Quote:
|
Originally Posted by tecoyah
|
I watched the video. The basis of my opinion on Gonzales and the Congressional investigation is that the wrong questions are being asked.
I don't see the importance of who put a name on the list. The important question is why the name was put on the list. If there is evidence that a termination was done illegally, that angle should be pursued. I understand the perceived need to know who put the name on the list so "they" can compel testimony to determine why the name was put on the list to then determine if any law was broken. The problem is that in this situation the "why" can be almost whatever the administration wants it to be (I put him on the list because I don't like demeanor as a ...whatever. They can be vague). Trying to prove a law was broken with these terminations will be virtually impossible.
If you want me to defend Gonzales using the same prepared statements - I can only add, that I would have done the same unless I had something new to say.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dc_dux
ace....you want some examples of victims of illegal surveillance of citizens with the consent of the AG (and ultimately the WH). This is not under the warrentless wiretapping program, but just as intrusive...and it could have been you or your family.....
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has said he was surprised and unaware of civil liberties violations committed by the FBI during its exercise of Patriot Act powers — including the use of so-called National Security Letters — until an internal Justice Department report uncovered them in March 2007. But Gonzales and his predecessor, John Ashcroft, were routinely sent notifications from the FBI when such violations occurred and had to be reported to the president's Intelligence Oversight Board (IOB), according to documents released this month under the Freedom of Information Act. Here is a timeline:
Feb. 10, 2005 Gonzales is sent an FBI report of an IOB violation involving an intelligence investigations of a U.S. citizen that went on for more than a year without proper notification or oversight.
Feb. 14, 2005 Gonzales is sent an FBI report of an IOB violation involving a counterterrorism investigation in which agents continued the collection of electronic surveillance of a U.S. person after a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court's order had expired.
Feb. 16, 2005 Gonzales is sent an FBI report of an IOB violation involving the improper search of a peson's property in an intelligence investigation.
March 18, 2005 Gonzales is sent an FBI report of an IOB violation involving an error during a counterterrorism investigation.
March 22, 2005 Gonzales is sent an FBI report of an IOB violation involving an error made by a telephone carrier during an electronic surveillance operation. IOB Violation Report
April 21, 2005 Gonzales is sent an FBI report of an IOB violation involving the prohibited collection of email contents through a national security letter due to an error by the Internet provider
...three months of reports directly to Gonzales and then days later he goes before the Senate Intel Committee (and again before the Senate Judiciary Committee earlier this year)and lies:
April 27, 2005 Gonzales testifies before the Senate Intelligence Committee in favor of renewing the U.S. Patriot Act, declaring "There has not been one verified case of civil liberties abuse."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv...l?hpid=topnews
So do you consider this an abuse of power? Should Gonzales "be fired and possibly put in jail' as you suggested above? |
I don't know the details of these violations. If they are procedural violations, I would not consider them to be an abuse of power. I would however, expect improved procedural controls to be put in place to minimize these errors in the future.
If these violations were willful, I would expect someone to be held accountable.
If Gonzales, has the responsibility to act but failed to act, he should be confronted with his failure and be given an opportunity to explain his failure. Given the amount of time he has spent testifying to Congress, I assume the question has been asked of him. Has it been?
{added}
Is the IOB similar to an Internal Audit department? I looked at a few of the reports, they referred to AG "guidelines" violations while not describing the activity as illegal or as an abuse of power. It would be interesting to see any communication on these issues between the AG's office and the FBI. Then I think we can make a better judgment on Gonzales.