stupid question regarding Gonzales

[LSK]

Who actually would prosecute him and/or arrest him. Yes he lied to Congress. But he is head of the Justice Dept where crimes are prosecuted. So who and how would he be prosecuted?

[Kber]

1. Impeachment via the Congress I think?

[BuyingThyme]

2. Patrick Fitzgerald.

[LSK]

4. would need to be assigned the case....

Ashcroft recused himself in the Plamegate matter and they appointed a special prosecutor.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

3. It'd have to be congress.

:shrug:

[Hamlette]

5. congress

The US constitution says:

"The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors."

Cabinet memebers are considered civil officers of the US

It's never been done...I don't think.

[Cabcere]

6. Yeah, but that's just

the Constitution. Which, thanks to "president" Bush, we all know now is "just a goddamned piece of paper." :eyes: :puke: :grr:

[BuyingThyme]

7. Impeachment and criminal prosecution are separate issues.

Congress cannot prosecute criminally.

[RaleighNCDUer]

12. Ed Meese came close. nt

[onenote]

8. Unfortunately, proving that he lied could be difficult

Yes, what he said was untrue. But that doesn't mean that he lied, as a legal matter. If he truly was in the dark about what was going on, he lacked the necessary element of intent to be found guilty of lying to Congress. In other words, if you asked someone if it was raining outside and they told you it was even though it wasn't, and you testified under oath that it was raining, it would be an untrue statement, but not an intentional lie.

Now, I don't think for a moment that Gonzo was in the dark about what was going on. But proving it is a different thing. The email trail -- incredibly -- doesn't include him. That's why I think its important to question Sampson about how he typically performed his job as Chief of Staff -- how clued in he kept his boss as to things he (Sampson) was doing. It is simply not believable that Sampson kept Gonzo in the dark, if not while the prosecutor termination process was underway, at least at the point when Gonzo was preparing to testify about the firings. If that's what happened, why would GOnzo allow Sampson to stay on the payroll while he job hunts. If you hire someone to be your chief of staff and they knowingly and willfully let you stand up and testify under oath to something that they know is untrue (if if the person testifying doesn't), you fire that person's ass, period.

[LSK]

9. well its like Schumer said

Either Gonzo was in the loop or hes completely inept at leading the Justice Dept if he doesnt know what his Chief of Staff is doing.

[onenote]

10. exactly.

[damntexdem]

13. Either he lied or ... has a memory as bad as Scooter's.

;-)

[RaleighNCDUer]

11. An independent prosecutor, selected by congress.

And THAT is why they tried so hard to steal the 06 elections.