Promising to provide as much public detail as possible on surveillance activities, the head of the National Security Agency repeatedly told Senators on Wednesday that two programs made public last week have both protected the nation from terror attacks as well as preserved the constitutional rights of American citizens.
"It's dozens of terrorist events that these (programs) have helped prevent," NSA director Keith Alexander told a Senate hearing.
"These authorities complement each other in helping us identify different terrorist actions and to help disrupt them," Alexander added.
But it was clear from the delicate questioning at the hearing that lawmakers in both parties aren't convinced that was true, as Democrats made the case that the NSA was wrongly using provisions of the Patriot Act to get access to phone records and internet data.
"They do this lawfully," Alexander said of his analysts, saying they protect "civil liberties and privacy and the security of this nation."
Alexander explained that while the phone data is set aside by major telephone companies, it cannot be looked at by the government unless there is a court order - a search warrant - that allows such reviews.
"But would that take a court order?" asked a worried Sen. Mike Johanns (R-NE), who said he was being pestered by voters back home, worried about privacy concerns.
"To do any kind of search in these areas on a U.S. person, you have to have a court order," said Alexander, who was quickly backed up by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), the Chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee.
"If you want to go to the content, then you have to get a court order," Feinstein explained, "the same thing you would do in a criminal case."
"You would have to get a court order that would permit you to collect the content of the calls," Feinstein added, referring to the telephone metadata.
When asked if the NSA could tap the internet activities and phone calls of Americans, Alexander curtly rejected that assertion.
"False. I know of now way to do that," the NSA director said.
But the back and forth with Senators at this hearing was at times a verbal struggle, as Senators and the NSA chief dealt with a series of hypotheticals and tried not to say too much.
Still, Alexander repeatedly vowed to offer up more details to the American people, seemingly conscious that the lack of information - and the questionable answers by top intelligence officials about these programs at earlier hearings - could well fan the flames of those worried about the reach of the NSA.
The linguistic struggle in that hearing was mirrored earlier in the day when I ran into one member of the House Intelligence Committee down in the bowels of the Capitol, as there was only so much to be discussed with reporters and even other lawmakers.
"Being on the intelligence committee, you get a lot of stuff," said Rep. Lynn Westmoreland (R-GA), "and sometimes when you're asked a question, you really can't answer a lot of it."
My hallway interview with Westmoreland reminded me of many times that you stop members of the intelligence panels and ask questions - as those lawmakers often take a distinct pause before giving an answer, seemingly measuring what they can say in public - and what they should not.
"You can't really give all the facts of the program without making the people that this program is trying to get to, aware of how they're being targeted," Westmoreland said when asked about what the NSA does with telephone call metadata.
Westmoreland echoed the points of the NSA director on how the data is used, a point he said that his fellow lawmakers should consider as they evaluate what the NSA is doing.
"They have to get a warrant," Westmoreland said, but if they develop more leads based on that initial investigation, they can only look further in the "box" of phone data with another warrant.
"They have to go back and get another warrant; it's not just 'here's all these numbers' and see what you like," said Westmoreland.
At several points in our conversation, Westmoreland stopped himself when he clearly felt like he was getting into territory he shouldn't discuss - but listening back on our interview, it wasn't readily apparent what kind of information he was apparently struggling with.
So, I asked the Georgia Republican, what do you say to colleagues who ask - is this something to worry about or not?
"Well, it's hard," said Westmoreland, as he rattled off the names of Democrats and Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee - some very liberal, some very conservative.
"At some point, I think you got to say, well these guys have listened to the program, they understand the program," said Westmoreland, who acknowledged that it's frustrating to know more about these issues, but not really be free to discuss it with other lawmakers.
"The reality of it is, there was several attempts to attack (the U.S.) that were thwarted by this very program," Westmoreland said.
The NSA chief will try to make that case again on Thursday in closed door briefings with members of the House and Senate.
