After 7 Years of Refusing Any Public Debate, Executive Decries Congress for Not Being “Open”

Here’s what the Administration thinks about the Amash-Conyers amendment (which it calls the Amash Amendment, perhaps not wanting to name a Democrat who has been involved in historic fights against out-of-control executive power in the past), which would defund dragnet Section 215 collection.

In light of the recent unauthorized disclosures, the President has said that he welcomes a debate about how best to simultaneously safeguard both our national security and the privacy of our citizens. The Administration has taken various proactive steps to advance this debate including the President’s meeting with the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, his public statements on the disclosed programs, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence’s release of its own public statements, ODNI General Counsel Bob Litt’s speech at Brookings, and ODNI’s decision to declassify and disclose publicly that the Administration filed an application with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. We look forward to continuing to discuss these critical issues with the American people and the Congress.

However, we oppose the current effort in the House to hastily dismantle one of our Intelligence Community’s counterterrorism tools. This blunt approach is not the product of an informed, open, or deliberative process. We urge the House to reject the Amash Amendment, and instead move forward with an approach that appropriately takes into account the need for a reasoned review of what tools can best secure the nation.

I find it interesting, first of all, that they sent this after Keith Alexander had his shot to lobby Congress in a Top Secret/SCI briefing. I guess they didn’t come away with a high degree of confidence Amash-Conyers was going to fail.

Then consider the head-spinning logic:

  • Unauthorized disclosures led to a Presidential claim he welcomes a “debate”
  • It lists several examples in which Executive Branch figures tell the public details about this surveillance (note the White House didn’t mention the NSA documents, which had to be withdrawn for inaccuracies); it calls these “proactive” in spite of the fact that they are all clear reactions to that unauthorized disclosure
  • It reiterates that it considers these one-way communications discuss[ions]
  • After saying one-way communication is discussion, the Administration says, “this blunt approach is not the product of an informed, open, or deliberative process”
  • Having made this ridiculous argument, the White House says it wants a “reasoned review”

Hell, if I were a self-respecting member of Congress, I’d support Amash-Conyers even if I weren’t already predisposed to, if only because this is such a crazy bat-shit claim to reason and openness.

The Executive Branch has had 7 years to have an open debate. It chose not to have that open debate. Now that one has been brought to it by Congress, it pretends Congress is the one at fault for the lack of informed or open process.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on Reddit0Share on Facebook0Google+4Email to someone

15 Responses to After 7 Years of Refusing Any Public Debate, Executive Decries Congress for Not Being “Open”

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
Emptywheel Twitterverse
emptywheel @benjaminwittes At least my memory isn't going worse than I already thought! Thanks. @csoghoian @Susan_Hennessey
6mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @benjaminwittes Which is some of what we're learning from decisions pre- and post-OPM hack @csoghoian @Susan_Hennessey
7mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @benjaminwittes I ask bc I think NatSec elite at least APPEARS to show similar disinterest in certain CI threats @csoghoian @Susan_Hennessey
7mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @benjaminwittes Thanks Remember the redesign survey, just not the Q. @csoghoian @Susan_Hennessey
8mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @Obornee Not sure either requires voters to distinguish. Q is just what white working/middle class responds to, if they vote @ThePlumLineGS
9mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @sremkusrenner We could get into discussion of how Dems responded to collapse of unions. But there's an election to be won @ThePlumLineGS
11mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @sremkusrenner Read the post! I think it's one of best descriptions/comparisons of appeal of Trump/Bernie. @ThePlumLineGS
13mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @benjaminwittes When you say none were clamoring, did you ask? Surprised your readership wouldn't see value. @csoghoian @Susan_Hennessey
14mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel RT @JennaMC_Laugh: FBI says it had 440 "terrorism disruptions" in 2015, but November DHS doc mentioned only 1 "foiled plot" https://t.co/aq
16mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel "Trump says our elites are weak, stupid, and corrupt. Sanders says our elites are being *corrupted*." https://t.co/sqEkvk94FV
19mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel As if Pavlov had trained them when the bell rang they got their bailout. https://t.co/tbJSdAvTIP
20mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel This post also has a list of what got changed on 2015's 702 certifications, per PCLOB. https://t.co/huDCrb9KTe (ODNI gave us outdated MPs)
22mreplyretweetfavorite
July 2013
S M T W T F S
« Jun   Aug »
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031