| Fdubya247 |
Liar, liar, pants on fire...!!!
:opps:
Documents contradict Gonzales' testimony
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales testifies on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, July 24, 2007, before the Senate Judiciary Committee.
By LARA JAKES JORDAN, Associated Press Writer 26 minutes ago
Documents show that eight congressional leaders were briefed about the Bush administration's terrorist surveillance program on the eve of its expiration in 2004, contradicting sworn Senate testimony this week by Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.
The documents, obtained by The Associated Press, come as senators consider whether a perjury investigation should be opened into conflicting accounts about the program and a dramatic March 2004 confrontation leading up to its potentially illegal reauthorization.
A Gonzales spokesman maintained Wednesday that the attorney general stands by his testimony.
At a heated Senate Judiciary Committee hearing Tuesday, Gonzales repeatedly testified that the issue at hand was not about the terrorist surveillance program, which allowed the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on suspects in the United States without receiving court approval.
Instead, Gonzales said, the emergency meetings on March 10, 2004, focused on an intelligence program that he would not describe.
Gonzales, who was then serving as counsel to Bush, testified that the White House Situation Room briefing sought to inform congressional leaders about the pending expiration of the unidentified program and Justice Department objections to renew it. Those objections were led by then-Deputy Attorney General Jim Comey, who questioned the program's legality.
"The dissent related to other intelligence activities," Gonzales testified at Tuesday's hearing. "The dissent was not about the terrorist surveillance program."
"Not the TSP?" responded Sen. Charles E. Schumer, D-N.Y. "Come on. If you say it's about other, that implies not. Now say it or not."
"It was not," Gonzales answered. "It was about other intelligence activities."
A four-page memo from the national intelligence director's office shows that the White House briefing with the eight lawmakers on March 10, 2004, was about the terror surveillance program, or TSP.
The memo, dated May 17, 2006, and addressed to then-House Speaker Dennis Hastert, details "the classification of the dates, locations, and names of members of Congress who attended briefings on the Terrorist Surveillance Program," wrote then-Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte.
It shows that the briefing in March 2004 was attended by the Republican and Democratic House and Senate leaders and top Intelligence Committee members, as Gonzales testified.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070725...63klDG8lzGWwvIE |
|
|
| Fdubya247 |
Credibility Collapse
Once again, Alberto Gonzales is unable to offer straight answers to simple questions.
Wednesday, July 25, 2007; A14
"I don't trust you."
"What credibility is left for you?"
SOMETHING IS terribly, terribly wrong when the attorney general of the United States is called to testify under oath before Congress and much of the hearing revolves around his credibility -- or lack thereof. But such was the case yet again during an appearance yesterday by Alberto R. Gonzales before the Senate Judiciary Committee.
The comments quoted above from Chairman Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) and ranking Republican Arlen Specter (Pa.) reflect the frustration we have come to know all too well when Mr. Gonzales is asked to provide answers to legitimate questions, whether the subject is surveillance programs, interrogation methods for foreign prisoners, the firing of U.S. attorneys -- or even last-minute missions to hospital rooms.
That last topic formed the basis of what can only be described as incredible testimony by Mr. Gonzales yesterday. During the hearing, the attorney general was asked about his March 10, 2004, sojourn to a Washington hospital where then-Attorney General John D. Ashcroft was in intensive care because of gall bladder complications. Mr. Ashcroft had temporarily transferred the powers of the attorney general to his deputy, James B. Comey. Mr. Comey had refused to give the department's legal blessing to an intelligence program due to expire the next day. Mr. Gonzales, then the White House counsel, traveled to Mr. Ashcroft's bedside with then-White House chief of staff Andrew H. Card Jr.
"Obviously, there was concern about General Ashcroft's condition, and we would not have sought, nor did we intend to get any approval from General Ashcroft if in fact he wasn't fully competent to make that decision," Mr. Gonzales testified yesterday. He then described Mr. Ashcroft as "lucid." Mr. Ashcroft ultimately told the two White House visitors that Mr. Comey was the only official legally empowered to make a determination on the matter.
Was Mr. Gonzales, now the top law enforcement official in the country, attempting to circumvent the chain of command? Mr. Comey, who has a reputation as a straight shooter, seems to think so. He testified in May that he believed Mr. Gonzales and Mr. Card were attempting "to take advantage of a very sick man."
But it's not just Mr. Comey's word against Mr. Gonzales's when it comes to aspects of this matter. Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.), who was ranking minority member on the Senate intelligence committee in 2004, told The Post's Dan Eggen and William Branigin that he was surprised by Mr. Gonzales's description of a meeting earlier on March 10, 2004, involving top lawmakers on the intelligence committees. Mr. Gonzales testified that there was consensus among lawmakers of both parties that the intelligence program in question should not be allowed to lapse and that Mr. Ashcroft should be informed about that consensus. Mr. Rockefeller told The Post that there was no such agreement. Mr. Gonzales is "once again . . . making something up to protect himself," said Mr. Rockefeller, who is now chairman of the Senate intelligence committee.
At what point does someone lose so much credibility that he should no longer serve in public office? In the case of Mr. Gonzales, we believe that time has come and gone.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...ml?nav=hcmodule |
|
|
| Bronks Breasts |
| Hmmm... .. I wonder if Zimmie and NC Mike will respond to this ? Come on guys.. amuse us. |
|
|
| Halcyon |
Quote: Originally posted by Bronks Breasts
Hmmm... .. I wonder if Zimmie and NC Mike will respond to this ? Come on guys.. amuse us. |
If they didn't respond to my thread, what makes you think they have the balls to answer to this thread? I've already exposed Gonzalez (and in large part the Administration as a whole) as a liar, what makes you think they would even dare admit this? Even when the facts are laid bare at their feet. They won't EVER come in and say, "You're right, we were wrong about this issue".... never.
And that's what seperates the men from the little boys. (Don't get excited at the mention of boys zimmie, we know how you like little boys)
Pathetic, spineless, cowardly punk bitches. Can never admit when they are proven wrong, only ignore the thread and hope it goes away.
That's why I put my thread in my signature. Little cowardly bitches. |
|
|
| Fdubya247 |
 |
|
|
| Calistan |
Quote: Originally posted by Fdubya247
Liar, liar, pants on fire...!!!
:opps:
Documents contradict Gonzales' testimony
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales testifies on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, July 24, 2007, before the Senate Judiciary Committee.
By LARA JAKES JORDAN, Associated Press Writer 26 minutes ago
Documents show that eight congressional leaders were briefed about the Bush administration's terrorist surveillance program on the eve of its expiration in 2004, contradicting sworn Senate testimony this week by Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.
The documents, obtained by The Associated Press, come as senators consider whether a perjury investigation should be opened into conflicting accounts about the program and a dramatic March 2004 confrontation leading up to its potentially illegal reauthorization.
A Gonzales spokesman maintained Wednesday that the attorney general stands by his testimony.
At a heated Senate Judiciary Committee hearing Tuesday, Gonzales repeatedly testified that the issue at hand was not about the terrorist surveillance program, which allowed the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on suspects in the United States without receiving court approval.
Instead, Gonzales said, the emergency meetings on March 10, 2004, focused on an intelligence program that he would not describe.
Gonzales, who was then serving as counsel to Bush, testified that the White House Situation Room briefing sought to inform congressional leaders about the pending expiration of the unidentified program and Justice Department objections to renew it. Those objections were led by then-Deputy Attorney General Jim Comey, who questioned the program's legality.
"The dissent related to other intelligence activities," Gonzales testified at Tuesday's hearing. "The dissent was not about the terrorist surveillance program."
"Not the TSP?" responded Sen. Charles E. Schumer, D-N.Y. "Come on. If you say it's about other, that implies not. Now say it or not."
"It was not," Gonzales answered. "It was about other intelligence activities."
A four-page memo from the national intelligence director's office shows that the White House briefing with the eight lawmakers on March 10, 2004, was about the terror surveillance program, or TSP.
The memo, dated May 17, 2006, and addressed to then-House Speaker Dennis Hastert, details "the classification of the dates, locations, and names of members of Congress who attended briefings on the Terrorist Surveillance Program," wrote then-Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte.
It shows that the briefing in March 2004 was attended by the Republican and Democratic House and Senate leaders and top Intelligence Committee members, as Gonzales testified.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070725...63klDG8lzGWwvIE |
SURPRISE, SURPRISE, SURPRISE!! |
|
|
| Halcyon |
Quote: Originally posted by Fdubya247
|
:jj::lol::spit: |
|
|
| otherone4life |
| The guy is the chief law enforcement officer in the nation and every day he stays on the 5th Fl. of the Justice Building he takes a shit on the office. |
|
|
| zimmie |
| Leahy and Schumer?.....lmao |
|
|
| mingmen |
gonzales and card
yikes! |
|
|
| mingmen |
| gonzales is a disgrace. |
|
|
| atomizer |
| Consider my confidence in the Office of the Attorney General (where no one knows shit about what the next cubicle is doing unless it's a Pat Robertson graduate, then we TOTALLY don't know what's going on) restored. It was a good day of work for Beto. Tomorrow I'll leave his wife a scone. |
|
|
| atomizer |
You know, I had some doubts with regard to the veracity of Alberto's and Harriet's testinonies, but they certainly proved us doubters wrong! Go, W 2008!
Oh, was I supposed to post that to...<static..fmmmmflllfffmmmph> |
|
|
| MLBoros72s |
Quote: Originally posted by Fdubya247
|
:lol::lol: He has mastered the art of the weasel. |
|
|
| otherone4life |
| the guy is an embarrassment ..disbarment and imprisonment should be in the cards. |
|
|
|
