Gonzales told about FBI violations

In March, we learned that the Bush Justice Department, more specifically the FBI, was engaged in widespread, illegal misuse of “national security letters” (NSLs). Using NSLs, the FBI has the power to obtain secret information about Americans — including phone calls, internet visits, even credit ratings — whether they’re suspected of wrongdoing or not. Officials can probe personal information without the consent, or even knowledge, of a judge.

There are, however, some laws and internal Justice Department regulations to regulate how the NSLs are obtained by law enforcement officials. As it turns out, the FBI repeatedly violated these laws.

When I last wrote about this, a clever commenter wrote, “Quick! We need to get Abu Gonzo before a congressional hearing so we can get to the bottom of what he doesn’t remember about any of this!” As it turns out, JoeW was onto something.

As he sought to renew the USA Patriot Act two years ago, Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales assured lawmakers that the FBI had not abused its potent new terrorism-fighting powers. “There has not been one verified case of civil liberties abuse,” Gonzales told senators on April 27, 2005.

Six days earlier, the FBI sent Gonzales a copy of a report that said its agents had obtained personal information that they were not entitled to have. It was one of at least half a dozen reports of legal or procedural violations that Gonzales received in the three months before he made his statement to the Senate intelligence committee, according to internal FBI documents released under the Freedom of Information Act.

The acts recounted in the FBI reports included unauthorized surveillance, an illegal property search and a case in which an Internet firm improperly turned over a compact disc with data that the FBI was not entitled to collect, the documents show. Gonzales was copied on each report that said administrative rules or laws protecting civil liberties and privacy had been violated.

The reports also alerted Gonzales in 2005 to problems with the FBI’s use of an anti-terrorism tool known as a national security letter (NSL), well before the Justice Department’s inspector general brought widespread abuse of the letters in 2004 and 2005 to light in a stinging report this past March.

It looks like that Gonzales fellow has a little trouble with the truth, even when testifying before Congress.

Now, to be fair, the question here is whether Gonzales knew what he was saying was false. It’s not entirely clear that he did.

Justice officials said they could not immediately determine whether Gonzales read any of the FBI reports in 2005 and 2006 because the officials who processed them were not available yesterday. […]

Each of the violations cited in the reports copied to Gonzales was serious enough to require notification of the President’s Intelligence Oversight Board, which helps police the government’s surveillance activities. The format of each memo was similar, and none minced words.

“This enclosure sets forth details of investigative activity which the FBI has determined was conducted contrary to the attorney general’s guidelines for FBI National Security Investigations and Foreign Intelligence Collection and/or laws, executive orders and presidential directives,” said the April 21, 2005, letter to the Intelligence Oversight Board.

So, either Gonzales read these reports and lied, or he blew off reports about serious widespread FBI abuses.

He’s either unqualified to serve as Attorney General because of stunning dishonesty, or he’s unqualified to serve as Attorney General because of breathtaking incompetence.

Your choice, Alberto.

I say kick the bum to the curb! -Kevo

  • Ah, but the devil is in the details (the parsing). Abu told the Senate. ” There has not been one VERIFIED case . . . ”

    Like any good reporter, he was merely waiting for a second confirmation from Karl or Dick or someone about the veracity of the cases cited by the FBI. After all, he knows that they lie sometimes. He would be remiss if he accepted anything they said at face value.

    Nothing to see here. Move along!

  • Unfortunately, it doesn’t matter what choice Alberto makes. He isn’t going anywhere anytime soon.

    The Republicans will not allow an up-or-down, no-confidence vote on Abu G in the face of yet another demonstrable instance of lying before them (and I don’t buy that he simply ‘may not have read the reports, or blew them off’), what recourse do we have? None. Certainly not the conscience of a dullard President.

    And that’s what’s so unbelievably annoying about all of this (to put it mildly). It’s all about party loyalty, and not loyalty to America. (New motto for the Republicans?) There is simply nothing that we can do about him.

  • To expand on comment #2, it depends on the meaning of “civil liberties,” or “cases” or “no” or any other way these bastards can twist this lie around.

    Seriously, this is a documented case of AG AG telling a lie to Congress. Is that not a crime? He was under oath, correct? Can Congress now try to remove him from office?

  • I wouldn’t be surprised if there was an unread letter from the FBI to Gonzales stating that they have identified Osama bin Laden working as a bartender in Santa Monica.

    The AG is working hard, kissing Bush’s ass and recruiting Regent University grads for the DOJ so he’s far too busy (Kissing Bush’s ass some more.) to pay attention to trivial letters from that ol’ FBI.

  • I have generally opposed impeachment of Bush, no matter that he deserves it, on practical grounds. But Gonzales is another matter entirely, and I strongly believe he should be impeached.

    First, the case is likely even stronger against AG2. He certainly appears to have lied to Congress at least twice, and his department is totally out of control and floundering.

    Second, I suspect the public – which may have some cognitive dissonance about impeaching Bush because it implicates their own bad judgment in 2000 and 2004 – has zero loyalty to Abu G. So this may be an easier way to move public opinion and put the Rethugs in a box they richly deserve — given that no one trusts him and the Det of Justice is falling apart, I think the R’s blocking impeachment would not play well with the general public.

    Third, I think warming up Congressional courage on this one may be a useful warning shot across the bow of the WH, and may inspire Congress to more acts of spinefulness going forward.

    And of course there is the simple basic reason that Gonzales is an incompetent, devoid-of-ethics, serial liar who cant manage his department and that the government would be far better without him.

  • Just another reminder of why, and an additional supporting argument of why, anyone coming from this administration to testify to Congress must be under oath and on the record, whether it is Abu G, Harriet Miers, or the DOJ/White House liaison woman. This sort of thing should be thrown back, publicly, into Fred Fielding’s fat face when Fielding tries to say Congress and its tone are the problem.

  • “He’s either unqualified to serve as Attorney General because of stunning dishonesty, or he’s unqualified to serve as Attorney General because of breathtaking incompetence.”

    Agreed. So congress has to ask itself, the next time they bring the current attorney general to testify on any matter, how much credence are they going to give to his testimony?

    No matter what he says, they will not be able to trust him. So why even bother to ask? So, let’s finish connecting the dots…

  • There is simply nothing that we can do about him.

    There are two options. First, as mentioned above, is impeachment. The second, and in this case the most important, is electoral. Lying and abuse of power on this scale (aided and abetted by GOP politicians and officials throughout the federal government) essentially disqualifies the Republican party from holding power. Democrats should forcefully make the argument that the Republicans have been utterly untrustworthy during their time in office, and that one of the greatest risks the nation faces is corruption and lawlessness perpetrated by an entire political party. As Ronald Reagan said in another context, these people need to go on the ash heap of history.

    So in the end, that’s the best option here: use this transparent malfeasance to attack the Republican brand. Destroying that brand is our best hope of discouraging this kind of behavior in the future.

  • Hey guys, civil liberties only apply in the United Stated, not in the made-up country the FBI apparently pretends, and prefers, to live in. . .

  • what jimBOB said. We should impeach Gonzales The Liar and then we need to hang his stinking carcass around the neck of the Republican Party. He should be their poster boy, with his churlish grin, his blatant lies about not remembering crimes he was obviously aware of, his total disrespect for the rule of law, which is the foundation of our society.

    Alberto Gonzales can’t remember if he perjured himself or if he’s just an idiot who was used like a tool by a bunch of criminals. Either way, he needs to be the poster boy for the modern Republican party.

  • Liberals wouldn’t be so upset about this if they’d kept up with the logical continuation of their own ideas from the ’60s: this isn’t a criminal conspiracy, it’s a “law-violators’ co-op.” Same thing with the WH in the Plame scandal.

    Get with the times, man.

  • According to top congressional Democrats, enforcing the law by holding Cheney, Gonzo and the Shrub to their Constitutional oaths would be a waste of Democrats’ previous time. They have better things to do, like raising the insane amount of money it takes to run for office these days. That they have the power to control that distasteful aspect of modern politics hasn’t occurred to them.

  • Ed – Re #17 –
    “That they have the power to control that distasteful aspect of modern politics hasn’t occurred to them.”

    To a limited degree, I agree, but….

    The obscene amounts of money necessary today goes to one primary destination: Television

    Until we Americans wrest back our airwaves from the Republican Corporate oligarchy, we are screwed. Substitute Insurance in there, and you have the health care problem in a nutshell.

    It comes back to money & power in so mant situations, but nearly all of the politicians are in the upper levels of income. Class warfare uses many methods, from power of the press to racism. Keep the plebes fed and entertained, don’t give them much (if any) real power.

  • Zeitgeist captures my point of view perfectly.

    Ed, I could be wrong, but I think that Pelosi specified that impeachment **of Bush** was off the table.

    Also, do you really think that a politician of Pelosi’s capability couldn’t find a justification for bringing Bush’s impeachment back onto the table if she thought it was do-able and advisable? Perhaps along the lines of “When I said that, we had no idea of the levels of corruption and incompetence to which the Bush administration has sunk. The recent round of revelations in Mr. Waxman’s hearings show that Mr. Bush’s continuance in office, even for the little time left, is a clear and present danger to the American system of governance….”?

  • #19 – Why must impeachment be do-able, in the sense of being brought to a conclusion by a majority of Senators voting? I agree that pursuit of that goal is probably a waste of time and could just backfire . But the House committee process of documenting all the crimes (forget misdemeanors) of this administration, especially a process drawn out until the next election, could do more to relieve public anger than almost anything I can imagine.

    #17 – I had in mind restating the government’s claim on the public airwaves which they offer the TeeVee producers for free and which, until Reagan, put those who “owned” such opportunities under some obligation to consider the public good. Congress could also set legal limits to the cost of campaigns, mandate that TeeVee time be given at cost or even free, shorten the length of the campaign season. All it takes is political leadership, of which none of the current crop seem capable. In fact, the scum which rises to the top seem to be experts at bending the campaign rules, extorting exorbitant contributions, and winking at election fraud.

  • Incompetent and dishonest is the GOP way.

    This all sounds like a re-play of the “Memo about Osama bin Laden attacking with planes? What memo? Ooooh, that memo. Uh. Was that important?”

    I’m sure Mr. Gonzales is familiar with the concept of “Knew or should have known.” If he said there wasn’t a problem because he hadn’t read the reports he’s still a liar and no reasonable person on the planet would believe he didn’t at least take steps to make sure he was ignorant of the reports’ contents. If he wants to argue that he never got around to reading them because he was busy fighting the forces of cyber-porn, fine. That would be amusing.

    I also second (or third) what Zeitgeist said at #8. No one likes the slimy little bastard and the world didn’t end when Ashcroft quit. I think the public sentiment would be “Big deal, get another AG.” Plus, it would piss off the BushBrat no end and I’m still looking forward to an on-camera pResidential temper tantrum.

  • He’s either unqualified to serve as Attorney General because of stunning dishonesty, or he’s unqualified to serve as Attorney General because of breathtaking incompetence.

    Your choice, Alberto.

    Why is it his choice? Isn’t he to be held accountable? Will congress do anything about this situation known as “Gonzales”?
    I mean now that they know he is either dishonest or incompetent?

  • Comments are closed.