Brennan Continues to Stonewall on His Own Leaks

John Brennan has now been asked three times (four, presuming Richard Burr asked during the closed hearing, as he said he would) to list the specific times he has leaked to journalists. He has refused all the unclassified questions, as he does here in his supplemental questions.

Describe each specific instance in which you were authorized to disclosure classified information to a reporter or media consultant, including the identity of the individual authorizing each disclosure and the reason for each such disclosure.

In exceptional circumstances, when classified information appears to have already been leaked to the media, it may be necessary to acknowledge classified information to a member of the media or to declassify information for the very purpose of limiting damage to national security by protecting sources and methods or stemming the flow of additional classified information. Such conversations involve only the most senior Agency officials or their designees and must be handled according to any applicable regulations. I have on occasion spoken to members of the media who appeared to already have classified information, in an effort to limit damage to national security; however, even in those circumstances I did not disclosure classified information.

Burr wants a list. Brennan isn’t giving him one.


Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Reddit0Share on Facebook0Google+2Email to someone

2 Responses to Brennan Continues to Stonewall on His Own Leaks

  • 1
  • 2
Emptywheel Twitterverse
JimWhiteGNV Today's Nobel Prize announcement is giving me flashbacks to my grad school and postdoc days researching DNA repair.
emptywheel @EveningStarNM actually not what DoD said. Plus they claim investigation ongoing. Also ignores public comments fr Afghans.
emptywheel @EveningStarNM Bc DOD has SPECIFICALLY SAID this wasn't US SOF taking fire. You're inventing facts now.
emptywheel @EveningStarNM Bullshit. I said, "Don't call this an accident when we don't know." I'm DOING what you claim to want to do.
emptywheel @EveningStarNM Thanks. Clean up your own house, then! You are doing precisely what you complain about and still don't understand that!
emptywheel @EveningStarNM Ok. Thanks. That apply to MSF too? Or it's okay to suggest they were shielding Taliban?
emptywheel @EveningStarNM But we DO have evidence of 2 things: Afghans raided this hospital in July, Afghans initially said they struck on purpose.
emptywheel @EveningStarNM Yes. Like you just did. This convo started w/me complaining that journos were reporting as *fact* something, that = accident.
emptywheel @EveningStarNM No. You're exhibiting prejudice, but don't realize it! It's actually sort of cute.
emptywheel Can think of few worse people to ask this Q than McCain. Esp since he's making big push to keep troops in Afg.
emptywheel @EveningStarNM In other words, after saying we have to wait, you're not only not doing so but collapsing 2 levels of involvement. Congrats!
emptywheel @EveningStarNM And part of that is not calling it an accident when the available evidence says it probably wasn't.
February 2013
« Jan   Mar »