Opposing view: 'Months of unfair treatment' »
Posted by: STONERS 1 year agoAs attorney general and before that as White House counsel, Al Gonzales has played a role in shaping our policies in the war on terror and has worked tirelessly to make this country safer. The (USA) Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act and other important laws bear his imprint.
Read Full Story at news.yahoo.com
Join the Discussion 
+ Add Comment
Comments So Far: 65
-
0%
STONERS1 year ago
"After months of unfair treatment that has created a harmful distraction at the Justice Department, Judge Gonzales decided to resign his position, and I accept his decision. It's sad that we live in a time when a talented and honorable person like Alberto Gonzales is (impeded) from doing important work because his good name was dragged through the mud for political reasons."
Reply-
-
0%
PsychoHosebeast1 year ago
Yeah, that line is probably going to bite Bush on the ass sooner or later.
Just once I'd like to hear Bush say something like "I told him to quit because he sucked. I made a mistake, and my dog would've made a better AG than this idiot. He's a liar and a fool, and I've asked that charges be pressed for obstruction."
Reply
-
-
-
JohnQPublicComment removed: User banned.
-
-
0%
dotsie_d1 year ago
Gonzales helped Bush implement almost Hitlerian policies and deserves everything he got, has, and will get. If he truly was talented, then he should have said no to Bush and stopped the madness in its tracks. He swore to defend the Constitution of the United States, not Bush's interpretation of it, and that was his mistake.
Oddly enough, bye the bye, I was watching some clips of Hitler's home movies on the History Channel today (8/28), and Hitler, too, had a Scottish Terrier, like Bush. Another weird parallel.
Reply-
0%
ETproductions1 year ago
I think the bottom line is we don't need the President's personally attorney running the Department of Justice. The DOJ needs to be run by the American People's attorney.
It is the rightful, constitutionally-required duty of Congress to provide oversight of the Executive branch. If Gonzales had honestly answered the questions asked of him by the Senate Judiciary Committee, he would have either cleared his name or been found guilty of turning the DOJ into a political weapon of the White House and the RNC. But he didn't answer the questions. In response to every question that got near malfeasance, he said in essence, "I don't recall."
That left two possible conclusions. Either he did recall and he was using the old lawyer's trick of saying I can't remember in order to sidestep perjuring himself or he really didn't have any clue what was going on in the vital department he was supposed to be running.
No matter which of those was true, he had to go.
Reply-
0%
ETproductions1 year ago
"Considering how important real issues are in the DOJ, appointments is a pretty minor thing."
Turning DOJ into a political weapon is not a minor thing. Would any White House do such a thing? Remember Nixon's "List of people to be screwed any way possible"?
The suspicion that such DOJ politicization had been done was what this hearing was all about. As I said before, if there was nothing there to hide, Gonzales could have easily cleared things up by simply playing open kimono. Instead, he and the White House claimed defective memory, obfuscated and plain refused to deliver documents and witnesses in the face of subpoenas. Therefore, Gonzales had to go.
Reply -
0%
joeblowe1 year ago
You know - I'm not sure about that "firing for any reason" deal. AG's and others appointed by the Pres. and confirmed by the Senate are SUPPOSED to be appointed for a particular term. 4 years for AG's, I believe. Let's see what the Constitution says:
The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.
Looks to me like the AG's can really only be removed after having been appointed and confirmed through impeachment. I can't find anything in the Constitution that says the President can simply FIRE someone for no reason after they have been appointed and confirmed. Anyone?
Reply
-
-
JohnQPublicComment removed: User banned.
-
0%
cloud151 year ago
dotsie the fact that you could get 7 positive votes for that comment shows how slanted this site is.
Reply -
0%
spkguy1 year ago
Here Bill Moyer's interviews Jon Stewart about Gonzales.
One word... "PRICELESS!"
http://unrepentantoldhippie.blogspot.com/2007/0...
Reply
-
-
0%
PsychoHosebeast1 year ago
With their silver and gold they have made idols for themselves... how long will they be incapable of innocence? ...For they sow the wind, and they reap the whirlwind.
Sometimes you poke the bear with a stick, he doesn't mind. But if you keep poking him, he doesn't get a stick and poke you back. He just eats you.
I love the idea of "unfair," as if anyone ever gives a damn what's fair until they decide to bitch about someone turning the tables on them. Unfair? Maybe.Illegal? No. Can he make the same claim?
Reply -
0%
Raiderwall1 year ago
Gonazles was a henchmen, not an Attorney General. His priorities were protecting his president, advancing the Bush programs, and enhancing the posistion of the president's political party.
The Alberto Gonzales episode provided a clear picture into the inner workings and priorities of the Bush Administration. Ideology came first, the American people a distant second.
Reply-
0%
Endoscopy1 year ago
Here speaks a truly mind numbed spouter of radical thought. Don't look at what was really done and if it was legal or not. Just spout what the braying radicals spout. The Democrats just want to tie up the administration in hearings. They come up with hot air but it is regurgitated like it means something.
What crime has been committed that causes this degree of investigation. None. Those federal lawyers serve at the whim of the president. They can be fired because someone doesn't like the color of their eyes. They go into that job knowing that.
Reply-
0%
spkguy1 year ago
Endoscopy
"They come up with hot air but it is regurgitated like it means something."
You know whats regurgitated and means something?
How about Gonzales saying "I can't recall" 64 times in four hours of testimony, and in the opinion of many out and out perjury!
Gonzales may have revealed classified meeting, committed perjury
"Republican Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA) put it bluntly: "I do not find your testimony credible." He reminded Gonzales that the entire committee would review his testimony, in an apparent threat of legal consequences for lying to Congress."
http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Gonzales_digs_dee...
Reply -
0%
sinophil491 year ago
Firing federal prosecutors for their political affiliations or to advance a political cause or party is criminal. Lying to the Senate Judiciary committee is criminal. The AG is the top law enforcement officer in the nation. If he were suspected of criminal behavior, it is only right, proper, prudent, and ethical to investigate such high crimes.
If there were no investigation, we really wouldn't know if he committed crimes. If there were no investigation, he could get away with anything he wanted to do.
Reply -
0%
CaptainLucid1 year ago
In addition to color of the eyes how about color of the skin? Is the president above laws about racial discrimination. Of course W thinks he is above all law anyway.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
0%
Raiderwall1 year ago
Attorneys fired for not following through on RNC business, i.e. trying to indict Democrats before an election. What made those BUSH appointed attorneys defy the AG and President and RNC Chairman on that. Seems to me they were doing good jobs, according to their reviews. No where, nowhere on those reviews did it say they were required to do Bush's or any Republican candidates groundwork.
AND, if there was nothing wrong, why does Gonzales not just come right and say what happened and why.
If the name fits, use it.
Henchman.
Reply -
0%
sinophil491 year ago
Gonzales hired attorneys for political reasons; he fired them for political reasons. He essentially ran the DOJ as a branch of the RNC, using political reasons to formulate policy. He crafted the guidelines that allowed torture of prisoners and tried to hide it from congress. He said that the Geneva Conventions do not apply to terrorists.
He even drafted a procedure (Not implemented) for suspending national elections if Bush were to declare a national emergency. While Bush was governor, he created a unique reason for Bush to not serve on a jury for a DUI. He said that Bush was in a position to potentially decide on a pardon for this DUI, therefore, it was a conflict of interest to be on the jury. By avoiding jury duty, Bush did not have to reveal his own DUI arrest.
Truly he had no interest in JUSTICE. His sole raison d'etre was to protect and serve Bush. I would have no problem if he was chosen to replace Harriet Miers as White House counsel.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
HateKoolAid1 year ago
Someone tell Bush "That was the damn problem!" The role of the Justice Department is to ENFORCE laws not MAKE them, that is supposedly the role of congress. The Justice Department is suppose to be a stand alone agency not subservient to either the White House or congress. Bush should have just got it over with and had them build an office in the White House for Gonzales in the first place.
Reply-
0%
Endoscopy1 year ago
Did you learn anything about the makeup of the government in school? Or do you live in a different country? The justice Department is under the executive branch. The Court system is a separate branch of government. The Legislative branch is the third equal branch.
Therefore the president has control of the Justice department as per the Constitution.
Reply-
0%
Raiderwall1 year ago
Well, maybe if Gonzo had just come out and said so, things would be different now, but he fumbled, and mumbled, and made poor excuses, and led everyone to believe there was something wrong.
And with this administration there's usually something wrong. My personal favorite is the college dropout from Texas who worked on Bush's campaign. He was rewarded with a job as a PR guy at NASA, and tried editing the work of NASA scientists on climate control so that it would say the evidence for global warming was inconclusive. The scientists told him to stuff it, and by the time this became a big deal, the kid got fired. I don't know what happened to him, maybe he went back to school and took some science classes.
Reply -
0%
sinophil491 year ago
endo - The fact that the DOJ is part of the executive branch is not a reason for the White House to manipulate the administraion of justice. Remember the statue of justice is blindfolded. The primary motivation of the White House was the reelection of Bush and the advancement of the Republican political agenda. It should never influence the administering of justice.
The most luminous example I can think of is Janet Reno. She had the authority to fire both Robert Fiske and Kenneth Starr. Although Clinton may have sorely wanted to, she never made a move to do that. That is real pursuit of truth without the cloud of political influence.
Bush and Gonzales do not have a fraction of her integrity and strength of belief in real justice.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
sjoko1 year ago
I just figured something out ........... I must be living in a different world???
Reply -
0%
amIdreaming1 year ago
Amazing only one Clinton comment here so far. When are the right wing neos gonna get a life? They remind me of the skit Saturday Night Live did back in the late '70's on Iran. Remember the game show with the Iranian participants? Every question was answered with "they are all CIA operatives working in Tehran." When will they move the f*ck on?!? Bush could shoot their mother and they'd still say, "yeah, but Clinton would have wanted to shoot my mother even more than Bush did."
Reply-
0%
Endoscopy1 year ago
When the left wing radicals stop just bashing and discuss the issues. The continued rants just feed each other and help every radical and far left lib believe they are right. This happens when no real issue is discussed but mostly just name calling. For example: liar, dumb, no brains, etc.
In this thread "in two weeks he'll forget he ever was Attorney General". Real intelligent discussion.
Reply-
0%
ETproductions1 year ago
Oh come on Endo. Does it really bother you that much when libs learn to use the tactics of the far right?
Actually, I don't consider myself a liberal. I was a registered Republican until Nixon came along. Since Tricky Dick, the Republican Party hasn't stood for what it did back in Ike's day.
I would love to see us begin to debate true issues without name calling, phony spin and deliberate sidetracking. As a nation, we face problems that are going to require us to come together in a common cause. I'm all ears if you see ways to better do that.
Reply -
0%
sinophil491 year ago
endo - You claim to want to "discusS the issues." Well. Please write a brief synopsis on what you feel are the real issues.
Many bloggers have written about the political criteria AG used to hire prosecutors, then subsequently fire them. Much has been written about the legal justifications for torture he crafted and why the Geneva conventions do not apply to US troops. We worry about the huge electronic spying program on US citizens. We are appalled at his bedside visit to Ashcroft to get his signature.
I guess you do not consider any of these as issues.
So, again, please tell us what you consider the REAL ISSUES.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
Belenus1 year ago
"Sleazy Gonzales" has become, Thank God, "Speedy Gonzales" on the way out.
Reply -
-
0%
sinophil491 year ago
"leve leva e malanga kae tau"
I have no idea what that means but I gave you a plus vote anyway
Reply
-
-
-
0%
ETproductions1 year ago
The New Republicans are TERRIBLE at defense. They boast and bluster, but they can't see the big picture. It takes more than just guts to win a war. Hitler demonstrated guts in attacking Russia and opening an Eastern front even as he was bogging down on the Western front. Guts without Brains wasn't enough then, and it still isn't now.
Chicken hawks full of false bravado are NOT the best choice for tomorrow's leadership. We need something new. We need a leader with Brains, bravery and heart equally integrated. We need to restore America to its former glory as the most respected nation on earth. Under Bush, we have become the most hated, even beating out Kim Jong Ill's Reclusive and Saber Rattling North Korea.
Reply -
0%
sinophil491 year ago
THORERICCHESTER - "They are more afraid of the American people than any terrorist group."
Interesting new thought. Thank you.
I always thought Bush, Rove, Cheney, et al. simply didn't give a damn about the American people, just their own power and the profit margin for their business interests.
Reply
-
-
0%
crespi1 year ago
Most of those groups made public statements declaring war on the United States (Clinton) government.
Terrorists by today's definitions.
Reply
Submitted By:
STONERS
I've started a ""STONERS Daily News Group"" Please stop by and have a look and join if you like it.. All welcome!!! ;~]
Add your ...
Also submitted:
- 5.1 - Undated video shows Qaeda leader reported killed
- 7.8 - Survey: Boomers doped up in old age
- 5.2 - Toll rises to 121 in Uganda hepatitis epidemic
- 5.0 - Mammoth Mystery: The Beasts Final Years
Related Articles:
Why not submit a story?
Also Propping This Article
charbarred
Helixbuilder
ciera-marie
sjoko
dandt1612
greeneyes
BronxBomber
monte-g- psilosjordan
uncle-dave
Groups Watching This
No groups are watching this story. Why not share it with your group?
