Gonzales is ‘too busy.’
By on Mar 3rd, 2007 at 2:16 pm
Gonzales is ‘too busy.’
From Bob Novak’s column today: “Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has indicated he is too busy to answer letters from Democratic congressional leaders about his firing seven U.S. attorneys involved in probes of public corruption, though a lower-level Justice Department official rejected their proposals.”
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Bush
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Guantanamo
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Technology
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Once he gets his subpoena to testify he won’t be so busy anymore.
BTW, people who are more familiar with the law surrounding this, is there anyway he could ignore a subpoena and get away with it?
March 3rd, 2007 at 2:23 pm#1. Sorry. I didn’t read your post until after I sent mine. Great minds think alike I see.
March 3rd, 2007 at 2:27 pmIt’s hard work stripping Americans of the Constitutional rights.
March 3rd, 2007 at 2:28 pmpuh-l-e-e-e-eze
And, yes, I DO take it personally
March 3rd, 2007 at 2:39 pmWhy isn’t anyone latching onto this? They clearly claim that firings were for political reasons.
“March 2, 2007, 11:46PM
White House OK’d U.S. attorney firings
By JOHN SOLOMON and DAN EGGEN
Washington Post
WASHINGTON — The White House approved the firings of seven U.S attorneys late last year after senior Justice Department officials identified the prosecutors they believed were not doing enough to carry out President Bush’s policies on certain issues, White House and Justice Department officials said Friday…..
Since the mass firings were carried out three months ago, Justice Department officials have consistently portrayed them as personnel decisions based on the prosecutors’ “performance-related” problems. But, Friday, officials revealed the White House’s role in the matter and acknowledged that the ousters were based primarily on the administration’s unhappiness with the prosecutors’ policy decisions.”
“At the end of the day, this was a decision to pick the prosecutors we felt would most effectively carry out the department’s policies and priorities in the last two years,” said Justice Department spokesman Brian Roehrkasse.” http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/nation/4599028.html
March 3rd, 2007 at 2:44 pmHe’s too busy to do the job for which he is paid?
We should be too busy to pay him. He has interpreted the Constitution to suit himself and Bush, totally ignoring the country he is pledged to serve.
He must be taken down a peg or two and made aware of just who and what he has sworn to serve, and it isn’t Bush&Co; it’s the people and the Constitution. Back to law school AG, or perhaps jail would be more appropropriate for your contempt of court, until you are found guilty of your felonious crimes and sentenced to prison.
March 3rd, 2007 at 2:48 pmWell, lawyerin’ IS hard work…
March 3rd, 2007 at 2:50 pmBTW, people who are more familiar with the law surrounding this, is there anyway he could ignore a subpoena and get away with it?
Comment by AshenShard
I don’t think so. But not as a matter of established law. The House could legislate stricter controls over Justice department funds, and I don’t think Justice could do anything but complain about it. These new prosecutors might find themselves saddled with a very unfomfortable load of congressional oversight, until the matter is resolved.
March 3rd, 2007 at 2:52 pmTime to fire another attorney, named Gonzales.
March 3rd, 2007 at 3:10 pm.
i saw an interview with keith olberman (where?) recently…
he was asked to give immediate, reflexive answers when given names…
his response to “alberto gonzoles” was
“i’d really like to see his law degree” (paraphrasing?)
me too…
March 3rd, 2007 at 3:12 pmThe good news here is that Gonzales and his fellow jokers are so drunk with power their driving is impaired. They don’t seem to be aware that the American people might not take real kindly to “I’m too busy ” As a matter of fact I think we’re all a bit tired of the cabal’s middle finger. Glad they seem to be tone deaf to this…..cause they just make bigger and bigger mistakes. Soon, they will be forced to sober up and I hope it won’t be pleasant for them. As Webb said. “we will show you the way” If we don’t …..no one will. The Dem leadership is in permanent deer in front of the headlights mode. And that’s being kind
March 3rd, 2007 at 3:15 pmSomebody tell me why this mexican is helping neo nazi fascists disenfranchise the middle class and strip the country of laws the help the ordinary people?
Who does he think he is? He’s a brown mexican like millions of others who have to fight hard just to be treated as equals, and not like some slave underclass.
Yet he comes across as a Nazi. Is there any doubt he would gleefully intern 11 million mexicans if Bush told him to?
Same with “condi” : shes a black as anybody, and while black women already get the worst of everything in america, she helps Bushco strip minorities of civil rights, healthcare and other needed programs, and sends more people of color to 4 tours in an illegal war to die in a war and kill 650,000 other people of color.
when i hear people say blacks wont vote for obama it makes me laff. they’ll vote for any democrat over any republican, as will i and probably you.
i dont know how anybody couyld feel good about voting for more years of republican rule in 2008.
March 3rd, 2007 at 3:18 pmI can’t wait until he’s “too busy” juggling his man-dates in prison. Smarmy little fascist.
March 3rd, 2007 at 3:26 pm#
BTW, people who are more familiar with the law surrounding this, is there anyway he could ignore a subpoena and get away with it?
Comment by AshenShard
I don’t think so. But not as a matter of established law. The House could legislate stricter controls over Justice department funds, and I don’t think Justice could do anything but complain about it. These new prosecutors might find themselves saddled with a very unfomfortable load of congressional oversight, until the matter is resolved.
Comment by Barfly — March 3, 2007 @ 2:52 pm
Actually, ignoring a Congressional subpeona qualifies as “contempt of Congress.”
In the federal law of the United States, contempt of Congress is the crime of obstructing the work of United States Congress, with a punishment of up to one year in prison and up to $1,000 in fines.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contempt_of_Congress
March 3rd, 2007 at 3:29 pm#14 impeachcheneythenbush
only up to $1,000 and 1 year in prison? Me thinks that is a bit too lenient. If punishments were much harsher I think people in DC would be less likely to pull the crap they often do.
March 3rd, 2007 at 3:35 pmi’d like to be a fly on the wall in the room where that fiesty italian grandma is when she hears that gonzo is “too busy”…
March 3rd, 2007 at 3:42 pm.
c’mon, nancy… grab him by the ear and make it happen…
…
He’s too busy lighting black candles and calling upon beezelbub to lead the armies of the United States into the final conflict.
March 3rd, 2007 at 3:43 pm“Why isn’t anyone latching onto this? ”
Because the vast majority of American morons simply do not care.
Doing the right thing no longer exists. It is all about sycophantic yes-men and yes-women now, in service to The King Of The Morons.
March 3rd, 2007 at 3:46 pmOne thing that bothers me the most in all of this is the time factor.
What I mean by that is the administration can keep these types of things strung out until they’re no longer in power. At that point, it would be doubtful that any further legal action would be taken.
If these offenses were minor issues, fine. What we’re talking about, beyond this issue, is major violations of the Constitution. The administration shouldn’t be able to draw those issues out.
March 3rd, 2007 at 3:49 pmIt is certainly bothersome to me that Abu-Grahbzoles takes this attitude and expects to get away with it. What bothers me much more, however, is that the House members are sitting on their hands and doing nothing at all. By the time the House works up the courage to do anything, the evidence will have been ‘disappeared’ and everyone’s story will line up properly. This has effectively killed the investigations and all the House can do is make gurgling noises. I didn’t include the Senate because too many are too frightened even to talk about this.
The monarchists have become so strong in spite of their small numbers that I’m not sure the nation can ever overcome the current rending of the body politic. Even if a Democrat is elected, the wingnut media will continue to attack in an attempt to upset the political applecart. In fact, I think that they will become more strident and shrill. The MSM continues to roll over and the Democratic “leadership” continues to commit suicide (see LIEberman, joementum).
March 3rd, 2007 at 3:55 pmhello, dogjudge! still around?
i sent an email your way last week (?) about the “puggle” puppy…
March 3rd, 2007 at 3:59 pmi’m wondering if your program thought my gmail address was somehow spam?
Not to busy to pick up his check or his share of the stolen money. Gonzo will be back to picking fruit in a while. He’ll soon be joining the family he forgot about. Notice when Bush doesn’t need you anymore he doesn’t remember who you are ask Jack Abramoff.
March 3rd, 2007 at 4:04 pmRemember the outraged HUE and CRY from progressives when Bill Clinton held a wholesale firing event of 93 US Attorneys???? Neither do I, hypocrites.
March 3rd, 2007 at 4:05 pmNone of these sorts of actions will matter to the American public until Al Gore is in office. Then, any time any administration official farts in any direction, the reich wing noise machine will whip the issue into a horrific calamity. People will resign to save face. Those things happen becuase the hateful, bitter, child-like Repugnicans know how to mold and manipulate the public into believing their point of view. They do it with righteous indignation and with emotion. Democrats in control of the Congress will do nothing to Gitmo Al or anyone else because of our inherent fear of “we dont want to ruffle any feathers.” (a non-binding statement against the war in Iraqnam vs saying hell no to the war in Iraqnam is a shining example). Until we get an entire Congress populated with people like Jim Webb or Ned Lamont, nothing will happen to despicable bastards like the Bush Crime Family.
March 3rd, 2007 at 4:22 pmTime to fire another attorney, named Gonzales.
Comment by Hardy Haberman — March 3, 2007 @ 3:10 pm
No. It’s time to IMPEACH this little fascist a$$hole!! Then off to The Hague!! Then back to the US where he can be legally executed in Texas!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
March 3rd, 2007 at 4:27 pmBen……”Tyrants and
murderers can seem invincible at the time, but in the end they always fall.
Think of it. Always.”
Ghandi
He’s right. The right wing noise machine is empty at it’s core. Don’t let them fool you….fight back.
March 3rd, 2007 at 4:46 pm#
Remember the outraged HUE and CRY from progressives when Bill Clinton held a wholesale firing event of 93 US Attorneys???? Neither do I, hypocrites.
Comment by valiant venus — March 3, 2007 @ 4:05 pm
#
First of all, U.S. Attorneys serve for a term of four years, and they serve at the pleasure of the President. Clinton is not the only incoming President that replaced all (but one) U.S. Attorney. Reagan did exactly the same thing. A new President has the right to appoint anyone he pleases, particularly when setting up his own administration and policy. Such appointments have to be confirmed by the Senate. What is extraordinary here is that these 8 attorneys are being replaced by Bush himself (who appointed them) to substitute other attorneys who apparently will hue to this administration’s policies even more closely. And to top it off, they claim it was done because of performance problems, when all 8 attorneys had recently received glowing reviews.
Explain to me why U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton isn’t being fired after he gave legal immunity to a Mexican drug dealer and prosecuted two U.S. Border Security Guards BEFORE the investigation was even done? The drug dealer is a member of the one of the largest drug cartels in Mexico! So….does Sutton represent Bush administration policy?
March 3rd, 2007 at 4:55 pmDoesn’t Gonzo have a staff? If so, doesn’t he know how to delegate? If not, why? Not enough money in his budget?
March 3rd, 2007 at 4:58 pm#15
What he/she said…
March 3rd, 2007 at 5:02 pmSubpoena that TREASONOUS corrupt basta*d…
…make him testify under oath as to WHY these conscientious and productive…
…in the wake of the Duke Cunningham, Abramoff prosecutions…
…public servants have been replaced with criminal Bushite political cronies…
…Democrats NEED to call these criminal sons-of-bi*ches out on their TREASON and corruption…
…EVERY TIME one of them gets in front of television cameras…
…the MSM is HOPELESSLY compromised…
March 3rd, 2007 at 5:04 pmDemocrats send out first round of subpoenas for Bush admin.
March 3rd, 2007 at 5:16 pmhttp://www.hillnews.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Frontpage/030107/subpoenas.html
From ThinkProgress.org:
Contempt of Congress, Anyone?
by mcjoan
Sat Mar 03, 2007 at 02:28:38 PM PST
Alberto Gonzales just has too much on his plate to bother with responding to a Democratic Congress, according to Novak:
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has indicated he is too busy to answer letters from Democratic congressional leaders about his firing seven U.S. attorneys involved in probes of public corruption, though a lower-level Justice Department official rejected their proposals.
Rep. Rahm Emanuel, House Democratic Caucus chairman, had written Gonzales two letters suggesting that he name Carol Lam, fired as U.S. attorney in San Diego, as an outside counsel to continue her pursuit of the Duke Cunningham case. Asked by Melissa Charbonneau of the Christian Broadcasting Network about this column’s report that Gonzales did not respond, Gonzales said: “I think that the American people lose if I spend all my time worrying about congressional requests for information, if I spend all my time responding to subpoenas.”
That’s a novel approach to government. Personally, I think the American people lose if they have an Attorney General who believes himself to be above the law. That’s just the kind of attitude than can get an Attorney General impeached.
March 3rd, 2007 at 5:24 pmThat’s just the kind of attitude than can get an Attorney General impeached.
Comment by s — March 3, 2007 @ 5:24 pm
When do we get started? Get’er’dun!!
March 3rd, 2007 at 5:30 pm:) you’re great dixie blood! I’m working to draft Gore to run for president. We have an exploding Michigan draft Gore group. That’s where my efforts are now…..BUT…..I’m willing to look into how to impeach Gonzales. Anyone?
March 3rd, 2007 at 5:37 pmComment by s — March 3, 2007 @ 5:37 pm
My expert here on these matters is BnF!!!
March 3rd, 2007 at 5:40 pmWell, I’m no expert. Maybe BnF can lead us. :)
March 3rd, 2007 at 6:04 pmComment by Ron Paul for pres #31
Thanks Ron,
good link…
March 3rd, 2007 at 6:17 pmThe Inquisitor General Alberto VO5 Gonzales is TOO BUSY looking for ways he and his cohorts at Bushland Uber Allies CAN ESCAPE THE WAITING NOOSE FOR THEIR MISERABLE NECKS!!!!!
March 3rd, 2007 at 8:28 pmGotta wonder if he’ll be reading his impeachment subpoena?
March 3rd, 2007 at 8:42 pmGonzales is guilty of treason. Prison is too good for him.
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:57 pmgood reads here:
The Attorney General’s Contempt For The Rule Of Law
March 3rd, 2007 at 9:57 pmhttp://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/03/03/the-attorney-generals-contempt-for-the-rule-of-law/
Thanks for the link Briseadh na Faire.
Excellent posts as well my friend. I look forward to your posts
Briseadh na Faire.
You are a true credit to the human race. Keep up the excellent work you do. It is very much needed.
—————————————————————-
http://www.peace-action.org/
———————————————————————————
To: Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice
cc: Chairs of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and House Committee on International Relations
We, the undersigned, vehemently oppose any U.S. military action against Iran. Such military action would inevitably kill large numbers of innocent people, foster even more hatred and international condemnation of the U.S., and dramatically increase the instability of the region. Our own intelligence agencies have concluded the Iraq war has worsened the terrorist threat, and a war against Iran would add immeasurably more fuel to the fire.
Even if Iran decided to build a nuclear weapon, experts agree that it would take several years. There is no crisis, and our government should not create one with inflammatory rhetoric or military threats. The U.S. has both the time and obligation to work with the international community to fashion a diplomatic resolution to the situation, and the current refusal of U.S. officials to talk directly with Iranian officials cannot possibly help resolve the nuclear standoff, nor contribute to peace in Iraq and the Middle East.
Therefore, we urge you to take all steps necessary to reach a peaceful resolution to the current situation, including direct negotiations without pre-conditions. This is the only way to prevent yet another war, one that would be a calamity of truly global proportions.
———————————————————————–
No War with Iran!
President Bush is now regularly accusing Iran of supporting attacks on U.S. troops, without any evidence, – remember the WMD’s in Iraq, anyone? – adding that “we will seek out and destroy†these networks. Bush has authorized U.S. forces to kill Iranian “operatives†in Iraq, and he is sending nuclear aircraft carriers and missile defense batteries to the Persian Gulf. The unthinkable – a wider war in the Middle East – is unfolding.
John D. Rockefeller IV, D-W.Va., chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said that any U.S. military move into Iran would be “catastrophically stupid†and “unleash a conflagration like we’ve never heard of before.†We could not possibly agree more.
Resistance to a Bush planned military strike on Iran is growing in Congress, but it needs your help! Sign the petition to Congress below – No War with Iran! House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said recently that she would introduce legislation to stop such a strike, so our demand is beginning to get through. But the pressure needs to be much, much stronger to stop a President who has apparently gone mad with war and his own power.
Please know that your email address is for internal purposes only; we will not send it to the petition recipients nor share it with any other organization for any purpose. Thanks also for forwarding this to your friends, colleagues and listserves. We need everyone who wants to bring peace to the Middle East and prevent a war with Iran to join the effort now!
———————————————————————————–
http://www.peace-action.org/
March 4th, 2007 at 12:03 amLittle fascist is too busy rewriting the Constitution to fit his sick and twisted interpretations.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:29 amMoron would make a mediocre Tex-ass constable, much less this job where the depth that he is over his head is measured in thousands of fathoms.
He’ll be remembered as the most pathetic excuse for an Attorney General in history, BAR NONE.
I feel lucky. one of them was here in seattle.
March 4th, 2007 at 12:45 ami saw an interview with keith olberman (where?) recently…
he was asked to give immediate, reflexive answers when given names…
his response to “alberto gonzoles†was
“i’d really like to see his law degree†(paraphrasing?)
me too…
Comment by katy — March 3, 2007 @ 3:12 pm
meaning what? hispanics can’t possibly possess a law degree?
March 4th, 2007 at 12:58 amdid you even question any of the whack jobs clinton appointed?
jocelyn elders comes to mind. LMAO
Given the administration’s desire to have control of the legislative branch, all of this brings up another very large issue.
As I understand it, many of these firings are occurring under the cloud of the prosecutions that these attorneys were pursuing.
There’s enough politics in this country these days.
Do we really want a Nixonesque situation where the chief executive of the country uses the Justice Department to pursue vendettas against any perceived enemies?
If this type of attitude continues, could you imagine the consequences of having Tom DeLay, or Newt Gingrich as President?
March 4th, 2007 at 10:03 amValient,
You need to provide links to your assertions, or its just a lie.
March 4th, 2007 at 10:57 amI think Ben Dover hit it. There is a fear of ruffling too many feathers and its bullshit.
March 4th, 2007 at 10:59 amBen Dover,
That is why I feel there is no difference between the Dem party and the Repub pary. Well the Repubs are more “in your face” about the bullshit.
March 4th, 2007 at 11:00 amThree words…contempt of Congress.
March 4th, 2007 at 1:20 pmSubpoena the bitch! Put his lickspittle ass in chains!!
March 4th, 2007 at 3:01 pm“Why isn’t anyone latching onto this?” — Pigboy
Rep. Conyers, FOUR SUBPOENAS, hearing on Tuesday.
“The Dem leadership is in permanent deer in front of the headlights mode. And that’s being kind” –s
Rep. Conyers, FOUR SUBPOENAS, hearing on Tuesday.
“Until we get an entire Congress populated with people like Jim Webb or Ned Lamont, nothing will happen to despicable bastards like the Bush Crime Family.” — Ben Dover
Rep. Conyers, FOUR SUBPOENAS, hearing on Tuesday.
March 4th, 2007 at 3:09 pmhttp://www.tarpley.net/bushb.htm
George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography — by Webster G. Tarpley & Anton Chaitkin
————————————————————–
I encourage everyone to download and read this free book about George HW Bush. It explains how George Junior grew up as well as all of his misgivings then and now.
It is available in .htm and .zip format
EVERY dirty little secret is revealed. It is a GREAT recent history text.
March 4th, 2007 at 6:03 pmJim Crow Laws Employment Law Us Supreme Court
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 14th, 2008 at 12:09 pm