All of his chiefs of staff have...shouldn't he go too?
By resigning on Monday, Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty joined Gonzales's chief of staff, D. Kyle Sampson; the department's White House liaison, Monica Goodling; and Justice official Michael Battle, who oversaw the dismissal of federal prosecutors, on the list of Gonzalesites who've left the building.
At this point, the number of U.S. attorneys dismissed for political reasons still exceeds the number of Justice officials who've left because of their involvement in dismissing those attorneys or dissembling about it, but the ratio is tightening.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/15/AR2007051501874_pf.html
2007-05-16 14:24:54 · 16 answers · asked by Reba K 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I heard a caller on a talk radio show mention that when Gonzalez was at the Air Force Academy he specialized in torturing people in their survival training, and that he was very good at torturing people and that he enjoyed it. The show host called around and got confirmation. Gonzalez left the Academy before he would have been obligated to serve. Does that give insight into why he would not resign? He loves his work, he likes torturing people. He and Bush used to yuck it up, laugh over clemency pleas from condemned prisoners in Texas. Even if you believe in the death penalty you should respect life enough, respect the seriousness of your job enough, that you do not take killing people as some kind of light entertainment. So that ought to answer the question, yes?
2007-05-16 14:31:43 · answer #1 · answered by jxt299 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
He is Republican. He was President Bush's Attorney General. The attorney general is the man whose job it is to enforce all the federal laws in the country, but Gonzalez was accused of breaking many laws himself. Wiretapping without a court order, imprisoning people without charges or access to a lawyer, authorizing torture in foreign prisons, lots of bad stuff like that. Congress has 'oversight' responsibility for the executive branch, but the Bush administration and Congress disagreed on whether or not they could subpoena Gonzales to testify before a committee. When he finally did testify he just claimed not to remember anything, and nobody believed him. Finally he resigned to avoid having to testify again (and perhaps go to jail). But he can still be subpoenaed, so he might go to jail anyway.
2016-05-20 15:43:04 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hm-mm! If the firings weren't for political reasons, why is everyone resigning? All those but the one who should. He's a fascist!
2007-05-16 14:28:56 · answer #3 · answered by cantcu 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I've been asking myself the very same thing. It is quite evident that it was him who fired the Democratic attorneys for political reasons. He should be gone, as he has done enough.
2007-05-16 14:27:41 · answer #4 · answered by phattyfatt 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Why should he? Federal Prosecutors serve at the presidents pleasure. He can fire them for having a bad haircut. Clinton fired 93. Leave it alone.
2007-05-16 14:28:24 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
So what? Gonzalez' primary mistake is in explaing ANYTHING to his detractors. The President can appoint and fire U.S. Attorneys at his discretion w/o explaining it to anyone.
He should've told 'em to "GO POUND SAND!" when they demanded reasons.
2007-05-16 14:39:59 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Cause he does no have the stones to do it, without Daddy's OK
2007-05-16 14:29:07 · answer #7 · answered by Scuzzy 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
He obviously thinks there is much more he can do to destroy the American justice system.
2007-05-16 14:29:52 · answer #8 · answered by razor 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
1) He has done nothing wrong.
2) He has the confidence of President Bush.
2007-05-16 14:27:23 · answer #9 · answered by yupchagee 7 · 1⤊ 4⤋
I know nothing Senor.
2007-05-16 14:34:09 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋