Actually, it's not. I mean, I guess you can argue anything you want, but there's really no substantive debate as there is no requirement. The debate would be pretty easily won against your position.
Just guessing, but my guess would be that the material they obtained would lead to how it was obtained, and thus - if shared - would lead to who allowed it to be obtained or to what flaw in the enemy's system allowed it to be obtained. That risk, since most everything Congress gets is leaked, is not worth the goal of briefing Congress on something they choose to write laws exempting themselves from knowing.
Their conclusion are not evidence they are correct. People conclude inaccurate things all the time.
Probably because he's a blowhard.
That would be a conclusion you are drawing from Pompeo's words. Interesting, it is a perfect example of how people conclude inaccurate things all the time.
Probably because it was, whether it needed to be or not.
Here's a link the War Powers Resolution.
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-87/pdf/STATUTE-87-Pg555.pdf
I just read the whole thing. Here are some of the highlights:
From Section 3, Consultation.
"The President in every possible instance shall consult with Congress before introduction United States Armed forces into hostilities or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances and after every such introduction shall consult regularly with the Congress until United States Armed Forces are no longer engaged in hostilities or have been removed from situations."
From Section 4, Reporting.
"a) In the absence of a declaration of war, in any case in which United States Armed Forces are introduced...the President shall submit within 48 hours to the Speak of the House of Representative and the President pro tempore of the Senate a report, in writing, setting forth A) the circumstances necessitating the introduction of United States Armed Forces"
"b) The President shall provide such other information as the Congress may request in the fulfillment of its constitutional responsibilities with respect to committing the Nation to war and to the use of United States Armed Forces abroad."
I can debate anything I want. Clearly there's no substance here.