5 ms·

Uhh of course they do. Why would they be exempt? If anything they are a legitimate target for fears of compromising national security.

• godgod 13y ago
  congress legit targets? when the system can't trust someone, the system can not be trusted.
• saraid216 13y ago
  The goal is to have an answer on record.
  • ProAm 13y ago
    It's pretty clear they do not care about being honest on record. Nor do we do anything about it when we find them in a lie.
    • saraid216 13y ago
      I said the point was to have an answer on record. The point is not to have the truth on record; that has never been useful.
      • SideburnsOfDoom 13y ago
        So then, how is having an answer on record going to be useful?
        • saraid216 13y ago
          If the answer is yes, > Acknowledgement that it has collected the communications records of American lawmakers and other officials is likely to make it harder for the NSA to argue that it needs such broad collection powers to defend against terrorism. If the answer is no, > The letter’s authors include surveillance skeptics like Sensenbrenner as well as those who voted against an earlier curtailment of NSA authorities, like Franks and Issa, the chairman of the House oversight committee. > “There can be no disagreement, however, on the basic premise that congressional witnesses must answer truthfully,” read the letter, which requested a reply by 10 January.
          • SideburnsOfDoom 13y ago
            You are saying that an answer of "no" is just not credible. I agree with that.
            • saraid216 13y ago
              That's not remotely what I'm saying. I'm saying that getting a lie on record is valuable because it makes it more likely that desirable consequences will occur.
              • SideburnsOfDoom 13y ago
                > I'm saying that getting a lie on record But you are certain that it would be a lie? Then it is implicit in this that the "no" is not credible. You're not being very clear.
                • saraid216 13y ago
                  What would you like me to clarify? If the no is true, then there isn't actually an issue. The point of such a request is to have someone give a public statement committing themselves to a position. Is this really so challenging to grasp?
                  • SideburnsOfDoom 13y ago
                    > The point of such a request is to have someone give a public statement committing themselves to a position. That's clearer, thanks, though a "public statement committing themselves to a position" is not in itself useful unless it has consequences. It seems that you can only state the usefulness by enumerating the possible outcomes. The link to "denial and lie on record" to positive consequences is a tenuous one. The consequences of "truthful denial on record" are that the status quo of widespread scepticism continues, i.e. no new consequences. > Is this really so challenging to grasp? it is not useful for you to get upset and offensive when you aren't being understood. It would be useful for you to be clearer.
        • a3n 13y ago
          Slowly accumulating outrage on the part of Congress and the people, one could hope.
• walshemj 13y ago
  Well the soviet sleepers where trying to make Friends and contacts with people in government so if a congressman or Senator had an "aide" like "Katia" Zatuliveter an Aide to the MP for Portsmouth who is on the defense committee I bet the FBI counter espionage guys would be interested And in the Past MI5 did catch a US diplomat working for the nazi's s well as catching an MP spying for the opposition John Stone House for the STB.
• Torgo 13y ago
  Congress can fuck up the country far more effectively than terrorism. See: Congress' response to terrorism. The scrutiny on them should be ENORMOUS but instead it is exactly the reverse, they are using a billions-dollar world eavesdropping device to parallel-construction convict petty pot dealers.
  • dwaltrip 13y ago
    Yes but I don't think closed door NSA style surveillance of congress people would be helpful. Government open data programs? Probably a better direction.
• genwin 13y ago
  They are also a target so that the head of the NSA can effectively control the country.