January 1, 2002
The Attacks on Ashcroft Have Hidden Purposes

by Joseph P. Tartaro
Executive Editor

A full-page advocacy ad with the headline “A Time to Speak Up for American Values” appeared in The New York Times on Dec. 16. Such a headline should not inspire controversy these days, except for its purpose.

In this case, the advertisement goes on to attack Attorney General John Ashcroft by registering “profound disagreement” with a statement he made on Dec. 6 before the Senate Judiciary Committee, and repeating the alleged statement.

There are several problems with the ad and the sentiment. First, the quotation is taken out of context—as has been done repeatedly by several others in politics and the media who have consistently opposed the nomination and confirmation of Ashcroft by President George W. Bush. They are largely the same people who opposed the election of Bush because his Administration represents a reversal of the extremist liberal fascism of the Clinton era. They ridiculed and belittled Bush before his election and for almost nine months after he took office.

But when Bush clearly took charge after the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11 and polls showed the American public had overwhelming confidence in how the President was leading the nation in a war in which every citizen, home and office had been placed in jeopardy, they have shifted the attack to his cabinet—especially Ashcroft.

Undermining the System
And while they profess to be patriotic guardians for “American values” they are working to undermine the constitutional system they profess to support. Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, continues to delay the confirmation for dozens of federal judges at a time when the federal courts are under-staffed. Rather than exercise the traditional Senate role of advise and consent they are holding Presidential appointments hostage in a hidden ideological war.

They don’t like Bush, but they can’t attack him now. They never liked Ashcroft, and he has fanned their hated on a civil rights issue of extreme importance to people like Leahy and those who paid for the ad in The Times.

First, Ashcroft—relying on an “original intent” viewpoint—has continually demonstrated support for the entire Constitution and Bill of Rights—and particularly the Second Amendment.

He made matters worse this past Spring when he replied to a query from James Jay Baker, executive director of the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislation Action (NRA-ILA), by writing a letter in which he espoused an “individual right” interpretation of the Second Amendment. Ashcroft’s statement was seen as a major reversal of the Clinton Administration’s continuous denial of any individual right, and the attorney general further fanned the flames of their hatred by having the Justice Department draft a policy statement affirming an individual right.

NICS Records Issue
Most recently, Ashcroft angered the anti-gunners even further by refusing to allow the National Instant Check System (NICS) records to be used in a fishing expedition ostensibly related to the war on terrorism.

Some might wonder what the Second Amendment debate has to do with the ad in The Times that challenged Ashcroft’s statement regarding people who have questioned the Administration’s anti-terrorism measures. The answer to that is quite simple. The advertisement include the name of the organization that paid for it: The Open Society Institute. The Internet website for the group is: www.soros.org.

If that still doesn’t send up a red flag, the chairman and principal contributor to The Open Society Institute is billionaire George Soros, whose name is also listed in the ad.

Soros and his non-profit institute have been a major source of funding for a variety of anti-gun organizations and initiatives, including the Bell Campaign, the Wellness Foundation and the Violence Policy Center.

But gun control is not the only item on the Soros agenda for a so-called open society, in spite of what his ads may claim. It is significant that while Soros and friends attack Ashcroft by using only part of what he told the Senate Committee, they never challenged Clinton Attorney General Janet Reno—not even when some 80 men, women and children died in the FBI’s final assault at Waco, TX, in 1993.

But to return to the current attack by Soros and his friends in government and the media directed at Ashcroft but aimed at Bush, one needs to read not just that part of Ashcroft’s comments used in the ad, but the entire statement.

Ashcroft Statement
I have included the relevant passage below with the sentence used by Soros and his media friends in italics.

Here’s what Ashcroft told the Senate committee:

“We need honest, reasoned debate; not fearmongering. To those who pit Americans against immigrants, and citizens against non-citizens; to those who scare peace-loving people with phantoms of lost liberty; my message is this: Your tactics only aid terrorists—for they erode our national unity and diminish our resolve. They give ammunition to America’s enemies, and pause to America’s friends. They encourage people of good will to remain silent in the face of evil.

“Our efforts have been carefully crafted to avoid infringing on constitutional rights while saving American lives. We have engaged in a deliberate campaign of arrest and detention of law breakers. All persons being detained have the right to contact their lawyers and their families. Out of respect for their privacy, and concern for saving lives, we will not publicize the names of those detained.”

Does that statement say what Soros claims? No.

Does it prohibit American citizens, lawmakers and even billionaires from keeping a watchful eye on how the Justice Department handled anti-terrorist investigations, detentions, and even trials? No.

Ashcroft has made it plain in many other statements that the civil liberties of American citizens will be upheld during the war on terrorism. He hasn’t even arrested the politicians and journalists who have called him “insane” for adhering to the legal limits on NICS records which were put in place during the Clinton Administration.

It is not Ashcroft who stifles debate, but Soros, who must have been crushed when Bill Clinton left the White House.