Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Alberto Gonzales is a man of integrity and high ethical standards (Mel Martinez says without irony)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Ian David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-21-07 04:22 PM
Original message
Alberto Gonzales is a man of integrity and high ethical standards (Mel Martinez says without irony)
Edited on Wed Mar-21-07 04:22 PM by IanDB1
From: "Senator Mel Martinez, Republican Party General Chairman" <ecampaign@gop.com>
To: xxx
Subject: Statement on Attorney General Alberto Gonzales


Alberto Gonzales is a man of integrity and high ethical standards. He has pledged to cooperate with Congress and I am confident he will. I have said that it is irresponsible to pronounce judgment on the replacement of the U.S. Attorneys before we have the facts. Unfortunately, some would prefer to make political pronouncements instead of getting the facts. There is no question that U.S. attorneys, like all political appointees, serve at the pleasure of the President. That was true when Bill Clinton's Justice Department replaced all 93 U.S. attorneys, and it remains true today. The Democrats may feign outrage to distract from their discord on the serious issues our nation faces, but sooner or later they will have to face the real responsibilities of governing.

Below, please find the President's remarks on this issue that he made last night.


Sincerely,

Chairman Ken Mehlman
Senator Mel Martinez
Republican Party General Chairman

Earlier today, my staff met with congressional leaders about the resignations of U.S. attorneys. As you know, I have broad discretion to replace political appointees throughout the government, including U.S. attorneys. And in this case, I appointed these U.S. attorneys and they served four-year terms.

The Justice Department, with the approval of the White House, believed new leadership in these positions would better serve our country. The announcement of this decision and the subsequent explanation of these changes has been confusing and, in some cases, incomplete. Neither the Attorney General, nor I approve of how these explanations were handled. We're determined to correct the problem.

Today I'm also announcing the following steps my administration is taking to correct the record and demonstrate our willingness to work with the Congress. First, the Attorney General and his key staff will testify before the relevant congressional committees to explain how the decision was made and for what reasons. Second, we're giving Congress access to an unprecedented variety of information about the process used to make the decision about replacing eight of the 93 U.S. attorneys.

In the last 24 hours, the Justice Department has provided the Congress more than 3,000 pages of internal Justice Department documents, including those reflecting direct communications with White House staff.

This, in itself, is an extraordinary level of disclosure of an internal agency in White House communications.

Third, I recognize there is significant interest in the role the White House played in the resignations of these U.S. attorneys. Access to White House staff is always a sensitive issue. The President relies upon his staff to provide him candid advice. The framers of the Constitution understood this vital role when developing the separate branches of government. And if the staff of a President operated in constant fear of being hauled before various committees to discuss internal deliberations, the President would not receive candid advice, and the American people would be ill-served.

Yet, in this case, I recognize the importance of members of Congress having -- the importance of Congress has placed on understanding how and why this decision was made. So I'll allow relevant committee members on a bipartisan basis to interview key members of my staff to ascertain relevant facts. In addition to this offer, we will also release all White House documents and emails involving direct communications with the Justice Department or any other outside person, including members of Congress and their staff, related to this issue. These extraordinary steps offered today to the majority in Congress demonstrate a reasonable solution to the issue. However, we will not go along with a partisan fishing expedition aimed at honorable public servants.

The initial response by Democrats, unfortunately, shows some appear more interested in scoring political points than in learning the facts. It will be regrettable if they choose to head down the partisan road of issuing subpoenas and demanding show trials when I have agreed to make key White House officials and documents available. I have proposed a reasonable way to avoid an impasse. I hope they don't choose confrontation. I will oppose any attempts to subpoena White House officials.

As we cut through all the partisan rhetoric, it's important to maintain perspective on a couple of important points. First, it was natural and appropriate for members of the White House staff to consider and to discuss with the Justice Department whether to replace all 93 U.S. attorneys at the beginning of my second term. The start of a second term is a natural time to discuss the status of political appointees within the White House and with relevant agencies, including the Justice Department. In this case, the idea was rejected and was not pursued.

Second, it is common for me, members of my staff, and the Justice Department to receive complaints from members of Congress in both parties, and from other citizens. And we did hear complaints and concerns about U.S. attorneys. Some complained about the lack of vigorous prosecution of election fraud cases, while others had concerns about immigration cases not being prosecuted. These concerns are often shared between the White House and the Justice Department, and that is completely appropriate.

I also want to say something to the U.S. attorneys who reside. I appreciate your service to the country. And while I strongly support the Attorney General's decision and am confident he acted appropriately, I regret these resignations turned into such a public spectacle.

It's now my hope that the United States Congress will act appropriately. My administration has made a very reasonable proposal.

It's not too late for Democrats to drop the partisanship and work together. Democrats now have to choose whether they will waste time and provoke an unnecessary confrontation, or whether they will join us in working to do the people's business. There are too many important issues, from funding our troops to comprehensive immigration reform, to balancing the budget, for us to accomplish on behalf of the American people.






Republican National Committee | 310 First Street, SE | Washington, D.C. 20003
p: 202.863.8500 | f: 202.863.8820 | e: info@gop.com
Paid for by the Republican National Committee Not Authorized By Any Candidate Or Candidate's Committee - www.gop.com
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
IntravenousDemilo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-21-07 05:02 PM
Response to Original message
1. "There is no question that U.S. attorneys, like all political appointees,..
...serve at the pleasure of the President."

Silly me, and all this time I thought that the judicial branch serves the Constitution. What was I thinking?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ian David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-21-07 05:04 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. There's a big difference between "at the pleasure" and "FOR the pleasure" of the pResident. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lpbk2713 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-21-07 05:13 PM
Response to Original message
3. Interestingly enough regarding Mel Martinez ...




He voted "No" on establishing a Senate Office of Public Integrity.

Link: http://www.ontheissues.org/Economic/Mel_Martinez_Government_Reform.htm


A quote from Ol' Mel; We have people accusing us almost daily of having done something wrong and publishing it through blogs and all that. I think we should be very careful in setting up another tool for these bloggers to create more charges against the Senate.

Translation; It would be a shame to have my own words used against me.





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-21-07 05:28 PM
Response to Original message
4. He didn't add...
"But, he can also be a lyin' little shit."?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 05:23 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC