The Gonzales resignation watch continues, and we move one step closer to his departure with the admission that ‘mistakes’ were made:
Under criticism from lawmakers of both parties for the dismissals of federal prosecutors, Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales insisted Tuesday that he would not resign but said, “I acknowledge that mistakes were made here.”
Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales acknowledged during a news conference at the Justice Department today that “mistakes were made.”
The mea culpa came as Congressional Democrats, who are investigating whether the White House was meddling in Justice Department affairs for political reasons, demanded that President Bush and his chief political adviser, Karl Rove, explain their roles in the dismissals.With Mr. Bush traveling in Mexico, the White House insisted that the president’s role had been minimal and laid the blame primarily on Harriet E. Miers, who was White House counsel when the prosecutors lost their jobs and who stepped down in January.
Harriet Meiers? But Hugh Hewitt says she is the best attorney since Abe Lincoln and should be a Supreme Court Justice!
At any rate, the inevitable bleed has started. Pretty soon Gonzales will have to resign so ‘the administration can put this behind them and get to work making Americans secure’ or some such nonsense.
*** Update ***
I am linking this solely for the awesomeness of the title. How many WaPo readers will get a reference to a 30 year old LP? Or is this a reference to something else, and I am showing my cultural ignorance by attributing it to Styx?
Mr Furious
Any time any of these a-holes utters the phrase “mistakes were made” the loud and clear message to me is the only mistake made was getting caught. There is no real accountibility in that statement, nor is there any remorse or acknowledgement of wrong-doing.
Interesting that the two prominant persons in this case were supposedly Supreme Court timber. Instead they are shown to be partisan flunkies of the most typical and typically imcompetent variety.
Gonzo and miers both swing for this, but since Miers has aleady stepped aside months ago, look for her to wear most of the pins.
Jay C
Except, Mr. F.: in the Bush 43 Administration partisanship, flunkiness and incompetence are deemed to be features, rather than bugs. Second-raters like Harriet Miers and Alberto Gonzales get where there because of their shortcomings, not despite them. It’s been that way since 1/21/01: why should it change now?
Zifnab
When will these people learn to delete their emails when plotting a highly suspicious and ethically horrendous act?
I honestly don’t think Miers will receive the rough side of the lash like Gonzo will, however. She’s had the good sense to get out of the line of fire. The best Congress can reasonably push for is Gonzo’s resignation. Harriet already resigned, and technically nothing they’ve done is illegal so the Congress will have a hard time physically removing anyone from office as it stands.
The real question is how badly Bush wants this to get dragged out.
Punchy
No chance in hell Speedy pink-slips himself. Rumsfeld stayed on YEARS after demonstrating incompetence, ignorance, lack of tact, etc.
And why won’t he off himself? Because–and only because–the Dems are demanding it. Once again and always on Tuesdays, it’s ALL about their party and NEVER about the credibility of our gov’t, our country, or the will of Americans.
Mr Furious
Oh, I’m not saying Miers will bear the brunt as publicly or brutally as the sitting AG—most people have never heard of her, and she is already gone. I’m saying the spin will be that it was her. No question that Gonzales is the bigger scalp. As long as Gonzales is still hanging on to his job, the Admin and right-wing media attemp to prop him up, it is Miers’ fault. Once Gonzales falls (and I will be surprised if he doesn’t—or will I?) he and his role will overshadow her.
Mr Furious
You might be right, Punchy. You might be right.
Jay C
Are you sure of that, Zifnab? I, honestly, don’t know what the exact legal parameters are: but I really tend to doubt that blatant interference (whether on political grounds or not) with ongoing Federal investigations is quite that benign a practice. Especially investigations into Congressional corruption, as in San Diego.
One would expect, of course, that Administration hacks would be smart enough to CTA pretty well (a la Plamegate); but then again it is BushCo, so who knows?
Mr Furious
I wonder if Congress grilled Alberto on the difference between his job as Bush’s lawyer and WH counsel and his job as the nation’s Attorney General, would he see any? Has he performed them any differently? More importantly perhaps, does the White House viiew the jobs differently?
I think we all know the answers, don’t we.
Faux News
I think I speak for all of Balloon Juice when I say that I want to hear more from Darrell on this topic.
Zifnab
True. But the White House has an out or two – namely by playing the “they weren’t enforcing immigration, etc” card – which gives them that smidge of plausible deniability.
The real question is whether these fired USAs (I do love that acronym) are given power as independent prosecutors to finish the investigations they began.
I do love how the media does manage to completely fail at keeping their eyes on the ball on this, though. Well over 90% of the coverage is on the firings, the Senate hearings, and the talking points. Almost nothing is said about what these USAs were actually investigating.
Dungheap
TPM has a choice quote from Dave McKay, the canned USA from Washington:
The obvious answer is that he was fired for getting caught, not for orchestrating the dismissals.
Punchy
The legal stuff is way confusing. While it’s illegal to meddle in a federal case, and surely in nearly ALL instances firing someone for NOT doing so is not allowed…well, the PatAct kinda says that these guys can get canned for any reason.
So it would seem that the PatAct provisions trumps the illegality (or unethicalness) of demanding that US Attys only nail Democrats. So…they can be fired for not sucking d#ck, apparently? Where are the Myriad Steves and their lawyerness shenanigans to explain this?
Mr Furious
and of course there’s the matter of lying to Congress
Rome Again
I think you don’t speak for BJ at all. Some of us are sick to death of hearing Darrell’s sort-of-opinion on any topic.
Rome Again
“Sorry Harriett, we needed someone to take the fall. ‘tag, you’re it!’ Oh, come on Harriett, it’s JUST A GAME!”
Mr Furious
Punchy, the way I understand it, these USAs always served at the “pleasure of the President”, the only thing the PATRIOT Act changes is how they are replaced.
In the old (2005) days, if a USA needed to be replaced, the President had 120 days to nominate a replacemet and get them confirmed or the US Circuit Court would appoint someone until the slot was filled.
The Specter Sneak Amendment allows the President, through the AG, to appoint a replacement by fiat—no Court or Congressional approval or input, and they cann serve until the next administration—it’s a permanent move with no recourse, check or balance.
There may not be anything illegal, but there might be Constututional implications, and it certainly was shady. The very people responsible for orchestrating the PATRIOT Act provision appear to be benefitting, and this gameplan was laid out all along.
Mr Furious
Let’s just get it out of the way…
Here’s Darrell: “BUT CLINTON FIRED MORE!”
Mr Furious
Seriously, people. I know I just added Darrelll to the thread in absentia, but it really does sum up any potential contribution he (it) is likely to make.
Can we all agree to just sit back and watch Darrell bang his head against the wall?
I’ll agree to ignore him if everyone else will. It can be tough for me, he is such an inviting/infuriating target. I and several others just pummelled him yesterday, but it really is to no avail.
Perhaps he’ll just go away if nobody plays.
Shall we give it a try?
Zifnab
Ah yes, the ASS Backward Amendment.
Dug Jay
This item would appear to be needed with this post and related comments.
Zifnab
I’m with you. Consider the territory marked, this is a Darrell-responseless zone. I swear on the life of my son, my dead gay son, that I will not add any fodder to the Darrell shitstorm in here.
Cyrus
Firing them wasn’t the crime, lying about it was.
Why did they lie about it? Because even this administration was smart enough that they didn’t want to tell the press and the congressional record, “We fired these guys because they we thought they were putting too much time into investigating suspected Republican criminals instead of Democrats. No, we don’t think those cases were actual criminals that got away, we just think indicting or subpoenaing Democrat candidates should be the highest priority of all for the federal government in October of even-numbered years. You got a problem with that?”
Even Darrell can realize that saying that sounds very bad indeed, which is why he would no doubt resort to arguing that selective, politically-motivated replacements are exactly the same as cleaning house at the beginning of a president’s term. And, um, completely ignore the “lying about it” part.
mrmobi
Thanks for the link, Dug. Already use ’em.
Lost in all this, at least for the moment, is the effect all these firings will have on a bunch of serious investigations of Republicans and Democrats.
Josh Marshall has a lot of great stuff about several investigations which were about to be expanded, but now…
Is anyone else here sick to death of Specter’s faux outrage at Abu Gonzales, when his staff inserted the provision which allows these criminal fucks to replace USAs without Congressional oversight? What a colossal prick.
Three cheers for the Gruppenfuhrer Darrell response-free zone! I myself am only prepared to say that Darrell likes pie.
RSA
So Republicans have gone from being the Abe Lincoln party to being the Donner party. It’s fun to watch.
No, but anyone who’s hung out with film buffs will think of the Jean Renoir movie, at least partly because it’s been lost, rediscovered, and re-released twice, the last time in the 1990s.
mrmobi
One other thing. If as Gonzo says, “mistakes were made,” in the firings of the USAs, which of them is he prepared to reinstate? Just asking.
jg
Didn’t the staff member who inserted that amendment get one of the vacant USA posts?
Jake
At least one, who thinks it’s brilliant.
Nope, don’t think so.
Now I have the damn song stuck in my head.
I wish I could get optimistic about Gonzo becoming Gonezo but I don’t see it. Granted there seems to be a bit of a disconnect in the story: “We fired them for performance issues,” became “And we’ll tell everyone if you don’t shut up.” and then “Uh. Maybe not. But we have the right to fire you anyway.” And I look forward to a full explanation.
I wonder if the first batch o’ lies was the result of that old “CYA” reflex getting out of hand.
neil
Well, the column title certainly is a grand allusion, but to what I’m not sure. Styx wasn’t the first to use the title and probably, Jean Renoir wasn’t either.
Mr Furious
Yup. They lie because they can’t help themselves. It’s reflexive. They always have something to hide. When you operate the governement like a criminal syndicate, you answer every inquiry like it’s a trap. Even if what they are doing isn’t illegal, it’s sure to be frowned upon, so they are always looking to cover their ass.
Mayberry Machiavellis indeed. Can we just turn a firehose on these fuckers and get them out of here?
Kirk Spencer
Zifnab – on not doing something illegal…
It appears on the surface that Gonzalez lied to congress while under oath at least once on this subject. That’s criminal. It’s also stupid – at least most of the time it’s stupid, though with the previous congress that stupidity had no consequences. That’s because this group of people, once they’ve discovered they’ve been lied to, has both authority and ability to do something about it if they wish.
jg
They lie because they think it looks manly to lie to congress. A body most conservatives have no respect for. That’s why they elect a great man, a moral leader who doesn’t need no stinkin congress watchin over him, they just get in his way the bastards. Lying to congress is noble.
Andrew
When are we going to hear about all of Karl Rove’s cronies who weren’t appointed US Attorneys?
qwerty42
About the title?
“The Grand Elusion”
No idea where Milbank got it, but I’d assume it began with Jean Renoir’s classic about WW1: “The Grand Illusion” (1938) Of interest is Erich von Stroheim as the prison camp commandant (think of Otto Preminger’s role in “Stalag 17” in 1953 – they even look alike — well, Stroheim’s character has this neck brace).
we now return to your regularly scheduled discussion of administration malfeasance and incompetence and other things that once would have been deeply disturbing but now are taken as routine.
Rome Again
Sure, I’ll play along, I promise to not tell TZ in email that Darrell is summoning him. ::laughs::
rob
Thanks alot. If that album is 30 years old then my 30 year high school reunion is this summer.
Tsulagi
I don’t see Gonzo going anywhere. He’s more important to Bush personally than anyone else in the admin. Who else would/could he get as reliable as Gonzales to write those cool findings that laws don’t apply to the moronarch? Or say the Constitution is obsolete, and anyway it doesn’t say what you think it means. See Gitmo, alternative interrogation, habeas corpus, unitary executive, etc. etc.
Good reason why Pubs when they were in charge wouldn’t swear in Gonzo or other admin people before their testimony. This isn’t the first time Gonzo has lied to Congress nor will it be his last. That of any importance to Bushtard? Yeah, right.
dreggas
Oh there are illegalities aplenty here the least of which is lying to congress (which is illegal especially under oath it’s perjury something ol Scoot-Scoot knows all about).
Add to that that because this “purge” was politically motivated there is at least one case of obstruction due to removing Lam, she is the story here, the fact that she was continuing to go after all the tendrils of the cunningham case which tracked high up into the pentagon and CIA means she was a threat. If she was sacked and a less diligent atty put in place, or more likely just a croney, the entire corruption investigation of wilkes, foggo, etc. would go nowhere and that is what was alluded to in the one email regarding the need to speak over the phone about the “other reasons” for getting rid of Lam. TPM has a few choice pieces on this today.
Second as far as deleting the emails, you can’t delete them permanently. There are backups of backups and if they had deleted them the backups would have been turned up. Anyone who works in a corporation knows that their email is backed up as a CYA measure. Not even shrub can get the backups deleted.
As for Gonzo…I predict he will be gonezo sooner rather than later. Like someone said yesterday, his presser wasn’t an attempt to calm the waters, it was an attempt to keep his ass from going to jail.
Jake
Didn’t Our Boy Alberto push some reg. that would require ISPs to hang on to their records for longer than 90 days?
Better watch out, them intertubes’ll get ya.
demimondian
That would have worked better as “which once were vices, but now are habits.”
norbizness
“Killjoy Was Here,” “Pieces of Al”
Remfin
It should be noted that statements like “any reason, or no reason” has not meant “any reason” since, at minimum, the 15th Amendment*. There are most definately reasons that are not allowed, like race, sex, or creed. Also, you can’t fire someone for refusing to do something illegal for you, and you can’t fire people to further an illegal act (say, conspiracy to obstruct justice). Those 2 particularly would apply to the situation as we know it. There is a lot of case law detailing these kind of exceptions.
*I’m not saying the 15th guarantees that, because it deals specifically with voting, but it’s certainly a point where it started to become how things work
Kirk Spencer
I will point out that Gonzalez knows where a lot of the bodies are buried. He’s been with Bush about as long as Rove, and since for a while he was Bush’s personal counselor he had access to a lot of info.
And before someone brings up client-attorney privilege, there are limits — it’s not absolute, no-matter-what. Two common tests that probably apply at least some of the time here are: the communications are solely between client and attorney (so if it was cc:d to, say, Rove, it’s moot); and if it involved attempted or committed fraud or crime.
elf
…Pretty soon Gonzales will have to resign so ‘the administration can put this behind them and get to work making Americans secure’ or some such nonsense….
here it is:
Bartlett accused reporters of trying to “connect a lot of dots that aren’t connectable” — then attributed all the controversy to the administration’s diligence against terror: “I think if you look back at any presidency, issues like this come up all the time, particularly when we are such an active government that is engaged in the war and . . . where we’re trying to prevent terrorists from attacking our homeland.
Jake
Look! A rabbit!
What next? Some actor who looks like ObL will run through press conferences to create a distraction?
jg
You just know he wanted to say fatherland.
11x
*Styx’s album was “The Grand Illusion” (emphasis, in this case, on “ill”)…
*An illusion is a distortion of a sensory perception.
*”Elusion” is a little different, though I guess one can perform an illusion while undergoing an elusion or vice-versa:
e·lu·sion
Pronunciation (-lzhn),n.
The act or an instance of eluding or escaping; evasion.
[Medieval Latin lsi, lsin-, mockery, contempt, from Latin lsus, past participle of ldere, to escape, mock; see elude.]
Krista
Weasel, weasel, weasel. That is just such a crap non-apology, right up there with, “I’m sorry if you were offended.” Party of personal responsibility, my arse.
Pb
Partial List of ‘Mistakes’ That Were Made:
* Bush promotes Gonzales (three times) in Texas
* Gonzales helps Bush execute (not pardon) record numbers of people in Texas
* Bush picks Gonzales for WH council
* Gonzales needs toilet paper, uses Geneva Convention instead
* Bush nominates Gonzales for AG
* Gonzales lies to Congress, telling them all the things he won’t end up doing, like not being a partisan hack in the future
* Congress confirms Gonzales for AG
Mr Furious
The biggest one.
Bubblegum Tate
But Gonzales is an immigrant who rose from nothing to the highest law office in the land! What is it you hate, moonbat? Immigrants? Hispanics? Success? Shellacked hair? Legalizing torture in the name of protecting ‘Murrica? Ass-licking Smithers types?
demimondian
I’m sorry that you’re upset. Can we talk about important things now?
Pb
“I love my dead gay son!”
Pb
Christ on a crutch, just look at this: the attached doc (“USA replacement plan.doc”) details the whole sorry plot, right down to the talking points that they all–specifically including Gonzales were supposed to use and in some cases are still using. Also, all the GOP senators (they don’t contact Democrats but rather tell the “Bush political lead” for that state instead!) were initially fine with having their respective US attorneys pushed out.
Rome Again
Hmmm, thanks for that link Pb, perhaps it’s that document that has John Sununu’s panty’s all ruffled?
The Other Steve
I don’t understand why you moonbats are making such a big deal about this.
clinton did far worse! he fired all 93 attorneys.
SaleemSinai
11x,
Thanks for pointing out that newspaper-headline writers sometimes use puns. /snark
I’m guessing that Milbank is a Styx guy more than a Renoir guy. Broder, on the other hand …