evince
Truthmatters
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/07/25/new-doc-spying/
It is now un refutable that this scumbag is lyin to the entire country.
What now?
It is now un refutable that this scumbag is lyin to the entire country.
What now?
Proof Gonzo lied surfaces right after testimony
- Thread starter evince
- Start date
I'm so furious that this guy is still in this position. This is the Attorney General of the United States. Making a mockery of our justice system. Also, the justice department has a lot of unfilled slots because people don't want to work there. You know, one of the things they do is track terrorist suspects. We can all think about this if there is another attack.
People yelling for impeachment, start with this criminal and buffoon.
People yelling for impeachment, start with this criminal and buffoon.
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
Most people are still unaware of what the firing of US Attorneys was really all about.
In 2000, the right-wing neocon cabal stole the election through the Supreme Court and throwing out millions of ballots.
In 2004, electronic voting was their weapon of choice to hijack the elections.
In 2008, election caging has been chosen and the attorneys that were fired were fied because they refused to prosecute voters and use the caging method.
If Americans allow them to steal another election, we are truly not worthy of a representative government.
In 2000, the right-wing neocon cabal stole the election through the Supreme Court and throwing out millions of ballots.
In 2004, electronic voting was their weapon of choice to hijack the elections.
In 2008, election caging has been chosen and the attorneys that were fired were fied because they refused to prosecute voters and use the caging method.
If Americans allow them to steal another election, we are truly not worthy of a representative government.
I know, you don't read much about the caging lists in the traditional media. But it's there, a thread running through the whole situation.
Oh, I so hope this finally leads to his removal.
doniston
Aint I a cutie? HEH HEH
IMHO, it doesn't matter why they were let go. the president has the constitutional right to let them go. what is wrong is misleading the public as to why. is short, If you are going to answere at all, TELL THE TRUTH" They lied to the public, and the congress, and thus in reality it equates with Clinton's lies. He was impeached for the lies, so also should Gonzo and company.
evince
Truthmatters
http://www.nbc30.com/politics/13760306/detail.html
they are having Gonzo probed(I love the sound of that) and have subpoenaed Rove.
they are having Gonzo probed(I love the sound of that) and have subpoenaed Rove.
Good.
Though it will mean nothing to the demented Democrats, they can at least read what the other side of the story is claiming.....
http://tinyurl.com/3crclr
The administration first used the term "Terrorist Surveillance Program" in early 2006 to refer publicly to a particular intelligence activity that the president publicly acknowledged and described in December 2005 — that is, the NSA's targeting for interception international communications coming into or going out of the United States where the NSA has reasonable grounds to believe that a party to the communication is an agent or member of al-Qaida or an affiliated terrorist organization. That is the only intelligence activity that the attorney general meant when he used the phrase "Terrorist Surveillance Program."
When members of Congress and the public, after that activity was disclosed, questioned whether it was lawful, the attorney general noted that there had not been serious disagreements raised by the Justice Department about the lawfulness of that particular activity — i.e., the interception of international communications of al-Qaida. That statement was accurate. There was not a disagreement between the Justice Department and the White House in March 2004 or any other time about whether there was a legal basis for that particular intelligence activity.
Indeed, the white paper that the department sent to Congress on January 19, 2006, reflects and is consistent with the legal position taken by the Department in 2004, including under (former Deputy Attorney General) Mr. (Jim) Comey's tenure, concerning the legal basis for that activity. The disagreement that occurred in March 2004 concerned the legal basis for intelligence activities that have not been publicly disclosed and that remain highly classified.
The May 17, 2006, letter from Director of National Intelligence (John D.) Negroponte is consistent with the attorney general's testimony. The letter indicates that the March 10, 2004 meeting included a briefing on the activity we have called the "Terrorist Surveillance Program," without indicating whether other intelligence activities were discussed.
http://tinyurl.com/3crclr
The administration first used the term "Terrorist Surveillance Program" in early 2006 to refer publicly to a particular intelligence activity that the president publicly acknowledged and described in December 2005 — that is, the NSA's targeting for interception international communications coming into or going out of the United States where the NSA has reasonable grounds to believe that a party to the communication is an agent or member of al-Qaida or an affiliated terrorist organization. That is the only intelligence activity that the attorney general meant when he used the phrase "Terrorist Surveillance Program."
When members of Congress and the public, after that activity was disclosed, questioned whether it was lawful, the attorney general noted that there had not been serious disagreements raised by the Justice Department about the lawfulness of that particular activity — i.e., the interception of international communications of al-Qaida. That statement was accurate. There was not a disagreement between the Justice Department and the White House in March 2004 or any other time about whether there was a legal basis for that particular intelligence activity.
Indeed, the white paper that the department sent to Congress on January 19, 2006, reflects and is consistent with the legal position taken by the Department in 2004, including under (former Deputy Attorney General) Mr. (Jim) Comey's tenure, concerning the legal basis for that activity. The disagreement that occurred in March 2004 concerned the legal basis for intelligence activities that have not been publicly disclosed and that remain highly classified.
The May 17, 2006, letter from Director of National Intelligence (John D.) Negroponte is consistent with the attorney general's testimony. The letter indicates that the March 10, 2004 meeting included a briefing on the activity we have called the "Terrorist Surveillance Program," without indicating whether other intelligence activities were discussed.
evince
Truthmatters
The disagreement that occurred in March 2004 concerned the legal basis for intelligence activities that have not been publicly disclosed and that remain highly classified.
The May 17, 2006, letter from Director of National Intelligence (John D.) Negroponte is consistent with the attorney general's testimony. The letter indicates that the March 10, 2004 meeting included a briefing on the activity we have called the "Terrorist Surveillance Program," without indicating whether other intelligence activities were discussed.
Yeah....what now?...well the Dems will bluster and yell...no SP will be appointed, and the accusations will be reported on a daily basis, until thety become "the truth" in the public's mind....standard operating procedure....
The May 17, 2006, letter from Director of National Intelligence (John D.) Negroponte is consistent with the attorney general's testimony. The letter indicates that the March 10, 2004 meeting included a briefing on the activity we have called the "Terrorist Surveillance Program," without indicating whether other intelligence activities were discussed.
Yeah....what now?...well the Dems will bluster and yell...no SP will be appointed, and the accusations will be reported on a daily basis, until thety become "the truth" in the public's mind....standard operating procedure....
evince
Truthmatters
WASHINGTON, July 26 — The dispute over the truthfulness of Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales reached a new intensity today as the F.B.I. Director, Robert S. Mueller 3rd, contradicted Mr. Gonzales’s sworn testimony before a Senate committee.
Mr. Mueller told the House Judiciary Committee that the Bush administration’s secret eavesdropping program was the main topic at an encounter in the hospital room of then-Attorney General John Ashcroft on March 10, 2004, contrary to what Mr. Gonzales told a Senate panel on Tuesday.
At the time, Mr. Gonzales was the White House counsel, and Mr. Ashcroft was recovering from gall bladder surgery. That March night, Mr. Gonzales went to the hospital room with Andrew H. Card Jr., then White House chief of staff.
In his testimony before the Senate panel on Tuesday, Mr. Gonzales said the subject in the hospital room was “intelligence activities” under debate in the administration, but not the secret eavesdropping program.
But Mr. Mueller contradicted that version of events today, several hours after four Senate Democrats called for the appointment of a special counsel to investigate whether Mr. Gonzales perjured himself before Congress.
Mr. Mueller told the House Judiciary Committee that the Bush administration’s secret eavesdropping program was the main topic at an encounter in the hospital room of then-Attorney General John Ashcroft on March 10, 2004, contrary to what Mr. Gonzales told a Senate panel on Tuesday.
At the time, Mr. Gonzales was the White House counsel, and Mr. Ashcroft was recovering from gall bladder surgery. That March night, Mr. Gonzales went to the hospital room with Andrew H. Card Jr., then White House chief of staff.
In his testimony before the Senate panel on Tuesday, Mr. Gonzales said the subject in the hospital room was “intelligence activities” under debate in the administration, but not the secret eavesdropping program.
But Mr. Mueller contradicted that version of events today, several hours after four Senate Democrats called for the appointment of a special counsel to investigate whether Mr. Gonzales perjured himself before Congress.
"Did you have an understanding that that the conversation was on TSP?" asked Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Texas. TSP stands for terrorist surveillance program.
"I had an understanding the discussion was on a NSA program, yes," Mueller answered.
Jackson asked again: "We use 'TSP,' we use 'warrantless wiretapping,' so would I be comfortable in saying that those were the items that were part of the discussion?"
"The discussion was on a national NSA program that has been much discussed, yes," Mueller responded.
----------
The seemingly overly cautious mincing and parcing of words and phrases by both Mueller and Gonzales is interesting to watch....why Mueller would only go so far a to say "NSA program" and not just say "Terrorists Surveillance Program" is curious.....seems the entire problem is that Gonzales refuses to utter those three words too, same as Mueller.......and thats way he is being accused of perjury.....interesting stuff....
"I had an understanding the discussion was on a NSA program, yes," Mueller answered.
Jackson asked again: "We use 'TSP,' we use 'warrantless wiretapping,' so would I be comfortable in saying that those were the items that were part of the discussion?"
"The discussion was on a national NSA program that has been much discussed, yes," Mueller responded.
----------
The seemingly overly cautious mincing and parcing of words and phrases by both Mueller and Gonzales is interesting to watch....why Mueller would only go so far a to say "NSA program" and not just say "Terrorists Surveillance Program" is curious.....seems the entire problem is that Gonzales refuses to utter those three words too, same as Mueller.......and thats way he is being accused of perjury.....interesting stuff....