Tuesday, May 23, 2006

gonzales' selective commitment to enforce laws

The Washingon Post correctly thinks that if prosecutors acted on de facto Attorney General/apologist for torture Alberto Gonzales' insinuation that the 1917 Espionage Act could be used against journalists who publish classified information, it would be a radical and outrageous blow against freedom of the press. But I was also struck by how Gonzales' answered the question about this:
There are some statutes on the book which, if you read the language carefully, would seem to indicate that that is a possibility. That's a policy judgment by the Congress in passing that kind of legislation. We have an obligation to enforce those laws.
So, can we take this as an indication that the de facto Administration WILL enforce laws passed by Congress? That their bullshit use of signing statements to essentially nullify laws duly passed by Congress is no longer Administration policy? That the Administration cares so much about how Congress feels about the laws it passes that it will, no matter how regretfully, feel obliged to enforce them all?

No. This is just another example of the hypocrisy and sheer disdain for the law of this Administration. They will use an obsolete law from the First World War to hush the press and make it harder for all of us to expose the Administration's illegal acts and numerous mistakes, piously claiming they are required to uphold the law.

But you know damn well they'll continue to ignore laws and regulations that make torture illegal, or that require warrants to do domestic wiretaps, or that require the identity of CIA undercover agents to be protected, or anything else that gets in the way of the Imperial Presidency that Cheney/Bush and their lawyer toady Gonzales/Yoo/Addington acolytes have been constructing.