National Review: Be Gone Gonzo

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Law Related
Posted on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 02:13:51 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

The National Review calls for the resignation of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales:

We do not need more evidence . . . to reach a conclusion about the suitability of Alberto Gonzales for the leadership of the Department of Justice.
. . . His claim not to have been involved in the firings suggests that he was either deceptive or inexcusably detached from the operations of his own department. . . . Gonzales’s latest tactic has been to concede that improper motives may have played a role in the firings, but to blame his underlings for any misconduct and to pledge to get to the bottom of it.
What little credibility Gonzales had is gone. . . . Alberto Gonzales should resign. The Justice Department needs a fresh start.

When is the last time you agreed with the National Review? I can't remember either.

< Six Years For a Shove | On The Iraq Supplemental: KISS >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

National Review: Be Gone Gonzo | 23 comments (23 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Funny (5.00 / 2) (#2)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 02:25:32 PM EST

I agree with NR just about every time I read their stuff - which admittedly isn't all too often, TL is much more fun reading.

scribe, I think NR real reason for supporting his ouster is exactly because:

He is a bleeding wound on the Admin, and if they can get rid of him they'll try to end the investigation by laying it all on him

They only object to his management style (5.00 / 3) (#3)
by lilybart on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 02:28:52 PM EST

NOT any of his actions, and they think the USA scandal is just about not explaining their "right" to replace them.

So, they only object to him now because he isn't very good at spin and coverup.

: Same as their spin (5.00 / 2) (#5)
by Edger on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 02:32:06 PM EST

if rethugs they criticize the occupation. Only that it was executed incompetently. They won't question if it should have been done, and they won't question that Gonales should have been AG.

: i think yours about nailed it, lilybart. . . (none / 0) (#23)
by the rainnn on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 08:33:04 PM EST

but i do not think he is,
by any stretch, the only one
left in the administration "not
good at spin and cover-up" ops. . .
take a look at the joint letter
sent today by rep. conyers, and
sen. leahy to white house counsel
fielding -- re the mass-firings. . .
i think he's painted the white house
into a corner, the damage from which
may radiate well-beyond-even-a-gonzo-
resignation-to-staunche-the-bleeding. . .
the letter indicates that subterfuge
may generally be s.o.p. at the white house. . .
tomorrow's leahy hearing -- at
which kyle sampson will appear,
and testify -- should prove to be
all the more interesting, due to
fielding's botched [non-]responses. . .

Funny (5.00 / 2) (#4)
by Edger on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 02:29:21 PM EST

Lowry didn't put his name to the piece. The byline just says "By The Editors".

In any case, as Krauthummer said, Gon-zo the clown is a dead man walking.

And he thought he was a made man. Heh.

: He is (5.00 / 1) (#19)
by squeaky on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 07:15:50 PM EST

a made man, wherever he winds up.

They're afraid - of investigations (5.00 / 3) (#9)
by Edger on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 03:13:33 PM EST

They want to kill it before it grows.

If congressional Democrats are wrong to bluster, however, they are within their rights to investigate. They may yet turn up enough evidence to prove that some of the firings were improper violations of political norms.
We do not need more evidence, however, to reach a conclusion about the suitability of Alberto Gonzales

John Dean, Why Bush Refuses to Allow Karl Rove and Harriet Miers to Testify Before Congress

...for the same reason that Vice President Cheney went to extreme lengths to block Congress from getting information about the work of his National Energy Task Force, as I discussed in prior columns such as this one, I expect President Bush to take what will appear to be a similar irrational posture. For both Bush and Cheney, virtually any limit on presidential power is too great.
And this conflict, in the end, is all about presidential power.

I know this is a petty,personal reaction, but (5.00 / 1) (#21)
by hellskitchen on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 08:03:40 PM EST

I absolute despise people who hide behind their staff.

In one of my first "real" jobs, I was asked to take over a task while someone was away on vacation. The person was not in our department, nor was the task, so everyone was new to it.

One day I had to process a piece of papers with an indecipherable scrawl on it and I asked my boss how do deal with it. She told me and I proceeded.

Well, it turned out to be the wrong thing to do, and the lead partner, a nasty piece of work, came into our department on the warpath, asking who processed the paper. Being honest, I said that I did it and received the full blast of his wrath which included screaming, jumping up and down apoplexy.

At no point did my boss speak up to defend me or admit her own fallibility in the matter.

From this small experience, here we have the whole country run by a bunch of damn hypocrites and cowards.

What I wish for them: I am reminded of some of the lyrics of the oratorio Israel in Egypt:
"The horse and his riders, the horse and his riders, hath He dashed into the sea."

Yeah!

After six years of, in effect, (5.00 / 2) (#22)
by buhdydharma on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 08:26:18 PM EST

complete silence on the misdeeds of bushco (except for those shrill LW bloggers, of course) the more the facts emerge into the MSM, the more unified the opposition and opprobrium will become.

Popcorn, baby!

Citizen Out-of-Touch (4.66 / 3) (#14)
by armagednoutahere on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 05:20:41 PM EST

I'm amazed that these pundits still think they have some idea what actual Americans think. They live in a world of privelege so blindingly unreal they can't see past their own egos. This priveleged world, by the way, is provided by the very people they're supposed to be covering. They have absolutely no concept of what real Americans are like. From Matthews to Stengel to O'Reilly, these idiots always claim to speak for the 'folks' but in reality are so far removed from the realities of American life that they wouldn't recognize a real life thought if it dropped their panties and spanked their big pudgy white asses.

: re: no concept of what real Americans are like (5.00 / 2) (#16)
by Edger on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 05:39:28 PM EST

Glenn Greenwald did a really good piece on exactly this the other day:
Beltway media stars really aren't bothered by any of this in the slightest. It's how their world works. Initially, they even refused to talk about the story at all, insisting that there was nothing worth seeing here, and were all but forced into writing about it as a result of the tenacious coverage in the blogosphere, led by TPM's Josh Marshall. Their instinct is to lash out at anyone who suggests real wrongdoing on the part of the Republican political machinery that has ruled their town for so long.
...
These are not journalists who want to uncover government corruption or act in an adversarial capacity to check government power. Rather, these are members of the royal court who are grateful to the King and his minions for granting them their status. What they want more than anything is to protect and preserve the system that has so rewarded them -- with status and money and fame and access and comfort. They're the ludicrous clowns who entertain the public by belittling any facts which demonstrate pervasive corruption and deceit at the highest levels of our government, and who completely degrade the public discourse with their petty, pompous, shallow, vapid chatter that transforms every important political matter into a stupid gossipy joke.

I still disagree with NR (4.33 / 3) (#1)
by scribe on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 02:18:29 PM EST

because the longer Torture Boy Gonzo stays around, the better. He is a bleeding wound on the Admin, and if they can get rid of him they'll try to end the investigation by laying it all on him - the rogue former employee.

And, Gonzo will find out how cold it gets when the Repugs fire you.

Nooo, the longer he stays, the more info we get.

: I'd like to see him gone now. (5.00 / 1) (#6)
by Edger on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 02:34:45 PM EST

But I agree with you, too. The longer he's around the better chance of it bringing down the whole operation.

: Chilly (5.00 / 3) (#7)
by scarshapedstar on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 02:48:47 PM EST

Gonzo will find out how cold it gets when the Repugs fire you.
He'll be given a Medal of Freedom and be nominated as UN ambassador, rejected, and then Scaife will pay him $400,000 a year to keep him on retainer, and he will never set foot in a courtroom for the rest of his life.

Brown (1.00 / 3) (#10)
by HeadScratcher on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 03:37:03 PM EST

I wonder how much of this has to do with the fact he is brown and not white. I mean, we'll never admit it, but many posters on this site have said that this administration hates brown people.

Viva La Raza!

Yep that's a HeadScratcher all right... (5.00 / 3) (#11)
by TomStewart on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 04:04:35 PM EST

I'm scratching my head right now over why you have to drag the man's race into this, rather than his vast incompetence.

he's a supporter and apologist for the most corrupt
administration in modern history, a defiler of the constitution of these United States, and a man who used the greatest law enforcement post in the land for petty political purposes. His race is no matter.

Head scratcher indeed.


: Gonzales played his race card. (5.00 / 4) (#12)
by lilybart on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 04:42:48 PM EST

When he gave his first formal statement about this whole mess, he replayed his hardscrabble childhood and how he made good in America.
So, as Rove would say, his race might be "fair game."
HIs race is of no matter at all, I am just reminding everyone that he himself brought it up for sympathy.

What a joke (5.00 / 2) (#13)
by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 05:04:21 PM EST

No one, and I mean no one, has ripped him more than me.

Check my bio, "concern" troll.


: omigod, you mean your not an anglo? (5.00 / 2) (#15)
by TexDem on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 05:38:29 PM EST

I'm amazed. I'm, floored. How can some named " " not be anglo?
heh ;7)

I'm an equal opportunity hater (5.00 / 2) (#18)
by Militarytracy on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 05:50:48 PM EST

I don't care what color your skin is if you are a lying cheating torturing criminal sliming my democracy.


Throw the Dems a bone? (none / 0) (#8)
by cal11 voter on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 02:56:47 PM EST

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, I guess. Doesn't seem like they made their case intellectually. I need to know whether it was a case of error in delegation of authority or something more? After Sampson, McNulty, and Gonzales testify, we shall have a better understanding.

Oh Damn It (none / 0) (#17)
by Militarytracy on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 05:43:27 PM EST

I'm in the DK pool for the first part of May. It wasn't long ago when the Military Times came out with that OpEd that Rummy must go and then days later he was gone.

Wow! great news (none / 0) (#20)
by annefrank on Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 07:33:45 PM EST

Gonzo claims he wasn't involved in the discussions of firing the USAs. Why wasn't he?