3 ms·

Haven't seen such a check-mate in government affair in a long time. Unfortunately NSA does not have to answer to anyone, including congressman requests. Its th

Haven't seen such a check-mate in government affair in a long time. Unfortunately NSA does not have to answer to anyone, including congressman requests. Its their data, per se, and they are not compelled to share with anyone. Sure they will have to set aside large chunk for upcoming lawsuits (that will be paid from your taxes anyways), but other than that ist not a big deal. NSA stands beyond anyone's power to subpoena. Think Eric Holter being requested to investigate... Eric Holter. Good luck with that.

eloisius 13y ago
> NSA does not have to answer to anyone, including congressman requests Do you mean officially or de facto? I was under the impression that no one was above congressional subpoena.
- Domenic_S 13y ago
  Congressman: <hard question> NSA rep: "That's a matter of national security, I can't answer you."
- mh- 13y ago
  > I was under the impression that no one was above congressional subpoena. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_privilege https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_privilege [..] members of the executive branch to resist certain subpoenas and other interventions by the legislative and judicial branches of government.
ChuckMcM 13y ago
Not exactly, the NSA has to come to Congress to get their budget appropriations approved. No budget, no money. It provides a useful check against them.
- meepmorp 13y ago
  Yeah, the NSA's budget is at exactly zero risk from this entire story, or this little sideshow in particular. If you think otherwise, you're kidding yourself.
  - ChuckMcM 13y ago
    This is sort of like saying we at zero risk of having Chinese nuclear missiles sent our way. It's true and it misses the point :-). Congress isn't going to cut the NSAs budget off, but they can. So they have some negotiating leverage with regard to the NSA's behavior. They have used that leverage in the past to achieve concessions from intelligence agencies on their activities and how they disclose their activities. The last bright-light scandal of this magnitude was the 'Iran-Contra' affair. It's useful to see how the CIA and Congress interacted prior to that scandal and after that scandal.
    - meepmorp 13y ago
      > So they have some negotiating leverage with regard to the NSA's behavior. They have used that leverage in the past to achieve concessions from intelligence agencies on their activities and how they disclose their activities. Except that congress wrote and passed the laws that enable these programs. Many congresscritters, in leadership positions in both parties, have expressed support for the surveillance and varying degrees of condemnation for Snowden. I'd be surprised if they don't actually have a good idea of what's going on at the NSA. You will see, perhaps, some grandstanding and/or honest pleas from a few people on this. And then it'll be like nothing happened when push comes to shove. There'll be no meaningful attempt to get greater disclosure, and it'll quietly die down in public consciousness, because this kind of shit nearly always does. And the NSA will get their budget, because intelligence and defense basically always do.

eloisius 13y ago

> NSA does not have to answer to anyone, including congressman requests Do you mean officially or de facto? I was under the impression that no one was above congressional subpoena.

Domenic_S 13y ago
Congressman: <hard question> NSA rep: "That's a matter of national security, I can't answer you."
mh- 13y ago
> I was under the impression that no one was above congressional subpoena. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_privilege https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_privilege [..] members of the executive branch to resist certain subpoenas and other interventions by the legislative and judicial branches of government.

ChuckMcM 13y ago

Not exactly, the NSA has to come to Congress to get their budget appropriations approved. No budget, no money. It provides a useful check against them.

meepmorp 13y ago
Yeah, the NSA's budget is at exactly zero risk from this entire story, or this little sideshow in particular. If you think otherwise, you're kidding yourself.
- ChuckMcM 13y ago
  This is sort of like saying we at zero risk of having Chinese nuclear missiles sent our way. It's true and it misses the point :-). Congress isn't going to cut the NSAs budget off, but they can. So they have some negotiating leverage with regard to the NSA's behavior. They have used that leverage in the past to achieve concessions from intelligence agencies on their activities and how they disclose their activities. The last bright-light scandal of this magnitude was the 'Iran-Contra' affair. It's useful to see how the CIA and Congress interacted prior to that scandal and after that scandal.
  - meepmorp 13y ago
    > So they have some negotiating leverage with regard to the NSA's behavior. They have used that leverage in the past to achieve concessions from intelligence agencies on their activities and how they disclose their activities. Except that congress wrote and passed the laws that enable these programs. Many congresscritters, in leadership positions in both parties, have expressed support for the surveillance and varying degrees of condemnation for Snowden. I'd be surprised if they don't actually have a good idea of what's going on at the NSA. You will see, perhaps, some grandstanding and/or honest pleas from a few people on this. And then it'll be like nothing happened when push comes to shove. There'll be no meaningful attempt to get greater disclosure, and it'll quietly die down in public consciousness, because this kind of shit nearly always does. And the NSA will get their budget, because intelligence and defense basically always do.