Attorney General Gonzales defends firing of Seattle U.S. attorney

[sabra]

Source: AP

SEATTLE -- Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said today it is "irresponsible and reckless" to suggest that the Justice Department improperly fired Seattle federal prosecutor John McKay and seven other U.S. attorneys.

The president has the authority and discretion to replace the U.S. attorneys, he said.

"It is reckless and irresponsible to allege that these decisions were based in any way on improper motives," Gonzales said in an interview with KIRO Radio. "It was not improper."

The reasons for the firings will come out, he added.

"We've got nothing to hide," he said. "I have no reason to believe there's anything improper here."

Read more: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003632694_webgonzales23.html

[Kagemusha]

1. Either he doesn't know, or he knows and just won't say

so why do we have to wait for the reasons to "come out"!?!

And if he doesn't know, how can he claim that it is reckless and irresponsible to allege that there were improper motives, if he, the Attorney General for the whole darn country, doesn't know what these motives are? Did the President not inform him of the reasons??? after all the President has the power to remove him - wasn't the AG consulted???

Kagemusha, fighting the urge to tear good hair out

[aquart]

2. Heaven forfend we suspect him of being a criminal.

If you have nothing to hide, Mr. Gonzales, take an oath and tell me all about it.

[fooj]

3. Blah...blah...blah...

[rox63]

4. If they've got nothing to hide, why would they have a problem with testifying under oath? n/t

[Tempest]

5. McKay, a strong Bush loyalist, was the one attorney who deserved to be fired

He received poor performance evaluations.

What Gonzalez isn't saying is that he had to be blackmailed into firing McKay. McKay was a Bush loyalist who wasn't on the list to be fired until the last minute.

A federal judge was going to release McKay's performance evaluations if McKay wasn't fired.

[PSPS]

6. I don't think that's it

I think they got rid of him because he wouldn't fabricate a "voter fraud" case (code for "voting while democrat") for Chris Vance and Dino Rossi.

[damntexdem]

7. Then he shouldn't fear testifying under oath, ...

with a transcript, so his sorry ass can later be prosecuted for perjury.

[never cry wolf]

8. "We've got nothing to hide," so, Gonzo, you have no problem with testifying under oath?

goddamn hypocrites.,..

[tanyev]

9. Pssst, Gonzo. I think a lawyer would advise you to not give any more interviews.