Friday, August 31, 2007
Explaining AGAG's Departure
So, why did Alberto Gonzales stun the world with his abrupt departure a few days ago?
Perhaps, it was because he had been made aware that he was being investigated by the DOJ's own inspector general:
What is most eyebrow-raising is that the IG wasn't even responding to Leahy's inquiry -- so much for this being just a partisan hunt: The office was already probing Gonzales.
Great. The attorney general flies the coop -- one step ahead of the law.
|
Perhaps, it was because he had been made aware that he was being investigated by the DOJ's own inspector general:
Justice Department investigators are examining the truthfulness of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales' testimony to Congress on the firings of federal prosecutors and domestic wiretapping.
The effort, disclosed in a letter released on Thursday, is a sign that political controversy over Gonzales' conduct will continue well beyond his resignation announced this week.
"The current attorney general is leaving, but these questions remain," said Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, a Vermont Democrat who sought
the examination.
Justice Department Inspector General Glenn Fine said in a letter released by Leahy that concerns over the truthfulness of Gonzales' testimony to the committee on July 24 and other times would be covered as part of probes already under way.
"We believe that through those investigations and other ... reviews we will be able to assess most of the issues that you raise," Fine said.
What is most eyebrow-raising is that the IG wasn't even responding to Leahy's inquiry -- so much for this being just a partisan hunt: The office was already probing Gonzales.
Great. The attorney general flies the coop -- one step ahead of the law.
Labels: Alberto Gonzales
Monday, August 27, 2007
Ding Dong, The Witch Is Dead
Well, it took a ridiculously long time, but "Fredo" finally packs it in. The "Perils of Pauline" tenure of AGAG comes to a close -- U.S. attorneys firings fiasco, the John Ashcroft hospital arm-twisting, the latest charges perjury, etc.
Given that just about every other high-ranking official under him had also left, there was hardly anyone else left to help him turn out the lights.
CNN is reporting that Michael Chertoff is the White House pick as a replacement. Appropriately enough, this occurs on the 2nd anniversary of Katrina.
UPDATE: It looks like Paul Bedard of U.S. News' "Washington Whispers" column was the first to break the news of Gonzales' impending departure. Oh, and one would be remiss not to overlook Josh Marshall's universe of web-sites for the breaking of the U.S. attorney's story 18 months back, which first brought scrutiny on AGAG.
UPDATE II: Madscribe and I were thinking on the same lines this morning, thus resulting in two AGAG posts. MS graciously took down his contribution, but there's more than enough room for AGAG bashing around here, thus, here is the Madman of Ohio's view:
|
Given that just about every other high-ranking official under him had also left, there was hardly anyone else left to help him turn out the lights.
CNN is reporting that Michael Chertoff is the White House pick as a replacement. Appropriately enough, this occurs on the 2nd anniversary of Katrina.
UPDATE: It looks like Paul Bedard of U.S. News' "Washington Whispers" column was the first to break the news of Gonzales' impending departure. Oh, and one would be remiss not to overlook Josh Marshall's universe of web-sites for the breaking of the U.S. attorney's story 18 months back, which first brought scrutiny on AGAG.
UPDATE II: Madscribe and I were thinking on the same lines this morning, thus resulting in two AGAG posts. MS graciously took down his contribution, but there's more than enough room for AGAG bashing around here, thus, here is the Madman of Ohio's view:
UPDATE III: For a supposed "non-scandal", there's quite a roster of DOJ employees who've been jumped ship.The prayers of some RT regulars have been answered. Another rat, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, has jumped off the deck of the sinking ship Bush II. Start placing your bets on who will be nominated and how the Democrats will talk a good game and then give Bush whatever he wants, anyway ...
--Posted By Madscribe to RAGGED THOTS at 8/27/2007, 08:32:00 AM
Labels: Alberto Gonzales, Justice Department, U.S. Attorneys
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
A Job To Kill For...
I speak, of course of -- being George W. Bush's best friend!
Forget about the fact that AGAG gets increased power in death penalty cases: Here's the interesting point in this story:
Wonder how much longer we'll be finding fascinating things squirrelled away in that BRAND NEW & IMPROVED PATRIOT ACT!?!?
|
Forget about the fact that AGAG gets increased power in death penalty cases: Here's the interesting point in this story:
The rules would give Gonzales the authority to approve "fast-track" procedures by states in death penalty cases, enabling them to carry out sentences more speedily and with fewer opportunities for appeal if those states provide adequate representation for capital defendants.Ah, that lovely Patriot Act reauthorization! Students paying attention might remember that that bill was also responsible for giving the attorney general the power to expedite replacements of U.S. attorneys (until that provision was overwhelmingly repealed earlier this year).
Such powers were previously held by federal judges, but a provision of the USA Patriot Act reauthorization bill approved by Congress last year hands the authority to the attorney general.
Wonder how much longer we'll be finding fascinating things squirrelled away in that BRAND NEW & IMPROVED PATRIOT ACT!?!?
Labels: Alberto Gonzales, Patriot Act, U.S. Attorneys
Thursday, July 26, 2007
The Perils of Alberto, Pt. XXIX
OK, it's one thing to have both Senate and House Democrats going after you. It's something else when even the director of the FBI has, um, a different recollection of events.
And the beat goes on...
|
And the beat goes on...
Labels: Alberto Gonzales, corruption
Tuesday, May 15, 2007
AGAG Survives...
...but the DAG walks the plank.
Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty announces his resignation using the ever-popular "family considerations" trope (This one being the "I need to make more money to send the kids to college" version).
Whether McNulty stepping down has anything to do with DOJ staffer Monica Goodling negotiating an immunity agreement on the fired prosecutors issue is another question. Keep in mind that McNulty is the one who ended up getting Congress ticked because he testified that the prosecutors were dumped because of "performance-related" issues and the White House had no role in the firings -- claims proven demonstrably false later.
|
Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty announces his resignation using the ever-popular "family considerations" trope (This one being the "I need to make more money to send the kids to college" version).
Whether McNulty stepping down has anything to do with DOJ staffer Monica Goodling negotiating an immunity agreement on the fired prosecutors issue is another question. Keep in mind that McNulty is the one who ended up getting Congress ticked because he testified that the prosecutors were dumped because of "performance-related" issues and the White House had no role in the firings -- claims proven demonstrably false later.
Labels: Alberto Gonzales, Paul McNulty, U.S. Attorneys
Thursday, April 19, 2007
AGAG On Parade
For those so inclined, summaries and video clips of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales' Senate testimony over the U.S. attorneys' firings can be found here.
Things got off to a rough start with a sharp exchange between Gonzales and Arlen Specter.
UPDATE: The Corner's Byron York calls Gonzales' testimony "disastrous." CNN quotes administration official that Gonzales was "going down in flames."
UPDATE II: York's full analysis.
|
Things got off to a rough start with a sharp exchange between Gonzales and Arlen Specter.
UPDATE: The Corner's Byron York calls Gonzales' testimony "disastrous." CNN quotes administration official that Gonzales was "going down in flames."
UPDATE II: York's full analysis.
Labels: Alberto Gonzales, U.S. Attorneys
Monday, April 16, 2007
I Will Be Surprised...
...if Attorney General Alberto Gonzales ever testifies before Congress.
His scheduled Tuesday appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee was postponed, ostensibly because of the Virgina Tech shooting, until Thursday. However, ABC News has identified a teensy-weensy problem:
|
His scheduled Tuesday appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee was postponed, ostensibly because of the Virgina Tech shooting, until Thursday. However, ABC News has identified a teensy-weensy problem:
It all comes down to the definitions of "make" and "decision" and "should or should not."Attorney General Alberto Gonzales' assertion that he was not involved in identifying the eight U.S. attorneys who were asked to resign last year is at odds with a recently released internal Department of Justice e-mail, ABC News has learned.
That e-mail said that Gonzales supported firing one federal prosecutor six months before she was asked to leave.
Gonzales was scheduled to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee Tuesday, but his testimony was postponed until Thursday because of the shooting rampage at Virginia Tech University.
When Gonzales appears before the committee, a central focus will be the extent of his involvement in the firings.
Gonzales has insisted he left those decisions to his staff, but ABC News has learned he was so concerned about U.S. attorney Carol Lam's lackluster record on immigration enforcement in San Diego that he supported firing her months before she was dismissed, according to a newly released e-mail from his former chief of staff.
The e-mail, which came from Gonzales aide Kyle Sampson, appeared to contradict the prepared written testimony Gonzales submitted to Congress over the weekend in advance of his Senate Judiciary Committee hearing Tuesday.In his prepared testimony, Gonzales said that during the months that his senior staff was evaluating U.S. attorneys, including Lam, "I did not make the decisions about who should or should not be asked to resign."
Labels: Alberto Gonzales, corruption, incompetence, U.S. Attorneys
Sunday, April 08, 2007
RT Obsession-Watch Grand Unification Theory
The wisdom of Rudy Giuliani meets the "competence" of Alberto Gonzales:
So, Giuliani overlooks his crony's potential mob ties and recommends him to a Cabinet position (the most important domestic one in the post-9/11 era. Gonzales abrogates the usual vetting process -- with the selection blowing up in the administration's face.
Again, this puts supporters of both Rudy Giuliani and the administration in an awkward position: What's worse, Rudy's blind eye to his employee/colleague's corruption -- or the administration (i.e., Gonzales') negligence in not scuttling the nomination before the announcement? Given this episode, AGAG (Attorney General Alberto Gonzales) 's foul-up with the U.S. attorneys makes even more sense.
With everything that was known (even to the White House) about Kerik before the nomination, isn't it interesting that a failure to pay taxes on a domestic worker was the "reason" he actually withdrew?
Or was it?
"Nanny problem" may be the "legal/political" flip side of the "retiring to spend more time with one's family" coin? If an individual just becomes a political embarassment, they resort to the latter. If there are a number of problematic legal issues associated with a nominee or appointment, heretofore unknown domestic workers will suddenly appear to force a hasty withdrawal/resignation.
Meanwhile, speaking of AGAG, a former House Speaker stated that it was about time he hit the road.
|
When former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani urged President Bush to make Bernard B. Kerik the next secretary of homeland security, White House aides knew Kerik as the take-charge top cop from Sept. 11, 2001. But it did not take them long to compile an extensive dossier of damaging information about the would-be Cabinet officer.Emphasis added.
They learned about questionable financial deals, an ethics violation, allegations of mismanagement and a top deputy prosecuted for corruption. Most disturbing, according to people close to the process, was Kerik's friendship with a businessman who was linked to organized crime. The businessman had told federal authorities that Kerik received gifts, including $165,000 in apartment renovations, from a New Jersey family with alleged Mafia ties.
Alarmed about the raft of allegations, several White House aides tried to raise red flags. But the normal investigation process was short-circuited, the sources said. Bush's top lawyer, Alberto R. Gonzales, took charge of the vetting, repeatedly grilling Kerik about the issues that had been raised. In the end, despite the concerns, the White House moved forward with his nomination -- only to have it collapse a week later.
So, Giuliani overlooks his crony's potential mob ties and recommends him to a Cabinet position (the most important domestic one in the post-9/11 era. Gonzales abrogates the usual vetting process -- with the selection blowing up in the administration's face.
Again, this puts supporters of both Rudy Giuliani and the administration in an awkward position: What's worse, Rudy's blind eye to his employee/colleague's corruption -- or the administration (i.e., Gonzales') negligence in not scuttling the nomination before the announcement? Given this episode, AGAG (Attorney General Alberto Gonzales) 's foul-up with the U.S. attorneys makes even more sense.
With everything that was known (even to the White House) about Kerik before the nomination, isn't it interesting that a failure to pay taxes on a domestic worker was the "reason" he actually withdrew?
Or was it?
"Nanny problem" may be the "legal/political" flip side of the "retiring to spend more time with one's family" coin? If an individual just becomes a political embarassment, they resort to the latter. If there are a number of problematic legal issues associated with a nominee or appointment, heretofore unknown domestic workers will suddenly appear to force a hasty withdrawal/resignation.
Meanwhile, speaking of AGAG, a former House Speaker stated that it was about time he hit the road.
Labels: Alberto Gonzales, Bernie Kerik, Rudy Giuliani
Friday, March 30, 2007
RAG Obsession Watch Two-fer
1) Former DOJ aide Kyle Sampson testifies on AGAG's assertion that he wasn't involved in the dismissals of the U.S. attorneys: "I don't think the attorney general's statement that he was not involved in any discussions of U.S. attorney removals was accurate."
2a.) Rudy Giuliani on Bernie Kerik -- and when he learned when his his now-controversial former police chief had some rather shady associations.
2b.) Rudy Giuliani on his plans for the active involvement of his wife in his administration. (Of course, it will be good to find out if a President Hillary Clinton would have her spouse sit in on Cabinet meetings -- though he would have slightly more experience than Judi Nathan).
|
2a.) Rudy Giuliani on Bernie Kerik -- and when he learned when his his now-controversial former police chief had some rather shady associations.
2b.) Rudy Giuliani on his plans for the active involvement of his wife in his administration. (Of course, it will be good to find out if a President Hillary Clinton would have her spouse sit in on Cabinet meetings -- though he would have slightly more experience than Judi Nathan).
Labels: Alberto Gonzales, GOP 2008 President, Rudy Giuliani, U.S. Attorneys
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
A Big Deal
The U.S. attorneys story has been a puzzling one for some time. I will admit that I'm not sure what is going on. The regulars in the comments section (at least those identifiably on the starboard side of the political equation) think I've been giving it too much attention.
Well, no one's given it as much attention as Josh Marshall. He addressed why he thinks this is a "big deal":
This isn't the same as Bill Clinton firing the U.S. attorneys at the beginning of his term; while an extreme, it's about par for the course for a new administration to get rid of the attorneys from the previous one -- especially if they are of a different party. On the other hand, it IS unusual for prosecutors to be canned in the middle of a term.
But, putting all of that aside is the behavior of the attorney general. Alberto Gonzales has forced the president's supporters to accept the fact that the attorney general is either duplicitous or incompetent -- neither choice being a happy one:
Finally, an aide to the AG decides that she will not testify in order to preserve her Fifth Amendment rights -- though in such an odd way as to invite even more questions.
Somehow, after slowly developing over several weeks, this story went zero-to-sixty very suddenly -- a discussion of transcript-less "interviews" between members of Congress and White House aides metastasized into a Fifth Amendment declaration in just days.
Yes, this is now a very big deal.
|
Well, no one's given it as much attention as Josh Marshall. He addressed why he thinks this is a "big deal":
What we seem to see are repeated cases in which US Attorneys were fired for not pursuing bogus prosecutions of persons of the opposite party. Or vice versa. There's little doubt that that is why McKay and Iglesias were fired and there's mounting evidence that this was the case in other firings as well. The idea that a senator calls a US Attorney at home just weeks before a federal elections and tries to jawbone him into indicting someone to help a friend get reelected is shocking. Think about it for a second. It's genuinely shocking. At a minimum one would imagine such bad acts take place with more indirection and deniability. And yet the Domenici-Iglesias call has now been relegated to the status of a footnote in the expanding scandal, notwithstanding the fact that there's now documentary evidence showing that Domenici's substantial calls to the White House and Justice Department played a direct role in getting Iglesias fired.Josh is a liberal and what he is saying is obviously through his particular prism. However, I think the points he is raising are legitimate.
So what you have here is this basic line being breached. But not only that. What is equally threatening is the systematic nature of the offense. This isn't one US Attorney out to get Democrats or one rogue senator trying to monkey around with the justice system. The same thing happened in Washington state and New Mexico -- with the same sort of complaints being received and acted upon at the White House and the Department of Justice. Indeed, there appears to have been a whole process in place to root out prosecutors who wouldn't prostitute their offices for partisan goals.
This isn't the same as Bill Clinton firing the U.S. attorneys at the beginning of his term; while an extreme, it's about par for the course for a new administration to get rid of the attorneys from the previous one -- especially if they are of a different party. On the other hand, it IS unusual for prosecutors to be canned in the middle of a term.
But, putting all of that aside is the behavior of the attorney general. Alberto Gonzales has forced the president's supporters to accept the fact that the attorney general is either duplicitous or incompetent -- neither choice being a happy one:
- The Corner's Jonah Goldberg: "Some readers are cross with me for using the word "lied" in reference to Gonzales. Okay, he may simply have been deeply, deeply, confused, out of touch and unprepared to give a press conference which was supposed to put an end to the "scandal" and instead poured gasoline on it. ... Maybe, just maybe, a good "CEO" would have asked his staff, "Hey, before I unequivocally tell the world I was out of the loop, let's double check and make sure I wasn't in the loop. Okay?" ... Doesn't Gonzales need to spend more time with his family?
- Captain's Quarters: "Even if Gonzales didn't intend to deceive -- that is to say that he honestly didn't recall sitting in on that meeting -- wouldn't a competent CEO (as he described himself) do some research before making categorical statements? ... Gonzales and others who have presented misleading versions of the project are either incompetent or deceptive. We should not accept either in the office of the highest-ranking law enforcement officer of the United States, regardless of whether he is a Republican or Democrat.
- Power Line's Paul Mirengoff: ".... politics aside, Gonzales should not continue to serve if he lacks the president's confidence. I have no idea where Bush is on this, but my confidence in Gonzales, already shaky, would diminish if it turns out that Gonzales misrepresented his involvement in the firings to the press. As noted, though, it's not clear that Gonzales did this.
Finally, an aide to the AG decides that she will not testify in order to preserve her Fifth Amendment rights -- though in such an odd way as to invite even more questions.
Somehow, after slowly developing over several weeks, this story went zero-to-sixty very suddenly -- a discussion of transcript-less "interviews" between members of Congress and White House aides metastasized into a Fifth Amendment declaration in just days.
Yes, this is now a very big deal.
Labels: Alberto Gonzales, George W. Bush, Republicans, U.S. Attorneys
Friday, March 23, 2007
Another Request For Al to Be-Gonzo
Regular administration supporter Captain Ed (not to be confused with regular RT supporter "Ed, My Ed") links approvingly to Charles Krauthammer's column calling for the sacking of Gonzales.
To paraphrase an old political cliche: It's not the crime, it's the stupidity (or "incompetence", take your pick).
|
To paraphrase an old political cliche: It's not the crime, it's the stupidity (or "incompetence", take your pick).
Labels: Alberto Gonzales, U.S. Attorneys
Thursday, March 22, 2007
Race Replaces Patriotism...
...in the "last-refuge-of-the-scoundrel" category (except those days when itis the first refuge).
I should have realized this before! AGAG (Attorney General Alberto Gonzales) is being attacked by Democrats because he's, of course, Latino:
Put aside whether there are legitimate merits to the U.S. attorneys' controversy. For the sake of argument, let's just say it's all political BS. Even then, the bias at play has NOTHING to do with Gonzales' ethnicity. It's because he's, um, how do I say this politely -- a Republican working for a Republican president and Congress is now filled with Democrats who are "biased" against Republicans!
Did Republicans go after Janet Reno because she was a woman -- or Mike Espy because he was black? No, it was because those two were Democrats -- and Congress was made up of Republicans (it may also have something to do with the fact that Reno was incompetent and Espy was corrupt)!
This is what OPPOSITION parties (especially those with subpoena power) do -- go after the other guy's guy.
Why would Gonzales be afraid of handing information over to "a political hack like Rove"? Gonzales is himself a "political hack" -- and a pretty poor one at that. White liberals (or white conservatives, for that matter) aren't out to "lynch" Gonzales because "they can't claim the credit for his life's accomplishments." Of course not, only George W. Bush can make that claim.
AGAG got his job the old-fashioned way-- his pal became president. And he's subject to criticism now for an old-fashioned way -- because his pal is the president.
And, yeah, he's an abominable manager whose agency screwed up -- at best -- the dismissal of federal prosecutors.
But it is nice to see a conservative columnist getting almost as good at playing the race-victim card as liberals!
Viva progress!
|
I should have realized this before! AGAG (Attorney General Alberto Gonzales) is being attacked by Democrats because he's, of course, Latino:
The nation's first Hispanic attorney general is being pressured to resign by -- pick 'em -- Democrats trying to make hay, an elite media that long opposed him, civil libertarians who condemn administration policy on detainees and wiretaps, conservatives who think Gonzales is too liberal, and liberals who think he's too conservative.Riiiight! Envy over Gonzales' role as an independent Hispanic is driving the calls for Gonzales' head!
The list even includes a pair of immigrant-baiting members of Congress -- Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-California and Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colorado -- who fell out with Gonzales over the prosecution of two ex-border patrol agents.
Leading this lynch mob are white liberals who resent Gonzales because they can't claim the credit for his life's accomplishments and because they can't get him to curtsy. Why should he? Gonzales doesn't owe them a damn thing.
Put aside whether there are legitimate merits to the U.S. attorneys' controversy. For the sake of argument, let's just say it's all political BS. Even then, the bias at play has NOTHING to do with Gonzales' ethnicity. It's because he's, um, how do I say this politely -- a Republican working for a Republican president and Congress is now filled with Democrats who are "biased" against Republicans!
Did Republicans go after Janet Reno because she was a woman -- or Mike Espy because he was black? No, it was because those two were Democrats -- and Congress was made up of Republicans (it may also have something to do with the fact that Reno was incompetent and Espy was corrupt)!
This is what OPPOSITION parties (especially those with subpoena power) do -- go after the other guy's guy.
It may be that he made a whopper here in trusting his No. 2 not to hand over the hiring and firing of U.S. attorneys to a political hack like Rove. But then, Gonzales' critics aren't after the truth. They're after him.Oh, please.
Why would Gonzales be afraid of handing information over to "a political hack like Rove"? Gonzales is himself a "political hack" -- and a pretty poor one at that. White liberals (or white conservatives, for that matter) aren't out to "lynch" Gonzales because "they can't claim the credit for his life's accomplishments." Of course not, only George W. Bush can make that claim.
AGAG got his job the old-fashioned way-- his pal became president. And he's subject to criticism now for an old-fashioned way -- because his pal is the president.
And, yeah, he's an abominable manager whose agency screwed up -- at best -- the dismissal of federal prosecutors.
But it is nice to see a conservative columnist getting almost as good at playing the race-victim card as liberals!
Viva progress!
Labels: Alberto Gonzales, U.S. Attorneys
Monday, March 19, 2007
Gonzo Daddy Gone
Stick a fork in AGAG, who is apparently dead to hill Republicans, says The Politico:
UPDATE (Tuesday 3/20) : The president announced his "strong backing" of Gonzales. Is it real? Or is it the equivalent of the baseball team owner giving his manager a strong "vote of confidence" -- before canning him a week later? We shall see.
What is fascinating about this story is how, sadly, it raises the "competence" issue with this administration -- an issue that has arisen on both the Iraq and Katrina stories. This has been the overarching problem, whether from a perspective of ideology or "politics." An administration is perfectly entitled to fire individuals for "political" reasons -- yet they haven't even been able to do that correctly. Let's take the argument at face value that say that initial plans to fire the USAs were hatched in late 2004 -- apparently confirmed by released DOJ e-mails. Fine: Go ahead and do it!
No one would have raised an eyebrow if Bush decided to do a mini-housecleaning right after he was re-elected (or re-inaugurated). Instead, for whatever reason, they waited until a time when it looked not just "political" in the good sense (i.e., getting rid of people who weren't executing admin policies), but "political" in the bad sense (getting rid of people investigating activities that could embarrass the administration -- or people who didn't want to use their office to go on political witch-hunts).
This is reminiscent of the botched handling of the Rumsfeld situation. My former boss, Newt Gingrich, has said that if Rummy had been canned in fall '06, Republicans could have held the Senate and reduced House losses by 10 (i.e. Democrats would have still taken the House, but only gained about 20 or seats). Instead, Bush waits until the day AFTER the election to do what nearly everyone in Washington -- and beyond -- (pro- and anti-war) knew was the right thing to do months beforehand.
As the latest issue of NR says, can't anyone here play this game?
|
In a sign of Republican despair, GOP political strategists on Capitol Hill said that it is too late for Gonzales' departure to head off a full-scale Democratic investigation into the motives and timing behind the firing of eight U.S. attorneys.Clearly, I was an optimist on my view this morning on Gonzales' fate (though "less than 30 percent" is hardly any sort of endorsement). Given what my NCAA pool looks like, I shouldn't be surprised.
"Democrats smell blood in the water, and (Gonzales') resignation won't stop them," said a well-connected Republican Senate aide. "And on our side, no one's going to defend him. All we can do is warn Democrats against overreaching."
A main reason Gonzales is finding few friends even among Republicans is that he has long been regarded with suspicion by conservatives who have questioned his ideological purity. In the past, these conservatives warned the White House against nominating him for the Supreme Court. Now they're using the controversy over the firing of eight federal prosecutors to take out their pent-up frustrations with how he has handled his leadership at Justice and how the White House has treated Congress.
Complaints range from his handling of immigration cases to his alleged ceding of power in the department to career officials instead of movement conservatives.
UPDATE (Tuesday 3/20) : The president announced his "strong backing" of Gonzales. Is it real? Or is it the equivalent of the baseball team owner giving his manager a strong "vote of confidence" -- before canning him a week later? We shall see.
What is fascinating about this story is how, sadly, it raises the "competence" issue with this administration -- an issue that has arisen on both the Iraq and Katrina stories. This has been the overarching problem, whether from a perspective of ideology or "politics." An administration is perfectly entitled to fire individuals for "political" reasons -- yet they haven't even been able to do that correctly. Let's take the argument at face value that say that initial plans to fire the USAs were hatched in late 2004 -- apparently confirmed by released DOJ e-mails. Fine: Go ahead and do it!
No one would have raised an eyebrow if Bush decided to do a mini-housecleaning right after he was re-elected (or re-inaugurated). Instead, for whatever reason, they waited until a time when it looked not just "political" in the good sense (i.e., getting rid of people who weren't executing admin policies), but "political" in the bad sense (getting rid of people investigating activities that could embarrass the administration -- or people who didn't want to use their office to go on political witch-hunts).
This is reminiscent of the botched handling of the Rumsfeld situation. My former boss, Newt Gingrich, has said that if Rummy had been canned in fall '06, Republicans could have held the Senate and reduced House losses by 10 (i.e. Democrats would have still taken the House, but only gained about 20 or seats). Instead, Bush waits until the day AFTER the election to do what nearly everyone in Washington -- and beyond -- (pro- and anti-war) knew was the right thing to do months beforehand.
As the latest issue of NR says, can't anyone here play this game?
Labels: Alberto Gonzales, Republicans, U.S. Attorneys
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
Gonzales Watch
Possible growing tension between the White House and DOJ:
By, you know, someone.
UPDATE: Sen. John Sununu becomes first GOP-er to call for Gonzales' head.
UPDATE II: And Rep. James Sensenbrenner, veteran GOP member of the House Judiciary Committee, doesn't sound enthusiastic either.
|
[Two] Republicans, who spoke anonymously so they could share private conversations with senior White House officials, said top aides to Mr. Bush, including Fred F. Fielding, the new White House counsel, were concerned that the controversy had so damaged Mr. Gonzales’s credibility that he would be unable to advance the White House agenda on national security matters, including terrorism prosecutions.And it is always nice to see the re-emergence of the passive voice in regard to White House controversies: "Mistakes were made..."
“I really think there’s a serious estrangement between the White House and Alberto now,” one of the Republicans said.
By, you know, someone.
UPDATE: Sen. John Sununu becomes first GOP-er to call for Gonzales' head.
UPDATE II: And Rep. James Sensenbrenner, veteran GOP member of the House Judiciary Committee, doesn't sound enthusiastic either.
Labels: Alberto Gonzales, George W. Bush, U.S. Attorneys
Friday, March 09, 2007
Prosecutorial Misconduct
And, no, I'm not talking about Patrick Fitzgerald.
Paul Krugman (Yikes!), via Andrew Sullivan has the gory details. We're talking about the other side of the fired U.S. attorneys coin. And, no, this doesn't strike me as (typical) Krugmanian hyperbole.
To justify the numbers here, one would have to accept that Democratic local officials are seven times more corrupt than Republican ones. The behavior of Republicans over the last couple of years demonstrates how unlikely that is -- as much as I'm willing to believe the worst of Democrats (particularly in New York).
|
Paul Krugman (Yikes!), via Andrew Sullivan has the gory details. We're talking about the other side of the fired U.S. attorneys coin. And, no, this doesn't strike me as (typical) Krugmanian hyperbole.
To justify the numbers here, one would have to accept that Democratic local officials are seven times more corrupt than Republican ones. The behavior of Republicans over the last couple of years demonstrates how unlikely that is -- as much as I'm willing to believe the worst of Democrats (particularly in New York).
Labels: Alberto Gonzales, corruption, Republicans, U.S. Attorneys
Tuesday, March 06, 2007
Alberto In A Can?
Andrew Sullivan prints an e-mail from a lawyer following the fired-attorneys hearings.
|
The writer's conclusion: This administration attempted to politicize the U.S. attorney position to a level unprecedented in history.
UPDATE: Josh Marshall's TPMuckraker has been following this story from Day One and his site has great stuff from today's hearings. Bud Cummins' testimony is gripping; he's clearly a man conflicted between seemingly betraying members of his own administration -- yet is angered at the betrayal he and his fellow prosecutors have suffered. The accompanying e-mail to his fellow USAs is troubling.
UPDATE: Josh Marshall's TPMuckraker has been following this story from Day One and his site has great stuff from today's hearings. Bud Cummins' testimony is gripping; he's clearly a man conflicted between seemingly betraying members of his own administration -- yet is angered at the betrayal he and his fellow prosecutors have suffered. The accompanying e-mail to his fellow USAs is troubling.
Labels: Alberto Gonzales, corruption, Republicans, U.S. Attorneys
