'Fredo' Gonzales is no friend of justice

[maddezmom]

By JOEL CONNELLY
P-I COLUMNIST

If Attorney General Alberto Gonzales steps foot in the federal courthouse while visiting Seattle on Wednesday, it'll be akin to a teenager entering a high school that he just vandalized.

Our city's federal bench has been home to first-rate, non-ideological judges, regardless of who held power in Washington, D.C. Cool, professional U.S. attorneys, of both parties, have prosecuted difficult cases.

Six months ago, a politically driven Justice Department under Gonzales fired one of those U.S. attorneys -- John McKay -- because of his professionalism and resistance to pressure.

Gonzales violated what our courthouse represents, as well as the independent legal-judicial system, which is the key check on power in the American government.

In a 1994 alumni banquet speech at the UW Law School, the late U.S. District Judge William Dwyer quoted a famous gloomy line from Yeats -- "Things fall apart; the center cannot hold."

more:http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/connelly/321410_joel27.html?source=rss

[babylonsister]

1. He's only the AG for the US; he's a disgusting man otherwise. nt

[Frustratedlady]

2. Gonzales is in place to do the bidding of his friend, George.

I fear he is just intelligent enough and has just enough grasp of the law to be dangerous...much like his friend, George. Gonzales is an enabler. George tells him what he wants to be able to do and Gonzales interprets the law to get what George wants.

[Alacrat]

3. I have a question

I haven't kept up with this story very well. We have a small baby who has taken most of my spare time so I haven't been able to keep up with things as well as I did in the past.

As I understand it, shrub fired several Judges who were appointed by President Clinton. His motive was purely political.
When President Clinton took office, didn't he remove a lot of Judges who were appointed by RR and bush1? I've heard President Clinton removed all the Judges that were appointed by rr and b1, but I don't how reliable that info is. From the same source...removing Judges appointed by previous Presidents is a common practice. I'm not sure about that either.

If removing or firing Judges who were appointed by previous Presidents is a common practice, IMO it would almost always be for political reasons.

If we condemn this, does that mean when we retake the White House our President won't be able to remove all the rad right Judges shrub has appointed?

I'm probably over simplifying the whole thing, maybe someone can explain it better.

[salin]

5. generally, at the end/beginning of admins

a whitehouse cleans house and makes political appointments in various departments - including the DOJ, and the USAs. This happened at the beginning of the bushjr admin - at the beginning of the admin. All of the fired USAs that were fired, I believe, were Bush appointees. In the past - sitting USAs - are not fired mid-term unless there are cases of serious misconduct. It is a myth that this practice has been common in past administrations.

Also precedence (former admins - dems and repubs) have let the USAs act in relative independence - the WH might specify priorities (eg - an interest in drug crimes) - but there was no political interference - lest the highest law enforcement system in the land act as a partisan operation rather than a justice department. The DOJ scandal has demonstrated a long-process of inappropriate interference and politicization of the DOJ. We keep learning of more and more examples of illegal hiring practices, inappropriate interference in USAs professional activities for political means, and direct contact from the WH political offices with a vast number of folks in the DOJ - where in past administrations this type of contact between the WH and the DOJ was limited to about five people to prevent the actions and appearance of political interference in the actions (prosecutions) of the DOJ. Now there are already many defense attorneys gumming up what might be perfectly legit prosecutions with charges - with an appearance of legitimacy due to the actions within the DOJ - of political prosecutions.

What started out as a curious story - has turned in many, many scandalous actions (including Gonzolas and Andy Card - going to the hospital bed of then Attorney General John Ashcroft to try to intimidate him to change his mind about a decision which could have forced the WH to abandoned its secret warrantless domestic spying operation.) This has led many to begin to refer to the Department of Justice as the Department of the Corruption of Justice.

It is an incredibly complex story and a vitally important one. The idea that this is what other admins have done has long since been dismissed. Especially since top department of justice officials from past admins (Clinton, Bushsr, Reagan) have denounced the actions of the Gonzales era DOJ and voiced grave concerns about the actions within the DOJ. If you want to begin to gain a better understanding of the story - as soon as you have time start reading www.Talkingpointsmemo.com - go back to their archives in March - and follow related stories through current times.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

4. kick! nt