Will he resign in disgrace, like so many of Bush's appointees and their staff members, or will the Administration finally step up to the plate and accept responsibility? Once again, Rove's fingerprints are all over this scandal, and it seems very typical of his (and Cheney's) past political maneuverings. It seems highly possible that this could have all been going on in the background, and that if Gonzales was even aware that it was occurring, he was being encouraged to keep his mouth shut.
Or, is the whole story about prosecutors being encouraged to go after Democrats (and take it easy on Republicans) untrue- in which case "someone" in the prosecutor's office would need to be held accountable for falsifying the consistently superior employment reviews received by those that were recently fired for "poor performance"?
2007-03-16 02:32:34 · 12 answers · asked by kena2mi 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Gonzales is being set up to take the fall for sending the message that Bush and Cheney will not tolerate any more of their criminal associates going to jail. "No more Scooter Libby's" if the Presidential administration wants to break the law, nobody, and I mean nobody had better think they will be prosecuted for it. Go to blockbuster and rent the old Segal flick, "Above the Law", it's more accurate than Fox news.
2007-03-16 03:01:09 · answer #1 · answered by blogbaba 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No, Gonzales is not guilty of anything. He was simply doing what the President asks, which is his right.
Federal Prosecutors are Presidential appointees, and being so, are subject to dismissal at any time. President Clinton did this often, and it was never an issue. He dismissed something like 127 federal prosecutors during his administration. In one case at least, Clinton dismissed a Federal prosecutor who was actually investigating him in the whole sexual harassment/Monica Lewinski affair. But, like I said, the Liberally run media never had a problem with that, because deep down they know the law as well.
If Gonzales and President Bush have made any mistake is that it is to be in any way apologetic about a right that is given to all Presidents. This is more of the same appearance of weakness that the media exploits.
2007-03-16 09:41:21 · answer #2 · answered by Eric K 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It's tragically funny how quickly people in this country (and around the world) forget. When Bill Clinton first took office, one his very first political maneuvers was to clean house of all the federal court judges. In effect, he stacked the deck. No one called him on this. No one cared. How quickly the band wagon pickes up momentum, still, no one remembers the past. So, what makes it right that one should do it and no one notice, but another does it and everyone wants him to face the firing squad? When Clinton took us into Bosnia, he never once asked permission of congress. Same in Haiti and Somalia. And did he lie? Oh Hell yes! He lied. But he was loved by the masses and that's all that matters. It's all politics and stupid people. From which direction is the wind blowing today?
2007-03-16 09:44:35 · answer #3 · answered by Doc 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He's being set up just like Libby. The left is done persecuting Libby and are on a witch hunt for another administration official. He should not and will not resign. The Rove splash is more of the same, left wing media spinning a meaningless e-mail into some sort of horrible crime.
2007-03-16 09:43:09 · answer #4 · answered by Sane 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
This is a non story. The only mistake Gonzales made was to apologize for acting in a perfectly legal way. All federal prosecuters serve at the will of the president. Isn't it odd that when Reno fired 93 of them at Clinton's orders the left was silent
2007-03-16 09:41:46 · answer #5 · answered by espreses@sbcglobal.net 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Yet again people are missing the point of what really happened here and why it is important.
The following questions are wholly irrelevant.
Does the timing of these firing matter? No, The president has the right to fire or request the resignation of anyone he wishes at anytime in his tenure.
Were these firing politically motivated? Probably!
Does it matter that these people were fired, or that Bill Clinton fired people at the beginning of his tenure? No!
So what question regarding this matter does have relevance?
Did the Justice Department mislead or lie to Congress regarding the reasons for these firings? If the answer is yes then the Attorney General should resign.
2007-03-16 09:58:53 · answer #6 · answered by Bryan 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
He is being set up. I am sure everything that happened came directly from the white house. Scooter Libby was set up also.
They are the fall guys for real criminals which is Bush and is cronies.
This is the first time in history that a president has fired the same attorneys he hired in the first place. Guess they saw how he was abusing his 'power' and trashing the constitution and wanted to do something about it. King George put a stop to that didn't he.
2007-03-16 09:53:53 · answer #7 · answered by Lou 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The real question is:
Why is Attorney General Gonzales taking such heat over the firing of a few judges?
When Clinton became president, he ordered Janet Reno to fire ALL federal judges except one. And she did. No one raised a ruckus over that.
2007-03-16 09:39:33 · answer #8 · answered by missingora 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
They president an AG can fire whoever they want. PERIOD. Democrat and the media are working overtime to smear Republicans. I hope the public understands the six year campaign of BS and lies by the demolibmedia.
2007-03-16 09:38:21 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
The E-mails tell the tale. Gonzales is not the only guilty one. Karl Rove is just as guilty. Politics at it's worst.
2007-03-16 09:39:05 · answer #10 · answered by Lettie D 7 · 0⤊ 4⤋