Alberto Desereto

WH Counsel Alberto Gonzales was, once upon a time, reportedly being considered and groomed for a seat on the Federal Bench and eventually even the Supreme Court. Supposidly he was on Bush's short list for a seat on the Supreme Court even.

Now he doesn't stand a chance in h-e-double hockey sicks in getting confirmed by the senate to be the President's Dog Catcher. Why? Slate's Alan Berlow explains:

"In the burgeoning Abu Ghraib prison scandal, Gonzales has surfaced as the author of one highly controversial memo and co-author of a second, both of which raise serious questions as to whether the president authorized or condoned the use of torture, a war crime under the Geneva Conventions. Although the president said he's only approved actions consistent with U.S. and international law, that hasn't settled the matter because the main thrust of the memos crafted by Gonzales as well as Justice, Defense, and intelligence agency lawyers, seems to have been to come up with justifications for torture within the law. It remains to be determined whether these memos, individually or collectively, provided the legal go-ahead for the policies that culminated in the abuses at Abu Ghraib. "

This wasn't the first time Gonzales had written currious legal opinions regarding international law. Back when Bush was governor of Texas, Alberto decided that these same Geneva Conventions didn't apply to the state of Texas, even though Texas is a part of the US via that whole constitution thing. The issue was a Mexican National who had put on Death Row and the Mexican Consolate in TX had never been notified of even his arrest. And just for fun, let me add that this man, Irineo Tristan Montoya, signed a English confession to brutally stabbing and murdering John Kilheffer in Brownsville, Texas, in 1985, despite the fact that he spoke only Spanish (he thought it was an imigration form, gee I wonder how he got that idea). By the way, two days after Gonzales' memo, Montoya was executed, over protestrations of Mexico and the State Department (even Albright herself tried to get involved). What's worse, Gonzales' interpetation of the constitution, or Bush's apparant repeated agreement with his interpetations?

Berlow sums up the longer term implications of Gonzales and Bush nicely: "Much more will be at stake if Gonzales' interpretation of the Constitution and international law is allowed to take root in the loosely defined war on terrorism. With the U.S. image worldwide at what may be an historic nadir, it is hard to imagine how a decision by the president to abrogate one of the cornerstones of international human rights law would either enhance that image or encourage other nations to shoulder any of the costs of the ongoing Iraq adventure. In the end, however, what is most important is what these memos say about who we are as a nation. If the president has, in fact, rationalized a decision to abandon the Geneva Conventions on Prisoners of War and the U.N. Convention Against Torture for the poisoned promise of torture, he should explain to the American public how that squares with this country's commitment to the most fundamental principles of justice and decency."