 9, 2013, 04:07 PM
Jun 2013

Ellison was on ABC and made it fairly clear that these breifings weren't exactly intended to be convenient to the Congress

davidpdx

(22,000 posts)
23. So the question for Congress is who knew what when
Sun Jun 9, 2013, 04:39 AM
Jun 2013

and who was just sandbagging and not doing their job reading stuff? I tend to think Senator Wyden does know what's going on given his continued objections about surveillance.

My take is Congress is just flat out not doing their work. They should know what's going on and if they don't feel they are getting answers they should be asking for them. After all they are direct representatives of the people of their states for fucksakes (with an approval rating so low a dead rat in a pool would be more popular).

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Does it make sense or is ...