Print
E-mail
Comment
Alberto Gonzales to speak at UF
By KIM WILMATH, Alligator Staff Writer
Alberto Gonzales, the former U.S. attorney general who resigned in August, will speak at UF on Nov. 19.
Student Government records state Gonzales was paid $40,000 for his speech at UF, which is the first college appearance since he resigned, said Steven Blank, Accent chairman. Accent, SG's speakers bureau, is sponsoring the appearance.
The speech will take place 7:15 p.m. at the Phillips Center for the Performing Arts, stated a press release from Accent.
Student Government records state Gonzales was paid $40,000 for his speech at UF, which is the first college appearance since he resigned, said Steven Blank, Accent chairman. Accent, SG's speakers bureau, is sponsoring the appearance.
The speech will take place 7:15 p.m. at the Phillips Center for the Performing Arts, stated a press release from Accent.
The event has been in the works for a few weeks, Blank said.
Free tickets will be available for students with Gator 1 cards on Nov. 14 and for the general public Nov. 15 at the Phillips Center and the University Box Office, the release stated.
Blank said he expects a full house.
In 2005, Accent brought another former state attorney to UF - Janet Reno.
The show was so successful that the bureau jumped at the chance to host Gonzales, Blank said.
Gonzales was appointed the first Hispanic attorney general in February 2005 and later played a role in President Bush's fight in the war on terror after Sept. 11.
Gonzales resigned in August after a controversial tenure.
Gonzales faced scrutiny over his leadership of the Department of Justice in 2006, after he dismissed nine U.S. attorneys.
The White House administration said the dismissals were solely based on performance.
Gonzales called the issue "an overblown personnel matter."
However, some officials have said that the Bush administration was trying to politicize the justice system.
Questions were raised about whether Gonzales testified truthfully about the National Security Agency's abuse of surveillance programs.
Bush denied the accusations against Gonzales.
Meanwhile, Democrats cheered his resignation.
Bush appointed Peter Keisler as acting attorney general Sept. 17.
Gonzales wasn't the only high-level official to resign during Bush's second term.
Gale Norton, Bush's former secretary of the interior, resigned in March 2006. Andrew H. Card Jr., former chief of staff, resigned the same month.
Norman Mineta, former secretary of transportation, left in June 2006.
Free tickets will be available for students with Gator 1 cards on Nov. 14 and for the general public Nov. 15 at the Phillips Center and the University Box Office, the release stated.
Blank said he expects a full house.
In 2005, Accent brought another former state attorney to UF - Janet Reno.
The show was so successful that the bureau jumped at the chance to host Gonzales, Blank said.
Gonzales was appointed the first Hispanic attorney general in February 2005 and later played a role in President Bush's fight in the war on terror after Sept. 11.
Gonzales resigned in August after a controversial tenure.
Gonzales faced scrutiny over his leadership of the Department of Justice in 2006, after he dismissed nine U.S. attorneys.
The White House administration said the dismissals were solely based on performance.
Gonzales called the issue "an overblown personnel matter."
However, some officials have said that the Bush administration was trying to politicize the justice system.
Questions were raised about whether Gonzales testified truthfully about the National Security Agency's abuse of surveillance programs.
Bush denied the accusations against Gonzales.
Meanwhile, Democrats cheered his resignation.
Bush appointed Peter Keisler as acting attorney general Sept. 17.
Gonzales wasn't the only high-level official to resign during Bush's second term.
Gale Norton, Bush's former secretary of the interior, resigned in March 2006. Andrew H. Card Jr., former chief of staff, resigned the same month.
Norman Mineta, former secretary of transportation, left in June 2006.
article tools
|
blogs
July 2nd, 2009 CorrectionThe UF-Georgia football game is held annually at the Jacksonville Municipal Stadium. The contract for the game is between UF and the city of Jacksonville. An article in Tuesday’s paper stated otherwise. |
No comments posted. |
Add your comment below. Comments in no way reflect the positions of The Independent Florida Alligator or Campus Communications. |
Please register to leave a comment.
Registered users sign in here: |
Become a Registered User |
pete wrote on Nov 8, 2007 10:15 AM:
" Who is paying 40k to have the worst attorney general in American history come and bleat more lies at us? They aren't wasting my tuition dollars on that lying toad, are they?
How do we get this thing cancelled? "
Karl wrote on Nov 8, 2007 10:25 AM:
" Ditto Pete - after the Don't Tase Me Bro incident, it sure would be nice if we didn't invite and pay the AG who trashed the Constitution and OK'd torture to our fine campus.
Who decides these things? Whoever it is needs to go. "
MMC2100 wrote on Nov 8, 2007 11:01 AM:
" Don't look at me for this one, JOU3101. I doubt I had much - if anything - to do with this. JOU4201 really should have done something to this. Oh well. It's only the Alligator .... right? "
Jon wrote on Nov 8, 2007 12:12 PM:
" I'd bet everything that they won't allow the audience to ask questions. If they do, I hope every question is "Is waterboarding torture?" "
Tarantula wrote on Nov 8, 2007 12:19 PM:
" It will be interesting to see what some moronic liberal nut/s hell-bent on notoriety are planning for the Gonzales speech. Maybe the cops will not have tasers this time and will be forced to use guns, mace, batons and good old fists. You know something is going to happen. The truth is: Gonzales is a good man who performed his duty with honor but that still will not stop liberals and the conspiracy nuts from acting like animals. "
Warren Sapp wrote on Nov 8, 2007 12:28 PM:
" I love how liberals love free speech, but only when it fits their needs. Such seems to be the case with Pete. I believe that Accent paid a lot of money to have Michael Moore come speak his propaganda, and obviously I would rather not have my tuition dollars go to his McDonalds bill, but it is fair to keep things balanced. "
pete wrote on Nov 8, 2007 2:19 PM:
" Saying "I'm sorry, but I don't want to pay for your lies" is in no way an infringement on Gonzales' free speech. He can speak freely wherever he likes. But I don't want to subsidize it. He is the worst attorney general of all time. I don't think we need to reward him with fat speaker's fees. "
GeorgeWBush wrote on Nov 8, 2007 3:14 PM:
" Well, given Abu Gonzales's poor memory for doing anything of "interest" during his tenure as AG, I don't expect we will hear much of interest during his talk. To Tarantual: The duty of the AG is to protect the constitution. How does breaking the law (e.g., Warrantless wiretapping, no trial for detainees, and US attorney scandal) fit into your definition of honor? "
Danny Beaulieu wrote on Nov 8, 2007 3:22 PM:
" I'm all for bringing controversial speakers to campus. Obviously, it would be worthwhile to go see Gonzales speak regardless of what you think of him. The same goes with Dr. Kevorkian. However, I do feel that we are paying outrageous amounts of money for these speakers to come to UF. I mean, Gonzales isn't exactly a rock star. I'd be willing to bet a semester's worth of tuition that at least half of the students on campus don't even know who he is. There has to be a way we can cut down on these speaker fees. I applaud ACCENT for bringing controversial speakers to our campus, but I question whether student's money is being used in the wisest manner possible. "
GeorgeWBush wrote on Nov 8, 2007 3:25 PM:
" Amen Danny. Regardless of how much I hate ABU G, I am glad that UF is able to bag high level speakers quicker than you can say "secret prisons." "
you wrote on Nov 8, 2007 3:52 PM:
" You obviously don't know how much speakers cost if you think this is too much to pay for Gonzalez. Why not let ACCENT decide how much to pay people as they have been doing this for a long time effectively. The day ACCENT starts bringing in 1 speaker a year you can question it - but this year has been an all-star line up. "
pete wrote on Nov 8, 2007 4:08 PM:
" Gonzales is not worth a dime of my fee money. Let him peddle his lies elsewhere. We should not reward his lawlessness with 40 grand of our fee money. "
Warren Sapp wrote on Nov 8, 2007 4:45 PM:
" Pete, your arguments make no sense. It sounds to me that you are saying that Accent should only have speakers that agree with you. As far as the lying thing goes, which are just accusations, I guess we should not have brought in Slick Willy to come speak either? There are two sides to an argument and your failure to see the value in that is why we have the partisanship problem we do today. "
pete wrote on Nov 8, 2007 5:10 PM:
" We have the partisanship problem we have today because of the amoral lawlessness of people like Gonzales, who put loyalty to their party above loyalty to the Constitution he's supposed to protect. I don't care about Accent getting speakers i don't agree with. But I do care about rewarding the worst attorney general in history with fat speaking engagements. He doesn't deserve our money. You want a former attorney general? Get John Ashcroft. There are plenty of people to choose from. "
GOP - Gay Old Party wrote on Nov 8, 2007 5:11 PM:
" Dear Warren Sapp clinton lied because of a BJ which was none of anybodies business to ask. To even justify the lies this administration has gotten away with that has resulted in untold number of deaths from it only confirms why so many idiots like you blindly back this administration. Who are you sleeping with we all demand to know you fricken loser. you hate America too. "
Timbo wrote on Nov 8, 2007 5:45 PM:
" At least there is something new to protest. Tasers were getting stale. "
Tarantula wrote on Nov 8, 2007 6:33 PM:
" GeorgeWBush - I understand you are a liberal and you will not understand or accept my answers which are the common sense facts of the matter but I will put this out there for rational people anyhow. 1 - Warrantless wiretapping - Legal as provided in homeland security provisions that were legislatively authorized for use by the executive authority. Also, the warrantless wiretapping issue (monitoring conversations of known terrorists communicating outside of the US) existed long before Gonzales came on board. 2 - No trial for detainees - Rights of Americans do not apply to non-Americans nor should they apply to enemy combatants. The idea that we should prosecute enemy combatants in our courts is ridiculous to say the least. 3 - US attorney scandal - This issue really showed just how stupid and vindictive liberals are. Those attornies are there only to serve at the will of the president. There is not supposed to be an ideological balance in the body of the president appointed subordinates. The president can fire any attorney he wants for any reason. It has always been that way and should be that way. Bill Clinton fired many more attorneys than Bush because they did not reflect his views adequately and not a word was said because sensible people realize this is his perogative. Liberals, on the other hand, are so full of hatred that they have to make issues out of nothing and create problems until they get their way. Unfortunatley, sometimes this tactic works and inspires them to continue with their dishonest, childish and mean-spirited tactics. "
Tarantula wrote on Nov 8, 2007 6:49 PM:
" GOP - Gay Old Party - Wouldn't it be nice if it were that simple. You have simplified the issue with Clinton. Clinton, who was tossed out of Oxford over a rape accusation, was accused by several women of sexual harassment. In the case of Lewinski, he had broken a law in which he signed by demoting and moving her to another office because he was finished with her sexually. Clinton used his office and priviledge to protect him from his own law. Because of his dishonesty and bully tactics, a special prosecutor was assigned who investigated the charges and found enough evidence to put Clinton before a grand jury for his crimes, let alone the morality issues that go with the office and the neglect of his duties caused by this distraction. Then he lied to the grand jury which is a felony. He was not asked if he got a BJ. He was asked if he had sexual relations with ML as it relates to her criminal charges. Gonzales did not do a damn thing wrong as I can tell and it is awful how liberals tear good people apart. "
Beatle Billy wrote on Nov 8, 2007 7:39 PM:
" Tarantula, there is a lot of recent buzz about clinton and the instances of rape and fondling and harassment ect for his whole adult life pretty much. There is a lot of solid accusations and I think his criminal past may catch up to him finally. Imagine all of his victims that know the real him and having to see how he is adored by so many foolish people he has lulled into mindless obedience. It is real sick "
Warren Sapp wrote on Nov 8, 2007 7:58 PM:
" Simple fact is that perjury is a crime. That's not debatable. Unfortunately, some people did not see that as fitting the definition of "high crimes and misdemeanors." It's like beating a dead horse, and frankly, I don't care. But, to equate opinions/accusations with facts is silly. "
Gonzo wrote on Nov 8, 2007 8:29 PM:
" Tarantula;
1. Wiretapping of "terrorists" sounds nice but in reality they were also wiretapping vegans, quakers, catholics, environmental groups, and anti-war groups.
2. habeas corpus is supposed show the evidence against the enemy combatants we detain. Your statement begs the question are they enemy combatants though? That's what the court is supposed to prove. Most of the people in Gitmo have yet to be proven combatants and were just turned it by others for the reward.
3. Clintons firings were like all the presidents before him. From Wikipedia: " Similarly, a Senate study noted that "Reagan replaced 89 of the 93 U.S. attorneys in his first two years in office. President Clinton had 89 new U.S. attorneys in his first two years, and President Bush had 88 new U.S. attorneys in his first two years. In contrast to the 2006 dismissals, Presidents rarely dismiss U.S. attorneys they appoint. Kyle Sampson, Chief of Staff at the Department of Justice, noted in a January 9, 2006, e-mail to Harriet Miers: "In recent memory, during the Reagan and Clinton Administrations, Presidents Reagan and Clinton did not seek to remove and replace U.S. Attorneys they had appointed, but instead permitted such U.S. Attorneys to serve indefinitely under the holdover provision." There is no precedent for a President to dismiss several U.S attorneys at one time while in the middle period of the presidential term in office." So, the dems weren't on a witch hunt. Gonzales did something unprecedented. Then lied about why it was done and whether he knew about it. "
Tarantula wrote on Nov 8, 2007 9:00 PM:
" Unprecendented because of when they fired the attorneys? That is true but so what? It was a small pointless distinction dubiously used to give the liberal argument traction. It is still at the president's discretion to assemble his subordinate staff as he sees fit. Gonzales never acted outside of the law concerning habeus corpus which again is not guaranteed to non-citizens and enemy combatants. If the federal authority decides someone is an enemy combatant then they are an enemy combatant. I understand this is a slippery slope and drives paranoid conspiracy theorists insane because of the potential abuse of power, but the other way is a far worse option. If we are invaded tomorrow by 100,000 troops, you might argue what right does the federal government have to say that each of these 100,000 people is an enemy combatant and illegally detain them? You can see how complicated this would become trying to apply constitutional rights to our enemies in this way. The authority to decide who is an enemy combatant has to come from somewhere and the courts are not the place. If you do not like the authority making these decisions, then change those in power but do not diminish the capabilities of the office. We have been weakened enough without liberals making it worse. I think ILLEGAL wiretapping of vegans and the like is conspiracy nonsense. Oh, and please keep in mind, Carnivore comes out of the Clinton administration. And, that was before terrorists were offing our citizens in record numbers. "
Warren Sapp wrote on Nov 8, 2007 9:09 PM:
" All credibility is lost when someone quotes wikipedia for a source. "
Carnivore and Roving WIre Taps... wrote on Nov 8, 2007 9:30 PM:
" 'Congress Passes "Roving Wiretaps," Expands Surveillance Authority. Oct 1998, in a closed-door manuever, controversial "roving wiretap" provisions were added to the Intelligence authorization bill and passed by the Congress. Prevoiusly, wiretapping law allowed tapping of a particular person's phones. The new provisions dramatically expanded current authority by allowing taps on any phone used by, or "proximate" to, the person being tapped — no matter whose phone it is. Such a broad law invites abuse. In 1996, the full House of Representatives had rejected these provisions after an open and vigorous debate. But in 1998, behind closed doors, a conference committee added the provisions to the important Intelligence Authorization Conference Report. - Invasion of Your Privacy Has Just Begun: Carnivore, the most recent example of FBI snooping software, is reported to be able to scoop up all of targeted individuals' Internet traffic, including e-mail. Carnivore is only one project aimed at destroying America's privacy. In fact, the FBI under the Clinton administration developed an entire series of hardware and software devices intended to monitor U.S. citizens. - GOP Wants to Pull Carnivore's Teeth: What has upset so many people who use the Internet to communicate is the new high-tech FBI device — called "Carnivore" because it finds the "meat" of e-mail messages. It enables law enforcement officials to sort through every bit of everybody's e-mail messages to find those of questionable legality.
"
tarantula wrote on Nov 8, 2007 9:58 PM:
" I'm sad because I have no life and can't help but speak about my personal views endlessly as if everyone cares. I need friends and nobody cares about me :/ "
Tarantula wrote on Nov 8, 2007 10:16 PM:
" I apologize. I have a stalker that reads and seethes over my every word. This person is upset with me because they were torn apart in an abortion thread with about 200 posts. I exposed this person for the moron he or she is embarrassing them terribly and they cannot forget. I keep getting nasty posts often about how my young children are having sex and abortions behind my back. I usually change my nick between discussions but I keep Tarantula solely to predictably annoy this person. In fact, I post on things I do not care about just to rile this idiot. It makes me laugh. On the flip side, I have a positive following of about a dozen people now (many more outside of the Alligator). "
nolesman59 wrote on Nov 8, 2007 10:52 PM:
" Welllll, I don't know what is going on in the swamp but when you invite an individual of Parole- Dr. Kevorikan and this man what a waste of the students money, This former AG was one of the most evil people to hold that job, It will take DOJ at lease 10 years to get over the evil that he has done, Sad...very sad "
JOU3101 wrote on Nov 8, 2007 7:58 AM: