Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Gonzales: We Know Best

Posted by Barbara O'Brien at 2:27 PM on January 17, 2007.


Alberto Gonzales thinks the courts should defer to the White House.
fatherknowsbest
father

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

You'll like this one. Suzanne Goldenberg writes for the Guardian:

The Bush administration’s most senior legal official said today that US courts were not fit to make decisions on national security and should show deference to the White House.
I should have warned you at the top of the post to sit down and stay calm.

In remarks made after a talk at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative thinktank, the attorney-general, Alberto Gonzales, said: “I don’t think that a judge is equipped at all to make decisions about what is in the national security interest of our country.”
Mr Gonzales’s comments come a few days after a Pentagon official provoked a national backlash after suggesting large corporations boycott law firms that defend detainees at Guantánamo.
You, there! You banging your head against the wall! Stop that right now!

The Associated Press reports (emphasis added),
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales says federal judges are unqualified to make rulings affecting national security policy, ramping up his criticism of how they handle terrorism cases.
In remarks prepared for delivery Wednesday, Gonzales says judges generally should defer to the will of the president and Congress when deciding national security cases. He also raps jurists who “apply an activist philosophy that stretches the law to suit policy preferences.
'Scuse me while I go bang my head against the wall. At least I didn't throw up, like some people.

Big Tent Democrat explains,
I think the Attorney General could not be clearer. He advocates the vitiation of the Constitution by the judiciary when the President so desires. He is unfit for the office of Attorney General. He should be removed from office.
On the other hand, AG Gonzales has decided the National Security Agency's domestic surveillance program will be subject to FISA approval, after all. (Glenn Greenwald is, as ever, the go-to guy for in-depth explanation of FISA.)

I understand Mr. Gonzales is scheduled to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee tomorrow.

Speaking of atrocities, my buddy the Talking Dog (who is not an atrocity; more of a shepherd-newfoundland mix, I think) interviews H. Candace Gorman, one of the attorneys Alberto Gonzales thinks should be boycotted because she represents detainees at Guantánamo. Good stuff.

Digg!

Tagged as: wiretapping, surveillance, gonzales, fisa, nsa

Barbara O'Brien has guest blogged at the Take Back America Conference, Glenn Greenwald's, Unclaimed Territory, and Crooks and Liars. She is the "owner/proprietor" of The Mahablog.


Marine Reservist Chases, Assaults Greek Orthodox Priest Whom He Mistook for an Arab Terrorist
Jasen D. Bruce hit the priest in the head with a tire iron, then chased him three blocks.
Post by Faiz Shakir. November 11, 2009.
Idaho Republican Blake Hall Fired for Throwing Used Condoms on the Lawn of a Woman He Was Stalking
"It's unimaginable that a 56-year-old would be so deviant."
Post by Steven D.. November 10, 2009.
Fox Mogul Rupert Murdoch Echoes Glenn Beck, Calls Obama a Racist
So much for the supposed "truce" between Fox and the White House.
Post by Steve Benen. November 10, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Always refreshing...
Posted by: JoshuaLudd on Jan 17, 2007 3:45 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... to see a fascist advocating dictatorship in such a high position.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Alberto Gonzalez (from the future)
Posted by: NoPCZone on Jan 17, 2007 9:27 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Definition
A Nazi who served as White House Counsel and Attorney General during the George W. Bush administration. During that time, he participated in some of the most heinous crimes against civil liberties guaranteed in the US Constitution and various US laws. He was disbarred following his tenure as Attorney General, a position he was forced to resign from in disgrace following various public Congressional hearings involving numerous illegal activities of the Bush Administration.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Executive power.
Posted by: kittynboi on Jan 17, 2007 9:29 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I guess now that the other two branches are lost to GOP control, they want the only one left that they hold power in to have absolute executive authority in everything.

Gonzales has managed to be just as evil as Ashcroft.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: xecutive power. Posted by: sethmo
Why does the left support judges so much
Posted by: albrechtkrausse on Jan 17, 2007 9:39 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
especially when, at the Federal level and even in some States, they are UNELECTED and appointed, sometimes to LIFE terms, by political cronies? I can understand why the Republicans and 'mainstream' Democrats support judges since judges rely on 'precedent' and so are unlikely to be progressive and usually start their careers by elections in the corrupt 2 party system. But why so many on Alternet support this royalistic style of ruling. Let the people ELECTED make the laws, not judges. This is what Republicans would love. Take the people out of it and have a group of unelected judges decide everything (if we can't get the President to decide everything.)
ps: Judges are also lawyers/politicans. Why trust THEM?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Civics review, albrecht. Posted by: Jesse
» RE: Civics review, albrecht. Posted by: albrechtkrausse
» RE: Sinclair lost the election Posted by: lessbread
"Unitary Executive" Theory
Posted by: fanny666 on Jan 18, 2007 8:40 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Important article to understand this administration's "unitary executive" theory.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

what's the delay?
Posted by: pacto on Jan 18, 2007 10:23 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
when are we going to wake up?The whole bush regime is anti-constitutional.Lets bring them to Impeachment process. Set some presidences,impeach the all at once.Or perhaps we should call for a special election (with paper ballots only).. to over ride all the harm the are doing,and have done, to our great democracy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

When the rules don't favor your style of play break them
Posted by: lessbread on Jan 18, 2007 1:07 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There is just too much evidence to deny that this is how the Bushies operate. Impeachment is a check on executive power, a check that should have been brought to bear on this president years ago.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hmm...
Posted by: CountessKarma on Jan 19, 2007 9:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Considering how much this guy kisses his ass, you'd think George Bush would like Mexicans a LOT more...


Forgive me for offending any Mexicans, I know you're not all like this jerkoff.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]