I heard General Gonzalez under pressure blurted out that there were ways of getting around the Constitution?

Question

If this is true, will you please let me know a website where he says this? Thanks!

Answer 1

It is all in the news just type General Gonzales on the search bar and click, all the information about him will be shown on your monitor.

Answer 2

He should quit his job if he really cares about America. Since his appointment, he has brought the honor and integrity of our Supreme Court to shame!

Of course, Bush would stick his neck out for him. "As counsel to Governor Bush, Gonzales helped Bush be excused from jury duty when he was called in a 1996 Travis County drunk driving case. The case led to controversy during Bush's 2000 presidential campaign because Bush's answers to the potential juror questionnaire did not disclose Bush's own 1976 misdemeanor drunk driving conviction. Gonzales' formal request for Bush to be excused from jury duty hinged upon the fact that, as Governor of Texas, he might be called upon to pardon the accused in the case. Upon learning of the 1976 conviction, the prosecutor in the 1996 case (a Democrat) felt he had been "directly deceived". The defense attorney in the case called Gonzales' arguments "laughable"
...The Executive Order 13233, drafted by Gonzales and issued by George W. Bush on November 1, 2001 shortly after the September 11, 2001 attacks, attempted to place limitations on the Freedom of Information Act by restricting access to the records of former presidents.

Gonzales authored a controversial memo in January of 2002 that explored whether Article III of the Geneva Convention even applied to Al Qaeda and Taliban fighters captured in Afghanistan and held in detention facilities around the world, including Camp X-Ray in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The memo made several arguments both for and against providing Article III protection to Al Qaeda and Taliban fighters."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alberto_Gonzales

Gonzalez has used his power to create more harm than good for America!

Answer 3

He just views them different than just about anyone else!

One of the Bush administration's most far-reaching assertions of government power was revealed quietly last week when Attorney General Alberto Gonzales testified that habeas corpus -- the right to go to federal court and challenge one's imprisonment -- is not protected by the Constitution.

"The Constitution doesn't say every individual in the United States or every citizen is hereby granted or assured the right of habeas,'' Gonzales told Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing Jan. 17.

Gonzales acknowledged that the Constitution declares "habeas corpus shall not be suspended unless ... in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.'' But he insisted that "there is no express grant of habeas in the Constitution.''

Specter was incredulous, asking how the Constitution could bar the suspension of a right that didn't exist -- a right, he noted, that was first recognized in medieval England as a shield against the king's power to dispatch troublesome subjects to royal dungeons." http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/01/24/MNGDONO11O1.DTL

Bruce Fein, a former Reagan Justice Department attorney who has become an outspoken critic of the Bush administration, noted that the day before his Judiciary Committee appearance, Gonzales had denounced "activist judges'' and advised them to stay out of national security matters.

Gonzales' comments to the committee on habeas corpus, Fein said, contained a message that "Congress doesn't have to let them (judges) decide national security matters.''

"It's part of an attempt to create the idea that during conflicts, the three branches of government collapse into one, and it is the president,'' Fein said.


Last night during FOX's On the Record host Greta van Susteren and her guests discussed the fact that Alberto Gonzalez, Attorney General of the United States and the highest law enforcer in the land, authorized a search warrant at the Rayburn House Capitol Building at 7:00 PM Saturday May 20th in violation of 218 years of separation of powers guaranteed by the Constitution.


Van Susteren and three members of her panel of lawyers - Jim Hammer, Jeff Brown and Bernie Grimm - all agreed that Alberto Gonzalez had gone too far. Both Dennis Hastert and Nancy Pelosi have condemned the action. None of the FOX News legal eagles had a problem with that part of the search warrant that authorized a search of Jefferson's home. However, van Susteren said the search of the Congressman's Capitol Hill office is the first action of its kind in the history of the Congress.

Ted Williams made all kinds of excuses for Gonzalez' actions, claiming that Jefferson was caught dead to rights in a videotaped shake down and somehow this justified the warrant. He was definitely in the minority on this topic.

Van Susteren responded, "The Speaker [Dennis Hastert], the Leader [Nancy Pelosi] and the former Speaker of the House [Newt Ginrich] and, I think, the rest of us, you know, agree if you looked at the Constitution, you know, that seems to be an easy one."

To which Jeff Brown replied, "Good. Well then walk right up to Alberto Gonzalez and tell him to start raiding Tom Delay and Bob Ney's office!"

Van Susteren ended the segment by saying "... you can't trample on Constitutional rights as you do it."


Sunday, November 19, 2006
GONZALES THINKS THE CONSTITUTION IS STUPID

AP - Attorney General Alberto Gonzales contended Saturday that some critics of the Bush administration's warrantless surveillance program were defining freedom in a way that poses a "grave threat" to U.S. security. Gonzales was the second administration official in two days to attack a federal judge's ruling last August that the program was unconstitutional. Vice President Dick Cheney on Friday called the ruling "an indefensible act of judicial overreaching." Gonzales told about 400 cadets from the Air Force Academy's political science and law classes that some see the program as on the verge of stifling freedom rather that protecting the country.

"But this view is shortsighted," he said. "Its definition of freedom — one utterly divorced from civic responsibility — is superficial and is itself a grave threat to the liberty and security of the American people."

Gonzales and Cheney's attacks on the court order came as the administration was urging the lame-duck Congress to approve legislation authorizing the warrantless surveillance. The bill's chances are in doubt, however, because of Democratic opposition in the Senate, where 60 votes are required to end debate and vote.

Answer 4

The closest item that matches your question is in regards to his opinion on the right of habeas corpus. He feels that the Constitution does not guarantee this right.

Answer 5

It wouldn't suprise me, given many of the legal analyses he's given during previous Congressional hearings.

I'll check around and see if I can find an actual verified quote.