Conservatives call on Bush to fire Gonzales

Katana

Illuminator
K
Joined
May 28, 2006
Messages
4,812
In what could prove an embarrassing new setback for embattled Attorney General Alberto Gonzales on the eve of his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, a group of influential conservatives and longtime Bush supporters has written a letter to the White House to call for his resignation.

The two-page letter, written on stationery of the American Freedom Agenda, a recently formed body designed to promote conservative legal principles, is blunt. Addressed to both Bush and Gonzales, it goes well beyond the U.S. attorneys controversy and details other alleged failings by Gonzales. "Mr. Gonzales has presided over an unprecedented crippling of the Constitution's time-honored checks and balances," it declares. "He has brought rule of law into disrepute, and debased honesty as the coin of the realm." Alluding to ongoing scandal, it notes: "He has engendered the suspicion that partisan politics trumps evenhanded law enforcement in the Department of Justice."

The letter concludes by saying, "Attorney General Gonzales has proven an unsuitable steward of the law and should resign for the good of the country... The President should accept the resignation, and set a standard to which the wise and honest might repair in nominating a successor..." It is the first public demand by a group of conservatives for Gonzales' firing. Signatories to the letter include Bruce Fein, a former senior official in the Reagan Justice Department, who has worked frequently with current Administration and the Republican National Committee to promote Bush's court nominees; David Keene, chairman of the influential American Conservative Union, one of the nation's oldest and largest grassroots conservative groups; Richard Viguerie, a well-known G.O.P. direct mail expert and fundraiser; and Bob Barr, the former Republican Congressman from Georgia and free speech advocate, as well as John Whitehead, head of the Rutherford Institute, a conservative non-profit active in fighting for what it calls religious freedoms.

Fein, speaking for the signatories, told TIME that Gonzales' planned testimony to Congress tomorrow, the text of which has been released by the Justice Department, was a "terrible disappointment" that left unanswered key questions on which his job may now depend. "Gonzales' testimony before the Judiciary Committee resorts to a truly Clintonesque defense of his own previous false statements," says Fein. "In fact," he says, "Gonzales' latest declarations really do call into question the forthrightness and honesty indispensable for America's chief law enforcement officer."
Click to expand...

Link

Will Bush listen?
 
Gonzales is toast. Dead man walking. Stick a fork in 'em. Finito. Adios. Cooked. Yesterday's news. Stinkin' up the joint. History. Goner. Gone-zo.

Why they wait, I cannot understand. What can be gained by forestalling the inevitable? Bush just can't lance this boil. Unfathomable.
 
hgc said:
Why they wait, I cannot understand. What can be gained by forestalling the inevitable? Bush just can't lance this boil. Unfathomable.
Click to expand...

I think the administration is trying to find a replacement first and I'm sure that's not an easy job.
 
Alt+F4 said:
I think the administration is trying to find a replacement first and I'm sure that's not an easy job.
Click to expand...


You bet. And judging by how they're filling the war czar vacancy, high-level jobs in the waning days of BushCo aren't looking too attractive.

It isn't just a matter of someone who actually wants the job that Bush can live with, but his choice also has to pass muster with Pat Leahy. There's a conflict in the making.
 
Alt+F4 said:
I think the administration is trying to find a replacement first and I'm sure that's not an easy job.
Click to expand...

hgc said:
You bet. And judging by how they're filling the war czar vacancy, high-level jobs in the waning days of BushCo aren't looking too attractive.

It isn't just a matter of someone who actually wants the job that Bush can live with, but his choice also has to pass muster with Pat Leahy. There's a conflict in the making.
Click to expand...


All true.

And should they actually find someone dumb enough to replace Gonzales, we may actually end up longing for the good 'ole days under Gonzo.
 
I've spent too many years watching to believe they can't find someone stupid enough to do it.
 
Schneibster said:
I've spent too many years watching to believe they can't find someone stupid enough to do it.
Click to expand...


There's one thing different now. It's hard to imagine a weak crony a la Gonzo getting through the Dem Senate in this climate of scandal within DOJ. Bush is in a real bind, in that his house of cards will tumble if his Justice Dept starts to root out crime within the government. A nominee who won't do this will have a hard time passing muster. The Dems on the Judiciary Committee, and possibly even Specter, will ask pointed questions of any nominee about how he'll deal with pending issues before the department, e.g., torture policy, habeas corpus, FISA lawbreaking, ...

Look, for instance, at former Senator John Danforth. He already served as Bush's ambassador to the UN, leaving that job after short tenure - and why?. The Dems would approve him for AG in a second. But then Bush runs the risk that Danforth would pursue lawbreaking everywhere, including all over the Bush Admin. What a mess.
 
The one major quality that Gonzales has is that he's a hard-core Bush loyalist.

The one major problem with Gonzales being the Attorney General is that he's a hard-core Bush loyalist.

Charlie (through the bum out) Monoxide
 
hgc said:
There's one thing different now. It's hard to imagine a weak crony a la Gonzo getting through the Dem Senate in this climate of scandal within DOJ. Bush is in a real bind, in that his house of cards will tumble if his Justice Dept starts to root out crime within the government. A nominee who won't do this will have a hard time passing muster. The Dems on the Judiciary Committee, and possibly even Specter, will ask pointed questions of any nominee about how he'll deal with pending issues before the department, e.g., torture policy, habeas corpus, FISA lawbreaking, ...

Look, for instance, at former Senator John Danforth. He already served as Bush's ambassador to the UN, leaving that job after short tenure - and why?. The Dems would approve him for AG in a second. But then Bush runs the risk that Danforth would pursue lawbreaking everywhere, including all over the Bush Admin. What a mess.
Click to expand...
I wanna see GWB go on TV and say, "I am not a crook."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom