Katie Couric's Notebook: Gonzales
The resignation of Alberto Gonzales marks another chapter in what seemed to be a great American success story -- a story that ends with a very public fall from grace.
Video: Click the image for more.
All Blog Posts from Couric & Co.
Read all 'alberto gonzales' posts in Couric & Co.
August 27, 2007 4:58 PM
Click the image for more.
Click the image for more.
August 27, 2007 10:17 AM
Gonzales's Undoing: How It Happened
Robert Hendin is a CBS News producer in Washington who covers the Department of Justice.
Alberto Gonzales had always said that only two people would decide his fate as attorney general. Since President Bush consistently stood by him, in the end, it was left to Gonzales himself to resign. He had no support from anyone except the President and, as Attorney General, running a department of some 100,000 people, he needed more support than just from his longtime friend.
Gonzales's undoing really began as the Bush Administration began the war on terror. As White House Counsel to President Bush, Gonzales was responsible for the so-called torture memo and many of the policies that led to enemy combatants, Guantanamo bay, and calling the Geneva convention protections quaint. Democrats and Civil Libertarians were outraged when he became attorney general, but it wasn't until the Democrats took control of Congress in 2006, did the unraveling of Gonzales's tenure really begin.
Once word spread that numerous US Attorneys were asked to resign, for what looked like political advantage in voting rights cases, Democrats put the heat on the AG. Through numerous hearings, statements, and thousands of pages of internal Justice Department documents, Gonzales's credibility began to unravel. He did not appear to be forthcoming to the Congress and made statements that appeared to be contradictory to the official record. Many in Congress simply said they did not trust the attorney general.
And when former Deputy Attorney General James Comey testified to the Senate about a late night hospital room visit in 2004, that then-White House Counsel Gonzales made to the bed of an ailing Attorney General John Ashcroft, the wheels finally began to come off. Gonzales's testimony about the secret NSA surveillance program that the Administration had started in secret, was contradicted by not only Comey, but also by FBI Director Robert Mueller -- saying that, in effect, what Gonzales told the congress simply was not true.
(AP)
Gonzales's undoing really began as the Bush Administration began the war on terror. As White House Counsel to President Bush, Gonzales was responsible for the so-called torture memo and many of the policies that led to enemy combatants, Guantanamo bay, and calling the Geneva convention protections quaint. Democrats and Civil Libertarians were outraged when he became attorney general, but it wasn't until the Democrats took control of Congress in 2006, did the unraveling of Gonzales's tenure really begin.
Once word spread that numerous US Attorneys were asked to resign, for what looked like political advantage in voting rights cases, Democrats put the heat on the AG. Through numerous hearings, statements, and thousands of pages of internal Justice Department documents, Gonzales's credibility began to unravel. He did not appear to be forthcoming to the Congress and made statements that appeared to be contradictory to the official record. Many in Congress simply said they did not trust the attorney general.
And when former Deputy Attorney General James Comey testified to the Senate about a late night hospital room visit in 2004, that then-White House Counsel Gonzales made to the bed of an ailing Attorney General John Ashcroft, the wheels finally began to come off. Gonzales's testimony about the secret NSA surveillance program that the Administration had started in secret, was contradicted by not only Comey, but also by FBI Director Robert Mueller -- saying that, in effect, what Gonzales told the congress simply was not true.
July 27, 2007 10:25 AM 
Lawyer Andrew Cohen analyzes legal affairs for CBS News and CBSNews.com.
I was going to write this morning about Atlanta Falcons’ quarterback Michael Vick and the Kobe-like arraignment he endured Thursday—news flash: his lawyer says he’s innocent—but when I trawled through the papers online this morning it became clear that the most profound legal story around still involves the drama surrounding the increasingly embattled Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales.
It’s been a tough week for President George W. Bush’s old pal; a tough week that is part of his self-made annus horribilus. First, he dubiously declared that he was part of the solution, not the problem, at Justice, where morale has plummeted as a result of the U.S. Attorney scandal and its aftermath. Then, Gonzales once again appeared before Congress and once again offered a pathetic performance that actually would have been funny if it weren’t so sad.
Gonzales’ appearance “was devastating,” said Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa), the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee. “But so was the hearing before that, and so was the hearing before that”...
Gonzales' Tough Week
(CBS)
I was going to write this morning about Atlanta Falcons’ quarterback Michael Vick and the Kobe-like arraignment he endured Thursday—news flash: his lawyer says he’s innocent—but when I trawled through the papers online this morning it became clear that the most profound legal story around still involves the drama surrounding the increasingly embattled Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales.
It’s been a tough week for President George W. Bush’s old pal; a tough week that is part of his self-made annus horribilus. First, he dubiously declared that he was part of the solution, not the problem, at Justice, where morale has plummeted as a result of the U.S. Attorney scandal and its aftermath. Then, Gonzales once again appeared before Congress and once again offered a pathetic performance that actually would have been funny if it weren’t so sad.
Gonzales’ appearance “was devastating,” said Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa), the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee. “But so was the hearing before that, and so was the hearing before that”...
July 26, 2007 3:18 PM
Just click the monitor for more.
First Look: More Trouble For The AG?
Bob Orr in Washington has today's First Look at the Evening News, with the latest on the call by Democrats to press perjury charges against Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.
Just click the monitor for more.
July 24, 2007 10:19 AM Lawyer Andrew Cohen analyzes legal affairs for CBS News and CBSNews.com.
Twenty-four-and-one-half pages into a 26-pagespeech he is prepared to give Tuesday before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales finally found the time and space to briefly share with lawmakers his latest views on the U.S. Attorney scandal—the “politicization of hiring in the Department” he labels it with a false sense of detachment.
“I believe very strongly that there is no place for political considerations in the hiring of our career employees or in the administration of justice,” the Attorney General writes. “As such, the allegations of such activity have been troubling to hear. From my perspective, there are two options available in light of these allegations. I could walk away or I could devote my time, effort and energy to fix the problems. Since I have never been one to quit, I decided that the best course of action was to remain here and fix the problems. That is exactly what I am doing.”
No one is fooled any longer by Gonzales’ Captain Renaud imitation. Surely he is not really shocked—SHOCKED!—to find his Justice Department politicized. After all, he is one of the people who helped politicize it. It was Gonzales who failed to protect career professionals at Justice; it was Gonzales who encouraged or tolerated the hiring practices that brought partisan hacks into the Department at the expense of non-partisan veterans. And it was Gonzales who allowed his patrons at the White House to turn Justice into just another arm of Karl Rove’s political machinery...
Gonzales: "No Place For Politics At Justice"
(CBS)
Twenty-four-and-one-half pages into a 26-page
“I believe very strongly that there is no place for political considerations in the hiring of our career employees or in the administration of justice,” the Attorney General writes. “As such, the allegations of such activity have been troubling to hear. From my perspective, there are two options available in light of these allegations. I could walk away or I could devote my time, effort and energy to fix the problems. Since I have never been one to quit, I decided that the best course of action was to remain here and fix the problems. That is exactly what I am doing.”
No one is fooled any longer by Gonzales’ Captain Renaud imitation. Surely he is not really shocked—SHOCKED!—to find his Justice Department politicized. After all, he is one of the people who helped politicize it. It was Gonzales who failed to protect career professionals at Justice; it was Gonzales who encouraged or tolerated the hiring practices that brought partisan hacks into the Department at the expense of non-partisan veterans. And it was Gonzales who allowed his patrons at the White House to turn Justice into just another arm of Karl Rove’s political machinery...
April 23, 2007 4:16 PM
From Washington, Chief White House Correspondent Jim Axelrod has today's First Look, which includes a report on President Bush voicing support for his embattled Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales. Just click the monitor to see more.
First Look: President Bush On Gonzales
From Washington, Chief White House Correspondent Jim Axelrod has today's First Look, which includes a report on President Bush voicing support for his embattled Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales. Just click the monitor to see more.
March 29, 2007 4:27 PM
Just click the monitor to watch.
First Look: Heat On The Hill
Chief White House Correspondent Jim Axelrod offers the First Look today, with the latest from Washington on the Gonzales controversy and the battle over funding the war in Iraq.
Just click the monitor to watch.
March 29, 2007 10:40 AM Lawyer Andrew Cohen analyzes legal affairs for CBS News and CBSNews.com.
Even before he testified this morning on Capitol Hill, D. Kyle Sampson, the now-deposed chief of staff to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, was explaining to us in his own words precisely why we all are making too big a deal out of the decision last year by the White House and Justice Department to fire eight U.S. Attorneys. “Politics,” “job performance,” it all amounts to the same thing, Sampson told us, and anyway, he added, since all federal prosecutors serve “at the pleasure of the President” the executive branch never really needs a reason in the first place to fire them at will.
More specifically, Sampson argues that a federal prosecutor's job performance is necessarily determined in part by her political fealty to the administration that appointed her. So, the argument goes, a U.S. Attorney can be deemed to be below certain professional performance standards if that prosecutor is not going along with the administration's political priorities even if she is otherwise doing a great job of helping enforce existing federal laws. This is a devastatingly short-sighted position for any executive branch official to take and the Congress (and the nation's community of lawyers and judges, for that matter) should reject it immediately...
"Performance" Or "Politics"?
(CBS)
Even before he testified this morning on Capitol Hill, D. Kyle Sampson, the now-deposed chief of staff to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, was explaining to us in his own words precisely why we all are making too big a deal out of the decision last year by the White House and Justice Department to fire eight U.S. Attorneys. “Politics,” “job performance,” it all amounts to the same thing, Sampson told us, and anyway, he added, since all federal prosecutors serve “at the pleasure of the President” the executive branch never really needs a reason in the first place to fire them at will.
More specifically, Sampson argues that a federal prosecutor's job performance is necessarily determined in part by her political fealty to the administration that appointed her. So, the argument goes, a U.S. Attorney can be deemed to be below certain professional performance standards if that prosecutor is not going along with the administration's political priorities even if she is otherwise doing a great job of helping enforce existing federal laws. This is a devastatingly short-sighted position for any executive branch official to take and the Congress (and the nation's community of lawyers and judges, for that matter) should reject it immediately...
Mike Huckabee on GOP "rock stars," 2012, health care reform and more.
