Conason: The Gonzales question

[kskiska]

Attorney general nominee Alberto Gonzales has more to answer for than just Abu Ghraib.

To his nomination as the first Hispanic attorney general of the United States, Alberto Gonzales brings an inspiring personal story and a blemished public record. His rise from immigrant poverty to the heady heights of power testifies to enduring American opportunity. Yet his performance as legal counsel in Austin and Washington has consistently eroded traditional American respect for the rule of law and the rights of the accused.

The historic elevation of Gonzales could ignite a long overdue national debate on how we treat those accused and convicted of capital crimes -- in particular, those whose guilt remains in doubt. At some point in the ineluctable rise of his public standing -- already he is being discussed as the next Supreme Court Justice -- Gonzales will have to answer for his alleged negligence in handling such cases years ago, when he served as counsel to then-Gov. George W. Bush.

As White House counsel, Gonzales has aggressively promoted policies that undermine civil liberties and international law on the treatment of prisoners. Although the soft-spoken lawyer usually remains in the background, as befits a Bush loyalist, he has left no doubt about his scorched-earth attitude toward prosecuting suspected terrorists and "enemy combatants": Jail them first and charge them later, or maybe never. In a now notorious January 2002 memo, he mocked the Geneva Convention and argued that the war on terror had rendered "obsolete Geneva's strict limitations on questioning of enemy prisoners and renders quaint some of its provisions." Due to that quote, he will bear historic responsibility for the lasting damage done to American prestige by the awful abuses at Abu Ghraib prison.

Yet despite the continuing criticism of his role in legitimizing brutality and undermining the Bush administration's adherence to the Geneva Convention in the treatment of prisoners, Gonzales is almost certain to be confirmed by the Senate next year without serious trouble -- and not only because of the heavier Republican majority. Democratic senators respect Gonzales and regard his comparative moderation as at least a marginal improvement over the fervent extremism of John Ashcroft. (An active Catholic, he probably won't be ceremonially anointed with Crisco oil before assuming his new office, as Ashcroft once was.) With Hispanic voters acting as a "swing" bloc in national elections, the Democrats won't be eager to filibuster Gonzales, which would be the only way to forestall his confirmation. They will be reluctant to fall into the kind of ethnic trap set by Bush's father when he nominated Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court.

more…
http://www.salon.com/opinion/conason/2004/11/13/gonzales/

[Briar]

1. Depressingly

Majorie Cohn over on Truthout

http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/111304A.shtml

expects the Democrats to roll over and annoint Gonzalez without too much opposition.

" Most Republicans and many Democrats have hailed Bush's nomination of White House counsel Alberto Gonzales for attorney general as a brilliant choice. Whereas John Ashcroft ruffled feathers with his coarse warnings that opponents of Bush's post-9/11 agenda "only aid terrorists," the soft-spoken Gonzales is much more palatable. And he's Hispanic to boot, so the Bush cabinet diversity quotient won't change when Colin Powell steps aside in the second term. Some Democrats will ask tough questions during Gonzales's confirmation hearing. But it would be unseemly for Democrats to seriously challenge the nomination of the first Latino Attorney General of the United States...

... In spite of opposition to Gonzales's nomination by public interest groups such as the Center for Constitutional Rights and Human Rights Watch, Democratic Senator Joseph Biden said "I think he's a pretty solid guy."

Unless the Democrats in the Senate show some backbone, and block the nomination of Alberto Gonzales with the only arrow left in their quiver - the filibuster, we will be saddled with another attorney general who mounts vicious assaults on our civil rights."


So, just as before, the tens of millions of Americans who voted against Bush and his Fourth Reich will be let down by the only party they could support to effectively oppose him.

[Demeter]

2. If There Is A Silver Lining...

It can't hurt to have such an appallingly bad lawyer in a public position. He can screw up so badly that he discredits not only himself, but his boss and his boss' boss, maybe even the Red States. Of course, one would have thought that Ashcroft did this already, but they managed to limit the damage to John himself.

And Ashcroft warmed up the crowd--he got the tomatoes now!

[Deja Q]

3. Not to forget; power can corrupt. That nullifies the glory of his big rise

from poverty to power.

An ethnic "trap" we created in good faith as a means to end white dominance, 30-some years ago.

It's no longer a dominance via ethnicity, but in action. EVERYBODY of all ethnicities has got to see that.

Still, the future may surprise us. Let's wait and see how Gonzales acts.

[Martin Eden]

4. I don't know which is scarier --

Gonzalez as Attorney General or eventual candidate for the Supreme Court.

The major threats to our civil liberties and due process are embodied by Gonzalez.

In Texas he gave biased summaries to Bush in capital punishment cases, and as White House Counsel he authored the most controversial portions of the Patriot Act and the memo that disnissed the Geneva Conventions.

This guy is Darth Vader cloaked in humble Hispanic form, and opposing his appointment is a losing proposition. The Dem senators had better at least ask some very tough questions, so Gonzalez is on record as to how far he will go in trashing the Constitution and International Law.