home

The Death Of Dignity and Shame

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Law Related
Posted on Thu May 10, 2007 at 10:00:00 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit
Update [2007-5-10 10:16:43 by Big Tent Democrat]: House Judiciary Committee on the Justice Department starring Gonzo here. I'll add some comment on the hearing below.

Karl Rove, apparently the person most responsible for the firing of the USAs by Bush footstool Alberto Gonzales has got some nerve:

A Republican strategist familiar with Mr. Rove’s thinking said that Mr. Rove, the president’s chief political adviser, “believes it’s in the best interest of the president for Gonzales on his own to resign.” But, this person said, Mr. Rove and other like-minded aides have concluded that “there’s nothing they can do — it’s about the relationship between Gonzales and the president.”

Karl Rove should have resigned long ago, if President Bush's word meant anything. Of course it does not and never will. That is why this charade on Iraq and the GOP we were provied yesterday is so much nonsense. But what kind of a person is Alberto Gonzales? Is he so lacking in personal dignity, lacking in ability to be ashamed, that he will "persevere" in the face of being exposed as an incompetent Bush footstool who is destroying the Justice Department? The answer is yes:

Though Mr. Gonzales is considered in Congress and in legal circles as an isolated and diminished figure, he has told aides he believes he has weathered the storm. . . . Mr. Gonzales has been operating as if nothing has changed. He appeared on Wednesday at a news conference at the Health and Human Services Department to announce the results of a Medicaid investigation. He was in Detroit on Tuesday for a civil rights speech. He has said that he will leave only if he concludes he can no longer function effectively.

He'll continue cutting ribbons apparently. Even though folks are laughing in his face. What a pathetic person.

On The Judiciary Committee Hearing:

GOP Rep. Lamar Smith asked Alberto Gonzales is the White House ever asked him to fire someone for political reasons. Gonzo says "not that I recall."

That is quite the answer. More than that though, Gonzo says he was not a part of the the process for choosing who to fire. How does he know how these folsk got on the list? Since we now know Rove and Meirs were intimately involved in the process, how would he know what their reasons were since he was not involved?

< House Vote On Iraq Withdrawal Scheduled For Today | More on The Netroots >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    The Death Of Dignity and Shame | 6 comments (6 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Further Gonzo (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by Alien Abductee on Thu May 10, 2007 at 12:44:18 PM EST
    "I think I may be aware of that."

    great line (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by Sailor on Thu May 10, 2007 at 01:12:40 PM EST
    "People are now asking, if you're a good U.S. attorney, why aren't you getting fired?" quipped [John] McKay, [the ousted attorney for western Washington.]

    Footstool? (none / 0) (#1)
    by squeaky on Thu May 10, 2007 at 10:15:40 AM EST
    Gonzo seems more like a headrest to me.

    I think he's being used for (none / 0) (#2)
    by Edger on Thu May 10, 2007 at 10:22:24 AM EST
    something else, lately.

    Parent
    He wasn't asked (none / 0) (#3)
    by manys on Thu May 10, 2007 at 11:45:44 AM EST
    GOP Rep. Lamar Smith asked Alberto Gonzales is the White House ever asked him to fire someone for political reasons. Gonzo says "not that I recall."

    That is quite the answer. More than that though, Gonzo says he was not a part of the the process for choosing who to fire. How does he know how these folsk got on the list? Since we now know Rove and Meirs were intimately involved in the process, how would he know what their reasons were since he was not involved?

    This is an impotent line of questions. Gonzales was asked whether he had ever been asked to fire someone for political reasons, not whether he knew why the White House would ask to fire someone. That is, the question was posed as if Gonzales would receive a call saying, "Fire Bob Jones for this political reason" as if Gonzales isn't going to answer based on the most narrow reading of the question. If it wasn't specifically and explicitly a political reason, sometimes these things go unsaid and understood you know, then how should he answer that?

    I know, he knows more than he's letting on, but the question of whether the White House asked him to fire people for political reasons has a hole you could drive a truck through, armored up or no.

    perhaps the most-telling moment. . . (none / 0) (#6)
    by the rainnn on Thu May 10, 2007 at 06:15:23 PM EST
    for me, anyway, came well
    into the afternoon session. . .

    ps: my video is up!

    it could be because i had written
    on this topic in the last week,
    but alberto gonzales' completely
    feeble-defense-of-public-corruption-
    investigation-disparities-by-party
    was. . .  sad.

    in the-above 1 min. 30 sec. video,
    rep. artur davis, elected out of
    alabama's 7th district, simply
    tears mr. gonzales apart -- piece by piece. . .

    well, it would be comical. . .
    if it was not, actually, also a
    national tragedy, of course. . .

    The Death Of Dignity and Shame | 6 comments (6 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment