Purging Alberto - Democratic Underground

ReadTomPaine

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Mar-10-07 11:37 PM
Original message

Purging Alberto

On December 15, 2006, former White House counsel John Dean published a prescient article regarding the pursuit of impeachment proceedings against the current administration. Instead of aiming for George W. Bush or Dick Cheney, he argued that the best approach to the process was to begin with lower level officials and dismantle the administration’s ability to commit further malfeasance from the ground up.

There was much subsequent debate over the wisdom of targeting lower-level officials. People rightfully argued that the dual source of the problem, the president and vice president themselves, would remain at large and be able to continue with only a minor pause to appoint replacements. Meanwhile, Democrats would have spent precious political capital & time on a pyrrhic victory, achieving little more than a symbolic gesture, purchased at a great political cost.

While I share much of this feeling, the spate of politically motivated purges against prosecutors across the country and recent Senate testimony regarding habeas corpus, FBI abuses and the purge itself have given sitting Democrats a golden opportunity to execute their first strike against the Bush political machine that would deeply impair the ability of the president to pursue his agenda. A strike that is much more certain to succeed in the current beltway environment than direct pursuit of the president. Democrats should begin fast track impeachment proceedings against Alberto Gonzales.

Why Alberto?

When Dean’s logic is applied to cabinet members like Condoleezza Rice or Josh Bolten, the criticisms aired regarding this strategy seem to carry weight. When we look at the office of the Attorney General however, pursing impeachment starts to make a lot more sense. As the chief law enforcement official of United States, Mr. Gonzales enjoys a unique capacity to protect the Bush administration from investigation and prosecution. He also wields considerable retaliatory power and has shown a willingness to use the tools of the office in an aggressive, partisan fashion that even his reviled predecessor, John Ashcroft, did not. As a Bush enabler, Gonzales has few equals in the current Washington landscape.

Moreover, as the ideological bodyguard of legislation such as the USA Patriot Act and mentor to the unitary executive theory, he’s regarded as a one-man think tank among his GOP peers. Hammering out legal shields and spears for the administration from raw material provided by right-wing legal scholars such as Viet Dinh & John Yoo, he coordinates a brain trust that has successfully fended off challenges ranging from Congress to the US Supreme Court.

Via his work and coordination have come the now infamous justifications for torture, a network of secret prisons spanning the globe and suppression of FOIA via executive order 13233, which he took the time to draft himself. Taking this key player away from Bush while investigations against the vice president and others gain momentum would cripple the White House’s ability to respond aggressively toward Democratic strategy. It also would remove Gonzales from future consideration as a nominee to the Supreme Court, an action very likely to take place should another of the sitting justices step down.

The First Strike

With the busy and highly successful first 100 hours of the 110th Congress behind them, Democrats have begun gearing up to fulfill the oversight and investigatory roles which the legislature had all but abandoned in recent years. With congressional Democrats finding their voice, and with a growing record of political accomplishments accruing, the timidity of previous years has slowly begun to fade and a new dynamic on the beltway is starting to coalesce.

Given this sea change and the antipathy of many GOP lawmakers toward Gonzales, the majorities required for such a procedure would not be as difficult to achieve compared to a similar proceeding against the White House itself. While ranking Republicans might feel loyalty towards Bush and Cheney, both ostensibly voted into office by their constituents, Alberto holds an appointed position that engenders no such emotion. A man of little charisma, political history or outside achievement, he’s an easy, high value target for the process. Witness the recent hearings and reaction to the attorney general’s appearance before the Senate to see this in action, firsthand, as well as recent calls from the NYT for his removal.

As point man and public face for some of the Bush administration’s more egregious acts, he is also much easier to prosecute, as ample evidence exists of his wrongdoings. From his connections to Enron to his actions regarding illegal wiretap programs and his rejection of the Geneva Conventions, his unlawful behavior is on clear display and not obscured by layers of spokesmen, or hidden deep in executive office. Any investigation is certain to uncover a wealth of misdeeds worthy of impeachment.

Considering Donald Rumsfeld’s ouster and other movements in defense and foreign affairs personnel and policy, it also seems wise to target an area of the administration that hasn’t received a recent reorganization. Painted as a stagnant holdover, the DOJ can serve as a scapegoat for those Republicans looking to separate themselves from an increasingly unpopular White House without actually taking on the occupant himself at first. This may seem especially attractive as the 2008 election season draws closer and they seek to cleanse themselves of the taint of corruption that hangs over the GOP.

Up the Long Ladder and Down the Short Rope

In such an environment, any replacement for the Attorney General would be vetted under considerably different circumstances than those which existed in 2005, when Alberto Gonzales assumed his post. Further, after he leaves the DOJ in disgrace, all eyes would be on the appointment process. Sitting Republicans, already disenchanted and feeling the heat of failures in Iraq, would be far less likely to rubberstamp a similarly inclined appointee. Bush simply would not have the political capital to spend during the selection process as he enjoyed in previous years.

With other corruption investigations and convictions already secured, as evidenced by Patrick Fitzgerald’s prosecution of Lewis Libby, successful removal of the current Attorney General would also provide real momentum for, and possibly evidence for use in, a further impeachment proceeding against the real prize, the White House itself. With the DOD, DOJ and Office of the Vice President all mired in scandal and prosecution, the step up to a Nixon style Bush resignation or a full impeachment is a much smaller one to take. The road to removing Bush runs through Alberto Gonzales, who will surely do all in his power to stop such a process if he is not removed first.

In the meantime the White House would be politically paralyzed, unable to push its agenda, busy spending considerable time and resources in defense of previous malfeasance. This would impede such questionable pursuits as the unilateral escalation of the Iraq war and further moves against Iran without full consideration of congressional alternatives and extensive congressional oversight.

For the first time in his presidency, Bush would be forced to seek wide approval of his policies from the legislature (and a Democratic one at that). Just this alone would restore much confidence in our democracy and shine a light for Americans and our allies across the globe to see past the darkness of our times.

Use it or Lose it

Dr. James McHenry, a Maryland delegate to the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia noted that when Benjamin Franklin emerged from the Pennsylvania State House after the long task of laying out the foundations of our government, he was confronted by a questioner.

"Well, Doctor,” a woman anxiously asked, “What have we got, a Republic or a Monarchy?"

To which Franklin famously responded, “You have a Republic … if you can keep it."

We have the tools, the power and a window of opportunity to do the founders of our great nation proud. Perhaps even more significantly, we should also acknowledge our responsibility to future generations by preserving our way of life so they make also partake of these fruits of liberty.

Let’s not forget our roots, so that our children may live in more free and peaceful times, and be proud of what we accomplish today.