home

Sununu: Fire Gonzales

By TChris, Section Other Politics
Posted on Wed Mar 14, 2007 at 09:40:03 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

To impeach or not to impeach? The question may soon be academic.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., predicted Wednesday that Gonzales would soon be out.

"I think he is gone. I don't think he'll last long," Reid said in an interview with Nevada reporters. Asked how long, Reid responded: "Days."

The first Republican in Congress to make a public demand for Alberto Gonzales' dismissal: Sen. John Sununu.

< Fitzerald to Congress: Nothing to Say About Plame | Crime and March Madness >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Sununu: Fire Gonzales | 4 comments (4 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    What's the Problem Here? (none / 0) (#1)
    by jarober on Wed Mar 14, 2007 at 10:45:17 PM EST
    US Attorneys can be asked to resign at any time for any reason.  They are political hires, not civil service hires.

    Be careful what you wish for; if you get civil service protections for US attorneys, the kinds of abuses we saw with special prosecutors over the years (think Ken Starr) will be multiplied by 93.

    dangers? (none / 0) (#2)
    by wg on Thu Mar 15, 2007 at 01:08:45 AM EST
    Well judges have what effectively is much more than civil service protection, their powers and thus the potential for the abuse are equal to if not greater than those of federal prosecutors and nobody has ever seriously proposed that they be made political hires.

    True great many of them get their jobs precisely thanks to political considerations and patronage, but their lifetime appointments tend to nullify that to a significant degree.

    There are other arguments for keeping the present system (US attorneys as political hacks in the service of the president), see a must read piece by Lithwick and Goldsmith in  Slate.

    It turns out the subject  has been intensely discussed many times in the past, and in each case the consensus was to keep the present system.  Lithwick and Goldsmith  agree, I find their  argumentation faulty and wish there was a place to engage them is serious discussion.

    No (none / 0) (#3)
    by jarober on Thu Mar 15, 2007 at 06:48:46 AM EST
    Judges can't bring cases - so they can't launch political witch hunts.  They can do damage to the cases they get assigned to, but they can't create the damage in the first place.  I'll repeat: If Schumer (et. al.) get the end result they seem to be calling for, we'll have every US Attorney being a special prosecutor - and we already know how often overreach happens there.

    nah (none / 0) (#4)
    by wg on Thu Mar 15, 2007 at 02:19:08 PM EST
    I disagree. The way to restrain an overreaching, vigilante, politically driven or out of control DA or USA is via courts as courts can easily throw out any case brought to them if they think they are frivolous or inconsequential. After a few of those and a professional conduct board investigation most of them will learn how to behave responsibly if they want to stay in their jobs.

    Of course there are corrupt, USA/DA cooperating or politically/ideologically like minded judges out there but hopefully they are in minority. Besides one can always appeal.

    For cases where a corrupt, political or overreaching DA/USA uses his/her powers to harass people (feeding media frenzy with  well placed/timed innuendoes, perp walks, tarring  people with secret and aggressive psychological profiling a practice widespread these days in this country far more than it ever was in the old Soviet Union, etc simply criminalize these things the way they did in Europe and the problem will be gone. Besides most of that stuff is done to please their political overseers, to ensure that once their temporary USA gig is gone they will have another job in the system.  Make them politically independent and the problem will be mostly gone.

    Furthermore having an independent and apolitical prosecutorial apparatus is essential to ensure that the government itself stays clean and doesn't abuse people's rights.

    As things stand now the FBI is secure in the knowledge they they will never be prosecuted by any USA serving at the pleasure of the president when they decide to go Hoover on you. And Hoover they go on people all the time, things have not changed that much since the old days (I know I have been their COINTELPRO target). Few people would agree that having the FBI the organization with tremendous Stasi like powers and practices be outside independent and effective prosecutorial oversight is a desirable situation.  

    Similarly police in this country kills people at the rates some 100 time higher that in all Western European countries.  Why? Because the prosecutorial apparatus has been thoroughly politicized on the local level. Finding a DA these days inclined or reckless enough to risk to honestly investigate cases of police killing is next to impossible. The system has been politically rigged with the results for all to see. 100 times higher killing rates!

    The old canard that the prosecutorial apparatus needs to be politicized in order to be responsive to the electorate (see Slate article linked above)is just that, a canard. Making sure  that the prosecutorial system is responsive to the wishes of the general public should never be an overriding priority when designing the system. Justice is supposed to more than that, otherwise we would still have public lynching in this country.

    Sununu: Fire Gonzales | 4 comments (4 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment