Bush has to fire  Gonzo to have a prayer of a chance of winning this politically.

The laughable assertion that "no crimes were committed" and that "Clinton dismissed all the federal attorneys" are just the latest examples of the kind of lying by distortion and half-truth that goes on daily.  Even experienced law makers pick this stuff up and repeat it.

Crimes WERE very likely committed AND, although Clinton dismissed almost all attorneys when his presidency started, so did Bush and his father.  Is customary at the beginning of a term.  What ISN'T customary is dismissal with no apparent reason (or many conflicting reasons as we currently see) during the middle of a term.

A Congressional Research Service report on the issue released yesterday examined the tenure of all U.S. Attorneys who were confirmed by the Senates between the years 1981 and 2006 to determine how many had served-and of those how many had been forced to resign for reasons other than a change in administration.

"The answer is that of the 468 confirmations made by the Senate over the 25-year period, only 10 left office involuntarily for reasons other than a change in administration prior to the firings that took place in December, according to the available evidence gathered by CRS. The average incidence of such involuntary departures was one out of every two-and-a-half years; the largest number of such departures prior to this administration was a total of four departures during the Clinton administration.

    But the December firings by the Bush administration stand in even more stark contrast with the firings that took place in previous administrations when the grounds for the departures are examined. In virtually all instances prior to the December firings, including two previous departures during this administration, serious issues of personal or professional conduct appeared to be the driving issue." (hat tip to Scott Lilly at The Center for American Progress).

The precedent for presedential advisors to speak before congress under oath is clear and established and well worn.  It is customary whenever there is the possibility of a crime.  Many of Clinton's advisors testified under oath and, as long as the Democrats have the clear and legitimate concern that crimes were committed - which they do - then Rove and Miers will be forced to testify - publicly and under oath.  You can count on that.  

The crimes - which the Democrats DO need to be clearer about - are lying under oath to Congress (Gonzales et all) and threating attorneys with retaliation for testifying before Congress (something that very few are mentioning).  Lying to Congress and interferring with a Congressional investigation are both serious crimes.

If not, why not?

Smacks of bias!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The longer the issue of the Administrations constantly-changing reasoning for firing many competent federal attorneys drags on, the worse it's going to be for the administration.  Every day new information surfaces that show the craven political motivations and the lying to cover it up. And this is just the tip of the iceberg of the numerous issues we could be investigating.

 Crimes were most likely committed and the American public is going to recognize that as the proof emerges - under oath and in public.  

Must have been a different Oliver North than the Reagan administration traitor, disgrace to a Marine uniform and waste of a Naval Academy education.

Since North's testimony was that Ronald Reagan had violated the Constution, I still don't get why Reagan wasn't impeached.

The Democrats (and their "rabid" base) are upset by, let's see, being lied into a war that has turned into the worse foreign policy blunder in American history, the "imperial" presidency of Bush which has denied access in numerous occasions to information needed for legitimate Congressional oversight - even by Republicans, issued "signing statements" in hundreds of instances that claimed the freedom to interpret laws the way they feel like - irregardless of Congressional intent, the circumvention of the court set up to issue warrants for wiretaps even though that court has rarely denied such wirtaps AND the law as written even allows for retroactive permission, and a general disregard for law and precedent not seen in modern history.

Accountability is LONG past overdue.  And, when it comes - as it is now, I have NO doubt that the American people are going to "get" why it's both needed and important.

Grow up fellas, 'clinton did it' just plain isn't trrue. This is an unprecedented action taken by an admin that changed the law w/o congress' approval or knowledge strictly (as the emails proved) for the purpose of bypassing the senate and interfering with multiple investigations.