Warrantless Surveillance May Extend Beyond Original Administration Reports

Gonzales Seeks to Clarify Testimony on Spying: Extent of Eavesdropping May Go Beyond NSA Work

Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales appeared to suggest yesterday that the Bush administration's warrantless domestic surveillance operations may extend beyond the outlines that the president acknowledged in mid-December.

In a letter yesterday to senators in which he asked to clarify his Feb. 6 testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Gonzales also seemed to imply that the administration's original legal justification for the program was not as clear-cut as he indicated three weeks ago.

At that appearance, Gonzales confined his comments to the National Security Agency's warrantless wiretapping program, saying that President Bush had authorized it "and that is all that he has authorized."

But in yesterday's letter, Gonzales, citing that quote, wrote: "I did not and could not address . . . any other classified intelligence activities." Using the administration's term for the recently disclosed operation, he continued, "I was confining my remarks to the Terrorist Surveillance Program as described by the President, the legality of which was the subject" of the Feb. 6 hearing.

In other words, he lied to congress... But since he was not under oath at the time, he cannot be charged with perjury. But can we trust the Bush administration if the highest law enforcement official in the federal government will not tell the truth? I am sure that AG Gonzalez could have said that he could not divulge the full details in open testimony and arrangements could have been made to hear the matters in closed session.

BUT THE BUSHIES CONTINUE TO INSIST THEY ARE ABOVE THE LAW...

At least one constitutional scholar who testified before the committee yesterday said in an interview that Gonzales appeared to be hinting that the operation disclosed by the New York Times in mid-December is not the full extent of eavesdropping on U.S. residents conducted without court warrants.

"It seems to me he is conceding that there are other NSA surveillance programs ongoing that the president hasn't told anyone about," said Bruce Fein, a government lawyer in the Nixon, Carter and Reagan administrations.

A Justice Department official who spoke only on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the program, said, however, that Gonzales's letter "should not be taken or construed to be talking about anything other than" the NSA program "as described by the president."

Russell Tice has already told us that such "deeper" programs exist and that the Bush administration was hiding the details. Now comes AG Gonzalez with only hints that he lied, mislead or attempted to befuddle congress on the true nature of the warrantless surveillance programs. Can we trust an administration that won't tell us the truth.

In his letter, Gonzales revisited earlier testimony, during which he said the administration immediately viewed a congressional vote in September 2001 to authorize the use of military force against al-Qaeda as justification for the NSA surveillance program. Bush secretly began the program in October 2001, Gonzales's letter said.

On Feb. 6, Gonzales testified that the Justice Department considered the use-of-force vote as a legal green light for the wiretapping "before the program actually commenced."

But in yesterday's letter, he wrote, "these statements may give the misimpression that the Department's legal analysis has been static over time."

He didn't "lie", he offered a "misimpression". My parents, church and the courts where I have testified would all call it a LIE!

Fein said the letter seems to suggest that the Justice Department actually embraced the use-of-force argument some time later, prompting Gonzales to write that the legal justification "has evolved over time."

One government source who has been briefed on the issue confirmed yesterday that the administration believed from the beginning that the president had the constitutional authority to order the eavesdropping, and only more recently added the force resolution argument as a legal justification.

Yes, and this administration BELIEVES it was anointed by God to invade Iraq. Pat Robertson believes we should assassinate the prsident of Venezuela. I believe I should live a life of luxury. But it is what our Constitution and laws mandate that is important.