‘I don’t understand for the life of me why Al Gonzales is still there’

One of the overlooked tidbits from Peter Baker’s interesting look at the president’s state of mind right now is that the White House is actually quite divided. Bush is summoning “leading authors, historians, philosophers and theologians to the White House” for some odd bull sessions, but the president’s team isn’t exactly reading from the same playbook.

Take Alberto Gonzales, for example.

The fabled loyalty of the Bush team, though, has frayed far more than might be apparent to him. The fight over whether Gonzales should remain attorney general has exposed a deep fault line. Bush remains convinced that his old friend did nothing wrong ethically in firing U.S. attorneys, and senior adviser Karl Rove angrily rejects what he sees as a Democratic witch hunt, according to White House officials. Yet beyond the inner circle, it is hard to find a current or former administration official who thinks Gonzales should stay.

“I don’t understand for the life of me why Al Gonzales is still there,” said one former top aide, who, like others, would speak only on the condition of anonymity. “It’s not about him. It’s about the office and who’s able to lead the department.” The ex-aide said that every time he runs into former Cabinet secretaries, “universally the first thing out of their mouths” is bafflement that Gonzales remains.

Some aides see it as Bush refusing to accept reality. “The president thinks cutting and running on his friends shows weakness,” said an exasperated senior official. “Change shows weakness. Doing what everyone knows has to be done shows weakness.”

That’s actually a great line: Doing what everyone knows has to be done shows weakness. So, to show strength, Bush is negligent in his responsibilities — on purpose.

It leads to bizarre situations with surprising regularity.

President Bush limited his deliberations over commuting the prison term of I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby to a few close aides, opting not to consult with the Justice Department and rebuffing efforts by friends to lobby on Libby’s behalf, administration officials and people close to Bush said yesterday.

“We were all told to stay away from it,” said an old Bush friend from Texas who is close to Libby and would not speak for attribution. “When we called over there, they said the president is well aware of the situation, so don’t raise it. None of us lobbied him because they told us not to.”

For the first time in his presidency, Bush commuted a sentence without running requests through lawyers at the Justice Department, White House officials said. He also did not ask the chief prosecutor in the case, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, for his input, as routinely happens in cases routed through the Justice Department’s pardon attorney.

Presumably, Bush believes people who know what they’re talking about might give him guidance, if asked. So the president has chosen an alternate path — he chats with Cheney, goes with his gut, and makes sure that he doesn’t do what everyone knows has to be done.

Only 567 days to go.

As Olbermann aptly applied last night to the Libby commute during his broadcast, this quote from Oliver Cromwell also just as aptly applies to Abu G:

““You have sat too long here for any good you have been doing lately…. Depart, I say; and let us have done with you. In the name of God,—go!”

  • Gonzales is still there because the Democrats took impeachment “off the table” and Dumbass Shrub and Pencil Dicktator Cheney know they won’t be held accountable for their crimes because they can run the clock out.

  • Bush is summoning “leading authors, historians, philosophers and theologians to the White House” for some odd bull sessions,

    It sounds like he should go back to college.

  • “The president thinks cutting and running on his friends shows weakness,” said an exasperated senior official. “Change shows weakness. Doing what everyone knows has to be done shows weakness.”

    He has mastered the art of a spoiled child’s psychological manipulation of his or her guardians. My childhood friend Owen O’Connor would approve. Bush’s legacy is as a bratty Sun Tzu; the scholars should declare it so.

  • bullshit that bush is calling authors, academics, etc to the white house. that’s spin put out by his enablers to buff his ‘legacy’. bush could give two shits what people think of him. he lives to infuriate and torment his detractors; and suck up to and provide for his cult-like followers.

  • The ex-aide said that every time he runs into former Cabinet secretaries, “universally the first thing out of their mouths” is bafflement that Gonzales remains.

    Yawn. More “No one could have possibly forseen,” crap in a slightly different form:

    “Goodness me, I had no idea the President could be such a stubborn little scamp! Until this unpleasantness with the A.G. arose he was such a calm, rational man. Incidentally, I only quit my job because I wanted to spend more time with my family.”

    This display of bafflement is as convincing as the act put on by a six year old when mummy and daddy find him alone in a room with a broken lamp. “Um, I don’t know what happened, I was just standin’ here…”

    They’re just worried aiding and abetting BushBrat will affect their lives after January 2009, unless they flee the country. They know he’ll except them to take the fall if things get ugly because they know he’s an unremitting prick. Fuck them, and their “condition of anominity.”

    “We were all told to stay away from it,” said an old Bush friend from Texas who is close to Libby and would not speak for attribution.

    Attribution, or RETRIBUTION?

  • It’s so bitterly funny to see all these Republicans running into the downside of Bush’s (in)famous “resolve”, which was supposedly a selling point in the 2004 campaign. “Resolute” is just another word for “won’t listen to anyone and does what he pleases.”

    Nice they could finally join the rest of us who have been finding it frustrating, scary and insane for years now.

  • Bush remains convinced that his old friend did nothing wrong ethically in firing U.S. attorneys, and senior adviser Karl Rove angrily rejects what he sees as a Democratic witch hunt, according to White House officials.

    That’s bullshit. Both of them know exactly how wrong, illegal and immoral what they’re doing is. This story line of Bush the naive idealist is just so wrong. Even the stories of how stupid Bush is, take away from the full impact of his wrongdoing. Wrongdoing by choice and with full knowledge.

    What’s Gonzales still doing there? Hell what’s George Bush still doing there?

  • What makes me sick is that we now have so many, many Republicans calling Bush an evil, dangerous, deranged person, and yet we have the Democratic “leadership” still making noise and doing nothing to remove this cancer.

    At some point in the near future, they become as culpable as the criminals themselves.

    Impeach. NOW.

  • “The president thinks cutting and running on his friends shows weakness,” said an exasperated senior official. “Change shows weakness. Doing what everyone knows has to be done shows weakness.”

    The President should have this embossed in silver script on the covers of copies of a book, by him, which he can call, “The Tao For The Spoiled Brat.”

  • Re: Racerx @ #10
    At some point in the near future, they become as culpable as the criminals themselves.

    Agreed. It’s quite similar to the U.S. Military Occupation of the Cheney Protectorate of Iraq. 70% of Americans want American national security to take priority over Iraqi national security (and our asses out of Iraq), but the Dems did not exercise their mandate to remove American Soldiers and American Taxpayer dollars from the morass.

    And now impeachment polls at 40%. Well, looks like we can expect the same thing out of the capitulant, complicit Dems. Even 70% wouldn’t be enough for the Dems to impeach the traitors in the White House. Will 90% be enough to get off their asses and impeach?

    Like I’ve said before, just what the hell does it take?

    Now someone please tell me that this is all Ralph Nader’s fault.

  • Even if The president doesn’t think AG has done anything that is actually “illegal” which he has, Why is it not ok to fire somebody just for being a bumbling incompetent. Impeaching the whole mess of them is what we should do, but just firing somebody who can’t do their job should be a no-brainer. Too bad Bush has less than no brains.

  • For those who have not read the entire article – go and read it!
    Unlike linda above, I believe that this little man is bringing in scholars, but the reaction to their feedback is the interesting – and scary – part of the article.
    He’s gone off the deep end, folks. I hope that the generals have disconnected the wires leading to “the button.” If he starts hallucinating that God wants him to start Armageddon, this article leaves no doubt that he will not hesitate to be God’s instrument.
    Fortunately, I’m sure that Cheney doesn’t want to start paying off his debt to Satan, so “Edgar” won’t let his Charlie McCarthy go there.

  • Gonzo is still there because America, as a constitutional republic, has lost the will to live.

    Big money has eroded and evaporated all constitutional safeguards, and so long as the corporations don’t care, it doesn’t matter to anyone worth taking seriously..

    I’m not amazed at Gonzo’s continuance in office, nor was I surprised by Shrub’s giving Scooter a get-out-of-federal-country-club-free card. Nor will I be in the least surprised when Cheney announces an end to the costly and divisive process of elections.

  • What makes me sick is that we now have so many, many Republicans calling Bush an evil, dangerous, deranged person, and yet we have the Democratic “leadership” still making noise and doing nothing to remove this cancer.

    [RacerX]

    You’re assuming the ReThugs are sincere in their fist shaking. They might mutter and moo against the pResident but they only time words have become real action was during the vote on the Immigration Shill.

    Look at the Maverpricks who stood up against torture. Until The Infant King banged his rattle on his high chair tray and told them to sit down.

    Look at Dick Lugar’s lovely speech about how we need to GtFo of Iraq. And how quickly he said his opinion wouldn’t affect the way he voted.

    The ReThugs are trying to keep their jobs without annoying He Who Must be Obeyed, which would be amusing if they weren’t fucking up the country while they dance the masochism tango. I bet you all of the fine things they say in opposition to the president will make it into their campaign commercials while their actual voting record … well, the opposition will have to bring that out in their own commercials.

    Sorry about the longish post but the ReThugs want everyone to blame the Dems.

  • Re: tAio @ #16
    Sorry about the longish post but the ReThugs want everyone to blame the Dems.

    Well, they’ve won then, I guess (at least in my book). So, impeachment boils down to strictly political calculation? That’s funny, I thought it was there in case of Constitutional emergency, such as the case now.

    If we do not strongly petition the Dem leadership for impeachment, then just who the hell can we turn to? Canada? WTF

  • For the first time in his presidency, Bush commuted a sentence without running requests through lawyers at the Justice Department, White House officials said. He also did not ask the chief prosecutor in the case, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, for his input, as routinely happens in cases routed through the Justice Department’s pardon attorney.

    Bush commuted the sentence without consultation? But, but, commutation over pardoning preserves Scooter’s ability to take the 5th! Realizing that would require something like…..independent thought on Dubya’s part.
    .
    .
    .
    Naw……just a lucky break.

  • “It’s not about him. It’s about the office and who’s able to lead the department.”

    How naive these people are. I know the statement refers to AG Gonzales, but it’s equally applicable to President Bush. It’s exactly about him and only him.

    Not the office. Not the nation. It’s about him. We saw it in the Libbey commutation. Reward your friends, screw the others. It’s not complicated.

  • Beyond loyalty, the other reason why Gonazlez hasn’t been poop-canned is because, well, who would want to replace him? David Addington?? They do not want to put him up for Senate hearings.

  • Shrub is desparately trying to favorably compare himself to good leaders and presidents. I think there really is a parallel between FDR’s administration and Shrub’s misadministration. During FDR’s time in office, there was a concerted effort to conceal his polio induced physical handicap. During Presidunce Bush’s administration there has a been concerted effort to conceal his mental deficiencies, which can only be attributed to his parents. Pencil Dick Cheney recognized how he could use that for his own gains. I am very pleased to see many more people being vocal on the subject of impeaching the cretins currently in the White House. I feel it is important for the simple reason they have 19 more months there. If Shrub’s personal philosophy could be summed up it would be, “You think it’s bad now, watch what I do next.” Can we afford 19 more months of stupid, incompetent and unpredictable in the White House? Let’s get them out first by whatever means necessary and then worry about punishment for what they have done.

  • JKap, and others who are angry with the Democrats,

    Please consider refocussing your anger where it will do some good. Democrats, albeit timid and spineless, have a very slight hold on power in the Senate, and without a clear supermajority there and less than majority public support for impeachment, impeachment can’t possibly succeed.

    Bush is weak and unpopular but still has enough Repblican support to squash impeachment proceedings and removal. There is in fact all the difference in the world between 40% support for impeachment and 70% support. Raise that level comfortably above 50% and you’ve got yourself a whole new ballgame.

    Fuel public outrage and direct it toward Bush, Cheney, and Gonzales, get a hue and cry going for his resignation or impeachment, get former Bush supporters to pressure some Republican senators to call for Bush’s removal, and there will be an invincible juggernaut heading right toward Bush that even the most timid Democrats will get behind.

  • Re: N. Wells @ #22
    Democrats, albeit timid and spineless, have a very slight hold on power in the Senate, and without a clear supermajority there and less than majority public support for impeachment, impeachment can’t possibly succeed.

    Again with “67-vote” final retreat of cowardice.

    I am not a Loyal Democrat. I am a Loyal American and a U.S. Constitution Loyalist.

    I don’t care what party is in the majority, frankly, whether it be Democrats, Republicans, Green, Red, White, Blue or Independent. The United States House of Representatives must act to protect the U.S. Constitution of 1789 from the Loyal Bushie Brownshirt Cabal.

    Anything else is just an excuse, face the music. Impeachment proceedings and associated investigations would shine a bright light on the machinations of the international criminal activity in the White House and the exposure would wake up many Americans to the abuse of power, corruption and treason committied by “Dick” & Bush and the rest of the Bush Laden Crime Family. And some of those ReThugs (and Dems) scurrying under the bright lights would then grow consciences because more Americans would loudly demand it.

    Either that or we can just direct our anger toward Ralph Nader instead for causing this whole mess, right? Pfff.

  • Either that or we can just direct our anger toward Ralph Nader instead for causing this whole mess, right? — JKap, @23

    No, no, JK; calm yourself down. We all know that Nader walks on water.

  • In the context of #18 …

    This commutation action was planned out a long time ago … the statement the President read was probably written six months ago. Don’t they just love it when a plan works?

  • Well, they’ve won then, I guess (at least in my book). So, impeachment boils down to strictly political calculation? That’s funny, I thought it was there in case of Constitutional emergency, such as the case now.

    Drop the Political and stick to calculation, good old fashioned math:

    Impeachment takes X number of votes. Right now, today The Democrats can get X – Y number of votes.

    Would you prefer they go ahead now and have the effort fail? Will you be satisfied if a Dem says “We’re going to try to impeach the pResident”? I’d be fucking pissed if they did and didn’t mean it or didn’t have enough evidence from the start. When any law enforcement agency worth the name starts an investigation they don’t tell the suspect, they gather evidence, make sure their case is air-tight and then they kick down the damn door. You sound like you just want the excitement of the initial charge and don’t much care what happens afterward.

    And to anyone who says “But so and so says impeachment is off the table,” I would reply, have you ever heard of this little thing called lying?

    If we do not strongly petition the Dem leadership for impeachment, then just who the hell can we turn to? Canada? WTF

    Go ahead and petition, I don’t think anything in my comments can be construed as a suggestion that the voters shut up. But if you’re going to get a cramp because the pResident isn’t being impeached right this very second, stock up on TUMS.

  • Re: tAiO @ #26

    Thank you for you worthwhile comments. You always seem to make some good points here. However, I still think that the Dems should get to “kickin’ down that door” sooner than later. I honestly believe that there is already a ton of evidence in the public domain that merits impeachment already (I won’t even mention “alternative” news sources). I’d hate to see the American Corporate Empire expand even further into the Cheney Protectorate of Iran.

    Also, my remarks from another thread are quite apropos in response to your 67-vote post-toke analysis.

    Rock on.

  • We should never again give creedence to the tough talk surrounding Bush that he is a strong person, despite staring into gale-force winds of oppostion. He is a very weak person emotionally which is why Bush is constantly worried about appearing “weak.” Only a person with a severe narcissistic neurosis would weigh each and every decision on how others view him. I don’t believe we have seen in modern times any American leader who ruled this nation solely by how is ego is perceived by others. A truly strong leader wouldn’t care if others though he was weak or strong: (s)he’d do he right thing instead.

  • This thread is old, so you probably won;t see this, JKap
    You said “Again with “67-vote” final retreat of cowardice. I am not a Loyal Democrat. I am a Loyal American and a U.S. Constitution Loyalist. I don’t care what party is in the majority, frankly, whether it be Democrats, Republicans, Green, Red, White, Blue or Independent. The United States House of Representatives must act to protect the U.S. Constitution of 1789 from the Loyal Bushie Brownshirt Cabal.”

    The 67-vote thing is pragmatism, not cowardice. I’d be thrilled if impeachment succeeded, and I’m not writing it off as a goal (nor, I think, is Pelosi. I heartily agree that action is needed, but what action, and how to make it work? Get some Republican rank and file fired up against Bush and you’ve got yourself a ballgame. Charge off into a one-party impeachment and you’ll encourage resistance. that (at the moment) will clearly deny success.

  • I don’t see why Gonzales was ever in trouble over firing a lawyer, you can fire any lawyer anytime and so can the government, it’s about time they did what they were told, they work for the government, not for themselves, if they don’t like the current administration or if they just look ugly, fire them!!!

  • Comments are closed.