According to the
Associated Press,
Senator Mark Dayton (D-MN), last seen taking the stage to oppose Barbara Boxer's support of the Congressional Black Caucas in protesting the Ohio vote, has said that he will probably vote against the nomination of Alberto Gonzales for attorney general.
I'm extremely troubled by his record based on what I've read so far. I'm strongly inclined to vote against his confirmation, but I'm not going to make a final determination until the record is complete.
Dayton went on to say he was disturbed about Gonzales' opinion that Geneva Convention protections for POWs did not extend to suspected terrorists.
(more below the fold)
What causes me greatest trouble so far is his role in condoning and providing a legal framework for the United States to renounce the Geneva Convention, and its proper treatment of prisoners...
For the United States to be in the position of not upholding those principles and practices is not only immoral but also puts our own troops and citizens at risk...
It sets the standard that we want to be applied to our own citizens and troops in those situations. We don't have any ground to object if we're not following those practices ourselves....
It's a pretty gutsy move for Dayton, because as has been noted here on Kos before, he's vulnerable in 2006, and his Republican co-senator, Norm Coleman, has already said he will support Gonzales.
It's good news for Gonzales opponents, who were forced to watch and wonder as one Senator after another at the confirmation hearings weenied out before the cameras with the notable exception of Lindsay Graham, who has steadily opposed the efforts of BushCo. on this front.
On December 13, 2003, after a tour of the Guantanamo Bay facilities, Graham sent a letter to Rumsfeld saying it was time to release the detainees or bring them to trial.
He also pushed through legislation giving higher rank to military lawyers, who were largely responsible for pursuing investigations into Guantanamo Bay rules, so that they would be on an equal footing with civilian lawyers who were fighting against it:
(It was interesting to note than when Graham questioned Gonzales during his confirmation hearings, he said that "My problem is that the DOJ memo was out there for two years, and the only people I can find that spoke against it were professional military lawyers who were worried about our own troops. " This while Biden was sucking up to Gonzales, calling him "Buddy" and saying "I love you." The Democrats could learn a thing or two from Graham's "frame.")
Graham also said he'd been consistently stonewalled in his efforts to obtain documents, and it makes one wonder -- what happened to Drudge's "grainy videos?" The ones that were supposed to blow the doors off the confirmation hearings?
[I]t's the grainy prison videos, shot by a soldier's cellphone and never before viewed by the public, that threaten to turn the New Year ugly: A video of a handcuffed prisoner beating his head against a wall; a video of a group of hooded men shown masturbating.
The Pentagon and the White House hold the videos in their possession and have not authorized any public release, including to the senate.
One top Democrat senate source said over the holiday weekend: "Mr. Gonzales should explain to us, to the public if this was policy. I am demanding we move to full disclosure."
Republicans counter showing the videos during the Gonzales hearings would jeopardize evidence in trials of the soldiers involved in the abuse.
The link has since disappeared from Drudge site, but you can still find it in a mirror here.
Sorry if this diary is all over the place, but I've been following the Gonzales stuff pretty closely (thank you Armando) and I just had a few loose ends I wanted to tie up.