home

Gonzo: WH Circles The Wagons. Why?

mcjoan has a very good post on why the White House is making the politically obtuse decision to not have AG Gonzales fall on his sword:

[G]iven any rational observer can see how damaging this situation is, and that it's only getting worse, what could be going on in their heads? Only two possibilities come to mind, and I suspect only one is really the answer. First, Bush truly is so stubborn, so willful, and so stupid as to not see the danger that Gonzales poses to the already damaged presidency, and he isn't going to let his Fredo go. But what is much more likely, Karl Rove needs the distraction, the deflection that Gonzales provides. As long as he's catching much of the heat, the White House stays out of the focus.

This makes sense to me. Rove got Gonzo into this mess and he will keep using him as a shield until it becomes impossible. mcjoan concludes that moving to impeach Gonzales is the best way to overcome this stonewall.

Gonzales's refusal to resign and Bush's refusal to force it are part and parcel of the effort to protect Rove, Miers, and ultimately Bush. Which is precisely why Alberto Gonzales must be impeached. It reflects why Gonzales is not and never was fit to serve as Attorney General of the United States. He has never been and never will be anything other than Bush's lackey, even as it means the complete and total destruction of his professional life.

Of course on the merits, Gonzales should never have been confirmed. Certainly he should be removed from his office. But it also becomes clear that the Democratic Congress should impeach Gonzales, as a means to get to the bottom of this scandal. To wit, it is good politics too.

< Monday Open Thread | Gonzo Aide Pleads The Fifth >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    How about the most obvious reason? (5.00 / 3) (#1)
    by MPhilip on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 03:37:17 PM EST
    The entertaining idea that Bush is all loyalty and zero self concern is too much.

    That Gonzo knows to much about too many things and that Bush cannot risk Gonzo going off the reservation is obviously the reason he cannot in any way afford to alienate Gonzo.

    Rove's theory is that if a Bush appointee screws up, then promote him or her and it will tend to keep the others feeling safe and quiet. Most of the appointees that Bush let's go, e.g., Brownie, know little to harm Buish or Rove with.

    Yet remember, Tenet, Bremer and other received presidential medals for keeping their trap shut and that is how Rove keeps most of them in order. If they go off the reservation the right wings attacks them like rabid dogs.

    So, where would you rather be: at the other end of Rove's bullet, or behind enemy lines with him?

    What could be going on in their heads? (5.00 / 3) (#2)
    by Edger on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 03:54:20 PM EST
    Impeachment worries?

    From a former Niagara Falls city councilman who now covers Detroit for Fox2 News:

    The attorney general of the United States is the poster child for lawlessness. This child of Mexican immigrants is a serial felon. He has approved of torture and secret prisons, asserted that the president has the authority to do anything in the name of national security, rejected the Geneva Conventions and international law, created rogue military tribunals, denied habeas corpus and legal counsel for detainees not charged with specific crimes, and authorized illegal wiretaps and eavesdropping on millions of Americans.

    His lesser felonies include repeated acts of perjury, destroying evidence and obstruction of justice. Richard Nixon's attorney general, John Mitchell -- who approved the Watergate break-in, helped cover up the crime and did a prison stretch for his vile deeds -- was a model of probity compared to Gonzales.

    What Nixon, Mitchell and their co-conspirators and fellow felons did brought great harm to our republic. But our national resilience overcame the nightmare. What President George W. Bush and Gonzales have done requires nothing short of a political exorcism. In a nation built on the rule of law, they are the bedmates of Beelzebub.

    --Bill Gallagher, Niagara Falls Reporter, March 27, 2007 Edition

    f'g Wow! (5.00 / 3) (#4)
    by scribe on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 04:02:11 PM EST
    And this from a guy who works for Fox?

    Let's all keep an eye on whether and how long he keeps his job....

    Parent

    Nice catch, edger! (5.00 / 3) (#5)
    by scribe on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 04:03:34 PM EST
    I should've included it initially, but hit "post" too quickly....

    Parent
    It's all about saving Bush I think. (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by Edger on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 04:05:35 PM EST
    The fall guy.

    Parent
    You see what Krauthammer has been saying? (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by Edger on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 04:04:28 PM EST
    it's loyalty to person, not principle, that drives (5.00 / 3) (#3)
    by scribe on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 04:01:14 PM EST
    Bushie and his band o' criminals.  That, and fear of one turning on the others.  Here's what I wrote a couple weeks ago (March 14, when Rover started growling about not answering subpoenas):

    My analysis:  Here's where misplaced loyalty (to person, rather than impersonal principle- the Admin's syndrome) becomes (and has become) The Fatal Flaw.  They will do what they know - stick together, and stick to and with each other.  Digging in their heels will only make things worse.  I suspect that if Gonzo is not gone by this time next week (and I'm being generous) some Senator - maybe a Rethug up for re-election in a bluing state - will ask why the House has not started impeachment proceedings against Gonzo.  That will be "Katie bar the door" time.

    Did I get it right, or what?


    Not... (5.00 / 3) (#7)
    by desertswine on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 04:05:33 PM EST
    the Fifth... How come?

    Monica Goodling, a senior Justice Department official involved in the firings of federal prosecutors, will refuse to answer questions at upcoming Senate hearings, citing Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination, her lawyer said Monday.

    Self-incriminate? (5.00 / 2) (#9)
    by Edger on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 04:13:45 PM EST
    Heh. She just did.

    Parent
    In Klin-Ton days, she'd be riding a rail out (5.00 / 3) (#10)
    by scribe on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 04:18:35 PM EST
    of town, carried by the same Rethugs who'd just tarred and feathered her.  See my comment, here.

    Parent
    Hah! (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by Edger on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 04:26:57 PM EST
    Good one, scribe!

    heh heh!

    Parent

    who's his cellmate? (5.00 / 2) (#13)
    by scribe on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 04:30:59 PM EST
    and why isn't he in the picture?

    Parent
    Separate (5.00 / 0) (#14)
    by Edger on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 04:37:07 PM EST
    cell.

    You know what crowded rats do to each other?

    Parent

    Omertà (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by Edger on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 04:30:38 PM EST
    Omertà:
    "an extreme form of loyalty and solidarity in the face of authority. One of its absolute tenets is that it is deeply demeaning and shameful to betray even one's deadliest enemy to the authorities. Observers of the mafia debate whether omertà should best be understood as an expression of social consensus surrounding the mafia or whether it is instead a pragmatic response based primarily on fear. The point is succinctly made in a popular Sicilian proverb Cu e surdu, orbu e taci, campa cent'anni 'mpaci ("He who is deaf, blind and silent will live a hundred years in peace")."


    Parent
    One of these days Rove is going to back (none / 0) (#15)
    by mentaldebris on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 09:19:04 PM EST
    his Rovemobile over the wrong person in DC. I do hope I'm around to enjoy it when it finally happens.

    The rats are coming home to roost.