SPECTER: Starting with the Patriot Act, I already commented that we had this wall which precluded law enforcement from using evidence of crime which had been obtained through search and seizure warrants under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. And now that evidence may be used in a criminal prosecution.
To what extent has that provision and the other provisions of the Patriot Act been of real importance in our fight against terrorism?
GONZALES: Well, of course, Mr. Chairman, I have not been at the department, so I may not know all of the details of specific successes that the United States and the Department of Justice have enjoyed as a result of the tools given to us by the Patriot Act.
But I am told that they have been very significant, and that for our career prosecutors, for the U.S. attorneys out in the field, they have been very, very beneficial in allowing our law enforcement personnel to defend this country.
I believe that in part because of the Patriot Act there has not been a domestic attack on United States soil since9 /11.
If the Patriot Act intends to make it easy to prosecute the terrorist, one has to wonder then why there hasn't been even a single criminal conviction of on terrorism charge since 9/11.