Do you find it odd that no one is pushing for Gonzales to be impeached. A target with

[CK_John]

a good probability of success in both the House and Senate. We have testimony and conflicting info on record for possible perjury.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

1. I think the Congress are overwhelmed with so many scandals

however Gonzles should go now

[CK_John]

2. I was thinking more of here on DU than Congress. n/t

[Capn Sunshine]

26. Well, most people working in the real world for Abu Gonzales' impeachment don't post at DU.

I love DU, but get over yourselves. It's an internet board, not party central.

[seafan]

3. Oh, we're out here, all right.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=175886&mesg_id=175886

[CK_John]

4. That was back on Feb 10, I see a response every once in a while. But no

big push to do something that we might succeed at.

[AndyTiedye]

9. Posted This One Earlier Today

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=2926934&mesg_id=2926973

[CK_John]

10. Keep them coming. This tread is not quite setting the world ablaze. n/t

[MADem]

5. Well, I think it's a firm possibility. Right now, they're giving him enough rope to hang himself.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/23/AR2007072300579.html

The House Judiciary Committee announced yesterday that it will press toward a constitutional showdown with the Bush administration over the U.S. attorney firings scandal, even as embattled Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales vowed to stay on and "fix the problems" that have damaged the reputation and morale of the Justice Department.

John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.), the House Judiciary chairman, said his committee will vote Wednesday on contempt citations for the White House chief of staff, Joshua B. Bolten, and former White House counsel Harriet E. Miers, both of whom refused congressional demands for information on the dismissals after President Bush invoked executive privilege.


The move puts House Democrats on a legal collision course with the White House, which said last week that it would not allow the Justice Department to prosecute executive branch officials for being in contempt of Congress.

Gonzales's promise to remain in office, made in written testimony to be delivered today before the Senate Judiciary Committee, comes as many Justice Department employees say they are dispirited and have little confidence in their politically wounded leader.

[CK_John]

6. That is very good news, but this will leave it up the DOJ and not the House.

I also believe they could start proceedings against the AJ for perjury at the same time. But, that doesn't seem to have the glitz to make an effort to rant or rave.

[MADem]

12. There are plenty of careerists over at DOJ. They just need one who is a good singer. NT

[Exultant Democracy]

7. First we impeach Gonzo and work from there.

[CK_John]

8. Absolutely then on to Rove, I have posted before it would be like training wheels for Congress.

[CK_John]

11. Why so little comment or support? n/t

[miceelf]

13. It's obvious

A movement to impeach Gonzales would have widespread support. So, it would be impossible for the Sheehanites to use it as a club to attack liberal democrats like Nancy Pelosi and John Conyers.

An impeachment process on someone like Gonzales would get Cindy Sheehan less attention than her quixotic attacks on Conyers and Pelosi. And it wouldn't help her libertarian friends' cause.

[CK_John]

14. Good possibility for some, but I think it doesn't have the glitz factor for many. Or is

this (tinfoil moment) a Rove effort to get the House to impeach and have it fail in the Senate. This to me would be Rove's dream come true and make the executive supreme. Many think that * cares about history and would be a mark against him, but * has already said he will be long gone when they write the history books. He has no shame or cares about anything but himself.

Also I think someone from Schumer's office read this post last night because he is all over it today.

[MGKrebs]

19. There seems to be a lot of simplistic worldviews at the forefront right now.

Perhaps because of the dire straits we find ourselves in, compounded by the presidential campaigns where it is easy to project all sorts of heroic abilities onto our favored candidate. We NEED somebody to fix this stuff, and right now! Little steps are about the same as doing nothing. There are only traitors or patriots, no middle ground.

I think going after Gonzo would be a great move. He's clearly vulnerable, he's in a critical position, and he's not going to serve justice. We need a special prosecutor and he'll never name one. There is understandably a lot of reluctance to try to impeach a president as it is very disruptive to the functioning of the government, but replacing a dysfunctional and ethically discredited Attorney General should be a gimme. Even Repubs would probably like to see a change there, but the process will open up a whole can of worms, or maybe a better analogy would be- a rich vein of ore to mine.

I have been reading about the Watergate scandal lately, and the parallels and connections and similarities are getting to be pretty interesting. Corrupt Attorney General, illegal wiretapping, using the Justice Dept. for political gain, Fred Thompson, Hillary Clinton, dramatic White House staff testimony, political retribution, defiance of subpoenas. One could believe that all the pieces are in place.


Did you know that Donald Segretti was John McCain's Orange County, CA campaign co-chair in 2000?

[CK_John]

20. All the major characters in the * admin have been around since Nixon

None of these guys forgive or forget, They have been through the process before and Dem's in the House have not. The Dem's need to practice on the low hanging fruit.

[pat_k]

15. Going after the puppet accumplishes nothing.

It is the puppet masters who are ordering the agencies under their control to torture and illegally spy.

Impeaching any of their minions, while refusing to impeach the masters, accomplishes zilch.

Impeaching only Cheney accomplishes zilch.

Bush and Cheney are partners in crime. Bush and Cheney are holding all three branches of our government hostage to their monarchical regime. ONLY impeaching Bush and Cheney says "NO!" to the intolerable crimes being committed against us and all we stand for.

[CK_John]

16. That is like expecting your first job out of college to be a CEO. May happen

in the dot com industry once in awhile but one usually starts a few rungs down the latter and work their way up the food chain.

[pat_k]

21. This isn't hiring. It's firing.

See how they are different things?

[CK_John]

23. To me they are same. You have to work your up to have the ability to

hire or fire.

[pat_k]

25. We already have the ability to fire any official in the judiciary or executive. . .

. . .who subverts the constitution or otherwise betrays our trust.

It's called impeachment.

[CK_John]

27. And what do you think the OP is about. Impeach Gonzales. n/t

[pat_k]

28. Impeaching Gonzales, while refusing to go after Bush and Cheney. . .

. . .would be as asinine as firing a corrupt hireling while allowing the CEO that did the hiring to continue to openly steal from the company and hire a corrupt replacement for the fired minion.

When you've got a corrupt CEO on your hands, the board has an obligation to the stockholders to take the CEO out IMMEDIATELY to contain the damage. Cleaning house of the minions is for the successor.

In the USA, we are the sovereigns. We are at the already at the "top" of the ladder. We delegated the power to protect our interests to Congress; our "board." The power to fire/impeach is the means by which we defend ourselves against abusive and corrupt occupants of ANY office in the executive or judiciary.

Formally accuse Bush and Cheney. Call on the Senate to fire them. A legitimate successor -- a nominee acceptable to the House and Senate if they resign, or Pelosi if they are removed -- can clean House.

And if they survive impeachment, at least the leaders who called for their removal will not be complicit in the horrifying crimes Bush and Cheney have committed -- the torture and illegal spying we know about, and the crimes that we have yet to discover.

[CK_John]

29. I think we agree on the goal, but differ on the approach. Time will tell how it works out. n/t

[MGKrebs]

30. I don't think anyone is saying to "not" go after Bush and Cheney,

just that we may have a better path to get there by doing Gonzo first. It is clear that the will is not there at the moment to go after either of those two, so people are speculating about alternatives.

[pat_k]

31. Not one Member is saying Impeach Bush and Cheney TODAY.

Given the blatant and grave violations committed by bushncheney, the Congressional leadership has a moral obligation introduce articles of impeachment against Bush and Cheney right now. The Members have a moral obligation to demand that the leadership convene impeachment hearings immediately.

We know that the leadership is well aware that Bush and Cheney order Americans to torture. They are well aware that the fascist fantasy of a unitary authoritarian executive destroys the principle of consent -- the very foundation of our Constitution and our nation. We know they know because they have told us in public statements. They describe the crimes, then declare their intent to do nothing to enforce the dictates of our Constitution.

People break laws. Law is enforced by stopping the law breakers. Those charged with enforcement are obligated to act as soon as it is clear that a crime is being committed. If you don't do everything in your power to stop the law breakers, you are NOT enforcing the law. When officials subvert the Constitution or otherwise break the public trust, Congress is the enforcement agent. They stop the abuses removing the abusers from power.

By refusing to impeach -- a moral imperative given their oath to "defend" and their knowledge of the "attack" -- Members of Congress are, in a very real way, doing more to destroy our Constitutional democracy than Bush and Cheney ever could. Violators of our laws do not destroy our legal system. The systems of our government is driven by people. A system is destroyed when the people we charge with critical duties within the system refuse to carry out those duties. Congress is refusing to act, and the horrible price we are paying for that failure grows every single day.

Bush and Cheney have been committing grave violations in plain sight for years. The Members of the 110th Congress have had a moral obligation to impeach since the day they convened. The Members of the 109th and the 108th had a moral obligation to make the case to the people, and to do everything in their power to make impeachment and removal a reality. They all have mouths.

When Democratic Presidential candidates and Congressional leaders claim they will stop the abusive violations in 2009 if we put them in the WH, they are telling us that they KNOW the acts are intolerable violations. A President who arrogates the power to "give back" our inviolable rights is doing as much to subvert the Constitution as one who arrogates the power to violate them.

Gonzales is a side show. A distraction. Bush, Cheney, and Rove are probably chuckling, thrilled to see Gonzales get the Dems so worked up. The outlaws in the WH are probably rubbing their hands, eager to see SCOTUS step in and rule that the U.S. Attorney is NOT obligated to lift a finger to prosecute Contempt of Congress charges.

As long as they refuse to immediately impeach both Bush and Cheney, Congress is doomed to impotence. Worst yet, they will lose power and ground as Bush and Cheney advance their agenda. And even worse for the Dems, they will confirm the public perception that they are wimps.

When the other team refuses to play by the rules, you don't keep playing, pretending that it's just "how the game is played." You stop. You accuse. You do everything in your power to see that the cheaters are forced to forfeit the game. If you refuse to accuse, and just keep playing, you should not be surprised when you are trounced.

If corrupt refs turn a blind eye to intolerable violations committed in plain sight, at least you've made it clear to the fans that the game was "fixed."

[alfredo]

17. I think perjury would be a better bet. Not only would he lose his job

(fat chance) he could face prison. (as if he would ever see a day in prison.)

[CK_John]

18. That is my point impeach him for perjury, get the process setup and find out

there moves, etc. Remember only 1 or 2 were around for watergate. And the GOP controlled the House when they found the blue dress. So basically the DEM have never done an impeachment. Also with Gonzales they would not need any real testimony because the best is already on record.

Gonzales will probably resign just before or right after the vote, so you scratch his name and write in Rove.

[alfredo]

22. Yep Rove is still the one we need to nail down.

[CK_John]

24. Agreed. n/t