|
Edited on Tue Jul-31-07 03:42 PM by GreatCaesarsGhost
cc transcript:
Maiveaux: Alberto gonzales says that there were no
major disagreements when it came
to the terrorists surveillance
program and that the
disagreements he's referring to
are other intelligence
activities.
So, a couple of points in this
letter to try to clarify and
essentially defend what he is
saying.
The first one says, a number of
these intelligence activities
were authorized in one order.
Saying that there are other
intelligence activities that he
could be referring to.
Secondly, gonzales says he was
being very specific.
He was referring to that secret
wiretapping, eavesdropping
program that terrorist
surveillance program.
The key line in this letter
says, one particular aspect of
these activities and nothing
more was publicly acknowledged
by the president and I described
in december of 2005.
That is what gonzales says was
the terrorist surveillance
program.
So, what other program are they
talking about?
Again, they say it's classified.
It's top secret.
The third line in the letter
that is key.
This is the only aspect of the
nsa activities that can be
discussed publicly.
So what they're saying is
everything else is secret, but
what he was talking about
specifically was the program
that terrorist surveillance
program.
Blitzer>> The warrantless wiretap
program.
Malveaux>> Right.
Blitzer>> Because there are other
aspects that were authorized in
the immediate aftermath of 9/11.
Authorized by congress, extended
by the president every 45 days
or so.
That has never been publicly
discussed, even though "the new
york times" had a very long
article about it over the
weekend, other details of this
classified program that the
administration has never
publicly discussed.
Malveaux>> Right.
And, wolf, as you know, we
reported earlier in the week,
it's called data mining and
essentially the controversy is
not over the eavesdropping, but
what do you do with all the
information, the emails, all the
phone records, those type of
things?
What can the government do
legally with all of the data
that it collects?
That's what they're talking
about.
It's not what they specifically
say in the letter because they
say it's classified.
And the big question here is
whether or not senator specter
and some of the others are going
to be satisfied with this
explanation and whether or not
they're going to go forward with
those perjury charges.
Blitzer>> We'll be speaking with
senator specter.
That's coming up.
|