Call for Gonzales to step down, sign the petition - Page 5 - U.S. Politics Online: A Political Discussion Forum

Lazarus · #61 (**permalink**) 03-18-2007

How anyone can argue that this administrations' obstruction of justice attempts should not warrant scrutiny is the height of either Bushitis and/or Republicanosis.

These assholes wanted to hinder the prosecution into several Republican politicians ( Rep. Jerry Lewis of CA ), wanted to force unwarranted investigations into Democrats ( New Mexico ), or wanted to install a friend into the job ( Arkansas ).

To do these things they devised cover stories - none of which are credible.
How many times has the story changed?

The damage control will not end with Gonzales. And it shouldn't.

Imperator · #62 (**permalink**) 03-19-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lazarus

How anyone can argue that this administrations' obstruction of justice attempts should not warrant scrutiny is the height of either Bushitis and/or Republicanosis.

These assholes wanted to hinder the prosecution into several Republican politicians ( Rep. Jerry Lewis of CA ), wanted to force unwarranted investigations into Democrats ( New Mexico ), or wanted to install a friend into the job ( Arkansas ).

please ...your selectivity is really, well, adorable...

Jay Stephens...Dan Rostenkowski

ViolaLee · #63 (**permalink**) 03-20-2007

It seems clear from the email evidence that the attorneys were fired so they could be replaced with loyal Bushites and croneys.

Sampson is the one who resigned in shame already.

Quote:

With the scandal clearly not going away, Sampson then urged others at the department to try to get Cummins not to join other fired prosecutors in testifying on March 6. Cummins had warned officials that if called to Washington, he "would tell the truth about his circumstances" of being fired so Rove's operative, Timothy Griffin, could take over in Little Rock.

"I don't think he should" testify, Sampson said in an e-mail to McNulty and other top Justice officials.

Sampson wondered how Cummins would answer several key questions, such as why he was told he was being elbowed out, and whether Griffin expected to be appointed under a new provision of the Patriot Act that would allow him to skirt Senate confirmation.

"Were you asked to resign because you were underperforming?" Sampson said Cummins would be asked. "If not, then why?"

Justice Dept. attempted to curb fallout - Los Angeles Times

I hope the Congress does not let these new attorneys be appointed without confirmation. Gonzales can't get away with that lie. At his confirmation hearing he assured congress he would not appoint attorneys without confirmation.

MattLarson · #64 (**permalink**) 03-20-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jason Marcel

Having said that, you have to remember that Gonzales is Attorney General. It's actually Attorneys General, which makes him the most important law official in the land. Yes, he can oversee the replacement of lawyers, which is what it was, not a firing. But it was the underhanded and overtly political nature of their replacing that needs to be criticized. Most every president replaces the other guy's federal lawyers at the beginning of his term, but never in the beginning of the lawyers second term. And doing it just before the Congress is going to sunset that ridiculous clause that allows the president to replace lawyers without the senate's backing represents a blatant abuse of power.

I just wish Americans weren't so polarized and could see the move for what it is. It doesn't matter whose in charge, this was an abuse of power. It makes Gonzales lose credibility on any future decision he might make, because it will seem political in nature, not moral.

I agree that motivation behind the replacements is quite suspect.

That said, these positions serve at the pleasure of the President. He can replace them all tomorrow for wearing the wrong color suit.

Matt

Imperator · #65 (**permalink**) 03-20-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by MattLarson

I agree that motivation behind the replacements is quite suspect.

That said, these positions serve at the pleasure of the President. He can replace them all tomorrow for wearing the wrong color suit.

Matt

or under wear...if you're slick willie....all 93 of them..(oops one got off because Bill Bradley made a phone call and interstingly enough it was of all people, Chertoff...)

Of course one of them, being Jay Stephens who was within 30 days of indicting Rostenkowski ( who was later indicted and punished etc.) but at the time he was the point man for Clintons first economic initiative and could not be spared…. so Stephens was not allowed to complete his assignment...and naturally when you have Hewitt et al already pimping for you, this means it was just a blip on the media radar screen...and who sent the order to these attorneys personally and gave them 10 days to clear their desks? Web Hubbell…you now the one that went to jail? Yea okay…..

Steve · #66 (**permalink**) 03-20-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Samantha

I hope the Congress does not let these new attorneys be appointed without confirmation.

Of course they will. They wouldn't dream of robbing you of yet another issue to piss and moan about...

ViolaLee · #67 (**permalink**) 03-20-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve

Of course they will. They wouldn't dream of robbing you of yet another issue to piss and moan about...

So you're OK with an attorney being fired so Karl Rove's friend can replace him? A friend so unqualified that the only way he could get the position is to be appointed without congressional confirmation?

Curly · #68 (**permalink**) 03-20-2007

Of possible interest.....

Quote:

With a 94-2 vote, the Senate passed a bill that canceled a Justice Department-authored provision in the Patriot Act that had allowed the attorney general to appoint U.S. attorneys without Senate confirmation. Democrats say the Bush administration abused that authority when it fired the eight prosecutors and proposed replacing some with White House loyalists.

Source

Good.

ViolaLee · #69 (**permalink**) 03-20-2007

Excellent news Curly, thanks.

Beer · #70 (**permalink**) 03-20-2007

Gonzales needs to go. I signed. Too much indication of insider bs.

Curly · #71 (**permalink**) 03-22-2007

Interesting story in the Washington Post this morning that offers some possible confirmation of the politicizing of the Justice Department (I'm not suggesting that the Justice Department has always been 100% non-political prior to Bush - it's just gotten so much worse over the last six years).

Prosecutor Says Bush Appointees Interfered With Tobacco Case, Washington Post, March 22, 2007:

Quote:

The leader of the Justice Department team that prosecuted a landmark lawsuit against tobacco companies said yesterday that Bush administration political appointees repeatedly ordered her to take steps that weakened the government's racketeering case.

Sharon Y. Eubanks said Bush loyalists in Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales's office began micromanaging the team's strategy in the final weeks of the 2005 trial, to the detriment of the government's claim that the industry had conspired to lie to U.S. smokers.

She said a supervisor demanded that she and her trial team drop recommendations that tobacco executives be removed from their corporate positions as a possible penalty. He and two others instructed her to tell key witnesses to change their testimony. And they ordered Eubanks to read verbatim a closing argument they had rewritten for her, she said.

"The political people were pushing the buttons and ordering us to say what we said," Eubanks said. "And because of that, we failed to zealously represent the interests of the American public."

I find that pretty damning. The Justice Department - indeed, the entire federal government - is supposed to look out for the best interests of the American people.

Quote:

News reports on the strategy changes at the time caused an uproar in Congress and sparked an inquiry by the Justice Department. Government witnesses said they had been asked to change testimony, and one expert withdrew from the case. Government lawyers also announced that they were scaling back a proposed penalty against the industry from $130 billion to $10 billion.

High-ranking Justice Department officials said there was no political meddling in the case, and the department's Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) concurred after an investigation.

There's always a risk when a department investigates itself that maybe the truth won't be revealed as it would with an independent investigation.

Quote:

Eubanks said Congress should not limit its investigation to the dismissal of the U.S. attorneys.

"Political interference is happening at Justice across the department," she said. "When decisions are made now in the Bush attorney general's office, politics is the primary consideration. . . . The rule of law goes out the window."

Gee, I'm shocked.

Wallaroo · #72 (**permalink**) 03-30-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Samantha

Make your voice heard for justice and what is right. Tell Gonzales to step down. Save our justice system. We should have a top law enforcement officer who tells the truth and obeys US law. Gonzales should go.

From an email that arrived today:

That email aint from her personally, I can tell you that.

ViolaLee · #73 (**permalink**) 03-30-2007

Thanks for telling us Wallaroo!

Captain Trips · #74 (**permalink**) 03-30-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by MattLarson

From today's Orlando Sentinel.

Personally, I'm not going to sign some partisan petition for Hillary. Not a chance.

Matt

Really ?

Why not ?

It couldn't be that you recognize how purposeless such things are could it ?

Internet petitions

ViolaLee · #75 (**permalink**) 03-30-2007

Don't you people understand the difference between ALL THE PRESIDENTS replacing all 93 attorneys at the beginning of their term and the Bush admin firing 8 of his own appointees in the middle of his term?

A message has been sent to the US attorneys. Become a loyal Bushie, or you will lose your job.

This is OK with you partisan republicans I suppose?

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode