Senate debate on Gonzales DAY TWO--on C-Span2 NOW...

[Peace Patriot]

GO HERE for live C-Span2 broadcast from the Senate:

http://www.c-span.org/watch/cspan2_rm.asp?Cat=TV&Code=CS2

Sen. Sessions (R-Alabama) is on right now, doing the mind-boggle of saying "Al Qaeda" does not qualify for protection against torture (all those properly convicted and carefully protected prisoners in Gitmo, and the ones whose location is unknown), while yet the Bush regime doesn't do torture...oh no, unh-uh, not them...

I think the plan was for 1 hour alternating segments (Dem/Repub). I also picked up that SENATOR BYRD would speak at 2:30 pm Eastern, and the Dems would have a chunk of time from 2:30 to 4:00 Eastern. SENATOR BOXER has not spoken yet, but her office says she will (they didn't know what time).

GO HERE for the Gonzales ACTION FORUM (Senate Dem contact info, link to Repub contact info., sample letter, talking points...):

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=312962#313712

and, more talking points and info.:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x306206

GO HERE for reports and discussion of yesterday's debate:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=312298

[whistle]

1. No way this bastard should be confirmed, he is a thug....

[meganmonkey]

2. Reed at 12:30; Feingold at 1:15pm

[Peace Patriot]

6. Thanks, meganmonkey! I missed the first part of today's debate...

...and the scheduling. Anything happen prior to Sen.Sessions?

Is that Easten time?

[meganmonkey]

8. I assume it's Eastern -

THat's what was on the screen when I just started streaming C-Span. SO I didn't see anything earlier. I will have it on this afternoon (but I am at work, so I will be on and off as far as paying attention and posting)...

[SaveAmerica]

9. Republicans have been playing good cop bad cop, one will

talk up the 'literally Humble' beginnings (I can practically see the 2 room house for 10 in my mind by now) and the next will chastise anyone for actually bringing up the administration's policies. The opening prayer was very powerful and I wonder how anyone can live with themselves after hearing it and then following it with words that says what Gonzales stands for is for good.

[SaveAmerica]

10. Byrd gets an hour at 2:30 n/t

[fooj]

22. Woo Hoo!

[Peace Patriot]

3. KICK throuh today! nt

[understandinglife]

4. What is it called when you support a war criminal, Senator? (nt)

BE THE BU$H OPPOSITION; 24/7

[understandinglife]

33. Q2. What do you call a Senator who votes for a war criminal? (nt)

BE THE BU$H OPPOSITION; 24/7

[Peace Patriot]

5. Senator Craig (R-Idaho) on now, talking about "the Truth"....

...ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.....

[fooj]

7. There's nothing worse than a punk with power! What are they thinking?

I don't understand how these bastards can vote "yes" with a straight face. Great. Just what we need. Another PNAC member at a top level position! Has everyone lost their minds?

[Peace Patriot]

11. 63% of Americans oppose torture, with no exceptions (ABC poll),

nearly 60% oppose the Iraq War, and Bush's approval rating has sunk as low as 43% (according to Rasmussen)--or hovering at or below 50% (in other polls)--an amazing "vote of no confidence" by the American people in a recently inaugurated president.

Yet we keep getting violently jerked by these criminals farther and farther into fascism.

No mandate.
No majority.
Stole another election.

It's flabbergasting.

Sen. Leahy is on now. Now we get an hour of Democrats.

... a brief interruption by Mary Landrieu (D-LA) talking about LA wetlands, and "Catholic School Appreciation Day." I wonder how she's going to vote on torture.

Back to Leahy...talkkng about the Prez's responsibiility to protect the Constitution...

[fooj]

13. The Washington Dispatch is conducting a poll...

"Does America trust President Bush?" 52% voted NO, while 33% voted YES! Rather telling, isn't it? You are right, Peace Patriot...it IS FLABBERGASTING!!!!! These crooks and liars have burrowed into our government like a parasitic tick! What gives? I find it absolutely shocking that not ONE REPUB has voted No on Gonzales! What's the deal? Have they been threatened with taking away their first born, or what? It's disgusting and I am ashamed!

[SaveAmerica]

12. Rhode Island Reed said 'NukeYouLar' I wonder if Bush learned him that

[fooj]

15. Thanks for the comedy relief!

[Peace Patriot]

14. Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI) just tore Gonzales to shreds, with by far the...

...detailed indictment yet presented. Didn't exhibit the great passion that Kennedy did, but equaled and surpassed him in...well, just sheer INDICTMENT. An awesome speech! I'll detail in a moment, got to transcribe my notes.

We are now being graced with Sen. Jim Bunning (R-Kentucky) unctious nothing...

I thought we had an hour for ONLY DEMOCRATS! What's this BushCon lapdog doing there?

SENATOR BYRD is coming up. He is wonderful! A great patriot, and Constitutional scholar, with a laser-like mind on these kinds of issues. Prepare for some citatons from the Founding Fathers.

[fooj]

17. I don't give a shit who raised him! Big deal! My grandparents

were immigrants and didn't have a high school education. So what? Why didn't this Bunning jackass tell the American public WHY Gonzales left the Air Force Academy? HE DODGED HAVING TO SERVE ANY MILITARY TIME!!! This is absolutely outrageous!

[SaveAmerica]

18. what's the purpose of a quorum?

[Peace Patriot]

30. Well, they're supposed to have a certain number of members...

...to conduct business. They can't vote without it. When a quorum is called, the Senate secretary has to call the roll and summon Senators from their various dalliances around DC, to be present. But why speakers keep asking for a quorum to be called, when they start or finish speaking, and then they or the next one says, please suspend the quorum call--I don't have a clue. They don't have a big enough audience in the room? A form of torture of the other Senators?

[SaveAmerica]

37. thanks, maybe they're using it to extend their time?

[ROH]

19. "I'll detail in a moment, got to transcribe my notes."

Thanks. Do you use shorthand or your own note-taking system?

[Peace Patriot]

24. I'm typing in shorthand in a separate document. But the BushCons...

...are so full of crap, I don't bother, except to note some particular absurdity. They say nothing. They talk like preachers--droning on and on, with a few punctuations of squeaky outrage at the sinners across the aisle, then back to the koolaid. I'm beginning to think of them as the Pod People. They don't seem to have any powers of independent thought.

[rumpel]

16. Secretary of State...

:think:

[SaveAmerica]

20. Why does Hatch think there's a vote for this nomination? I'm

thinking if everyone was supposed to let the prez have whatever nominee he wanted without question there wouldn't be a vote.

[fooj]

21. Enforcer of Civil Rights Laws? Where the hell was he on Nov. 2nd?

Bullshit. Senator Hatch-SIT DOWN! I am SO GLAD their BS is on the record!

[Peace Patriot]

23. Orrin Hatch is UN...FRIGGING...BELIEVABLE...

...WHERE are our Democrats? Isn't this THEIR HOUR?

Hatchet Man says cuz Gonzales was raised on the other side of the tracks, and has experienced prejudice, he will enforce the Voting Rights Act...the Voting Rights Act... the Voting Rights Act! the VOTING RIGHTS ACT!! THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT!!! THE FRIGGING VOTING RIGHTS ACT!!!! ...will enforce...will enforce...because he has experienced prejudice... he will enforce THE BLOODY VOTING RIGHTS ACT!!!!!

OH MY GOD! SOMEONE TO ENFORCE THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT!!!!!! AND A MINORITY, BECAUSE HE'S A MINORITY....

aw, God, oh please...

[Peace Patriot]

25. Now this is getting falling down funny...

...Orrin Hatch suggesting that the DEMOCRATS are prejudiced against Gonzales because he's Hispanic. And whispering it, in a soft voice, "could it be??...they're....PREjudiced????"

I think I'm gonna die...

[mirrera]

42. You are cracking me up!

I just finished sputtering the same outrage to my husband who is at work...I log on and read to see what I missed...your post is so funny. When he mentioned the voting I just about frothed at the mouth. Are they playing with our heads on purpose? Maybe this is a new military weapon they are testing. They will stupid us to death...

[fooj]

26. How dare Hatch imply that this is a racisct act by the Dems!!!!

What a jackass! I hope someone rams those words right back down his throat! Our concerns have no merit? These Senators are shameless! No one doubts the assholes ability...we doubt his integrity, honor and YES...his PATRIOTISM!

[fooj]

28. Torture...the big hot shot debate! I want to hurl...

His condescending attitude is intolerable! Get out the hook...

[Alizaryn]

27. Will a someone PLEASE stand up and counter Hatch's

asinine assertions LOUDLY,EMOTIONALLY and CLEARLY?????

[SaveAmerica]

29. If he ever gets a chance, I think Byrd will n/t

[Peace Patriot]

32. I have a fantasy. Imagine this...

DONALD SUTHERLAND doing Orrin Hatch. Hatch is almost too far gone to parodied, but I think DS could do it. Think about it.

[SaveAmerica]

31. Somebody please vote Hatch off the island

and I thought it was supposed to be dems who do things by their emotions.

[Peace Patriot]

34. Oh, God, now we have to suffer through Wayne Allard (R-CO)...

... the SAME speech, the Pod People speech...

but only for 20 minutes. BYRD is next, at 2:30 pm Eastern.

Meanwhile I'm working on my JACK REED notes. Post 'em here in a few minutes. They are great.

[Peace Patriot]

38. Robert Byrd: Don't ya love that man? I am totally enamoured.

Wow. All I can say. Wow, wow and wow!

Working on notes for Reed and Byrd. Such incredible amount of substance, it's not easy. But it'll be worth it to have it fresh here in a few minutes, to quote and savor. (It will all end up in the Congess. record.)

[hootinholler]

39. Shameful that after he yielded he suggested the absence of a Quorum N/T

On Edit: Er, that there was an absence not that he stated it.

-Hoot

[Peace Patriot]

43. Notes on Sen. Jack Reed's great speech (D-RI):

(At first I thought this was Leahy, but it was't. Leahy turned the floor over to Reed. It was very methodical, very unemotional, very prosecutorial and devastating.)


--the Founders of our country did not create a new monarchy, they created a new form of government in which the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, not the Prez

--laws and treaty obligations are the way 'we the people' have agreed to rule ourselves, and the Prez, Senators, all fed and state officials, etc. are bound by oath to defend the Constitution

--Gonz's attitude toward the law of the land, the Constitution, makes him not fit to be AG

--I understand that Gonz created these policies in the fear after 9/11, had to face it realistically, cold war doesn't apply, had to take preemptive action, did so in Afghanistan, but the threat did not exempt us from the Constitution, that's one of its strengths, the law of the land and our hardwon international agreements cannot be ignored or trivialized, espec. rules needed during the fury of war… (describes the suspicion, fear, disorder and violence of war…)

Shakespeare: "Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war!" (Henry V?)

Quotes Abe Lincoln, on war, and on the awful revenge and retaliation, and fear, that occur even among honest men

--Bush & Gonz's guidance to our soldiers in this situation is confused at best, and failed miserably in the crisis of war

--Gonz one of the architects of Bush policy on treatment of detainees in Afghanistan and Iraq--denied prisoners access to lawyer's and judicial review, and said Prez's authority as Commander in Chief overrides the law. WH counsel is supposed to weigh advice given to the Prez, Gonz allowed poor legal advice to be passed to Prez, and was deeply involved in devising policies that have undermined our standing in the world

--those who wrote the GENEVA CONVENTIONS had pretty much seen it all in WWII, all manner of abuse, and sought to cover all of it as prohibited; in 1996 War Crimes Act amended to say that any breach will be punished, some breaches even with the death penalty; prohibits arbitrary detention and cruel and degrading treatment; 1998, convention against torture said torture regardless of circumstances...sec. 2340 and 2340a...US code of laws

--also covered in the Unif. Code of Mil. Justice -UCMJ - article 93 forbids cruelty or maltreatment, 190-08 implements the Gen. Conv.

--in addition the Constitution contains prohibitions against cruel & unusual punishment – Gonz. solicited memos for exceptions, exemptions from these prohibitions, and sought arguments for what US officials COULD use re: torture without criminal liability- and created a complete redefinition of torture (behind closed doors). Cites top lawyer who testified to Judic. Committee: the Gonz. memo on torture is "the most clearly erroneous legal opinion he has ever read," would have exempted Saddam Hussein from torture charges, and turns Nuremberg on its head

--legal counsel to Prez should have immediately repudiated this interpretation, instead endorsed by G on legal opinion of Dept. of Justice as policy for the gov't

--cites the Achille Laurel, crew captured, tortured--under Gonz. memo, what they experienced would be NOT torture

--Gonz. maintained that US officials are not criminally liable for torture, and can claim necessity of self defense

--the Gonz. memos were rescinded only 4 wks ago, but were in effect for 2.5 years, and had extremely harmful effect on military and intel personnel. IF these memos were so wrong they had to be rescinded, why didn't G know it shouldn't be endorsed??

--Gonz. memo says that carrying out Prez's Commander in Chief (C in C) powers can be used as a defense for those who torture

---Gonz. put Prez and subordinates above the law, claiming that any regulation of military behavior in time of war would violate the CinC's power

--violates everything we know about the rule of law, and the Supreme law of our land

--Gonz. memo allows Prez to ignore all laws on torture--Prez gets to define (what torture is, and who gets tortured)

--Youngstown Sup Ct decision - Prez (FDR) could not seize steel industry during war – espec. against the express will of Congress

--Gonz.: asserts Prez's complete power over conduct of war; doesn't cite any precedents, because few or none exist

--but given these "overriding" Prez powers, where are the Prez's orders re: torture? If no Prez orders, can't all these folks be prosecuted who participated in torture?

--if Prez has such power, he has to issue orders - WHERE ARE THE ORDERS? --IF NO ORDERS, no immunity, according to this misinterpretation

--there are 20,000 private contractors in Iraq, currently liable under Gen. Conv on torture, and many employed by or accompanying the armed forces (—how are they immunized? by what instrument?)

--Gonz. created these C in C "override" powers - DoJ has had to back away from it (because it's illegal)

--in an Amer Bar Assc. speech – Gons. said Prez has not exercised his C in C override, but statement implied that he could--but there is no Constitutitonal principle for this

--Gonz. provided no ANSWERS on any of this

--Gonz. wouldn't say Prez could NOT suspend torture laws

--torture is "in the eye of beholder"—according to these memos

--AG: responsible for enforcing laws of our land, yet Gonz. agreed to new unchecked power to the Prez, and the creation of exemptions from the law

--wrong interpretation of our treaty obligations regarding protection of Taliban and Al Q POW??

--post WWII, 4 conventions's, created 6 classes of persons in war zone, most of them protected as POW, article 3 prohibits outrages on personal dignity, or inhumane or degrading treatment as the MINIMUM STANDARD for ALL detainees

---if their status is in doubt, the military authority or ruling gov't MUST convene tribunals - no tribunals were created--and human rights must remain in place at all times

--Gonz. granted the Prez "a Plenary power" to suspend all conventions in Afghanistan – Gonz. has exhibited a cavalier attitude re: answering questions about this

--Gonz. approved suspending War Crimes Act, and Geneva Conventions, one of the pro's of doing so being "flexibility" (not a legal argument)

--Powell objected, the Gonz. memos did not clearly present to the Prez that they were reversing over a century of US policy and practice, with high cost in international relations, and undermining cooperation with allies

--Gonz. created new untried interpretaton of law vs. 100's of years of effort toward the protection of prisoners

--3rd Geneva Conv requires tribunals – But Gonz./Bush maintained Genev doesn't apply to Al Q and Taliban (tho Taliban lawful gov't)

--Torguba (sp?) & Schlessinger reports: Gonz. caused confusion, disarray in Iraq, Sanchez authorized torture using Gonz. memo, created a permissive and compromising climate for soldiers, T & S recommended further defining detainee status, in accord with military doctrine and Gen. Conv.

--abuses still coming to light, the abuse is systemic, authorized by Prez on basis of Gonz. memos

--and one final troubling issue: "ghost detainees" – Gen. Conv. not enforced in Iraq, prohibition against movement, deportation, 10/2004 DoJ granted permission to CIAto move prisoners temporarily, and to deport illegal aliens (out of the way of the Red Cross); Gen. Convs. says Red Cross must have access, 2 Generals have said US hid prisoners from Red Cross

--SOMEONE is responsIBLE for these decisions. Will Gonz. pursue and prosecute?

--12 retired General and Admirals testified to Committe: Gonz. memos had significant role in treatment of prisoners, and undermined intelligence gathering, and added to risk of torture of US soldiers.

--cites religious groups against Gonz. for "sanctioning torture"

--cites top lawyers: Gonz. legal judgments paved the way for abuse

--grave doubt about Gonz.'s role at DofJ

--Hispanic groups against Gonz., he left too many questions unanswered, on enforcement of Voting Rts Act, Affirmative Action, due process for immigrants, role of local police in immigration law

--Founders of US were particulary concerned about power of Prez—as opposed to Congress or the courts or the states. AG doesn't just serve the Prez, he must protect and defend the Constitution above all

--Gonz. record shows he does not have judge necessary for top law enforcement job

(Note: Gonz. memo = Bybee memo--it was written for Gonz. and approved by him. There has also been reference to a 2nd Gonz. memo, came out more recently.)

[fooj]

50. Wow- I'm impressed!

Thanks for taking the time to do this! Now other members who were unable to tune in have a clear idea of who said what! You rock!

[rumpel]

35. waiting for Byrd...

[rumpel]

36. Sessions talking for 3rd time...

[understandinglife]

40. Continuing to make calls urging various Senators to filibuster (nt)

TBO;24/7

[troubleinwinter]

41. Answer me this:

I have read that the Dems are "saving" their filibuster power for "more important nominees, such as Supreme Court Justice".

I have also read that the AG position is supposed to be a "stepping stone" to SCOTUS for Gonzales.

Now, HOW do the Dems fight him for SCOTUS, if they allow him to be confirmed for AG???!!!

The torture issue is not the only problem with this guy. We will NEVER get any special investigations into ANY B* regime crimes under him.

I hate to think our Dems are STUPID? Am I overlooking something?

[fooj]

44. I'm thinking this may be more SELF-SERVING rather than STUPID!

I don't get it, either! This guy is nothing but a punk drunk on power! It's all very frightening!

[Peace Patriot]

45. Sen. Leahy back on now, defending against Orrin Hatch's ABSURD

...accusation that Democrats are biased against Gonzoles because of his ethnicity. He's basically saying if they had any good arguments they wouldn't be using this ridiculous charge. He's saying it's a dishonor to the Senate.

He says their opposition is on his record as WH counsel.

Gonz. said prohibitions against inhumne treatment does not apply overseas--no one else agrees with this. He laid down policies that will haunt us for years (paraphrasing).

-----

Now on: first Dominici, then Susan Collins. Oh, yuk, more Pod People. I'll go back to my BYRD notes, and finish them up. BYRD's speech was delivered with great dramatic pauses and pointed elocution, a brilliant presentation.

[fooj]

47. Why doesn't someone asks these idiots to REFUTE the mounds

of evidence regarding Gonzales? Put them on the spot...if this guy is on the level then it should be a cake walk for the repubs to refute these concerns. Can't they be specific in asking that?

[fooj]

46. Good for Leahy! I resent the ethnic implications, as well!

Typical bully tactic! Deflect attention from the REAL ISSUES!
They are pathetic! You go, Leahy! You bet they have dishonored the process! Hmmmm...61 judges blocked because nominated by Clinton! Did you hear that? Hatch is a fool!

[flyarm]

48. what an insult o hatch...

i called hatch a pig yesterday and i feel even more so today..i am the wife of a hispanic husband and son..i have hispanic nephews in iraq, and i was a delegate to the dem national convention and i am appalled at gonzalez and i just called salazars office and ripped him a new A hole...and told him i would put my money where my mouth is and i will see him be a one term senator...for supporting a war criminal !! i am just furious..h0w dare anyone let alone a dem support that filthy criminal who is putting our soldiers lives in jeapordy ..i am just soooo angry ..how dare salazar..say he spoke to gonzalez and gonzalez told him he just misinterpreted the law...bull crap..just unadulterated bull crap...and then for hatch to use race ..what nerve...i am beside myself i am so angry!!

the war crimes of gonzalez are only a part of the parcel of the wrong in making this pig the attorney general!
he is an insult to all law abidding hispanics!
he is an insult to all americans !
he is an insult to our constitution!
he is an insult to all our soldiers!
he is an insult to all international law!
he is an insult to all who have fought in our uniform!
he is an insult to democracy itself!

fly

[Peace Patriot]

49. Thank you, flyarm, I was going to get into Salazar, but you've...

...covered it pretty well.

Oh, God, Susan Collins (R-ME), more Pod People talk...born in poverty...no hot water...no telephone...but they believed the American Dream....instilled the American values of personal responsibility and...

...personal responsibility...?

...would that be a voluntary stint in Gitmo for, say, a year, to take personal responsibility...?

christ.

[fooj]

51. Peace Patriot- I have a question!

Check out post #47! Has anyone done this?

[Peace Patriot]

55. fooj, it would be a good thing to suggest in emails and tel calls...

...tonight and tomorrow. I was struck with this, too. The Pod People are so vague, and never answer any of the specific charges about the illegality or unconsitutionality of Gonzales' memos--except in very little nitpicking ways--and never explain his lack of remembering anything he said, or anybody said, in any meetings--about the most radical secret re-writing of our laws we're ever seen.

They DID argue this out time and again in committee. The Dems really hammered on this--Gonzales' lack of answers, failure to search for docs, failure to remember. And many of them have been mentioning this in their speeches. Kenney and Byrid were especialy good on it. So maybe they feel it's been covered, and they're not going to get any further answers NOW. They've been mentioning a lot.

What I HAVEN'T seen is much Dem questioning of the Pug Pod People, all thinking and talking alike, and telling the same story of his early poverty over and over. It's so absurd. "The banality of evil" as Hannah Arrendt called it.

I've listened to most of the speeches, and I'd say the Dems have REALLY HELD THEIR OWN. Solid, well articulated arguments about fundamentals of law--and Kennedy did it with great passion, and Byrs with great flair and style. Really good speeches--some of the best I've ever heard.

So the Pod People ARE getting answered--and more than that, they're getting blown away. The case against Gonzales is so solid. He should NEVER be A.G. Never!

But he does fit right in with them--the bland, hypocritical, amoral, egregiously corrupt Bush toadies that the Republican Party has become.

[fooj]

62. What concerns me is that the case against Gonzales IS solid...

which begs the question "How can any legitimate, honest senator vote to approve his nomination?" Don't these people have a responsibility to their constituents? Where is the accountability for their gross, partisan misconduct re: approving Gonzales? I believe that it is exactly that...PARTISAN! These senators need to be called on the carpet for their partisan politics which ultimately will destroy our Constitution! I don't care if they are Repubs, Dems, Ind. or Mardi Gras revelers! Whoever aids and abeds this administrations choice for AG by recklessly approving the nomination must be held accountable! Period! Thanks for the info...I'm proud of the Dems who stood up today and spoke the truth! We need to see much more of that! Peace!

[Peace Patriot]

52. Aha, Pete Domenici (R-NM) is inadvertenly revealing one of the things...

...that's going on here. With BushCons, you can almost always figure out what crimes they are committing--or what their evil minds are calculating--by what they accuse others of doing.

So, he says, the opposition has always touted themselves as the most natural reps of the growing, ever increasing, more and more voters Hispanic population of the US. (This might be because Pugs chose a "southern strategy" and became the Bigot Party, when the Dems did the right thing in the 1960s-70s and wrote the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act and welcomed black and brown people in the Big Tent Party.)

Ergo, the Pugs have their beady little eyes on this new, growing Hispanic population. And Gonzales is the bait. And, given the Salazar and Cisneros statements endorsing Gonzales, it looks like it's working, at least among wealthy Hispanics.

They did the same thing with some well-to-do, now powerful blacks--Andy Young and C. Dolores Tucker--on the Condi Rice nomination. Andy Young! Andy Young! God, it was sickening! (--former lieutenant of Martin Luther King, now living the good life...)..


...and poor Henry Cisneros, his life destroyed by the BushCons, now also trying to curry favor...my, my...

...the BushCons corrupt everything they glance upon.

[Carolab]

53. Domenici saying "hispanics are FOR Gonzales"...

how more obvious can this race exploitation be?

[RaulVB]

54. Not THIS ONE!

Neither my friends!

[SaveAmerica]

56. nor the hispanic caucus

[flyarm]

58. not this hispanic family either,.and i just ...

called old peteies office..and they put music on for me instead of hanging up so i called back 5 times and called old peteie a liar!!
and told his secretary that he better stop pissing in the wind and that this is one hispanic family they will not hang up on!! not when they are using us for their lies..their putrid lies!!!!..what filth these pigs are!! lying filth!!
then i read off all of gonzalez's statements about prisoner treatment and the geneva convention..and i told her to make sure old peteie knows..we dont like being used and lied about!!

fly

[RaulVB]

59. I commend you for what you're doing, fly

I really appreciate it.

[fooj]

63. Hey there! We meet again!

Peace!

[RaulVB]

64. Hi, fooj (n/t)

[Peace Patriot]

57. My notes on ROBERT BYRD's speech coming up in about 20 mins.

Fabulous speech. I want to get a tape of it.

[Peace Patriot]

60. SENATOR ROBERT BYRD spoke in his sometimes cranky, sometimes..

...melifluous southern drawl, slowly, with some well-timed pauses and some long drawn out words, beautifully articulating every word, for maximum drama... here is some of what he said, from my ragged notes...

---------

BYRD

Alberto Gonzales has been chief legal adviser to the President, and worked in the West Wing, a few steps from the Oval Office.

--in his official biography, before coming to WH, he is described as having been a justice in the Texas Sup. Court, and before that, Secretary (of State?) of Texas and adviser to then Gov. Bush, and before that was general counsel to Bush—over a decade as a close confidante of Bush. On his 5th appointment by Bush, as WH counsel, Bush said he was "very grateful," praised Gonzales for putting together a "superb team of lawyers," and of playing a "quintessential leadership role in the war on terror," and helped "shape our policies." Bush and Gonzales--the closest of friends.

--Byrd said he's not on the Judicial Committee, and so had to familiarize himself with Gonzales by reading the record, and "Imagine my perplexity" at the lack of responses from Mr. Gonzales in this record! This closest of advisers of Bush suddenly couldn't remember anything about the formulation of the policies he shaped—the justification of torture—which, in retrospect turned out to be WRONG! Can' recall anything about this weighty matter, this matter of monumental importance, could not remember what he advised on torture during this war, CAN'T REMEMBER a decision that reversed 200 years of legal precedent.

--it seems af if he's just an old family friend who has no legal opinions of his own, no independent recommendations; Bush's top legal adviser can't recall what he said, and suffered this SUDDEN memory lapse regarding a matter that would have PROFOUND effects on world affairs for decades to come; the torture of prisoners by placing them strapped to a board and dipping them in water to simulate drowning…

--oh, there were some meetings, some discussion, but Gonzales could not recall what

--asked if he told his lawyers to "LEAN FORWARD" in promoting ways that US officials could torture prisoners, as reported in the WaPo, he can't recall

--the memo they wrote at his request and which he endorsed contributed to the abuse of prisoners in Afghanistan, Guantanamo Bay and Iraq, but all he can remember is there was discussion…what does this statue mean?..."I don’t recall." One wonders what his job was (he had so little to do in these meetings and so little advice to give the President)

(--here's what all this loss of memory was about…)

--as soon as the torture memo (note: the Bybee memo) was leaked to the press, he had to disavow it—that's why he couldn't recall

--in June '04, Gonzales withdrew the memo; the Dept. of Justice had to repudiate it

--(then they wrote a new legal analysis on torture) but didn't publish it for 6 months, in fact not until just before the hearing on Gonzales' nomination, when they provided their "most recent take" on the matter

--the memo was called the Bybee memo, authored by Jay Bybee, who now sits on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeal, appointed by Bush. (…long pause…) "God help the 9th Circuit Court of Appeal!"

--Byrd says he voted against Bybee, and is glad he did so; the "Bybee memo"—the Bybee-Gonzales memo—earned universal scorn…

--the memo did two things..,

1. It said torture is prohibited under US law only in very narrow circumstances, and allows terrible harm to be inflicted and not prohibited unless it creates pain equivalent to organ failure, impairment of bodily functions or death--and penalizes only the most egregious conduct; and

2. Equally shocking and erroneous, this so-called 'torture memo' said that, in the current war, prosecution under "2340a" may be barred as an un-Constitutional… an UN-CONSTITUTIONAL …INFRINGEMENT of the President's authority to conduct war as Commander in Chief. Commander in Chief. Where've we heard that before? And that the President can OVERRIDE the law just because he disagrees with it…thus…CROWNING HIMSELF KING!

--this reasoning is so antithetical to everything that the Founding Fathers laid down as the foundation of our Republic that it is INCONCEIVABLE that it could have been contemplated by any government officials, attorneys or the White House counsel.

--the President thus circumvents the will of the people and its legislature

--cites Federalist Paper 69, Alex. Hamilton, on the difference between the new American governmental system they were creating and the British monarchy: "There is no comparison…THERE IS NO COMPARISON—none!—between the intended power of the President and the actual power of the British sovereign. The one can act alone. The other cannot act without the peoples' legislature."

--NO President or anyone else can act against or nullify or countermand the laws against torture!

--THAT's what was sought by this memo, the President deciding on his own to DISREGARD the law. The Gonzales memo says the President can violate the law.

--and the replacement document for this policy does NOT rescind that assertion

-- when asked in Committee, Was any rescinding of that memo communicated to others (whom might be guided by it)?, Gonzales COULD NOT SAY.

--cites Red Cross reports of widespread abuse of Iraqi detainees at Abu Ghraib

--the LA Times last week cited a Pentagon source that there were dozens of abuse complaints at yet another location

--describes a Saddam Hussein villa, in east Baghdad, where the dying body of a detainee was thrown on top of his sister

--NO RESPONSIBILITY! NOT HIM! NOT HE! He had "some discussions." "It's not my job to decide effective means of interrogation." "It's not my job to decide what meets these standards—it's the responsibility of the Dept. of Justice."

--One has to wonder: What WAS his job?

--The Constitution does not say that the President SHOULD or MAY insure that the laws of the United States are faithfully executed. It says he SHALL insure that the laws of the United States are faithfully executed.

--the Gonzales memo not only failed in advising the President on faithfully executing the laws of the United States—it sought to UNDERMINE, to CONTRAVENE and to GUT them.

--With such a record…how…can …we …trust …this …man …to be …the Attorney General of the United States?

--As I said in the debate on Condoleeza Rice, there needs to be ACCOUNTABILITY. The bad judgments, the mistakes, the abuse in Afghanistan, Guantanamo Bay and Iraq have caused us to be SHUNNED by our allies. They have sent us careening down the wrong path. We cannot rely on a nominee with so little respect for the rule of law and for our Constitutional system of government.

--Mr. Gonzales has contributed to the ABOMINABLE abuses in Afghanistan, Guantanamo Bay and Iraq, and to the abominable legal decisions that have FLOWED from this White House for the last four years!

--(then he concluded with something like: ) I oppose this nomination!

[Peace Patriot]

61. 8 hours of debate tomorrow. I didn't get good notes on this, but...

...I think, a couple of hours of morning business, then, I would guess sometime between 10 am and 11 am Eastern, the first hour is the Democrats, followed by eight hours of debate, which will be equally divided in half hour segments.(--or maybe total 8 hours,not sure), and possible VOTE. Did anybody else hear these details?

I'LL START A NEW THREAD TOMORROW: "Senate debate on Gonzales DAY THREE"

Senator Boxer has been awfully quiet on this nomination. I called her office in DC and they said they thought she was speaking today but didn't know what time. There are a number of Dem members of the Judiciary Committee who haven't yet spoken. All eight of them voted against Gonzales, I believe.

Patrick J. Leahy (spoke)
RANKING DEMOCRATIC MEMBER, VERMONT

Edward M. Kennedy (spoke)
MASSACHUSETTS

Joseph R. Biden, Jr. (hasn't spoken)
DELAWARE

Herbert Kohl (hasn't spoken)
WISCONSIN

Dianne Feinstein (spoke)
CALIFORNIA

Russell D. Feingold (hasn't spoken--or did I miss him? was scheduled, didn't speak?)
WISCONSIN

Charles E. Schumer (spoke)
NEW YORK

Richard J. Durbin (spoke?)
ILLINOIS



2/1/05 - Dem speakers

Milulksi (quite a good speech), Kennedy (fabulous speech!), Feinstein, Schumer, Dayton, Stabenow, and I think Durbin also spoke--all against. (Johnson-SD scheduled to speak but didn't.)

2/2/05 - Dem speakers

Leahy, Jack Reed (fine legal speech, an indictment), Robert Byrd (brilliant--very upset that the pResident can just re-write laws at will)
Salazar (friend of Gonzales, apparently)--for

I can't recall for sure when Mikuski spoke--it was a quite spirited speech.

The Pug Pod Peole are not worth mentioning, except for Orrin Hatch who accused the DEMOCRATS of race prejudice against Gonzales.

Oh, and they're all for dropping a dying Iraqi man onto his sister, tying people to a board and dunking them in water to simulate drowning, burning prisoners with cigarettes, stuffing a baseball in their mouths, indefinite detention without trial, food deprivation, spiriting prisoners to other locations to avoid the Red Cross, the pResident re-writing the Constitution, international agreements and other laws in secret, the pResident "overriding" laws at will, and lying, lying and more lying, until the word, literally, has no meaning, and we are in an upside down inside out "Wonderland" world where the Queen of Hearts just yelled, "Off with your heads!"

[fooj]

65. You really nailed it in your final paragraph!

I could FEEL the sense of urgency, the constant movement, the snowball effect rolling endlessly...

Excellent post! Your "upside down inside out" really perpetuates confusion! I am a teacher and I'd really love to share that final paragraph with my students. Would you mind? The magic is in the power of the message! Peace!

[Peace Patriot]

67. fooj, No, I don't mind at all! Thanks for the appreciation! n/t

[Nevilledog]

66. Oh, the hypocrisy

Here's what I don't get. If the WH says that torture is okay in most cases, how does the administration reconcile the prosecution of soldiers for acts which would be allowable, ala Abu Ghraib? Answer me that......