Gonzales stops trying

No matter what the circumstances, in politics or out, an employee who believes his or her job is on the line is going to behave a certain way. He or she will be on their best behavior, doing everything possible to impress those who might help decide his or her fate.

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales no longer believes his job is on the line, so when he appeared before the House Judiciary Committee yesterday, he didn’t seem intent on impressing anyone. Gonzales wore the smile of a man with a get-out-of-jail-free card — the president’s unwavering, facts-be-damned support. Consider the lede of the AP article on the hearing:

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales confidently deflected House Democrats’ demands Thursday for details in the firings of U.S. attorneys, appearing ever more likely to survive accusations that the dismissals were politically motivated.

“Confidently deflected” is an interesting phrase, isn’t it? Gonzales didn’t add any insights to the scandal that has rocked his Justice Department, he still can’t remember any pertinent details, and he still can’t answer key questions. But Gonzales can “confidently deflect” demands for information because he knows full well that he could sing off-key showtunes for the House Judiciary Committee and there’s nothing lawmakers can do about it.

It’s a stark contrast with a month ago. The Senate Judiciary Committee scheduled a hearing with Gonzales that, we were told, would ultimately decide his fate. Gonzales prepped diligently for weeks — and bombed. Senate Dems were disgusted, Senate Republicans were furious, the White House was disappointed, the media excoriated Gonzales’ incompetence … and the president offered Gonzales unequivocal support.

With this in mind, Gonzales simply doesn’t care anymore. Unless Congress considers impeaching him, Gonzales is acting like a man without a care in the world.

Slate’s Dahlia Lithwick explained yesterday’s proceedings perfectly.

Alberto Gonzales is in his happy place. He enters the hearing room in the Rayburn Building for his testimony before the House judiciary committee smiling the smile of a man who sleeps well each night, in the warm glow of the president’s love. Gone is the testy, defensive Gonzales who testified last month before the Senate. Today’s attorney general breezes into the chamber with the certain knowledge that having bottomed out in April, he has nothing left to prove. His only role in this scandal is as decoy: He’s the guy who runs out in front of the hunters and draws their fire so nobody pays any attention to what’s happening at the White House.

Gonzales seems to have made his peace with this. No more angry outbursts, no bitter attempts at self-justification. Instead, the AG answers some questions with a giggle and most others with the same old catchphrases we’ve heard so often: He has consistently failed to investigate any wrongdoing at the Justice Department out of “deference to the integrity of the ongoing investigations.” The decisions about which U.S. attorneys made Kyle Sampson’s magic list were the “consensus recommendations of the senior leadership of the department.” Over and again, ever in identical language, Gonzales “accepts full responsibility for the decision” just as he insists that he played only a “limited role” in the decision-making. The fact that the attorney general can’t even be bothered to pull out a thesaurus after all these weeks — even if only to create the illusion that these nonanswers come from him as opposed to a list of pre-approved talking points — reveals just how little he cares about what Congress and the public think of him anymore.

The House Democrats are furious. To them, there is only one plausible explanation for what happened to the eight (now nine?) fired U.S. attorneys. There is only one narrative that works with the facts. The White House wanted party loyalists placed in either key battleground states, or in states where Republicans were being investigated or they thought Democrats should have been. Gonzales rolled out the welcome mat at the Justice Department and told them to install whomever they wanted while he played hearts on his computer. If Gonzales truly wants to rebut that narrative, he needs only to offer some plausible alternative. Anything at all. But he doesn’t. He offers only distractions.

Our hapless Attorney General didn’t know anything, didn’t do anything, didn’t remember anything. As the WaPo’s Dana Milbank explained, yesterday’s entire hearing was a chance for Gonzales to spend a few hours avoiding anything of any substance at all.

Alberto Gonzales is not a details guy. During the attorney general’s appearance before the House Judiciary Committee yesterday, he was tossed a softball question by Rep. Dan Lungren (R-Calif.), who wanted to know how many lawyers there are in the Justice Department.

Gonzales was flummoxed. “Oh, about, I think, 10,000 to 15,000,” he answered.

So, the nation’s top law-enforcement official thinks maybe he has 10,000 lawyers on staff — or maybe he has 50 percent more than that?

For the record, the answer to Lundgren’s question is Option A: 10,000 lawyers. This tally, of course, doesn’t include the eight U.S. attorneys whose removal Gonzales approved, starting his current woes over alleged politicization of the Justice Department.

But, defying expectations, the list of lawyers working for the Justice Department continues to include Gonzales himself. President Bush’s decision to keep Gonzales has confounded lawmakers in both parties who have called for him to go — but, on the positive side, it gives Gonzales more time to learn all those pesky details about the department he is running.

Rep. Tom Feeney (R-Fla.) asked what proportion of Justice’s resources go to counterterrorism. “I don’t know if I can break it down in terms of assets or resources,” Gonzales answered.

Rep. Bobby Scott (D-Va.) asked about a Congressional Research Service report about the Justice Department’s firing of U.S. attorneys. “I’m not familiar with the CRS report,” the attorney general said.

Low morale at the Justice Department? “I don’t know what’s the source of that statement.” Why a well-respected U.S. attorney was fired? “That’s something you’d have to ask others.” White House plans to force out another U.S. attorney? “I think I may be aware of that, based on my review. I can’t remember.”

Finally, Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.) cruelly turned Gonzales’s ignorance against him: “You said you didn’t know who put [U.S. Attorney David] Iglesias on the list” to be fired?

“That is correct,” Gonzales said.

“But you said you knew the president and the vice president didn’t,” Cohen pointed out. “How do you know they didn’t?”

Gonzales paused, trapped. “Well, I just know that they would not do that,” he said.

However befuddled the witness became, he was clearly confident that Bush would let him keep his job. In contrast to the man who took a beating before the Senate Judiciary Committee last month — when even Republican senators disparaged him — Gonzales literally laughed at his questioners yesterday. He chuckled while answering Rep. Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.), and shook his head and grinned while listening to Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) and Keith Ellison (D-Minn.). The attorney general’s coyness about the U.S. attorney firings enraged Robert Wexler (D-Fla.). “You know who put them on the list, but you won’t tell us!” Wexler blurted out.

Gonzales only smiled.

Of course he did. He knew what lawmakers didn’t — that his answers (and their questions) mattered only to them.

So, impeach him.

Bush won’t budge, so we do. Bush won’t compromise, so we do. Bush won’t leave, so we stay. Bush won’t behave, so we let him do what he wants. Bush won’t obey the law, so we turn the other way.

At some point, Democrats are going to have to muster the balls for a showdown.

  • Gonzo almost has feathers sticking out of his mouth with his the cat that swallowed the canary smile. I take comfort in knowing Gonzales has earned the karma of all those who are Bush accomplices. Fly now.. pay later.

  • Things like this festering damage the republicans a lot. But at this point I’ve had enough of it. I really, really, really want to see some real action taken against this bastard.

  • memekiller is right. if the democrats don’t challenge the president on something sooner or later, it ain’t gonna be pretty come election time next year. there will be an accountability moment.

  • Don’t we all wish that Bush would follow Tony Blair’s lead!

    I guess the President and Veep believe that their approval ratings can’t get any lower, regardless of what they do, so why bother to pay attention to the will of the people??

  • NPR said it best this morning: [paraphrasing]

    “You would think the following news items were a re-run from last month: Gonzales is up on Capitol Hill facing questions regarding the prosecutor purge, but refused to either clarify why the attorneys were fired or whether he will step down. Just like a month ago. Meanwhile, Congress passes an Iraq War Accountability Act, but the president threatens to veto it. Also just like a month ago.”

    This won’t do. As memekiller said, it’s time for a showdown.

  • Gonzo appeared before Congress again? Impossible, something that big would be on the front page of the “Paper of Record”, but I just looked and there’s not a peep.

    I am so glad I stopped paying for the NYT, it’s not even good fish wrap.

  • OK Dems, either you impeach these clowns or you lose all respect.

    This isn’t funny anymore.

  • Sounds like someone’s asking for a nice hot cup of impeachment.

    You want to put that back on the menu, Nancy and Harry?

    Or would it take Bush erecting a statue of a massive, erect middle finger facing Capitol Hill to get the message he’s sending you?

    (side note for Republicans (and other conservatives) who support or enable Bush: you people, with your talk about “small government” and “principles” and “respect for the rule of law” or even that pesky phrase about “upholding the Constitution”? You’re all full of shit. Completely full of shit. All of you. You like power, and you’ll do anything to help your friends keep it. That’s no surprise in politics, but it’s just unusual for there to be such a stark contrast between what people say and do – especially when they claim they’re following Jesus instead of the Pharisees.)

  • “At some point, Democrats are going to have to muster the balls for a showdown.” memekiller

    “Impeach them all.” Ohioan

    “OK Dems, either you impeach these clowns or you lose all respect. This isn’t funny anymore.” Racerx

    Hear, hear. I couldn’t have said it better.

    OT: With Glenn Beck’s recent comments re having a Jewish president in mind alond with all of his other comments, is it me or does he really seem to be trying to fashion himself as the real life, grown-up Eric Cartman?

  • An absolute disgrace and black mark on the government of the United States of America. To stand before the Congress and obfuscate, lie, conceal, deceive and distort the truth, the “Attorney General” demonstrates new heights of hypocrisy. He is nothing but a low-life street thug in a suit. Redefining treachery before our eyes. He should be charged with perjury and obstruction of justice and be sentenced to the rest of his disgusting existence in solitary confinement trying to “recall” the definition of the word integrity.

  • Bush has actually given us an opening. The Leadership has no stomach to impeach the President, no matter how deserved. Well, here’s your out: impeach Gonzales. You send the message up the chain there is accountability. You make impeachment up the chain more popular. You take down a man the Republican Party won’t have much stomach to defend. Democrats prevail over Bush’s stubbornness, demonstrating they are stronger than he is.

    Game. Set. Match. A gift from Mr. Rove.

  • Exactly. Start with Abu G. Then hit Cheney. Then hit Rove (or Rove can go before Cheney). Then hit Rice.

    Oh, and subpoena Rove and Miers and their records already. Put that issue to rest once and for all.

  • I don’t have a problem with this guy not being impeached. He is a public example of corruption, cronyism, bushism and republicanism. Leave him out there for all to see.

    Team Shrubco have damaged the republican brand.

    Anyone see this post:

    http://www.harpers.org/archive/2007/04/horton-republicans-banana-republicans

    It cuts to what the republican party has now become. Banana Republicans. Or Bush Republicans more accurately….. band of radicals who core organizing principal is the pursuit of power, through dedication to party and president. Serve the Party and President blindly and then you serve the country.

    There is an opportunity now that the repub brand will be scarred for a generation. See Goerge Will and the Hoover anchor around Nixon in the 1960 campaign. Which CB sums up here:

    http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/10668.html

    Sure, it’d be nice if Shrubco pulled a Blair, quit and turned the keys to the capital to new management. But it ain’t happening.

    The next best thing to happen is a major accountability moment in November 2008, 2010, 2012, 2014, etc…..

  • If crimes were comitted, and that is still a big IF

    Wouldn’t it be possible for the Justice Department in 2009 to bring crimal charges against the people who comitted those crimes in 2006 and 2007?

    Can’t some of these people be convicted of purjury in 2009 for their lies under oath?

  • Alberto is safe. Cheney is safe. Bush is safe. Nobody’s going to be impeached. Americans have given up on influencing government. The Bush administration has become like the weather. Rain, snow, tornadoes, government — people bitch about them, but accept and endure them as is.

    The mid-terms gave the Dems Congress, but not enough of it to override a veto or pass meaningful legislation. They investigate and hold hearings. To what end? Nothing happens. So, we continue to muddle until we have another president. Then we will muddle through another unimaginative administration.

  • Just imagine if Janet Reno had put on such a performance. She would have been tarred, feathered, and run out of town on a rail.

  • I would respectfully suggest that bringing an impeachment vote, particularly of Abu G, even if not successful, is a very valuable tool. Just like the Dems are getting GOP members of Congress on the record for their support of the War/Bush and not the will of the American people at this late stage, a vote on impeachment will show just where the GOP Congressfolk stand on law and order, corrupt or impartial justice, etc. Even if it is done as one or two nonbinding ‘sense of the House’ votes that they do. Get the GOP on record, and then hang them with it.

  • The only thing better than having Bush tar the GOP image is to have the Democrats bolster their image by having the courage to take a stand against it. It will be a feather in our cap for decades, even if we lose. Right now, this whole thing is just an indictment of the system, where a criminal, rogue administration intimidated everyone.

    Alberto is nothing. Letting him taunt us like he is will tar our brand for decades to come, too.

  • What empowers a lame duck president and his weakened AG with a minority congressional status and rock bottom polls?
    These bunglers should tumble but they seem to defy gravity.
    The only answer can be that hidden strings and wires pulled by the shadow big money power establishment are propping up these clowns. When dems with power of subpoena can’t get the goods on Gonzo.. I fear invisible strings.

  • Kali, not strings. Stubbornness. They won’t move until we move them. They taunting us, daring us to do something about it because they know we won’t.

  • Last night’s rerun of the hearing on c-span made me feel physically ill. After searching news outlets all day for up to the minute coverage, it was painfully aware that someone has rallied the cheerleaders. It matters little if the Dems are in majority if the news media seem interested only in Republican opinion. It’s big news that 11 Rep lawmakers gave Bush some tough love, but Gonzales openly mocking the Constitution, the Congress, and law and order in general is merely a tidbit for the blogosphere. Switch to c-span this morning with pompom queen Martha Radditz selling books and cheering the crusade surge. The fix is in again folks, the Repubs have set the stage; we’ll have non stop cheerleading the surging success through Sept, then suddenly the Repubs will declare an overwhelming shock n awe victory. Get the popcorn and fireworks ready and prepare to be entertained, not by impeachment (what, you kiddin?) – by Halloween Bush and Cheney will be strutting their stuff and passing out medals of freedom. Please do not adjust your sets.

  • Someone help me. Can an appointed government official be impeached? I suspect the answer is no. If it is no, how then does an incompetent official get removed, especially when the person who appointed him is also incompetent?

  • Are there specific examples of AG AG telling lies to congress?
    If so, is this not a crime? And the Congress needs a crime in order to impeach.
    After this performance, the Dems should be angry enough to “pull the trigger” on an impeachment, and Abu G should be in their sites.
    But, if there’s no crime, no action. Rule of law is important to our side

  • I am with all of those above who say, “Impeach the twit.” Wipe the smile off his face.

  • Impeachment absolutely has to be brought back to the table. Even if it winds up being unsuccessful, the American Public needs to know in 2008 who sided with accountablity and transparency in government…and who is a Bushie and/or a DINO. If it’s successful, all the better, let the cowardly bastards who’ve given Bush the Dope carte blanche for far too long develop the stones to do their effing job.

  • Okay, IF (really big IF) Alberto were fired, resigned, or impeached, would there be an opportunity to review some of the dubious “legal” opinions he has had a part in, like Habeus Corpus for Guantanimo, or the wisdom of allowing “not really” torture on prisoners, or the Unitary Executive principle, or signing statements?

    Regardless of who made these into policy, these issues really should be reclarified by congress so that they will not be referenced by future Presidents as precidents.

  • Rule one of the Bush admin is to deny the authority of anyone to hold it accountable or interfere with what it wants to do. Gonzales forgot that for a while, and his last testimony was disasterous, but he’s back with the program now.

    In effect, he’s saying, ‘as long as I don’t admit to anything, there’s nothing you can do to me. I don’t have to answer your questions, or be consistent, or be truthful, or even make sense. In fact, I don’t even have to be here — but for the sake of appearances, I’ll play along with your charade.’

    From a pragmatic perspective, there’s nothing else he can do. There’s no way Bush can nominate someone else for AG who would be radical enough to serve his purposes and secure Senate approval.

  • The next best thing to happen is a major accountability moment in November 2008, 2010, 2012, 2014, etc….. — brian, @17

    But, if Dems act like a whipped puppy– belly to the floor and tail wagging — every time they get this kind of crap from the WH “rulers”, there’ll never be any accountability. Ask yourself: why should anyone vote for Dems in ’08, 10 etc, if they act like wimps? What’s more, they’ll lose whatever little support they now have from the”moderate”/scared Repub representatives now in Congress, because it’ll be safe again to bootlick Bush and ignore the public. So, inaction is bad all around.

  • But, if Dems act like a whipped puppy– belly to the floor and tail wagging — every time they get this kind of crap from the WH “rulers”, there’ll never be any accountability.

    There are plently of things to pound these guys on. You’ve got corruption in the 109th, Katrina, Iraq, A-stan and Tora Bora, Abu G, torture, Gitmo, deceipt and deception with WMD and the selling of the war, abramoff, libby.

    Keep on them about the attny general purge. But there is also plenty to go around for all. So there should be hearings to last out the term. Maybe some more prison terms will come of it. Notice many of the wingnut blogs finding a new appreciate for the rights of inmates lately?

    To me Abu Gonz is a useful idiot. Sure he can’t remember what he had for breakfast or what his wife’s name is. The purge investigation ain’t over. If he slips up and blunders into a purgery trap, so be it. He and Libby can share a cell.

    What is it called – the Phase 2 portion of the Senate WMD intellegence report? Its portion that shows how the flawed WMD intellegence was used misused. Its been blocked up to now. Anyone want to predict when it will be finished and released to the public?

    The goal should be to get ahead not just even. Just my two cents.

  • Anyone who has to be confirmed to the Senate for an appointment can be impeached. To answer bedgars @27 above. A new poll shows both Congress and W at 35% approval. I think that’s because the Dems are seen to be wavering and wishy-washy and not forceful enough on the issues we care about.
    Congress, no matter the outcome, must begin impeachment hearings on Gonzo. (Maybe they are waiting for Goodlings testimony.Maybe they are tentative sycophants afraid of the VRWC.) During impeachment hearings, there is testimony and investigations. I don’t think Bush could stop congress from hauling Meiers and Rove to those hearings, even if they might be able to stop them from coming to a regular oversight hearing due to executive privelege. So begin the damned proceedings.
    I’ve said it before, these people are not worth the time and effort to impeach them, BUT our Constitution is. If the rule of law is important, then it can only be defended by putting impeachment on the table and keeping it there, all they way up to the Presidency.
    And, INMHO,impeachment proceedings should have begun 2 minutes after Gonzo said “there was no right to habeus corpus in the Constitution.”
    Note to Howard Dean: if the Reps don’t vote to impeach, make them explain every damned day til the next election, why the rule of law is no longer opperative. I’m sure their constituents will agree. (snark)
    BTW: Keith Olberman did a brilliant “Dueling Gonzos” last night about his 2 recent testimonies. Kudos KO!
    Dee

  • Simple solution: start defunding things. Begin with “the shadow government” of Dick Cheney by “turning the guns” of defunding on OVP. That alone will deny Das Bu$h his attack dog. Then turn the guns on State and give das Bu$h a choice: play nice, or lose Condi. We can get better results by sending Pelosi abroad than we’ve gotten from “Saddam’s embezzlement enabler.” If Das Bu$h wants to throw Condi under the bus, then carry through with the defunding—and then turn the guns on DoJ.

    In other words—challenge the legitimacy of “the Unitary Executive” with a like model—“the Unitary Legislative.” SCOTUS either stays out of the Constitutional crisis altogether—or they have to rule both parties in the wrong. Either way, Das Bu$h “loses….”

  • Brilliant Idea Steve! For the DOJ, they could only fund the regional officies and career attys in them. Or even the political appointies grandfathered in say, pre-purge. At Main DOJ again, they can fund only career employess. The Reps would have too much of a PR advantage if the dems defunded the entire DOJ. American’s like law and order. The fear card would be too easily played and the strategic advantage would go to the WH.
    Why aren’t the commentators at this site and several other liberal blogs on Howard Dean’s payroll yet?
    Paging Dr Dean, paging Dr Dean….

  • Comments are closed.