Gonzales claims the constitution does not guarantee the right of Habeas Corpus.

[OregonBlue]

Time for Dems to introduce resolutions in both the Senate and House stating that the constitution DOES guarantee the right to Habeas Corpus. Make the Republicans VOTE against it if they don't think it does. Make them go on the record. And watch them go down in flames with their conservative base if they try to claim it does not!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Taverner]

1. WTF??? This is as absurd as the Pubs saying it doesnt give you freedom of religeon

[OregonBlue]

8. Gonzales is claiming it's not in the constitution. Make the Repukes back him up.

Make them go on record as voting the the constitution does not guarantee the right of Habeas Corpus!! If they are so sure that they're right, make them state it on the record to the people of the United States.

[Fovea]

46. Habeas Corpus ought to be on the Dem 08 platform

Along with FISA.

[OregonBlue]

47. Don't think we can wait that long. Need legislation NOW.

[originalpckelly]

12. That's an excellent example.

Perfect, because it doesn't say that people have the freedom of religion, it says the government may not prohibit/support it:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

It doesn't say: "The people of the United States shall have the freedom of religion"

[Taverner]

15. But that's based on natural rights

The logic of the framers was that man naturally has the right to choose his own religion - or even to opt out of religion, with or without congress' approval.

[originalpckelly]

18. I use these amendments as the basis of my logic:

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved for the States respectively, or to the people."

"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

[Beetwasher]

24. Or Better Yet, The RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS

That oughta send the wingers into a tizzy. Ask Gonzo where it explicitly states in the constitution that people have a right to bear arms and if he thinks people have that right.

[Taverner]

29. And how he defends it...

If he goes for natural rights, and that the 2nd ammendment protects a natural right - then use my earlier argument.

If he goes for this being a specific right grated - then go with originalpckelly's argument.

Either way, he's wrong

[Vincardog]

2. Gonzo talks out his a$$ all the time. God help us and save us from these thugs and bullies.

[Warpy]

3. That's because they want to be cafeteria constitutionalists

They want to abolish all the amendments, right down the line, except for the second. When they've done that, the second will go.

Face it, they're EVIL.

[Mist]

4. Is this being streamed by CSPAN? I can't find it. nt

[acmavm]

5. Gonzales shows how frigging ignorant he is every time he opens

his mouth.

I wonder what cereal box his diploma came out of.

[Justitia]

20. Oh he's not ignorant, he knows better. He's just way too willing to be a tool for the criminals in

this maladministration.

He went to excellent schools (Rice University, Harvard Law), so lack of education is not his excuse - it's a total lack of personal integrity.

He wants his overlords of a certain class to smile favorably on him and his legal "cleverness".

He had lots of experience as a legal whore when he was counsel to Enron.

For Torture Boy, it's all about making friends in high places.

[acmavm]

27. NO, NO, NO. You misunderstand. He shows his ignorance

everytime he opens his mouth. He thinks that the American people are just going to buy this shit. If that's not ignorance, then it's insanity.

As for the cereal box remark, that was pure flippancy. Should have used some kind of smilie or something.

But back to his ignorance. Maybe I should explain more in my remarks but I assumed that most would understand that it's his underestimation of the intellect and resolve of the American people that his biggest intellectual black hole. Could a truly intelligent man really think that he could tell us that the things he's been okaying for Chimpy are not in conflict with the Constitution and the Bill of Rights? His statements have been so outrageously ridiculous that a kid in fifth grade who's been paying any attention in school knows he's lying his ass off. Did he think he could get away with that forever? Apparently so. And that was stupid.

[Justitia]

37. Gotcha completely. I just like highlighting that despite his dazzling formal education, he has

ZERO integrity and willingly undercuts that fine education in his very own Faustian Pact.

Knowing better makes him a criminal of the highest order.
As in the Geneva Conventions are "quaint".

Yeah, he's speaking to a certain audience all right, but it's not you, me or the American People - it's his handlers that gave him the job.

Anyway, we're in agreement that he's a total tool.
:evilfrown:

[baldguy]

6. Art 1 Sec 9

"The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it."

[Justitia]

14. I nominate you for the post of US Attorney General, seems you are overqualified for the job 'tho.

You have an inconvenient awareness of the actual Constitution.

;-)

[originalpckelly]

16. Well he's right, but it shows that he has a profound lack of understanding of our basic...

principles.

The government has to prove why it should take away our rights, it is assumed that we have every right imaginable, and that the government may only be given power in certain areas. In fact the US Constitution says that:
"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

and

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved for the States respectively, or to the people."

That means we have the rights unless the US Constitution says otherwise.

[Morgana LaFey]

45. You're wrong. He understands it perfectly. He and the other fascists

simply want to deny it to most of us, and certainly their enemies. They find it and apparently all the rest of our various Constitutional rights get in their way tooooooo often.

NOW, here's something alarming. One of the legal analysts I was listening to on Pacifica after the morning session (and she was a good one, IMO) said that to you and me this is preposterous. HOWEVER, you take his argument into the courts (that the right isn't explicitly given -- and it's not) and they may not, especially since Congress legislated it away. Others, of course, would say that law is unConstitutaional.

[RaleighNCDUer]

36. And there is no suggestion in the text that it applies only to

citizens.

Anyone under the authority of the US has the right.

[TechBear_Seattle]

7. Crimeny, has that twit even READ the US Constitution?

Here it is: Article I, Section 9, paragraph 2: The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.

While technically not guaranteed (as it can be suspended in very limited cases), it is a very, very far cry from what Gonzales seems to be implying.

[Mist]

10. Why would he bother reading it? He thinks it's "quaint." nt

[HereSince1628]

30. He's hung his case on that "techinquely not guaranteed" notion you recognize

Habeus is mentioned in I-9-2 is in the context of when it can be denied. Clearly "habeus" has no universal guarantee.

It's this sort of thing that makes the Gonzo's and Yoo's so freaking dangerous as Domestic enemies.

[Justitia]

41. Yoo - egads, what a monster. Must have been born of a jackal. -eom

[rock]

9. Remember: Habeas Corpus = Evidence

(In the simplest of terms). So according to the Attorney General (for Christsakes): the government doesn't need evidence to put you in prison.

[BOSSHOG]

11. It took me about 8 seconds to find it

in my handy dandy constitution book:

Article 1, Section 9

The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public safety may require it.

I invite all "conservatives" to give up their right to habeas corpus; put it in writing and file it at your county courthouse.

Lets chuckle for a moment while "conservatives" try to figure out what habeas corpus is.

Can I be Attorney General Now?

[indepat]

13. Way past time for the Congress to impeach this piece of ....

[nosferaustin]

23. just say it

He's a piece of shit opportunistic asswipe.

[solara]

17. Gonzalez is "catapultin' the propaganda" like the good little toady he is

How else can you program a nation to believe what you want them to believe? If Gonzalez and other people who are supposed to "know" these things say it often enough.. they will convince a good percentage of Americans that the constitution NEVER guaranteed the right to Habeas Corpus.. that it is all a political ploy by the ( traitorous) Democrat Party to politicize something or other ( or some such gobbledy-gook)

May the Bushites ROT IN HELL for what they have done and are doing to this country

[no_hypocrisy]

19. Take away this asshole's law license. He isn't fit to practice law

in the Aleutian Islands.

[DoYouEverWonder]

21. Time for Congress

to impeach his sorry ass.

[Norquist Nemesis]

22. Can't wait to see this as the headline on CNN, MSNBC, and FAUX

discussed at length, 24/7 through next Tuesday up to the point when Bush deigns to enter the halls of Democratically held Majority of Congress.

I'm not holding my breath.

[DURHAM D]

25. I feel KO gettin' his anger up because of this idiot general -

look for a "Special Comment" within five days.

[TZ]

26. same idiot

who claims that the Geneva Convention is "quaint" and doesn't apply to us. Seriously, I believe he does think Bush/US can do anything they want in the name of "security". Here would be his argument too: The constitution never had to deal with terrorists, therefore it too is "quaint" and outdated...:grr: :grr: :grr:

[Raiden]

28. This is not a War on Terror...This is a War on the Constitution!!

They won't stop until the Constitution is put through a paper shredder :scared:

[The Backlash Cometh]

31. Isn't incompetence enough to remove him?

[TZ]

38. This is not just incompetance..

This is willful dictatorial behavior. They believe they are not bound by any law let alone the constitution..:mad:

[The Backlash Cometh]

43. I hope Congress learns a lesson from this. NEVER give a president

carte blanche when it comes to warmongering. We've been psy-oped. There are some things that have been embedded in us and we're programmedd to respond in a certain way. For example, criticizing a president overseas during a time of war and putting all bi-partisan differences aside to support a president when we're attacked. Rove, probably with the help of CIA henchmen, put the two together and managed to get Congress to neuter themselves after the 9/11 attacks. I think the whole things was meticulously thought out, and Congress was taken for dopes.

[OregonBlue]

32. Here is the statement by Gonzales. Send it to every news media that you know.

Send it to every congress person Senate and House. Demand that they introduce a resolution stating that the CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES GUARANTEES THE RIGHT OF HABEAS CORPUS.

MAKE THE REPUBLICANS GO ON RECORD AS VOTING AGAINST THE RESOLUTION!!

Specter: "now wait a minute wait a minute the Constitution says you can't take it away except in the case of invasion or rebellion doesn't that mean you have the right of habeas corpus?"

Gonzales: "I meant by that comment that the Constitution doesn't say that every individual in the United States or every citizen has or is assured the right of habeas corpus it doesn't say that. It simply says that the right of habeas corpus shall not be suspended"

[Faryn Balyncd]

33. Can you post the link to those quotes?

or the Congressional Record date or page, if that is the origin?

Thanks.

[Norquist Nemesis]

39. It was during the Judicial Committee hearing today

It will be airing later on CSPAN.

What's with the "Congressional Record date or page, if that is the origin"? :think:

[OregonBlue]

40. Sorry, have to find it again. It's on DU somewhere else as well. I'll find

it and get back to you.

[OregonBlue]

42. Not on CSPAN any more. What's going on? Usually the feed is available

so it can be replayed. It is not there. Only link I have is to another DU'er who transcribed it verbatim. AG Gonzalez on Habeas Corpus just now (OMG)

Edited on Thu Jan-18-07 10:01 AM by underpants
verbatim I am transcribing this from the video
ON EDIT- corrected typo

Gonzo just before this exchange "Just because they talked about the Constitutional right to habeas corpus doesn't mean the decision was about the Constitutional right to habeas corpus"


"There is no express grant of habeas in the Constitution, there is a prohibition against taking it away"


Specter "now wait a minute wait a minute the Constitution says you can't take it away except in the case of invasion or rebellion doesn't that mean you have the right of habeas corpus?"

Gonzo "I meant by that comment that the Constitution doesn't say that every individual in the United States or every citizen has or is assured the right of habeas corpus it doesn't say that. It simply says that the right of habeas corpus shall not be suspended"

Specter "You may treading on your interdiction of violating common sense"

[jean]

34. did this guy get his law degree by mail or what?

[wryter2000]

35. Not a bad idea

Even Specter jumped on that bit of idiocy.

[BuyingThyme]

44. Absolutely not. It's not time to debate the Constitution.

It's time to impeach and jail the traitors.

Enough of this fucking nonsense.