Jon Kyl

I know there is an argument on the other side that, well, if we secure the border, then some people will not want to do comprehensive reform because they would not have any incentive to do so anymore. I don't think that is right. I think…

So there is a requirement that the Government, with some degree of burden, prove that the individual knew that national security could be harmed above and beyond the fact that he knew he was leaking classified information.

It seems to me, with that clarification--and I really appreciate that--that with that further requirement, it is hard to justify a good-motive leak when, in order to prosecute such a case, you would have to establish that he knew that he…

I really hope that we can call upon you as we start to try to formalize how we might want to respond to all of this for your advice in helping us craft ideas for our colleagues perhaps.

Do you think that is good policy? Or would it not, in fact, be a rather simple and, in fact, important way to solve this problem?

There needs to be a brighter line and a better transparency so that the official leak becomes the authorized official statement of unclassified information somehow.

Nobody should be leaking information. If the Secretary of State decides that it is a good thing to do, then I am all for it being done.

Those who become real spies should be prosecuted with the full might of the Government. Those who, without authority, leak to the media or others not authorized to have possession of classified information should similarly be prosecuted.

Anonymity is Okay. No problem there.

I appreciate that that is a different question, though, and it is one that deserves examination.

I do not have a lot of sympathy for people who decide on their own to bypass those statutes.

We were talking on the way over about the need probably to replace terms like 'code books' with 'electronic information' and things of that sort;

If it was 241,000 last year that were apprehended, there are estimates that as many as five to one are not apprehended. So that could have been over a million people who crossed the Arizona border illegally in 1 year. That is staggering in…

I think our policy should be to expand it.

I think we need more Border Patrol. I hope that you will ask for them. Congress will provide them if you do.

The 2011 budget includes enough funding for 1 mile of physical fence. We need more than that, do we not?

The Supreme Court did not strike down the President's authority to establish a military commission

The executives claimed that it could arrest and lock up individuals suspected of terrorist ties without charge, without counsel, without due process, and without any prospect of release until the war on terror is over evaded the rule of…

If the President has constitutional authority to execute a war, it may not be a good idea or good policy not to communicate more robustly with the Congress

The Presidency requires a constitutional conscientiousness that was lacking in the George W. Bush administration that must be inculcated in the future.

The Senate has an obligation, a very serious obligation to the U.S. Constitution, to provide advice and consent to the President on his nominations.

The American people have a pretty firm view on this whole thing after what they have seen with regard to TARP and the other bailouts. They are obviously not crazy about what has happened. I think most Americans think there should be two…

You said it was 'utterly lacking in any legal principle.' That's a pretty tough criticism for a Supreme Court decision.

The Obama administration, that ACS had the opportunity to actually get our ideas and the progressive vision of the Constitution and of law and policy into practice.

If you look across the entire run of cases, you see a fairly consistent pattern where respect for precedent goes by the wayside when it gets in the way of result.