mr. tatelman does not quibble. is an absolute right as he reads the constitution, while the late supreme court justice brennan may wish for consideration on our part, the constitution doesn't mandate it. as a matter-of-fact mr. tatelman's reading of the constitution is that's all in the fine print but we can't come if we wish, choose to ignore the consequences even if it's pending litigation over criminal trial. is that your reasoning as well, or deeply that really or that opinion by mr. brennan put some check and balance on the otherwise unfettered right of congress to seek information from the executive branch? >> i think what's being said is that the court would do what it was, was within its power if the congress ran roughshod over, in the case of an immediately, that's the phrase in the case, immediately pending trial. >> thank you. let me ask. let's deal with a hypothetical here. well, let's not deal with a hypothetical. let's deal with the example that chairman katie about oliver north. refresh my memory but