Specter Off To A Bad Start
By on Feb 6th, 2006 at 9:47 am
Specter Off To A Bad Start
At the beginning of the hearing with Attorney General Gonzales about Bush’s warrantless domestic surveillance program, Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA) announced:
1. Attorney Alberto Gonzales won’t be sworn in, even though the last time he testified under oath he misled the committee about the program. Leahy noted he was sworn the other two times he appeared before the committee. Leahy appealed the ruling of the chair and asked for a roll call vote.
2. Specter won’t allow videos to be shown during the hearings of the President and Attorney General Gonzales misleading Congress and the public about the program. You can watch the video of Bush here and Gonzales here.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Bush
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Guantanamo
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Technology
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
From my understanding of the way the law is written, you do not need to be sworn in. Lying to congress is illegal under any circumstances, though being sworn in helps. But in any case he has already lied under oath to congress.
February 6th, 2006 at 9:49 amMe thinks that they did not want to ignite a Bible on the Senate floor.
February 6th, 2006 at 9:50 amThat’s right, Mark. But he should still be sorn on principle. Especially since he misled the committee last time.
February 6th, 2006 at 9:50 amThats sounds about right….If you don’t swear under oath then what you say or don’t say can’t be used against you and you really can lie your ass off to protect the Diactorship of War Mongers
February 6th, 2006 at 9:52 amThere is no excuse for the republican chairman’s decision to decline the witness be sworn, the smug little smile as he put the matter to vote of the Feingold move tells more than a thousand lies!
February 6th, 2006 at 9:52 amF Specter.
February 6th, 2006 at 9:53 amThis is going to be a whitewash. Thanks repubs. You let America down.
February 6th, 2006 at 9:55 amwtf – these guys are heading up our government?
February 6th, 2006 at 9:56 amWho are these people? Congress refuses to compel the AG to swear to tell the truth about government spying on Americans? What is the fucking point? And now Time is publishing an article stating the the DOJ concludes that this Preznit can order killings within the United States. Do you want to know how the people in Central American felt living during 80’s? Well, we’re all about to find out thanks to the same exact cast of characters.
RIP
February 6th, 2006 at 9:57 amUnited States of America
1776-2000
is leahy sneaking in his statement before spector? wish i could watch the entire hearing live…
February 6th, 2006 at 9:57 amWhat a joke. Specter is a F*CKING joke.
February 6th, 2006 at 9:58 amGus,
February 6th, 2006 at 10:00 amSpecter may be a joke, but it is not funny!
This is disgraceful, to say the least.
February 6th, 2006 at 10:05 amThey put a president under oath concerning sexual activity, but to put the AG under oath in matters of national security and Constitutionality is somehow unnecessary.
The Republicans are traitors, aiding and abetting the subversion of the Constitution.
This is as bad as the little hole in the Pentagon on 9/11.
February 6th, 2006 at 10:06 amUn-Freaking-Beleivable.
Why not simply say “He won’t give an Honest answer anyway…”
Bet he mentions 9/11 at least 10 times.
February 6th, 2006 at 10:07 amSo follow the argument, the Administraqtion has claimed that this program would have prevented the 9/11 attacks, aren’t they really saying that if it’s ok now then it would have been before 9/11, right? What did they do before 9/11 that needed this? Let’s get the dates straight first. On what date was this program initiated?
February 6th, 2006 at 10:11 amI think Larry King is going to sit in for Lindsey Graham today, to ask the questions of the Attornye General no one has the cajones to do.
February 6th, 2006 at 10:17 amI think he should be asked if he objects to being sworn in. When he claims he has nothing to hide, he should then be asked by a committee member to make a pledge similar to or identical to the one which Specter excused him from.
February 6th, 2006 at 10:20 amDid Senator Specter give any explanation for why he felt that asking the witness to swear to tell the truth was unnecessary? Does Senator Specter really believe that confirming for all to see that we live in an open government and that our government officials are not above the law is a waste of time? Does Senator Specter support the truth or not?
I hope that Judd and Mark are correct in that lying to Congress, whether under oath or not, is still a crime. And we need to be demanding that Senator Specter refer the Attorney General’s previous mendacious testimony to the proper authorities for review of a crime.
February 6th, 2006 at 10:28 amI thought Specter’s comments about this ‘program’ being illegal was just bait.
February 6th, 2006 at 10:33 amNow we see where his loyalty lies.
oops, weird occurance, appologies.
February 6th, 2006 at 10:34 am“RIP
United States of America
1776-2000″
That would make a GREAT bumper sticker.
February 6th, 2006 at 10:36 amlistening on cspan -specter just asked gonzo if he, gonzo, would have any objections to having ashcroft testify at a later date…whaaaaa?
February 6th, 2006 at 10:36 amwhy would he even ask that??? considering how gonzo stuttered around his eventual answer of “no objection”, sorta, ashcroft needs to be there, and sworn in…
Apparently, Specter’s price has been met.
February 6th, 2006 at 10:37 amHe’s a Republican politician! Why would you expect integrity from a Republican politician! Sometimes it seems like the good people on this blog can never stop giving the benefit of the doubt to even the most aggregious Republican operatives. Acting like Spectre is anything other than a loyal GOP party member is setting yourself up for disapppointment, just like trusting the likes of McCain, who sometimes has brief spurts of honesty but always sublimates them to the needs of the GOP. They are the first to circle the wagons and scream partisan-ship on the part of the Dems, but there was never a party so inbred, biased, short-sighted, greedy and self-righteous as the GOP is today. You will see a GOP dog-and pony-show in these “hearings”, nothing more. They will sell out our country and our Constitution in a split second for money and power.
February 6th, 2006 at 10:43 amI hope that now all you people see Spector for what he is, a weasel faced, bloviating, phony.
Spector tries to stand tall, but fails in all his efforts. He is doing his job in these hearings, and that job is to protect this shitting republican president.
Spector was built up in the blogs as a person who would get at the truth, a puke against this whole mess. Well, guess what? He aint. He aint pro-choice either. He states this just to get re-elected.
Spector is a phony from the top of his thinning hair to the bottom of his souless feet.
February 6th, 2006 at 10:50 amRIP
United States of America
1776-2000
I have to agree here. I can’t believe that Spector refused to swear in Gonzales, even after Gonzales said he had no objections to being sworn in.
This is really starting to make me wonder if the Republican opposition to the warrantless domestic spying program is really just for show.
February 6th, 2006 at 10:59 am#25… Republicans are supposed to be Americans also… now a days you got to wonder though.
February 6th, 2006 at 11:08 am…and, a few minutes ago, grassley was commenting that HE was not hearing as much dissent about this issue as he heard about the Plame outing, and THAT, in his opinion, “was a 2-bit nothing”…
this is what we’re up against folks…
R.I.P. – U.S.A.
1776-2000
i’m gonna add that one to my collection…
February 6th, 2006 at 11:29 am[...] Well, this is one hell of a way to start the Domestic Spying Hearings. First Specter doesn’t make Gonzales testify under oath, and second won’t allow videos to be shown during the hearings of the President and Attorney General Gonzales misleading Congress and the public about the program. [...]
February 6th, 2006 at 11:53 am#20
yeah, Spector just put a little bait out there, acting all concerned, then fell in line like he does. McCain is the same way. That’s why i hate em’ both.
February 6th, 2006 at 12:13 pmRepublicans have turned around from their days of being the party of fiscal responsibility, small government, and personal responsibility.
Republicans have ushered in the largest deficit in history, and higher national debt than ever.
Republicans now believe that big government is the answer to everything.
Republicans now refuse to take personal responsibility for any of their actions. They prefer to blame anyone/everyone else for their failings.
Why should we be surprised over any illegal or unethical actions from the Republicans? It’s not like they care anymore.
February 6th, 2006 at 12:14 pmHow many of the posters on this board have sent e-mails- voicing your displeasure and concern about the lack of credibility a move like NOT swearing-in Gonzales causes-
… to ussenate.com to these Republiscum inbred Senators involved in this cover up?
These are the culprits:
Orrin Hatch
Arlen Specter
Mike DeWine
Kyl
John Cornyn
Lindsey Graham
Grassley
Brownback
Coburn
I have…
February 6th, 2006 at 1:57 pmSometimes it seems like the good people on this blog can never stop giving the benefit of the doubt to even the most aggregious Republican operatives. Acting like Spectre is anything other than a loyal GOP party member is setting yourself up for disapppointment…
Comment by Solitaire #25
Solitaire,
It’s a combination of “desperation” – wanting so badly to believe that the representatives of our government aren’t really the monsters they’ve become these past ten years…
…and “delusion” – deluding ourselves into believing that “we” (and by extension our elected officials on both sides) stand for all that is good, fair, honest, moral and unimpeachable…
Reality is so daunting…
February 6th, 2006 at 2:04 pm#34 big papa
Sadly, I am afraid it is so.
February 6th, 2006 at 3:51 pmThe hearings today are going down a a white wash. The Dems are angry and it shows at times, but the Reps are defensive and supportive; they hold the majority. Fairness, legality, Contsitutionality, are all going to fare poorly when up against the majority political party.
It is obvious to me after listening to that nonsense all day this whole thing of spying is much much bigger and broader than ol gonzo is coping too. wha
February 6th, 2006 at 7:06 pmIt is obvious that the dept. of justice is clamping down on the n.s.a. whistleblowers as a way to keep them away from congress with any valuable testimony. I hope someone comes forward.
February 6th, 2006 at 9:06 pm