Robert Kuttner: Gonzales should be impeached (Boston Globe)

[Eugene]

Source: Boston Globe

ROBERT KUTTNER
Gonzales should be impeached

By Robert Kuttner | March 24, 2007

THE HOUSE of Representatives should begin impeachment proceedings
against Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

Gonzales, the nation's highest legal officer, has been point man for
serial assaults against the rule of law, most recently in the crude
attempt to politicize criminal prosecutions. Obstruction of a prosecution
is a felony, even when committed by the attorney general.

The firings of US attorneys had multiple political motives, all contrary
to longstanding practice. In some cases, Republican politicians and the
White House were angry that prosecutors were not going after Democrats
with sufficient zeal. In other cases, they wanted the prosecutors to
lighten up on Republicans. In still others, exemplary prosecutors were
shoved aside to make room for rising Republican politicians being groomed
for higher office.

-snip-

Why impeachment? In our system of checks and balances, the Senate
confirms members of the Cabinet, but impeachment for cause is the only
way to remove them. The White House, by refusing to cooperate, has
now left Congress no other recourse.

-snip-

Read more: http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2007/03/24/gonzales_should_be_impeached

[Hepburn]

1. There it is....right out in the open....the "I" word.

IMO, we are going to see a LOT more of that! <smile>

[femmedem]

2. Gotta love the final sentence:

"It's time for an impeachment, not just to oust Gonzales, but as a salutary warning to his superiors."

K&R

[Mrs. Ted Nancy]

9. Wish we had a modern day J. Proctor Knott

When explaining why the Grant's Secretary of War should be impeached, "House Judiciary Chairman J. Proctor Knott explained to the Senate, 'was that his infamy might be rendered conspicuous, historic, eternal, in order to prevent the occurrence of like offenses in the future.'" No truer words have been spoken.

Didn't Henry Gonzales draw up articles of impeachment against Reagan for the same reason?

[femmedem]

11. Yes, he did. Reagan, then VP Bush and Meese, for Iran-Contra..

And more,from his obituary:

During his stint as banking chairman, Gonzalez opened investigations that led to the resignation of the government's chief thrift regulator and the conviction of S&L owner Charles Keating. Those hearings proved uncomfortable for Democrats, spotlighting four Democratic senators' ties to Keating.

Gonzalez also probed the Reagan and Bush administrations' friendly dealings with Iraq before the Gulf War. He unearthed evidence that U.S. agricultural credits and illegal loans were used to help Saddam Hussein build his war machine before the 1990 invasion of Kuwait.

A great man. Thank you for prompting me to google him. And welcome to DU!

[loudsue]

12. Wow! I wish we had great orators these days!

I've gotta bookmark this. Beautiful!

:kick:

[liberal renegade]

3. every last one of them

need kicked to the curb.....

[solara]

4. Finally! The Bush Barrier has been broken

and, hopefully, the rest of the U.S printed media will follow........

Thank you for posting this....K&R


INVESTIGATE IMPEACH INDICT INCARCERATE :patriot:

[Warren Stupidity]

5. He is correct - this is the best next move.

The house should skip right past the subpoena quandry, for now, and begin an impeachment investigation into Gonzales. That investigation should then issue the required subpoenas. This will put those subpoenas in a position quite similar to US v Nixon, where the SCOTUS ruled that executive privilege could not be used to shield the executive from an ongoing criminal investigation.

By moving, or threatening to move in that direction, the Bush admin will have no choice but to ditch Gonzales.

[pnwmom]

6. I kind of hope they don't make him resign.

I'd love to watch those impeachment proceedings.

[pat_k]

8. "the best next move" is still impeaching Bush and Cheney, but. . .

. . .impeaching Gonzales could take us closer to making that a reality. It could constitute a bit of "exposure therapy" for the impeachophobics on the hill (post #7 below)

[Warren Stupidity]

10. There is an open wound here and we need to explore it.

Obviously the administration is very defensive. What else is going on here that they do not want uncovered? Wherever this leads, we should follow.

[pat_k]

7. "exposure therapy" for the impeachophobics on the hill.

In his conclusion, Kuttner characterizes the impeachment of Gonzales as a warning to Bush and Cheney. I like to think of it as http://www.phobialist.com/treat.html">exposure treatment for the impeachophobics on the hill.

. . . Though the assaults on the Constitution by Bush and Cheney surely rise to impeachable offenses, the Democratic leadership has been loath to use the impeachment process. The fear is that partisan polarization, so close to the end of Bush's term, would overshadow the issues.

But now, the offenses of a Cabinet member criticized by both parties, and the stonewalling by the White House, have given ample justification. It's time for an impeachment, not just to oust Gonzales, but as a salutary warning to his superiors.