From today's WaPo.
"Gonzales Seeks to Clarify Testimony on Spying".
Not like we didn't suspect this was true given all of the extreme word hedging in his testimony, but here we go.
Here's the transcript of the Feb. 6 hearing.
Here's Open Thread VII from the hearings, if you want to wade through all of them. We told you so!
Gonzales testified on Feb. 6 about the wiretapping. He spoke, rather, since he wasn't sworn in. Yesterday he wrote a letter to in order to clarify his statements.
At that appearance, Gonzales confined his comments to the National Security Agency's warrantless wiretapping program, saying that President Bush had authorized it "and that is all that he has authorized."
But in yesterday's letter, Gonzales, citing that quote, wrote: "I did not and could not address . . . any other classified intelligence activities." Using the administration's term for the recently disclosed operation, he continued, "I was confining my remarks to the Terrorist Surveillance Program as described by the President, the legality of which was the subject" of the Feb. 6 hearing.
The letter also states that wiretaping techniques were approved by Bush in October 2001.
There's more shifting on the legal justifications, which Gonzales admits have not been static. This is just another example of Bush doing what he wants without caring about the legalities or consequences of it.
UPDATE: As lysias notes below, Russ testified to the existance of another program. From her link to UPI (I can't get it to work):
Russell D. Tice told the House Government Reform Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats and International Relations he has concerns about a "special access" electronic surveillance program that he characterized as far more wide-ranging than the warrentless wiretapping recently exposed by the New York Times but he is forbidden from discussing the program with Congress.
Tice said he believes it violates the Constitution's protection against unlawful search and seizures but has no way of sharing the information without breaking classification laws. He is not even allowed to tell the congressional intelligence committees - members or their staff - because they lack high enough clearance.
Neither could he brief the inspector general of the NSA because that office is not cleared to hear the information, he said.