Gonzales wasn’t out of the loop after all

Remember all the comments [tag]Attorney General[/tag] [tag]Alberto Gonzales[/tag] has made this month about not having been directly involved with the [tag]prosecutor[/tag] purge? Right about now, Gonzales probably wishes you didn’t.

Internal [tag]Bush[/tag] administration e-mails suggest that Attorney General Alberto Gonzales may have played a bigger role than he has acknowledged in the plan to fire several U.S. attorneys.

The e-mails, delivered to Congress Friday night, show that Gonzales attended an hour-long meeting on the firings on Nov. 27, 2006 – 10 days before seven U.S. attorneys were told to resign. The attorney general’s participation in the session calls into question his assertion that he was essentially in the dark about the firings.

By any reasonable measure, Gonzales’ claims were always hard to believe. The Attorney General was only passively aware of an unprecedented effort, coordinated with the White House, to fire U.S. Attorneys? He was out of the loop? His own chief of staff was helping execute the plan, but the Attorney General never even participated in a discussion about the purge? Please.

Tasia Scolinos, a Justice Department spokesperson, told reporters last night that Gonzales’s attendance at the hour-long meeting was not inconsistent with his past remarks.

This need not be complicated. Less than two weeks ago, Gonzales forcefully insisted, “I was not involved in seeing any memos, was not involved in any discussions about what was going on…. I never saw documents. We never had a discussion about where things stood.”

And yet we now know that Gonzales met with the Deputy Attorney general to discuss the firings. They didn’t run into each other at Starbucks; they had an hour-long meeting seven days before the Dec. 7 purge (a meeting which fell during the 18-day gap in Justice Department documents).

“Not inconsistent”? Oh come now.

“Another late-night document delivery has produced evidence of the attorney general’s involvement much earlier than he previously acknowledged. … This puts the attorney general front and center in these matters, contrary to information that had previously been provided to the public and Congress,” said Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.

Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., said the latest e-mails could increase the pressure on Gonzales to resign. Sampson’s scheduled testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday should shed more light on Gonzales’ role.

“If the facts bear out that Attorney General Gonzales knew much more about the plan than he has previously admitted, then he can no longer serve as attorney general,” said Schumer, who has already called on Gonzales to step down.

That seems like a safe assumption.

Now, you might be wondering how it is that there could be two huge document-dumps in recent weeks, but this little tidbit of news wasn’t released until a third dump, late on a Friday afternoon. The NYT reported that Justice Department officials claimed there had been no intentional effort to delay the release. “Instead, they said, the e-mail messages were overlooked in past searches of office files and computers.” And since the DoJ has been so reliable and trustworthy on this issue up until now, there’s no reason in the world to question this claim.

There’s some other newsworthy updates from overnight that I’ll get to shortly, but I did want to note that Josh Marshall, who describes the newest revelations as “crystal clear proof” that “Gonzales was lying about his role in the US Attorney Purge,” suggested that we not be distracted by this.

Right-wing shills want to chalk the blundering administration response to US Attorney Purge scandal to incompetence. But just as we can infer the force of gravity from the descent of the falling apple, the panicked succession of lies and dodges out of the administration implies not incompetence but guilty knowledge of underlying bad acts.

This isn’t about the AG’s lies. It’s not about the attempted cover-up. It’s not about executive privilege and investigative process mumbojumbo.

This is about using US Attorneys to damage Democrats and protect Republicans, using the Department of Justice as a partisan cudgel in the war for national political dominance. All the secrecy and lies, the blundering and covering-up stems from this one central fact.

I think that’s largely right. I might quibble about looking past Gonzales’ demonstrable mendacity — the headlines this morning will certainly increase pressure for Gonzales to resign — but Josh’s broader point is important. The scandal is about far more than lying.

No! You’re telling me that Abu Gonzo’s mendacious? Goodness gracious! I’m shocked, shocked I tell you.

  • Don’t any of these guys remember Nixon? This is a clear cut case using the levers of government to punish political enemies and protect political friends. If this isn’t an abuse of power, then it means power is impossible to abuse. Bush’s defenders have skated so far out onto the thin ice, that their only remaining defense of him will be some sort of Divine Infallibility.

  • But… but… but… Tony Snow and numerous media pundits told us we could get the truth without oaths and transcripts!

  • From today’s radio address by Junior,

    “Members of Congress now face a choice: whether they will waste time and provoke an unnecessary confrontation, or whether they will join us in working to do the people’s business,” Bush said. “We have many important issues before us. So we need to put partisan politics aside and come together to enact important legislation for the Republican …..ahhhh, urrrr, American people.”

    Ok, he didn’t exactly say the last part.

  • I remember my US History books discussing the attempt by FDR to “pack the Supreme Court” in order for him to pursue his agenda without ever having to fear losing any battles over the Constitutionality of his political agenda.

    Is the import of these actions by the Bush administration (and as someone else mentioned, the Nixonian uses of DOJ), really that far afield as matters of historical importance?

    I don’t think anyone (but the 28%ers) are either surprised or fooled by any of this – and that includes the Republicans (mostly lawyers) in Congress.

    Neither Current Events nor US History will be kind about this. Another nail in the “Bush Legacy.”

  • Don’t any of these guys remember Nixon?

    That’s a great question and I think the answer is clearly “yes”. This administration contains a few of the actual vermin from those years and I’m sure Nixon’s meltdown and disgrace has rankled these idiots for years. It’s almost as if the current crop of Nixon-inspired reprobates are absolutely determined to emulate the old turd’s method of governance, consequences be damned. And having a servile political majority in the Congress for six years to enable the malfeasance has made them believe they can say and do and get away with anything.

  • I hope Godwin and all the halfwit morons who have been citing his “law” as a way of attacking those of us who saw clearly what we were looking at when we saw this fascist coup d’etat take place in 2000 will finally admit they had their heads up their collective ass.

    Go read “The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich,” you know-nothing knowitalls!! This entire administration has been organized exactly the same way the Nazis organized the Third Reich. They don’t run around in uniforms (although I think a case can be made for the “pinstriped classic Republican suit” as an effective substitute, with its little flag lapel pin they’ve been wearing for the past 38 years as if it was a red armband).

    Hitler claimed he was a “conservative” and was anything but. Bush claims he’s a conservative and is anything but. Given the history of his family’s involvement with the Nazis from before they took power, perhaps it is his presidency that is the victory of the “Werewolves.”

    These people are radical far right revolutionaries, and those who fail to understand this basic point will never understand how to fight this fascist enemy.

  • JoeW (#2): in fact these people do remember Nixon – they came into politics because of Nixon and they never ever for a minute thought he did anything bad – the only crime was they got caught, according to them. The plan was to have learned from history and to do it right this time.

    These people remind me of the Greek General in “Z” who exposed his politics by shrieking “Dreyfus was guilty!

    I really think we’re getting to the point where re-reading Barbara Tuchman’s chapter on the Dreyfus Affair in “The Proud Tower” would be good historical instruction. The American right is no different from the French right then, as it is no different from the Italian right in the 1920s or the German right in the 1930s or the Argentine right in the 1970s or the Chilean right in the 1980s… right is right is right is right.

  • Tom Cleaver nails it. Do we really have to wait until they all start giving stiff-armed salutes and shouting “sieg heil” before we can call them what they are?

  • Insofar as both nazism and fascism not only differed from one another but also differ from shrubism, I don’t have much quarrel with Godwin’s law of not applying those terms to the current situation. But, there’s nothing wrong with simply saying “totalitarian regime”; it covers all kinds of cancers…

  • “His honour rooted in dishonour stood, And faith unfaithful kept him falsely true.”

    Lord Alfred Tennyson
    Idylls of the King–Lancelot and Elaine

  • Comments are closed.