[Dolphy]

I'm trying to follow from the office but Durbin raised a point that I wonder if correct. If those being briefed in Congress had an objection to the program on legal grounds what was their remedy?

[Gritty]

Brownback now talking about the pre-911 phone calls from Yemen to one of the hijackers.

[A CA Guy]

They were only being informed as a courtesy. In fact it is NOT in their authority to do the President's job or to try and make politics out of a war issue.

[BigSkyFreeper]

If those being briefed in Congress had an objection to the program on legal grounds what was their remedy?

Many Democrats could have voted NAY all these years it's been implemented.

[A Citizen Reporter]

It could be he was looking for an out for Jane Harmon. But she's already on record on the talking head shows. She was briefed, but basically said that she was too dumb to know the law, so she didn't object.

NOW that the Move-on crowd is calling for hearings, now she objects.

[Cboldt]

If those being briefed in Congress had an objection to the program on legal grounds what was their remedy?

They can "blow the whistle" to others in Congress or make a public fuss, directly or indirectly. The assertion that they would thereby be breaking the law (being sworn to secrecy) is a circular argument. If they are apprised of an illegal act, they are stuck between conding that illegal act, or "breaking" a law that forbids disclosure. That bottoms out on their sense of what's best - and that calculus can be selfishly personal, risk averse, or aimed at making the situation better "for all."