'Torture Boy' Signals More Spying' GONZALES recanted testimony!

[in_cog_ni_to]

You really need to read this entire article! I can only post a small part and the entire thing is well worth a read.



'Torture Boy' Signals More Spying
By Robert Parry
March 2, 2006


<snip>
Leahy persisted. “Under your interpretation of this, can you go in and do mail searches? Can you go into e-mails? Can you open mail? Can you do black-bag jobs? … Can you go and do that (to) Americans?”

Gonzales responded, “Sir, I've tried to outline for you and the committee what the President has authorized, and that is all that he has authorized.”

“Did it authorize the opening of first-class mail of U.S. citizens?” Leahy continued. “That you can answer, yes or no.”

Gonzales: “There is all kinds of wild speculation about...”

Leahy: “Did it authorize it?”

Gonzales: “There is all kinds of wild speculation out there about what the President has authorized and what we’re actually doing. And I’m not going to get into a discussion, Senator.”

Recanted Testimony

Three weeks later, by recanting the statement about “that is all that he (Bush) has authorized” in the context of Leahy’s line of questioning, Gonzales appears to be acknowledging that some of Leahy’s concerns are valid, that there are other components to Bush’s warrantless surveillance operations beyond the NSA program.

Given the fact that the Bush administration and its media allies have openly challenged the loyalty of Americans who have disagreed with Bush’s policies, it would not be a big jump to suspect that Bush has authorized spying on citizens, journalists and/or politicians who have, in his view, undermined his strategy in the War on Terror or the Iraq War.<snip>

edited to add the link:

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2006/030206.html

[jsamuel]

1. link

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2006/030206.html

[in_cog_ni_to]

9. Thank you...I'll go fix it.

:hi:

[Burried News]

2. Three words - CONTEMPT OF CONGRESS

[enough]

3. With Congress's full cooperation.

[Burried News]

5. Yes - a thousand times yes.

[MADem]

4. Uh, remember, SPECTER PREVENTED the swearing-in of this witness

The "I forgot" and "I misspoke" excuses will likely make an appearance if anyone dares get shirty about it.....

[Burried News]

7. But Warner made sure Taguba was sworn in.

Perhaps I should have use two words - CONTEMPTIBLE CONGRESS

[in_cog_ni_to]

11. HE ALSO said that whatever testimony was given,

if untrue, is still considered ILLEGAL and would be Contempt of Congress..

[MADem]

12. Torture Boy will simply say he misspoke, he was tired, he did not MEAN

to be duplicitous...Specter engaged in a ten minute debate over swearing in, when swearing in would have taken twenty seconds, tops. Ya gotta ask yourself.....WHY?

[in_cog_ni_to]

15. Right. You're right.

He'll get away with it.:grr:

[jberryhill]

16. 18 USC 1001

The relevant statute doesn't care whether he was sworn in.

[MADem]

18. Yeah, but your burden of proof is higher

Try proving intent--he will make excuses, oooh, I misspoke, I didn't understand the question, I meant to say this but said that by mistake.....he'll bring the WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAmbulance with siren blaring...the oath serves to put you on notice, and he didn't give the panel that courtesy.

And I remain convinced it was prearranged, and DELIBERATE.

[katty]

6. it's called CYA time for Speedy Gonzales

[Norquist Nemesis]

8. How very odd!!! Gonzo WASN'T TESTIFYING!!!!!

He was not sworn in at that "hearing". It's weird that he is 'recanting'.

[in_cog_ni_to]

10. It's still illegal to lie to the committee.

At least that's what we're told by Specter.

[jberryhill]

17. Spector is correct

18 USC 1001 covers false statements made to a federal government body on matters within its jurisdiction, and specifically covers congressional committees. There is no 'swearing-in' requirement to trigger the statute.

Gonzo is under his oath of office at all times anyway.

[enough]

13. Glenn Greenwald has a detailed analysis of Gonzalez' letter and

his remarks before the Specter committee.

http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/03/nsa-scandal-now-clearly-includes.html

I strongly recommend reading this along with the Robert Parry article in the OP. There's too much there to give a clear impression with excerpts.

[in_cog_ni_to]

14. He refuted the WH LIE about CLINTON using ILLEGAL wiretapping!

He was asked if any prez had signed any order to illegally wiretap SINCE FISA was passed (paraphrased) and he said he wasn't aware of any. The WH started that little lie and it spread all over RW radio for weeks.:grr: Flat-out LIE.