Today’s Must ReadIs Alberto Gonzales a liar? a slippery parser of language? an amnesiac (as yet undiagnosed)? Or is he just an idiot?
These are the various scenarios contemplated in The Washington Post’s front page analysis this morning, which marshals experts and an examination of Gonzales’ history of public service to examine the question:
Whether Gonzales has deliberately told untruths or is merely hampered by his memory has been the subject of intense debate among members of Congress, legal scholars and others who have watched him over the years. Some regard his verbal difficulties as a strategic ploy on behalf of a president to whom he owes his career; others see a public official overwhelmed by the magnitude of his responsibilities.
Defenders of Gonzales certainly have ground to stand on. Gonzales does (claim to) forget a lot (points for the “amnesiac” theory). And every answer he gives is tangled in lawyerly knots (points for the “slippery parser”). And sometimes in the midst of a hearing, he just seems befuddled (points for the “idiot” theory).
But there’s a troubling consistency to Gonzales’ ten-year history of less-than-honesty, the Post points out:
Democrats and some experts on the use of language say that Gonzales’s gaffes are too numerous and consistent to be chalked up to misunderstandings. In most instances, his answers, or his refusals to answer, have served to obscure events that would be damaging to the administration, Gonzales or Bush.
Now, I don’t want to rush to judgment. But given the weight of expert opinion here, it would seem that Gonzales has something of a credibility problem.
Note: Here’s another examination of Gonzales’ pattern of testimony.