Monday, January 30, 2006

Feingold Charges That Gonzales "Was Not Being Straight" During Confirmation Hearing

Sen. Russell Feingold (D-WI) charged yesterday that Attorney General Alberto Gonzales misled the Senate during his confirmation hearing a year ago when he dodged a question about whether the president could authorize warrantless wiretapping of U.S. citizens.

In a letter to Gonzales, Feingold demanded to know why Gonzales dismissed the senator's question about warrantless eavesdropping as a "hypothetical situation" during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in January, 2005.

Readers may recall that JABBS asked a similar question last month.

The question remains: Given his role in circumventing the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, did Gonzales commit perjury during his confirmation hearing?


Anonymous Straight Shooter said...

It sure as hell wasn't hypothetical, then, was it?

Go for it, Russ. And it doesn't depend on what the meaning of "hypothetical" is, either.

10:48 PM  
Anonymous hang a left said...

I am sure if someone perused the transcript they would find other untruthful statements to the Senate. I am too freakin tired, maybe someone is up for it.

10:54 PM  
Anonymous shraby said...

Russ smells a rat. Get out the rat trap Russ.

10:54 PM  
Anonymous alias: "cutiepie" johnson said...

he's no dummy
It was obvious that Gonzales was dodging the question. People don't dodge in order to tell the truth ...

11:27 PM  
Anonymous shraby said...

Russ nicely provided the rope and Gonzales used it.

11:27 PM  
Anonymous MO_Dem said...

Get him, Russ!!
Senator Feingold won't settle for spin! He ROCKS!

11:27 PM  
Anonymous TOJ said...

Uh, Russ, the word is LIE

why don't our people use that word?

11:28 PM  
Anonymous alias: "cutiepie" johnson said...

You don't say "lie" because that assumes intent. You say things like "fact-challenged" or "misled" because that simply means that Gonzales didn't give the facts.

I'm not a lawyer, but I assume that for politicians, it's a defense mechanism, to avoid being sued for slander.

11:29 PM  
Anonymous gumby said...

Someone lied in their confirmation hearing and then the Dems voted for them? I'm shocked, shocked I tell you.

Asscrap lied in Feingold's face and Feingold voted for him.

There is a whole list of these lying Repukes who the Dems confirmed. Clarence Thomas? Rehnquist? Ted Olson? If they don't sit there and lie, they just get elevated in a Recess Appointment.

11:30 PM  
Anonymous kuro5hin said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

12:18 AM  
Anonymous RoyGBiv said...

No, the word is "perjury."

"Perjury" is a legal term encompassing a greater range of infractions than "lie," which is not, in and of itself, a legal term. For example, deliberately giving incomplete testimony under oath is perjury.

1:09 AM  
Anonymous robbedvoter said...

Nawww! You think? Can you "unconfirm" him now?

As they say in the old country: "catch the blind man, get his eyes"

A cautionary tale for Alito.

10:18 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Listed on BlogShares