Nominations

NOMINATIONS -- (Senate - January 24, 2005)

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I didn't intend to speak this afternoon, but after listening to the comments of the Senator from Massachusetts regarding four individuals, three of whose nominations are pending before this body, I believe a brief statement and indeed a brief correction of the RECORD are necessary.

I am well aware that in politics a charge unanswered is often a charge believed. Indeed, I think the practice is not too rare that some believe if you make the same erroneous charge over and over and over and over again despite the facts that eventually your opponent will tire and fail to correct the RECORD. I don't want to be guilty of that because I believe not only do the American people need to know the truth and not be misled, the nominees whose integrity has been impugned during this all too painful and sometimes even cruel process deserve better.

Obviously, the Senate in providing its advice and consent on the President's nominations should ask hard questions, and we should press for answers to those questions. But there does come a point where the process no longer becomes one that can be described as a search for the truth but, rather, becomes akin to harassment, and, unfortunately, I think that line has been approached.

Let me explain what I am talking about. The Senator from Massachusetts talked specifically about four individuals-Mr. Bybee, who is now a circuit court judge; Mr. Haynes, who is the general counsel for the Department of Defense; Condoleezza Rice who, as the Chair knows, we all know, has been nominated by the President to be Secretary of State, and whose confirmation we will debate tomorrow, and, finally, the name of Alberto Gonzales, currently White House counsel, having been nominated to serve as Attorney General. Those are the four individuals who are the object of his comments.

I want to be fair to the Senator from Massachusetts. Sometimes when I was listening to him I thought my hearing was betraying me. I was not quite sure what I heard was, in fact, what he was saying because it was so far from what I believe the facts to be. I believe, and the RECORD will correct me if I am wrong, he used words tantamount to authorize the use of torture. He did, and I wrote this down, speak of a "formal policy of prisoner abuse"-of course, all of which pertains to the allegations, indeed, the proof in some circumstances, of prisoner abuse at places like Abu Ghraib.

To conflate the acts of a few criminals with the acts of distinguished public servants who have disavowed any policy, any approval, of abuse or the use of torture as a policy of this Government, to conflate and somehow confuse and gloss over them and to suggest that indeed these individuals did somehow by their acts or inactions authorize the use of torture or condone, encourage, or create a perception that torture was okay, is just false. It is a story, but it is a false story. The American people should not be confused because the facts clearly point to the contrary.

We do know that the Department of Defense, pursuant to the investigation called for by Secretary Rumsfeld, has conducted eight investigations, three of which have not yet concluded, of the Abu Ghraib prison scandal. So far, the conclusion has been, as well as that of the independent investigations like that of former Defense Secretary Schlesinger, that the acts at Abu Ghraib are the acts of a criminal few on the night shift, not a matter of public policy of this Government or of the Department of Defense or any branch or agency of the Government.

Indeed, recently we saw the American system of justice mete out that justice in convicting one soldier, Graner, of abusing prisoners at Abu Ghraib and meting out a 10-year prison sentence in that connection.

It is not true, and the American people should not be misled or perhaps be given information that has no justification in the Record. It is unproven, these allegations. They are unjustified. Frankly, I don't believe it does this body honor to propagate these false allegations.

Everyone has a right to their opinion. I know some of the speakers who are so concerned from time to time about what happened at Abu Ghraib, as we all are, disapprove of this Nation's policy in the first place in going to war in Iraq and removing Saddam Hussein. Somehow, and this is unthinkable to me, they actually think that the world would be a better place with Saddam still in power. I disagree. Not only is the world a better place with Saddam in a prison cell awaiting trial, but the American people are safer and the people of Iraq now have the hope of a free, fair
election in the next week or so leading, we all hope, to a free and democratic Iraq.

While everyone has a right to their opinion, no one has a right to distort the facts. Unfortunately, when it comes to the involvement of these four individuals-Mr. Bybee, now Judge Bybee, confirmed by this Senate not too long ago by a vote of nearly 80 Senators; Mr. Haynes, who is the general counsel for the Department of Defense; and as I mentioned, Condoleezza Rice and Alberto Gonzales-the allegation that somehow they have been involved in a Government policy of condoning torture or authorizing prisoner abuse is just false. It is important to stand up and say so.

Our disagreements about policy, indeed, the foreign policy of this Government, whether it be authorizing the use of force or whatever the issue may be, cannot be used as an excuse to make such scurrilous allegations against public servants who I believe are trying to do their best. If, in fact, somehow this administration and these individuals who are engaged in important public policy decisions did not care one whit about what the law is, what the definition of torture is, and how we can avoid somehow engaging in this sort of illegal and heinous act against any human being, why would they research the law? Why would they write lengthy legal memoranda? Why would they have debates among themselves about what the law is and what Congress proscribed-indeed, what our international treaty obligations proscribe in this area. They would not. You would not be so scrupulous and so careful about what the law provides if you did not care about following the law. That has been what these individuals and this administration and this Government have tried to do under very difficult circumstances.

In conclusion, I hope our disagreements about some aspects of our Nation's foreign policy, our policy in Iraq, should not be license to distort the facts and impugn the character of these nominees. Three are nominees, one already has been confirmed. We know Mr. Haynes has been renominated by the President to serve as a circuit judge. We know Condoleezza Rice's nomination to be Secretary of State will be debated tomorrow in the Senate.

Finally, I expect on Wednesday Judge Alberto Gonzales will be voted out of the Judiciary Committee and that nomination will soon come to the Senate.

It appears the opponents of this administration and its policies will pass no opportunity to continue to repeat false charges which cannot be borne out by the facts and which I think need to be corrected.

I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

http://thomas.loc.gov