Fox News
Expand
Browse All Video
Watch Live

You're watching...

Lawmakers consider softening crackdown on security leaks

Details

  • Description

    Rep. Peter King 'tired' of critics saying bill goes too far

  • Duration 4:57
  • Date

Clips

Also in this playlist...

Politics Fair and Balanced

Auto-advance: ON

Auto-advance
View All

Transcript

This transcript is automatically generated

A tough new measure cracking down on national security leaks may be -- -- the senate legislation would have -- security clearances for those caught leaking information.

But now lawmakers are considering softening those penalties among other changes.

New York congressman Peter King this is the chairman of the house homeland security committee thank you so much for joining us congressman.

When -- got any good to be with this so legislation was approved fourteen to one in committee the goal is to prevent leaks of classified national security information to the media.

But critics immediately said that it goes too far what is your view.

It first -- and -- these critics dissimilar these types of New York Times the Washington Post.

The fact is American lives are being put a risk because a secret to being leaked out.

We have to clamp down on -- we have to restrict we have to stop.

And I think senator feinstein's bill pass out of the committee is a perfect well maybe there's some room for improvement let's say -- I -- right now.

It addresses the issues -- -- we cannot allow these type leaks -- I think polygraph should be given to people outside the intelligence community.

Who may have leaked I think the Director of National Intelligence to make that recommendation.

I also think that if the president is going to.

Declassify you the information.

He should make that known to house -- intelligence committee the Senate Intelligence Committee.

There's right now America lives -- -- risk whether the operation in Yemen whether it was the -- stocks in the program.

Well now this latest where -- disclosing CIA headquarters this part of the operations in Syria.

-- you mentioned some of them but -- what elements of this bill are most controversial and how might they be revised now.

Again I think what the media's probably looking for is they don't want these restrictions being put on they don't want to use of polygraphs.

Outside the intelligence community.

-- -- are basically as I yesterday that they are afraid that they gonna lose this sources in the it's a whose community.

And the fact is I don't see any changes it should be made maybe a technicality here -- but I -- what it comes down to was the media.

And the -- these people -- the media.

They -- to have access to the people they feel someone right now in the intelligence community or the White House.

Or the administration.

-- think you leave you something.

If they're afraid of being prosecuted they're afraid of getting a polygraph there won't leak in the sources are gonna dry up.

So basically you have these people putting their own parochial interest -- throughout the media ahead of the national interest right.

Nonetheless the bill is being looked at again what modifications.

Do you expect to go through.

This committee and -- you think it will be approved by the full senate.

I certainly hope it's approved by the full senate I hope the senator -- its -- Steps up and basically was -- -- It was a good bills have bipartisan bill Democrats and Republicans and not to be backing down to the media the media has their own agenda that we've seen with the New York Times is done.

New York Times and put secrets on page one.

New York Times does he care about American security on these issues that yellow journalism at its worst.

So what I'm saying is I just hope the senator Feinstein that Republicans in this and on the committee in the senate.

Stand -- on this and don't give -- there's really defining moment we gonna allow.

People in the administration to leak out the national security secrets for political benefit -- put American lives at risk.

And do so because you were dedicated to the media we can't do that this bill is important -- -- go through as is any changes at all maybe -- make its opera.

But it should not be watered down should not be modified this enough weeks now let's not make it any worse for watering down what -- that bill.

So an example of one controversial element did bands intelligence officials from giving so called background briefings to journalists that's where.

They give information without the reporter revealing the source.

Under this bill only certain press officers an agency directors would be authorized to speak on background.

And that this could be a change what's a pretty common practice right now where you have.

Various experts in the intelligence agencies explaining to reporters what's really going on behind the scenes this is journalists say look.

Without those background briefings we're going to be able to report as accurately -- to be more influenced by politicians.

For not covered.

By this -- what about that.

In the directives of the agencies they can designate who will be the approved government spokesman.

Or -- a spokesman for the agency.

Other person designated by the CIA by the FBI by the national security -- if you will by the DIA -- -- someone was formally designated.

That's -- the dark of -- giving out secrets in New York Times or the Washington Post another look at the information but it will be done away with classified information this document out there's a reason why this information.

Is kept secret because we don't want the enemy to know what we're doing we don't want them to know.

Where the base of operations -- so with the -- -- euphoria is a license to continue to take secrets which are putting American lives terrorists.

And is a difference between getting background information to explain an issue and revealing the location of that a secret base out our congressman Peter King -- thank you so much for joining us.

Load More