As Oxblog notes, we're going to see a lot of right wing talking points focused on the fact that Reid and Pelosi knew about Bush's NSA program. In no particular order, here are some thoughts on that:
- These are classified briefings they got. Even if they hated the program, there's nothing they could do about it that wouldn't be illegal. Notice how Bush is hinting at a Justice Department investigation against who leaked to The Times? Democratic politicians don't get special exemption from those laws.
- There's a real question on what these briefings actually contained. We don't know the whole of the program, and while certain congressional leaders knew of its existence, we've no clue how much they knew, or how well their understandings conformed to the operation's actual shape.
- What were Reid and Pelosi supposed to do anyway? And if there was some logical course of action they failed to follow, doesn't that merely make them at fault? Accomplices?
- At base, everyone Bush informed about the NSA operation was legally compelled to keep their mouths shut. When the whole story emerges, it may prove true that a case could've been made for damn-the-consequences publicizing, but we're not there yet.
- If congressional leaders knew about the program and Bush believed they wouldn't pass a law legalizing it, that doesn't bode well for the operation's legality. It means lawmakers knew about it, thought it either unconstitutional or politically offensive (a rare thing in counterintelligence operations), and were legally barred from saying anything to stop the data collection.
- This was either illegal or it wasn't. Congressional complicity has very little bearing on that fact. It might make for a nice monologue on the talk shows, but in the end, it's irrelevant.
