Comments (31)

jimmy wrote on August 27, 2007 4:55 PM:

for an interesting take on what latinos are saying about this ignoble end to one of their own -- a perspective absent even in non-MSM outlets -- check this out...

http://brownstate.typepad.com/ken_burns_hates_mexicans/2007/04/you_can_call_me.html

Jake D. wrote on August 27, 2007 4:56 PM:

So, it's not even possible that Bush truly respects the Attorney General's judgments and he knew that the Attorney General had given this thoughtful consideration and had come to the conclusion that it was in the best interest of the Department of Justice for him to step down, even though there was no wrongdoing?

drational wrote on August 27, 2007 4:58 PM:

Here is a question for Scott:

Are You High?

Anonymous wrote on August 27, 2007 5:01 PM:

The AG serves at the pleasure of the President. They tell us this over and over and over and over.

So how is it that the President has no opinion on whether he wants the AG to stay or go?

Talk about changing the story line 180 degrees.

Jake D. wrote on August 27, 2007 5:13 PM:

LOL -- I believe that "no opinion" is quite different from "He respects the Attorney General's judgments and he knew that the Attorney General had given this thoughtful consideration and had come to the conclusion that it was in the best interest of the Department of Justice for him to step down." Next canard?

donna wrote on August 27, 2007 5:19 PM:

Is Gonzales' resignation tied to Friday's indictment against Feiger and Johnson, the Edwards campaign contributors?They were going to speak out tomorrow....

http://portal.grandecom.net/news/read.php?id=15434897&ps=1011&lang=en&_LT=HOME_USNWC01L2_UNEWS

Something tells me there's a connection here.

It would be fascinating to find out if Edward's campaign entrapped Gonzales....

And my codeword is "blood". Blood in the water, indeed!

fuzz wrote on August 27, 2007 5:28 PM:

That's some funny, funny stuff, Jake. I was feeling kind of down this afternoon, but now I'm all giggly thanks to your note. A tip of the hat.

I think the president does indeed respect Alberto's judgment. And I'm sure, in their minds, there wasn't even a hint of wrongdoing. Never has been. Never will be.

V. Populi wrote on August 27, 2007 5:39 PM:

Question: The resignation, is this an admission that his critics were right, that after all this time that he would no longer be effective as Attorney General?
Stanzel: No, I think this is a recognition by the Attorney General that it was in the department's best interest for him to move on.

I think, by "No...," Stanzel meant "Absolutely, yes..." Otherwise, Stanzel's response makes absolutely no sense.

Why would it be in the department's best interest for him to move on unless he's a pi**-poor, ineffective AG?

anon wrote on August 27, 2007 5:54 PM:

Is Gonzales' resignation tied to Friday's indictment against Feiger and Johnson...

Huh? What connection?

Mike Conwell wrote on August 27, 2007 6:04 PM:

1) Jake D is a troll
2) Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfield tried to resign TWICE during the emergence of the Abu Graib (sp?) revelations. Georgie-Boy TWICE did not accept Rumsfield's resignation. Did he not respect Rumsfield as a grown adult and know that he knew what was best for him , the DOD and the Country?

Anonymous wrote on August 27, 2007 6:10 PM:

The reasons why Gonzales resigned are thoroughly discussed in this compilation of legal opinions, some of which have appeared here on TPM.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1669387

Gonzogate keeper wrote on August 27, 2007 7:07 PM:

One question:

In the interest of truth-in-advertising why don't they change the name of the White House morning press gaggle to the press GIGGLE?

Evergreen wrote on August 27, 2007 7:44 PM:

Gonzo doesn't remember why he resigned, and Bonzo can't put it into words.

jak1 wrote on August 27, 2007 9:24 PM:

Only a continued inquiry into the lawlessness of the soon-to-be-former Attorney General will achieve what is the essential purpose of this Congress: the restoring of the rule of law to a country deeply damaged by petty little men who chose personal loyalties and political expediency over their duty to the Republic.

Mike In Denmark wrote on August 27, 2007 9:47 PM:

http://www.deletedyoutube.ftvteen.com/?v=ulp21rOFxKA is the Romney campaign video with Craig. Banner ads are NSFW.

Reff wrote on August 27, 2007 9:49 PM:

V.Populi - "I think, by "No...," Stanzel meant "Absolutely, yes..." Otherwise, Stanzel's response makes absolutely no sense.

Why would it be in the department's best interest for him to move on unless he's a pi**-poor, ineffective AG?"
************
Please do not pretend that you know more than this administration about what is in the department's best interest - they are very plainly telling you that they believe it is in the department's best interest to have a poorer and more ineffective AG.
Now unless you can conclusively prove that Gonzo is the poorest and worst of the lot, do not prejudge the intentions of this WH - they intend to scour the ends of the earth to find a more ineffective one!

George wrote on August 27, 2007 10:27 PM:

Don't feed the sniveling, ignorant little troll. He's getting bothersome again with his blind support of the Chimperor.

As to Fredo: history will show him to be the worst AG in history and a disgrace to our nation.

Code--shirt, preferably brown for the little troll.

Law wrote on August 27, 2007 11:00 PM:

While, the Attorney General's motives for his past actions are questionable, all I know is that this thing is so overblown. Okay, maybe he made a mistake, maybe he didn't. There are other things in the world to worry about.

Spotty Dog wrote on August 27, 2007 11:23 PM:

I love the apologists for Gonzales, Rummy, Heck Of A Guy Brownie, Larry Craig, Jack Abramoff, Doolittle, Scooter Libby, the Alaska Delegation, Denny "I never met a Republican pedophile from Florida that I couldn't overlook", George "Macaca" Allen, and the whole sordid and ever growing cast of Republican thugs, criminals, incompetents, and the like.

"...all I know is that this thing is so overblown. Okay, maybe he made a mistake, maybe he didn't. There are other things in the world to worry about."

mill wrote on August 27, 2007 11:39 PM:

Oh, sure. It's so "overblown"...using the Judicial Office to take instruction from the Presidential office. Using the Judicial Wing for political purposes....yes, so "overblown"

Stop reciting the Rove talking points, Law

parrot wrote on August 27, 2007 11:47 PM:

Well, at least we've now got the 'AG' out of 'AG AG'!

moondancer wrote on August 28, 2007 12:01 AM:

All the talk about pals etc. is horseshit. Everyone around the chimp are fodder for his whim. Chimp thought that fredo diving under the bus thats careening towards his house of cards might slow it down and give him an extra day or two. That's it, nothing else. Loyalty is for chumps. Its all about not being accountable for his actions. Everyone is expendable.

GeorgeBush43 wrote on August 28, 2007 12:09 AM:

I don't know why Al decided to resign now except that he wants to spend more time with his family. But he told me that it certainly was NOT tied to internal Justice Department investigations related to making false statements and removing officials for exercising professional judgment on prosecutions. I blame TPM and Josh Marshall for making this whole Attorney scandal public in the first place. Josh, you are helping the evildoers!
God bless America!

tescht wrote on August 28, 2007 2:03 AM:

George Bush announces Gonzo's resignation on Monday morning...
Monday evening...Jon Stewart/Stephan Colbert rerun cycle begins.
coincidence? timing?

just sayin'

V. Populi wrote on August 28, 2007 2:55 AM:

Nice one Reff. Kudos :)

The problem I would pose to the Gonzo apologists is one I hope gets a well-reasoned and elaborative response. [that's you too, whoever called the issue "overblown."] Federal prosecutors have been quoted in open court making statements to the effect of: "How can I credibly pursue a perjury/obstruction case in light of the AG's recent testimony?" Taking AG at his word, letting him off the hook, increases the burden on these prosecutors by leaps and bounds when they want to prosecute any criminal for lying under oath or obstruction. Clinton perjured himself too, and I think we can all agree he paid a high price for it. He also copped to it and apologized immediately. AGAG hasn't yet; he hasn't apologized for how his admittedly misleading statements have increased the burden on prosecutors - he also has a terrible memory. Can we really keep an AG under whom more criminals will get off for perjury than under another, more artful/clever/forthcoming AG who can remember important meetings? Do you realize that criminal defense lawyers watch this AG's behavior very carefully as they consider how to counsel their clients' reactions, and how to foil prosecutors? He's setting an example for the defense lawyers, not the prosecutors!

The AG should inspire confidence. Not the opposite [i direct your attention to the list of DoJ resignees]. The AG should answer a question from Congress candidly - not leave people scratching their heads, not "forget" important events, not have to correct himself and put off questions for days till he can review it with lawyers at DoJ. I'm totally flummoxed that both aisles of Congress and the public and the legal community and the media were all calling for him to step down, yet the WH and AG continued to assert his effectiveness in the job. Innocent until proven guilty is fine for ordinary citizens, but widespread perception of serious wrongdoing (with regard to the TRUTH no less) by an AG is enough to render him ineffective and complicate the work of federal prosecutors. C'mon, he's the head of the DoJ, he's gotta be held to the highest standard and conduct himself in a manner almost beyond reproach.

emptynester wrote on August 28, 2007 3:14 AM:

Excellent work, TPM and Josh Marshall. Thank you for deposing Gonzales.

blogamator wrote on August 28, 2007 4:20 AM:

Bush and Cheney are cornered now. They and the clingers-on will either humbly try to work with Congress on the gathering investigations, or, they'll go out guns-a-blazin in some sort of ego-maniacal OK corral or "TheAlamo" fantasy.

Which do you think they'll do?

Kelvin Phillips wrote on August 28, 2007 4:58 AM:

Still, one has to wonder why now? It reminds me of that scene from "MIB", where Will Smith looks up at the monitor sees all the aliens leaving the earth, and asks," What do they know that we don't?", to which Tommy Lee Jones replies, "Why do rats leave a sinking ship?"

Martell wrote on September 23, 2007 9:30 AM:

Work from home, earn decent income and forget about your money worries forever. The Canadian marketer tells you how to build your online empire on a tight budget.

Gehl wrote on September 29, 2007 10:45 PM:

What is email marketing? The effective method of getting new leads for your business.

Jack wrote on October 10, 2007 10:31 AM:

How do you think about passing a drug test. Is it easy or not?