Its about time?
 

Does anyone here...feel that the loss of Gonzales at AG....is a Bad thing?

A bad thing for who?

The United States...all of us.

I said, "No, he was a poor AG", although the fact is, I have little hope that Bush will appoint anyone better. Gonzales was Bush's legal strong-man. With the Justice Department (the name of which reminds me more and more of euphemisms like "The Ministry of Truth") still under the thumb of the Bush administrations, it seems unlikely to me that whoever replaces Gonzales will be any less of a puppet.

I didn't vote because there is no "Unsure... until we see who is next." choice.

I think this is just BushCo's way to try to cover their asses. Gonzales will now be turned over to the "wolves" and BushCo will think they are ok.

The problem I foresee is the next person being even a bigger lackey and Bush pushing his power even more.

I think this is a sad statement for the affairs in this country when our government that is supposed to be the shining example is so distrusted and so corrupted that nothing to help the people is getting done.

I think that the past 15 years and possibly more, we have worked so hard to destroy this country, to destroy the credibility of our leaders and to destroy freedoms, that we no longer care to rebuild and strengthen ourselves. We would rather just destroy.

And what's even sadder is we have an administration that is more than willing to oblige and help the destruction move faster.

I still fear Bush taking complete control and the '08 elections not being held.

Gonzales' leaving, truly does nothing but scare me even more of this.... yet, I have no true concrete idea why.

like most folk i expect, i am a bit baffled: why now?

and i am still trawling about news reports trying to find something that gives a sense of that.
reaction to follow maybe.

I do. We have gone through most of the reasons why in other threads.

No one is better off today compared to yesterday. Democrats gained nothing. The Judicial Committee gained nothing. American justice gained nothing. Bush was not harmed. The Bush agenda will not change. The people who got fired gained nothing. The alleged illegal wiretaps will prove to have been a non-issue.

I can argue that we are worse off. It is one thing to disagree politically, however it is very discouraging to think that people who want to serve this nation will be subject to an endless barrage of personal attacks for political theater. I think many good people on both sides of the political fence will take pause before committing to public service.

But why not now? Seriously. Better now than when this becomes a fight over executive priviledge in the Senate. No other major bad news has gone out from the White House recently, so it might as well be now.

I, for one, will be paying attention to what else comes out of the administration over the next few days. I' sure they'd like to let other information out now while the majority of folks are paying attention to the greater scandals. It's good spin.

I don't feel it's either good or bad. Much like Rove. It's a little late in the game for it to feel like anything but political gladhanding.

Gonzales was both dishonest and incompetent and was exposed for politicizing the DoJ (aided and abetted by Rove) to levels unforeseen in any recent administration.

Anything that helps to restore the Dept of Justice to its role of enforcer of the law and the fair and impartial administratior of justice for all Americans is a very good thing!

Bush would serve himself and the nation well by appointing an outsider with judicial qualifications rather than another political hack. But that is unlikely.

Political rumor has it that Chertoff will take his place. No good news there.

Why hasn't he been charged with perjury if he has been dishonest in his testimony to Congress and to the Judicial Committee? Or is this another example of an attack on the man's character?

How his resignation helps to restore, assuming they lost that focus, DOJ's role of enforcer of the law and the fair and impartial administrator of justice for all Americans is an important question. To say that DOJ has not been doing its job since Gonzales, is a bold statement.

ace...as I have noted previously...oversight hearings are not criminal proceedings. Congress cannot charge Gonzales (or anyone) with perjury (or any crime). It is not within Congress' power.

Any charges against Gonzales or the appointment of a special prosecutor to conduct a potential criminal investigation would have to be initiated and filed by....duh....the Dept of Justice (or the WH directly)

Just my opinion as well as from reading comments over the last year from numerous career DoJ attorneys and other employees.

At the very least, the oversight hearings exposed and ended the unlawful practices of using political affiliation for hiring career attorneys and denying promotions in the Civll Righs Division based on political affiliation as well as the practice of DoJ and WH consutling with (Repub) members of Congress regarding pending DoJ cases..or pursuing unsubstantiated voter fraud charges against minority interest groups (in OH..just one example) right before the '04 election in violation of DoJ internal policies and procedures.....among many other highly questionable practices.

All of these actions happened on his watch so he was either incompetent in allowing them to happen or complicit in that he condoned/encouraged or was personally involved in such actions. But with his faulty memory, we'll never know.

You can argue that we are worse off with his resignation if thats what you believe....but I would suggest that is an equally bold statement.

We each have our opinion :)

AG's replacement will have to be confirmed by congress which will not be easy if Bush tries to appoint another lackey. However Bush could always do a recess appointment leading to a political fallout for the white house.

Whomever the replacement and there is a suggestion that Bush might just name Paul Clements, the current Solicitor General, as "acting" AG and try to stretch it out for the remainder of his term, which does not require Senate confirmation.

In any case, the real test will come next month if Congress proceeds with contempt charges against the WH over the executive privilege claims. In order for that to be ejudicated, the DoJ is required to have the US Attorney for DC take the case to the DC Circuit Court.

It could be that Gonzales resigned rather than be forced to take that action or face impeachment for not taking that action.

It could be as simple as Bush waiting until the worst has passed so he can take action on his own terms.

Seems like the same thing pertained for Michael Brown, Rumsfeld, and Rove.

i suspect that's partly the case--and the reverse seems also to be the case--gonzales is leaving before the confrontation over the administrations--uh--"expansive" interpretations of executive privilege. in a game where appearance is everything, losing such a conflict would be politically fatal for this lame duck administration.

reading through comments here and there from the right is a surreal exercise. of course there is cowboy george whining about unfair treatment--but my favorites have been the accusations of racism from some conservatives, who blame some nameless faceless "liberal conspiracy" and accuse that fiction of being "enraged by persons of color who are conservative." i found these to be funny. you can find some of them in the comments left on this michael tomasky blog thing, which is linked via the guardian website:

http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/...eaves_rat.html

this remains a curious bit of theater.
like others above, i dont feel much of anything about it---it should have happened long ago but it didnt. the bush regime's legal philosophy is dangerous. i am not sure that i see it changing with a change in its water-bearer. but we'll see.

We have yet to reach the denouement in this political theater. The DoJ Inspector General has expanded the internal investigation of Gonzales, which may have led, in part, to his resignation:
This investigation should absolutely continue to make it clear that even the Attorney General is not above the law.

The next act in this theater of the absurd will be the response of the Acting AG and BUsh if the Inspector General recommends that formal criminal proceedings against Gonzales be initiated, which IMO is highly likely.

Will Bush block the filing of any formal criminal charges with the "Libby defense that Gonzales has "suffered enough"? Stayed tuned.

Can they keep investigating after he leaves if they think he's done something that requires a worse punishment than losing his job?

Absolutely.

The FBI can be brought into the investigation...

Upon written request of the Department, the FBI also investigates perjury violations committed in connection with any inquiry or investigation being conducted by the United States House of Representatives or the United States Senate, or their components.
http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/eousa/foia...9/crm01742.htm

...and if the DoJ Inspector General is of the opinion that there is reasonable evidence that Gonzales lied under oath in his testimony at Congressional hearings, he can recommend to the Acting AG (and Bush) that a special prosecutor present a case to a grand jury.

I think it important for the integrity of the Dept of Justice that this plays out to the fullest extent possible.

That would mean perjury, which carries with it a lot more than just losing one's job. The reason I ask is that Rummy seemed to make it out unscathed, which is something truly regrettable.

Do you have any wonder why Bush had said he would allow Rove et al to "speak to" Congressional Committees on numeorus issues under investigation but insisted that they not be required to testify under oath.

As a cabinet secretary directly accountable to Congressional oversight, Gonzales did not have that option or you can bet they would have insisted on the same parameters.