Gonzales, Senators Spar on Credibility

[rodeodance]

Source: wpost



Gonzales, Senators Spar on Credibility
Account of Meeting In '04 Is Challenged

By Dan Eggen and Paul Kane

Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, July 25, 2007; A01

Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales testified yesterday that top congressional leaders from both parties agreed in March 2004 to continue a classified surveillance activity that Justice Department officials had deemed illegal, a contention immediately disputed by key Democratic lawmakers.

Rep. Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) and Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV (W.Va.), who were briefed on the program at the time, said there was no consensus that it should proceed. Three others who were at the meeting also said the legal underpinnings of the program were never discussed.

"He once again is making something up to protect himself," Rockefeller said of the embattled attorney general.

The dispute came as Gonzales weathered one of the most contentious and hostile congressional hearings seen during the Bush administration. Democrats and the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee accused him of repeatedly misleading them and warned that he could face perjury charges if he lied to the panel.

..........

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/24/AR2007072400207.html?hpid=topnews

[rodeodance]

1. and: House Panel Nears A Legal Clash With Bush Over Firings

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/23/AR2007072300579_pf.html

House Panel Nears A Legal Clash With Bush Over Firings
Gonzales to Tell Senators He Will Not Quit

By Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, July 24, 2007; A04

The House Judiciary Committee announced yesterday that it will press toward a constitutional showdown with the Bush administration over the U.S. attorney firings scandal, even as embattled Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales vowed to stay on and "fix the problems" that have damaged the reputation and morale of the Justice Department.

John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.), chairman of the committee, said it will vote on Wednesday on contempt citations for the White House chief of staff, Joshua B. Bolten, and former White House counsel Harriet E. Miers. Both refused congressional demands for information on the dismissals after President Bush invoked executive privilege.

The move puts House Democrats on a legal collision course with the White House, which said last week that it will not allow the Justice Department to prosecute executive branch officials for being in contempt of Congress.

Gonzales's promise to remain in office, made in written testimony to be delivered today before the Senate Judiciary Committee, comes as many Justice Department employees say they are dispirited and have little confidence in their politically wounded leader.

[rodeodance]

2. Sens. say Gonzales lied

Source: The Hill






Sens. say Gonzales lied
By Elana Schor
July 25, 2007

The Senate veered closer to a contempt finding against the White House on Tuesday after an acrimonious appearance by Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, with the Judiciary Committee’s senior Republican offering options for taking the Bush administration to court.

Gonzales struggled under a verbal battering from senators that grew unusually personal as the hearing wore on. Several Democrats directly suggested that the besieged attorney general had lied to the committee, indicating they would scour the record for evidence of official perjury.
...............
Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) blasted Gonzales for saddling the Department of Justice (DoJ) with “a lack of credibility — candidly, your personal credibility.”

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) lamented that Gonzales’ performance has so compromised his agency that “it’s almost as it the walls were actually crumbling on this huge department.”

Read more: http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/sens.-say-gonzales-lied-2007-07-25.html

[bluestateguy]

3. I support impeaching him

For this we might actually have the votes, maybe.

[BOSSHOG]

4. Lying, like hypocrisy, is a conservative value

[Raven]

5. "...on behalf of the President." This exchange between Gonzales

and the committee was the most telling of all. He would not say who sent him to the AG's hospital bed but he did admit that he was there on behalf of the President. I think his pathetic attempt to dodge this question may mean that Cheney sent him. He was willing to implicate Bush in this because he was afraid to name Cheney. No surprise, we all know who's running the government.

[jtrockville]

6. Given Cheney's propensity to destroy lives...

I can't imagine it will be easy to find anyone who's willing to implicate him. Intimidation seems to be Dick's strong point.

[bdamomma]

21. sounds about right to me.

all the more reason cheney must be impeached, probably in my dreams or nightmares.

[gratuitous]

7. So . . . what are you punks gonna do about it, huh?

Gonzales slouches against the door jamb, collar on his jacket turned up, insolent look on his face as he shifts the toothpick from one side of his mouth to the other. "Yeah, I lied," he challenges, as he jams his hands into his jacket pockets. "What of it?"

[WCGreen]

10. Yoou're giving Gonzo too much credit...

Do you really think he has the dexterity to manipulate a toothpick around his mouth...

[brentspeak]

12. LOL!

:spray:

[0007]

8. 'Tis was a thing of beauty, watching the senators go after

Gonzales like he was a dish of ,,,,,

[CanonRay]

9. How many times are they going to parade him in there

before they DO something about it. What a charade.

[brentspeak]

13. They can't file any action against him without putting him on the hot seat first

[madrchsod]

11. so he lied,

so what are they going to do about it? words mean nothing without action

[Stuckinthebush]

14. Uh huh...

great.

Yes, we all know he lied. Yes, we all know he is incompetent. Yes, we all know that he is a criminal. Yes, we all know that he should be impeached.

And, yes, we all know that nothing will happen. That is the sad state of affairs in the Congress today. There seems to be lots of hand wringing and admonishments and looking officially for perjury.

I think many Americans are dubious when it comes to the will of Congress to do anything.

I sincerely hope they will do something this week, but I'm quite certain nothing will happen besides some strongly worded statements and perhaps a censure motion.

I'm so sorry I am so jaded. I think I'm just depressed.

[TechBear_Seattle]

15. Did they have Gonzo testify under oath?

If not, then there is nothing they can do about his lies; perjury only applies if a person has sworn to tell the truth.

[Ilsa]

16. I believe so. I think I heard that the senator swearing him in was

stressing the phrases, "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth," as if he was wanting Gonzo to realy listen.

It seems to me that between him and The asshole residing in the White House that they have made it clear that the AG doesn't work for the benefit of the people. And there are the lies. Seems like we have enough support to get it started. It is so disgusting.

[TechBear_Seattle]

17. I'd say haul his ass to jail then, but....

He and his department are the ones charged with prosecuting perjury. What happens when it is the Department of Justice itself that is breaking laws and committing crimes?

[Ilsa]

22. That's the big question. Bush has instructed the DoJ not to bother

with investigating and prosecuting his or their crimes.

[TechBear_Seattle]

23. Which brings me back to

This thread.

[damntexdem]

25. The Sergeant at Arms can take him into custody.

And, in theory, any inherent contempt proceeding is beyond the power of the Prez to influence.

[libnnc]

18. Wow. Senate says he lied.

That's an important statement for the Senate to make.




Now what?

[Doctor_J]

19. Yeah...AND?????

:eyes:

[leftyladyfrommo]

20. I listen to him and watch him and he just doesn't seem to be all

there. Its like the lights are on but no one is home.

He is the oddest guy.

[damntexdem]

24. What? They used the L word?

They didn't just note that he 'misspoke.' Well, no -- in fact they noted that he lacked credibility. It's time they DID use the L word and note that it consitutes the P word: perjury.