The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“THE PRESIDENT'S NOMINEES” mentioning the U.S. Dept of State was published in the Senate section on pages S128-S129 on Jan. 24, 2005.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
THE PRESIDENT'S NOMINEES
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, Jay Bybee, William Haynes, Condoleezza Rice, Alberto R. Gonzales--these four persons have three things in common. They were all high officials in President Bush's first administration. They were all key participants in the shameful decision by the administration to authorize the torture of detainees at Guantanamo and in Iraq and they have all been nominated by President Bush for higher office.
Jay Bybee, head of the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, was nominated for a lifetime appellate court judgeship in the spring of 2002, before he wrote the now notorious legal memorandum redefining torture so narrowly that virtually the only victims who could complain would be dead victims. Mr. Bybee even went so far as to state that the President could simply decree that any action taken as the Commander in Chief was immune from challenge. Most people who later read that memo immediately rejected its conclusions. But not the White House.
Instead, when the Bybee nomination was not acted on by the Senate in the 107th Congress, President Bush renominated him for the same judgeship in the 108th Congress. Although we asked for Bybee's OLC writings we received nothing, thus the Senate knew nothing about the Bybee memorandum on torture, and his nomination was confirmed.
William Haynes was, and still is, General Counsel to the Secretary of Defense. As such, he had a personal role in deciding how far Defense Officials could go in interrogating detainees. But he had a problem. High-level military officers and top State Department lawyers were experienced in these issues and the treaties that governed them, and they were adamantly opposed to the extreme change in policy that he and the Secretary and the White House were seeking.
So he formed a ``working group'' of lawyers that excluded these dissenters. That working group's report adopted verbatim some of the most outrageous parts of the Bybee memorandum. In one memo, for example, Mr. Haynes told Secretary Rumsfeld that waterboarding, forced nudity, the use of dogs to create stress, threats to kill the detainee's family, and other extreme tactics not only do not violate the Uniform Code of Military Justice, but are ``humane.''
After he did that, the White House also nominated him to a lifetime judgeship on a Federal court of appeals. Fortunately, by the time the Judiciary Committee was ready to vote on his nomination in late 2003, we had become aware of some of his other controversial legal views, and the Senate did not confirm him. President Bush has chosen to renominate him, however, so the Senate will have another chance to review his role in support of torture.
Condoleezza Rice has been nominated to be Secretary of State, and we will consider her nomination later this week. As national security adviser she was clearly involved in the prisoner abuse issues, but because of the nature of her position, we know less about her role. Two of the members of the Foreign Relations Committee have voted against her nomination, and we will hear their full report in the coming debate.
White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales, as the President's chief in-
house lawyer, was at the heart of the debate, inside the administration, on prisoner detention and interrogation. Although he says he can't remember it very well, he apparently was the person the CIA contacted when they wanted to use extreme interrogation methods on those whom our troops and intelligence agents detained in Afghanistan and Iraq and elsewhere. He was the one who went to Mr. Bybee at the Department of Justice to obtain the notorious Bybee memorandum justifying the use of torture. He keeps saying he doesn't recall, but his office obviously helped Mr. Bybee develop the memorandum.
When Mr. Gonzales received the memorandum, he disseminated it far and wide in the military and elsewhere, although he can't remember how. For almost 2 years, Mr. Gonzales allowed this policy guideline to stand throughout the Government as the administration's formal policy on prisoner abuse. For almost 2 years it remained in effect, producing a system of detention and interrogation that the International Committee of the Red Cross, the FBI, the Defense Intelligence Agency itself found abhorrent to the rule of law. When the Bybee memorandum finally became public last summer, Mr. Gonzales attempted to distance himself and the President from it, but he didn't quite withdraw it.
Suddenly last month, the night before New Year's Eve, so late that most newspapers could not get the story in the next day's paper, Mr. Gonzales and his Justice Department and White House colleagues decided that the memo was so clearly erroneous and its standards so extreme, that it should be withdrawn altogether and replaced by a gentler version.
Members of the Senate have asked repeatedly for the relevant documents on all this. But we have not received a single one of the documents we need.
Four Senate committees have now considered some part of this issue. The Foreign Relations Committee had a brief opportunity to question Ms. Rice last week, but apparently not enough information on her involvement was available to assess her responsibility. The Intelligence Committee is still waiting to hear from the CIA on its role in the prisoner abuses, but as far as I know nothing has been forthcoming. Despite the initiatives and hard work of the chairman, the ranking member and many other members of the Armed Services Committee, Secretary Rumsfeld and his deputies have managed to stonewall and slow-
walk us right through the election, and have used a series of separate investigations to propagate the original message that it was just a few bad apples on the night shift who committed the abuses.
We now are told that there was confusion and lack of clarity in the rules on interrogation without any indication of who was ultimately responsible, and without any accountability by those we know were involved, such as Mr. Haynes and Mr. Gonzales.
That leaves the Judiciary Committee, which is now considering Mr. Gonzales's nomination to be Attorney General. What standard should we apply to him? We know that rejection of a cabinet nominee is rare. In all of U.S. history, although hundreds of nominees have been stopped in committee or withdrawn by the President, only 9 of over 700 cabinet nominees have actually been rejected by the Senate. Two of them have been nominees for Attorney General. President Calvin Coolidge's nominee for Attorney General was rejected not once but twice and both times by a Senate of his own party.
Mr. Gonzales's case is a rare case in which a nominee may have been directly responsible for policies and resulting practices that have been counter-productive, contrary to international standards and practices, harmful to our troops' safety, legally erroneous, and plainly inconsistent with the rule of law and the basic values which this administration prides itself on defending.
President Bush's Inaugural Address resounded with those values last week. ``From the day of our Founding,'' he said:
we have proclaimed that every man and woman on this earth has rights, and dignity, and matchless value, because they bear the image of the Maker of Heaven and earth.
The choice before every ruler and every nation, he said, is:
the moral choice between oppression, which is always wrong, and freedom which is eternally right.
America's belief in human dignity will guide our policies,
he said.
Americans move forward in every generation by reaffirming all that is good and true that came before--ideals of justice and conduct that are the same yesterday, today, and forever.
Those are lofty values, and all of us agree with them wholeheartedly. But they were abandoned by the White House in its decision on the use of torture, and our credibility in the world as a leader on human rights and respect for the rule of law has been severely wounded. The cruelest dictators can now cite America's actions in their own defense.
How can we be true to our own oath to defend the Constitution, if we confirm as the highest legal officer in the land a person who may well have encouraged our basic values to be so grossly violated?
So far, Mr. Gonzales has not been responsive to our questions in the Judiciary Committee about his role. He still has time to clear the air, and I urge him to do so.
The position of Attorney General and the issues involved in this nomination go to the heart of our Nation's commitment to the rule of law. A nominee whose record raises serious doubts about his own commitment to the basic principle should not be confirmed as Attorney General of the United States.
Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Burr). Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________
