Demagogue

During his confirmation hearing, Alberto Gonzales repeatedly insisted that the Bush administration rejected the use of torture and that President Bush had never authorized torture to be used

MR. GONZALES: First of all, sir, the president has said we're not going to engage in torture under any circumstances. And so you're asking me to answer a hypothetical that is never going to occur. This president has said we're not going to engage in torture under any circumstances, and therefore, that portion of the opinion was unnecessary and was the reason that we asked that that portion be withdrawn.

I guess that since torture is never going to occur anyway, it makes sense for the Bush administration to oppose attempts to actually makes sure that it doesn't

At the urging of the White House, Congressional leaders scrapped a legislative measure last month that would have imposed new restrictions on the use of extreme interrogation measures by American intelligence officers, Congressional officials say.

[edit]

The Senate had approved the new restrictions, by a 96-to-2 vote, as part of the intelligence reform legislation. They would have explicitly extended to intelligence officers a prohibition against torture or inhumane treatment, and would have required the C.I.A. as well as the Pentagon to report to Congress about the methods they were using.

But in intense closed-door negotiations, Congressional officials said, four senior members from the House and Senate deleted the restrictions from the final bill after the White House expressed opposition.

This makes sense in light of another comment Gonzales made during his hearing

SEN. LEAHY: Now, as attorney general, would you believe the president has the authority to exercise a commander-in-chief override and immunize acts of torture?

[edit]

GONZALES: Senator, I do believe there may come an occasion when the Congress might pass a statute that the president may view as unconstitutional. And that is a position and a view not just of this president, but many, many presidents from both sides of the aisle.

Obviously, a decision as to whether or not to ignore a statute passed by Congress is a very, very serious one, and it would be one that I would spend a great deal of time and attention before arriving at a conclusion that in fact a president had the authority under the Constitution to --

Unfortunately, Leahy interrupted Gonzales before he could finish making his point, but it seems clear that he was saying that Congress might try to outlaw certain practices - practices the Bush administration thinks are justified and legal. And that would create a bit of a dilemma for the administration as they would then be forced, not to abandon those practices, but to give a lot of thought to exactly how they would ignore the statute.

So a shorter Alberto Gonzales would be: We are not going to torture people, but don't make it illegal because that will just force us to spend lots of time figuring out ways to ignore that law.