| Attorney general refers to president bush as the client { February 7 2006 } Original Source Link: (May no longer be active) http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/06/AR2006020601426.htmlhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/06/AR2006020601426.html
In Quizzing a Reticent Gonzales, Senators Encounter a Power Shortage
By Dana Milbank Tuesday, February 7, 2006; A02
In an entire day of testimony about the Bush administration's secret wiretapping program, Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales recognized the supremacy of congressional authority in precisely one instance: the power to declare a recess.
"Attorney General Gonzales, would you like a break?" Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) inquired after 90 minutes of back-and-forth.
"If you're offering a break, Mr. Chairman," the attorney general replied.
"Well, I'm not going to offer you one unless you want one," the chairman insisted.
Gonzales would have none of it. "I will defer to you, Mr. Chairman," he said, before finally accepting a brief recess.
Otherwise, Gonzales offered the legislative branch little deference yesterday, and certainly no apology for the administration's decision not to seek congressional approval for its surveillance program. "The short answer is that we didn't think we needed to, quite frankly," he declared in a typical exchange.
When did the administration decide it had the authority? "I'm not going to give an exact date," he said.
What does the administration do with the information it collects? "I can't talk about specifics."
Is the information used to obtain search warrants? "I am uncomfortable talking in great detail."
More interesting than what the attorney general said was what he would not say. Has President Bush, invoking his "inherent powers" under the Constitution, also authorized warrantless eavesdropping on domestic calls, opening of Americans' mail and e-mail, and searches of their homes and offices?
"I am not comfortable going down the road of saying yes or no as to what the president has or has not authorized," Gonzales, shifting frequently in his chair, informed the senators.
Just 13 months ago, at his confirmation hearing, Gonzales vowed that he would "no longer represent only the White House," instead representing "the United States of America and its people." Yesterday, however, he relapsed, referring to Bush at one point as "the client."
Fortunately for Gonzales, the committee members did not seem to be in any position to impose restrictions on the executive branch. They couldn't even agree on whether to administer an oath.
"He said he would be willing to be sworn," Specter reported to his colleagues, but "I think it is unwarranted."
"But Mr. Chairman, may I ask, if the witness has no objection to being sworn, why not just do it?" Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) persisted.
Specter grew irritated. "The reason I'm not going to swear him in is not up to him. Attorney General Gonzales is not the chairman. I am."
"I appeal the ruling of the chair," Sen. Russell Feingold (D-Wis.) blurted out.
Specter held a voice vote. Feingold demanded a roll-call vote. Specter complied. Feingold demanded to see the proxies.
"This," Specter observed, "is really not a very good way to begin this hearing."
The attorney general entered the hearing room flanked by bodyguards and trailed by a phalanx of lawyers carrying thick briefing books. Gonzales, in an opening statement that mentioned "enemy" 10 times and "al Qaeda" 20 times, suggested that those who questioned the legality of the program were aiding the terrorists.
"Our enemy is listening, and I cannot help but wonder if they aren't shaking their heads in amazement at the thought that anyone would imperil such a sensitive program," he said. "How can anyone conclude that it is not necessary and appropriate to intercept al Qaeda phone calls?"
Nobody had concluded that, except perhaps for the demonstrator who shouted "You're a fascist!" at Gonzales. Democrats, worried about being branded terrorist-huggers, merely complained that they hadn't been consulted. "We make the laws," Leahy pleaded. "If you believe you need new laws, then come and tell us." Gonzales nodded, his lips pinched tightly.
A trio of Republicans on the committee vied to serve as Gonzales's chief defender. Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (Utah) used his questioning time to attack those "people who are wildly saying that the president is violating the law." Sens. Jeff Sessions (Ala.) and John Cornyn (Tex.) joined the sister of a Sept. 11 victim at a news conference outside the hearing room.
But other Republicans were skeptical. "In all honesty, Mr. Attorney General," Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (S.C.) advised, the "argument that you're making is very dangerous." He warned that, eventually, "there is no check and balance."
As the hearing stretched late into the afternoon, the witness grew testier. When Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) asked him about domestic surveillance, Gonzales cut him down with "I'm not going to respond to that" and "I'm not going to answer." At another point, Gonzales cited the secret program in his boast that "it's not simply a coincidence that the United States of America has not been hit again."
After yet another rebuffed question, Leahy replied to Gonzales with a tone of mock sympathy: "Of course. I'm sorry, Mr. Attorney General, I forgot: You can't answer any questions that might be relevant."
It was about time for Congress to exercise its constitutional authority to call another recess.
© 2006 The Washington Post Company
|
|