NationStates Jolt Archive

Right now, it looks as if the decision will soon be finalized to confirm Gonzales as the next Attorney General.

Bush selects evangelical for attorney general post
By Andrew Buncombe in Washington
11 November 2004


Alberto Gonzales, the White House counsel who advised that the Geneva Conventions and international anti-torture treaties did not apply to terrorist suspects held by the US, was yesterday selected by President George Bush as his new attorney general.

Officials said that if confirmed by the Senate, Mr Gonzales would succeed John Ashcroft, whose resignation from the post was announced on Tuesday. Mr Gonzales, 49, would be the first Hispanic to hold the position.

Mr Gonzales was among several possible replacements widely discussed before the election when it was thought Mr Ashcroft would not serve in a second term. Mr Ashcroft actually proffered his resignation to the President in a five-page handwritten letter on election night but Mr Bush waited until after the weekend to accept it and decide upon a replacement.

If the right-wing, evangelical Mr Ashcroft was among the most polarising members of the Bush cabinet, Mr Gonzales is not without considerable controversy. He was at the centre of the effort to publicly defend the administration's policy of holding prisoners captured in the so-called "war on terror" without access to lawyers or the courts, a stance opposed by the Supreme Court. He also wrote a memo in February 2002 in which the Bush administration claimed the right to ignore international treaties prohibiting torture of prisoners. Campaigners said that memo led directly to the sort of abuses that were uncovered at Abu Ghraib in Iraq and which have been alleged at Guantanamo Bay.

But the controversy surrounding Mr Gonzales dates back further, to the time when he worked as general counsel to Mr Bush when he was governor of Texas. An article last year in Atlantic Monthly examined Mr Gonzales's role in the preparation of memos to Mr Bush on 57 death penalty cases in which the governor was required to consider the granting of clemency.

The magazine's investigation found Mr Gonzales "repeatedly failed to apprise the governor of crucial issues in the cases at hand: ineffective counsel, conflict of interest, mitigating evidence, even actual evidence of innocence". The magazine said Mr Gonzales appeared to exclude factors such as "mental illness or incompetence, childhood physical or sexual abuse, remorse, rehabilitation or racial discrimination in jury selection".

Mr Bush allowed the executions to proceed in all but one of the 57 cases, including that of Terry Washington, a 33-year-old mentally retarded man with the communications skills of a seven-year-old.

Mr Gonzales had also been considered a possible candidate for the Supreme Court if an opening should emerge. In recent weeks, his name had been mentioned increasingly, with the announcement that Chief Justice William Rehnquist was suffering from thyroid cancer.

Reports suggested that in the end it was decided, somewhat ironically, that Mr Gonzales was not sufficiently conservative on certain basic issues to please right-wing Republicans looking for a zealot on the bench.

The replacement of Mr Ashcroft was first of what will likely be several reshuffles in the cabinet over the coming days and weeks. Mr Bush is already looking for a replacement for Commerce Secretary Donald Evans, who announced his resignation on Tuesday.

Yesterday Mr Bush was due to meet the Secretary of State Colin Powell, about whose future there has been intense speculation. It was generally considered Mr Powell would not serve in a second term but there has been a flurry of reports suggesting he might.

Senator John Kerry, the former Democratic presidential candidate, yesterday offered a statement in which he called Mr Ashcroft "one of the most divisive faces in this administration". He said: "With the end of the era of John Ashcroft, the President now has an opportunity to heal those divisions and make good on his promise of renewed bipartisan co-operation."

But, in an early sign of the increased control held by Republicans, the Energy Secretary, Spencer Abrams, said he believed the new Congress would vote next year to permit drilling for oil in the Alaskan wildlife reserve (ANWR).

Republican Senator Pete Domenicic, chairman of the Senate Energy Committee, said: "With oil at $50 a barrel, and likely to stay there for months, the market mandates congressional action. We can develop ANWR without harming the environment or the wildlife. Now is the time to do that."

THE CV

Born: 4 August 1955, San Antonio, Texas. Raised in Houston with seven brothers and sisters

Education: Graduated from Rice University, Houston, and from Harvard Law School

Marital status: Married with three children

1973-75 Served in the US Air Force

1982-95 Joined the Houston law firm, Vinson & Elkins

1992 Assistant legal counsel, Houston Host Committee, Republican National Convention

1995-97 General counsel to Governor George Bush

1997-99 Secretary of State, State of Texas

1999-2000 Justice, The Supreme Court of Texas

2000-04 White House counsel for George Bush

2004 Nominated as US Attorney General


What do you think of Bush's choice?

Right now, it looks as if the decision will soon be finalized to confirm Gonzales as the next Attorney General.

What do you think of Bush's choice?
Seems like a good choice of a good man, based upon what I've heard of him.

Ignoring the obvious bias in the article, I think its a good appointment.

I like him. As Bush's counsel, he has done a very good job making legal arguments for the administration. As for his substance, he's consistent with the president, and that I like. Besides, he'll get more easily appointed than Ashcroft.

I think the role of an Attorney General is to uphold the law, not look for ways to circumvent them.

Time will tell. I'm not prepare to tar Mr. Gonzales with Ashcroft's brush. I think something 'alarming' could be dug up on any candidate for the post if one were motivated to do so.

WHat concerns me more is his proximity to the President for so long. I think a more independent A.G. would have ben a better choice.

The only reason Bush is doing this is to "thank" the hispanic voters who helped him win. :rolleyes:

Right now, it looks as if the decision will soon be finalized to confirm Gonzales as the next Attorney General.



What do you think of Bush's choice?
I think we may well find Mr. Gonzales positioning himself somewhat to the right of Mr. Ashcroft.

Im not really sure if its a good choice, he was the one who wrote up the 'laws' at Abu Gahbi that the soldiers were following. Then he tried to get the supreme court to vote that they did not have power in that area. Come on who would voluntarily give up power, especially in a case like that, but I'll give him a chance seeing as Ashcroft was terrible, but I'm just a 14 year old liberal, who cares about my opinion anyway.

The only reason Bush is doing this is to "thank" the hispanic voters who helped him win. :rolleyes:
Well, for one, this name was always floated around as an Attorney-General. For another, the Hispanic vote went mostly to Kerry, as these exit polls show.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/US/P/00/epolls.0.html

I support it largely because it means Gonzales is not going to be the next nominee for the Supreme Court (and I'm afraid he just may be way too left for THAT position).

Im not really sure if its a good choice, he was the one who wrote up the 'laws' at Abu Gahbi that the soldiers were following. Then he tried to get the supreme court to vote that they did not have power in that area. Come on who would voluntarily give up power, especially in a case like that, but I'll give him a chance seeing as Ashcroft was terrible, but I'm just a 14 year old liberal, who cares about my opinion anyway.
Don't sell yourself short. You'll be an educated voter in 2008.

Great Choice!

Well, for one, this name was always floated around as an Attorney-General. For another, the Hispanic vote went mostly to Kerry, as these exit polls show.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/US/P/00/epolls.0.html

I'm not disputing that, I'm talking about Bush's Hispanic vote strictly, not who received the most... anyways, wasn't his name also tossed around for Supreme Court?

I think Al Gonzales is a great choice. Also, watch out for the confirmation hearings.. this will set the tone for the first 2 years.. we'll see if the liberals are going to fight or not.

WHat concerns me more is his proximity to the President for so long. I think a more independent A.G. would have ben a better choice.


How about RFK's close proximity to JFK?

How about RFK's close proximity to JFK?

How about it?

so y'all think bert the butcher would make a fine choice for the chief law enforcer of america. the man who justified torture of enemy prisioners. the man who said the geneva conventions were quaint and out of date and could be ignored. the man who shat on the american constitution and all the values we hold dear to appease bush's lust for power. who said bush could by executive order deny any american his constitutional rights, and that this discision was unreviewable by the courts.

this man is guilty of treason against the united states for justifying bush's usurpation of the constitution, and war crimes for laying the psuedo legal group work for american atrosities at abu garab and gitmo. this is the man you seem to welcome into the position of top cop, a man who is more likely to set up death squad and torture chambers than neighborhood watches and police review panels.

so y'all think bert the butcher would make a fine choice for the chief law enforcer of america. the man who justified torture of enemy prisioners. the man who said the geneva conventions were quaint and out of date and could be ignored. the man who shat on the american constitution and all the values we hold dear to appease bush's lust for power. who said bush could by executive order deny any american his constitutional rights, and that this discision was unreviewable by the courts.

this man is guilty of treason against the united states for justifying bush's usurpation of the constitution, and war crimes for laying the psuedo legal group work for american atrosities at abu garab and gitmo. this is the man you seem to welcome into the position of top cop, a man who is more likely to set up death squad and torture chambers than neighborhood watches and police review panels.

But...but...

he's hispanic!

;)

One poster gave an interesting take on it; this is a test. How much will the Dems fight this choice of Attorney General? Getting rid of a lightning rod like Ashcroft was undoubtedly a good move, but replacing like with like is probably gonna stir up trouble.

Alberto has made some pretty nasty arguments in favor of legalizing torture (and torture-lite), if anyone read his early 2002 work, you'll know its very, very troubling. Still, he's already a member of the administration and is replacing someone who is noticably unpopular. I doubt the Dems will challenge this.

Alberto Who?

Bush is just replacing the Christian Taliban (Ashcroft) with a latin American Dictator (Gonzalez)--Gonzalez also worked as a lawyer for the corrupt Bush- supporting enron and for the war profiteering Halliburton

How about it?
TTR has a valid point. The president is going to appoint someone who will be his Top Cop, Prosecutor, etc. Bush does not have the need to appease anyone and is in the mood to please the people who supported his reelection most. In his eyes that is the Christian Right.

If the Dems don't get over it & get organized Bush is going to clean their clock for the next generation. Pepe D made the point best when he said, "this will set the tone for the first 2 years.. we'll see if the liberals are going to fight or not." Nicolo Medici is on point when he calls this a test.

Bush has bigger appointments to look forward to in the next four years. If he can parlay this this into a midterm call to end congressional blockage he will be freer in the latter half to shape the USSC for the next 20 or more years. As I have said before, The Bush Legacy.

What do you think of Bush's choice?
Another personal friend of Bush in a position of power. Same old same old.

I really meant it when I asked, 'Alphonse Who?'

Oops. I meant to say 'Albert'.

Bush! Sometimes I think that president is just trying to make liberals angry!

Seems like a good choice of a good man, based upon what I've heard of him.
Ignoring the obvious bias in the article, I think its a good appointment.
Oh yeah, a man who permits torture. Brilliant. :rolleyes:

I think Al Gonzales is a great choice. Also, watch out for the confirmation hearings.. this will set the tone for the first 2 years.. we'll see if the liberals are going to fight or not.
Bet on it. :p