i cant think: Goodbye Ashcroft, Hello Belial

« We Do What We're Told | Main | Images of Fallujah »

November 10, 2004

Goodbye Ashcroft, Hello Belial

Yesterday's resignation of John Ashcroft and some guy named Evans (he was the Secretary of Commercials, or something) almost made me downright joyful. Could it really be true? Did Bush really mean it when he said "We'll put out an agenda that everybody understands and work with people to achieve the agenda... It's not a Republican issue, it's a Republican and Democrat issue. So I'm -- plenty of places for us to work together"? With Jackboot John on the way out, maybe we really could see a softer, gentler Bush in the years ahead.

But no, it seems that it's not to be. Sometime this afternoon my hallucinations were painfully ripped away by the announcement that Bush would be appointing Alberto Gonzales as Ashcroft's successor.

Gonzales and Bush have been together since Bush's days as Governor of Texas; then, as now, Gonzales served as Bush's legal counsel. While serving in that capacity, Mr. Gonzales garnered quite a reputation for speeding up the line of inmates on Texas' death row. On June 16, 1997, Gonzales wrote regarding the conviction of Irineo Tristan Montoya, that "Since the State of Texas is not a signatory to the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, we believe it is inappropriate to ask Texas to determine whether a breach … occurred in connection with the arrest and conviction" of a Mexican national. He wrote those words in response to a complaint by the Mexican government that the state of Texas, in direct conflict with the Vienna Convention of 1969, failed to notify them of the arrest of Mr. Montoya. Lest we forget, the Vienna Convention was entered into by the U.S. to ensure that foreign nationals accused of a crime are given access to legal counsel by a representative of their home country. Mr. Gonzales, however, chose to argue that the Vienna Convention did not apply to the state of Texas since they did not sign it. Article 6 of the U.S. Constitution is very clear on this point, when it states that "... all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land."

Fast-forward to 2001. Jim Lehrer interviewed Mr. Gonzales on Newshour where Mr. Gonzales had this to say in response to a question asking how he would reassure Americans:

We of course are in an extraordinary time, Jim. And these call for different kinds of measures. But I can assure you that we have looked at everything that's been done by the administration carefully, from a legal perspective; everything that has been done, I think is well within the requirements of the constitution and the laws passed by Congress.

Knowing Mr. Gonzales previous writings concerning "the requirements of the constitution and the laws passed by Congress," I feel so much better now.

Then there's Gonzales' contribution to the Abu Ghraib scandal, in his infamous Memorandum For the President of January 25, 2002. In it, Gonzales outlines his reasoning for the justification of ignoring the Geneva Convention (oops, those pesky treaties again) and endorsing torture of detainees in Guantanamo Bay, and also the right of the U.S. to hold those detainees without charge and without access to counsel.

In my judgement, this new paradigm renders obsolete Geneva's strict limitations on questioning of enemy prisoners and renders quaint some of its provisions requiring that captured enemy be afforded such things as commissary privileges, scrip (i.e., advances of monthly pay), athletic uniforms, and scientific instruments.

Quaint? Does he mean to equate the Geneva Conventions with the senile ramblings of Grandma? A summer cottage in the Hamptons is quaint, not a long-standing international treaty.

Mr. Gonzales further went on to argue that ignoring the Geneva Conventions "Substantially reduces the threat of domestic criminal prosecutions under the War Crimes Act (18 U.S.C 2441)." In other words, if we pretend that it doesn't exist then we can't be prosecuted for breaking it. This is known as the "I didn't know" defense, as in "I didn't know it was against the law to kill the pizza delivery guy because he was 30 minutes late."

So it seems that if Bush gets his way, and Mr. Gonzales is confirmed as Attorney General, then we can expect the wholesale disregard of laws, treaties, and even the Constitution for at least the next four years.

And maybe, in 2008, we can do something to fix it. If there's anything left to fix. Or anyone left to care.

Posted by bcoffee at November 10, 2004 08:13 PM