This morning, ThinkProgress listed three questions that Alberto Gonzales needed to answer during today’s hearings. Question No. 3 read, “Can you guarantee this program has never “” either intentionally or unintentionally “” captured communications of political opponents or journalists?”

RawStory reports that Sen. Joseph Biden made a similar request today, asking Gonzales to guarantee the program had not been used to spy on innocent Americans with no connections to terrorism:

BIDEN: Can you assure us, General, you are fully, totally informed and confident that you know the absolute detail with which this program is being conducted? Can you assure us you personally can assure us no one is being eavesdropped upon in the United States other than — other than someone who has a communication that is emanating from foreign soil by a suspected terrorist, al Qaeda, or otherwise?

GONZALES: Sir, I can’t give you absolute assurance.

BIDEN: Who can?

GONZALES: Certainly General Hayden knows more about the operational details of this [program]. What I can give the American people assurance is that we have a number of safeguards in place so that we can say with a high degree of confidence or certainly certainty that what the president has authorized in connection with this program, that those procedures are being followed.

Gonzales tries to kick this question to former NSA Director Michael Hayden. But as ThinkProgress has noted, Hayden has been asked this question on at least three occassions and ducked it every time.

Alberto Gonzales was asked today by Sen. Dianne Feinstein whether President Bush had the authority to engage in illegal covert propaganda within the United States. Gonzales stonewalled. Watch it:

(Quicktime streaming)

FEINSTEIN: Can the president suspend, in secret or otherwise, the application of Section 503 of the National Security Act, which states that no covert action may be conducted which is intended to influence United States political processes, public opinion, policies or media? In other words, can he engage in otherwise illegal propaganda?

GONZALES: Senator, this will probably be my response to all of your questions of these kind of hypotheticals. Questions as to whether or not — can Congress pass a statute that is in tension with the President’s constitutional authority? Those are very, very difficult questions, and for me to answer those questions sort of off the cuff, I think would not be responsible.

Gonzales’ stonewalling is part of a trend. Top Bush officials have refused to publicly answer several critical questions about the warrantless domestic spying program, including whether the program has targeted journalists or political opponents.

Full transcript below: Read more

Glenn Greenwald, who has blogged extensively about warrantless domestic spying, appeared this morning on C-SPAN opposite University of Virginia professor Robert Turner. Watch the video, or read an excerpt of Greenwald below:

(Quicktime streaming)

The Founding Fathers would be shocked to learn that they created a system of government where we have a President who can — without what Bush defenders call “interference” from the Congress, which this is the people of the United States and their representatives, or the courts — can make decisions about how Americans are detained, how Americans are eavesdropped on, how Americans are interrogated, not just abroad, but in the United States. The power the professor is describing is the power of a king.

Deputy Director of National Intelligence Michael Hayden appeared yesterday on Fox News Sunday and ABC’s This Week. On both programs, he was asked whether President Bush’s warrantless domestic spying program was being used to spy on individuals with no connection to terrorism.

Both of Hayden’s responses were missing an important word — “No.” Instead, Hayden claimed that NSA officials “don’t have the time” to spy on innocent Americans:

ABC’s GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: The concern, of course, is that it’s going to capture Americans that have nothing to do with al Qaeda.

HAYDEN: Right.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Let me try to give you a hypothetical. I went to Pakistan after 9/11. I interviewed a Taliban representative. If, after that interview, that person calls me, am I captured?

HAYDEN: I can’t get into operational details, but the way we do this is based on the people most knowledgeable of al Qaeda, its communications, its intentions, its tactics, techniques and procedures. And so we really don’t have the time or the resources, the linguists, to linger, to go after things that aren’t going to protect the homeland.

From Fox:

FOX’s MIKE WALLACE: Let me ask another question which I’m sure concerns a lot of people. Can you assure Americans that there is no spying on political opponents or political critics of the Bush administration?

HAYDEN: Chris, this is focused on al Qaeda. The only justification we have to undertake this program is to detect and prevent attacks against the United States. We don’t have the time or the lawful authority to do anything except that.

Multiple news reports have shown that the program was used to spy on thousands of innocent Americans with no ties to al Qaeda, and the Bush administration has been caught spying on political opponents on multiple occassions.

Bush officials cannot be allowed to spin this question. The burden is on them to show that the program has not been used to spy on journalists or political opponents.

UPDATE: Via MyDD, Hayden has dodged this question before: Read more