What a weasel!...at least when Reagan pulled this crap he was in his 70's !!!...umm,.. to best of my recollection !!!
********: ALBERTO GONZALES - REMEMBERS ? ? ?

What a weasel!...at least when Reagan pulled this crap he was in his 70's !!!...umm,.. to best of my recollection !!!
********: ALBERTO GONZALES - REMEMBERS ? ? ?
Let me repeat myself, and educate your LSD tainted hippy brain.
No, heres the true story.Originally Posted by anabolicrhino
Ps. Gonzales is in trouble not because he fired 6 attorneys, but because he replaced them with "pro-NEOCON" stooges, that were easily "outted" by their own records. The real issue is the documentation of the orders to fire the attorneys came from the White House as per the missing E-mails of Karl Rove!!!
"Who's Politicizing Justice
One reason I have been urging Republicans to man their battle stations against Democrats is that Democrats are in perpetual, full-blown war mode against Republicans. The Democrats' militant approach to the manufactured Justice Department scandal illustrates the point.
If Democrats, as they profess, are inclined toward bipartisanship and conciliation, why are they always alleging GOP scandal even before they have any idea what the facts are?
The answer is that it's all about discrediting the president and augmenting their own power, which is why they always try to tie Cheney or Rove personally to every event they mischaracterize as a scandal.
So it is with this latest installment concerning the firing of eight U.S. attorneys. Despite the unfortunate responses from Alberto Gonzalez, probably born of wholly justified defensiveness toward the Democrat scandalmongers, all available facts point to the conclusion that no impropriety was involved on the part of either the Justice Department or the White House.
One reason I have been urging Republicans to man their battle stations against Democrats is that Democrats are in perpetual, full-blown war mode against Republicans. The Democrats' militant approach to the manufactured Justice Department scandal illustrates the point.
If Democrats, as they profess, are inclined toward bipartisanship and conciliation, why are they always alleging GOP scandal even before they have any idea what the facts are?
The answer is that it's all about discrediting the president and augmenting their own power, which is why they always try to tie Cheney or Rove personally to every event they mischaracterize as a scandal.
So it is with this latest installment concerning the firing of eight U.S. attorneys. Despite the unfortunate responses from Alberto Gonzalez, probably born of wholly justified defensiveness toward the Democrat scandalmongers, all available facts point to the conclusion that no impropriety was involved on the part of either the Justice Department or the White House.
Democrats know that presidents have broad discretion to terminate U.S. attorneys so long as they aren't trying to interfere with investigations or the like. But where were Democrats when Janet Reno, almost immediately after becoming attorney general, took the unprecedented action of firing all 93 U.S. attorneys even before they had successors lined up to take their places? Yet Democrats insist on jumping to the worst possible conclusions concerning the Gonzalez Justice Department's much less extreme action of firing only eight.
Scandalmongerer in chief, Sen. Chuck Schumer, exploited reports of these firings with his customary even-handedness. He didn't suggest that we need to examine the facts to determine whether any wrongdoing occurred. He immediately accused Gonzalez of gross improprieties and demanded he resign because he is putting politics above the law. What? Talk about calling the kettle black!
It is Schumer and his fellow Bush-haters who are putting politics above the law, like they put partisan politics above almost everything else, including America's national security interests. How better to describe Schumer's demands that Gonzalez resign for engaging in the completely lawful and ethical act of firing attorneys serving at the president's discretion, likely because of policy differences or performance?
Even the reliably liberal Washington Post has conceded that so far, "little evidence" has emerged that the firings were calculated to interfere with the administration of justice. What, then, do Schumer and his colleagues know that we don't? Nothing, of course, except the important lesson that allegations of wrongdoing repeated over and over damage their target, even when they are baseless.
Schumer's Democrats are demanding that the evil Rove and others shackle themselves in leg braces and shuffle over to Congress to volunteer themselves as witch-trial, perjury trap martyrs in the spirit of the fallen Scooter Libby. When at first you don't succeed at taking down Cheney and Rove, try, try again.
President Bush, though admirably standing his ground so far and properly upholding the integrity of the executive branch against this Democratic legislative power grab, has been very accommodating and forthcoming with the evidence. If Democrats were interested in the facts, instead of rushing to injustice, they would be jumping at this opportunity to examine the evidence before jumping to conclusions of criminality.
Bush has offered that Rove and others meet informally with the witchhunters, and is providing mountains of e-mails and other documentary evidence for them to peruse in their quest for just a sliver of a morsel to suggest the faintest hint of a shred of barely discernible ambiguity that could be stretched, contorted and distorted enough to fool some into believing wrongdoing occurred.
We must encourage the president to hold his ground here and, the next time Sen. Schumer expectorates false charges against him, to reverse the charges. He should say to Mr. Schumer, "Senator, you are the one subordinating the law to politics. You are the one acting unethically and abusing your power, by wrongfully accusing public officials of wrongdoing and demanding their resignation without any evidence wrongdoing occurred. If you have a scintilla of evidence of wrongdoing, produce it, or hold your slanderous tongue. Before lecturing us again on politics and justice, explain to us why you routinely savage my highly qualified and ethical judicial nominees for crass political purposes."
By the way, where was Sen. Schumer when President Clinton and Attorney General Reno were giving a nearly eight-year seminar on how to politicize and corrupt the Justice Department? I devoted an entire book to that subject and would be glad to send an uninscribed copy to the senator, reminding him that he was conspicuously silent during that period."
Posted by David Limbaugh at March 22, 2007 06:50 PM
Read up Mooreon Marxists. The truth always hurts your cause.
Liberals losers and miserable human beings.
Speaking of mind controlled robots how about your boy, the Republican party's own "Manchurian Candidate" John McCain
The Daily Colonial - The Fall of John McCain
There has been no wrong doing with what Gonzales did whatsoever, this entire ordeal is a transparent attempt at a perjury trap, and anyone who can't see that hasn't taken a very good look at it.
it was almost as good as hillary's little show. "uhm i don't recall 250 times during one session"
The "issue" is why did Gonzales make the decision to "fire" the attorneys.
If the reason was "pressure" from the White house, then Gonzales looses all credibility as a man who makes his own decisions.
When The executive branch of the government is transparent in its "dictation of agenda", then the country is in danger of becoming a dictatorship!
The chance that US attorneys could so easily be coerced by the White house to make decisions based upon fear of loosing their jobs is scary at best!
The Gonzales case will help send a message to the Bush administration that the abuses of power over the last 7 years will no longer go unchecked!!!
As soon as someone can explain to me the legal and ethical differences between firing a whole bunch of US attorneys for political reasons at the beginning of your term and firing eight for similar reasons midterm, I'll take this nonsense seriously.
McCain is the consummate politician, with no real values or principles, as he will say or do whatever he think will make him more popular.
I think *everyone* would be happier if there were more politicians that actually do what they say and believe that they are working towards the betterment of their district/state and the country... Lieberman, for example, I disagree with on 95%+ of the issues, but it's clear that he does what he thinks is for the best, opinions be damned, so at least I can respect the man![]()
You are really grasping at straws here... Kyle Sampson resigned, is no longer a part of the system, and had this to say at the Leahy Judiciary Committee:
Cornyn: "Is there any reason to your knowledge to believe that the replacement of a US attorney with another individual appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate would in and of itself tend to interfere or impede with any investigation into any criminal, serious criminal matter that a US attorney's office was investigating or prosecuting?"
SAMPSON: "Not to my knowledge. My observation was that US attorneys, political appointees came and went. We had participated in the selection of all of the US attorneys from the beginning of the administration, and about half of them had already left office. There was much turnover in the US attorney ranks, and it never was my belief that a US attorney changeover would have much influence at all on a particular case."
Gonzales and the whole lot have volunteered to show up and go over the entire process in private, but of course that wasn't good enough for certain politicians, as they want people under oath, rapid firing questions with the express intent of perjury entrapment, and a three ring media circus mocking them throughout.
If you want to look for government corruption and conspiracy, that's fine and dandy, but this case is much ado about nothing, period.
there is no crime here whatsoever only stupidity. they should have fired all of the clinton left overs
Right so, if Gonzales is so clean why does he want to meet in private. Could it be he prefers not to testify under oath, so he would not have to worry about the truth and any subsequent perjury?
Nice try and thanks for the "evidence" that proves the point!!!
It is called "guilty demeanor"!!!
The Democrats have nothing constructive to do but to fabricate pergury scandles, as is proven with the Libby case. While Sandy Burgular roams free with a slap on the wrist, Gonzales cant do something legal without the democrats attempting to set him up for the raving rabid liberal media to crucify him and send him to jail. He has the right not to speak, shouldn't speak, and democrats should pass some ****ING laws that do some good for this country. Democrats are just plain pathetic. They dont care about this country, only to further their power to set them up to win in 2008. Whats bad for this country is good for Democrats.
I'm not what most would even close to consider a Democrat but seriously Bush adminstration and the people he has appointed have been a big dissapointment by far.
They can't seem to work within checks and balances of our goverment and can't seem to get there stories straight. I certianly hope we can get a Libertarian in office some day, instead of our two current party lines.
Dr L
I'm pretty sure it was the Bush administration that appointed the Special Prosecutor for the Libby/CIA leak issue, not the Dems. And who nominated that Prosecutor? <I dont like it so it must have been Clinton..lets blame Clinton for everything...aaarrgh!>
And what about the handful of Republicans that are asking for Gonzo's resignation? Oh yeah, those must be the "liberal" conservatives in the party. <Its Clinton's fault again...aargh!>
Right, let's drag EVERYONE out and put them all under oath and start trying to trap them in their own words, brilliant. And you know what, I'd even agree to it, so long as the Libs produce Sandy Burgler, and have him say what documents he destroyed, which ones he stole, which ones he copied, and why.
Let's also produce Harry Reid, and have a look into how he abused his power to strong arm legislation so that he could make a couple million on real estate a real estate deal, then later didn't even claim it as an asset.
Let us also bring Nancy Pelosi up on criminal charges for engaging in foreign diplomacy when she has no constitutional basis for doing so, as well as misrepresenting the sovereign nation of Israel and telling our enemies that Israel is willing to come back to negotiations.
If any of those *legitimate* abuses of power were investigated, the guilty parties would be crucified. The difference between the conservative and liberal ideology could not be made more visible than when looking at criminal activity and scandals; conservatives expect their people to stay clean, libs do not. I challenge anyone to compile a list of scandals, and put them into "R" and "D" columns. You will find one simple difference; the R's are taken to task, the D's many times are let off the hook.
Gonzales is not a favorite of conservatives. He's fairly moderate in most of his views and hasn't pursued some issues as aggressively as they'd like. So they're happy to throw him to the wolves and use the issue to try and put some credible difference between themselves and an unpopular administration.
I would also like to add that if these eight firings are of such paramount importance that firing them threatens the very fabric of America and sends us spiraling into a dictatorship, precisely which cases were these attorneys working on that the administration wanted to affect?
It was the rapid left wing media and the Democrats that ran wild with the Libby case. Newsweek, MSNBC, NYT and about every other newspaper. And lots of Republicans dont like and have never liked Gonzales for political reasons. And this is their chance to get in a guy they like better. Also, Gonzales hasnt handled the issue well, but can you blame him for not being forthcoming when he hasnt committed a crime, and when talking (not commiting a crime in the first place) landed Libby in jail. Libby did not even leak the name of Plame, and neither did Cheney. If an angry mob of pitchfork weilding liberals were after me I would learn from Libby and shut my mouth too. All this happened while Sandy Burgurlar who actually comitted a crime that should be a multiple felony got a slap on the wrist and a little fine. But once again, defending a personal attack from politically motivated liberals isn't, but stealing and destroying national records about national security from the federal archives
is just fine right? Thats the way the "justice system" and liberal media see it. Democrats speaking about a culture of corruption is like Rosie Odonnel calling someone else fat, ugly and annoying.
HAHA....The Rapid Left Wing Media!!![]()