Gonzo Gone

[Tchocky]

Another rat off the sinking ship, it seems :p

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6965602.stm

[The Avon Lady]

COOL!

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady

COOL!

You beat me to posting this picture! Uggh!

[geetrue]

All this means is that things go on behind closed doors that we don't
understand ... without knowledge you can not understand and without
understanding you can not have wisdom.

The attorney general did not fire those eight people on his own ... he didn't
just wake up one day and decide to fire 8 democrats ...
someone else in the cabinet did.

Gonzales did a poor job of protecting that information and now he has to pay
for being part of the solution.

Someone else's solution that is.

Here's the Time's article: http://www.time.com/time/politics/ar...656544,00.html

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by geetrue

All this means is that things go on behind closed doors that we don't
understand ... without knowledge you can not understand and without
understanding you can not have wisdom.

The attorney general did not fire those eight people on his own ... he didn't
just wake up one day and decide to fire 8 democrats ...
someone else in the cabinet did.

Gonzales did a poor job of protecting that information and now he has to pay
for being part of the solution.

Someone else's solution that is.

Here's the Time's article: http://www.time.com/time/politics/ar...656544,00.html

The real problem is, these democrats are just the latest. Every administration has fired and replaced attorneys. This is not a new thing. It just is all hyped up this time around. Its annoying to watch the news lately.

-S

I thought all the prosecutors that were terminated were Bush appointees to begin with, is that not the case?

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by waste gate

I thought all the prosecutors that were terminated were Bush appointees to begin with, is that not the case?

I don't think so, but I don't know for sure.

-S

PS. Most lawyers are democrats anyway by the way.

This whole thing could and should have been handled more effectively. Gonzalez should have told congress that the US Attorneys were hired for political reasons and terminated for political reasons. Both are true statements and both can be defended constitutionally. End of story.

All Presidential appointees work at the pleasure of POTUS. Congress's only role is advice and consent during the approval process.

[geetrue]

Originally Posted by waste gate

This whole thing could and should have been handled more effectively. Gonzalez should have told congress that the US Attorneys were hired for political reasons and terminated for political reasons. Both are true statements and both can be defended constitutionally. End of story.

All Presidential appointees work at the pleasure of POTUS. Congress's only role is advice and consent during the approval process.

Yes, I agree, but someone advised Gonzalez to do what he did, before, during and after his appearance before Congress.

That advisor is probably no longer with the cabinet either ... know what I mean jelly bean?

Originally Posted by geetrue

Yes, I agree, but someone advised Gonzalez to do what he did, before, during and after his appearance before Congress.

That advisor is probably no longer with the cabinet either ... know what I mean jelly bean?

I know exactly who you mean. I just don't understand why that approach was taken.(??) A piece of the puzzle is missing.

EDIT: I wonder how John Ashcroft plays into the mix?

[Iceman]

Originally Posted by Tchocky

Another rat off the sinking ship, it seems :p

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6965602.stm

Maybe look at the whole picture a little more before passing sentence there chief...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alberto_Gonzales

don't send him to the chair yet there damn...looks like he "May" have actually have had some good intentions as I really believe anyone who would serve in public office would have had, to have some sort of conscience and care about they're country....

and it's "Tchocky" with the first stone...next.

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by waste gate

This whole thing could and should have been handled more effectively. Gonzalez should have told congress that the US Attorneys were hired for political reasons and terminated for political reasons. Both are true statements and both can be defended constitutionally. End of story....

Now there's the caveat - A lawyer must do what he believes when being prosecutor without threat of his actions being used against him politically and without the threat of his job at stake. So no, Gonzalez can't say that.

-S

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

Now there's the caveat - A lawyer must do what he believes when being prosecutor without threat of his actions being used against him politically and without the threat of his job at stake. So no, Gonzalez can't say that.

-S

That certainly is the line of the Democrats in congress and the fired US attorneys after the fact, but it is not reality.
How does a political appointee stay above the politics of the job? An example is illegal aliens. Why don't US Attorneys prosecute the mayor/city council of every 'sanctuary city'? Their policies break federal law and they know it. Politics comes into play.

My feeling is that you either uphold all federal law or you uphold the laws your boss deams appropriate. The problem is that congress in its zeal to look like it is meaningful enacts so many laws that the executive branch has no choice but to pick and choose enforcement.

Here is an idea; for every federal law passed by congress two must be removed. In the beginning this will be a simple matter but eventually real decisions will have to be made and congress will be forced to be more beholden to the people who elected them.

[Skybird]

the slow death of the muppets show.

[Tchocky]

I gotta stop sending my posts to the Guardian for proofreading

http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/...eaves_rat.html