Good Riddance Gestapo :: Ashcroft Condemns Judges Who Question Bush

[jefferson_dem]

Here's a suitable "WTF" baptism for the fresh "Justice, Courts, & The Law" forum - Nazi-boy Asscrack woos Federalist Society Freakers by recommending an end to judicial review of the Chimp-in-Chief. >>

WASHINGTON - Federal judges are jeopardizing national security by issuing rulings contradictory to President Bush (news - web sites)'s decisions on America's obligations under international treaties and agreements, Attorney General John Ashcroft (news - web sites) said Friday.


In his first remarks since his resignation was announced Tuesday, Ashcroft forcefully denounced what he called "a profoundly disturbing trend" among some judges to interfere in the president's constitutional authority to make decisions during war.


"The danger I see here is that intrusive judicial oversight and second-guessing of presidential determinations in these critical areas can put at risk the very security of our nation in a time of war," Ashcroft said in a speech to the Federalist Society, a conservative lawyers' group.


The Justice Department (news - web sites) announced this week it would seek to overturn a ruling by U.S. District Judge James Robertson in the case of Salim Ahmed Hamdan, who the government contends was Osama bin Laden (news - web sites)'s driver.

<SNIP>

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=536&e=2&u=/ap/20041112/ap_on_go_pr_wh/ashcroft_judges

[Komrade _azul]

1. Torturer Gonzales to follow

Will anyone awaken to the threat of Torturer Gonzales? He was White House counsel for how many years and will be so far up the, eh, pocket of George II that there is no chance of an independent Justice Department.

[Fleurs du Mal]

2. A$$croft was a cakewalk compared to candidate Gonzales

Think Himmler or gulags.

[justa]

3. Didn't think anyone could be worse than Ashcroft but

it is starting to look like I might have been wrong.

[TaleWgnDg]

4. If I may jump in here w/ my insignificant 2-cents . . .

about the Federalist Society. It seems that some of my peers join this "innie" association merely for the professional contacts, which is to be expected. So don't assume that all Federalist members are hell-bent "strict constructionists" a la Pope Scalia or his shadow/echo Cardinal Thomas. Instead, it's merely a demonstration of the political times that has swept across our nation.

As for John Ashcroft, well, the guy never was a "class act" -- NEVER!

Who in their right mind would publicly drape coverings over old larger-than-life DoJ statues in full light for all to see what an asshole he is? Or hold prayer meetings in the DoJ thereby chilling the workplace environment of his underlings (attorneys and others) who work for him? Not to say too much about the potential violation of the Separation of the Church and State. Nuts.

And, Lawyers simply do not make such public remarks about judges! I don't care if it happens to be the nation's top attorney or not (the nation's Attorney General). It's simply not done. It's not professional. But then, again, these freaks in this GWBush Administration are plowing *new* territory of arrogance and blunder.

BTW, did you hear what Cardinal Thomas said about such stuff? Here you go:

"You do ask for strength and wisdom to live up to your oath.
It's because of your religion that you don't do things that are
skewed -- because it's not right. You took an oath to be
impartial. That's when you ought to leave the court -- when
you can't look at yourself and say, `I was impartial.' When I
can't, I'll leave." - U.S.Sup.Ct. Associate Justice Clarence
Thomas, Q&A w/ law school students at University of Kansas,
October 28, 2004, John Hanna, AP Writer, Lawrence, Kansas
(Justice Thomas is a Roman Catholic, schooled at parochial
and Catholic colleges.)

"What are you supposed to do when somebody brings a lawsuit?
You hear people say the Supreme Court jumped into the last election
(Bush v. Gore, 2000). I find it very ironic that the very people saying
judges are interfering are bringing lawsuits. What do you think? Donald
Duck is going to decide it? I would prefer not to have to decide it, but
that joins a long list of things. It's my job." - U.S.Sup.Ct. Associate
Justice Clarence Thomas, Q&A w/ law school students
at University of Kansas, October 28, 2004,
John Hanna, AP Writer, Lawrence, Kansas

"I think we'll see in short order. Some of the people now out of
Guantanamo Bay (due to the U.S.Sup.Ct's rulings) are now
fighting against the U.S." - U.S.Sup.Ct. Associate
Justice Clarence Thomas, Q&A w/ law school students at University of Kansas,
October 28, 2004, John Hanna, AP Writer, Lawrence, Kansas

So much for judicial professionalism and judicial ethics. Wha? This justice doesn't understand that similar cases will go before him in the future? Shall he recuse himself? Or that he shouldn't make off-handed remarks about only God can guide us lawyers or judges when we take an oath of office to serve in the judicial branch of government? Uuuummmmm, hasn't Cardinal Thomas heard of the first amendment's Separation of Church and State? That one may take an oath or affirmation? Oh, that's right too, he's attempting to place his religion into our laws. So much for any recusal on these grounds too.



<sub>. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . "I always laugh when people say that George W. Bush is saying this or that to appease the religious right. He is the religious right." - GWBush first cousin John Ellis</sub>

edited to correct a minor typo