Willravel

...what would you ask? As I've been listening to the Judiciary Committee questioning Attorney General/Torture Fiend Alberto Gonzales, I've been imagining questions that I would pose if I were on the Judiciary Committee.

"Mr. Gonzales, it seems, based on your testimony, that Mr. Sampson had the ability to overrule your authority and make decisions for you. Could you speak to the that fact, despite the fact that you had seniority over Mr. Sampson, who was the Chief of your staff?"

"Mr. Gonzales, Mr. Sampson gave the following testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee: 'I don't think the attorney general's statement that he was not involved in any discussions of U.S. attorney removals was accurate.' Can you speak, without using the word 'recall', to this?"

"Mr. Gonzales, how can you run a department that relies on facts when you seem to lack the ability, after being given 25 days to gather your facts and think about what happened, to remember only a few important conversations?"

"Mr. Gonzales, should each of the new attorneys have to go before the Congress for their conformation?"

"Mr. Gonzales, can you speak to the justifications for allowing torture?"

"Mr. Gonzales, which, to you, is more important: loyalty or the ability to do one's job?"

"Mr. Gonzales, what do you think happened to all of those emails?"

"Mr. Gonzales, when you resign later this week, who will you be covering for?"