Senate Questions Attorney General Gonzales on Wiretapping Program

KWAME HOLMAN: Gonzales didn't respond to Specter's scolding but did address his issues, defending the president's reasons for establishing military commissions for Guantanamo detainees, a process recently struck down by the Supreme Court.

ALBERTO GONZALES, U.S. Attorney General: For example, no one can expect members of our military to read Miranda warnings to terrorists captured on the battlefield, or provide terrorists on the battlefield immediate access to counsel, or maintain a strict chain of custody for evidence.

The current DOD military commissions take into account these situational difficulties and thus provide a useful basis for Congress's consideration of modified procedures.

KWAME HOLMAN: Gonzales then moved to the newspaper accounts that revealed classified terrorist-related programs.

ALBERTO GONZALES: It is wrong that someone would reveal intelligence activities that are helping to prevent another terrorist attack on America. American lives are potentially endangered by such conduct.

KWAME HOLMAN: However, during a series of rapid-fire questions, Senator Specter asked Gonzales if he was ready to prosecute the authors of that New York Times story which disclosed the terrorist surveillance program.

SEN. ARLEN SPECTER: Are you considering the prosecution of the author of that article in the newspaper?

ALBERTO GONZALES: Our long-standing practice -- and it remains so today -- our policy is that we pursue the leaker. That is our primary objective, is to go after the leakers, quite frankly. We hope to work with responsible journalists and persuade them not to publish a story, with respect to...

SEN. ARLEN SPECTER: But they did publish the story.

ALBERTO GONZALES: They did publish it.

SEN. ARLEN SPECTER: And you said on May 21st you were considering a prosecution. Now, we've had June and July. We've had two months since then. Are you or are you not considering a prosecution?

ALBERTO GONZALES: Mr. Chairman, I will say, we're focused primarily on the leakers, and we continue to work with the media to try to persuade them not to publish stories.

I do think, quite frankly, Mr. Chairman, it is appropriate to have a discussion and a dialogue about, what do we do when we're in a time of war and we're talking about highly classified programs that may save American lives...

SEN. ARLEN SPECTER: I'm prepared for a discussion of the dialogue, but on another day when we have more than 10 minutes. I'm going to move on and accept your non-answer because I don't think I'm going to get anything more on that subject, and perhaps nothing more on the next subject.

KWAME HOLMAN: The next subject concerned whether the Bush administration was conducting other secret programs without court approval.

SEN. ARLEN SPECTER: Question: Is it true that it is only the terrorist surveillance program -- also known as the electronic surveillance program -- is that the only program that the administration has which is not functioning under a court order?

ALBERTO GONZALES: Mr. Chairman, you and I did have a conversation. What I can say is that what you're asking about, the programs and activities you're asking about, to the extent that they exist would be highly classified. To the extent they exist would be -- have been and would be fully briefed to the intelligence committees.

And I can also tell you that we are currently having discussions within the administration to see what additional information we can provide to this committee about any additional activities.

SEN. ARLEN SPECTER: But you can confirm your statement to me that the only program which is not subject to judicial authorization is the electronic surveillance program?

ALBERTO GONZALES: Mr. Chairman...

SEN. ARLEN SPECTER: You told me that, didn't you?

ALBERTO GONZALES: ... I believe what I said -- well, here's what I'd like to be on record, that to my knowledge...

SEN. ARLEN SPECTER: No, no, no. Answer if you told me that. Then you can go on the record.

ALBERTO GONZALES: I wouldn't use -- I'm not sure that those were the words that I used, Mr. Chairman.

SEN. ARLEN SPECTER: Well, the substance of the words you used?

ALBERTO GONZALES: Those are the substance of the words I used, but those are not the exact words that I used.

SEN. ARLEN SPECTER: OK.

KWAME HOLMAN: Patrick Leahy, the committee's top Democrat, asked Gonzales to take a position on what kind of legal procedures Congress should design for those Guantanamo detainees.

SEN. PATRICK LEAHY (D), Vermont: At our hearing last week, Mr. Attorney General, one of your assistants testified in effect that we in Congress should simply ratify the military commission procedures that the president designed and that the Supreme Court criticized and struck down as illegal. Is that, in fact, the administration's position?

ALBERTO GONZALES: Senator Leahy, I think our position is -- we care less about where we began. We care more about where we end up. And we'd like to...

SEN. PATRICK LEAHY: No, no. The question is very specific: Is it the administration's position, as one of your assistants suggested, that we should simply ratify the military commission procedures that the president designed and the Supreme Court struck down in Hamdan?

ALBERTO GONZALES: That would certainly be one alternative that Congress could consider, Senator Leahy.

SEN. PATRICK LEAHY: That was the alternative that the one person we had from the administration who testified suggested. Is that the administration's position, yes or no? That's simple.

ALBERTO GONZALES: I don't believe the administration has a position as to where Congress should begin its deliberations.

SEN. PATRICK LEAHY: Thank you. So we were misled by that testimony.

KWAME HOLMAN: Utah Republican Orrin Hatch stayed on the issue, reminding colleagues that the Supreme Court didn't necessarily outlaw military commissions.

SEN. ORRIN HATCH (R), Utah: Unlike some of the hysterical comments about that particular decision, as though it was a complete slap in the face to the administration, I didn't think it was. Frankly, all the decision basically -- well, there are a number of things that the decision said, but basically it said that they expect us to come up with a set of procedures that will work during this process.

ALBERTO GONZALES: Well, these are very, very tough issues. And you have to remember that you had six out of eight justices who wrote in that case, 177 pages of analysis. And so to say that this was something that was so obviously wrong, I just disagree.

KWAME HOLMAN: Gonzales spent four hours before the Judiciary Committee. Chairman Specter thanked him for his time. The attorney general smiled in response, and the hearing ended with a respectful handshake.