Attorney general refuses to step down on prosecutor sacking issue

Dankdude

Well-Known Member
Attorney general refuses to step down on prosecutor sacking issue

WASHINGTON: U.S. attorney general Alberto Gonzales said he will not step down over the controversial issue of sacking eight federal prosecutors.

Addressing a press conference Tuesday, Gonzales said he admitted that mistakes have been made and he would, like the CEO of an organization, take responsibility for what happened at the department of justice. He vowed to find out what went wrong but insisted he had no direct knowledge of how his staff had made the firing decisions.

He then laid the entire blame on his top assistant, Kyle Sampson, who has resigned on this account. He said Sampson had been entrusted with directing the process to ascertain where were the weak performers, where the department could do better in districts around the country. It was his responsibility to drive the process, he added.

Meanwhile, emails exchanged between Sampson and Harriet Miers, a former White House counsel, indicated that the decision to sack the prosecutors was at the behest of senior aides of president George W. Bush. One of the emails from Sampson talked about prosecutor Henry "Bud" Cummins of Little Rock, Arkansas, who was "in the process of being pushed out."

An email from Sampson in March 2005 shows a formula for evaluation of the performance of the attorneys. The attorneys are to be listed in three categories -- bold = recommend retaining, strong attorneys who have managed well, and exhibited loyalty to the president and attorney general; strikeout = recommend removing, weak attorneys who have been ineffectual managers and prosecutors, chafed against administration initiatives, etc.; and nothing = no recommendation, have not distinguished themselves either positively or negatively.

Another email openly talks about replacing Cummins with Timothy Griffin, a former aide to top White House official Karl Rove.

The emails also revealed that Miers had suggested in February 2005 that all of the attorneys should be fired in order to get fresh faces. Gonzales, however, rejected the proposal. Sampson then drew up a list of 10 attorneys on the basis of their "underperformance."

Miers had stepped down in January 2007.

Under existing rules, federal prosecutors -- there are 93 in number -- are appointed by the president for four-year terms and they can be got rid of at any time. But lawmakers, especially Democrats, say these eight prosecutors were identified and sacked because they refused to toe the lines dictated by Republican politicians on the investigations into possible voter fraud which they felt had benefited the Democrats.

Gonzales said there were mistakes by the department and that the Congress was not fully informed about the decision. However, he maintained, there was nothing wrong in firing the prosecutors.

Democratic Congressmen are now demanding that Gonzales should resign. Senate majority leader Harry Reid has insisted that Gonzales should step down.
 

Dankdude

Well-Known Member
Editorials on Attorney General Alberto Gonzales
McClatchy-Tribune News Service

(MCT)

The following editorial appeared in the Philadelphia Inquirer on Tuesday, March 13:

THE U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL SHOULD RESIGN

U.S. Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales should resign.

If he ever does, the nation could take it as a clear sign that President Bush finally grasps the need to preserve core civil liberties while guarding against terrorism.

It would also be a sign that the president grasps that the Justice Department is at least one part of the government that should be free from the all-politics-all-the-time approach of his Karl Rove-led White House team.

Until the day Gonzales does the right thing - or it's demanded of him - Americans must assume that their president doesn't get these key distinctions.

That's the inescapable conclusion after a week in which, first, some U.S. attorneys claimed they were fired for not being quick enough to prosecute Democratic politicians, and then, more civil liberties abuses were uncovered on Gonzales' turf.

In a detailed audit released last week, the Justice Department's inspector general, Glenn A. Fine, found that FBI agents working for the Justice Department blanketed the country with data demands that trampled citizens' privacy.

Without a court order, businesses were forced to divulge phone, banking, credit, and Internet data on thousands of Americans. If the FBI doesn't know everything about every living American by now, it's not for lack of prying. Trouble was, Fine said the agents at times acted without official authorization and by concocting phony emergencies.

And, surprise, over a three-year period, the bureau underreported to Congress how often it used these so-called national security letters.

Gonzales can't seem to figure out the difference between his former job as Bush's legal gofer and being the nation's top law-enforcement official. When Bush wanted to end-run the courts and Constitution to enable the National Security Agency to tap overseas calls and messages of U.S. citizens, Gonzales said swell. Now he has plenty of improper snooping to answer for within his bailiwick.

The problems got blamed on shoddy record-keeping and human error. Mighty convenient. Fact is, the agency, under the direction of FBI chief Robert S. Mueller III, with Gonzales as his boss, sure looks to have skirted the law.

What the president on Saturday called "FBI shortfallings" looks like more of the same from an administration that has conducted its antiterror efforts as though the Constitution were a list of suggestions. The question is whether anyone in this administration can say "no" to excesses like the FBI's here.

If the attorney general doesn't speak up for civil rights and the rule of law, who will? Yet the incumbent has been, over the years, a chief apologist for Abu Ghraib-style interrogations, a backer of National Security Agency spying, and a disdainer of the courts' role as a check upon the president's powers.

Fine's audit gives Congress ammunition to rein in the FBI on the security letters. It should get to work.

Meantime, the nation needs an attorney general whose first loyalty is to the rule of law, not to his old pals in the White House.
 

Dankdude

Well-Known Member
The following editorial appeared in the Seattle Times on Tuesday, March 13:

SPIES IN THE FBI: THE NEED FOR BALANCE

Last week was marked with the Bush Justice Department relenting, backtracking and admitting disturbing overreaches - all under scrutiny of the Democratic-controlled Congress.

The heat has at least some in Congress suggesting U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales should step down. After weeks of criticism and high-profile hearings, Gonzales agreed not to oppose legislation to limit his power to appoint interim U.S. attorneys without Senate oversight. The proposed changes would restore the practice of requiring quick confirmation - something eliminated by last year's renewal of the Patriot Act by the GOP-controlled Congress.

Gonzales also agreed to permit that five of his top advisers be questioned by the Senate Judiciary Committee about the controversial firings of eight U.S. attorneys, including John McKay in the Seattle office. Several of the former U.S. attorneys testified under congressional subpoena they had been contacted improperly by members of Congress or their aides or been subject to intimidation by the Justice Department if they spoke out.

Additionally, the agency's inspector general found widespread errors in how the FBI used its authority to secretly and improperly collect information - such as bank accounts and telephone records - on U.S. citizens without court oversight, the Washington Post reported.

In a sampling of 293 instances in which the agency used its national-security letter authority between 2003 and 2005, the audit found 22 instances that flouted agency regulations and might have broken the law. For context: The agency made 143,000 requests for information on more than 52,000 people through national-security letters from 2003 to 2005.

The letters' use, which does not require court oversight, greatly expanded after the 9/11 terrorist attacks when the Patriot Act lowered the threshold for when they could be used.

The audit was ordered by Congress over the Bush administration's objections. FBI Director Robert Mueller apologized, saying he should have been monitoring the letters' use all along.

Yes, he should have.

Congress finally is providing checks on the Bush administration, which has been too cavalier in protecting civil liberties and too reckless pushing a partisan agenda over justice. The scrutiny is unpleasant but necessary - and long overdue.
 

Dankdude

Well-Known Member
The following editorial appeared in the Orlando Sentinel on Tuesday, March 13:

KNOWING WHEN YOU'RE WRONG

Like the gambler that Kenny Rogers sang about, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales knew when to fold `em.

After a group of U.S. attorneys went public last week with complaints that they had been sacked for political reasons, Gonzales dropped his ill-fated opposition to a bill that could block future prosecutorial purges.

The bill would repeal a bad law, passed just last year at the request of the Bush administration, that allows the president to name "interim" U.S. attorneys without Senate confirmation. That law is a direct assault on the constitutional principle of checks and balances between branches of government.

Gonzales' damage control should not deter Congress from completing a full investigation into the ousting of the U.S. attorneys.--- - _
 

Dankdude

Well-Known Member
Abuses of power

New reports show why Attorney General Gonzales should be removed from office

U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales should never have gotten the job as America's top legal officer to begin with in 2005.

Even then the list of disqualifiers attached to his name was long:

It was Gonzales who advised President Bush to ignore the Geneva Conventions in dealing with terrorist suspects, sanctioning torture and abuse.

It was Gonzales who justified the trials of terrorism suspects through secret military tribunals that federal courts later shut down as outside the bounds of American standards of justice.

Those policies disgraced our country and mocked the Founding Fathers' principle of a nation based on the rule of law.

Once in office, Gonzales' record got no better.

He backed the Bush administration program of illegal, warrantless wiretapping of U.S. citizens' telephone calls and e-mails.

He's also defended Bush's use of signing statements -- more than 800 disclaimers the president has attached to bills saying he has the right to ignore Congress or withhold information from lawmakers.

That includes the right to ignore a law giving Congress more oversight of Patriot Act powers to conduct secret searches or seize personal papers.

Many Americans -- among them us -- believed the expanded powers of the Patriot Act, passed in a frenzy after 9-11, threatened the civil liberties of Americans protected in the Constitution.

Last week came damning evidence that White House promises the Patriot Act would be used with great restraint were bald-faced lies.

A report released by the Justice Department's Inspector General found the FBI -- which Gonzales oversees -- flagrantly abused part of the Patriot Act to illegally obtain telephone, banking and other personal information about tens of thousands of people.

The audit said the agency failed to provide oversight of how the bureau issued national security letters -- a kind of subpoena that doesn't require court approval -- to gain access to telephone, banking and other private data.

The FBI went so far as to convince telephone companies to release information without a security letter, saying an urgent situation existed and the document would arrive later, according to the report.

Often, neither was true, according to The Washington Post.

FBI director Robert S. Mueller on Friday accepted responsibility for the agency's failures, and Gonzales said he was deeply concerned as well.

We're not buying his act.

He has played point guard for a White House bent on exploiting legitimate security concerns to erode checks and balances on executive powers and to smack down the rights and privacy of ordinary citizens.

The politically motivated firings of eight U.S. attorney generals in 2006 damage Gonzales' credibility even more.

He should be removed and replaced with someone willing to protect the Constitution. Chances are Bush won't do that.

But Congress can prevent more trampling of civil liberties.

And it should do so at once by restoring court oversight of security letters and restricting Patriot Act powers in ways that don't impede speedy investigation of actual terror risks.
 

ViRedd

New Member
This whole thing is a none starter, Dank.

The Attorney General works at the discretion of the president ... as do all of the U.S. Attorneys. They are APPOINTED at the discretion of the President and can be let go anytime the President wants to let them go.

How short are the memories of democrats like Schumer and Hillary? When the Clinton's first took the White House, one of the very first things they did was to instruct their APPOINTED Attorney General, Janet (Waco) Reno to fire ALL 92 U.S. Attys and installed their own puppet-people in their place.

This latest "scandal" is nothing more than the democrats making up phony issues for political gain.

Quite honestly, Dank ... you need to watch Fox News more often to get a more unbiased viewpoint. :)

Vi
 

Dankdude

Well-Known Member
No Vi Fox News has been caught lying more than any other network, so I'll watch something with a better credibility factor.
Personally I think he should be fired due to abuses of the Patriot act. (Which I told you would happen since it's inception.)
The Bush Administration is rotten to it's core, and karma is finally catching up with them.
 

ViRedd

New Member
I have to admit ... Bush really blew it on the Mexico trip. Lots of people are totaly pissed at him right about now, including me.

Vi
 

Garden Knowm

The Love Doctor
This whole thing is a none starter, Dank.

The Attorney General works at the discretion of the president ... as do all of the U.S. Attorneys. They are APPOINTED at the discretion of the President and can be let go anytime the President wants to let them go.

How short are the memories of democrats like Schumer and Hillary? When the Clinton's first took the White House, one of the very first things they did was to instruct their APPOINTED Attorney General, Janet (Waco) Reno to fire ALL 92 U.S. Attys and installed their own puppet-people in their place.

This latest "scandal" is nothing more than the democrats making up phony issues for political gain.

Quite honestly, Dank ... you need to watch Fox News more often to get a more unbiased viewpoint. :)

Vi


c'mon bro.... you're not a super hero.. you don't even have any magical powers.. how the fook can you defend Gonzales...... LOL...


oh yeah.. my bad.. you're not trying to defend gonzales.. you are just trying to redirect the conversation to your "favorite conversation"... Democrat bashing...

:hump: :spew: :peace: :mrgreen:
 

ViRedd

New Member
My favorite topic isn't "democrat bashing" at all. My favorite topic is shining a light on those who are anti-liberty no matter what their political affiliation is.

Don't be such a wuss.

Vi
 
Top