No Dissent on Spying, Says Justice Dept.(will not retract statement of Gonzo in 2006)

[maddezmom]

Source: Washington Post

No Dissent on Spying, Says Justice Dept.

By R. Jeffrey Smith
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, May 17, 2007; Page A06

The Justice Department said yesterday that it will not retract a sworn statement in 2006 by Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales that the Terrorist Surveillance Program had aroused no controversy inside the Bush administration, despite congressional testimony Tuesday that senior departmental officials nearly resigned in 2004 to protest such a program.

The department's affirmation of Gonzales's remarks raised fresh questions about the nature of the classified dispute, which former U.S. officials say led then-Deputy Attorney General James B. Comey and as many as eight colleagues to discuss resigning.

Testifying Tuesday on Capitol Hill, Comey declined to describe the program. He said it "was renewed on a regular basis" and required the attorney general's signature.

He said a review by the Justice's Office of Legal Counsel in spring 2004 had concluded the program was not legal.



Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/16/AR2007051602715.html

[truthisfreedom]

1. Heh. Everything bush does now starts with a stamp of his little foot, and ends with bargaining

and eventually giving in. He's such a time-waster... he might as well admit the jig is up.

[cyberpj]

11. I don't think that's happening on the war budget though. He may yet get his way on that. nt

[MidwestTransplant]

2. Does he ever tell the truth?

[wishlist]

3. These blatant lies are so preposterous, but they can't ever admit lying n/t

[Lasher]

4. Was Speedy under oath when he said that?

Remember when Specter was chair of the Judiciary committee and he refused to swear Speedy in despite objections of Democratic members present? Looks like this is one reason why. I remember Gonzo saying he was perfectly willing to be sworn in. Liar, he was not. He and Specter had that made up ahead of time.

[salin]

5. sworn or not - this response puts clear the current lies.

I can't understand, why after this, there wouldn't be talk about impeaching him. This is just one more - but a very CLEAR one - example of intentional lying to congress. This man should not be sitting at the top of federal law enforcement - he should be behind bars for corruption of justice.

[Lasher]

6. It doesn't matter if they impeach him.

He's just a symptom. Junior and Cheney are the disease. Junior would nominate someone else just like Speedy to replace him. And you gotta figure that other senior DOJ officials are 'loyal Bushies' too.

Remember when The Hamper and his pals did that redistricting in Texas? DOJ was required to review the plan to ensure it was in compliance with a law that protects minority voter rights. Career attorneys said it was not, but political appointees overruled them. That was highly unusual but I guess not in this administration. Later court action forced Texas Republicans to undo the part that was illegal in this respect.

I'm mentioning this to make a point; This happened before Gonzales was AG. The DOJ is rotten to the core, staffed with idealogues who are willing to do anything that would give Junior and the Publican party an advantage.

[Robbien]

7. It does matter

As long as Gonzales is there, the DoJ will continue operating along partisan lines. Unless the DoJ is slapped by a Gonzales firing, the DoJ will continue to hire and fire and mete judgment on a partisan basis.

Yes Cheney/Rove/Bush need to be driven out, but each government department head needs to be handled also. One does not need to wait for the other to happen.

[windy252]

15. I'm not a lawyer,

but isn't it a crime to lie to Congress whether or not you're under oath, or does that not apply to the Senate?

[Lasher]

16. I think you're right.

I've seen that theory set forth more than once, that it's illegal to lie to Congress (either the House or Senate).

[rodeodance]

8. umm. Comey vs the WH on who is lying?---Asscroft needs to testify.

[gratuitous]

9. Not just Ashcroft, but his wife as well

Comey testified that when he got to Ashcroft's hospital room in the dead of night, Mrs. Ashcroft was there and said that she had just gotten off the phone with someone at the White House who told her that Gonzales and Card were on their way over for their little social visit. Who called the Attorney General's hospital room in the middle of the night? Who would have the necessary clout to get patched through, even if they were from the White House? Could it have been Bush himself? Mrs. Ashcroft needs to be interviewed to find out who called her husband's hospital room that night.

[maddezmom]

14. and as someone said earlier, where are the denials?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x281968

[Rageneau]

10. This Gonzalez guy is giving lawyers a bad name.

[Beetwasher]

12. Well, When "Dissent" Is Defined As

Total and complete agreement on a subject, then of course there was no "dissent". Those silly "word" things, they mean what we tell you they mean.

[damntexdem]

13. Hey, there was no dissent. Sure, senior staff threatened to resign in protest --

but there was no dissent.

And a majority just voted to make that unanimous.

;-)