A Feeble Performance

[cal04]

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has reportedly begun telling friends and associates that he has weathered the storm over the firing of nine United States attorneys and that his job is safe despite widespread calls for his resignation. We can only hope he is wrong. Not only is the purge of the attorneys extremely serious, it is part of a long chain of evidence that Mr. Gonzales does not have the ability or the moral compass to do his vitally important job.

Consider Mr. Gonzales’s performance the other day before the House Judiciary Committee, where the chairman, John Conyers Jr., framed the questioning with admirable simplicity: who made up the list of prosecutors to be fired, and why? That should not be a hard question. The nine prosecutors who are now known to have been purged — it was eight until the case of Todd Graves of Missouri came to light this week — are nearly 10 percent of all United States attorneys. It defies belief that an attorney general would allow so many top officials to be fired without being well aware of the reasons.

Yet that was just what Mr. Gonzales claimed. He delegated, he was not informed, he just could not recall. None of it was believable. When asked by Representative Robert Wexler who decided to fire David Iglesias, the United States attorney in New Mexico, Mr. Gonzales flatly stated that President Bush and Vice President Cheney did not. He said he did not know who chose individual prosecutors to be fired, but he was certain that it was not his bosses.

(snip)
Beyond the unseemly images of Mr. Gonzales high-fiving his team for riding out the attorneys scandal, the spin from some quarters was that his testimony was successful — simply because he smiled blankly and refused to be ruffled when his answers and integrity were challenged.

Mr. Gonzales can cling to his office as long as the president supports him and Congress does not impeach him. The White House clearly has reasserted some party discipline since his Senate appearance the other week, when several Republicans called for his resignation. But that does not mean it is in anyone’s interest for him to stay on. The Justice Department is too important to be saddled with a year and a half more of such shoddy leadership.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/12/opinion/12sat1.html

[napi21]

1. I'm undecided on wether Gonzo should stay or go.

If he stays, he's severly damaged goods and has no credibility with anyone! If he goes, we have no idea what creature Shrub will dig up to replace him. I've heard rumors about Ted Olson, Oren Hatch and people like them. I never agree with either of those guys, but they are FAR smarter and more capable than Gonzo could ever hope to be. Either of them could put confidence back into the DOJ.

I think I'm actually leaning toward wanting the damaged merchandise to stick around. You know he can't possibly help Shrub in any way, and that can't do anything but pile more damage onto the Pub Party before the 08 elections.

[struggle4progress]

3. The Publicans being bent on destroying as much as possible, it will be better ...

.. for the country, if the more-experienced wreckingballs like Gonzales get kicked out sooner rather than later.

[Igel]

4. One conservative columnist has a different take.

He points back to Nixon. His AG left; the senate was dem controlled. One requirement for confirming the new, nominated AG was that he appoint a special prosecutor to investigate Nixon, one that was amenable the dems. Cox.

Had his AG not resigned, no special prosecutor.

[Cobalt-60]

2. Can Gonzales himself not be impeached?

He's obviously lying under oath.

[MasonJar]

5. He has friends?