Gonzales pummeled by Senate

"True, some Republicans, notably Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah are serving as his cut men, attempting to patch him up whereever they can."

Why? If Senator Hatch and the others believe in Mr. Gonzalez, why do they feel the need to "patch him up"? Why not let him speak for himself and let the truth come out? What are they afraid of? Or if they are afraid of the truth, why protect Mr. Gonzales over their sworn duty to protect the Constitution?

Bedtime For Gonzo!

Yep, more stalling, dodging, obfuscating, evading, avoiding, and generalizing from this corrupt, bent, lackluster, soul-less, morally obtuse administration. I'm hardly surprised, but more upset, and can't wait until this reaches the top. A fish always rots from the head down.

I always knew Gonzo was a Bush lickspittle who owed his career to shining the Chimp's shoes, but I didn't realize he was so dim until recently.

Ediwn Meese now takes second as the worst Attorney General of the United States.

I bet we all would have done the same in his place. Those 8 fired do not have a permanent position. The positions that they hold are not even elected positions. They are appointments. So let the congress moan, cry, and grill "Gonzo". Cudos for the guy sticking it out. Most people in the same place would have cracked under the pressure.

One signal of leadership is the ability to choose subordinates based on merit and qualifications, two words that Bush appears to be unfamiliar with. His own life's progress is marked by inadequacies being papered over by others as cover; and here we have the same thing.

The biggest problem was Rumsfeld, who had Cheney on his side, and who appears to have had Bush totally buffaloed. Wolfowitz, Perle and others should have taken direction from Bush; not the other way around.

Brown and Katrina set the tone for Bush's lack of judgment and competence in selections, as well as political bias, and now we see it's extended into tht DOJ.

Hatch is not defending Gonzales - he's finally acting as a second branch of the Government should, and pressing Gonzales to be accountable.

With regard to Iraq - who presses Bush to be accountable???

Typical Liberal BS....funny how they don't make mention, nor the media for that matter, how Clintion/Janet Reno fired 93 attorneys at the beginning of his term.

They are United States Attorneys not "attorney generals." The man testifying is the one Attorney General of the United States.

As a resident of Utah, I'm deeply ashamed of the moral retreat of Senator Hatch to a politically motivated defense of the indefensible.

Adios, Alberto. Don't let the door smack you as you head off to some conservative think tank or K Street lobbying job. Maybe Tom DeLay can hook you up with some cushy gig shaking down casino operations? It's over, Senor Gonzales. Hasta la vista, babee!

First off, I am an independent with Democratic leanings. This hearing is not about anything illegal that happened. It is about the politicizing of our main law enforcing body and the directly contradictory statements made by the AG.

The part I am most upset with is that the White House has succeeded in completely removing any impartiality or credibility form a cabinet level office that, for the most part, has operated with the public's respect for over a century. Now, we cannot even look at the AG's office under this administration and think there is any possibility of criminal prosecution without political influence.

Mr. Gonzalez, in my view, is poorly suited for this position. I was OK with John Ashcroft, even though I disagreed with mostly all of his political views, including the patriot act. At least Mr. Ashcroft didn't taint the 93 US AG's with mass political firings and obvious political cronies with little or no experience in a courtroom.

Janet Reno, at least spent much time as a prosecutor prior to her appointment.

I can't but help see Mr. Gonzalez as a political hanger on that made his way up the ladder by hanging on to Bush's coattails. Now that is how a lot of political types move up, but at this level the stakes are much higher and Mr. Gonzalez's blind loyalty has led him down a path in which he is clearly outclassed compared to his opponents ability to spin the news.

I think "Cho's" rampage would have been a much better used of Ammo if he had expended it somewhere near the Capital and or the White House

This clown is the A.G., and even he can't come up with something more original than, "I can't remember." Enough!

As an attorney, I am dismayed that the Attorney General of the United States can be allowed to flaunt the truth. If I responded to a judge's questions about a case the way the Attorney General is responding to the senators' questions, the judge would rightfully hold me in contempt of court, and send a transcript of the hearing to the state's disciplinary committee with a recomendation for disbarment.

These are dark days for our great nation. Someone resurrect Ross Perot...

"I mis-spoke" ... another way of saying "I lied".

I wanna "mis-spoke" on my taxes!

Well Gonzo is just another example of why humans will become extinct.

It seems that Gonzales, like everyone else in the administration, never considered that he might have to account for his actions one day.

So, where is the smoking gun? Where are the big cases they were working on? There are none. When they were told to follow an administration priority to follow and pursue voter fraud - they would not. No matter how good I was at my last review- if I tell my boss no tomorrow- I'll be fired.
Also priorities of this administration - child porn on the internet. Busted people molesting children on line to requests. No - I mean 0 such cases purused by Clinton administration.
Also not pursued by Clinton administration "sex slaves". Thirty state bust by this DOJ - yes new administrations can make new priorities. THe abused children and women that Mr. Gonzolas has helped are thanking god for that. Yes I want voter fraud pursued so we can get more people like him working for the helpless.

Gonzalez claimed many of the attorneys in question were fired because of general management problems in their respective offices, because they mishandled various cases, and because they had lost the trust and confidence of their deputies. Even if these allegations were true (and he provides zero evidence to support them), how can he possibly hold these attorneys to standards that he refuses to apply to himself? If he did, he would recognize his own failures and resign on the spot. Gonzalez is not only a serial liar, he's a hypocrite as well.

Your a bunch of whiners! The president can remove any US Attorney anytime he wants. Read the history on past presidents. Stop walking around in ignorance thinking your educated because you read the papers. Pick up a book you lazy bums!!

This is such a non issue... Janet Reno did the same thing under Clinton's administration to something like 90 different attorneys and not one red flag was raised anywhere. This is just a distraction so the 'honorable' senators don't have to discuss something of real importance that actually matters to the citizens of the U.S.

Ya all pickin on Gonzo, cause he ain't white. Why not pick on Carl Rowe??? Everybody knows what kind of person he is, yet nobody seems to bother about him at all. Why don't they ask 'straight' questions to the man in question?

A lie when it can not be gotten away with, becomes mistakenly misspoken? Wow, what an elegance and under oath!

"what I know -- what I know -- I heard concerns raised by Mr. Rove. And what I know today -- what I don't recall, the specific mention of this conversation, I recall the meeting -- is that there was a meeting in October with the president in which the president, as I understand it, relayed to me similar concerns about pursuing election fraud –"

These verbal gyrations bring to mind a drunk ice skater trying to regain his balance... as if he ever had any to begin with!

For all his floundering, there is a peculiar, almost naked honesty about his performance in these hearings.

He's not a slick operator playing dumb. He really is dumb, and is surrounded by a bunch of slick operators who understand that he was made the AG because he wouldn't have the sense or the ability to stand up for the Department. "I've learned a lot" indeed.

The firing scandal isn't half of it. This same sucker-in-charge syndrome is what allowed the infamous Torture Memo to come from (and get defended by) the Justice Dept. on Gonzales' watch.

Personally, I don't feel like I'm being lied to at all (which is unusual, from this Administration.) To the contrary, I feel as though I'm getting a very clear picture about exactly the sort of man the AG is, and the kind of person Bush truly values.

Really, he's doing a heckava job up there.

More mindless prattle from the Loony "We hate all" Left. I've come to the conclusion that many elements of the Loony Left are just as disturbed as the VT shooter Cho. Reading all the mindless, hateful prattle day in and day out here is no different than hearing his Cho's videotaped rant.

A bright light shining on a dim bulb.

I support any attempt to expose the underhanded and often downright illegal practices and policies of this administration, but this does not seem to be one of them. Either the US attorneys serve "at the pleasure of the President" andy be removed at any time for any reason, or they do not. According to the law, they do. It might seem in poor taste to inject politics into the justice system and is certainly against the spirtit of the balance of powers set out in our constitution, but it is nonetheless legal.

I suggest we drop these trivial matters and begin focusing on the important things. This administration used falsified information to take us to war and directly casued the deaths of more than 3000 Americans and at least 100,000 Iraqis. So let them slide on the one count of questionable firings and string them up on the 103,000 counts of manslaughter.

I am sure my last post won't make it you liberal bums!!!

What a lackie. I would be surprised if Bush doesn't have him cleaning his pool, too.

I don't know whether to feel sorry for the guy or admire him. If he's really as disconnected, forgetful, and under-involved as he portrays himself as being then its clear he holds a position way past the point where the Peter Principle normally should have kicked in.

On the other hand if he's lying through his teeth with such a magnificent degree of ease as he appears to be, then that's the work of a true artist of deceit. It hard to not be impressed in some darker sense by such an audacious abandonment of ethics and personal integrity.

It's time for EVERYONE in this administration to resign and GO (back) TO (ahem) Texas.

This guy is practically incoherent. No wonder Bush loves him so much. He isn't even competent enough to lie badly. If this is his idea of being "prepared", I'd REALLY hate to see him in action when he isn't prepared. Even Orin Hatch ought to have more common sense than to try to keep this bozo on his feet.

i first observed senator spector during the water gate hearing. my impression of him then (& i'm a yellow dog dem)remains the same today. he is a bright, engaging, honorable man. i wish he represented my state 9 (ok) in the us senate.
thank you sir, for your service

More criminals Bush is defending now include Karl Rove,and Wolfowitz, millions of illegal aliens and an errant attorney general. Wasn't there a guy that stole some papers as well? This is BS and seems the rule rather than the exception and this administration thinks it is above the law.

Why the uproar? Look how Clinton let his federal prosecutors go....nary a word was said about that. They serve at the pleasure of the President!

This is just more of the same old, Bitch and Moan Club. Bush and his administration has been through a living hell since he came into office, yet there has never been a time that he was given one ounce of sincere applause from across the aisle. Frankly, I will always believe this nonsensical and ridiculous behavior by the Democrats is "payback" for Bill Clinton.

I liken the Democratic party to a bunch of brats who can't have their way on every issue and they intend to run this country, even if President Bush was voted in TWICE. The Democrats stand before the nation and claim the "American People" want them to lead. Well, I am an American as were my ancestors way back to the beginnings of our great country, and I am here to say that I do NOT want them to lead this country. If they spent half as much time trying to keep our country unified as they do trying to rip us all apart, they might garner some respect, but as it is, their childish behavior only increases division and disgusts many true Americans.

They demean the spirit of America daily with their diatribe and then SMILE at the camera as if they wish to say to President Bush "Gotcha". How childish! They refuse meetings with the President and then run off to terrorist countries and meet with their leaders, claiming the "road to Damascus is the road to peace". What silly people we have in office. What does that say to the whole world? It screams, "Rogue Politicians". Capitol Hill is full of them.

Bush sect members: Please tell me in clear concise language why the country should not force Bush and his cohorts to dress orange jump suits and one way tickets to Gitmo?

This is disgusting.

This is the same guy who let a Mexican national be executed in Texas, despite the fact that the US had signed a treaty against it. He said "the state of texas didn't sign that treat"...this is no surprise!

Bush sect members: Please tell me in clear concise language why the country should not force Bush and his cohorts to dress in orange jump suits and one way tickets to Gitmo?

This is disgusting.

Bush sect members: Please tell me in clear concise language why the country should not force Bush and his cohorts to dress in orange jump suits and be semt to Gitmo.

This is disgusting.

CORRECTIONS

I now know the known knowns & unknowns without knowingly knowning about the knowns where the unknowns were known.
I just hope the e-mail didn't get deleated with what I now know & didn't know so you can see the unknown knows & knowns.

It's Bedtime for Gonzo!

As a lawyer I have carefully considered Alberto Gonzales' statements in the light of his Constitutional responsibilities and his and the Administration's pledge to 'protect and defend', and after due deliberation I say, hang 'em all!

quoting original post:

"Gonzales's strategy coming in was to do a mea culpa, say he had learned a lot and would be a better attorney general going forward."

haha -- you couldn't have said it better than that...it sounds like a 7th grader who got caught stealing a candy bar.

The issue here is not that the attorneys were fired, the issue is the way their firings and the subsequent fallout have been handled.

This is not an issue of liberal v. conservative. Both sides should be embarrassed at the sorry state in which such divisive, partisan BS has left our country.

These people work for us. They are accountable to us. We pay their salaries. They need to do what we have hired them to do.

I don't see how Daylo's comment has anything to do with the matter at hand.

The truth is that Gonzales screwed up. He put politics ahead of justice. Before we say "Oh, pish-posh", I'd encourage people to google "Georgia Thompson". Georgia Thompson was used as a political tool in the WI race for governor. A federal attorney general, who was about to make the list for not politicizing his office enough, decided to go after her without a lot of evidence to hurt the Democratic candidate.

The result was that she was sent to jail, in what the appelate court who had her released described as a miscarriage of justice.

What's going on with Gonzales is very serious business. It's serious enough for both Democrats and Republicans in the Senate to be deeply concerned. If he can't explain himself, he needs to be removed.

Maybe it's time for us to grow up and stop using the fourth-grade excuse of "But the other guys did this!"

IT IS COMMON SENSE, AND THE U.S. SENATORS MUST ASK THE ATTORNEY GENERAL MR.GONZALES, FOR THE EXACT ALLEGATIONS OF THE POOR PERFORMANCE. I BELIEVE THAT THE A.G.'S FIRED MUST FORMALLY ASK FOR SPECIFIC DETAILS OF THE POOR PERFORMANCE, AND THEN PUBLISH THOSE REPORTS SO THE AMERICAN PUBLIC CAN DISCERN IF IT IS TRUE THE FIRINGS WERE DUE TO POOR PERFORMANCE OR NOT. THAT WILL RESOLVE ALL THE ISSUES.

Your a bunch of whiners! The president can remove any US Attorney anytime he wants. Read the history on past presidents. Stop walking around in ignorance thinking your educated because you read the papers. Pick up a book you lazy bums!!

Posted by: Phelan Fenno | Apr 19, 2007 12:55:49 PM

Are you folks as dense as your posts suggest, or are you just being partisan? The issue is not, and never was, the President's power to do this. The question has always been over the responsible exercise of that power. That distinguishes this situation from a President firing all USAs from the previous admin.

And Fenno, the reason I think I'm educated is that I managed to learn about contractions in 3rd grade. Your problem is you're not acquainted with such a device.

I love it when the republicans are on the ropes and go off and blame those liberals. How can you even begin to defend this administration? But you're not...all you argue is that this is a liberal backlash. If this situation was reversed with the dems in office, you'd all be asking to impeach.

"your characterization of your participation is just total -- significantly, if not totally, at variance with the facts."

... OK, how many synonyms for lying can YOU name?

When Arlen "Magic Bullet" Specter can take you to task coming out the chute, you're officially done.

You righties still have your blinders on. In the past, attorneys were released NOT because their views/rulings ran counter to the President's political agenda. I know it's hard for you all to understand why the citizens in this country see something wrong with Bush's push for absolute power over war decisions, judiciary, morality, but maybe it's time for you to stop treating the bill of rights like toilet paper and do YOUR history.

Where are the yahoo messages boards? I miss the trolls so much. This format is censored and boring.

You righties still have your blinders on. In the past, attorneys were released NOT because their views/rulings ran counter to the President's political agenda. I know it's hard for you all to understand why the citizens in this country see something wrong with Bush's push for absolute power over war decisions, judiciary, morality, but maybe it's time for you to stop treating the bill of rights like toilet paper and do YOUR history.

More mindless prattle from the Loony "We hate all" Left. I've come to the conclusion that many elements of the Loony Left are just as disturbed as the VT shooter Cho. Reading all the mindless, hateful prattle day in and day out here is no different than hearing his Cho's videotaped rant.

Posted by: John D | Apr 19, 2007 1:00:22 PM

Opposed to your sunshine-filled praises of everything? Come on, John D., you complain and rant as much as the rest of them.

You remind me an awful lot of Derek Zoolander: He couldn't turn Left, and you can't say Left without the giving it a prefix.

Wake up, Daylo. Bush was never voted into office. The investigations are just getting rolling in Ohio regarding the disgraceful conduct of the 2004 election, and he only got into the White House in the first place by whining to the Supreme Court. You need to sample some news sources - Fox and Rush don't count as the recent Pew survey verified. Your comments are obviously based on an ignorance of fact. And history. Just because your family has been here for a long time doesn't give your desires more weight or validity than the newest citizen of this nation. If you don't like it, go live somewhere else in the world where a long "pedigree" gives you special consideration. The fact that you're typical of Bush and his minions' last bedraggled and pathetic supporters is all a person with common sense needs to start thinking about the possibility of impeachment.

Unbelievably, there are still a few posters here who keep repeating the old meme 'well Clinton let all his AGs go'. Please people. Read up. We're not talking about replacing the AGs with their own people at the beginning of a term. Yes, Clinton did that, but so did Bush. Totally normal. We're talking about the possibility that these 8 AGs were fired mid-term specifically to obstruct on-going investigation of Republicans and/or punish them for not investigating Democrats aggressively enough, leading up to the elections. That would not be at all normal and raises the spectre that the Department of Justice in the United States plays political favorites at the whim of a presidential administration. I happen to think they did just that. You may not agree, but at least frame the issue correctly.

Your a bunch of whiners! The president can remove any US Attorney anytime he wants. Read the history on past presidents. Stop walking around in ignorance thinking your educated because you read the papers. Pick up a book you lazy bums!!

Posted by: Phelan Fenno | Apr 19, 2007 12:55:49 PM

PHELAN - IT SHOULD BE "YOU'RE" EDUCATED.... I GUESS YOU'RE NOT.

Your a bunch of whiners! The president can remove any US Attorney anytime he wants. Read the history on past presidents. Stop walking around in ignorance thinking your educated because you read the papers. Pick up a book you lazy bums!!

Posted by: Phelan Fenno | Apr 19, 2007 12:55:49 PM

PHELAN - IT SHOULD BE "YOU'RE" EDUCATED.... I GUESS YOU'RE NOT.

Of course the talking point response is to bring up Clinton's firing of prosecutors. The fact is that it is -normal- for -all- administrations to replace the majority of federal prosecutors at the -start- of their term, like Clinton did and the Rep. presidents before him. It is firing prosecutors in the -middle- of a term that is unprecidented. It is firing prosecutors in the middle of a term for not adhering strictly enough to political agendas that is the reason it is being investigated.

As usual, the talking points leave out important context. That's why they're "talking points" and not "thinking points", because you're just supposed to -say- them without -thinking- about them.

I liken the Republican party to a bunch of selfish white guys who have no grip on reality and think the world owes them a living.

Biggest difference between Clinton/Reno and Bush/Gonzales - Clinton fired the attorneys at the BEGINNING of his term, like every president before him had. Bush is firing the attorneys in the MIDDLE of his term, something unprecedented. News flash to conservatives - Clinton isn't screwing up the country. Your boy Bush is doing a good enough job by himself now..

Maybe we'll find out if illegal things were done here, maybe we won't. A more important issue is that this scandal goes to the heart of the Justice Dept.'s presumed integrity and impartiality. This administration has succeeded in politicizing almost every aspect of federal justice. Whether this crosses the line into illegality or not, no matter what party you belong to, that should bother you profoundly.

Several comments concern Clinton's replacement of all 93 US Attorneys, but that was at the start of his FIRST term after over a dozen years of Republican rule, and something Bush did as well at the start of his first term with no complaints heard. But Clinton didn't remove anyone after his re-election, as Bush did here, and seemed to appoint people based on their skill and experience, not exclusively on their political loyalty, which seems to be more to the point. What a sad day for our Department of Justice.

It now becomes known that clearly Gonzales is completely inept at his appointed capacity. Obviously, the administration hoped that this excuse for an attorney general could ride through the term without any crisis and come out looking clean. Unfortunately, as the muck catches up with the administration, how evident that the entire presidency has been nothing more than a sham to bamboozle the public while the cookie jar was stolen.

I am now having difficulty understanding how Gonzales ever got into law school, passed the bar or even became literate in law, as his talent is poor at best.

No one ever thought that he would need to defend himself, revealing his true inability to coherently explain his own actions.

He comes off looking like a lamb ready for the slaughter and knowing it.

I find it fascinating that Republicans who are responding, the once "law and order" Republicans, are not concerned that the Attorney General is involved in a scandal to lean on U.S. Attorneys to investigate Democrats and lift investigations on Republicans just because an election was going on.
Because they wouldn't play ball, that's why they were fired.

He's politicized the highest office of law in the land and made extraordinarily unethical if not illegal actions. Clinton fired the U.S. Attorneys outright, when he first came into office. It isn't even close to the same thing, that's just another talking point that, once again, skews the truth.

So don't talk about this being just partisan politics unless you know the facts. This is about rounding up a group of corrupt politicians and kicking their ass out of Washington. Enough is enough!

"Should have been more precise" was the wording chosen by whoever wrote the AG's statement. This is interesting, since, in terms of data, "precision" is "consistency of information" while "accuracy" means "closeness to actual information". "Precision" is saying the same thing every time; "accuracy" is telling the truth. So AG Gonzales has apologized for not keeping his story straight, but has not apologized for any lies, distortions or omissions.

I consider this situation to be only one of hundreds of symptoms of corruption and incompetence in the "W" administration.

Sadly, this guy is one of the Bush's political running dogs still around.

Actually, it is no ones business why these people were fired. Your boss does not have to have a reason to fire you, and if he does, is congress going to run to your defense?

Get real, Clinton fired all of them and the non-partisan White House Travel Office employees. This is a waste of time and a political ploy to get Americans to focus on non-issues rather then substance.

Mooncalves, one and all.

Hey Mark, Clinton fired attorneys at the beginning of his term. That was typical and without agenda. Bush had them fired because they werent investigating and discrediting Demos. Making the rebubs look good.

It's a tribute to the worthlessness of government as a whole and the federal portion specifically that with all that needs improving in the U.S. these career politicians, both Republican and Democrat, find time for this charade. Can anyone name one proactive thing that the federal government has done since the Founders died? Does anyone know how much we are being "ripped off" by these parasites with 20 to 30 years sucking at the government teat? When will America wake up and exercise its VOICE - NOW? Throw all these bums out. Vote Out Incumbent Politicians Everywhere - NOW!

Note that this isn't about politics as usual, this is really about subverting democracy.
Firing the other guy's is OK at the start of an administration. Firing a few of your own for pursuing inconvenient investigations is obstruction of justice at the highest level.

a filthy degenerate administration from one end to the other...

these republican shills get on here about clinton/reno firing US attorneys at the BEGINNING of his term... as if that compares to firing a selecion of US attorneys currently working on major republican corruption cases... then they say, where's the big corruption case -- you're making it up... gee, i wonder if the new BUSHY US attorneys running those districts has anything to do with the silence??

this is republican strategy in the modern world... lie about everything... then lie about the lies... and laugh while honest ppl try to save their country's integrity...

where did goodling go to school? messiah university? OMG!! i like the point bill maher made last week... the attorney she chose for herself? classmate from oooooh lorrrrd university? HELL NO! an elite ivy league trained attorney...

so an anti-intelligence, anti-education perversion of legal theory is suitable for the united states as a whole, but when her goose is cooked she goes for a real lawyer....

wake up america -- this administration and all of their supporters are like the invasion of the pod people...

I feel like I'm reading something else entirely than the rest of the people making comments here. I totally understand what Al is saying and it makes complete sense. It sounds like the Dems are arguing about semantics and his opinion of invlovement. Quite simply it looks as if he had direct involvement in the proceedure of firing the federal prosecuters, but little involvement in the information collected to make the decision. He is not the catalyst but he was involved with the solution. Its semantics and he has every right to fire people who are reportedly not doing there job. Why are you people pretending these prosecuters were stellar and flawless employees?!?

So far, the best defenses I can hear for Gonzales are

1. Clinton did it too (like he's suddenly a moral beacon for the Right.) The argument dodges the reality that the 93 were fired for OBVIOUSLY political reasons, and nobody pretended otherwise. They were all Republicans, the new Administration was representing a Democratic majority, and the previous appointees all needed to move on. Reagan did the same thing. It's a well known, totally accepted Washington tradition. Nobody ever said any of the 93 were fired due to incompetence. There was no fumbling dishonesty, ergo no scandal.

And it's VERY different from firing a few in the late stages of an Administration. The only president for that is obviously criminal conduct (stripper-biting, for example.) Saying these guys had been fired due to incompetence only made them look even worse. It's also what caused them to fight back in defense of their reputations.

2. They serve at the pleasure of the president. That doesn't mean that anything the president finds pleasant is automatically okay. He's not the Pope, after all, and if he decided he wanted to get falling down drunk every night, that wouldn't make it okay, even if it was legal. But according to these people, it's simply not possible to abuse authority. If you have it, so the argument goes, anything you do with it is okay and beyond reproach. Except, of course, it's not.

3. There's no smoking gun.

Really? An AG who, with weeks of preparation and access to EVERY document in his department still can't remember the details of what the President and Karl Rove wanted from him? That's not a smoking gun, it's a loaded weapon, ready to go off.

Kinda like 'Brownie'. One major catastrophe away from a totally meltdown. Only thing is, we don't' depend on FEMA for Justice.

The conservatives, whose opinions and actions are ususally based on their self-serving interpretation of the Bible, continue to blame the Clintons for everything from dandruff to 93 fired attorneys.

Well, dim bulbs, the difference is Clinton fired EVERYONE i.e. non-discriminatory. Bushies fired those that did not pass muster with the right-winged authoritarians that have been raping our civil rights, ruining our standing in the world and bankrupting our economy.

You had your moments in the sun. Now get out of the way of people that want to deal in truth and real American values.

Honestly, we're never going to get anywhere if everyone attacks based on Dem or Repub. Look at the man, his character, his manner, his actions, his record. Is this a man you trust? Is this a man you would want representing you? To those Repubs who attack based on party, if Gonzales were a Dem, you'd be all over the man now. It's insane. Look at the person's character/intelligence/leadership ability. Also to the person who said Clinton fired attys - yes, but he did not appoint them. They were the previous admin's appts. It's very common for the incoming president to fire the former admin's attys. Bush's admin APPOINTED these attys.

The issue is not the president, or any president, firing U.S. attorneys, our prosecuting attorneys. That is one of the prerogatives of the office; a president of one party should be able to have U.S. Attorneys of the same political persuation.

The issue here is whether U.S. Attorneys should be fired for doing their job of serving the public.

The issue here is whether U.S. Attorneys should be fired because they failed or refused to let suspected Republicans who are suspected of committing crimes remain unindicted or uninvestigated.

The issue here is whether U.S. Attorneys should indict or investigate Democrats as to whom there is no reasonably basis for believing they may have committed crimes.

The issue here is whether the president can require U.S. Attorneys to enforce, or refuse to enforce, the law with the overriding goal being to further the interests of the president has his administration.

I could go on, but certainly the point has been made.

I am a Democrat, and I would feel even more adamant and outraged by this situation if the firing of U.S. Attorneys was being done by a Democratic president, a member of my own party. Just as one might be more outraged by his brother committing a crime -- sullying the family name -- than the same crime committed by a guy across town.

-- Paul Arnold

This guy is the biggest joke. It appears that the only qualifications for his positions is incompetence and half truths. I could totally have his job!

And what about Johnny Sutton, one of Gonzo's nemesis who could care less about protecting our Southern Border. And what about Chertoff, a major incompetent whose more interested in establishing a "North American Union" and what Mexico thinks more than homeland security? And what about Congress now run by the Democrats? Are they funding the fence with Mexico per the law passed by Congress just before the elections. Noooo way. The Demos are ALSO bought out by corporate interests. The recourse we American citizens have is to live by our Constitution; all of it. Lose one part of it and we lose it all!

This Gonzales is a liar, a derelict, and most incompetent. I do not believe he is being honest here. He seems incoherent. He's not speaking the truth. If this guy can't remember things, he most certainly needs to be replaced and replaced immediately. He can't even answer the questions. We cannot afford to have a dishonest, crooked hack like this as head of the Dept. of Justice. If it can be ascertained that Gonzales has lied he needs to be removed from office and arrested.

This man should be an economist! I say that because, as a UK citizen, he was, as a famous man once said, "economical with the truth".

What keeps bugging me is that if these 8 were fired for not being agressive enough in their pursuit of politically correct indictments. What does it say about the rest of the US attorneys who weren't fired!?

It boils down to this: Bush and his administration have no shame.

I keep wondering if the Bush apologists on these comments pages are for real or if they are White House flacks using their RNC laptops. Could there be this many completely deluded citizens on so many issues?

US attorneys are traditionally replaced by a new administration, or to placate Senators who want to do constituent favors. Then they are left alone to do their jobs according to their own integrity. That's normal politics. Bush, instead and uniquely, wants to threaten the jobs of his own staff if they do not appear willing to tilt the law in favor of Republican or against Democratic suspects. That is corruption, pure and simple. There is no actual comparison with anything in the recent past, and if you know enough to follow the issue, you know that. That is why even some Republican Senators cannot stomach it.

Beyond that, the idea that Justice Department decisions have been made based on buried, hidden and destroyed evidence is corrupt in and of itself, no matter how innocent the decision. Except where specifically granted rights of secrecy, Justice above all other departments needs to be an open book.

I find it hard to believe y'all really do not understand all that. Just imagine if the party affiliations were reversed here! Imagine if this were AG Edwards in the Obama administration. You'd be rioting in the streets, and Rush would be so high on endorphins he wouldn't even need pain pills.

I was born during the Truman administration and I've seen institutionalized rot many times but these clowns have retired the trophy. At the end of the day, the one incredible aspect remains the unending, unmitigated hypocrisy of those still defending Bush, Inc. If this situation were reversed with the dems in office, they'd all be asking, no, SCREAMING, for impeachment.

Amazing how the pro terrorist, Anti-American, liberals forget about real criminals like Sandy Berger,and William Jefferson and make attacks on something that isn't illegal. Where there should be an investigation is on Pelosi and fraternizing with terrorist sponsoring nations. Its that same old liberal motto of "never accept responsibility for something that you can blame someone else for". Osama is right with you bumper sticker plastering libs. As for the guy who thinks Cho should have been at the White House, thats all I need to know that I'm on the good side.

It makes me sick to hear the wakos defend bush/gonzo by citing the fact that Clinton replaced the 93 US attorneys. He replaced them at the beginning of his administration, as did most previous presidents, not over halfway through his administration (for not showing blind obedience to Karl and co). No one is taking issure with bush's right to replace the US attorneys, the problem is the outrageous political reasons that he did it. Maybe some of these wakos should "read their history" instead of regurgitating the party line!

To the people on this list who are supporting Bush and Gonzales in this matter: You have failed to grasp the details of this situation. This is not unusual for your crowd. I am not trying to make you feel bad, I just want you to go back and find out more details before you make up your minds. I am sure that, given more information, you will arrive at the obvious conclusion: The AG, under instructions from Miers, Rove, and ultimately, Bush, contrived to remove FPs based on their refusal to act as political axe-men for the Administration. That is obvious. The problem with this sort of action is that it places all current and FUTURE FPs in a politicized position. This has never been the case in the past. These FPs are the backbone of our Federal Justice system. It is fundamental to a free and democratic society that they be free to investigate and prosecute whomever they see fit based on their professional judgement. By acting in the manner described, the AG and his superiors have attacked the basic tenets of our democracy. This must be brought to light and remedied. So far, the evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of my interperetation of events. Perhaps this will change over the next few hours. The questions is, will the rhetoric of the right wing reflect the facts, or their bias?

As a "yellow dog" Democrat I certainly hope that Alberto Gonzales does not resign. With him in place and almost daily evidence of politization of the D.O.J. we can continue the daily dung drops on him and this corrupt administration. We can keep the dung drops going for weeks. It is a low cost, win-win for our party. Hang in there Gonzo.

And what about Johnny Sutton, one of Gonzo's nemesis who could care less about protecting our Southern Border. And what about Chertoff, a major incompetent whose more interested in establishing a "North American Union" and what Mexico thinks more than homeland security? And what about Congress now run by the Democrats? Are they funding the fence with Mexico per the law passed by Congress just before the elections. Noooo way. The Demos are ALSO bought out by corporate interests. The recourse we American citizens have is to live by our Constitution; all of it. Lose one part of it and we lose it all!

"I mispoke", is it a euphemism for "I lied"?

Speak the truth Gonzo; be a man!!

This is just another “tip of the iceberg” on the horizon. Gonzales is just another player in the greed, corruption and insatiable desire for power the Republican party has assaulted America with.

The chicanery this administration has committed upon the American public is almost at an end. Once this is over, Watergate will look like a parking ticket!

Upcoming criminal investigations into the administration’s underhanded and illegal dealings will take years and cost taxpayers more than the Iraq war!

Given the contempt for the American public and society in general that this administration has revealed through all its schemes and connivances, the Republican party has been effectively “Pearl Harbored” from within.

In the end, we might expect to find this administration linked to the Twin Tower attacks, the JFK assassination and even the Roswell incident!

There is one assumption that seems implicit in a lot of the discussion concerning Mr. Gonzales (and most other discussions regarding the workings of the Bush Administration): that this Attorney General is qualified and competent and that mistakes are just exactly that--mistakes. Consider for a moment this: perhaps this man was appointed precisely because of his inability to function as a competent, independent chief prosecutor. His loyalty only solidifies his resumé.

This is the sad reality of our culture, magnified so clearly, that incompetence does not matter, if you know the right people (and have a lot of money). In fact, I believe that a certain level of ignorance and incompetence has worked its way into our culture due to the relative ease with which we live our lives. Too bad there isn't a pill for ignorance to ask your doctor about. It's time for the 30% percent to admit your fears and question your faith in your leaders' intentions.

OK. This is our lawmakers at their best.
Can anyone tell me if the fired AG's will get unfired as a result of this hearing?
I guess we should look at this farce as time when these good people are not voting to raise our taxes on some pork barrel project. Hooray for both the democrats and the republicians.

"Where are the yahoo messages boards? I miss the trolls so much. This format is censored and boring.

Posted by: SAM | Apr 19, 2007 1:38:10 PM

REPORTED!!

QUOTE: "Amazing how the pro terrorist, Anti-American, liberals forget about real criminals like Sandy Berger,and William Jefferson and make attacks on something that isn't illegal. Where there should be an investigation is on Pelosi and fraternizing with terrorist sponsoring nations. Its that same old liberal motto of "never accept responsibility for something that you can blame someone else for". Osama is right with you bumper sticker plastering libs. As for the guy who thinks Cho should have been at the White House, thats all I need to know that I'm on the good side.

Posted by: Michael | Apr 19, 2007 2:03:54 PM"

This is why the Republicans are on their way out!

Can you imagine that the person who just said this might have a job, walk among us, vote and probably procreates??? There's more than one time bomb among us...........

I love how very naughty the word "partisan" has become in this country. One of the most important parts of how our nation operates is having people of differing opinions openly discussing things they don't agree on. Unfortunately, we've got people in office doing horrifically sketchy things. Okay. Let's talk about it.

I'm so very glad that one of the things we do is have debates on the Senate floor that allow our senators to make more informed decisions about this. I'm glad this guy is getting grilled. Not because I have it in for him, but because he has the opportunity here to present as much information as possible to our senators defending his decisions and the senators can openly ask him any of their own lingering questions. Now, from what I'm seeing here, he's not exactly doing a bang-up job at it right now, but I'm glad the process goes through.

Why are we getting snippy with each other about this one? Because it's heavily publicized? Why are we not getting snippy about what's going on under the radar? There's quite a bit of stuff that we never get to talk about because it never gets presented to us as a part of responsible reporting. Let's discuss start talking about the general tendency for this administration (and many of the more recent ones) to "fly under the radar" when it comes to its policy. THAT is truly unamerican.

Every incoming administration cleans house. When Clinton came in in '93 he removed all of the Reagan/Bush appointees so that he could make his own appointments. Does anyone on this planet believe Shrub kept any of Clinton's appointees, including the U.S. attourneys, when he came in in '01? Of course not. The 93 attourneys fired by Clinton in '93 is a total red herring.

So what if he replaced them in the middle of his administartion. Why is this illegal? Why don't the hateful Senators spend more time on domestic issues rather than constantly looking for stuff to hammer this administration with!

No crime has taken place in the Justice Department. The Democrat Party has forgotten this.

Here is where crimes have been committed: Travelgate, Watergate, Clinton lying to a grand jury, Sandy Berger's thefts, etc. Did I forget to mention that these occurred during by the previous Democrat administration?

All I'm hearing from Gonzales supporters is spluttering rage and widely discredited arguments.

Kind of like what Bush is hearing from Gonzales right now.

I think there is a great difference between firing ALL 93 US attorneys at the time (which keeps getting mentioned) and firing a few attorneys involved in key investigations against prominent Bush friendly senators and congressmen. To further compound this disgrace, they claimed these firings were "performance based" while many of these attorneys had spectacular performance reviews.

Your weak "But Clinton fired 93 attorneys! Boohoohoo" argument is baseless. If you fire ALL attorneys, it cannot automatically be construed as politically motivated. Please say something else from Fox News when commenting on this situation, this talking point was poorly thought out.

P.S. I count myself as a conservative.

It's long past time for Abu Gonzalez to go. His arrogance is staying is actually damaging the country further. What is wrong with this administration? They have completely lost touch and are WAY off mission. Gonzalez' on-going "misspeaks" are just lies he got caught in.

Does anyone in this admin have any shame?

Jeff C., there have been some posts in which I just say "left" and not "loony left."

YOu should know better too as being the recipient of an avowed member of the Loony Left trying to figure out what the C stands for in Jeff C.

To me that is "loony," as well as hate Bush all the time no matter what, sort of like one Swamper suggesting the Bush administration orchestrated the VT shootings so Gonzalez wouldn't have to testify. Or the President Chimpy, Darth Cheney, Bush is a Nazi stuff.

Catch my drift?

In response to Mark's completely biased response that most uneducated individuals have on this topic by suggesting that Clinton's removal of all 93 US Attorneys justifies the Bush administration's removal of only 8 US Attorneys, I would point out to Mark that removing all US Attorneys at the start of a term is a standard practice used by both Republican and Democratic presidents. It has not been frowned upon because EVERYONE is removed rather than eliminating only those few who potentially are not adhering to the agenda of the executive branch. The fact that only a small number of US Attorneys were fired by the Bush administration( as opposed to 93 by the Clinton administration) is not the important point. It is whether those individuals were selectively removed because they did not "play ball" and follow the White House agenda. That is the purpose of these hearings -- to determine if the executive branch exceeded its authority and effectively took control of the judicial branch by targeting for removal US Attorneys who did not follow a White House agenda as well as determining if the DOJ retained US Attorneys who put their positions and the White House agenda above their ethical obligations to the court by agreeing to "play ball" and make prosecutorial decisions consistent with the White House agenda instead of their investigative findings.
Also, while I recognize that these are not permanent positions, it does not mean that you can be removed for a nefarious reason. An at-will employee can be fired for any reason, but not a bad reason.
If there is no political agenda behind these firings, then what is the White House and Gonzales so worried about? Tell the truth, prove it was based on legitimate reasons other than politics and let's move on. On the other hand, if it was based on politics and White House directives, it is critical that we address this issue and ensure that the separation of powers our founding fathers established remains in place. This administration has already eroded so many of our constitutional rights -- we cannot afford to let it continue!

One mooncalf after another. Read, just read. These attorney's were fired at the beginning of his second term, for not following up on election fraud, period.

And who cares anyway. Is congress going to investigate your boss if he fires you over political reasons? No. Stop wasting my money with these investigation that are nothing more then political agendas.

Find a real issue to spend my money on. Like improving the mental health system in this country. Take your damn political agendas and shove it.

phylora wrote:
"Honestly, we're never going to get anywhere if everyone attacks based on Dem or Repub."

As a not terribly political person, the following thing bothers me - a lot:
Why did that high-level DOJ official quit last week and announce that she would take the 5th if subpoenaed by Congress? Talk about no smoke without fire!
We are supposed to have a government, not a bad spinoff of the Sopranos crossed with the Three Stooges.

John D.,

Yes, yes I get it. We've previously agreed on the looniness of trying to find people's identities. I think Johnny E. might have been confused, though, as there was a "Jeff Carpenter" posting here the day before he tagged me with that name. Alas, I always use Jeff C. and my last name doesn't have nine letters.

And fear not, I know you have said left without "loony" before it, just as Derek Zoolander whipped out a left-turn as he unveiled Magnum.

Per Bolverk:

And who cares anyway. Is congress going to investigate your boss if he fires you over political reasons?

---

Earth to Bolverk: If I'm employed by the U.S. DOJ, then perhaps Congress will (rightfully) investigate.

If I'm flipping burgers next to you, it won't.

Get it?

Some people find comfort in being told what to do and think. This admin is really good at that.

Is it no wonder that so many people here "Clinton did it" and can't or won't understand the difference?

This is the worst admin we've ever had. I knew it when he was first running.

I wonder if those same people understand what they've done will impact the future generations, or if they care.

This admin will leave this country in shambles and we may never recover from it.

Thanks "W", Karl Rove, Cheney and Gonzo for destroying our country.

I see that the childish virus has infected this blog as well. It would seem that there is not going to be any reasoning or attempts at unification by the Democratic party or their minions. They wish to go about their merry way, snickering at their own antics and so-called cute little quips, grinning after each and every degrading remark made concerning President Bush, while being interviewed. Greatly reminiscent of Nero fiddling as Rome burned.

Evidently, I stepped on 10 percenter's toes when I mentioned in passing that I had ancestors here at the beginning of our great country. I really cannot fathom where that statment might send 10 percenter into a spasm. All of a sudden it is not acceptable anymore to say I love my country as my ancestors did! Politically incorrect? Too bad! I LOVE MY COUNTRY AS MY ANCESTROS DID!

I do believe many of our ancestors would roll over in their graves if they could see what utter disarray, disregard for civility and lack of respect that has befallen our country and whether you wish to accept the facts, or not...it all begins on Capitol Hill with rogue politicians who belong to the organization of Democratic Socialists of America. Communism/Socialism. They go hand-in-hand.

Having lived in Texas all 52 years of my life, I've seen alot of different types of government corruption but it was at it's worst when Bush was Governor. And guess who was there to help him... Gonzales! Back in their glory days it was Alberto (Bush's toadie) preparing the execution packets for Bush to sign off on and the amazing thing is that Bush never read them!
Bush proudly describes himself as the CEO of the United States. If every CEO and his staff ran things the way they did, they'd be fired by their stockholders!
Well, we're all "stockholders" in the future of the United States and I think it's about time we cast our vote to have these imcompetents removed from the "board"!

I'm a Canadian I should be allowed to vote in the Presidential elections. Bush's incompetence affects a good portion of the world.

Amen, Bolverk!

As a resident of Utah, I'm deeply ashamed of the moral retreat of Senator Hatch to a politically motivated defense of the indefensible.

Posted by: Porter Rockwell | Apr 19, 2007 12:40:02 PM

Borrin' Orrin has made a career out of defending the lame, the incompetent, the indefensible, after all, he's one of them. Remember his impassioned defense of Justice Thomas. Not only was Thomas likely a sexist, but his performance on the US Supreme Court is an embarrassment. Clarence Thomas hasn't done a single thing to distinguish himself, he merely rubber-stamps everything that Judge Scalia proposes. That's Orrin's kind of people, all right.

It makes me sad to read all of these comments like: "The Bush/Gonzo supporters have obviously missed the point etc."

No they haven't. They are lying.

Where is the mystery here? Everytime you listen to a repugnican shill as if there's a chance in a million of the truth escaping their lips you are doing yourself harm... It is a criminal regime...

I mean, OK, the first couple of dozen times they blatently lied about various constitution subverting activities, you could chalk it up to coincidence, or mis-spoken, i don't recall, i would NEVER deliberately mislead...

But now, after hundreds of treasonous and traitorous acts and deliberate obfuscations... WHEN, oh WHEN will the good people accept the reality of the situation...

If you are a republican, FINE... I have republicans in my family... I have republican friends... You hate paying taxes, OK, I get it... BUT what does that have to do with defending this vituperrious group of low-lives??

This isn't sports however much you wish it was... It isn't cool to root for the team regardless of how god-aweful the team is...

I'm a democrat, and the alcoholic bum who lives on the street corner near me might very well be a democrat, BUT I wouldn't vote for him if he was running for president...

So now we are stuck with a mean-spirited putz for president, and all of his mean-spirited henchmen too...

JUST PLEASE STOP with the constant surprise at how Full Of S*&t these people are, and their supporters too...

Evidently, I stepped on 10 percenter's toes when I mentioned in passing that I had ancestors here at the beginning of our great country. I really cannot fathom where that statment might send 10 percenter into a spasm. All of a sudden it is not acceptable anymore to say I love my country as my ancestors did! Politically incorrect? Too bad! I LOVE MY COUNTRY AS MY ANCESTROS DID!

Posted by: Daylo | Apr 19, 2007 3:06:52 PM

Daylo.. I also have a lineage back to pre-revolutionary war days. Although I don't see how that has anything to do with who's on what side of current events (as evidenced by the fact that we are on opposite sides of this fence).

Unless you also want to apologize and personally pay reparations for slavery, I don't see how your ancestry qualifies you any more than someone who just got their citizenship 15 minutes ago to debate current events.

And I certainly don't think the actions of our current King George, with his war of aggression and unrelenting Executive Branch power-grabbing, are exactly doing justice to the spirit of the American Revolutionary war and our Founding Fathers.

I watched all of Gonzales's testimony. He's either incompetent (unable to manage his department despite trying), negligent (inattentive to his duties), or mendacious.

Only Orrin Hatch could bring himself to defend AGAG. Tom Coburn, a very conservative Republican, called on AGAG to resign. That can't be good for his future.

AGAG is not an attorney, at least not a scrupulously independent one. He's an enabler, like all of the other inner-circle Bushies. He won't leave unless and until W tells him to leave - the ultimate proof of Gonzales's elevation of loyalty above all else.

I'm sure conservatives will be okay in '08 when the dems control every branch of government, from the national level to a majority of states and demsocrats start firing conservatives at will.

If your argument is blaming Clinton for doing the same thing, I would suggest two things for you: 1. get your news from somewhere else 2. stop being so dumb.

Getting to the truth is NOT whining. Complaining about oversight is. Conservatives have always used the "dems whine" line only because they themselves are guilty of it.

As an ex-Republican and current independent who heavily sides with Democrats of late, it's a shame that the GOP has become the party of hate, inequality, fear while dumbing down our great nation for political gain. The GOP needs to straighten their priorties or become a regional party in the Southeastern U.S.A.

America is too great to have a disgraceful party in the GOP.

It's time to send Gonzo to Gitmo and Water Board
Alberto Gonzales until Gonzo finally tells us
the Truth!

awe Poncho!....awe Cisco! Its all about not being forthright with answers to questions asked by those who should ask them,period!

Let's not forget also... Yes, Gonzo fired these prosecutors inappropriately during the middle of a term for persuing Republicans on legitimate verifiable crimes, and not persuing Democrats on unverifiable phantom crimes.

But also a MAJOR difference here from any past administration is that the Attorney General's office was given (under the Patriot Act) the authority and ability to appoint U.S. Attorneys WITHOUT getting Senate confirmation on the appointees. This was intended only for temporary appointments until they could get the appropriate Senate confirmation, however it has come to light that Gonzales intended on NEVER getting the replacement U.S. Attorneys Senate confirmation.

Why? Well I don't know much about the replacements, but I would speculate that most, if not all, would not be confirmable by the Senate, and very likely because they were intended to be highly partisan political hacks that would do the prosecutorial bidding of the corrupt administration by ignorning the legitimate crimes of Republicans and going after phantom crimes of Democrats.

I love all the "Clinton did it" justification from the Bush backers. Was that why you voted for Bush? Because you thought he'd be just like Clinton? I guess it'll be a couple more years then before honor and integrity return the White House...

To the person above who said,
"This is a waste of time and a political ploy to get Americans to focus on non-issues rather then substance."

...I must respond: "ISSUES OF SUBSTANCE"? Today, there is hardly a place to look that is not replete with such issues, and they are ALL painful for the Bush administration to contemplate! If we call the integrity of the DOJ a "waste of time" then we have no choice but to return to the continuing destruction of Iraq or to the Wolfowitz charade, or to focus on Guantanamo, to name just a few! Or are these "non-issues" as well? You'd be hard-put to look anywhere at all and not find substance these days! If that writer means to suggest that this is *relatively* insubstantial compared to, say, perpetrating a self-interested war by means of wholly invented pretexts, then perhaps the characterization is accurate, but barring that particular comparison, it is a ridiculous assertion.

The reason that any lingering shreds of faith --held by the people of this country and around the world-- are crumbling into oblivion is perfectly illustrated by the spectacle of the Gonazales interrogations, which show us clearly that this administration holds nothing sacred when it comes to the pursuit of absolute power--not democracy, neither the letter nor the spirit of the law, not the preservation of our legal system, and least of all, the simple truth.

For these reasons, the above quoted statement about political ploys seems a perfect exemple of the willful obtuseness of the party-line parroters who helped Bush "elect" himself to a second term, and who would vote for him even now if they could. This frightens me more than anything, really, and this is what shocked and depressed me so much after the last election. I never understood before that this country has so many citizens that do not *think*--so many voters who prefer to swallow prepared packages of propaganda put out by an administration that actually *scripts* a president to sound as ignorant as the constituents he is courting.

In order to vote for Bush a second time, these people put on blinders and simply accepted what they heard because the speaker was the president of the United States of America, and they chose to live in the fantasy of a world where that office still carried with it an obligation to truth and decency. Now that it's become blatantly apparent that no such thing exists in our government any longer, It seems that, to a disturbing number of ordinary Americans as well, the truth is unimportant. Rather, it is the appearance of "patriotism" (in their narrow perception of that word's definnition) that matters: consistency is what counts, not contemplation; the appearance of righteousness is confused with the truth of *being* right.

Most horrifying is the fact that the corruption is being supported and perpetuated by voters who are unwilling to admit that they were wrong to put their faith in George W. Bush. These are not even the wealthy people who benefit from his policies, but middle and lower-income conservatives who are clinging to dreams of a way of life they heard their parents talk about when they were children.

Wake up, good people of the United States! Open your eyes, all of you decent, strong-hearted Americans! If you want a world where your children might have a chance at happiness, opportunity, integrity, and --perhaps most of all-- a world that is still beautiful and living and green, you must open your eyes! Some of you trusted a man who deceived you, and now he and his corrupt officers must be seen for who and what they are! True patriotism means that you can mourn when you see democracy being mangled, you can feel outrage when you see power being abused, and you can demand change when you have been cheated and betrayed by those you elected in good faith!

Loving America means that we stop deceiving ourselves when the word "America" no longer stands for something we can be proud of. I am ashamed every time I hear another lie from the White House, and ashamed every time I read another willfully ignorant comment from a Bush defender who would rather repeat such obviously flawed logic than open their eyes and ears and hearts and see what is really happening to this country, and what this country is doing to the rest of the world. I hate feeling ashamed to call myself an American, and every day, with every new scandal and every new comment, I have more reasons for that shame and more reason to want to save America from her attackers--namely, George W. Bush and his administration of terror.

They have gotten rid of every US Attorney at the beginning of every administration. Even Bush I did it.

The thing that doesn't happen is getting rid of them in the middle of an administration and it has happened a handful of times in the entire history of the country and nearly all were for malfeasance.

I find it interesting, appalling, curious that much of this is based on election fraud, or the "prevention" of that. Being that in the first rould of Bush's presidential career his cronies (ROVE) stole an election using the very thing they now say is wrong. Then in Bush II, they got the help from Diebold (Hagel's outfit) to do it once again. That, coupled with the fact that Karl Rove's greatest claim to fame, prior to being the Prez's political hitman, was stealing an election at the school he dropped out of; makes this the most obvious farce in the history of politics.

Whether you are Red, Blue or Beige - you can't deny the fact that all of the kings men and horses can't put this administration back together again. Maybe Cheney's billions that he will reap (Haliburton deferment) after the end of the run can pay for the damage that has been done to the lives of world's citizens and the Constitution.

Daylo.. I also have a lineage back to pre-revolutionary war days. Although I don't see how that has anything to do with who's on what side of current events (as evidenced by the fact that we are on opposite sides of this fence).

Unless you also want to apologize and personally pay reparations for slavery, I don't see how your ancestry qualifies you any more than someone who just got their citizenship 15 minutes ago to debate current events.

And I certainly don't think the actions of our current King George, with his war of aggression and unrelenting Executive Branch power-grabbing, are exactly doing justice to the spirit of the American Revolutionary war and our Founding Fathers.
Posted by: Dave | Apr 19, 2007 4:58:14 PM

Well good for you, Dave, I am quite sure you have a "sterling pedigree"...and you mention this because?????????? I do not believe I mentioned anything in my post about someone qualifying or not qualifying in order to make comments. By all means, feel free.

As far as the sins of the fathers, I do not believe I am liable for anyone, except what I have done personally. It is called "personal responsibility", a new and unique phrase for the liberal set.

Sounds like there is a lot of nitpicking with all the comments being made, and as they say, "swallow a camel and strain on a gnat".

The libs jump on the UNIMPORTANT things in a post like a duck on a june bug, attack it and chew it apart, but then leave the meatier comments about all the members of congress (DEMOCRATS) who belong to the Democratic Socialists of America organization, off in the distance without comment. I wonder why that is? Perhaps it is that not-so-secretly the libs/dems want the overthrow of the government and have their little communistic Kommyhas with redistribution of all the wealth in America, (except of course theirs).

Better wake up before it is too late!

Loving America means that we stop deceiving ourselves when the word "America" no longer stands for something we can be proud of. I am ashamed every time I hear another lie from the White House, and ashamed every time I read another willfully ignorant comment from a Bush defender who would rather repeat such obviously flawed logic than open their eyes and ears and hearts and see what is really happening to this country, and what this country is doing to the rest of the world. I hate feeling ashamed to call myself an American, and every day, with every new scandal and every new comment, I have more reasons for that shame and more reason to want to save America from her attackers--namely, George W. Bush and his administration of terror.
Posted by: Gillian | Apr 19, 2007 7:22:23 PM

Gillian were you ashamed when Clinton was in office? Were you ashamed when Hillary stonewalled about the Rose Law Firm papers?

Actually all the Democrats on this blog write like they have the inside scoop on every issue that goes on within the White House. I would be willing to bet that no one on this blog, really knows the real truth, yet your judgments are harsh and quick...because you are a Democrat or a liberal, or both.

The fact is that most of what really goes on in the White House will be hidden from most of us for the rest of our lives. Then there is the media, biased in every direction, and yet they can present their cases so that we are sure this one or that one is guilty or innocent based on what they tell us. Who really knows the real truth? YET and still, you continue to make statements that lead others to believe you are an actual participant in what goes on, making such broad remarks as "Bush lied". Really? Were you there? What did he say and what did the Attorney General say? Tell us all about it. Oh, wait you already have...

If you are so ashamed of our country, why do you continue on here? Unlike a lot of countries, we have the ability to leave as did Nancy Pelosi on her little trip to Syria to hob nob with the leader of that terroristic country, making self-important statements such as "the road to Damascus is the road to peace". BUT I suppose you are not ashamed of Nancy, are you? No, I can probably answer that for you. Rogue politicians probably hold a soft spot in your heart. She undermines whatever the President is trying to do. Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid MAKE ME ASHAMED, BUT NEVER MY COUNTRY.

You just cannot see the forest for the trees.

As for the guy who thinks Cho should have been at the White House, thats all I need to know that I'm on the good side.

Posted by: Michael | Apr 19, 2007 2:03:54 PM

Michael : That guy would be John E. he thinks everybody is dumber than him. BoyChimp is one of his monikers. I'm going to refer his posting to Al Gonzalez and see if we can't get the secret service involved in this very serious matter. Making veiled gun threats against the White House is a Capital Offense. I think a fitting execution for this scoundrel would be some cement shoes..what do you think John E.?

Well good for you, Dave, I am quite sure you have a "sterling pedigree"...and you mention this because?????????? I do not believe I mentioned anything in my post about someone qualifying or not qualifying in order to make comments. By all means, feel free.

As far as the sins of the fathers, I do not believe I am liable for anyone, except what I have done personally. It is called "personal responsibility", a new and unique phrase for the liberal set.

Posted by: Daylo | Apr 19, 2007 8:13:34 PM

It seems you just post and forget, eh Daylo? I mention this because.... If you'd go back and read the post I was referencing you'd see that you spent 2/3 of it ranting about your ancestors, even feeling the need to go all-caps on the statement "I LOVE MY COUNTRY AS MY ANCESTROS DID!" as though that means anything... as far as I know, you're ancesters were Tories and hated this country's non-Monarchic system from day one as much as you obviously do today.

It almost paints a picture.... your ancestor from 230 years ago, looking exactly like you except in period attire, transposed over you today, both saying with the same shrillness "How this collection of fools dare challenge the will of our great leader, George! It's criminal, I say!"

You proceed with the third (final) paragraph of your post as though you're channeling your ancestors and they are speaking through you of their contempt for the "Democratic Socialist of America"... I find that cute as well.

And the most ironic (hypocritical?) part of all is you're claim that you're such a big personal responsability guy, all the while being so offended that the president is being held personally responsible for anything for the first time in 6 years (It's called oversight... something that Kings, Despots, and Fascists don't have to deal with, but this country that you claim to love so much has it written in its Constitution... and it's a responsibility Congress has neglected the whole time your decended-from-Tories, Monarchic rubber-stamp party held the gavel).

So you might want to brush up on your history... you'll find that today's conservative party that you love so much descends directly from the pro-British Loyalists... and if your descendants truly did love this country as much as you say they did and fought for independance, they're probably rolling in their grave, yes, but it's because of what's happened to their bloodline, not their political party.

The question has always been over the responsible exercise of that power. That distinguishes this situation from a President firing all USAs from the previous admin.
Posted by: a blinkin | Apr 19, 2007 1:32:08 PM

Well a blinkins' at it again, strolling merrily down Loony Lefty Lane making bizarre and untrue statements. Clintoon fired 93 to get two
Judge Charles Banks who was about to serve up a nice scrumptious platter of indictments for Bubba. He was replaced by his law student clerk Paula Casey who of course ran interference for him. And the other one was the judge who pinched old Rosty, who had a novel approach for home redecorating at the tax payers expense. Of course, Rosty was pardoned at the end by Bubba.I suppose that's your idea of responsible exercise of power ? You liberals are sooooo easy to disprove time and time again.

I would be willing to bet that no one on this blog, really knows the real truth, yet your judgments are harsh and quick...because you are a Democrat or a liberal, or both.
Posted by: Daylo | Apr 19, 2007 8:28:56 PM

I'd be willing to bet the very same statement holds true for you Daylo. Your judgments against a group you don't like (Democrats) seem just as harsh & quick. You mention a lack of respect for the office of the President but you don't seem to have any problem showing a lack of respect for the last person to hold that office. So is respect based on the office itself or is it based on your judgment of the person that holds that office?

BTW: Being an American & actual respecting what being an American is supposed to stand for means accepting that not everyone will feel as you do or see eye to eye with you on every issue. It is also your duty as an American to stand up for another American's right to disagree with you or what you believe. You say you love this country but you show a lot of disrespect for anyone who don't feel or think just as you do.

Daylo's reference to the Rose Law firm documents is telling...
First, whenever Bush/Rove/Cheney's apologists realize they haven't a leg to stand on when it comes to defending this corrupt administration, they resort to the tired old game of attacking CLINTON, who's been out of office for over SIX YEARS.
Second, after several years and millions of dollars spent on a partisan special prosecutor (i.e. witch-hunt), all the Republicans could get on Clinton was that he lied about an affair. Big deal.

Daylo:
"YET and still, you continue to make statements that lead others to believe you are an actual participant in what goes on, making such broad remarks as "Bush lied". Really? Were you there?"

Earth to Daylo: Bush & co. have lied, and lied, and lied, and continue to do so. It is well-documented how they lied to congress, and to us, in order to get their little "preemptive" war. The AG lied when he said he wasn't involved in any meetings about the attorney firings. Rove is spewing forth reams of falsehood when he goes on about "voter fraud," as if it were DEMOCRATS stealing elections, when there is ample evidence (see Mark Crispin Miller's well researched work about how voting irregularities somehow always have gone in favor of the repubs in the past several years) to the contrary.

Millions people who have supported bush in the past are starting to wake up and realize just how corrupt, criminal and discpicable this administration truly is (and always has been).

It is well-documented how they lied to congress, and to us, in order to get their little "preemptive" war.
Posted by: Pointy | Apr 20, 2007 5:34:42 AM

So Pointy, all that information, from all those intelligence agencies, from all those countries ( at least 8 plus the U.N.) was redacted by Mr. Bush, and put in liar format and then presented to all our brainy senators' and congress people and no one knew about it ? You know, for a guy who's vilified endlessly by the Looney Left for being so stupid, he really accomplishes some extraordinary things. Do you really think most sane Americans buy that old ,stale ,worn out childish excuse as to why they voted for war authorization ? Please post a site or link for your "well documented lies" you refer to. I'll be waiting to read about your 'PROOF".

I rest my case...all about my/your ancestors after I make an offhand remark about my ancestors AND nothing about the Democrats who belong to the Democratic Socialists of America. Blinders on again, I see. That would be dsausa.

You see, the real issue is the direction of the Democratic party. The rogue Democratic party leads small little revolutions daily in front of the camera and all the little Bolsheviks throughout the country scream, hear, hear!!! You have been programmed and do not even realize it. It has taken small bytes of irrelevant and false information fed to you daily and now you have been satiated enough to expel it on your on.

Then there WAS the party of Truman Democrats. That was the party my grandfather belonged to. Not this one. That ancestor would roll over in his grave as well, but let's not start a feeding frenzy over my grandfather, okay? Shameful of me to even mention I have a grandfather.

Respect? For Clinton? You must be joking! The office of the Presidency, YES. Clinton/Clinton? NO!

Ladies and Gents, It has been my pleasure!

Don B:

When you categorically get rid the previous admin's USAs, the consequences are going to tilt both ways: some of the USAs would have been beneficial to you; others not. The point is that when Clinton (and all others) did this, the process was not selective but categorical, and thus not so readily susceptible to abuse.

That the Gonzo situation reflected abuse is a fact obvious to all but dead-enders like you.

Rosty?: He served his prison term. The subsequent pardon was compassionate, but clearly did not undermine the justice system. Nice attempt at a complete red herring though, and thanks for not even mentioning Sandy Berger or Monica.

So Pointy, all that information, from all those intelligence agencies, from all those countries ( at least 8 plus the U.N.) was redacted by Mr. Bush, and put in liar format and then presented to all our brainy senators' and congress people and no one knew about it ? You know, for a guy who's vilified endlessly by the Looney Left for being so stupid, he really accomplishes some extraordinary things.

Posted by: Don B | Apr 20, 2007 6:52:56 AM

Don B... all those intelligence agencies, from all those countries (including the UN), as well as our own intelligence community, were telling the Bush administration behind the scenes to cool it and that their "evidence" was not being presented correctly publicly.

The lie was that the Bush admin stoked our fears with a repeated "if you only knew what we know" rhetoric in public that was based entirely on claims that intelligence agencies worldwide were telling the admin were erronious and the admin's now-obvious propensity to hand-pick only that intelligence that supported it's pre-determined conclusion (regardless of the soundness of that evidence or credibility of the source).

[quote]
Typical Liberal BS....funny how they don't make mention, nor the media for that matter, how Clintion/Janet Reno fired 93 attorneys at the beginning of his term.
Posted by: Mark | Apr 19, 2007 12:32:11 PM
[/quote]

Mark, that diversion has been beaten to death here in The Swamp weeks ago. ALL presidents replace US Attorneys AT THE BEGINNING OF THEIR ADMINISTRATIONS!!!

But let me ask you this: how many US Attorneys did Clinton fire in the 6th year of his administration, like Bush and Gonzales did in 2006?

[quote]
More mindless prattle from the Loony "We hate all" Left. I've come to the conclusion that many elements of the Loony Left are just as disturbed as the VT shooter Cho. Reading all the mindless, hateful prattle day in and day out here is no different than hearing his Cho's videotaped rant.
Posted by: John D | Apr 19, 2007 1:00:22 PM
[/quote]

John D, what those of us you insult by calling "the Loony Left" hate most of all is politicians lying to us, and continuing to lie even after they've been shown that we've caught their lies earlier.

Tell us, why do you hate political differences of opinion among Swamp posters? Would you prefer that everyone goose-step to one official political path as dictated to them by this administration?

"ATTY GEN. GONZALES: Senator, I do recall having a conversation with Mr. Rove. I now understand that there was a conversation between myself and the president, and at some point, Mr. Sampson brought me what I understood to be the consensus recommendation of the senior leadership that we ought to make a change in that district."

Yeah, see; it's just like they said all along: these US Attorneys serve at the pleasure of the consensus recommendation of the senior leadership.

Hello

Looks good! Very useful, good stuff. Good resources here. Thanks much!

G'night