Hentoff: GONZALEZ "Worse Than ASHCROFT"

[UTUSN]

***********QUOTE********
http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0448/hentoff.php
Liberty Beat
by Nat Hentoff
Worse Than Ashcroft
Bush's new attorney general helped write the Patriot Act and supported torture

.... I must credit National Public Radio's Nina Totenberg, an experienced analyst of constitutional law and a reporter who never stops digging to get to the core of Gonzales's ominous record as White House counsel. On November 11, she pointed out: "Gonzales was responsible for developing the administration's policies on the treatment of prisoners; for developing a new definition of torture to allow more aggressive questioning of prisoners. He developed the policy that allowed the indefinite detention of American citizens deemed to be enemy combatants without or access to counsel. . . . The Supreme Court, though, rejected that theory . . .

"Top legal brass in the army, air force, and navy say that Gonzales deliberately left them out of developing policy on the treatment of prisoners because he knew they would oppose."

On November 10, Totenberg quoted retired general Jim Cullen of the U.S. Army Court of Criminal Appeals, who says Gonzales directly contradicted established military and international law. He added that Gonzales realized that "the Judge Advocate Generals Corps would never sanction departures from the Geneva Conventions or engaging in practices that the common man would regard as torture." (Emphasis added.)

Says the Senate Judiciary Committee's clueless attack dog in these matters, Charles Schumer, about Gonzales: "I can tell you already he's a better candidate than John Ashcroft." ....

Next week: Alberto Gonzales's role, and record, as legal counsel to the then chief executioner of the United States, Texas Governor W. Bush, in deciding on the petitions for clemency from 57 of the 150 men and two women executed during Bush's six years as governor. Gonzales was central to amassing that record—unrivaled by any other governor.

Those who know Gonzales, however, keep saying he's a nice guy.


************UNQUOTE**********

[Neoma]

uhhh

shit..

[seaofcrisis]

1. yeah, but what are his religious beliefs?

That's what most people have a problem with regarding ashcroft.

[madrchsod]

4. religious belief?

religion has no meaning only power has meaning

[yardwork]

5. I don't care about Ashcroft's religious beliefs

I cared about what Ashcroft was actually doing.

[newyawker99]

10. Hi seaofcrisis!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

2. I truly doubt we'd be able to stop Gonzales.

We need those bullets for the Supreme Court.

[UTUSN]

6. Agreed on Both Counts, But It Doesn't Mean We Can't Question

The tool, Ruben NAVARRETTE, another Affirmative Action alumnus (like Clarence THOMAS) who pretzels himself into slamming Dems and supporting Shrub every step of the way, claims:

1) GONZALEZ (and RICE) are just glorius choices JUST BECAUSE of their race/ethnicity, that their nominations should be supported by us Libs/minorities JUST BECAUSE of that.

2) That Shrub should be given "credit" for naming minorities to top spots that CLINTON never did.

3) He asks Libs, "What have you done for me LATELY?" Like wingnuts have EVER done anything for minorities, having kicked and screamed every step of the way against all social justice and social welfare programs. So 3 top jobs are a fair trade over millions of jobs through Lib social programs.

4) He says that if GONZALEZ doesn't live up to his expectations, he will go after him badly (later). Like, this is what VETTING of nominations first, and Senate advice and consent hearings second, are supposed to be about. NAVARRETTE believes that the PAST RECORD is wiped CLEAN just by patronage nominations.

(Parts of what I'm reacting to above are in this NAVARRETTE column; others are in a radio interview he did.)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x2755739

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

7. I agree. We should subject him to harsh questioning.

I know people here are going to be wondering why we aren't filibustering every nominee Bush puts out though, which is the impetus for my statement. I apologize if stepped on your toes needlessly.

[Voltaire99]

11. Er, like Ashcroft was subjected?

And fat lot of good it did in halting his extremism.

While Dems in the senate continue to prove themselves worthless to the task of halting this mad regime, they will continue to lose the respect and votes of those who expect an opposition to oppose. Sitting on the filibuster is a lose-lose proposition: it will hurt America, and it will hurt the party.

[madrchsod]

3. he get a pass on all that

and he`ll be the next aj, after all he`s bushes executioner.

[UTUSN]

8. Since LEAHY and SHUMER Are Pre-Approving

shouldn't NAVARRETTE "give credit" to Dems/Libs for installing GONZALEZ, the way he demands that Shrub be given credit for nominating minorities?

[RUDUing2]

9. I grew up in MO with Ashwipe as governor and then as senator..

believe me when I say Ashcroft is 10 times worse then Gonzo..

my god I voted for a dead man cause a dead man could/would represent our state better then Ashcroft..

Ashcroft believes everything that Gonzo does in regards to treatment of prisoners, death penalty, etc..but in addition he also believes (unlike Gonzo) that all abortion should be illegal (no exceptions even if the mother dies) and that most forms of birth control should also be illegal..condoms and nfp being the only exceptions...