Hi there,

For nearly 30 years, Democracy Now! has gone to where the silence is. Our reporting provides news you can’t find anywhere else and helps maintain an informed public, which is critical for a functioning democracy. Thanks to a group of generous donors, all donations made today will be TRIPLED, which means your $15 gift is worth $45. Please donate today, so we can keep amplifying voices that refuse to be silent. Every dollar makes a difference. Thank you so much!

Democracy Now!
Amy Goodman

Non-commercial news needs your support.

We rely on contributions from you, our viewers and listeners to do our work. If you visit us daily or weekly or even just once a month, now is a great time to make your monthly contribution.

Please do your part today.

Donate

Gonzales Defends Delay on Domestic Spying Reversal

HeadlineJan 19, 2007

Domestic spying was a top issue on Capitol Hill Thursday — one day after the Bush administration announced it would finally seek court warrants for spying on U.S. citizens. The reversal came more than five years after the Bush administration began the warrantless eavesdropping and a little over a year after the program was first publicly disclosed. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee to explain the delay. He was questioned by Republican Senator Arlen Specter.

Sen. Arlen Specter: “I believe that the United States and the administration have paid a heavy price for not acting sooner to bring the terrorist surveillance program under judicial review. That’s the traditional way — before there was a wiretap, or search and seizure — to have probable cause established and to have the court approval.”

Critics have argued the Bush administration reversed its stance on domestic spying just as the Democrat-controlled Congress was to bring new scrutiny. But Gonzales said the administration had good reason for the delay.

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales: “I must take issue with Senator Specter. This is a very complicated application. In many ways, it’s innovative in terms of the orders granted by the judge. It’s not the kind of thing you just pull off the shelf. We’ve worked on it a long time.”

The original content of this program is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License. Please attribute legal copies of this work to democracynow.org. Some of the work(s) that this program incorporates, however, may be separately licensed. For further information or additional permissions, contact us.

Non-commercial news needs your support

We rely on contributions from our viewers and listeners to do our work.
Please do your part today.
Make a donation
Top