We all know that a resignation is actually being fired. So it all depends on what is politically expedient at the time. If there was an incident such as the Walter Reed case where our solders are not taken care of, then heads will roll as it puts a bad light on the WH. Rumsfeld didn't go until after the election that showed most Americans think Iraq was a mistake. If most Americans think that Gonzales did something bad with the Patriot Act, then he will go. As I see it, for now there are lots of CYA by the firings federal prosecutors to contain the damage. Past damages that have taken place are: Gitmo, illegal wire taps, FBI illegal use of Patriot Act. I think it would take another bad news in order for Gonzales to go.
2007-03-11 15:39:09
·
answer #1
·
answered by ? 6
·
2⤊
1⤋
He should never have been appointed in the first place. As Bush's personal attorney, he had a built in conflict of interest as the Attorney General. His client, the people of the United States, could have issues with his former client, George Bush. I said this when he was nominated, and I was right. But it's worse than that. This man has interpreted the US Constitution like a hack. He's an idiot, just like his former client George Bush. If I were the CEO of a company that broke the law as the FBI did, I'd be out of a job. Gonzalez, the head of law enforcement in this country, was responsible for the breach of the public trust by the FBI. He should resign. And there is yet another reason for impeachment of George Bush. The village idiot.
2007-03-11 19:58:03
·
answer #2
·
answered by Toodeemo 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
Over this issue ?? Not really, not when there are so many much more serious issues that would merit this person's absolute dismissal in disgrace.
What's the statute of limitations on the unilateral and totally illegal effective repeal of the Geneva Conventions ?
Do the people of the US of A not have any incling of just how much people like this, and their atrocious ( literally ) behaviour bring down the image and prestige of your country ?
The Geneva Conventions, brought about through the actions of the Nuremburg War Tribunals, largely sponsored by the United States, and due to the extraordinary and criminal actions of the German Nazi regime.
This 'Attorney General', who is, is he not, supposed to be the highest legal officer in the United States administration, declared the terms of these conventions to be 'quaint', and thus out-dated, and apparently in the opinion of the United States, no longer worthy to be recognised.
Shame on you.
While your at it check out the provisions of the 'US Servicemen's Protection Act', with particular reference to the International Criminal Court in the Hague, Netherlands.
2007-03-11 17:21:38
·
answer #3
·
answered by cosmicvoyager 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
Why should he go? Oh yeah, the party of the little guy and minorities doesn't really want a minority in a position of power...so lets go after Alberto Gonzales, Condoleeza Rice, Colin Powell. The only competent person of coloe the Dems ever elevated to a position of responsibility was Ron Brown. Donna Shilalah was a joke, Ron Brown was educated, smart, intelligent and hard working. Hmmm, why is the Republican Party the Party of Lincoln? What have the Dems done to help the poor or people of color? They try and succeed at doing nothing but playing polotics. Isn't it time to lime to look at results and what HAS happened.
2007-03-11 15:56:34
·
answer #4
·
answered by Partisanshipsux 3
·
0⤊
2⤋
Gonzalez shouldn't in any respect have been shown interior the 1st place--his advocacy of torture and unconstitutional surveillance of the american human beings is a controversy of public checklist and makes him undeserving to hold his workplace. What we are seeing now--the violations--blatently unlawful--of yank's civil rights--grew to become into predictible and inevitable with this manner of individual on the helm of the Justice branch. yet I do think of he must be compelled to provide up, rather than prosecuted. no longer because of the fact he would not need to be placed on trial--yet because of the fact he's regrettably clever sufficient to stay away from conviction. extra effective to easily rigidity him out--it accomplishes the point of removing a wager to the folk. BTW--do no longer forget approximately the Director of the FBI (and the brokers who broke the regulation)--all of them must be axed.
2016-10-18 03:09:36
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
What does it matter? The United States is just like Rome at its high power. Learn the history of Rome and you will see the United States is following almost exactly. Will we last another 600 years? What do you think?
2007-03-11 16:26:58
·
answer #6
·
answered by JoAnn W 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Why should he? the article never mentioned why the prosecutors got fired, so we can't assume they were doing their jobs. At least he found out about the illegal activity of the FBI. The article also fails to mention what he is doiing about it. Until we find out the actions he took on the FBI, and the reasons the others were fired, how can we say he should resign without all the facts?
2007-03-11 12:54:06
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
2⤋
Yes! Without a doubt! The WH may retaliate if the ousted prosecutors complained...what does that sound like? Not the US that is for sure! He has taken his position for granted and it gets me sick!
2007-03-11 08:42:42
·
answer #8
·
answered by hera 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
No since the Dems have the attention now they will push for this since they never wanted him to be AG in the first place if you review the confirmation hearings. Go and look one administration ago and see the political dealings on judicial matters by an AG and see real political posturing and corruptness.
2007-03-11 08:33:51
·
answer #9
·
answered by ALASPADA 6
·
1⤊
2⤋
I did fallow the link to be sure how I felt and YES I do think he should have a good day.
2007-03-11 12:52:55
·
answer #10
·
answered by jane h 3
·
0⤊
0⤋