Ah, that Russ Feingold. As noted by BarbinMDon the FP, he's up to his usual tricks again: demanding honesty from participants in our political system.
This time, he's going after National Intelligence Director Dennis Blair, and implicitly challenging Obama's whole "looking forward" approach to the Cheney Administrations misdeeds. The text of the letter is below the fold and in the FP article. It's a doozy, and it puts both the White House and the wingnuts in a bit of a pickle.
Barb has expressed her opinion on how the White House should handle the situation, but I wrote this diary to address the more amusing question of how the wingers will respond.
Greg Sargent, in his blog "The Plum Line" at whorunsgov.org, quotes a letter from Feingold to Blair.
According to a story on Thursday in the Washington Post, you stated that the failure to notify the congressional intelligence committees about a program recently cancelled by CIA Director Leon Panetta did not violate the law. I disagree and believe that the program in question fit squarely within the notification requirements of the National Security Act. I therefore request that you provide me with your analysis, and any analysis by the DNI General Counsel, supporting your conclusion.
Wow. Not a lot of ways for Blair to wiggle his way out of that one. And it puts Feingold pretty much at odds with the President's general philosophy on these issues. But what I'm wondering is how Limpo Nation will respond to this development.
As recognized by Sargent, MSNBC's Tamron Hall, and BarbinMD, Feingold's letter puts the White House in an "awkward" position. So imagine you're a rightwing media peronsality. What would you do?
Do they alert their disciples to this major schism in the Democrat party, with the downside of giving voice to the nasty socialist accusation that St. Dick broke the law? Or do they ignore it, bite their tongues when there's such a great chance to point out that even Obama's base is critical of his administration?
Actually I'm sure they'll come up with some way to use this as a criticism of Obama without acknowledging the underlying issue, but I confess I don't know what it will be. Any predictions?