Brennan suggested Wyden shouldn't ask him about spying on Senate but CIA's actions fall w/in designated threats.http://www.salon.com/2016/02/11/the_cias_ludicrous_spying_charade_heres_what_you_need_to_know_about_john_brennans_angry_senate_tirade/ …
-
-
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel I saw the exchange as Brennan asking why there wasn’t accountability on the SSCI original error.3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Susan_Hennessey
@Susan_Hennessey But that only shows that pretending Intel Committees can provide oversight of Article II activities is silliness.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel Maybe. But protecting executive deliberative honesty is important--especially when intel lawyers are giving advice.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Susan_Hennessey
@emptywheel All kinds of bad outcomes happen if lawyers are giving advice based on messaging and consequence to oversight.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Susan_Hennessey
@Susan_Hennessey Have you read those legal docs? Neither arguments themselves nor their bureaucratic deployment supports they were advice.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel That said, I leave the writing on this to you. Wouldn't touch that fight w/ 100 ft pole. **Backs into bush Homer Simpson style**2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@Susan_Hennessey I am absolutely 100% sympathetic to CIA's arg that they had Article II orders to do this & that this theft was WH ordered.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.