Gonzales' steps down!

Remove all ads!

Gonzales' steps down!

Finally. This blight on the legal profession draws consequences in a consequential way (as opposed to the usual lip service). The unofficial reason for this extraordinary step is rumoured to be him being unable to recall what his job is about.

Whether Chertoff is so much better, I don't care. At least one of these goons gets the boot. Not quite what he deserves for his exemplary defence of torture, it is still better than nothing.

 

Did you have to stretch before saying that?

I'm surprised this came about, but only a little. What surprised me more was that he offered no reason for the resignation during his press conference. He didn't even pull out the "spending more time with family" claptrap.

Good riddance, but the damage has already been done. This was far too overdue to be very meaningful. It's like taking penicilin a month after the gangrene rotted your foot off. But then again, this seems to be the way the Bush administration does things.

 

My totally revised and much improved post: Gonzales' departure shows that the GOP wise men have recognised that there is a time after Bush, and they do not want to crippled their election chances by dragging around scandal magnets like Gonzales or Rove. They are IMO trying to do damage control for 2008.

Hehe, I bet it must have been like pulling teeth to persuade Bush into this. This is genuine Schadenfreude, from someone who can pronounce the word properly

[ August 27, 2007, 18:40: Message edited by: Ragusa ]

 

My question is this: Why now? A few months ago people where howling for his resignation and he wouldn't give it. Now, with some of the hot-button issues cooling off from earlier (like the firing of federal prosecutors) he does resign.

 

Why now? Probably so he can focus on his own impending legal defense.

 

Monty,
losing face, like... what's happening now? Don't kid yourself, people have never ceased calling for his head and now they have him. He was a dead man walking the last two months, and he knew it and made a brave face. Do you recall the I don't recall show?

That's a transparent legal defence strategy. If you hear administration officials having difficulties recalling details they try to dodge perjury charges while letting out as little details as possible. If not earlier, after that Fredo was definitely radioactive. That he fell is simply a result of who controls congress now. He was a sitting duck in the hunting season.

While the Democrats enjoyed tormenting him by a thousand cuts and tried to look like an opposition in the process, the Republicans had outright abandoned him. When FOX News calls people and asks them to defend Gonzales, and then have to announce that they 'had no takers' that means Fredo was at that point dead meat.

What will his brave face and his as loyal as abysmal service record bring him? A medal of freedom I wager.

 

Well, the "qualifications" are quite ridged for the next AG:

1. Someone who has been a good golfing buddy to GWB (letting him win occasionally).

2. Having worked and/or contributed heavily to the Bush reelection campaign.

3. Being from Texas helps, of course.

 

So let me think, what do I know on Chertoff (some of it courtesy of Wikipedia)

- 1980s - he and a certain Mr. Rudy Giulianni were involved in some notable processeses against the Italian mobsters
- 1992 - involved in the conviction of Jersey City mayor Gerald McCahn
- 1993 - reaffirmed by Clinton; strangely enough, he was the only reaffirmed attorney.
- 1990's - involved in the Whitewater committee that pursued allegations of wrongdoing by the Clintons
- 2001 - co-author of the Patriot act
- 2001-2003 - leads the criminal division within the DoJ, some controversies about a trial related to enron and his involvement in the "war on terror," especially as related to the detainment of immigrants
- 2003: nominated for the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in Philadelphia, affirmed
- 2005 - nominated and approved as secretary of the Dep't of Homeland Security. Involved in the handling of Hurricane Catrina, says that no one could have predicted it - later disproved. His department has headed the efforts after August 30, 2005.

While I suppose he could do an okay-ish job, I think that his partisan credentials are the main reason he's picked. You can't tell me there aren't at least 10 US lawyers that can do better than that, at least as far as the last 10 years are concerned.

 

@Shaman - people who get appointed the these positions are rarely chosen strictly based on their credentials. And I'm not saying that this only applies to the Bush Administration - Democrat or Republican, throughout history, the people who get the plum jobs are always the ones in tight with the current administration. However, unlike most administrations, Team Bush doesn't even seem to pick competent insiders. It seems like everyone who gets the appointments either is totally unqualified to run the organization (like Brown), or whose job credentials would indicate that they would work counter to the organization's stated goal (like placing a former pharmaceutical CEO in charge of revising the prescription drug plan).

As far as I can see Chertoff seems OK - at least better than many others that have been picked - but it's not like the bar was set high. I will remain suspicious of the choice until I see him in action.

 

I suppose I should have written "only reason he's picked," instead of "main," but I did not want to appear too confrontational. I am under no illusion that holders of the AG office are without partisan credentials at least most of the time, but it's not it. There are bound to be some Republicans with better work credentials than Mr. Chertoff, I'm sure. IMO the lack of achievements in the post-Katrina reconstruction is enough of a reason to think whether this is the best man for the job.

 

Yeah, but this is not business as usual. Until people get off their butts and start being outraged by how corrupt - how incompetent, as you point out - this government truly is, then nothing will change.

Never has Justice been this compromised, at least in my lifetime. When was the last time we've seen hearings like this? Where the AG just decided to "misinform" congress? AND have his own people say that the Attorney General of the United States attempted to tamper with sworn testimony before Congress? You tell me. Look at the management of the reconstruction of Iraq. They don't even know where half the money is going. And GWB wants another, extra, $50 billion! Because he can't even account for all the taxpayer money that he has already pissed away. That's the "no government spending" Republicans for you. This government is a disgrace - "Democrat or otherwise." Sorry to be so emotional, but the outrage finally needs to begin.

 

Being pissed off at Bush requires roughly half of the voting public to admit that they were wrong in '00, and wrong again in '04.

It requires, in essence, the implicit admission that they were, at best, duped. That's a hard thing to admit, sometimes.

 

Not really. Most people don't vote. Dissatisfaction with a sitting president does, however, tend to expand the size of the voting public.

 

Sure. Which is why I typed 'voting public' and not merely 'public'. I suppose "...the people who voted in '00 and '04 to admit they were wrong" would have been more precise.

I'll grant the point about dissatisfaction and expansion.

 

What I'm really getting at, though, is that the vast majority of the country (as high as 85%) can still be pissed off at Bush even if every single person that voted for him still liked the guy. Given how much larger the turnout is likely to be in '08, even if everyone who voted for Bush voted for the GOP, the Dem's still have a pretty strong chance at winning the election.

 

Really? I guess it depends on whose ox is being gored. I seem to remember one Janet Reno and some corresponding compromises of justice.

Mind you, I'm not defending King George's regime here but I thought I'd point that out.

 

There's a big difference between being utterly incompetent and purposely circumventing the justice system.

Waco and the leak regarding Richard Jewell in the Centennial Olympic Park bombing* were her only real mistakes.....and there's still quite a bit of debate about whether or not the federal government was really in the wrong in its handling of Waco. The Elian Gonzales debacle, while unpopular, was in keeping with international law.

* She actually apologized for this one, stating "I'm very sorry it happened. I think we owe him an apology. I regret the leak.

 

I agree with Drew. Reno was not a very good AG but but Gonzo was way worse, for the reasons I cited. And if she could have been forced to resign, the way Gonzo did, the Republicans would have gone for her throat.