Watson Coleman: “I appreciate the concern over the institutional issue of having access. I join my colleague in getting that information.…”

“I appreciate the concern over the institutional issue of having access. I join my colleague in getting that information. Where I disagree is that when we have the chairman of the Intelligence Committee stating to us in this letter--saying: After reviewing the content of each report, it was apparent to us both that it was not necessary to know the actual names to determine whether the requests were proper. Ultimately, he found no basis to question the justification nor appropriateness of Mr. Bolton's request for the U.S. persons contained therein. So we have an individual we all deeply respect, the chairman of the Intelligence Committee, saying ``it was apparent to us,'' the chairman and the ranking member, and then the letter went on. I would say there is an institutional issue that we should resolve at some point. In the context of this nomination, where we have a very clear statement that this specific information that was requested--it was ``not necessary to know the actual names to determine whether the requests were proper.'' Then it is basically saying the requests were proper. Let us move forward with this nomination because we have a statement saying the information wasn't needed to make a determination. Let us pursue with great vigor the right of Members of this body to have access to that kind of information. I think we really have to separate the two, based on the statement of the chairman of the Intelligence Committee.”