Does Anyone Here Want to Defend the Attorney General?

[andyfox]

This is a guy for whom truth and the law are secondary considerations to defending his patron. He's more of a consigliere than an attorney-general.

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
This is a guy for whom truth and the law are secondary considerations to defending his patron. He's more of a consigliere than an attorney-general.

[/ QUOTE ]

Post I made Earlier

Don't you think it's time for Congress to move forward and prove their accusations of Gonzo unlawful activities? Note that I state in my post that the Democrats may be correct.

Maybe Congress has had hearings on the following but I'm wondering why Congress doesn't question more legal experts on the constitutionality of the TSP. Perhaps they have done this and I just didn't pay attention.

[AzDesertRat]

he is either incompetent or a complete liar. In either case, he should not be the AG. Fire his ass.

[qwnu]

[ QUOTE ]
Don't you think it's time for Congress to move forward and prove their accusations of Gonzo unlawful activities?

[/ QUOTE ]

What lawmakers are accusing the Attorney General of "unlawful activities"? Other than the relatively recent perjury stuff, I'm not aware of any. What I am aware of is widespread suspicion about improper and unethical actions (by persons unknown in the Justice department) regarding the firings of the U.S. Attorneys. Regardless, even if Congress suspected Gonzalez of a crime, it would not be their responsibility to investigate the charges, nor to "prove" them.

What they are doing, as best they can, is "moving forward" by holding hearings, hearing testimony, and exercising their oversight capacity by investigating to try and determine whether any rules or laws seem to have been broken.

The problem is that their investigations are being hindered (stonewalled) by the Executive branch, documents are being withheld, subpoenas are being ignored, executive privilege is being invoked, and testimony by some seems to be misleading at best, and deceptive at worst. All the while Tony Snow wants us to believe that it is Congress who is being confrontational on the issue.

So, in summary, I'm not sure what else it is that you would like to see the Congress do (that is within their authority).


[ QUOTE ]
...I'm wondering why Congress doesn't question more legal experts on the constitutionality of the TSP...

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, I don't think Congress really has any authority to rule on the constitutionality of anything. A federal judge has already ruled that the NSA warrantless wiretapping was unconstitutional and in violation of FISA. That ruling was vacated earlier this month, but this had to do with standing, and nothing to do with the merits of the case.

That's sort of beside the point anyway, since the administration hasn't really claimed that it didn't break the law. Instead they've claimed that the President has the authority to ignore the law, and that the courts have no jurisdiction to say otherwise.

Having said all that, the legality of the TSP is only tangentially related to the Attorney General's job performance.

[Zeno]

[ QUOTE ]
The guy's a hired hack. Laws and the Constitution for him mean only what he says they mean to please his boss. He's authored a memo restricting access under FOIA. He believes Article III of the Geneva Convention is outdated and "quaint." He's been the leader in trying to keep Cheney's energy task force documents secret. He denies the Constitution has a right of habeus corpus. He's defended wireless wiretapping. His testimony in front of Congress has been one of constant lapses of memory interspersed with obfuscation. He believes in an all-powerful President.

He's a disgrace.

[/ QUOTE ]

As disgraceful as Robert Kennedy, John Mitchell, or Edwin Meese?

-Zeno

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Don't you think it's time for Congress to move forward and prove their accusations of Gonzo unlawful activities?

[/ QUOTE ]

What lawmakers are accusing the Attorney General of "unlawful activities"? Other than the relatively recent perjury stuff, I'm not aware of any.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ridiculous. A quick search turns up this synopsys.

Democrats In Congress on Bush

[ QUOTE ]
What I am aware of is widespread suspicion about improper and unethical actions (by persons unknown in the Justice department) regarding the firings of the U.S. Attorneys. Regardless, even if Congress suspected Gonzalez of a crime, it would not be their responsibility to investigate the charges, nor to "prove" them.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course it's their responsibility to provide proof of what they say. Why else does one hold hearings but to gather evidence, determine at least some facts, and gather information.

[ QUOTE ]
What they are doing, as best they can, is "moving forward" by holding hearings, hearing testimony, and exercising their oversight capacity by investigating to try and determine whether any rules or laws seem to have been broken.

The problem is that their investigations are being hindered (stonewalled) by the Executive branch, documents are being withheld, subpoenas are being ignored, executive privilege is being invoked, and testimony by some seems to be misleading at best, and deceptive at worst. All the while Tony Snow wants us to believe that it is Congress who is being confrontational on the issue.

So, in summary, I'm not sure what else it is that you would like to see the Congress do (that is within their authority).

[/ QUOTE ]

Apparently you didn't take the time to go to the link I provided in my response to Andy. Here's link to an op-ed piece in the Washington Post from a lawyer on what Congress can do.

Congress's Power To Compel

Mr. Askin is certainly no fan of the Bush administration. Many in the Democratic party base are demanding action.


[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
...I'm wondering why Congress doesn't question more legal experts on the constitutionality of the TSP...

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, I don't think Congress really has any authority to rule on the constitutionality of anything. A federal judge has already ruled that the NSA warrantless wiretapping was unconstitutional and in violation of FISA. That ruling was vacated earlier this month, but this had to do with standing, and nothing to do with the merits of the case.

That's sort of beside the point anyway, since the administration hasn't really claimed that it didn't break the law. Instead they've claimed that the President has the authority to ignore the law, and that the courts have no jurisdiction to say otherwise.

Having said all that, the legality of the TSP is only tangentially related to the Attorney General's job performance.

[/ QUOTE ]

The whole bruhaha last week was about Gonzales testifying about his role in the TSP.

Senators Call for Gonzales Perjury Probe

A group of Senate Democrats on Thursday called for a special counsel to investigate whether Attorney General Alberto Gonzales perjured himself in testimony regarding dissent over President Bush's domestic surveillance program.

His Senate testimony on Tuesday contradicted documents concerning a 2004 meeting with key lawmakers. The documents show that, contrary to Gonzales' testimony, a terror surveillance program was discussed at the meeting.

Why do you think that members of Congress are so interested in his role in the TSP? It isn't because they believe the TSP is a lawful, constitutionally valid operation. It seems to me that the crux of the matter is the constitutionality of the TSP in how it was conducted. That's something that people within the administration that were responsible for carrying out the program can shed some light on. They can testify to what they did and how it was carried out. Congress can also require testimony from experts on constitutional law regarding how a TSP should be carried out. They may have done this already, don't know. Since many in Congress have basically concluded that Bush has stonewalled an investigation long before last week, it's completely absurd to believe that a Gonzales testimony would shed any light. I'm not opposed to having Gonzales go on the record but it's just silly to believe the administration has stonewalled an investigation into the program and apparently be surprised when Gonzo stonewalls the investigation. Moving forward means that Congress needs to elicit testimony from people who can shed some light on the workings of the TSP as well as the constitutionality of the program. If the TSP is unconstitutional and the Bush administration broke the law the people need to have the facts.

[andyfox]

I'd rank him as worse than Kennedy and Meese, but not as disgraceful as Mitchell. Mitchell ended up in jail. My favorite thing Mitchell did was, upon taking office, to say, publicly, "Watch what we do, not what we say." I like it when a guy tells you, up front, that he's going to be a full-time liar. Cuts right to the chase.

BTW, during WWII, Mitchell was JFK's PT boat unit commander.

[guids]

[ QUOTE ]
Who said he's being prosecuted for anything?

[/ QUOTE ]

It was really an honest question, I havent been following any of it fwiw, and am sick of politics and the unwillingles for anyone to listen to anyone. I assumed from a couple news blurbs I heard that he was being prosecuted for something, due to the way he is being portrayed and wanted to know which of those things he was being prosecuted for.

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
he is either incompetent or a complete liar. In either case, he should not be the AG. Fire his ass.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes he's a political liability at best. At worst he's been appointed to being AG to help cover up and stonewall unlawful policies of the administration. Hire your hack as the head of the Justice Department to head off all investigations of wrongdoing. That's a fairly common perception out there right now. Let's see if there's any substance to this.

[elwoodblues]

[ QUOTE ]
I havent been following any of it fwiw, and am sick of politics and the unwillingles for anyone to listen to anyone

[/ QUOTE ]

I haven't been listening and am frustrated at people who don't listen too.