Gonzales' 'credibility' at stake

Gonzales' credibility? He doesn't have any. What's at stake now is the credibility of the Justice Department.

"credibility" at STAKE?

How can he lose what he never had?

The man has been a croney from day one, and nothing more.

I have yet to hear from blowhard Senator Little Dick "Eddie Haskel" Durbin and all the other whining democratic senators, what crime has been committed?

Senator Little Dick "Eddie Haskel" Durbin and credibility are two words that should not appear in the same sentence.

It always amazes me that Republicans or conservatives are always found guilty before the facts come out. Let Attn Gen Gonzales have his say, then make the decision of guilty or innocent.

Joanne, do you know Gonzales personally to call him a croney? And if you did, you may not call him that........

I don't know how Americans can be so blind from day one. The Mexican-American Gonzales was not chosen for his abilities to perform, he was politically the right choice. Republicans wanted to appease latino voters by "historically" appointing him to Attorney General. Gonzales a disgrace to his latino brothers and sisters, he sold out ALL AMERICANS and our Constitution for Bush's radical agenda. It's like Condi Rice, she's black, but she's also an ex-oil CEO and does what she's told. If anything, Bush has completely changed the role of these government positions.

Anyways, there's no faith left in the government. American Democracy is starting to look like a sham to nations around the world. Thanks Bush for bringing us back to the dark ages, there has not been such a disconnect between the government and the people in a long time.

If Alberto Gonzales intend to do this county a a service while he still can, he should pass his seat to someone who is capable for the job.

This is the same person who emphatically advanced the theory that the President could "render" captives in secret foreign prisons. This is a person who has no respect for the civil liberties in the United States Constitution that he is sworn to protect and defend. Now he is finally being held accountable for just one impoper and, perhaps, illegal thing that he has done. This entire administration has a shameful record! Gonzales is just a symptom of a deeper, more pervasive problem.

This is the same person who emphatically advanced the theory that the President could "render" captives in secret foreign prisons. This is a person who has no respect for the civil liberties in the United States Constitution that he is sworn to protect and defend. Now he is finally being held accountable for just one impoper and, perhaps, illegal thing that he has done. This entire administration has a shameful record! Gonzales is just a symptom of a deeper, more pervasive problem.

Being from Texas I can assure you we don't currently have any intellectual giants in government at any level. Gonzales is par for the course. He is Bushes' factotem and always has been first at the state level and then federal. He is sort of a joke in Texas. He obviously didn't get where he is because of his brilliant legal mind. He is loyal, but too dense to even feign competence. However, I think he is in his element and it would'nt do to torture an honest and independent thinker by placing them in a key position in this administration.

When it is loyal Bushism that is the guiding principle, the credebility issue reverberates throuout the entire administration.

Alberto Gonzales should never have been confirmed as Attorney General based on his prior justification of torture. Even in his new position, Gonzales who was Bush's personal Texan lawyer, represents the White House, not the American people, not the administration of justice, not human and civil rights which had been enshrined in International Law, Constitutional Law and moral law. Any member of Congress who had voted to confirm Gonzales should not be a candidate for the Presidency nor in fact for any federal office.

You know the world is whacky when Dick "Our troops are no better than Nazi Germany or Pol Pot" Durbin questions the credibility of anyone!!

I have yet to hear from blowhard Senator Little Dick "Eddie Haskel" Durbin and all the other whining democratic senators, what crime has been committed?

Terry...don't you think ,as the chief law enforcement officer in the country, Gonzo should be telling the truth to Congress? The Attorney General is getting caught up in his own contradictions left and right, and his Congressional critics are both Democratic and Republican.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/24/washington/24attorney.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

P.S. The Justice Department is not an extension of the White House

The real problem here is once Gonzales is out of a job, Bush will just pick someone worse as the new Attny General. We thought John "Blue Drapes" Ashcroft was bad--so we got Alberto "Torture" Gonzales. The next guy is probably a puppy drowner or something.

This paragraph is taken from John D's bible, Fox News, June 22, 2005:

WASHINGTON — Sen. Dick Durbin (search) went to the Senate floor late Tuesday to offer his apologies to anyone who may have been offended by his comparison of treatment of detainees at the U.S. military base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to Nazis, Soviet gulags and Cambodia's Pol Pot.

Tell me Johnny (Master of distortion) Dyslin,
How does comparing the use of torture by the U.S. at Guantanamo Bay to that of the dictatorial regimes of Nazi Germany, the Soviet Gulag, or Pol Pot, translate into "Our troops are no better than Nazi Germany or Pol Pot?

Durbin deplores the use of these methods by the US as something beneath us, as something akin to the tactics of brutal dictatorships, and in your mind that means; US troops = Nazis. You're either incredibly stupid or part of the larger, and appalling, Republican disinformation machine.

The real problem here is once Gonzales is out of a job, Bush will just pick someone worse as the new Attny General. We thought John "Blue Drapes" Ashcroft was bad--so we got Alberto "Torture" Gonzales. The next guy is probably a puppy drowner or something.

Posted by: Cheryl | Mar 25, 2007 5:33:11 PM

Cheryl...Don't you know that Ashcroft's efforts to shield the public fron the obscenity of Liberty Justice's naked boob was the shining accomplishment of his tenure. Oh, that and the lovely rendition of "Let the Eagles Soar".

dt, Durbin never apologized for his filth, he just apologized if anyone was offended. Not an apology. Anyway, our tactics never were like Nazis or Pol Pot.

But here is question for you and your loony left. Beat a terrorist to prevent more acts of terrorism or let thousands of innocent people die? It seems you loony lefters choose the terrorists.

""credibility" at STAKE?
How can he lose what he never had?
The man has been a croney from day one, and nothing more.
Posted by: Joanne G Murphy | Mar 25, 2007 11:14:49 AM"

JGM,
I wish I said that....

Pat M, Concerned Citizen, joe richards, Cheryl:

All good posts. Thank you.

dt: You're crazy but you're funny as hell.

Gonzales needs to be questioned along with everyone else in this administration. Jay Leno did a great joke about this:

"Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth?"

And Karl Rove replies: "NO".

As you all know, I hope, Gonzales wrote detainee policy for Bush's prisons. That's Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, and the rest that they have illegally established throughout Europe.

If they have to be taken out one by one, let's do it. Enough is enough.

"But here is question for you and your loony left. Beat a terrorist to prevent more acts of terrorism or let thousands of innocent people die? It seems you loony lefters choose the terrorists.

Posted by: John D | Mar 25, 2007 7:09:05 PM"

Come on, John D;
If I beat you long enough, you would say "I'm a Democrat!"

It has become painfully obvious to every thoughtful American that this administration has had a political agenda from the day that it took office. This agenda was to be pursued at the highest levels with no respect for the Truth, the Constitution or for the American People whom it supposedly represents.
Until the voting public begins to become more fully informed, and refuses to be led by blind partisan loyalties, we can expect nothing better of the next administration, regardless of the political label attached to it. It has been said that a democracy gets the government that it deserves. Few would argue that we deserve a better government than we currently have. But, until we learn that our votes should go to the candidates with the highest records of integrity and the the highest levels of competency instead of to the party that our parents or our communities have traditionally followed out of unquestioned loyalty, we are doomed to the same corrupt, inept and crony-laced leadership that we see presented on the evening newscast every night.

dt,

What is the underlying crime that the Senate is investigating?

dt,
Actually, I have to respectfully temper your opinion of Ashcroft (though not on "Let the Eagles Soar"). I never had much (if any) respect for him before I learned that he was forced to resign over his objection to w's use of the NSA to conduct secret wiretapping of US citizens. While I disagree with a lot of what he did, at least he had enough respect for the Constitution to oppose w on domestic spying.

dt, Durbin never apologized for his filth, he just apologized if anyone was offended. Not an apology. Anyway, our tactics never were like Nazis or Pol Pot. [John D.]

And what "filth" was it that Durbin was supposed to apologize for?, suggesting that torture was akin to what the Nazis did? Geez, I dunno, I kind of agree. What we know of our country's own atrocities as documented by Human Rights First:

http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/us_law/etn/misc/factsheet.htm

But here is question for you and your loony left. Beat a terrorist to prevent more acts of terrorism or let thousands of innocent people die? It seems you loony lefters choose the terrorists.

Posted by: John D | Mar 25, 2007 7:09:05 PM

John...I'll answer that with that other John, the Republican rights, very own, John McCain:

Obviously, to defeat our enemies we need intelligence, but intelligence that is reliable. We should not torture or treat inhumanely terrorists we have captured. The abuse of prisoners harms, not helps, our war effort. In my experience, abuse of prisoners often produces bad intelligence because under torture a person will say anything he thinks his captors want to hear—whether it is true or false—if he believes it will relieve his suffering. John McCain---from this article:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10019179/site/newsweek/

In summary, you need to quit watching '24', that "ticking bomb" argument is bogus.

dt: You're crazy but you're funny as hell.

Posted by: gypsy | Mar 25, 2007 7:19:25 PM

Thanks....I think.

Hey John D, yes the Loony Left still recognizes that the military is sworn, not to protect fascist Neo-Cons right to profit while avoiding military service... but rather, to protect and uphold the US Constitution. America: Love it or leave it, the Constitution is what makes it America, idiot.

Well said Phil A. ,if it were not for the 7 +1 lame years of the reign followed by another puppet played by ye Master puppeteers!

Gonzales serves at the pleasure of the president; if he fired those prosecutors, he did it at the behest of the president. You people don't think Gonzales did it on his own do ya? So GROW UP! It is NOT Gonzales' fault!And he said that he isn't quiting, so go blow it out of your ears! GONZALES, will he fall like The Alamo did, or will he STAND?

Does anyone else find it hilarious how upset the Republicans get when one (or, these days, most) of their own are caught up in a major scandal?

Just to re-cap for those who need a succinct take:

Clinton bashing, demanding that U.S. Soldiers return home from Kosovo, de-railing Hillary's plan for national healthcare, and not paying any attention to reports that Al Queda chatter had increased to dangerous levels in August, 2001 makes you "Patriotic."

Questioning the war strategy, attempting to preserve constitutional rights, voicing displeasure over torture, and wishing our brave men and women weren't getting killed while in the middle of an Iraqi civil war makes you "Un-Patriotic" - a "Cutter and Runner", if you will.

This president has given us Harriet Meyers, "Brownie", and Don Rumsfeld - a man whom Republican war hero John McCain publicly despises. So calling Gonzalez a "Crony" is rooted in history, not leftist conspiracy.

And lastly - to those of you who keep insisting "Gonzalez didn't commit a crime by authorizing the firing of U.S. attorneys then by lying about why they were fired", or "Gonzalez shouldn't be forced to testify on record", or, "this is a political witch-hunt", I have some advice for you.

Go look at yourself in a mirror, and remind yourself that you wasted years of our country's time and money impeaching Clinton for lying about something which seems comparitively laughable right about now.

You should all be ashamed of yourselves, my Republican friends...

He lied. Under oath. The ATTORNEY GENERAL. So, I ask, WHAT credibility?

Q) Hello Republican friends - how do you feel about the accusation (backed up by a bi-partisan comittee) that Alberto Gonzalez authorized the firing of good, decent U.S. attorneys because they didn't carefully follw a Republican-dictated script?

A) "Oh yeah? Well, uh... Dick Durbin isn't credible!"

A) "Oh yeah? Well, uh...Clinton lied too!"

A) "Oh yeah? Well, uh...Democrats want to cut and run!"

How disgusting.

The defense of Gonzalez on this board is typical FOX News babble; misinformation and name-calling dressed up as fact. It's disgusting.

The Gonzalez investigation has nothing to do with Dick Durbin, folks. Or Denocrats wanting to lose the war. (Which, when you think about it, is one of the most offensive claims ever labeled against a political party). A top-level government appointee has made a cruicial mistake and needs to be held accountable.

Remember kids, impeaching Clinton? True patriotism!
Disagreeing with Bush's never-ending, fake war? The most un-patriotic act ever.

Why does the media continue to focus on the lesser
evils of the Bush cabal (Gonzalez, Scooter Libby) and not the real crimes of this administration: thousands dead in Iraq, military contractors stealing billions and delivering shoddy work, New Orleans still struggling . . . I could go on (and on and on).

There should be no surprise over the fact Gonzalez knew and has lied to all Americans. The entire Bush White house is built upon deceiving Americans. Bush must be IMPEACHED. He knows, he lies; He is DESTROYING OUR COUNTRY.

dt,

What is the underlying crime that the Senate is investigating?

Posted by: Terry | Mar 25, 2007 9:43:22 PM

Your ignorance.

The AG was trying to pack the US Attorneys offices with attorneys who will prosecute based on party affiliation. They came up with it while they were all working at the WH. They needed a better way to manipulate the judiciary from the inside in an effort to consolidate power in the party. Can you think of a better way than contolling who is prosecuted and for what? The AG was then put in charge of Justice and the plan went forward. That is what it means to be a loyal bushie. You look at the polls, you make a plan for victory and then stick with it. If you are a good bushie, you are smart enough to know how to lie without being told. The AG is a good bushie, so he lies, cheats and steals to win. No surprise. If you don't like it, become a bushie. If you are smart enough and willing to lie, you can also get on the gravy train.

The party that wins the White House gets to pick what agenda they want to follow as far as prosecuting crimes.

The whole process is political- from beginning to end- there should be no argument that the firings were political-of course they were.

Since there is no way that all laws that are broken CAN be pursued, there has to be some selection of what types of crimes WILL be pursued.

If a federal attorney is not prosecuting the types of crimes that the administration wants to prosecute he SHOULD be removed.

This is not manipulating the judiciary- this is how the system is designed to work. This why the AG is a cabinet post, appointed by the president and approved by congress.

This a non-issue until election time, when we all get to pick the guy (President) who will pick a new AG.

Gonzalez should have been more straight forward from the beginning, he let this become an issue by not immediately saying "They were fired because they were not following our plan".

The dems- especially Leahy, knows this and are blowing it out of proportion ..a BAU move for his party.

I am glad the president is standing up to this- even though Gonzalez screwed up.

"Since there is no way that all laws that are broken CAN be pursued, there has to be some selection of what types of crimes WILL be pursued."

The problem is not the type of crimes pursued, but that the WH wanted lawyers who would prosecute democrats instead of republicans. That is what it means to be a loyal bushie.

Steve-

That sure would make the Dem case sexier wouldn't it? Unfortunatley, this is much more mundane that - until we get the circus, along with the TV cameras going.

If that were the case - why wouldn't Leahy accept the intial offer of Rove talking w/o being under oath. He could learn as much as he can and then if he wasn't satisfied, subpeona for testimony under oath. There is no statute of limitations for this- the Dems want this as public as possible now. Feinstein herself has all but called it a fishing expedition.

We all ( including Congress) need to move on- be indignant, mad or whatever, then do the right thing when you can (Election Day).

People can't trust what WH advisors say, and that is why people would prefer to question them under oath.

The dems are pursuing this because they can't control Iraq, and the public is tired of debating how we got there. The AG issue is fresh and follows the same corruption theme. It is easier to pursue because there were more people involved in wrongdoing and those who were attacked were not weak. They were federal prosecutors.

I am sure the WH can drag this out long enough that it will also become tiresome, but not before the AG resigns. People are starting to take the 5th.

Ultimately, the AG and WH sought to fire lawyers who they thought were prosecuting republicans and failing to prosecute democrats. Not sexy... but true. The AG was using his position to further the party agenda. No surprises.

dt,

Thanks for proving me wrong. I always thought that you no one could be more ignorant than John E. - You proved me wrong.

Back to the question, what is the underlying crime?

Underlying crime? Obstruction of justice with a heaping helping of perjury to go with it.

Back to the question, what is the underlying crime?

Posted by: Terry | Mar 26, 2007 7:56:06 PM

That's not the question. Congressional oversight power/responsibility is primarily to ensure that the executive branch is doing its job properly. This basic point was lost during 6 years of witless cheerleading by the Republicant Congress. Congress's duty in this instance is to see whether the Executive Branch is undermining the justice system by intimidating prosecutors.

Terry may be content to lower the standard to "not criminal," but one can't expect much from a dead-ender. The rest of the country is entitled to expect much more.

All that said, it's certainly interesting that Gonzalez's top aide, Goodling, is taking 5. It's her right, but it's not exactly inconsistent with the prospect that there in fact were crimes committed.

a blinkin,

Don't waste your time trying to make a point with Terry or Jeff or any of the other 'true-believers', they can only process one Republican talking-point at a time.

Kinda like those dolls that talk when a string is pulled. Brittney Spears has one, when she pulls the string it says: "Honestly, I think we should just trust our president in every decision that he makes and we should just support that."

Still no underlying crime.

Tom O - what was the underlying crime to all that "obstruction of justice" and "perjury"?

In response to:
Posted by: Linder | Mar 26, 2007 7:26:21 AM
Why does the media continue to focus on the lesser evils of the Bush cabal (Gonzalez, Scooter Libby) and not the real crimes of this administration: thousands dead in Iraq, military contractors stealing billions and delivering shoddy work, New Orleans still struggling . . . I could go on (and on and on).

Posted by: Linder | Mar 26, 2007 7:26:21 AM

Why,indeed! It has become painfully obvious that the powerful can distract the populace with bogus issues like "Did Libby lie?" , "Did Gonzales lie?", "Is John Edwards exploiting his wife's illness?", "Did Mueller tell the truth about the Patriot Act and the FBI?", "Is Bush going to veto the bill submitted by Congress?"

In such a scenario, the populace will NOT hear questions from the media like:

"Did the Bush Administration knowingly and willingly, with malice and forethought, beyond a reasonable doubt, deliberately LIE to the American public about:

(A) WEAPONS of mass destruction in Iraq...''U.S. intelligence indicates that Saddam Hussein had upwards of 30,000 munitions capable of delivering chemical agents.''--State of the Union Address, 1/28/2003 ''We have also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas.''--State of the Union Address, 1/28/2003 ''Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent.''--State of the Union Address, 1/28/2003

(B) AN ABSOLUTE connection between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein .....CLAIM: There's overwhelming evidence there was a connection between al Qaeda and the Iraqi government. I am very confident that there was an established relationship there." - Vice President Cheney, 1/22/04

CLAIM: "The regime of Saddam Hussein cultivated ties to terror while it built weapons of mass destruction." � President Bush's UN speech, 9/23/03

CLAIM: "Iraq [is] the central front in the war on terror." � President Bush's UN speech, 9/23/03

CLAIM: "You can't distinguish between al-Qaida and Saddam." � President Bush, 9/25/02

CLAIM: "There's no question that Saddam Hussein had al Qaeda ties." � President Bush, 9/17/03

CLAIM: "There was a relationship between Iraq and al-Qaeda." � Vice President Cheney, 9/14/03
FACT: According to documents, "Saddam Hussein warned his Iraqi supporters to be wary of joining forces with foreign Arab fighters entering Iraq to battle U.S. troops. The document provides another piece of evidence challenging the Bush administration contention of close cooperation between Saddam's regime and al Qaeda terrorists." [NY Times, 1/15/04]

FACT: "CIA interrogators have already elicited from the top Qaeda officials in custody that, before the American-led invasion, Osama bin Laden had rejected entreaties from some of his lieutenants to work jointly with Saddam." [NY Times, 1/15/04]

FACT: "Sec. of State Colin Powell conceded Thursday that despite his assertions to the United Nations last year, he had no 'smoking gun' proof of a link between the government of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and terrorists of al-Qaeda.'I have not seen smoking-gun, concrete evidence about the connection,' Powell said." [NY Times, 1/9/04]

FACT: "Three former Bush Administration officials who worked on intelligence and national security issues said the prewar evidence tying Al Qaeda was tenuous, exaggerated and often at odds with the conclusions of key intelligence agencies." [National Journal, 8/9/03]

FACT: Declassified documents �undercut Bush administration claims before the war that Hussein had links to Al Qaeda.� [LA Times, 7/19/03].

FACT: "The chairman of the monitoring group appointed by the United Nations Security Council to track Al Qaeda told reporters that his team had found no evidence linking Al Qaeda to Saddam Hussein." [NY Times, 6/27/03]

FACT: "U.S. allies have found no links between Iraq and Al Qaeda. 'We have found no evidence of links between Iraq and Al Qaeda,' said Europe's top investigator. 'If there were such links, we would have found them. But we have found no serious connections whatsoever.'" [LA Times, 11/4/02]

(C) AN ABSOLUTE connection between Saddam Hussein and the terrorist attacks on 9/11/01...
CLAIM: "We have never claimed that Saddam Hussein ... had either direction or control of 9/11." � National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, 9/16/03
FACT: President Bush sent a letter to Congress on 3/19/03 saying that the Iraq war was permitted specifically under legislation that authorized force against �nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.�

FACT: Vice President Cheney said on 9/14/03 �I think it's not surprising that people make that connection� between Saddam and 9/11- with no evidence to back up his claim.

FACT: Two days after Cheney made that statement, Reuters reported on 9/18/03 that �President Bush distanced himself from the comments.�

These are only a VERY FEW examples of the lies and manipulation that have led to mass murder, rape, pillage, thievery, torture and other atrocities which, at the very least, have been facilitated, if not outright PERPETRATED by the introduction of USA military and "contract para-military" personnel by the government of the United Staes of America. This is being done in OUR name, with OUR tax dollars, against OUR best interests!

So the powerful continue to play with the lives and fortunes of common, everyday American citizens, lying to us, stealing in our name, using our tax dollars to perpetrate crimes against humanity, calling any dissident voice a traitor, betraying the basic principles of our Constitution, enacting laws that justify the use of torture, and generally behaving in classic tyrannical fashion.

Bush, Cheney, Rove, Pearle, Wolfowitz, Addison, Gonzales, Ashcroft, Hughes, Gingrich, Card, and legions of additional self-interested, self-aggrandizing, wealthy, powerful "persons of interest" have succeeded in hoodwinking, bamboozling and outright defrauding, not only the American public, but also the world, with this totally unjustified and unjustifiable "pre-emptive" war on Iraq. Get ready, people of the world....it looks like IRAN is next on their "HITLIST".

But, Concerned Citizen....Jeff Y adamantly claims that "the facts are with us", certainly you must be mistaken. What did I tell you about going off on your own, for facts? Remember, the only accurate stories are on Faux News, or if you have to show off by reading, stick to the Washington Times or American Spectator. Are you trying to create a crisis of confidence in our government , or something?

By the time the 2008 Presidential election is upon us, the trivialization of politics will be in high gear.
A....The "public", such as it is, will NOT be treated to any substantive debate between and among any intelligent candidates.

B....All "appearances" by "candidates" will be closely monitored, spruced, rehearsed, spun and doctored by their respective "handlers".
C....There will be snide innuendoes, name-calling, obfuscations, deliberate misinformation, accusations and cheap-shot personal attacks.
D....There will be no factual, balanced, fair, informative discourse about American foreign policy.
E....There will be no factual, balanced, fair, informative discourse about American economic policy.
F....There will be no factual, balanced, fair, informative discourse about American energy policy.
G....There will be no factual, balanced, fair, informative discourse about American healthcare policy.
H....There will be no factual, balanced, fair, informative discourse about American education policy.
What we will see is more of the same outrageous, insulting, patronizing, disdainful behavior from "candidates", "commentators", "consultants",and various other assorted "talking heads"....all doing their best to avoid anything remotely resembling serious, thoughtful, historically accurate analysis and discussion about very serious issues.

The whole charade will be about keeping everyone duly distracted and mindlessly entertained. The Romans had their bread and circuses. We Americans have our TV's, video games, iPods and spectator sports. There's no need to get "the people" upset by having a real, substantive, insightful dialogue about things that human beings genuinely regard as important. Just innundate everyone with enough madness-of-disinformation glut and the critical mass will reach overload....THEN the powerful will just go on doing whatever they please, and "the people" be damned!