Rove Invoved In Firing Of Attorneys General

  • News
  • Thread starter edward
  • Start date
  • Tags
    General
In summary: I am glad to see SOMEONE in the government is finally showing some backbone and holding these people accountable for their actions.In summary, a controversy has arisen over the firing of several Attorneys General by Alberto Gonzales, an adviser to President Bush. It has been revealed that White House adviser Karl Rove conveyed complaints to the Justice Department about federal prosecutors who were later dismissed. House investigators have announced their intention to question Rove about his role in the firings. It has also been discovered that a plan to remove the prosecutors had been in the works for 22 months. The documents provided by the Justice Department leave many questions unanswered, including the involvement of the president and Rove. The White House has stated that Bush and Rove
  • #106
BobG said:
Bush will get a supportive Attorney General

With a democratically controlled Congress, I think the chances of that are exactly zero. This may be the achilles heel that they're after.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #107
I think that BobG is right. Bush will "regretfully" accept Gonzales' resignation when Congress adjourns for Memorial Day, and he will appoint a loyal Republican Senator or Congressman using a recess appointment - one who is popular enough to quell complaints. Look for senior members of House and Senate who are ready to retire and who have held positions on committees overseeing law-enforcement.
 
  • #108
turbo-1 said:
I think that BobG is right. Bush will "regretfully" accept Gonzales' resignation when Congress adjourns for Memorial Day, and he will appoint a loyal Republican Senator or Congressman using a recess appointment - one who is popular enough to quell complaints. Look for senior members of House and Senate who are ready to retire and who have held positions on committees overseeing law-enforcement.

Arlen Specter?
 
  • #109
Skyhunter said:
Arlen Specter?
He'd be perfect, but no.
 
  • #110
Ivan Seeking said:
With a democratically controlled Congress, I think the chances of that are exactly zero. This may be the achilles heel that they're after.
Both John Bolton and Sam Fox were appointed via recess appointment. Bolton was at least being filibustered. Fox would have been rejected in a vote, so was withdrawn as a candidate just hours before the Senate could vote on him.

The only 'silver lining' is that a recess appointment only stands until the end of Congress's current term, which in this case expires about 3 weeks prior to the end of Bush's term. The only thing he risks is the wrath of Democrats (vs risking the wrath of Republicans, Independents, and Democrats if Gonzalez stays). Bush is despised by Democrats regardless of what he does.

Skyhunter said:
Arlen Specter?

Specter wouldn't need a recess appointment. He'd easily be approved by the Senate. He'd also have a nearly zero chance of being nominated.
 
  • #111
Do you suppose that Bush will then make Gonzo the new Justice Czar?:biggrin:
 
  • #112
edward said:
Do you suppose that Bush will then make Gonzo the new Justice Czar?:biggrin:
To make war on Justice? Seems a good fit. :cool:
 
  • #113
BobG said:
Congress may not approve an AG nominee like that, but another Congressional recess is just around the corner (regardless of when the nominee is submitted). Bush will get a supportive Attorney General regardless of whether Gonzalez resigns or not.

I didn't quite read this right the first time. Ugh! I wasn't thinking that Bush could do this as a recess appointment.
 
  • #114
I get such a kick out of listening to Bush and his supporters talk about Gonzo: They insist that he did nothing wrong, but he didn't answer something like 100 questions, they can't produce the missing emails, he has been caught lying several times, and in a couple of cases it sure looks to me that he lied to Congress while under oath.
 
  • #115
New investigation into Gonzales' Justice Dept:
WASHINGTON, April 2 (UPI) -- Federal investigators are looking into claims that a U.S. Justice Department official fired a career attorney because of sexual orientation, officials said.
...
Numerous people questioned by the inspector general's office told NPR they thought the attorney general's office dismissed Hagen due to rumors that she was a lesbian.

In a Feb. 1, 2007, evaluation Hagen received outstanding ratings for her job performance. The evaluation came several months after she was informed the department was not renewing her contract, NPR said.
...
Officials reportedly have said Hagen's contract was not renewed because her position is a privilege and more people should have an opportunity to fill it.

http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Top_News/2008/04/02/inspector_general_probes_lawyers_firing/7762/

Will I be surprised to find that Monica Goodling, a graduate of Messiah College and Pat Robertson's Regent University, is behind this?
 
Last edited:
  • #116
Another glimpse into the workings of the "Justice" Department:

Memo linked to warrantless surveillance
By PAMELA HESS and LARA JAKES JORDAN Associated Press Writers
Article Launched: 04/02/2008 04:48:21 PM PDT

WASHINGTON—For at least 16 months after the Sept. 11 terror attacks in 2001, the Bush administration believed that the Constitution's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures on U.S. soil didn't apply to its efforts to protect against terrorism.

That view was expressed in a Justice Department legal memo dated Oct. 23, 2001. The administration on Wednesday stressed that it now disavows that view.

The October 2001 memo was written at the request of the White House by John Yoo, then the deputy assistant attorney general, and addressed to Alberto Gonzales, the White House counsel at the time. The administration had asked the department for an opinion on the legality of potential responses to terrorist activity.

The 37-page memo has not been released. Its existence was disclosed Tuesday in a footnote of a separate secret memo, dated March 14, 2003, released by the Pentagon in response to a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit by the American Civil Liberties Union.

"Our office recently concluded that the Fourth Amendment had no application to domestic military operations," the footnote states, referring to a document titled "Authority for Use of Military Force to Combat Terrorist Activities Within the United States."

Exactly what domestic military action was covered by the October memo is unclear. But federal documents indicate that the memo relates to the National Security Agency's Terrorist Surveillance Program, or TSP.

http://www.mercurynews.com/politics/ci_8786382?nclick_check=1

Of course, the JD is refusing to release the October memo.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #117
Former White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove was deposed Tuesday by attorneys for the House Judiciary Committee, according to Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.), the panel’s chairman.

Rove’s deposition began at 10 a.m. and ended around 6:30 p.m, with several breaks, Conyers said.

Conyers would not comment on what Rove told congressional investigators, what the next step in the long-running Judiciary Committee investigation would be or whether Rove would face additional questioning.

“He was deposed today,” Conyers said in an interview. “That’s all I can tell you.”...
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0709/24668.html#ixzz0Kcfx7iQU&C
 

Similar threads

  • General Discussion
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • General Discussion
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
2
Replies
65
Views
8K
  • General Discussion
Replies
10
Views
3K
Back
Top