RotoGuru Politics Forum

View the Forum Registry

XML Get RSS Feed for this thread


Self-edit this thread


0 Subject: AG Gonzales Must Go

Posted by: Perm Dude
- [3621299] Fri, Mar 09, 2007, 10:51

This guy is about as bad as Ashcroft.

US Attorney Scandal

298 of 375 investigations of officials target Democrats

More as I find come across them. Is there a bigger threat to law in the US than AG Gonzales? He pretty much lies to Congress, tells others he simply can't do his job because of all these congressional subpeanas, ignores letters from Congress asking him to provide the information he said he'd provide, and so on.
Only the 50 most recent replies are currently shown. Click on this text to display hidden posts as well.
[Lengthy or complex threads may require a slight delay before updating.]
343walk
      ID: 2530286
      Sun, Jul 29, 2007, 11:27
Right, and it's amazing how long the loyal protection towards gonzales by bush continues. It's just a macho thing by bush at this point, and he never relents. At the end of the day, it's a total reflection of bush's appts, so if he dumps gonzales, he's admitting a direct hiring mistake -- and he really never does that.
344walk
      ID: 2530286
      Sun, Jul 29, 2007, 11:36
Conservatives not Defending Gonzales, even on Fox TV
345Perm Dude
      ID: 25631299
      Sun, Jul 29, 2007, 11:38
I think Bush knows that not only does he have a guy taking bullets for him, but the Senate would not confirm another guy like Gonzales as AG. Bush is going to ride him into the ground, I suspect.
346walk
      ID: 2530286
      Sun, Jul 29, 2007, 13:14
Agreed, PD. I think bush values the loyalty, allegiance and cover AG provides, and the reluctance to admit judgmental error (bush has also gone to far in his support of AG to reverse now...), more than anything.
347Perm Dude
      ID: 19713279
      Mon, Aug 27, 2007, 10:14
Word is that AG Gonzales' press conference in about an hour will be to announce his resignation. Stay tuned...
348Seattle Zen
      ID: 49112418
      Mon, Aug 27, 2007, 12:14
Yup, the horrible wretch has finally slinked away.
Alberto Gonzales, the nation's first Hispanic attorney general, [who performed the near impossible feat of being a WORSE AG than his predecessor John Ashcroft] announced his resignation Monday, forced from the helm of the Justice Department after a wrenching standoff with congressional critics over his honesty and competence.
349Perm Dude
      ID: 19713279
      Mon, Aug 27, 2007, 12:24
Will the last rat please turn out the lights?

350Seattle Zen
      ID: 86541617
      Mon, Aug 27, 2007, 23:17
I'm now very interested in which direction the Congressional investigations take. Now that he has gone, I hope that they ease up a bit on his covering his ass regarding the decision to fire the eight US Attorneys and focus on the far more disturbing idea that his DOJ focused their investigations of officials nearly exclusively upon Democrats, as Toral mentioned above.

Lying to Congress to cover your ass is one thing, using the DOJ as a partisan Inquisition is criminal.
351Razor
      ID: 136523110
      Tue, Aug 28, 2007, 09:55
Perhaps he and others deserve to get a stronger punishment than merely being forced out of office, but I doubt they'll get it because, regrettably, any further prodding at Gonzalez will be seen as bitter partisanship by the public. I hope they continue on, especially after Bush claimed, as is always the case when a corrupt or incompetent Republican is exposed, that Gonzalez was railroaded.
352Perm Dude
      ID: 26731289
      Tue, Aug 28, 2007, 10:51
Frankly, I think the public wants the kind of things that Congress is nibbling around on but refusing to bite: Hard investigations, line-in-the-sand withdrawal dates from Iraq, and limiting Presidential powers gained after 9/11.

The President has very low approval ratings because he's been godawful. Congress has very low approval ratings because they continue to pull their punches.
353Razor
      ID: 136523110
      Tue, Aug 28, 2007, 11:00
Though oversight is one of their responsibilities, I think most people think Congress is doing a good job when they are passing legislation, not when they are conducting investigations.
354Perm Dude
      ID: 26731289
      Tue, Aug 28, 2007, 11:08
Perhaps in a general sense. But, as Glenn Greenwald points out, Americans overwhelmingly want investigations. Americans also overwhelmingly oppose the surge and want the troops home.

Congressional approval is so low because Congress isn't doing what Americans really want. Passing legislation like the most recent expansion of the President's spy powers isn't going to help.

pd
355Perm Dude
      ID: 26731289
      Tue, Aug 28, 2007, 13:09
Another Greenwald piece that goes more directly to the point you're raising, Razor
356Tree
      ID: 3533298
      Tue, Aug 28, 2007, 13:15
PD - i agree with you 100 percent in post 352. a new, Democratic Congress was elected to bring about change. instead, they've just paddled in circles.
357Perm Dude
      ID: 26731289
      Tue, Aug 28, 2007, 13:20
Yeah, we should call them the "One-legged Duck Congress."

:)
358Seattle Zen
      ID: 49112418
      Tue, Jun 24, 2008, 14:42
The cartoon in post 312 was right, this Administration tried to make the DOJ a conservative cabal for "just us".

Report Sees Illegal Hiring Practices at Justice Dept.
Justice Department officials over the last six years illegally used “political or ideological” factors to hire new lawyers into an elite recruitment program, tapping law school graduates with conservative credentials over those with liberal-sounding resumes, a new report found Tuesday. “Many qualified candidates” were rejected for the department’s honors program because of what was perceived as a liberal bias, the report found. Those practices, the report concluded, “constituted misconduct and also violated the department’s policies and civil service law that prohibit discrimination in hiring based on political or ideological affiliations.”

Pathetic, pathetic, pathetic. The past seven years of waste, lies, and ineptitude can't end soon enough.
359Boxman
      ID: 337352111
      Tue, Jun 24, 2008, 15:21
Point Of Order:

If Zen posts regularly but references a cartoon, does it count as a "normal" post or another cartoon?
360Myboyjack
      ID: 8216923
      Wed, Jun 25, 2008, 10:07
RE 358:

This might be the most unmitigatedly egregious of all this administration's sins. I don't think people realize how important it is to keep funcitonary level prosecutors as free as possible of ideological bridles. What a disaster.
361Boldwin
      ID: 85241823
      Wed, Jun 25, 2008, 10:51
I'd get upset at that if I didn't highly suspect that that was merely a small step to returning balance to a system that had been abused in the other direction.

I am unaware of any hardball tactic that liberals haven't played nastier than Republicans.
362Boldwin
      ID: 85241823
      Wed, Jun 25, 2008, 10:56
The blocking of applicants with liberal credentials appeared to be a particular problem in the Justice Department’s civil rights division, which has seen an exodus of career employees in recent years as the department has pursued a more conservative agenda in deciding what types of cases to bring.

MBJ, you really don't think that dept hadn't already been shifted so far to the left as to positively scream for redress?
363Razor
      ID: 545172413
      Wed, Jun 25, 2008, 10:58
You've certainly got your own reality, Boldwin, and don't need evidence to support any of it.
364Perm Dude
      ID: 42540259
      Wed, Jun 25, 2008, 11:00
The "They are just as bad!" defense rears again.

Even if it is untrue.
365Boldwin
      ID: 85241823
      Wed, Jun 25, 2008, 11:12
I wish I could remember her name but there is just an infamous crazy woman in the civil rights enforcement aparatus and she is surely typical of the people packed into career positions by decades of 'great society' liberal government before Reagan turned the tide.
366Boldwin
      ID: 85241823
      Wed, Jun 25, 2008, 11:13
And that is PD and Razor's real objection. It's only good when the packing is with liberals.
367Tree
      ID: 3533298
      Wed, Jun 25, 2008, 11:30
And that is PD and Razor's real objection. It's only good when the packing is with liberals.

and what of MBJ, who is not a said "liberal"? what's his real objection?
368Myboyjack
      ID: 8216923
      Wed, Jun 25, 2008, 11:40
My experience with career DOJ lawyers is that they generally are not party hacks and have not been hired on that basis. That's the way it should be
369Razor
      ID: 545172413
      Wed, Jun 25, 2008, 11:47
And that is PD and Razor's real objection. It's only good when the packing is with liberals.

I'd actually prefer to see the best candidates hired, regardless of political leanings. The fact that any employee anywhere is eliminated from consideration because of perceived political affiliation is deplorable, but it is especially deplorable that it has been happening systemically at the DoJ.

As long as we have people like you claiming (correctly or falsely, doesn't matter) that impropriety is a necessity based on past events, then we'll never get anywhere. This would be a good time for you to remember that you're really not supposed to be involved in politics at all.
370Seattle Zen
      ID: 49112418
      Wed, Jun 25, 2008, 12:29
Baldwin is simply asking for the DOJ to redress what, in his mind, is years and years of unfair prejudice against conservatives. He wants to rectify this injustice by giving conservatives a chance to compete as they have been repressed by years of mainstream liberals picking their own. In short, he wants conservative affirmative action with quotas. Far fewer Yale and Harvard grads, let's get George Mason and Patric Henry's finest on board.

Just drop your insistence upon high test scores and grades, these flawed standards do not take into account the most important criteria, the ideological superiority of Conservatism.
371biliruben
      ID: 52561217
      Wed, Jun 25, 2008, 12:54
What do you expect from a dude still thinking a band Iraqis are stealthily sneaking across Jordan to attack Israel, because WND said so; a firm grasp on reality?

I don't blame his processor so much as the bad data he insists on feeding it.
372Boldwin
      ID: 85241823
      Wed, Jun 25, 2008, 13:31
and what of MBJ, who is not a said "liberal"? what's his real objection?

MBJ is just being high minded. Gratz to him but he's bringing a judges gavel to a switchblade fight.
373Tree
      ID: 3533298
      Wed, Jun 25, 2008, 13:39
MBJ is just being high minded. Gratz to him but he's bringing a judges gavel to a switchblade fight.

it was mostly a rhetorical question, as i knew you'd come back with a nonsensical answer.

it never ceases to amaze me how much in favor of gumming up this nation, and throwing its core beliefs and Constitution out the window, in the name of somehow "getting even."
374J-Bar
      ID: 205332512
      Wed, Jun 25, 2008, 14:25
I think Elston was just probably not the guy that McNulty and Gonzales thought they knew.
375Perm Dude
      ID: 42540259
      Wed, Jun 25, 2008, 14:36
Yeah--they thought he wouldn't be so ham-fisted about it.
376J-Bar
      ID: 205332512
      Wed, Jun 25, 2008, 18:27
Just hired him to do a job and he let his own political bias come in to play and should be fired. oh wait he no longer works there. case closed unless of course there is something out there that shows that this was more than 2 rogue people acting on their own accord to select based on their own criteria.
377Perm Dude
      ID: 42540259
      Wed, Jun 25, 2008, 18:39
You haven't read any of the links above, have you?

There's plenty of evidence of more than two "rogues" including the AG himself.
378Perm Dude
      ID: 42540259
      Wed, Jun 25, 2008, 18:40
You kinda missed to point as well, that these people were hired for their political bias. It is the reason many got the job. And why many replaced career ADA who weren't partisan enough.
379J-Bar
      ID: 205332512
      Wed, Jun 25, 2008, 19:15
unsure what a career ada is, but the point that an appointee of a republican AG would be republican is somehow unbelievable is plain silly. then if that person uses a selection criteria that is possibly unlawful with no proof of a broader policy then that person should be disciplined for what they did if the prosecutor can prove it.
380biliruben
      ID: 52561217
      Wed, Jun 25, 2008, 19:24
Dude. They were trolling the bottom. Pat Robertson law school grads. They weren't qualified to ambulance chase much less get appointments at Justice.

Also, the dismissals were in the middle of the term. That is virtually unheard-of in the history of the US. US attorney's are generally replace at the beginning of the term of a new president.
381J-Bar
      ID: 205332512
      Wed, Jun 25, 2008, 20:26
if dismissal w/o cause is ok at the beginning of a term what would make it not ok at any other time. from the articles talking about the reports that i have read it was generally a higher percentage that leaned right and that that percentage was the roughly the same in reference to the most qualified group also.
382Perm Dude
      ID: 42540259
      Wed, Jun 25, 2008, 21:04
A President requesting the resignations of all ADAs at the beginning of a term is common (not all resignations are accepted, BTW), as those ADAs were not appointed by that President. But dismissing stellar ADAs (which Bush appointed) for not filing bogus charges (for instance) is wrong.

timeline.

Surely you see the difference, at the very least, between asking for the resignations of appointees you didn't appoint and asking for the resignations of those you did appoint who have solid positive reviews?
383Boldwin
      ID: 85241823
      Wed, Jun 25, 2008, 21:58
Hmmm...that gives me an idea. David Souter has got to go. Conservatives should be allowed to correct their mistakes.
384Perm Dude
      ID: 42540259
      Wed, Jun 25, 2008, 22:10
Heh.

Scalia can use a do-over or two himself.
385Razor
      ID: 475342117
      Wed, Jun 25, 2008, 23:40
This is sickening to read. The idea that Harriet Miers, the White House counsel, suggested to DoJ officials firing all 93 U.S. Attorneys is just unbelievable. I just keep going down the timeline, and it just gets worse and worse and worse. It's embarrassing for our country that we are this petty and corrupt at the highest levels of government.
386Boldwin
      ID: 85241823
      Thu, Jun 26, 2008, 04:50
Total BS Razor. You didn't give a crap when Clinton did the exact same thing when he took office or when liberals got packed into the permanant government for twenty plus years '60's-80's. Conservatives have a long run controlling congress and they barely scratch the surface redressing that imbalance and you have a cow.

If Dems decide as it seems they have, to simply not appoint judges during Republican administrations so they can resume packing the judiciary when Dems retake the WH, you'll be happy as a pig in mud.

Your outrage is as unprincipled and hypocritical as it could possibly be.
387walk
      ID: 181472714
      Thu, Jun 26, 2008, 07:44
I disagree, Boldwin. You know that the US Attorney plan was unusual cos it was mid-stream, not at the outset of the new admin coming in, and also tied to ongoing investigations of corrput repulicans and made-up investigations of corrupt Dems, and also gov't elections. This US Attorney change-over was far more nasty, partisan, and corrupt. Your outrage of Razor's outrage is outrageous.
388Perm Dude
      ID: 4550267
      Thu, Jun 26, 2008, 08:50
You didn't give a crap when Clinton did the exact same thing when he took office

Will we have to talk slower, Baldwin?

"Surely you see the difference, at the very least, between asking for the resignations of appointees you didn't appoint and asking for the resignations of those you did appoint who have solid positive reviews?"

Maybe we don't give a "crap" because you are comparing two different things: One common, the other criminal.
389Razor
      ID: 545172413
      Thu, Jun 26, 2008, 09:25
The guy who is in favor of the illegal and unjustified firings of well-performing government attorneys and disqualification of qualified candidates merely on the basis of their involvement in organizations that are deemed "liberal" is accusing everyone who is NOT in favor of that of being "unprincipled and hypocritical."

LOL. It wouldn't be so damned funny if it weren't coming for the most allegedly pious guy on this board.
390Seattle Zen
      ID: 49112418
      Mon, Jul 28, 2008, 13:14
Monica Goodling, a senior aide to former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales broke the law by using politics to guide their hiring decisions for a wide range of important department positions, slowing the hiring process at critical times and damaging the department’s credibility and independence, an internal report concluded Monday.
In one case, for instance, Ms. Goodling slowed the hiring of a prosecutor in the United States attorney’s office in Washington, D.C., for a vacancy because she said she was concerned that he was a “liberal Democrat.” After the United States attorney, Jeffrey Taylor, complained to her supervisors, he was allowed to hire the candidate anyway. Ms. Goodling interviewed the woman herself for possible positions and wrote in her notes such phrases as “pro-God in public life,” and “pro-marriage, anti-civil union.” She was eventually hired as a career prosecutor.

Ms. Goodling also conducted extensive searches on the Internet to glean the political or ideological leanings of candidates for career positions, the report found. She and other Justice Department supervisors would look for key phrases like “abortion,” “homosexual,” “guns,” or “Florida re-count” to get information on a candidate’s political leanings.
391Perm Dude
      ID: 151157612
      Sat, Dec 06, 2008, 14:03
Are the prosecutors circling?
392Perm Dude
      ID: 154552311
      Tue, Aug 11, 2009, 19:10
In the Unsurprising News of the Year category, documents show that Rove was personally involved in the firing of the AGs.
 If you believe a recent post violates the policy on Civility and Respect,
you may report the abuse via email to moderators@rotoguru1.com 
RotoGuru Politics Forum

View the Forum Registry

XML Get RSS Feed for this thread


Self-edit this thread




Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?)

Name:
Email:
Message:
Click here to create and insert a link
Click here to insert a block of hidden (spoiler) text
Ignore line feeds? no (typical)   yes (for HTML table input)


Viewing statistics for this thread
Period# Views# Users
Last hour21
Last 24 hours21
Last 7 days32
Last 30 days1813
Since Mar 1, 20074528937