Know-Nothing Gonzales

National Review Online: Alberto Gonzales' Inability To Explain Or Remember May Seal His Fate

(National Review Online)  This column was written by Byron York.

---

Judging by his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee Thursday, there are three questions about the U.S. Attorneys mess that Attorney General Alberto Gonzales wants answered: What did I know? When did I know it? And why did I fire those U.S. Attorneys?

As the day dragged on, it became clear — painfully clear to anyone who supports Gonzales — that the attorney general didn’t know the answers. Much of the time, he explained, he didn't really know much at all — he was just doing what his senior staff recommended he do.

Gonzales began the day with an apology. "Those eight attorneys deserved better," he said in an opening statement. "They deserved better from me and from the Department of Justice, which they served selflessly for many years." Gonzales also took the blame for his own statements about the case that were, in the words of Republican Sen. Arlen Specter, "at variance with the facts."

"My misstatements were my mistakes — no one else's," Gonzales told the committee. "I accept complete and full responsibility."

It wasn't a terribly auspicious beginning, and it's fair to say that things went downhill from there, despite Gonzales' weeks of preparation. And it did not take long for it to become clear that Gonzales' big problem was not with committee chairman Sen. Patrick Leahy and his fellow Democrats, who brought righteous indignation and little else to the hearing, but with Republicans, who brought simple, straightforward questions — questions Gonzales often failed to answer.

Under examination from Republican Sens. Sam Brownback, Lindsey Graham, Jeff Sessions, Tom Coburn and others, Gonzales maintained, in essence, that he did not know why he fired at least some of the eight dismissed U.S. Attorneys. While Gonzales was able to give a reason for each firing, it appeared that in a number of cases, he had reconstructed the reason after the fact; he didn't know why he fired the U.S. Attorneys at the time, other than the dismissals were recommended by senior Justice Department staff.

Brownback began his questioning in a gentle, collegial way. "I'd like to get just a series of facts and the factual information out on the table on why this list of U.S. Attorneys out of the 93 were terminated," Brownback said. He then methodically went down the names of the eight U.S. attorneys who had been fired, starting with Daniel Bogden, the U.S. attorney in Nevada sacked in the group firing of last December 7.

"Senator, this is probably that one that to me, in hindsight, was the closest call," Gonzales began. "I do not recall what I knew about Mr. Bogden on December 7th. That's not to say that I wasn't given a reason; I just don't recall the reason. I didn't have an independent basis or recollection of knowing about Mr. Bogden's performance."

Gonzales explained that, after the Bogden firing, he went back to look at documents relating to the matter. "It appears that there were concerns about the level of energy, generally, in a fast-growing district," Gonzales explained, "concerns about his commitment to pursuing obscenity… and just generally getting a sense of new energy in that office." But after the controversy over the firing blew up, Gonzales continued, he wondered whether getting rid of Bogden had been the right thing to do. So he asked a top staffer whether he should stand behind the decision. "I went to the deputy attorney general," Gonzales said, "and I asked him, ‘OK, do we stand behind these decisions?'" The deputy attorney general said yes, so Gonzales stood by his decision. In the end, Gonzales explained, even though he did not know why he fired Bogden, "I believe it was still the right decision."

What about Margaret Chiara, the U.S. attorney fired in Michigan, Brownback asked. "Quite candidly, senator…I don't recall the reason why that I accepted the decision on December 7," Gonzales said. "But I've since learned that it was a question of similar kinds of issues: poor management issues, loss of confidence by career individuals."

How about John McKay, the fired U.S. attorney in Washington state? "When I accepted the recommendation on December 7, generally I recall there being serious concerns about his judgment," Gonzales testified. "That's what I recall when I accepted the recommendations. And what I've since learned, of course, is that it related to an information-sharing project. … He was doing a good job with respect to that. It's the way he pursued it, in exercising poor judgment."

Gonzales was even less clear a little later when he was asked about a U.S. attorney who had been on the firing list but was later spared. Why? Gonzales didn't know. "This was a process that was ongoing that I did not have transparency into," he said.

It's safe to say that no senator, Republican or Democrat, was terribly moved by Gonzales' explanations. Why was he so removed from decision making? Why didn't he know what was going on? When it came his turn, Sen. Graham cut to the essence of the story. "Is it fair to say," Graham asked, "that when you made your final decision, it was based on trust of your senior team more than it was knowledge?"

"I think that's a fair assessment," Gonzales answered.

And so it went. At times, Gonzales seemed not only removed from the decision-making process in the U.S. Attorneys matter but also removed from his daily life as attorney general. For example, Leahy brought up an October 2006 meeting at the White House in which President Bush told Gonzales about concerns that some allegations of voter fraud weren't being pursued. What did Gonzales remember about that? "There was a meeting in October, with the president, in which the president, as I understand it, relayed to me … concerns about pursuing election fraud," Gonzales answered. At that, a number of observers scratched their heads. As I understand it? Gonzales spoke as if he hadn't been there, but someone had told him about it.

The attorney general faced even more trouble when Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions questioned him about his statement at a March 13 news conference that he "never saw documents" about the firings and "never had a discussion about where things stood." Documents released later showed that Gonzales did attend at least one meeting, on November 27, 2006, at which the U.S. attorneys matter was discussed, and he likely had greater knowledge of the matter than he told the press in March.

Sessions, a former U.S. attorney himself, wanted to know more. "Senator, I have searched my memory," Gonzales said. "I have no recollection of the meeting. My schedule shows a meeting for 9:00 on November 27th, but I have no recollection of that meeting."

"This was not that long ago," Sessions said. "This was in November of last year?"

"According to my calendar, November 27."

"And [former Gonzales chief of staff Kyle Sampson] seemed to indicate that he really — he understood it was a momentous decision," Sessions continued, "that there would probably be political backlash. He even performed some outline about how that should be managed. And you don't recall any of that?"

Gonzales didn't.

"Well, I guess I’m concerned about your recollection, really, because it's not that long ago," Sessions said. "It was an important issue. And that's troubling to me, I've got to tell you."

By that time, Gonzales could see that he wasn't going to get a break, certainly not from his own party. And in the end, it was a senator no one had expected, Republican Tom Coburn, who delivered the most devastating blow. The Justice Department had described the U.S. Attorneys firings as performance-related, Coburn said to Gonzales. "Why should you not be judged by the same standards by which you judged these dismissed U.S. attorneys?"

Gonzales explained that he had admitted his mistakes and had taken responsibility for them. "Well, I believe there are consequences to a mistake," Coburn replied. "And I would just say, Mr. Attorney General, it's my considered opinion that the exact same standards should be applied to you in how this was handled. And it was handled incompetently. The communication was atrocious. It was inconsistent. It's generous to say that there were misstatements. That's a generous statement. And I believe you ought to suffer the consequences that these others have suffered. And I believe that the best way to put this behind us is your resignation."

And that was that. After the hearing ended, the White House went into damage control mode, issuing a statement that President Bush was "pleased" with Gonzales' performance and has "full confidence" in the attorney general. Perhaps that's true. But things can change. If Gonzales has lost the support of Sam Brownback and Jeff Sessions and Lindsey Graham and Tom Coburn and other Republicans on the committee, he might soon lose his support at the White House, too.

[changeit4]

If you haven't seen video of his appearance, check out the Washington Posts. While some of the public's behavior is of questionable taste, it is quite satisfying in general.

I wish you well, Alberto, in your future endeavors. You know people; maybe they can hook you up with something...

[flreason]

Antillo99-"The Prosecutors were terminated because they imprisoned Duke Cunningham. ...The President eliminated prosecutors who threaten the GOP. Any Democratic President would do the same thing. Prosecutors can become cruel. The President corrected that error."

You seem to feel that being a loyal Republican and supporting the President Bush excuses egregious violations of federal law by Cunningham/the GOP. You suggest that the GOP should be above the law. Perhaps you have forgotten that the federal prosecutors are paid with tax dollars. They may work at the pleasure of the President, but they are employed by the American people-not the GOP. While it is normal for a President to make changes when he takes office, this move by the Bush administration to remove prosecutors for perceived failure to use their positions to protect the GOP is unprecedented and is a disservice to all Americans who believe in the rule of law. The GOP members of the Judiciary Committee recognized that and did what the American people should be able to expect of those they have trusted to represent their interests.

You may consider yourself a good Republican, but you're not a good American.

[processor2]

Gonzalez, with all his "I don't recall' is sounding alot like the Clintons

...

[walt1944-2009]

I am sure that Gonzalez has to remind himself who he is and what planet he is on, on a daily basis; or perhaps George Bush or Karl Rove send him a self-destructing e-mail every morning when he gets up to remind him how to get to work, and what to do when he gets there. If, unlikely as it may be, Gonzo does resign, I think Bush should appoint "Bagdad John" McCain as Attorney General. It doesn't matter that McCain doesn't have any legal experience, what matters is that he has his Bush-influenced act together much better that Gonzo does, even down to telling bad jokes!

[jjp735i]

"Bush was "pleased" with Gonzales' performance and has "full confidence" in the attorney general".

Hum, sounds like a repeat of "Great job Brownie".

Is Bush REALLY that blind to what is going on around him? Or has Rove really got his hand so far up Bush's arse that Rove moves his lips?

[johnlt1]

I could not care less about these fired US Attorneys. Everyone of them probably tripled their salaries once they left the Justice Department. This fiasco just proves to me how out-of-touch Congress is with working America. I care about Iraq, gas prices, paying for my daughter's college, and whether she is safe once I send her to college.

[terrapin78]

How many weeks did he sequester himself to prepare for this testimony? All I can figure is he sat in front of a mirror and said "I don't recall" over and over again until he believed it. And how much money did he get paid to prepare?

This clown needs to go back to the freak show in the circus.

[jonny_chaos]

The Prosecutors were terminated because they imprisoned Duke Cunningham?

"Cunningham resigned from the House on November 28, 2005 after pleading guilty to accepting at least $2.4 million in bribes and underreporting his income for 2004."

He pleaded guilty to federal charges of conspiracy to commit bribery, mail fraud, wire fraud, and tax evasion.

sounds like a great guy, really.

to bad he was framed...

[starleo146]

Bush is pleased with Gonzales because he couldn't RECALL (64 times) and didn't give any names or any white house secrets they all planned and he could not even recall Gooding. Who is in charge of our Justice system? Give us a break Gonzales RESIGN.

Alberto Gonzales's performance before the Judiciary Committee was lame at best and it is obvious that his poor memory has become poor because he must not endanger Bush. The outrageous, purely vindictive assault on the Department of Justice by this president is without precedent. He has a basic disrespect for law except when he can use it to beat up his opponents. Gonzales should go forthwith and I hope the Judiciary Committee pursues this story to its conclusion, but I imagine we will not know the full sickening details until Bush leaves office, if ever.

[starleo146]

Well Look what we have a Bush Supreme Court, A Bush Justice dept does anyone see how this country is going here SCARY I believe its a take over to all of his Beliefs and to h*** with the laws of our founding fathers if we don't see this I just cannot believe what lengths they will go and we haven't heard about all the snooping of phone calls etc.

[starleo146]

Well Look what we have a Bush Supreme Court, A Bush Justice dept does anyone see how this country is going here SCARY I believe its a take over to all of his Beliefs and to h*** with the laws of our founding fathers if we don't see this I just cannot believe what lengths they will go and we haven't heard about all the snooping of phone calls etc.

[david1737]

Where's the lost e-mails? What is the White house covering up? What's Gonzo covering up? Stay tuned for the next episode. Impeachment!

[david1737]

Neo-Con-Artist Gonzo says:

"My misstatements were my mistakes %u2014 no one else's," Gonzales told the committee. "I accept complete and full responsibility."

He should have added:

Especially not W, and really not Rove.
No really Bush and Rove have nothing to do with this, really they don't, I'm the only one, really. lol.

[david1737]

JohnLT1...

You are right the Dem. controlled Congress is out of touch with working America. Unlike the poor workin' oilmen in the White House. I see you point. lol

[david1737]

JohnLT1...

You are right the Dem. controlled Congress is out of touch with working America. Unlike the poor workin' oilmen in the White House. I see you point. lol

[macusweil]

"Boy will be left to answer the door when the U.S. Marshalls come with arrest Warrants."

That's why the land grab in in South America. Bushie plans to be the 1st US president in exile.

`Russian Intelligence Analysts are reported that the American President%u2019s daughter, Jenna Bush, has secured on behalf of her father, the American President, and the Bush Family, the purchase of nearly 100,000 acres of land in the South American Nation of Paraguay`

[gkc99]

When you have a mental and moral midget like Curious George Bushit as president, Gonzo is clearly the kind of mediocrity that gets picked as a helper. This clown was a member of the Texas Supreme Court and now is US Attorney General? The neocons sure know how to pick'em. It will take 50 years for us to recover from these morons. And anybody who still supports George Bush is a traitor and a fool.

[jonny_chaos]

The power to remove U.S. Attorneys belongs to the President, not the Attorney General.

so, either gonzo is covering the presidents chestnuts, as his personal attorney again, or he commited a high crime.

either way, this entire administration just looks incompetent and dirty. funny how lieing and cheating looks more and more like a crucial conservative value.

personally, as in american, i may not like the results of an election, but its my duty to honor them. something missing from these guys value system, fair play and morals.

death peanalty cases just prove gonzo is lazy and jaded.

[infidel_us]

You people are such whiners. I'm sure you were just as "outraged" when Janet Reno torched Waco, right? Talk about an incompetent boob. How many times did the dems have to come to her defense?
Too many.

[processor2]

Gonzalez, with all his "I don't recall's' is starting to sound alot like the Clintons

...

[stevex47]

After the nut jobs are thrown out of office, the reich wingers are really gonna have a tough time with that.

At least you nut jobs can look at it as a second career for your 2nd king rush. Boy he's gonna eat a lot of drugs then.

[oxmyx-2009]

Iran-Contra disease strikes again!

[infidel_us]

`Russian Intelligence Analysts are reported that the American President%u2019s daughter, Jenna Bush, has secured on behalf of her father, the American President, and the Bush Family, the purchase of nearly 100,000 acres of land in the South American Nation of Paraguay`
Posted by macusweil at 02:41 PM : Apr 20, 2007

So. I'm looking in to land in Costa Rica, myself. It's an investment. Ever hear of that? It's something that working people do as apposed to libs who would like to be taken care of by the government from cradle to grave.

The other reason I'm buying it is for when the country finally disolves and turns socialist. I'll retire outside of the US....taking my tax dollars with me.

[oxmyx-2009]

Another unqualified, political hack Bush appointee stumbling ad nauseaum- stunner.

[infidel_us]

Another unqualified, political hack Bush appointee stumbling ad nauseaum- stunner.
Posted by oxmyx at 03:40 PM : Apr 20, 2007

HA! UNQUALIFIED????? I got two words for you:

Joycelyn Elders

Need I say more????

[oxmyx-2009]

Infidel- So you're a racist and a neocon moron. Keep posting, you're the best anti conservative advertising out there.

[infidel_us]

clinton and "I cant recall" dont stop now
Posted by ainttaken at 03:40 PM : Apr 20, 2007

It worked, didn't it? Why is it ok for one side to use it and not the other? You're probably one of those kids who took his ball and bat home when his side was losing.....whining all the way.

[jonny_chaos]

no, waco was a mess. i'm not whining. i'm pitching stones. your guys are criminals. so was clinton. what do we as americans expect? whatever your politics, can you really say you dont have to hold your nose when you vote? i mean clinton had a chance to really do good and he squandered it. america was for sale under his presidency as well. how can you be an elected politition and not be a crook? seriously, the only people that want the job are inherently unstable. who feels its their right to tell others how to live? this is america, i'm supposed to be free, so where does phone taps and opening my mail play into this? seriously, its a joke. are you really such a bunch of frightened sheep? whoops, we got hit. we're strong, we can take it. unless its really true that were a nation of cowards needing daddy bush to protect us. and hes not very good at it either.

[infidel_us]

Infidel- So you're a racist and a neocon moron. Keep posting, you're the best anti conservative advertising out there.
Posted by oxmyx at 03:44 PM : Apr 20, 2007

That's right, cupcake. Kind of makes you feel inadequate, doesn't it. I you supported her call for "safer guns and safer bullets". LOL If there was any justice in the world, she would be YOUR primary care physician under "Universal Healthcare."

[infidel_us]

i'm supposed to be free, so where does phone taps and opening my mail play into this? seriously, its a joke.
Posted by jonny_chaos at 03:48 PM : Apr 20, 2007

Are they tapping YOUR phone, Johnny??? Are "they" opening YOUR mail? The only "joke" is that people don't realize we are at war and that there are people living among us who are more than willing to die in order to take as many of us with them as they can.

Now don't get me wrong, if oxmyx and stevex47 were to go up in a large ball of flame, I would consider that a good start. :)

[gkc99]

Bill Clinton was the closest thing to a Republican the Democrats have had in a long time. He was globalizer #1, a union buster, the president from Microsoft and Intel. Not too surprisingly he resembled the Republicans in their dishonesty and power hunger as well.

[oxmyx-2009]

Not all conservatives are ignorant (infidel excepted), but most ignorant people are conservative. Rant on. Converts are coming to our side with each post.

[stevex47]

Ha, am I getting under your skin a little bit infidel....aww, too bad. And going down in a ball of flames? Um, no such luck for you. Oh, and get ready for many years of democrat rule. Your side screwed you for a long, long time. So don't blame us, remember bushie was the decider. HE made all the lame decisions. Not clinton.

[stevex47]

No matter how clear the evidence is, people can always find an interpretation that will allow them to cling to what they want to believe.

[talkingham]

Gee, I thought this was about Not-so-speedy-memory Gonzales. What a typical dirty Bush trick for AG. Yet another Bush right-hand man revealing what a liar he is. 74 I don't recalls in one testimony from the leading law enforncement official. It's amzaing how much I don't recall, or we can't find now or ever we've gotten from these liars all the way back to so-called Bush National Guard duty. After more than 10 years of Bushes in the White House this is what we get. As former head of the CIA The Bush baby daddy made sure his son got elected and look what they've wrought. aaaarggghhh.

[riledupinwi]

Gonzales is just a hack--a second rate lawyer who's only there because he's a loyalist of the WH. He's a good little soldier, who organizes PR events to coincide with elections to keep his boss and the other republicans in office.

Watch, he'll submit his resignation by the end of April, and he'll end up in some cushy, overpaid position somewhere like Wolfowicz did. It'll be hush money, because Gonzalas "knows" too much about the shenanigans in the WH to be left without a job.

[mcvet]

Are they tapping YOUR phone, Johnny??? Are "they" opening YOUR mail? The only "joke" is that people don't realize we are at war and that there are people living among us who are more than willing to die in order to take as many of us with them as they can.

Now don't get me wrong, if oxmyx and stevex47 were to go up in a large ball of flame, I would consider that a good start. :)
Posted by Infidel_US at 03:53 PM : Apr 20, 2007

LOL You have NO idea why the constitution contain's those protections do you? You have ABSOLUTELY NO idea what the Founding Fathers were trying to do with that language and thus you are willing to just toss away Freedoms and Rights. Sieg Heil Y'all.

[mcvet]

worked, didn't it? Why is it ok for one side to use it and not the other? You're probably one of those kids who took his ball and bat home when his side was losing.....whining all the way.
Posted by Infidel_US at 03:45 PM : Apr 20, 2007

We're not going to concern ourselves with the matter of COMPETENCE here? It's okay when a Guy is trying to evade people prying into his PERSONAL LIFE you pathetic Nazi. It's a totally different matter when it's the Attorney General and the action he knows nothing about is part of his JOB! God how dumb are you fascist anyway? Sieg Heil Y'all.

[tejasdemo]

Unbelievable that someone this *** incompetent and with such disregard for the law has this job.

Makes me ashamed. Probably doesnt matter what they do to him now, the damage has been done.

[jonny_chaos]

Infidel, how would i know. i do however know that freedom is dangerous. your parents kept you safe, were you free? its pretty simple:
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety Ben Franklin.
name a single politcion on either side of the asile that has our founding fathers courage.
were losing the way. its not about war, its about streanght. increased airport security, terror levels, all are a sign the terroists are winning. dont you get it? if a couple plane loads of suicidal idiots can throw our country into a panic, were not a very strong country.
i blame clinton as well. he sold us out. but it was our choice to allow him. just like it was our choice to allow bush and co. to trample on our rights. personally, i think we need several parties. we need choices. yes, were at war. but that was a choice made by men who found it was easy to get scared citizens to sacrifice thier freedoms. compare this war to WWII seriously, and you see this is a totally different situation. there is no hitler here. just a bunch of tin cup despots. keep in mind, iran is using american technology. they got it thru haliburton. i'm sorry, if i sell a man a gun and he points it at me, its my fault.

[jonny_chaos]

two other thoughts infidel.
1. when arent we at war, using your definition? there will always be (I hope) countrys that envy our freedoms. so, we will always be under the threat of attack until we are a police state or third world ghetto.
2. from what i've seen about this current administrations competence, i would bet their tapping ALL our phones and peeping in ALL our mail. these guys just dont seem to swift.
and a third, i was considering my feeling towards bush. i would do the same thing, i would bomb every country that i didnt like as fast and hard as possible, starting with afganistan, (taliban suck), move on too Iran, (religious presecution and lack of human rights), and on thru the middle east and africa, loop back go to asia, and wrap up in south america. maybe hit canada cause they got resources. also, i would assume i had the right to do what i wanted. so, i came to the conclusion, i'm not fit to lead this country. i may agree with overthrowind regimes in principle, but in actuality, hunting monsters may make one a monster. my country should not torture, i might think its ok, but the moral high ground is critical. we lost it. rally round were still not safe.

[jonny_chaos]

roves just angry cause guys like me used to beat his a_s_s for fun on the play ground.

[rharrin1]

I don't recalls in one testimony from the leading law enforncement official. It's amzaing how much I don't recall, or we can't find

Posted by talkingham

Ronald Reagan started that line in the contra hearings.

[aaabee-2009]

Best In Show goes to Coburn:

And in the end, it was a senator no one had expected, Republican Tom Coburn, who delivered the most devastating blow. "Why should you not be judged by the same standards by which you judged these dismissed U.S. attorneys?"

Can I hear that again please?

And in the end, it was a senator no one had expected, Republican Tom Coburn, who delivered the most devastating blow. "Why should you not be judged by the same standards by which you judged these dismissed U.S. attorneys?"

Ahhhhhhhhhh, thank you.

And not once have I thought Gonzales was stupid or incompetent. Just that his nose is so buried up Bush he didn't see the edge of the Republican cliff.

[david1737]

Gonzo will step down at some future date saying:

"I've decided to spend more time with my family"

[shanev137]

The Bush Administration is a corrupt pathetic sham and most Americans are OK with it, the same way they are OK with $3 gasoline. The people in this country are real morons.

[rafterman1]

"Are they tapping YOUR phone, Johnny??? Are "they" opening YOUR mail? The only "joke" is that people don't realize we are at war and that there are people living among us who are more than willing to die in order to take as many of us with them as they can."

This is a weak-a$$ and cowardly view. Just because they aren't reading average American's mail now doesn't mean they won't in the future. I don't trust the government with this kind of power. Period. War or no war. The Constitution doesn't have an asterisk on it describing situations when it doesn't apply. It applies always. I'm sure Germans in 1933 didn't think giving up some rights would affect them, just their "enemies". Sack up and grow a pair and stop being afraid of terrorists so much that you would hand over your rights little by little.

[knyghtwolf]

The problem shanev137, is that people are not sure what to do. The bush administration has things so fouled up, going in so many different directions, no one knows where to start and bush itself has a lot of people thinking it has a sort of pseudo black ops team waiting to strike down any and all opposition to it's whims, wants, and desires. No one wants to believe that our country is as far gone as it is, no one wants to think the unthinkable, that the United States is basically history and the bush administration handed our country's pride, honor, and way of life to a bunch of neoconistic no brainers for nothing more than 30 pieces of silver. bush is to America as Judas was to Christ, end of story. Ya'll have a good night and sleep well.

[cruzn66]

Anyone, and I mean anyone, who can actualy tell me that such memory lapses as described by the current U.S. Attorney General is acceptable is way beyond perceiving reality. Such lapses in in memory and judgement in the private sectoe would, without a doubt, get an individual fired immediately. So if you are willing to accept this overwhelming amount of BS as acceptable, check your brain at the door, and check into therapy A.S.A.P.. No self-respecting professional would continue to profess themselves capable of doing there job if they were to offer such lame excuses for failing to uphold their responsibilities. How Gonzales can expect the American public to buy into such hogwash only goes to prove how little respect he has for the American public as a whole, and his position as AG in particular. What a shame that his boss is so blind to the inherent damage being done to the Justice Dept. as a whole.