Jonathan Alter on Bannon serving on the NSC:

[Rhiannon12866]

Link to tweet

[pkdu]

1. This could get VERY interesting....nt

[yodermon]

2. It's not an obscure law, it's the very statute that defines the NSC!!!!

good that someone in the media is picking up on it though.

[Rhiannon12866]

4. At least he did the research, long past time somebody did!

One would think it would have been the POTUS - under normal circumstances...

[C_U_L8R]

3. Grilling Bannon

Oh I wish I could sign up for that.

[fishwax]

5. I wish this were true, but it's not

There was another thread about this Sunday night/Monday as well: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10028561689

The statute (which isn't exactly obscure--it established the NSC) defines who are statutory Members of the Council. However, when people speak of the NSC, they often mean not that collection of cabinet-level advisors, but rather the whole organization that supports the function of the NSC, and that organization includes hundreds of people.

Within the NSC, there is a "Principals Committee" (made up of some of the cabinet-level individuals mentioned in the statute) as well as a "Deputies Committee" (assistant directors and undersecretaries of the same). What this administration has done is declared that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and the DNI (who in past administrations have been standing members of the Principals Committee) will only be invited to the meeting of the PC when the issues discussed align with their specific areas of expertise. That's troubling. (Note: the administration is now claiming that they can still come to these meetings if they want to, though the organizing memo says otherwise.) At the same time, he has also said that the Chief Strategist (Bannon) will be invited to all PC meetings. Also troubling. But while disturbing, it doesn't require senate confirmation.

Here's a link to the memo; the relevant information is at the top of page four:

The PC shall have as its regular attendees the Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of Defense, the Attorney General, the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Assistant to the President and Chief of Staff, the Assistant to the President and Chief Strategist, the National Security Advisor,and the Homeland Security Advisor. The Director of National Intelligence and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff shall attend where issues pertaining to their responsibilities and expertise are to be discussed. The Counsel to the President, the Deputy Counsel to the President for National Security Affairs, and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget may attend all PC meetings.

[Rhiannon12866]

6. Thanks!

I didn't do the research, so thanks for the specifics. It made sense to me since Bannon has no "field of expertise" except as BOT (Buddy of Trump).

[fishwax]

7. yeah, it sure would be nice if they could find

some way to reign this guy in.

Even though the Senate doesn't have to approve it, though, I think it's still worth raising a ruckus over. The move has clearly ruffled the feathers of some even in the GOP (like McCain) ... and anything that pushes them closer towards standing up to Trump is a good thing!

[Rhiannon12866]

8. The pundits tonight on MSNBC were saying that it's McCain and Graham

Who are the most likely leaders in opposing Trump's unprecedented overstepping. Who would have thought that we'd be depending on that particular duo to be the ones with the leadership to step up and do the right thing??

[Rhiannon12866]

12. I read this last night, but wasn't sure of the source:

Donald Trump didn’t realize Steve Bannon needs Senate confirmation for National Security Council
http://www.palmerreport.com/opinion/trump-apparently-didnt-realize-steve-bannon-will-need-senate-confirmation-security-council/1282/

According to section (a)(6) of federal statute 50 U.S. Code 3021, a civilian like Steve Bannon will in fact need to go through Senate confirmation and approval in order to serve on the National Security Council because he doesn’t fit into any of the five listed pre-approved categories. That obscure law, which has remained obscure because no president has ever tried to put a political hack on the NSC until now, was dug up by MSNBC analyst Jonathan Alter late on Monday night. This sets up a remarkable showdown if Trump goes ahead with the Bannon pick, because few in either party have shown any affinity or trust for the guy – and they’ll have limitless material for embarrassing him.

[Cooley Hurd]

9. Kick!!!

[tavalon]

10. Obscure?

Sarcasm?

[Mr. Ected]

11. It's obscure if the mainstream media doesn't mention it.

Journalism? 1st Amendment? What the hell is that?