Skip to main content

NSA revelations only 'the tip of the iceberg,' says Dem lawmaker
By Daniel Strauss, June 12, 2013, The Hill

"I can't speak to what we learned in there, and I don't know if there are other leaks, if there's more information somewhere, if somebody else is going to step up, but I will tell you that I believe it's the tip of the iceberg," [Rep. Loretta Sanchez] said.

[...] "I think it's just broader than most people even realize, and I think that's, in one way, what astounded most of us, too," Sanchez said of the briefing.

So tell us, already!

Members of Congress can say anything on the floor that they wish, without any possibility of outside legal repercussions.

United States Constitution, Article I, Section 6

[The Senators and Representatives] shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.

That provision supersedes any oath of secrecy members of Congress have taken.
U.S. Supreme Court, United States v. Gillock - 445 U.S. 360 (1980) (p. 369-370)

The Framers viewed the speech or debate privilege as fundamental to the system of checks and balances. The Works of Thomas Jefferson 322 (Ford ed.1904); The Works of James Wilson 421 (R. McCloskey ed.1967).

Edward Snowden only wishes he had that kind of immunity.

Sen. Mike Gravel did it with the Pentagon Papers.

He went from obscure Alaskan Senator to national hero, overnight.

A member going solo could run the risk that the rest of the members of the house would vote to expel him/her, but if the revelations are bad enough, those members would feel considerable political pressure not to do so. If a few members join in on the fun, it could be politically impossible for the rest of the house to take action against them.

It would be difficult for Democrats in the House of Representatives or Republicans in the Senate to read revelations of things like classified National Security Agency 4th Amendment violations into the record, given that they don't hold committee leadership positions. (In Sen. Gravel's case, he used his chairmanship of a subcommittee to call an after-hours hearing.) But Democrats in the Senate and Republicans in the House are free and clear to do this.

If members of the executive branch retaliate by withholding classified information, either house of Congress has the power to hold them in contempt ("inherent contempt" power, enforceable via a house's sergeant-at-arms), or both houses together can remove them from office for high crimes and misdemeanors, i.e. abuses of official power, via impeachment. (That applies to officials who lie to Congress, too.)

Let's be utterly clear: if Senators or Representatives decide to release information that the executive branch has classified, they have the unilateral power to do so.

When the executive branch exceeds its legitimate authority, when the President and the administration overstep the power that the Constitution proscribes, the legislative and judicial branches should step in and stop the abuses. This is how checks and balances are supposed to work. If a branch of government fails to abide by the oath of office to uphold the Constitution—especially when, in so doing, that branch fails to guard its own prerogatives, as with Congress allowing the President to grossly misinterpret the laws it passes—the structure of our federal government fails.

When significant portions of the Constitution are not in effect, then the social contract between the people and the government is broken, and the government is not legitimate.

I'm not claiming that anyone in Congress will do this. I mean, really, what would it take to get them to, the realistic possibility of a mass popular uprising? I'm saying that they should. Public officials (particularly Democrats) often claim they don't have the power that they actually do, power that they can and should use on our behalf to uphold our rights.

This was "already diaried" by Mets102 with respect to Republican Congresspeople. ukit wrote about the Hill story. Of course others made this point before (it's right there in the Constitution and within living historical memory!), notably bmaz (who is now at Emptywheel) at Firedoglake in 2007, with respect to Democratic leaders and Bush/Cheney secret abuses of power.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site