The title of a recently released CNN article is "Senator: Cheney and Alleged Secret CIA Program 'A Problem'. There's that trigger word again: "problem", meaning that there will be some serious back and forth on this issue.

The first sentence of this article is: "CIA Director Leon Panetta testified before a congressional committee that he was told former vice president Dick Cheney ORDERED THE INTELLIGENCE AGENCY TO WITHHOLD INFORMATION ABOUT A SECRET COUNTERTERRORISM PROGRAM FROM CONGRESS, the chairman (actually, Feinstein is a chairwoman) of the Senate Intelligence Committee said Sunday". This is partisan politics at its best, with Republicans again talking about national security, which seems to be their only advantage over Democrats now and Democrats hitting back...hard.

So, again the question is: who is more reasonable and convincing? According to Feinstein, speaking on "Fox News Sunday", "Panetta testified that "he was told that the vice-president HAD ORDERED THE PROGRAM NOT BE BRIEFED TO THE CONGRESS". Panetta added that " I think this is a problem, obviously". The key word is obviously "problem". Let's keep track of some stats here. So that's one strike/vote against Cheney.

According to one CIA spokesman, Paul Gimigliano, "IT'S NOT AGENCY PRACTICE TO COMMENT ON WHAT WAS SAID AT A CLASSIFIED BRIEFING". This is a typical spokesman comment (i.e. 'No comment').

"When a director brought this to Director Panetta's attention, IT WAS WITH THE INTENTION THAT IT BE SHARED WITH CONGRESS. That was also his view and he took swift, decisive action to put into effect". This suggests that Cheney and the CIA Director at the time,, Michael Hayden, are to blame.

According to a letter released on June 26, Panetta testified that the CIA "concealed significant actions from all members of Congress and misled members FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS, FROM 2001 TO THIS WEEK". "from 2001 to this week" is quite a significant "number of years".

CIA spokesman George Little says that Panetta "stands by his May 15 testimony" Little added that "This agency and this director believe it is vital to keep Congress fully and currently informed. Director Panetta's actions back that up. As the letter from these...representatives notes, it was the oversight committee itself that toom the initiative to notify the oversight committees".

However, here's something debatable/contentious: "The White House opposes a measure that would increase the number of briefing participants from the current eight to 40 members of Congress. A White House memo warned President Obama's senior advisers would recommend a veto if the bill contained the expanded briefing provision". OK now the issue is: what's more important: getting things done quickly (requiring only 8 Congressional officials' approval) or reaching a concensus (which would require 40 'yes' votes)? The question should be: how can we get things done WELL?

According to Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn, speaking on "Fox News Sunday", "This looks to me suspiciously like a political cover to her (who?). I agree with Senator Feinstein (?) - the CIA SHOULD brief the Congress". The first part of Cornyn's statement already has a contradiction. First he says that Feinstein is seeking "political cover". Then he says he agrees. This is how dysfunctional the GOP has been since the 2006 mid-term elections.

"Congress should exercise responsible oversight. But to trot out THE vice-president and say he's the one that's at fault, this...unfortunately sounds like a new theme where they still want to BLAME the Bush-Cheney administration for the economy and other things". It's clear that Sen. Cornyn is nostalgic for the Bush administration. Sen. Cornyn, Dick Cheney is no longer vice-president. Republicans are now blaming Democrats for playing the "blame" game? Republicans are now doing most of this because now they are the minority party in both the House and the Senate and the opposition needs to garner attention. Also, let's not forget that the global financial crisis happened during the Bush administration. On top of this, Bush was an oil executive and those people routinely abuse power. In contrast, both President and Mrs. Obama are lawyers, so they know how to fight for ordinary citizens/the common folks.

Finally, according to North Dakota Sen. Kent Conrad, "This is a question of whether the former vice-president of the United States denied certain sensitive information to the intelligence leaders in Congress. That is not acceptable". Sen. Conrad is speaking in his capacity as merely a United States Senator instead of in his capacity as the chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, so it is appropriate for him to comment on this intelligence issue. To sum up, it seems like most of the people who spoke in this report are against Cheney for not being open and transparent enough. John Cornyn was the only person openly supporting the ex-vice president.