Who would have thought that former Attorney General John Ashcroft would start to look good? But in addition to his now much-publicized decision, while he was in a hospital bed, not to reauthorize the Bush administration warrantless eavesdropping program, Ashcroft also resisted several other programs that he felt violated constitutional rights. The Washington Post reported that Ashcroft also opposed holding detainees indefinitely at Guantanamo Bay without some form of due process, that he fought to guarantee some rights for those to be tried by military commissions, and that he insisted that Zacarias Moussaoui, accused of conspiring with the Sept. 11 hijackers, be prosecuted in a civilian court.
Ashcroft was no civil libertarian, as he pushed for the USA Patriot Act and other policies. But compared with Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Ashcroft at least tried to show some independence.
Speaking of Gonzales, Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., predicted Sunday that Gonzales would resign rather than face a vote of "no confidence" pushed by Democrats.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Phantom on Open thread 11/23
- Raptor on Too many exemptions
- CapnAmerica on Too many exemptions
- CapnAmerica on Too many exemptions
- Heckler on Open thread 11/23
- Heckler on Open thread 11/23
- CapnAmerica on Too many exemptions
- Pleefer on Open thread 11/23
- Monkeyhawk on Too many exemptions
- CapnAmerica on Too many exemptions
29 Comments
Gonzales has failed to make the transition from White House counsel to the People’s counsel.
I think the MSM and the House Democrats gave that image to him Ben.
They tried to railroad him out and “THEY HAD NOTHING.”
So if the Dems can’t prove anything, assassinate his character.
Is that how it works Ben?
No Rep. He has been contradicted in testimony, both by his underlings and by himself, that he has lost credibility. He once said that he had a dual role as both representing the White House and the President. On that he is dead wrong – thus my comment about the transition from White House to “Public”
As for it being Dems how do you explain the number of Reps who are sayin the same things?
As Robert Greenwald puts it, The Gonzales hearings made plain for all to see that the highest law enforcement officer in the land is unwilling to tell the truth under oath.
1. Watch the video2. Sign the petition to impeachThink about that.
He doesn’t recall. He doesn’t know. He evades, answering questions with questions, and yet, the President has not fired him. He continues to damage our country.
It’s all there on TV for everyone to see, although few have the time or patience to watch. That’s why we at Brave New Films have produced a 2 minute video (with an assist from George Bush) to boil the story down to its essence.
Watch it here: http://impeachgonzales.org/
Let’s not be shy. Let’s use the “i” word — IMPEACHMENT. Say it, SHOUT it loud and clear. It has a good patriotic feel to it. And yes, the attorney general CAN be impeached. It is legal, it is proper, and it is time. The Senate is expected to hold a “no confidence” vote on Gonzales sometime this week. We need to show them there is broad grassroots support to go further.
McJoan from DailyKOS notes the political importance: “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.”
I’d rather see his boss impeached.
It would take a pretty slimy person to make Ashcroft look like a Patriot, Gonzo fits the bill!
Gonzalez needs to go. Period.
Let him stay. The longer he is around the more truth comes out about how this administration functions. Lets not give him a pass. Instead lets look at what his minions have to say. I found the wiretap reauthorization to be very telling in how far the preznit is willing to go to break the law.
Let him stay. The people forced Ashcroft out and we got Gonzales. We force out Gonzales and we’re bound to get even worse! Probably Jay Sekulow.
Jed – perhaps, but the confirmation hearings would sure be good!
Ben, bush will use a recess appointment so there will be no confirmation hearings. The Justice Department will remain what bushco needs it to be. And, that doesn’t resemble justice!
He has several upcoming opportunities for that recess appointment — Memorial Day, 4th of July, Labor Day.
Even that could be fun linda. I think a lot of his Republicans are getting nervous.
Regarding Impeachment:
Can somebody send an intern to Bush’s private office? Apparently that’s the only thing that works anymore…
“So if the Dems can’t prove anything, assassinate his character.”
Posted by some neo-con.
. . . and the republican character assignations of both Bill Clinton and John Kerry were not? Geeze . . . more rush coulter limited mentality thinking.
I think the MSM and the House Democrats gave that image to him Ben.
They tried to railroad him out and “THEY HAD NOTHING.”Posted by: Republican | May 21, 2007 at 01:28 PM
Looks like the Dems DO have something: Gonzalez spilling restricted state secrets to those without security clearance to know them.
I believe the technical term for that’s a heap big no no.
See this, from US News & World Report:? ? ? ?”…congressional sources tell U.S. News that Democrats will ask the Texas Bar Association to determine whether Gonzales violated his code of professional responsibility or broke laws by bringing up the NSA program in the hospital in front of Ashcroft’s wife, who lacks security clearances. ”
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/070520/28justice.htm? ? ? ?
Now, I’m sure you have the integrity to admit you were wrong when you said Democrats had “nothing.”
Right, Republican?
LOL, I ain’t holdin’ my breath on that one, we all know integrity ain’t exactly your strong suit. And just think: you have no reputation to save!
“As for it being Dems how do you explain the number of Reps who are sayin the same things?”
I wonder why Republican never answered this question?!
Oh, maybe Republican was busy signing up to serve in the Armed Forces to help his buddy Bush and bring Democracy to Iraq!
Oops, hypocrites want OTHERS to fight their dirty wars….I almost forgot!
Whether the real Ashcroft was good or bad a few people know. It was the media that continuously painted him bad with negative stories. Anything positive was not written or no effort was made to find out. Liberal politicians or apointees get a free pass. I am sure Gonzales also will be treated in the same negative way. He may have done a few things wrong but the media will not give him a fair shake. If he was a liberal I am sure they would have played the race card and tried to save his job. But since he is close to Bush only negativity will be portrayed relentlessly.Also after misrepresenting Ashcroft, the media will not try to look at itself but will try to skewer Gonzales and think it is fair reporting. It is interesting how the editor writes “Gonzales makes Ashcroft look good” but not “the media made Ashcroft look bad”
John – want some cheese with that?
It’s true Ben, the MSM which favors the Democratic Party skews the headlines and what stories they publish.
The days of being objective by reporters is long gone.
I doubt if anyone at the Wichita Eagle could write an objective story now, even if they tried.
HAHAHAHAHA!
The corporate media is hardly “liberal”; their corporate owners make sure of that!
OMGosh, John.
You’re so right!
Consider President Clinton’s two BJ’s with Monica Lewinsky.
The media was utterly SILENT about it.
Praise Allah, Jerry Falwell’s video told us about that and Clinton’s murder of Vince Foster and the cocaine ring the Clinton’s ran in Arkansas . . .
Man, republicans have turned into a bunch of WHINERS!
I thought they were the party of accountability? I haven’t seen any of that in ages.
Defend, deny and deflect. Excuses excuses…
And people wonder why young people don’t watch or read the “traditional news sources”…
YET AGAIN, Republican cannot stay on the question at hand because s(he) is too busy finding liberal media conspiracy theories.
Gonzales went under oath and told the Senate and House that he had nothing to do with the firings and did not know who did–appalling to begin with: who runs the show there?
BUT WAIT: He then told one of the members of the House that he was sure the firings were NOT authorized by Bush, Cheney, or Karl Rove.Congressman: “If you don;t know who authorized the firings, how do you know it wasn;t Pres, VP, or Rove?”Gonzales: “Well, uh… They wouldn’t do that.”Congressman: “How do you know?”Gonazales: “Well, I just know. They wouldn’t do that.”
WHAT? YOU JUST “KNOW?” Gonzales is the height of sleaze–either a liar, incompetent, or just a Bush “unitary executive” idiot who thinks that the role of the Justice Dept is to do the President’s bidding. Like with Patriot Act’s illegal surveillance program. Like with Abu Ghraib.
The man is a pathetic joke.
Free To Be Al Gore
By E. J. Dionne Jr.Tuesday, May 22, 2007; Page A15
Boy, it would be fun if Al Gore changed his mind and ran for president — fun for the voters, anyway. Imagine a candidate whose preelection book is devoted in large part to an attack on the media for waging war on reason.
Politicians, it is often said, never win by attacking the media. That’s simply not true. Conservatives have been attacking the media for decades, to good effect from their point of view. Their intimidation sometimes worked — go back to the coverage of the 2000 Florida recount if you want to see media bias. When intimidation fails, they declare inconvenient facts to be merely “liberal” opinions. …
But the larger change is that the very process Gore describes [in Gore's new book, "The Assault on Reason"] — of propaganda taken as fact, of slogans taken as arguments, of repetition substituting for logic and, yes, of lies and half-truths taken as truth — is now well-recognized. What worked against Gore during the recount and what worked for the administration in the run-up to the Iraq war doesn’t work anymore. That is an advance for democracy and for reason.
Gore, to his credit, won’t talk about Florida, but I will. Whatever flaws he has, Gore suffered through an extreme injustice with great dignity. His revenge is to have been right about a lot of things: right about the power of the Internet, right about global warming and right about Iraq.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/21/AR2007052101437.html?hpid=opinionsbox1? ? ? ?Gore’s new book, “Assault on Reason,” looks like a keeper. It will likely prove most helpful in a prophylactic role for thinking voters during the runup to the 2008 elections.
And Dionne is right: Gore has been correct about all the things. His judgment has certainly proved to be head and shoulders above that of Augustus Stupidus.
We really blew it in 2000.
should read “Gore has been correct about all the important things.”
While we’re on the liberal media thing, I got news for you all:THE EAGLE IS NOT LIBERAL. Compare it to the LA Times or Washington Post–THOSE are liberal.NPR, that’s liberal.
But what amazes me is that, somehow, all the existing conservative media people are not factored in to the “liberal media.” Are you kidding me? What about Fox News? What about Bill O’Reilly? What about Joe Scarborough? What about Rush Limbaugh? What about Neil Boortz? –Have you listened to the radio in the last 10 years? IT’S ALL CONSERVATIVES!! Terry Fox, he’s part of the “liberal media” too!
Rupert Murdoch OWNS HALF THE MEDIA ON THE PLANET, FOLKS. HE’S A BIG GIANT HAIRY AUSTRALIAN CONSERVATIVE.
Prediction: AG, AG will not resign until August when the WPE (you know what/who that stands for) has the opportunity to appoint a successor during congressional recess. Dollars to donuts; or millions bucks to a gallon of gas – whichever is the better deal by that time.
I still prefer Gonzales to Ashcroft. Gonzales has the advantage of being an entirely transparent liar. We all can tell when he’s up to no good.The good voters of Missouri knew what they were doing when they elected a dead guy over Ashcroft!