They aren't because there is literally no new data, none
Grusch cannot legally divulge classified information publicly. Nobody can. Instant jail time- see Manning, etc. So no, obviously, we couldn't possibly have seen data or proof today.
He can, however, discuss it with Congress and the whistleblower program in a secure setting and has done so (as he mentioned many dozens of times under oath today) and is willing to do so further.
truth claims
I think I see the disconnect here.
I don't see (credible) people claiming that anything was proven to be the "truth" today. Yet that seems to be what you're railing about. Well, hey, I agree with you a hundred percent about that. Nothing proved.
However, for reasons reiterated dozens of times here, his claims are very significant. If they are not true then he has duped a lot of members of Congress. Considering some of the congresspeople I saw up there today, it's not exactly the intellectual A-Team. But still.
> Grusch cannot legally divulge classified information publicly. Nobody can.
Congresspeople can. They can stand up and read classified information into the record. They can’t be prosecuted for it, because of the Speech and Debate Clause.
It's vanishingly rare, of course. Part of the problem is how does Congress get classified information from the Executive Branch? The latter has to turn it over. Cooperation between the two is necessary. If Congressfolk routinely read classified information into the record, cooperation would vanish. If Congressperson Blip made it a habit to run to the floor everytime s/he received anything with classification markings, Congressperson Blip would find that supply drying up faster than rain in a desert.
But it is an ultimate recourse Congresspeople have, should they come into possession of classified information they are afraid will be deposited into the memory hole, like Senator Gravel did with the Pentagon Papers.
He can, however, discuss it with Congress and the whistleblower program in a secure setting and has done so (as he mentioned many dozens of times under oath today) and is willing to do so further.
I think I see the disconnect here.I don't see (credible) people claiming that anything was proven to be the "truth" today. Yet that seems to be what you're railing about. Well, hey, I agree with you a hundred percent about that. Nothing proved.
However, for reasons reiterated dozens of times here, his claims are very significant. If they are not true then he has duped a lot of members of Congress. Considering some of the congresspeople I saw up there today, it's not exactly the intellectual A-Team. But still.