Alberto Tucks Tail and Rrrrruns !!

If Al Gonzo had a spine or any measure of integrity, this would be his letter of resignation:

 Dear President Bush:

I respectfully submit my resignation as Attorney General of the United States.

The reasons for my resignation are well-known to you but it may serve the public interest to know the truth.  Finally.

I have disgraced myself, my family, my political friends, my savior (that would be you, Mr. President), and my country.

I am simply incapable of doing this job properly.  You personally know that I am a loser.  That I am unqualified.  That politics mean more than the rule of law.   That the only reason you gave me the job was because you knew that my nose would always be firmly implanted up your ass.  And it has been.  Faithfully and without complaint.

I love torture.  Oh, how I love torture.  We both know the American people are stupid.  That’s how you were elected in the first place.  Americans do not understand torture.  They simply cannot grasp that surfboarding and waterboarding are not all that different.  America’s security is at great risk unless we can torture at will.

I love torture.  Since the American people and their flunky representatives in Congress were unwilling to accept my justification for torture, I thought I’d stay on a bit longer after that traiter Arlen Specter called for my resignation. 

But my attempts at torturing them by not resigning backfired.  I could not get any good seats at any of the best restaurants in the District.  Not even in the in-house restaurant.  Not even at a window-seat at Legal Seafoods down on K Street.   Where the waiter insists on serving me frozen catfish instead of the lobster bisque.  I cannot find unused toilet paper with which to blow my nose.

Rick Santorum refuses to return my calls.   Mark Foley is chasing the boys.  I’d complain to John Asscroft in his hospital bed but he’s dead.  Monica Goodling is thinking of converting to Catholicism.

My life is a wreck.

I need to go.

Maybe I’ll partner up with Don Rumsfeld.  He didn’t do so bad after his sorry ass was run out of town.

All my best to Laura and to your pregnant twin.

Forever truly yours,

 Alberto Gonzales.

xoxoxox

p.s. may I remove my nose from between your buttcheeks?

Subpoena issued for Rice; immunity for Goodling

In rapid succession, congressional committees Wednesday ramped up their investigations of the Bush administration by approving a subpoena for Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and granting immunity to a key aide to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

Simultaneously across Capitol Hill, the Senate Judiciary Committee approved — but did not issue — a subpoena on the prosecutors’ matter to Sara Taylor, deputy to presidential adviser Karl Rove.

By 21-10, the House oversight committee voted to issue a subpoena to Rice to compel her story on the Bush administration’s claim, now discredited, that Iraq was seeking uranium from Africa.

Joint letter issued for Gonzales
And in case Gonzales thought the worst had passed with his punishing testimony last week before the Senate Judiciary Committee, the chairman and top Republican issued a new demand: Refresh the memory that Gonzales claimed had failed him 71 times during the seven-hour session.

“Provide the answers to the questions you could not recall last Thursday,” Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and ranking Republican Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, wrote to Gonzales on Wednesday.

Moments earlier in the committee chamber next door, the House Judiciary Committee voted 32-6 to grant immunity to Monica Goodling, Gonzales’ White House liaison, for her testimony on why the administration fired eight federal prosecutors. The panel also unanimously approved — but did not issue — a subpoena to compel her to appear.

Specter’s letter underscored that Congress’ march against the administration isn’t driven solely by Democrats. Only six members of the House Judiciary Committee voted against immunity for Goodling — all Republicans. And several Republican lawmakers have lobbed harsh criticism at Gonzales in the two days since Bush issued a fresh statement of support for him.

“I’ll be as vigilant as ever in overseeing the Justice Department and working with other senators both Republicans and Democrats for accountability from the attorney general and the department he leads,” said Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa.

Wednesday’s actions indicate that Democrats plan to increase their oversight of an administration that operated for six years under Republican congressional control.

Political influence at question in firings
Democrats say they want to force into the open the story of why the eight U.S. attorneys were fired and whether they were singled out to influence corruption cases. Republicans point out that Gonzales survived a brutal Senate hearing last week with President Bush’s support and no evidence of wrongdoing in the prosecutors firings.

For his part, Gonzales tried Wednesday to mend fences on Capitol Hill. He met with a key critic, Sen. Mark Pryor, D-Ark., who has complained that Gonzales was not truthful with him over the dismissal of Bud Cummins, the former U.S. attorney in Little Rock, Ark.

But his outreach apparently didn’t take.

“I reiterated with the attorney general, face-to-face, that I think he should resign,” Pryor told reporters in a conference call after meeting with Gonzales in Washington. “I think it’s the best thing for the Department of Justice and it’s probably the best thing for him personally and the administration.”

 

Conservatives to Bush: Fire Alberto Gonzales

Monday, Apr. 16, 2007

By Adam Zagorin/Washington

In what could prove an embarrassing new setback for embattled Attorney General Alberto Gonzales on the eve of his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, a group of influential conservatives and longtime Bush supporters has written a letter to the White House to call for his resignation.

The two-page letter, written on stationery of the American Freedom Agenda, a recently formed body designed to promote conservative legal principles, is blunt. Addressed to both Bush and Gonzales, it goes well beyond the U.S. attorneys controversy and details other alleged failings by Gonzales. “Mr. Gonzales has presided over an unprecedented crippling of the Constitution’s time-honored checks and balances,” it declares. “He has brought rule of law into disrepute, and debased honesty as the coin of the realm.” Alluding to ongoing scandal, it notes: “He has engendered the suspicion that partisan politics trumps evenhanded law enforcement in the Department of Justice.”

The letter concludes by saying, “Attorney General Gonzales has proven an unsuitable steward of the law and should resign for the good of the country… The President should accept the resignation, and set a standard to which the wise and honest might repair in nominating a successor…” It is the first public demand by a group of conservatives for Gonzales’ firing. Signatories to the letter include Bruce Fein, a former senior official in the Reagan Justice Department, who has worked frequently with current Administration and the Republican National Committee to promote Bush’s court nominees; David Keene, chairman of the influential American Conservative Union, one of the nation’s oldest and largest grassroots conservative groups, Richard Viguerie, a well-known GOP direct mail expert and fundraiser, Bob Barr, the former Republican congressman from Georgia and free speech advocate, as well as John Whitehead, head of the Rutherford Institute, a conservative non-forit active in fighting for what it calls religious freedoms.

Fein, speaking for the signatories, told TIME that Gonzales’ planned testimony to Congress tomorrow, the text of which has been released by the Justice Department, was a “terrible disappointment” that left unanswered key questions on which his job may now depend. “Gonzales testimony before the Judiciary Committee resorts to a truly Clintonesque defense of his own previous false statements,” says Fein. “In fact,” he says, “Gonzales’ latest declarations really do call into question the forthrightness and honesty indispensable for America’s chief law enforcement officer.”

In testimony to be delivered before the Senate Judiciary Committee tomorrow — and in an op-ed in Sunday’s Washington Post — Gonzales says he has “nothing to hide,” and that there were no political motives for seeking the resignations of any U.S. attorney involved in the current controversy. He acknowledges that he made various mistakes in the controversy and apologizes to the U.S. attorneys and their families.

“I also have no basis to believe that anyone involved in this process sought the removal of a U.S. attorney for an improper reason,” Gonzales asserted. “I firmly believe that these dismissals were appropriate.” But he did not offer specifics about any of the firings, and specifics seem likely to dominate Tuesday’s Senate hearings. Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, the top Republican on the committee, said yesterday that Gonzales has a “steep hill to climb” to keep his job, noting that, “He’s going to be successful, in my opinion, only if he deals with the [specific] facts.”

Signers of the letter says that it is also aimed at fellow Republicans — and especially GOP members of Congress — whom they hope to encourage to call for the attorney general’s ouster, a step they argue is crucial to ending damage to the Department of Justice, as well as GOP standing on Capitol Hill.

Conservatives have long distrusted Gonzales, but until now many hesitated to criticize him publicly in the current controversy out or respect for the broad latitude they believe a President should have in selecting his cabinet. Behind the scenes, however, their opposition helped dissuade Bush from nominating Gonzales to the Supreme Court and, over the years, they have regularly disparaged him as too soft on key issues such as affirmative action and abortion. But as the President’s popularity and political clout continue to decline, the group’s assault on the Attorney General is designed to rally a growing number of Republicans who seem to hope that Gonzales will finally step aside. His testimony, however, gives no indication that he intends to do so.

Battle contradicts Gonzales’ Statements on Firings

By Dan Eggen and Paul Kane, Washington Post Staff Writers
Monday, April 16, 2007; A04

The former Justice Department official who carried out the firings of eight U.S. attorneys last year told Congress that several of the prosecutors had no performance problems and that a memo on the firings was distributed at a Nov. 27 meeting attended by Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales, a Democratic senator said yesterday.

The statements to House and Senate investigators by Michael A. Battle, former director of the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys, represent another potential challenge to the credibility of Gonzales, who has said that he never saw any documents about the firings and that he had “lost confidence” in the prosecutors because of performance problems.

Battle’s statements, relayed to reporters yesterday by Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), came as Gonzales prepares for a make-or-break appearance on Tuesday before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Prepared testimony released yesterday indicates Gonzales will apologize to the fired prosecutors for the way they were treated and will acknowledge that he has been “less than precise” in describing his role in the firings.

But Gonzales will also hold firm to his contentions that any missteps were “honest mistakes,” that “nothing improper” took place, and that most of the details were handled by his then-chief of staff, D. Kyle Sampson, according to the testimony.

“I have nothing to hide and . . . I am committed to assuring the Congress and the American public that nothing improper occurred here,” Gonzales says in his remarks.

“I made mistakes in not ensuring that these U.S. attorneys received more dignified treatment,” he adds later. “Others within the Department of Justice also made mistakes. As far as I know, these were honest mistakes of perception and judgment and not intentional acts of misconduct.”

Seven U.S. attorneys were fired on Dec. 7, and another was dismissed earlier, as part of a plan that originated in the White House to replace some prosecutors based in part on their perceived disloyalty to President Bush and his policies.

The uproar over the removals has grown amid allegations that some Republican lawmakers improperly contacted prosecutors about investigations and repeated misstatements by Gonzales and other Bush administration officials about the scope and nature of the dismissals. Democrats have also seized on presidential senior adviser Karl Rove’s connection to some of the firings, and on revelations last week that the White House and the Republican National Committee have lost e-mails that are supposed to be preserved under record-keeping laws.

Gonzales and his deputy, Paul J. McNulty, initially told Congress that the firings were due to “performance-related” problems. Subsequent e-mails and other documents released by Justice showed that most had positive job reviews, that they and other U.S. attorneys were ranked on whether they were “loyal Bushies,” and that Gonzales was more deeply involved in the process than he has sometimes acknowledged.

The statements by Battle, who left his job last month, are the first details to emerge from more than 20 hours of interviews with four top Gonzales aides over the past two weeks by staff members on the House and Senate Judiciary committees. The last of those interviews was conducted yesterday with Sampson, who testified publicly last month that he was only an “aggregator” of information on the firings and that ultimate responsibility rested with Gonzales.

Battle told investigators that he was “not aware of performance problems with respect to several” of the prosecutors when he called to fire them, Schumer said in a conference call with reporters yesterday.

Schumer said Battle also contradicted Gonzales’s assertion at a March 13 news conference that he had not seen any documents or participated in any discussions about the firings. A memo related to the dismissals was passed out at a Nov. 27 meeting attended by Gonzales and others, Battle told investigators.

“Mike Battle remembers a memo was distributed,” Schumer said.

In his prepared remarks for Tuesday, Gonzales says “my statement about ‘discussions’ was imprecise and overbroad, but it certainly was not in any way an attempt to mislead the American people.”

Gonzales also addresses new documents released Friday showing that Sampson had identified five potential replacement prosecutors in early 2006, which appeared to contradict testimony from Sampson and repeated statements from Justice officials that no such list had been drawn up. Gonzales will testify that he remembers being told about two possible replacements, but that neither was approved and no one was lined up when the last seven firings were carried out.

Schumer and Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.), chairman of the Senate Judiciary panel, immediately criticized Gonzales’s planned testimony as falling short of answering key questions about the firings.

“The attorney general has offered another in a series of contradictory statements about the mass firing of U.S. attorneys,” Leahy said. “It has been impossible to discern the truth in this matter based on the shifting explanations and changing stories coming out of the Justice Department and White House.”

Sen. Arlen Specter (Pa.), the committee’s ranking Republican, also said Gonzales should consider reinstating the fired U.S. attorneys.

Specter and fellow Republican Lindsey O. Graham (S.C.) said Gonzales has an “uphill” climb to restore his credibility with Congress. Numerous Democrats and some Republicans have called on Gonzales to resign.

“He needs to explain what he did and why he did it,” Graham said yesterday on “Fox News Sunday.” “There are three or four different versions of his role in this, and he needs to bring clarity to what he did and why he did it.”

In a related matter yesterday, an attorney for Sen. Pete V. Domenici (R-N.M.), who faces an ethics inquiry into his role in the firings, declined to comment on an Albuquerque Journal report that Domenici directly contacted Rove to push for the firing of David C. Iglesias as New Mexico’s U.S. attorney.

The report said Domenici’s call to the White House came after a late October phone conversation with Iglesias about a local corruption case. Iglesias has testified he felt the call amounted to improper political pressure and believes it lies at the heart of his firing.

Domenici has acknowledged that he complained to Gonzales and McNulty about Iglesias, and has said he told the Justice Department he wanted Iglesias replaced “some months” before the call. But he has never acknowledged calling the White House about the issue.

Thousands of pages of documents released by Justice have yet to explain the rationale for Iglesias’s firing. In his testimony last month, Sampson could not recall why Iglesias was put on the list, which did not happen until Nov. 7, less than two weeks after Domenici’s call to Iglesias.

 www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/15/AR2007041500548_pf.html