Replies to post #445479 on Zeev's Turnips Talk Politics (ZTTP)

[BullNBear52]

Cheney has backed himself into a corner from which there is no retreat.

Apparently Dick got po'd at Albert,

Report: Gonzales Backs Holder on Prosecutor Appointment
Appearing on The Washington Times' "America's Morning News" radio show Tuesday morning, former U.S. attorney general Alberto R. Gonzales "defended the decision of his current successor, Eric H. Holder Jr., to investigate alleged prisoner abuse by CIA interrogators over President Obama's desire to look forward," the paper reported.

"As chief prosecutor of the United States, he should make the decision on his own, based on the facts, then inform the White House," said Mr. Gonzales, who was appointed to the post by President George W. Bush in 2005 and resigned in 2007.
Mr. Gonzales also said Bush administration lawyers clearly defined what interrogation techniques were legal and the few who went beyond the rules should be investigated, despite the so-called chilling effect it might have on future intelligence-gathering.

"We worked very hard to establish ground rules and parameters about how to deal with terrorists," he said. "And if people go beyond that, I think it is legitimate to question and examine that conduct to ensure people are held accountable for their actions, even if it's action in prosecuting the war on terror."

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2009/09/02/report_gonzales_backs_holder_o.html?wprss=44

Then Albert qucikly changes his mind. Of course what mind did he ever have to begin with. He was simply Bush's stooge at Justice.

Gonzales Clarifies Remarks On CIA Interrogations Probe
By Stephanie Woodrow | September 3, 2009

Former U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales on Thursday clarified his recent comments about Attorney General Eric Holder’s decision to probe possible CIA interrogation abuses, saying he supports Holder’s authority to investigation but does not support the investigation itself, The Washington Times reported.

On Tuesday, Reuters and Main Justice reported that Gonzales supported Holder’s decision to investigate. His comments came during an interview with The Washington Times’ “America’s Morning News” radio show. During the interview, Gonzales said if people go beyond the established parameters for interrogations, “I think it is legitimate to question and examine that conduct to ensure people are held accountable for their actions, even if it’s action in prosecuting the war on terror. ”

On Thursday, in a follow-up interview with The Times, Gonzales offered the clarification. “I don’t support the investigation by the department because this is a matter that has already been reviewed thoroughly and because I believe that another investigation is going to harm our intelligence gathering capabilities and that’s a concern that’s shared by career intelligence officials and so for those reasons I respectfully disagree with the decision,” Gonzales said.

Regarding his earlier comments, Gonzales said he was not endorsing the investigations, but rather Holder’s right to conduct the probe. He said, “It’s an endorsement of his right to exercise his discretion,” adding, “I’m just saying I would have exercised my discretion in a different manner, given the information I have.”

Gonzales would not say what evidence was uncovered during the Bush administration that led him to deem Holder’s probe unnecessary. “This has been looked at, and I agree with President Obama that we ought to be looking forward,” he said Thursday.

http://www.mainjustice.com/2009/09/03/gonzo-backpedals-on-support-for-cia-torture-investigation/

One would almost think someone had gotten to Albert and waterboarded him into submission.

[BullNBear52]

Morality is now something to be laughed at.

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=41151951

The right wing nut cases whose politicans preach from the pulpit can't stand to be confronted with their own hypocrisy.

Gaddy trades barbs with Jindal over taxpayer-funded flights to churches
By Robert Marus
Thursday, September 03, 2009
MONROE, La. (ABP) -- Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal is trading barbs with a prominent Baptist pastor over the governor’s use of a state helicopter and travel detail to attend churches in far-flung -- but politically strategic -- parts of the state.

Welton Gaddy, who is president of the Washington-based Interfaith Alliance but also preaching pastor at Northminster Baptist Church in Monroe, La., sent Jindal an open letter Sept. 1 objecting to the trips. The letter came after a review by the Baton Rouge Advocate revealed that, in five months this spring and summer, Jindal took 14 helicopter trips to attend Sunday worship at Louisiana churches.

The congregations were almost all evangelical -- although Jindal is a Catholic -- and almost all were in the heavily Protestant northern part of the state. Many were in parishes (Louisiana’s municipal equivalent of a county) that the conservative Republican lost in a 2003 race for governor but won in his successful 2007 gubernatorial bid. He spoke in at least some of the worship services.

“I’m completely just humbled and honored that I’m asked to come and worship with Louisianians across the state,” he told the paper. “It’s important for the governor to get out of Baton Rouge.”

Gaddy said the trips -- which the Advocate said cost taxpayers approximately $45,000 for personnel and travel expenses-- were not for legitimate state purposes. He said Jindal should reimburse Louisiana’s coffers for them and any other similar trips outside of the period covered by the paper’s investigation.

“If you were traveling to these churches to worship with the various congregations, you should have paid your own expenses to get there as did the other worshippers,” Gaddy wrote. “If you were traveling to these churches for the purpose of sharing your personal faith and encouraging faith in others, state funds absolutely should not have been used to pay your expenses. Indeed, in that instance, your state-funded actions were a violation of the United States Constitution’s promise of religious freedom which has been a critical contributor to the vitality of religion in our nation. If you were traveling to these churches for political purposes, you should not have been there in the first place, regardless of who funded the travel.”


He concluded: “For the sake of religion, please do not politicize houses of worship in Louisiana and rob those of us who minister there of the credibility that allows our faith to be a healing force in our state and across our land.”

In reaction, a Jindal spokesperson accused Gaddy and the Interfaith Alliance of being out of touch with Louisiana.

“This political group opposes putting crosses up in honor of fallen policemen, has attacked the National Day of Prayer and advocates for same-sex marriage, so it's not surprising that they are attacking the governor for accepting invitations to speak at Louisiana churches,” Melissa Sellers said in a statement responding to the letter.

She also said Jindal accepts invitations from local churches to speak, and he tries to take the opportunity to meet with local elected officials when he has church engagements.

The governor has risen to national prominence in recent months and is widely believed to be considering a run for the GOP presidential nomination in 2012.

Gaddy released a statement saying Jindal’s response avoided the question of whether he should reimburse the state or not -- and smacked of a misunderstanding of the First Amendment’s religion clauses.

“Gov. Jindal’s critique of the work of Interfaith Alliance is another disturbing example of his lack of understanding of the danger of entanglement of institutions of government and institutions of religion,” he said. “I am saddened to know that Gov. Jindal lacks a basic appreciation for the constitutional principle of religious freedom.”

The Interfaith Alliance supports a strong understanding of church-state separation and attempts to provide a faith-based voice to counter the Religious Right in political debates. Its supporters are mostly liberal-to-moderate Christians, Jews and adherents of minority faiths.

Ari Geller, the group's communications director, said Sept. 3 that Sellers’ response woefully mischaracterized the Interfaith Alliance's work. He noted that the organization does not specifically advocate for gay marriage, but believes states should be able to legalize same-sex civil marriage if they choose, and that the choice to perform gay unions should not be imposed on -- or denied to -- churches and synagogues. “That’s for each house of worship to decide for themselves. But if the state wants to legalize gay marriage, then that should be allowed,” he said.

Geller also noted that the alliance has not criticized the National Day of Prayer, but the way that a conservative evangelical group had in recent years co-opted what used to be an ecumenical observance. “We opposed the National Day of Prayer Council because they turned it into an exclusive event and portrayed themselves as the official committee organizing the event,” he said, a reference to the National Day of Prayer Task Force, which is headed by the wife of conservative Christian broadcaster James Dobson. “Again, we’re not taking issue with the National Day of Prayer so much as the group promoting it.”

He said the reference to crosses honoring slain police officers apparently refers to a federal court case out of Utah, in which the state is defending the crosses by arguing that they are actually secular symbols.

http://www.abpnews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=4369&Itemid=53