errorCOUPWATCH: Ashcroft's First Order of Business--Investigate Self For Perjury

By Paul Rosenberg

Senators and Congressmembers are allowed to lie with impunity. It's called Congressional im(p)unity, and it's supposed to serve a high-minded purpose: preventing nutcases from suing elected representatives and tying the legislative process into knots. But when the nutcases get inside Congress and start taking over, then it's Katy bar the door, as Martin Dies, Richard Nixon and Joseph McCarthy proved so well back in the '30s, '40s and '50s. Newt Gingrich kept their spirit alive in the '90s and many of his erstwhile good friends are still around to see that this hallowed tradition of politicans slandering ordinary Americans keeps on going strong into the new millenium.

John Ashcroft won't be there among them, though. The voters of Missouri saw to that. Instead he'll be the nation's number one law enforcement officer. The US Senate saw to that. In doing so, they voted for man who not only lied viciously on the Senate floor-a privilege shared by all who voted for him-but who also lied *to* them when testifying before the Judiciary Committee. This latter act is not privileged. In fact, it's a felony-perjury.

Ashcroft viciously lied about Ronnie White on the Senate floor in order to defeat White's nomination as a federal judge. That's Congressionally protected slander. But then he lied about his oppositin to White to the judiciary committee. That's perjury. The difference may seem slight, even non-existent to some, but it's precisely the reason that Republicans claimed a *duty* to impeach President Clinton: lying about sex may be universal and understandable (just ask Henry Hyde, Helen Chenoweth, Newt Gingrich, Bob Livingston, etc.) but doing so under oath strikes a dagger at the heart of our justice system.

Unless, of course, you're a Republican.

Ahscroft lied about Bob Jones University, and about Southern Partisan magazine as well. He lied about his opposition to a voluntary desegregation plan as well. All of these lies were reason enough to vote against him, of course. But they were much more than that. They were grounds for indicting him for perjury. And now that Ashcroft has been confirmed as Attorney General, they are grounds for his impeachment. Which, of course, it's now John Ashcroft's duty to pursue. (No special prosecutors anymore, thanks to our fair-minded Republican friends, it's all up to Johnnie Boy hisself.)

If John Ashcroft had a single shred of integrity in his bones his first order of business would be to investigate himself for perjury in his testimony before the Judiciary Committee during his confirmation hearing. But his confirmation hearings made one thing perfectly clear: John Ashcroft doesn't have a single shred of integrity, so there's nothing to worry about. We're in good hands with total hypocrisy.

"*Total* hypocrisy?" you may wonder. Yup! Just consider a few of the choicest statements recently made by Republicans on the subject of perjury. The following are excerpted from a collection by John Aravosis at http://uspolitics.about.com/newsissues/uspolitics/library/weekly/aa013001a.htm:


Arlen Specter (R- PA): Perjury and obstruction of justice are serious offenses which must not be tolerated by anyone in our society."

Unless, of course, you're a US Senator.

James Inhofe (R- OK): "I have a hard time reconciling the idea that there might be certain permissible exceptions to telling the truth under oath."

Unless, of course, you're a Republican testifying to Congress. (Tell 'em about it, Ollie!)

Frank Murkowski (R- AK): "if we turn a blind eye and allow people to lie under oath, destroy or hide evidence, or conspire to present false and misleading testimony, the entire notion of justice and truth become meaningless."

Sorry, Frank, the Rehnquist Gang got there first. But it's nice to know-by your own admission--that your eyes are as blind as theirs.

Mike Crapo (R- ID): "Tampering with the truth-seeking functions of the law undermines our justice system and the foundations on which our freedoms lie… The primacy of the rule of law over the rule of individuals is one of the most important safeguards of freedom in our Constitution. Our entire legal system is dependent on our ability to find the truth. That is why perjury and obstruction of justice are crimes…Perjury and obstruction of justice are public crimes that strike at the heart of the rule of law--and therefore our freedom--in America. "

Et Tu, Mike?

Larry Craig (R- ID): "But I would submit that if a generation of young people are taught by our actions in this case that a lie carries no consequences, then the nation is at risk. If our citizens conclude that lawlessness in the highest office is acceptable, that their elected representatives are complicit in that corruption, and that nothing can be done to stop it, then the nation is at risk."

But what the hey, we're doing everything else we can think of to destroy the country, so why not this as well? Am I right?

Mike DeWine (OH); "How can we allow a man who has obstructed justice and committed perjury to remain as the chief law enforcement officer of our country? How can we call ourselves a nation of laws and leave a man in office who has flouted those laws? We define ourselves as a people not just by what we hold up, not just by what we revere, but we also define ourselves by what we tolerate. I submit that this is something we simply, as a people, cannot tolerate."

Unless, of course, OUR guy does it. Right, Mike?

Let's make things perfectly clear, folks. The Republicans have no shame. After stealing an election in broad daylight, what more can you do? Everything else is petty by comarison. Lying to Congress? C'mon, get over it! What do you expect? But the Democrats… the Democrats who want to blame everything on Ralph Nader have 50 votes in the Senate and they can-just as Ralph Nader said in his campaign-effectively block EVERYTHING that George Wallace Putsch wants to do-IF they really want to. But they don't. They would rather prove Ralph Nader right and sell us down the river one more time.

And who was out there leading this sellout parade? None other than the progressive Russ Feingold. It seems that the Monarchic principle of deference mattered more to him than the judicial principle of one law for all. *That's* a progressive?

=========================
For a complete list of 31 Republican quotes on perjury, click on the link below.

Published Sunday, February 4, 2001, in the Miami Herald

More gay immigrants seeking refuge in U.S.
New rules, groups aid asylum quests

JOHNNY DIAZ
jodiaz@herald.com

Matthew Ramos' eyes widen and water like a scared deer's when he speaks of the name-calling and the beatings that forced him to flee his native Brazil.

``They would beat me with clubs wrapped in towels so they wouldn't leave marks. They called me bicha (a derogatory term for a gay man in Portuguese). They followed me in my car and stopped me for nothing,'' recalls the 24-year-old of the harassment and humiliation he endured from police in Brazil's capital city who knew he was gay.

Desperate and scared, he e-mailed and called the Dade Human Rights Foundation, a Miami-based advocacy group that supports gay and lesbian causes.

When he showed up at their front door, his story became the catalyst for a South Florida task force that recently formed to help a small but growing number of gay and lesbian immigrants seeking asylum on U.S. shores.

Unlike a little over 10 years ago -- when U.S. laws barred gay men and lesbians from settling in the country -- Ramos' request for asylum based on his sexual orientation was granted by Immigration and Naturalization Service agents in Miami.

Experts say approving such applications represents a relatively new rethinking of the asylum laws once reserved for religious and political applicants, and a new-found recognition that gay and lesbian asylum seekers are members of a social class that has been persecuted.

As more people learn about their eligibility for asylum based on their sexual orientation, immigration officials and advocates foresee a rise in their numbers -- through word of mouth or through task forces that have formed nationwide to help them.

``We will undoubtedly see more sexual-orientation asylum cases,'' said David Abraham, an immigration law professor at the University of Miami. ``America's readiness to see gender and sexual orientation for the basis of granting asylum has been steadily growing as the gay rights movement in the United States has scored significant political and cultural victories.''

Some 41,000 people applied for U.S. asylum during fiscal year 2000; about 17,000 of those were granted. Because the INS does not keep records detailing the reasons applicants seek asylum, it's difficult to say how many of the new arrivals are claiming such oppression.

The new wave of asylum seekers hails from around the globe, although those who settle in South Florida are primarily from nearby Latin America and the Caribbean.

Examples of the persecution they face in their homelands are numerous. The San Francisco-based International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission, a watchdog group that documents crimes and abuses against gay people worldwide, reports:


On Nov. 19, a transvestite walking with a male companion died after being gunned down in San Salvador. Seven similar murders were reported in 1999; 12 in 1998. In one of the 1999 incidents, five men dressed in black fired shots from a moving taxi at a 37-year-old man who had left a bar with two other men, one of them wearing women's clothing.

In Romania, two men were beaten and faced imprisonment for kissing and holding hands in public. Other hot spots for anti-gay assaults and raids are Mexico, Russia, Japan and Pakistan. In Cuba, gays can be imprisoned. In Iran, they can be executed.
``In some of these countries, it's very oppressive and often times [gays] have to keep it a secret. Their families reject them,'' said M. Ross Seligson, a Nova Southeastern University professor and Fort Lauderdale psychologist with gay clientele from Latin America.

``They come here for the same reason many people come here -- the language, the large gay community and the weather. It's easier to assimilate in places where there are a lot of similarities,'' he added.

SALVADORAN CASE

U.S. immigration officials in Maryland granted a 28-year-old gay Salvadoran man asylum in November. He said he had been beaten and sexually assaulted by police officers in his home country.

Two Colombian men -- whose applications for asylum were approved by the INS in Miami in November -- said they were routinely jailed and hosed down, beaten up, even shot at after officers in Bogotá discovered they were lovers. They now live in Hollywood where one works as a nurse and the other is a pharmacy technician.

Clark Reynolds, outgoing executive director of the Dade human rights group, said the idea of forming a Miami task-force chapter came after Ramos, the Brazilian immigrant, and the Colombian couple showed up at his office seeking help.

The South Florida chapter of the New York-based Lesbian and Gay Immigration Rights Task Force is one of 15 chapters nationwide.

The Miami chapter is made up of a network of immigration attorneys and advocates who can answer questions and assist would-be immigrants with the asylum application process. A key goal: getting the word out to immigrant groups that help is available. Brochures in English, Spanish, Creole and Portuguese explaining the task force's mission are being printed for distribution in the coming months.

``It's scary to think of all the immigrants here who don't know they have the option to apply for asylum here if they have been persecuted in their native country,'' Reynolds added.

But immigration advocates are quick to point out that being gay should not be the only grounds for winning asylum.

``Just because you are gay does not mean you are going to get asylum,'' says Bill Strassberger, a spokesman for the INS in Washington, D.C. ``You are going to get [asylum] because you have proven you are fleeing persecution and/or you have a well-founded fear of persecution if you return to your country.''

As in all asylum cases, there is a potential for fraud among applicants. There are also hurdles that range from applicants documenting their same-sex orientation to proving they were persecuted in their native countries. The biggest hurdle of all for some of the applicants may be coming out of secrecy and telling immigration officials they are gay.

The INS documents persecution through a series of oral interviews and written testimonies with asylum officials. Police incident reports, medical records that show injuries and documentation of human rights violations from certain countries are other means would-be immigrants could present for their cases, Strassberger added.

``No one would have imagined 20 years ago that sexual orientation would have been a valid basis for asylum,'' said Abraham, the UM immigration law professor.

He noted that a U.S. law barring gay men and lesbians from settling in the country was repealed in 1990.

Under the Immigration and Nationality Act, a person can be granted asylum if he or she establishes a well-founded fear of persecution because of race, religion, nationality, political opinion or membership in a particular social group.

The latter category was clarified in 1994 when then-Attorney General Janet Reno said persecution based on sexual orientation can be grounds for asylum.

Reno's action broadened the significance of a decision by an immigration review panel in 1990 in a case involving Fidel Armando Toboso-Alfonso, a Cuban who sought political asylum in 1986 on the grounds that he had long been persecuted because he was gay.

For Ramos, the Brazilian, his fear of retaliation from police officers -- against family members and others still in Brazil -- is so great that he asked that his real name not be used for this article.

BAD MEMORIES

By his account, Ramos' problems began in September 1999 in his native Brasília, the capital of Brazil. He and his boyfriend were sitting in a parked car ``holding hands'' when police officers banged on the car window and dragged them out. The officers roughed them up with clubs wrapped in towels.

``I just wanted to run away, It's like when you are in a burning building -- you just run. I wanted to save my life,'' Ramos said.

While browsing the Internet looking for help, he stumbled upon the Dade Human Rights Foundation website.

Ramos obtained a visa in Brazil, flew to Miami and called Reynolds last May.

He hopes one day to return home, but he says for now, ``I'm doing well. I'm starting to be happy again.''