At the risk of spurring another conversation with James Joyner about whether or not the president is dumb, Bush’s apparent understanding of the controversy surrounding Alberto Gonzales is rather startling. At a press conference yesterday, he seems to fundamentally misunderstand what’s going on in Washington.
Q: Mr. President, I want to take you back to domestic issues again. You say the no-confidence vote has no bearing as to whether Alberto Gonzales remains as Attorney General. How can he continue to be effective? And it seems like you’re not listening to Congress when it comes to Gonzales, but you are listening to Congress when it comes to Peter Pace.
BUSH: Yes, it’s an interesting comment about Congress, isn’t it, that, on the one hand, they say that a good general shouldn’t be reconfirmed, and on the other hand, they say that my Attorney General shouldn’t stay. And I find it interesting.
This makes absolutely no sense at all. The “good general” Bush referred to is outgoing Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Peter Pace. The administration decided not to keep Pace on in his current position because, officials have told reporters, the Senate might be mean to him on Iraq policy during upcoming hearings.
It led to a reasonable question: why would Bush stand by Gonzales when the Senate has turned on him, but throw Pace under the bus before the Senate even has a chance to consider his re-nomination?
Yesterday, Bush seemed to think he’d stumbled onto something clever — he told reporters it’s “interesting” that the Senate was skeptical about Pace’s leadership and opposed to Gonzales’ leadership of the Justice Department. Bush was so fond of this observation that he mentioned how “interesting” it is twice.
But what on earth is so fascinating?
What’s so unusual about lawmakers questioning a general whose leadership has been ineffective, and then also questioning an attorney general who has repeatedly lied about a scandal? What connection does Bush see here that’s so “interesting”? The whole argument sounded child-like, which regrettably, is fairly common with this president.
Bush elaborated on his AG.
“And as to how Gonzales — first of all, this process has been drug out a long time, which says to me it’s political. There’s no wrongdoing. You know, he — they haven’t said, here’s — you’ve done something wrong, Attorney General Gonzales. And therefore, I ascribe this lengthy series of news stories and hearings as political.”
First, I particularly liked the phrase “drug out,” instead of the correct “dragged out,” in part because of the irony — the president sounded medicated when he said it.
Second, there’s plenty of evidence of “wrongdoing,” and the Senate has repeatedly told the AG that he’s done “something wrong.” Bush does know what subject we’re talking about, right?
And third, this process has been “lengthy” because officials at the White House and the Justice Department have decided not to cooperate with the investigation. This process could go very quickly with basic answers to basic questions, which the Bush gang refuses to provide.
The president is either pretending to be clueless or he is clueless. It’s that simple.