Friday, January 07, 2005

Attorney Generalissimo?

Alberto Gonzales is looking to be a more dangerous version of John Ashcroft. Not because he's not moderate, but because he's totally indebted to President Bush for everything and doesn't understand the meaning of torture. Forgive me, but the man evaded questions about his role in the infamous torture rulings done in-house back in 2002. If Judge Gonzales is really against torture, then could he explain why he doesn't recollect 2002? If he was really against it, why would he not have said, "I was against the ideas expressed in this memo, and advised President Bush as such?"
He would not have been violating attorney-client privilege, because during the Clinton years, the courts and this Congress ruled official White House Counsel does not have that privilege. Nothing kept Gonzales silent except the fact that admitting his complicity would force Bush to pull his nomination, or fight it out with his GOP-controlled Congress.For the sake of our image, our moral standing, and our Constitution, here's hoping for the SECOND time that President Bush realizes his nominee is not a good idea, and searches for a better AG. If that is not the case, then would the Senate please vote their conscience (if they have one...although Lindsey Graham and Arlen Specter are certainly okay in my book for challenging the White House on various issues, including this one.)


Post a Comment

<< Home