Did Gonzo Lie to Congress to get the Patriot Act Extended?

According to the Washington Post, the FBI had informed A.G. Gonzales of its internal analysis of repeated violations in the wiretapping program PRIOR to his testimony to Congress that he was not aware of any "verified" case of civil rights abuse.

As he sought to renew the USA Patriot Act two years ago, Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzalesassured lawmakers that the FBI had not abused its potent newterrorism-fighting powers. "There has not been one verified case ofcivil liberties abuse," Gonzales told senators on April 27, 2005.

However, only 6 days before, he had been copied on reports which should have informed him otherwise:

Six days earlier, the FBI sent Gonzales a copy of a report that said its agents had obtained personal information that they were not entitled to have. It was one of at least half a dozen reports of legal or procedural violations that Gonzales received in the three months before he made his statement to the Senate intelligence committee, according to internal FBI documents released under the Freedom of Information Act.

One of the most troubling aspects of this A.G., in this instance and also in his testimony regarding the firing of the U.S. Attorneys is that either he reads nothing, remembers nothing, hears nothing and fails to apprehend what he is informed about OR he is lying. Certainly, his explanations provide no comfort:

"I was upset when I learned this, as was Director Mueller. To say that I am concerned about what has been revealed in this report would be an enormous understatement," Gonzales said in a speech March 9, referring to FBI Director Robert S. Mueller. The attorney general added that he believed back in 2005, before the Patriot Act was renewed, that there were no problems with NSLs. "I've come to learn that I was wrong," he said, making no mention of the FBI reports sent to him.

So, his speech states that the information in the reports was in fact very concerning, yet he fails to mention the reports in the speech or that he had received them prior to his testimony.  Is this incompetence or active falsehood?

So we have an A.G. who is either incompetent or a liar (or an incompetent liar?) while we have a president who obstructs the investigation into the outing of Valerie Plame by commuting Libby without any condition that he cooperate with the investigation (if he is going to commute at all). The DOJ has not been in worse hands since John Mitchell.

Comments

[granny]

This is so disgusting it literally gives me a stomach ache ... to see yet another chapter, day after day, of the same old coming of the second cavalry.

The real question now is: what do the American People want to do about this?
It appears, that perhaps all they want is to get it over with and move on...

[Robt]

I would like the author of this article to consider,

When referring to I Lewis "Scooter" Libby. Try refering to him as " Inmate #28301-016 for now on.

It will at the least give you the feeling that justice in America in tangible, but it depend on us the american people............