Comments on: Gonzales plans to ‘tighten the leash’ on attorneys.

By: barney@mpd.org

barney@mpd.org — Fri, 22 Jun 2007 11:20:18 +0000

It’s ok for Chuck Shumer when he pressured Fitzgerald!

Fascist liberals!

By: ANON A MOUSE

ANON A MOUSE — Mon, 18 Jun 2007 18:35:56 +0000

The one think ol’ Berto forgot is that as Atty General he is not the President’s Lawyer, not Bush’s Lawyer and not the RNC’s Lawyer. He is the People’s Lawyer.

By: Roger Sanford

Roger Sanford — Mon, 18 Jun 2007 03:27:59 +0000

I retired as an AUSA after nearly 30 years with the Department of Justice, and worked under seven US Attorneys in two districts in Democratic and Republican administrations. Never did I see or feel the slightest political pressure in the exercise of my responsibilities. Does it happen? Sure, but not in the blatant and arrogant manner espoused by this administration. Who doesn’t know that Gonzales doesn’t issue mandates or orders? He simply and blindly follows Rove’s instructions and could care less that the DOJ’s once laudable reputation sinks lower by the week. What I don’t understand, though, is why the truly dedicated DOJ employees haven’t called for a work stoppage or aren’t subtely sabotaging the goddamn political appointees whenever they get the chance. Roger

By: Jackie

Jackie — Mon, 18 Jun 2007 02:50:27 +0000

Gonzo will follow the direction of Karl Rove and Dick Cheney. As for teaching other attorneys will Gonzo will teach time how to say ” I don’t recall” and how to lie under oath and make a fool out of themselves. Gonzo is a disgrace to the Justice System. Now Gonzo told Congress that he wouldn’t appoint any attorney yet again he lied under oath.

By: Mr Blifil

Mr Blifil — Mon, 18 Jun 2007 02:20:08 +0000

Apparently, the formality of adhering to the laws of the land as they existed before Gonzo’s appointment was not quite formal enough.

By: yathink

yathink — Sun, 17 Jun 2007 23:59:56 +0000

Never before have US Attorneys been beholden to politicians. Some politicians believe they are way above the law. They should all be impeached. But a good question is if the administration was Democratic, would the minority put up with this crap? Donâ€™t think so. They all took an oath to uphold the constitution. Many arenâ€™t doing that. That is the question we should ask all of our senators and representatives. No excuses.

By: Shirley

Shirley — Sun, 17 Jun 2007 23:57:36 +0000

America, your courts are tainted, your electoral process is hacked, rigged and suppressed, your “free” press is a fascist exercise in modern propaganda and your republic no longer exists.
What are you going to do about it…? Sit on yopur asses at your computer screens and type like the wind, or just pass wind?

By: Shirley

Shirley — Sun, 17 Jun 2007 23:55:28 +0000

AND ALMOST ZERO OF ANY OF THIS IS MAKING IT’s WAY INTO AMERICA’s LARGEST DAILY PAPERS. Reading the L.A. Times since it was bought out has become like an exercise is dumbing yourself down.

By: chimpeach

chimpeach — Sun, 17 Jun 2007 22:28:35 +0000

This makes perfect sense. As you know, the problem all along has been that GOP members of Congress didn’t have a formal avenue for pressuring the Justice Department to get rid of U.S. Attorneys who weren’t sufficiently partisan in the conduct of their duties. They used to have to go to Karl Rove or one of his underlings and have them try to get Gonzo to take care of it. Now they can go straight to Gonzo. Problem solved!

By: kasinca

kasinca — Sun, 17 Jun 2007 21:32:51 +0000

Everythingâ€™s political. Complaining about politicizing DoJ is just naive.

Comment by MAF54 â€” June 17, 2007 @ 3:15 pm

Not so, moose breath…show me where it mentions politics in the constitution. Show me where it says anything about it. You are believing the lies of the thugs in the crime family.

By: Frank

Frank — Sun, 17 Jun 2007 19:54:49 +0000

We are talking here not just about politicization of the DOJ, but of the electoral process. Everything is not political, there are some places we expect political differences to go away, e.g. the military, the IRS, and in the counting of our votes. That is why DOJ itself has a regulation forbidding the bringing of certain sorts of cases just prior to an election. Here we are seeing evidence that USAs were fired for failing to bring cases to influence elections and promote voter suppression. So you may call the complaints naive, but I call them constructive.

By: MAF54

MAF54 — Sun, 17 Jun 2007 19:15:28 +0000

Everything’s political. Complaining about politicizing DoJ is just naive.

By: Frank

Frank — Sun, 17 Jun 2007 19:08:53 +0000

The current DOJ/USA system is broken. Karl Rove and Harriet Miers hacked it. The DOJ has been infected by a political virus. We need to patch the code. Gonzo’s idea of documenting the bug as a feature is not what I have in mind. The USAs need to be given more job security by statute. Or else if this is to be so political, maybe it needs to be made an elective office. Short of that I’m not sure I see any way to put Humpty Dumpty back together again.

By: Wayne A. Schneider

Wayne A. Schneider — Sun, 17 Jun 2007 18:40:09 +0000

Would the newly appointed officials be capable of providing the top notch, reliable, beneficial service that we have come to expect from the Rep. appointees?

Comment by PRIMVS INTER PARES â€” June 17, 2007 @ 1:58 pm

The “service that we have come to expect from the Rep. appointees” has been neither “top notch”, “reliable” nor “beneficial”. So I think the Deocrats could easily do better than the Republicans. The main difference is that the Dems want it to be done right, the Rep’s don’t.

By: Meah Bottoms

Meah Bottoms — Sun, 17 Jun 2007 18:15:29 +0000

Oh to be a fly on the wall in the meetings where the next plan of attack is decided. Heads low. Smirks and laughs. Yea, great idea Karl! We got Carol Lam, and that’s what we wanted. Now a new guy in L.A.will protect Jerry Lewis. Let’s just pretend it is business as usual, and call all the folks in to face their detractors. Yea! We don’t want any more scandals, and we have an election to think about. That will do it! Go AG! Hee hee hee.

By: PRIMVS INTER PARES

PRIMVS INTER PARES — Sun, 17 Jun 2007 17:58:27 +0000

Trolls on TP, please answer the question posed above. How would you react if it was a Democratic administration that was politicizing all departments in our government?
Comment by Kate Henry â€” June 17, 2007 @ 11:14 am

Well, that all depends.

Would the newly appointed officials be capable of providing the top notch, reliable, beneficial service that we have come to expect from the Rep. appointees?

By: Wayne A. Schneider

Wayne A. Schneider — Sun, 17 Jun 2007 17:11:53 +0000

Comment by xaxnar â€” June 17, 2007 @ 12:45 pm

I like the way you think. Document the meetings on audio and video media (you don;t just want still shots) and store them in a secure location. Then, if a question arises, just “go to the video tape” and see what actually happened.

Oh, and one other thing, it should be a major felony to alter those recordings in any way. Can’t give them a way out of it by letting them destroy the tapes with impunity.

By: Wayne A. Schneider

Wayne A. Schneider — Sun, 17 Jun 2007 17:08:03 +0000

Briseadh wrote:
For months now weâ€™ve been told that the DoJ is staffed with political appointees who serve at the pleasure of the president.

Hi, Bris,

I think a major part of the problem we are having in this area just might be in a misinterpreatation of that phrase “serves at the pleasure of the president.” I think that the Bush administration feels that it means to serve the president at his pleasure, rather than to serve the people at his pleasure. The correct interpretattion, of course, is that they all serve the people, and that they do it at the pleasure of the president. But with all the people there expected to be “loyal Bushies” (to borrow a term used by one of them), I think that some of the ones who hired and fired people thought that they were supposed to be serving the president at his pleasure.

I could be wrong, but I think this might explain in part how we got into this mess. That and the fact that some of the people in charge were completely unqualified (or ill-suited) to do the jobs for which they were hired.

By: colonyhead

colonyhead — Sun, 17 Jun 2007 17:04:57 +0000

“…hauling in every U.S. attorney for a meeting to hear, among other things, politiciansâ€™ beefs against the prosecutor.”

Does anyone here think that the term “politicians” in that sentence refers to Democrats as well as Republickers? Is anyone that naive?

By: xaxnar

xaxnar — Sun, 17 Jun 2007 16:45:23 +0000

You know, I think this would be a really good thing for Gonzalez to do – IF the entire meeting was videotaped and copies sent to House and Senate judiciary committees. Because, after all, Gonzo has serious memory problems and this way he wouldn’t have to worry about remembering what to forget.