« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Gonzo Contacted By Prosecutor On US Attorneys Firings
This morning, as we noted, the Washington Post reported that the prosecutor Nora Dannehy has met with defense lawyers and issued subpoenas, through a grand jury, in her investigation into criminal wrongdoing in connection with the US Attorney firings.
And it looks like Alberto Gonzales, the former Attorney General on whose watch the firings occurred, is among the people she's contacted.
In an interview with TPMmuckraker, Bob Bork Jr., who serves as a spokesman for the ex-AG, initially said that although Gonzales' lawyer, George Terwilliger III, had reached out to Dannehy at the start of her investigation, he didn't believe that Dannehy had formally contacted Gonzales or Terwilliger in connection with the probe.
But Bork Jr. called back an hour later to say that he had been mistaken about that. "We won't be able to talk about any interactions with DOJ," he now said.
In other words, it would appear, Dannehy has contacted Gonzo and/or his lawyer.
Since DOJ released a report in July into politicized hiring at the department, there has been intense speculation that Gonzales could face perjury charges in connection to his 2007 testimony to Congress.
Tom Carson, a spokesman for Dannehy declined to comment on the progress of the investigation.
Josh
Zachary
I have ten bucks that says Gonzo gets a pardon before Bush leaves office, along with a bunch of others.
December 3, 2008 4:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm thinking that Gonzo is the one guy he must pardon, because if you say that he lied then next question is "so what is the truth".
And there is nothing this administration fears and loathes more than the truth.
December 4, 2008 1:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
But a pardon for what? Can Bush just say he's pardon for any conceivable crime he may have ever committed or does he have to specify the specific crime?
December 3, 2008 4:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not sure he can pardon him for any crime he's ever committed in his life (now that I think about it, I'm not sure he can't), but he certainly can issue a pretty broad-based pardon that would cover his ass quite well. Bush-I did it on Christmas Eve in 1992, pardoning Weinberger, Abrams, McFarlane, and three others for their roles in the Iran-Contra affair.
December 3, 2008 4:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Can Bush just say he's pardon for any conceivable crime he may have ever committed or does he have to specify the specific crime?"
I think "All the crimes Gonzo has no recollection of" is perfectly specific.
December 3, 2008 5:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think "All the crimes Gonzo has no recollection of" is perfectly specific."
Spot on!!!! LOL
But seriously, can The President pardon for a non-specific crime???
When Bush I pardoned McFarlane et al, he pardoned them for crimes associated with Iran Contra - but did HW Bush have to name the crimes? Or he just say's, "No one can ever prosecute Abrams on an indictment that has the words "Iran", "Contra", or "Bush"" ????
To the point - does The President have to name the crime for which someone is being pardoned? Or can The President pardon someone for anything associated with a particular story line???
December 4, 2008 1:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think Ford pardoned Nixon for any crimes he MAY have committed during his tenure (note that this is pretty much a blanket pardon for any and all crimes). The constraint is that Ford is widely seen as having lost his reelection for this act.
The Iran/Contra pardons were more specific for two reasons:
Congress actually exercised its oversight functions, and turned up actual crimes committed by Abrams et al.;
and the memories of the blanket pardon, and Ford's subsequent defeat, were still relatively fresh in people's minds, so circumscribing the limits of these pardons was a way of minimizing the electoral fallout.
It is doubtful Bush could tarnish the GOP's electoral chances with PARDONS, when the world teeters on the brink of total collapse.
December 4, 2008 7:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
So the President's power to pardon really is that absolute. Wow.
December 5, 2008 1:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
I remember in 2001 thinking that the AG story would be about the conservative nut case who lost a senate race to a dead man, who would probably spend his entire time prosecuting millions for possession of nickle bags and who worried about bare breasts on statues. I never could have predicted the single most incompetent person I have ever seen in this office. I watched hours of his testimony. After his first day of testimony it was leaked that when he got back to his office he exclaimed something like: I ACED IT. You can't make this stuff up. Hatch and one other senator did their best to buck him up. But they could not keep him from fucking up.
This was sold wrong. Gonzo could have made millions turning this into a weekly sitcom. All the bad stuff going on in this world, at least I need some entertainment like this. I am following this to the very end. KEEP ON MUCKING.
December 3, 2008 5:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
I love it when a plan comes together!
December 3, 2008 6:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gonzo: "I can't remember"
SpecPros: "Can't remember what you ate for breakfast"
Gonzo: "where am I now?"
December 3, 2008 7:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
First off, one of the first actions taken by the Obama administration - on January 20 - should be to tell this free-loading liar that he needs to find his OWN attorney. The citizens of America have paid enough, both monetarily and otherwise, due to Gonzo's inept "leadership".
Second...even IF King George waves his magic pardon wand, it may leave Gonzo at risk.
He can't refuse to testify once he has accepted the pardon. And if he lies or "forgets" his name again, he will be committing NEW crimes for which his pardon has no validity.
December 3, 2008 7:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
"He can't refuse to testify once he has accepted the pardon"
Anyone can refuse to testify... I used to not believe it either... up until the last few years when almost EVERBODY has refused to testify...
December 3, 2008 10:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Down here in Texas, we call people like Gonzales
"Tio Tacos"...the Hispanic equivalent of an Uncle Tom. If there's any justice at all this Bush lackey
will have his law license revoked (at the very least).
December 4, 2008 12:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
Refusal to cooperate by Bushies like Rove and Miers has been enabled by the Bush admin's refusal to enforce subpoenas.
Come January, others will be in charge at the Justice Dept, and (one would hope) they will be more willing to back up prosecutors in these cases.
December 4, 2008 3:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
And we can hope that once the DOJ politicization is made a front burner issue by the Gonzo case we will have more transparency about why exactly was USA Carol Lamm fired - former FBI station chief
San Deigo is on record saying it was to protect certain politicians from criminal-(paging Chairman Jerry Lewis ....)
hey lets depose Ted Olson and former USA Yang about that derailed criminal investigation and that big sign on bonus Yang recieved ...."federalist society" this Teddy boy ...
December 4, 2008 4:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hmmm, did you read where Gonzo's spokeman's name is "Bob Bork, Jr."? I wonder if he's related to the former SCOTUS nominee Robert Bork. Regardless, I say bork Gonzo!
December 4, 2008 9:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's Bork's son. Birds of a feather...
December 4, 2008 4:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gonzo and Bork Jr.: Sounds like the name of a Dickensian law firm.
December 4, 2008 7:37 PM | Reply | Permalink