Top Democrat senator warns other members of congress to stop investigating this "spy" stuff

Typically, not one American out of 100 knows the topics of the first three main "sections" of our country's Constitution.  Hell, not 5 of 100 even know what the founders actually called those major sections.  Do you?

Okay, now the first question:  In order, what are the titles of the first three "sections"?

For example: Is the section on "Freedom of speech" before or after the third "section"?  Answers at the end.  For now, consider this:

Last Friday the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee warned his colleagues that they could be committing a crime if they obtain the identity of a secret FBI source and use it to undermine the ongoing investigation into claims of Russian interference in the 2016 election.

Yes, as Republican allies of President Donald Trump demanded that the Justice Department furnish "unredacted" details about a person hired by the FBI to spy on the Trump campaign, the top Democrat warned “It would be at best irresponsible, and at worst potentially illegal, for members of Congress to use their positions to learn the identity of an FBI source for the purpose of undermining the ongoing investigation into Russian interference in our election."

Both the New York Times and the Washington Post published stories Friday night reporting that a secret FBI informant met with multiple Trump campaign officials in 2016, but did not name the source at the time.  Then after another publication published the name, both the Post and the Times gloated that they'd known the name for weeks but had kept quiet because they didn't want to give ammunition to Trump backers.  Or something like that. 

If the Lying Mainstream Media can play fast and loose with facts, that means it's fair for everyone.

Now:  The Founders were quite clear that they believed the ultimate power and authority in this nation rested with... congress.  That's the first Article of the Constitution.  The president had wide latitude to take care of details, but the ultimate authority lay with congress.

If congress can't hold government agencies responsible for operating within the law, who can?  The courts?  As one president said about a justice of the Supreme Court who had made an adverse ruling, "Now let him enforce it."  No, the ultimate authority is with congress. 

But if that's true--and it seems obvious even to a Democrat--what was Mark Warner doing trying to intimidate his colleagues into stopping their investigation?

Simple:  He's carrying out the wishes of the insiders, who know things are getting tight.  If they can stop the investigation into FBI spying now, it will be far easier than dealing with things later.

BTW, I predict Stefan Halper isn't the only spy--let alone the most highly placed.  Reason:  The Times and the Post gave him up far too easily.  When people admit a fact damaging to their own case, it's always to protect an even more damaging revelation.