WAPO - Gonzales "NEVER SHOULD HAVE BEEN CONFIRMED"

[kpete]

A Story Unravels
A hollow promise of 'accountability' in the firing of U.S. attorneys
Wednesday, March 14, 2007; Page A14


"PREPARE TO Withstand Political Upheaval," the attorney general's now-ousted chief of staff wrote in an e-mail to the White House as the administration prepared to fire a number of U.S. attorneys last year. About that, at least, D. Kyle Sampson was right. Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales, whose tenure in office has served only to deepen our conviction that he should never have been confirmed, has dismissed the firings as an "overblown personnel matter" and assured lawmakers that "I would never, ever make a change in a U.S. attorney position for political reasons." It's become clear, most recently and pointedly with the release of e-mails between Mr. Sampson and former White House counsel Harriet E. Miers, that Mr. Gonzales's assurances can't be trusted. The stench of politics surrounding the firings grows daily: from the original, harebrained idea of the hapless Ms. Miers to can all 93 U.S. attorneys; to the involvement of the president's chief political adviser, Karl Rove; to the improper intervention of lawmakers and a senior congressional aide; to the misleading -- at best -- accounts from Mr. Gonzales and other top Justice Department officials.

............

Now that the political costs are higher than the administration could have imagined, now that senior officials have squandered their claim to credibility, it is imperative that the entire story of the firings be uncovered. As we have said previously, the administration is entitled to prosecutors who reflect its policies and carry out its priorities. It is not entitled to treat federal prosecutors like political pawns -- nor is it entitled, any longer, to the benefit of the doubt about the propriety of its conduct.

Mr. Gonzales can make self-serving declarations about his belief in "accountability," as he did at a news conference yesterday; he can proclaim his plans to "ascertain what happened here . . . and take corrective actions." Nothing in his record gives any reason for confidence that anything will change in a department under his leadership.

more at:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/13/AR2007031301527.html?nav=rss_opinion

[no_hypocrisy]

1. Neither should have *, but we play the hand we're dealt. n/t

[depakid]

2. Tell that to the Dems who voted for him

and to the far right enablers in the "leadership" that refused to filibuster on this and so many other issues.

[annabanana]

3. I am glad to see that WaPo has read the emails...

Their quote is from PDF page 17 of the email release
http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/pdf/why_a_031307.pdf

also on that page:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=406572&mesg_id=407649

If they are actually digging into the meat of the release, Gonzo is gone-o

[blm]

4. Both Gonzales and Rice showed staggering incompetence BEFORE their nominations

so NO WAY should ANY Democrat have voted for either one of these confirmations.

There is just no honest reason that either could have passed the smell test at that point.

[wiggs]

5. He was Bush's PERSONAL ATTORNEY previously! He is supposed to

represent us, not just be a consigliare for the WH. Article is exactly right...he should not have been confirmed.

This has been said before: There is a Katrina/Walter Reed/Iraq waiting for us in EVERY POLICY AREA. Gonzales is another disaster; deficits, education, global warming, foreign policy, medical care, constitutional integrity, energy, national security, etc all have been compromised by ideology, cronyism, corruption, incompetence, and indifference.

What a fiasco.

[Solly Mack]

6. Duh - just doesn't quite do it

The dangerous thinking that a President has the right - the right! - to have anyone they want in their cabinet - regardless of how bad they would be for the country - leaves me astonished.


I'm astonished people moan and groan after the fact - rubber stamping just any old thug because a President wants that thug in office is an action that just begs for abuse.

The people are entitled to the best person possible for a job...not the person who will best cater to a President's every whim

No one in government serves at the pleasure of the President...they ALL serve at the pleasure of the people.....including the President.


Checks and balances like, gee, I dunno - confirmation hearings - are designed to keep mindless sycophants, who serve the whims of a President to the detriment of the people, out of office

Confirmation hearings are NOT supposed to be a rubber-stamp process...yet that is exactly what they have become and the people have been on the losing end of that kind of thinking for too long.