Gonzales Also Ends Up Defending His Credibility (L. A. Times)

[kurth]

Los Angeles Times
February 7, 2006
Gonzales Also Ends Up Defending His Credibility
Senate Democrats accuse the attorney general of previously misleading them on the domestic surveillance program.
By Richard B. Schmitt, Times Staff Writer

WASHINGTON — ... Before Gonzales could utter a word of his opening statement, members of the panel wrangled over whether he should have to swear to tell the truth to the committee. Democrats were armed with a DVD that they said featured misleading statements by Gonzales and Bush about the program before its existence was disclosed in December by the New York Times. "This is really not a very good way to begin this hearing," said the Judiciary Committee chairman, Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.). The panel voted along party lines to give Gonzales a pass on the oath...

Sen. Russell D. Feingold (D-Wis.) accused him of giving a misleading answer to a question about the scope of presidential power — the linchpin of the debate over the eavesdropping program — during his confirmation hearing last January. At the time, Feingold asked Gonzales a question that seemed to touch on the then-secret program — whether he believed that Bush had the power to authorize warrantless wiretaps of Americans "in violation of the criminal and foreign intelligence surveillance statutes of this country." Gonzales responded that the question was hypothetical, but added that it was "not the policy or the agenda of this president to authorize actions that would be in contravention of our criminal statutes." On Monday, Feingold said that answer was misleading. Gonzales said the earlier response was accurate because the administration had always believed that the eavesdropping program was legal and authorized by Congress. "Senator, I've told the truth then; I'm telling the truth now," Gonzales said. "Mr. Chairman, I think the witness has taken mincing words to a new high," Feingold said.

Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) cited another exchange during the confirmation hearing, when Gonzales declared that Bush had never exercised his authority to conclude that a law was unconstitutional and refused to comply with it. Durbin said Monday that the administration was doing just that in the domestic spying program, and was skirting a 1978 law — the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act — that established procedures for a court to consider the sorts of domestic eavesdropping that the administration undertook. "So how can your response be valid today in light of what we now know?" Durbin asked. "Oh, it's absolutely valid, senator," Gonzales replied. Gonzales said the administration believed a joint congressional resolution after the Sept. 11 attacks effectively supplemented the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act by giving Bush the power to take all necessary action to protect the country — implicitly including electronic surveillance without warrants...

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said Bush had misled the public during a 2004 speech in Buffalo, N.Y., in which he sought to ease fears about the Patriot Act by stressing the role that courts played in authorizing wiretaps. " 'Any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires — a wiretap requires a court order,' " Feinstein quoted Bush as saying. " 'Nothing has changed, by the way. When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so.' " "Mr. Attorney General, in light of what you and the president have said in the past month, this statement appears to be false," Feinstein said. "Do you agree?" Gonzales said the statement was taken out of context, and that Bush was addressing a particular kind of wiretap. "I take great issue with your suggestion that somehow the president of the United States was not being totally forthcoming with the American people," he responded...

"It is sort of startling. Here is a very mild-mannered guy, a very nice person, who has, on virtually every issue in the war on terror, told the president what he wants to hear," said David Cole, a law professor at Georgetown University. "The constant theme is that the president, as commander in chief, is essentially above the law."

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-na-gonzales7feb07,0,2445925.story?coll=la-news-a_section

[chat_noir]

1. Too few answers on domestic spying

ATTORNEY GENERAL'S DEFENSES RING HOLLOW

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales' defense Monday of President Bush's order to authorize warrantless spying on Americans failed to shed much light on the deeply disturbing program.

Gonzales sparred with skeptical senators over the significant question of the program's legality. On that point, he repeated the dubious arguments made by Bush and his defenders in recent weeks that the program was authorized by law and by the Constitution. He gave only vague explanations for why the president won't obtain warrants from the secret court established by Congress to oversee domestic spying.

And the attorney general, claiming he could not disclose details of the program without tipping off the enemy, avoided saying anything about some of the most important questions the program raises: Whose calls are being monitored and why? How many Americans or legal visitors are being subject to the snooping, and how many of those have been found to be connected to terrorists? How long does each wiretap stay in place?

To those questions, the administration's response boils down to this: Trust us, we're spying on terrorists.
The answer is inadequate, particularly for an administration whose reservoir of trust with the American people is dangerously close to empty.

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/opinion/13810388.htm

[HereSince1628]

2. Yes, this issue seem obvious to me and clearly Gonzales is hiding

much from the committee.

ALL domestic spying is subject to actions of the FISC and consequently appropriate to be investigated by the Judiciary Committee.

Gonzales is clearly limiting his comments to the administration's program of international spying.

[DoYouEverWonder]

3. With a smug smirk on his face the whole time

well almost the whole time. The smirk disappeared for a moment, when Gonzalez felt compelled to say, 'For the record, I am not a fascist'.

The one about George Washington and Abraham Lincoln using electronic surveillance was pretty funny too.

Where does Bush find these assholes, that so willing do his bidding?

[tecelote]

4. None of this matters.

http://www.insightmag.com/Media/MediaManager/Rove2.htm

The Devil has spoken.