Congress Must Force Gonzales Out

The Nation: If The Attorney General Won't Quit On His Own, Congress Should Impeach Him

(The Nation)  This column was written by John Nichols.

---

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales says he is not going anywhere.

Never mind that he is caught up in the biggest scandal involving a sitting Attorney General since the sordid days of the 1920s.

Never mind that the scandal that plagues Gonzales involves the same sort of concerns about the politicization of the Department of Justice and the federal bureaucracy that ultimately forced Richard Nixon from office in the 1970s.

Never mind that even Republicans are saying the firing of U.S. attorneys who would not agree to launch pre-election prosecutions of Democrats has created "a crisis with the Justice Department" — to borrow a phrase from conservative Nevada Senator John Ensign — while Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee are beginning to echo the assessment of New York Senator Charles Schumer, who says that Gonzales has engaged in an "unprecedented breach of trust and abuse of power."

Never mind that Schumer well sums up the crisis when he says that Gonzales has "either forgotten the oath he took to uphold the Constitution or doesn't understand that his duty to uphold the law is greater than his duty to protect the president."

Never mind that Schumer and a growing number of senators and presidential candidates have called on Gonzales to step down.

Gonzales knows that calls for his resignation are no more consequential than complaints about his disregard for the rule of law when it comes to torture and civil liberties.

While he may in fact have violated his oath of office and placed himself in direct conflict with the Constitution, the Attorney General claims that he is accountable only to his president.

"I work for the American people and serve at the pleasure of the president," says Gonzales.

President Bush, the Attorney General argues, will decide whether he will continue to run the Justice Department.

Gonzales ought to peruse his Constitution a little more closely.

The Attorney General does serve at the pleasure of the president, who nominated him to serve in the position two years ago and who, according to initial White House statements, "has all the confidence in the world" in Gonzales.

But Gonzales occupies the venerable position of Attorney General because the Senate, which is empowered by the Constitution to provide the president with advice and consent regarding Cabinet picks, consented to his becoming the nation's chief law enforcement officer.

The Congress has the power to withdraw that consent via the process of impeachment.

If Gonzales refuses to do the honorable thing and resign of his own accord, and if Bush refuses to cause his appointee to surrender control of the Department of Justice, Congress is fully empowered to force the hand of the Attorney General.

The Constitution is clear on this point. "The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors," reads Section 4 of Article 2.

Congress has a rich and healthy history of withdrawing its consent and aggressively challenging lawbreaking attorneys general. In 1923, after Republican political fixer Harry Micajah Daugherty turned the Department of Justice into a den of iniquity, the great Montana populist Senator Burton K. Wheeler led progressives in a fight to bring Daugherty down for protecting the oil profiteers involved in the Teapot Dome scandal and a host of other wrongs. The Attorney General and his allies in the Department of Justice fought back by securing an indictment against Wheeler on trumped up charges, but the progressive reformers stood their ground.

Allies in the House launched impeachment initiatives, and Wheeler and his compatriots in both the Democratic and Republican parties made it clear that the Senate was ready to try the Attorney General. In short order, Daugherty was forced to resign.

Two years later, after Harlan Fiske Stone had cleaned up the mess Daugherty created, Republican President Calvin Coolidge nominated corporate lawyer Charles Warren, another conservative political operative, to serve as attorney general. Prodded by Wheeler and his fellow progressives, a Republican-controlled Senate rejected the Warren nomination twice in a week.

Wheeler said his purpose in refusing to allow attorneys general to serve merely at the president's pleasure was to restore the rule of law and respect for a Constitution "from which we have wandered in recent times."

In this time when another attorney general has wandered from Constitutional fundamentals, the question is not: "Will Alberto Gonzales, of his own accord, do the right thing?" It has been confirmed, time and again, that he won't.

Nor is the question: "Will George Bush, of his own accord, do the right thing?" It has been confirmed, time and again, that he won't.

The question is whether there is a Burton K. Wheeler in this Congress, a member of the House or Senate who is willing to utter the "i" word with regard to Alberto Gonzales and to fight to restore the rule of law and respect for a Constitution "from which we have wandered in recent times."

[adian1-2009]

Bravo, Mr. Nichols! Bravo!! Bravo!!! No doubt that Gonzales deserves to be impeached. The problem is that there are too many rubbish senators from the Republican Party that won't think about what is good for our country, but merely what they think is good for their electoral gains. Of course what is and has been at stake is the prevalence of our Constitution and of the rule of law! Of course turning the Department of Justice into an arm of a political party, no matter which, is to inflict grave harm to our country. Of course it amounts to betray our trust! But to expect that there are going to be enough persons in Congress and Senate to undertake the duties we entrusted them with, Mr. Nichols, is to daydream! I'm sorry for saying that, but lamentably, that is the real truth!!!

[cdnunn]

Time to remind conservatives that presidents routinely replace all US attorneys at the beginning of their presidency, especially when the white house changes parties. What's unprecedented w/Bush is NO president has ever fired his attorneys in the middle of his term of office. I realize this distinction might be too difficult for conservatives/repulsicans to understand, but the rest of us can appreciate it. This will be Bush's watergate.

[thgdriver]

fredgrad2000
You are wasting your time with the libs here. They don't want the truth. Janet Reno with the blessing of their godly leader Bill Clinton, killed 17 Children in Waco Texas. Thats fine with them. She killed a mans family in Ruby Ridge, Idaho. (his 14 year old son was shot in the back as he ran away), the four dogs were shot dead, the mans wife was shot dead the next day. By the way, at trial, the man was acquitted. That's fine with them. Then she raided a private home and ripped a small child out of the arms of his Aunt and shipped him back to Fidel's Commie Cuba. That's fine with them too.

All of the above is true and correct but the liberals here all say, "well that was in the past lets move on". They hate it when you rub their nose in the facts of Janet and Bills heinous crimes against children.

Al Gonzales is an Angel when compared to that murdering child killer bitcC.

[dallison7]

Janet Reno fired 92 of 93 US Attorneys in 1993, for political reasons...let's not forget that in all this discussion of 8 attorneys fired here.
Posted by fredgrad2000


Trying to do an end run there freddie-boy? Instead of using Clinton's name you use Janet Reno? Sorry, son, you're not fooling anyone... you are still using the only argument you know how to use. (Clinton did something worse) Bill Clinton really stuck in the craw of you Nazis, didn't he? It just kills you to know that William Jefferson Clinton will be remembered as one of the greatest presidents in history, while your 'Monkey Boy' will go down in history as the WORST!!

[marcodele]

Is there like a neocon training camp where the first thing they learn to say is "Clinton did it!"

Do these idjuts know the difference between the changes in a new administration and firing your own appointees because they didn't dispense justice along party lines?

Six years of cut-throat divisive partisan bullies.

[bm6005]

I mean we all knew neocons hated the government, but who imagined that they would go so far as to willfully try to destroy it with incompetence and corruption!
diamtool

That's the beauty of their plan. Sour the American people on anything done by the gov't by simply being totally, willfully incompetent! This is the same method used in American business today, appoint highly educated idiots who don't know the business except for how to outsource it all.

[diamtool]

WARNING:
out of work and/or imprisoned neocon rightie loons are flocking to this site after the "whuppin' of '06".
BUT:
At least all they can do here is whine about the old Clinton days and lick their wounds rather than continuing to wreck our Government or start bogus wars.

rightwingers hate big government so much that the voters should be sure to keep them far away from it in the future. That way disaster victims and wounded war Vets will get the help they deserve as fellow Citizens.
I mean we all knew neocons hated the government, but who imagined that they would go so far as to willfully try to destroy it with incompetence and corruption! As much as they hate "big" government, they sure do love their Big Business and Big money cronies.

So Ricky S, and Macacaman- give my regards to Duke and tell him to keep his head down and stay on the keyboard, I hear pardons for righties are on the way!

[doctor--o]

Alberto Gonzales accurately displays Republican and Bush administration values. No surprise there.

[ramadeyrao]

Even a single deserving official who is got rid of for political reasons by the government is a dangerous thing to happen. There should be an inquiry into this matter and until it has been cleared up there should be some other deserving and qualified individual be the AG. If found guilty the AG should be removed immediately.

RDR

[tuckerndfw]

Presumably, the requirement that the Senate confirm nominations is to prevent the president from rewarding his personal friends and political cronies with appointments to high political offices.

The underlying problem is that the Senate does not properly use its authority to ensure nominees are qualified.

And, it is not unique to this administration. Although it does appear George Bush places personal friendship and loyalty far above qualifications. And, the Senate acts as a rubber stamp, ignoring those lack of qualifications and/or obvious biases that would prevent them from properly carrying out their responsibilities.

The GOP led Senate is ultimately responsible for the numerous unqualified people Bush nominated and they appointed to office. Neither Ashcroft nor Gonzales should have been confirmed.

If Gonzales refuses to step down, and Bush refuses to fire him, the Senate should impeach him. And require his successor to have actual qualifications. Loyalty to Bush or a political party (in this case, the GOP) is not a valid qualification.