News broke this morning that Alberto Gonzales submitted his resignation and the President accepted.

Gonzales Resigns - NYT

1. Is this a surprise to you?

2. Is it appropriate at this point for Gonzales to resign?

3. Who do you think would make a good replacement?

Absolutely.

Gone_zalez, should have been fired a long time ago.

It was only a few months ago that Gonzales notified a shocked Senate Judiciary Committee that the Constitution did not guarantee habeas corpus, despite explicit language to the contrary.

In early 2002, Gonzo wrote a memo to Bush effectively urging him to scorn prohibitions in federal law and in the Geneva Convention banning torture. Gonzales, then serving as White House counsel, revealed: "The nature of the new war places a high premium on other factors, such as the ability to quickly obtain information from captured terrorists and their sponsors in order to avoid further atrocities against American civilians. In my judgment, this new paradigm renders obsolete Geneva’s strict limitations on questioning of enemy prisoners and renders quaint some of its provisions."

On June 22, 2004, Gonzales publicly declared that Bush possessed "commander-in-chief override power" over the Constitution and the federal law in the conflict with Al Qaeda. This "override power" is something that exists in the minds of conservative absolutists, not the Constitution."

1. Is this a surprise to you?

A bit suprising considering the weak position that the White House is in. Who can they possibly get to take the post and be able to get through the Senate?

2. Is it appropriate at this point for Gonzales to resign?

Despite the surprise, I do think it is appropriate. Gonzales has been more divisive than John Ashcroft (never thought that would be possible).

3. Who do you think would make a good replacement?

Short term it will probably be Solicitor General Paul Clement. There is a strong likelihood that Bush will be unable to find a permanent replacement for the AG post and thus Clement will finish out Bush's term.

Obviously, Gonzalez should have resigned if not only for the fact he is a lightning rod and does not apologize for representing George Bush - as opposed to the Constitution.

But what really cracks me up, is that the Bush apologists have been saying the attorny firings were not an issue because Clinton did it, but the big players in the justice department have been resigning every week until the culmination of Gonezo getting bounced. For something not to be a big problem, staggering resignations for months seems a little odd.

I really never thought that the firings were a big deal and a right held by the president until the lies started. After the blatant lies, mass resignations were staggered until Gonzeo was out, it was clear something very bad happened. I never claimed to be Columbo, but my elementary deduction skills tells me something smells like cat pee. You'd have to suspend a great deal of logic to conclude the lying and mass resignations were simply coincidental.

Ok...I'll place the first bet here. I bet Gonezo gets his Medal of Freedom before the year's out. Heckuva job, Gonezo!

2. Is it appropriate at this point for Gonzales to resign?

Absolutely. In fact he should have done this months ago. Still, along with Rove's departure, it's welcome.

It reminds me of the Queen song Another One Bites the Dust.



In a little more than 500 days the whole rotten regime bites the dust to forever be gone, gone, gone.

Actually many "apologists", such as myself and, it seems, you, are of the position that firings are well within the authority of the AG and the President. "Clinton did it", in this case, is simply an illustration of that fact.

Gonzalez's real fault was the poor public relations job he did on that as well as his position on the "spying" and Abu Ghraib incidents. The guy would never make it as a politician which, unfortunately, is what the AG post is much of the time.

BoF-- how can now be the appropriate time to resign if "he should have done this months ago"? Wouldn't that make the decision overdue?

I do find it funny that the "at least he's not John Ashcroft" crowd in the Senate is having a field day over this.

"Now" is real time.

"Should have" is not real time.

The resignation "now" is all we can deal with. I guess you could say better late than never.

1. Is this a surprise to you?
It's a surprise whenever anyone in the current administration does the right thing under any circumstances.

2. Is it appropriate at this point for Gonzales to resign?
Of course.

3. Who do you think would make a good replacement?
Anyone who isn't a torture apologist. In other words, nobody the current administration will put forward.

Yes, how "quaint" of people to have a problem with the author of torture apologia being Attorney General. I guess not everyone can be as resoundingly moral as Republicans.

1. Is this a surprise to you?


I was surprised at first, but Pete Williams of NBC News reported this morning that Josh Bolten had requested that anyone not wanting to stay for the rest of Bush's term should resign now. So, given that context, it's not as surprising anymore.


2. Is it appropriate at this point for Gonzales to resign?


If he didn't want to stay until the end(see above), then yes it is appropriate.


3. Who do you think would make a good replacement?


I've heard some names, none which really thrill me. I think I'd prefer to see someone who is intimately familiar with the current policies and operations of the DoJ, maybe a deputy AG or one of the current US Attorneys. I don't think this is a good time for an "on-the-job" training experience.


Aquilla

1. Is this a surprise to you?

This is a huge surprise, considering Bush’s (and by extension, Gonzales) stubborn disregard for the law and contempt for the Constitution. The fact that Bush only “reluctantly” or “grudgingly” accepted Gonzo’s resignation is the only predictable in this situation. The fact that Gonzo actually acted against the prez’s wishes is surprising enough.

2. Is it appropriate at this point for Gonzales to resign?

It’s overdue.

3. Who do you think would make a good replacement?

Chertoff’s name is being bandied about, but no one Bush appoints will be a “good” replacement. Hopefully, it will be someone who at least pretends to care about the law and does the least amount of damage possible during the remainder of Bush’s reign…er, presidency.

1. No.
2. Probably.
3. If I were Bush I'd put Ann Coulter up for it. When she was denied I'd put up Chuck Norris. Then ultimately I'd produce a brain in a jar and declare it was Hitler's and put the jar and it's contents up for AG. Then I'd smile, laugh, give everyone the finger and announce I was going on vacation indefinitely and remind everyone that I have more money than God.

It seems Chertoff is the guy though.

I agree that a president has the authority to fire any and all of them at will. Heck, he could do it for sport. I don't question that.

But here's what makes me think something is going on under the surface - many resignations were staggered over the last few months. In fact, every Friday for most of that time, somebody else involved in the firings resigned. Add that to the fact that Gonezo clearly lied, there can't be much doubt there is more to this story.

If Bush did what he was able to for reasons he is able to, there would be no reason for the AG to lie and stagger mass resignations until the AG himself resigns. It's simply not plausible.

Not shocking. If you look back over the last few years, the Administration has a history of doing things long after those things should have been done. Rumsfeld's resignation, admitting Iraq is no Miami Beach, removing Harriet Miers from consideration for SCOTUS, etc. I wouldn't call it a surprise, but it sure is a nice, albeit empty gesture. Kind of like giving your girlfriend chocolates after being caught cheating on her.

It's appropriate for Gonzales to be prosecuted for perjuring himself before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Resignation is Disneyworld [or is it Disneyland? One's in California, one's in Florida, right? Well whatever.] compared to the punishment this man should be receiving.


Someone other than who the President will actually appoint.

CP

I appreciate the tongue-in-cheek BA, but the only way Bush could float either of these nominees would be by recess apointment.

Coulter though, is a good idea. Her tenure would provide the wrecking ball to completely destroy the Republican Party.

I doubt there's much smiling - just gloom - in Bush world these days. Mighty Casey struck out months ago.

The Miners are dead. Beckham has played a few games. Vick is pleading guilty. And the primary focus has shifted back to Iraq. Recently, Hillary Clinton and Carl Levin called for the resignation of Iraqi PM al-Maliki. Troops are still dying. The bumbling moron we call President of the United States, with Karl Rove gone, has decided to make comparisons to Vietnam. The American people are about to get back on focus to the real issue. It's not doggies. It's not a ball. It's not six guys in a hole. The real issue is the US service members dying in scores everyday. That focus is back on, so the Administration must get the focus onto something else. So they throw the people a bone, Alberto Gonzalez. The Gonzalez story had taken a back seat in recent weeks so this resignation appears to be Gonzalez' decision. Gonzalez wasn't thrown out, he left. How are we the "Greatest Country on the Planet" when this sort of foolishness, by our highest office, goes on everyday?


This is why we should be able to cuss.

1. Is this a surprise to you?No, as noted they wanted all resignations out of the way before this fall.


2. Is it appropriate at this point for Gonzales to resign?
Oh yeah.

3. Who do you think would make a good replacement?
Andrew McCarthy. No, not the one from Weekend at Bernie's, but the one who writes for National Review and is a fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies. He knows more about FISA than any Senator who could ask questions about it anyway.


score (definition 11) a group or set of 20: about a score of years ago.

US military casualty rates by month.

Military Fatalities: By Month

• Period - US deaths
• 8-2007 - 74
• 7-2007 - 79
• 6-2007 - 101
• 5-2007 - 126
• 4-2007 - 104
• 3-2007 - 81
• 2-2007 - 81
• 1-2007 - 83

"Scores" = some multiple of 20, presumably 2 or 3 "scores", bare minimum one "scores"
"Every day" = 30 days per month
Range of possible casualty counts in barnaby's estimate = [600 - 1800]
Error factor in this calculation = {6X - 18X}
Level of hyperbole vs. reality = "high"


Obviously, it all goes back to our lack of emphasis on math basics in primary education...

1. Is this a surprise to you?

Neither the resignation nor the timing is a surprise. I wouldn't be too surprised if the date had been set for several months.

2. Is it appropriate at this point for Gonzales to resign?

Hard to say, and that could be by design. Waited long enough to look like the admin really believed he was innocent, and for the firestorm's temperature to simmer down a bit. If Shrub thought Gonzales guilty (or wanted him to look guilty) of something substantial, he should have fired or demanded resignation immediately. By waiting awhile, it's at least remotely believable that Bush or Gonzales just didn't want to deal with the circus anymore, even if Bush still believes in Gonzales. Another possibility is that Gonzales agreed not to implicate Bush if Bush would give Gonzales a fighting chance to emerge with some semblance of a law career by delaying the resignation.

Whatever the case, I'm not convinced Gonzales could have been an effective AG if he had remained. In the era of dragnet politics, when either of the two major parties is expending much of its resources to attack you, you're toast, whether you deserve it or not; in this case, Gonzales made a lot of alarming comments before burning himself by bungling Firegate at every turn. You can't expect to give your opponents that much ammunition and serve out your term, in any era.

3. Who do you think would make a good replacement?

Janet Reno? She knows how to fight armed cults and deport six-year-old illegal Elians, yes? But, my guess is they've been prepping someone to take over the role for a while, probably someone soft on illegal immigration with experience in the DoJ and who has (relatively) recently been confirmed by the Senate, so Chertoff is probably as good a guess as any. Who, then, to replace Chertoff?

You are aware of the writing tool known as the hyperbole, so why bother responding with such a petty response? I don't think the sentence "..US service members dying at a cumulative rate of 3.0375 a day" nearly gets my point across as well as the word score. It certainly doesn't read as well, which a writer considers when they review their work. So we use things like hyperboles and metaphors, or irony and sarcasm. You should know this Carlitoswhey, ha ha, not way, but whey, or Gnome Chomsky, not Noam. Hee hee.

In Johnny Knoxville's movie, The Ringer, there is a scene where Johnny asks one of the retards if they "Can pass him the ketchup." The retard laughs and says, "Yes." And then just sits there and continues laughing and saying, "I can pass you the ketchup. Ha ha ha." EDIT.

1. Nope. You expect Democrats like Chuck Schumer and Pat Leahy to have the knives out for Gonzales, but when hardcore conservatives like Tom Coburn suggest it's time to resign, that means even his own party had reached the end of their patience with Gonzales. Sooner or later he was going to go. It just took a lot later that most pundits had expected.

2. HELL yes. Gonzales put his loyalty to Bush over his commitment to justice. He fired qualified attorneys to plug in party hacks and Karl Rove loyalists. He was a terrible Attorney General and it will take months to fumigate the building and get his stink out of there. Gonzales will go work for some law firm or become a lobbyist and make five times what he got paid to run the Justice Department into the ground. Don't start worrying about taking up a collection for him.

3. Personally, I'd like to see former Senator John Danforth take the job, but with such little time left to clean up the mess Gonzales has made, Bush will have to settle for whatever doofus can get through the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings with as little trouble as possible. That might not be so easy since the relationship between the White House and Senate are so lousy.

At the very least a good replacement would be someone who realizes he is appointed by The President but serves the needs of the American people. Al Gonzales didn't.

But on the bright side, at least he never got appointed to The Supreme Court.

1. Is this a surprise to you?

Yes. Of course, Rummy's "resignation" was, too, since Bush also said he was going to stay in the administration.

2. Is it appropriate at this point for Gonzales to resign?

As BoF said, better late than never. Considering that Gonzales and the administration have been under such criticism and scrutiny for several months, the appropriate time for him to resign would have been many moons ago.

3. Who do you think would make a good replacement?

I don't know who will want to go through the confirmation process and take on the job if it means that s/he will not be eligible to run for some other office in the upcoming elections.

Does Bush have any good buddies left who have law degrees? If so, there will be a replacement, but not necessarily a good one. I'm going to go out on a limb here and figure that whoever he chooses will not have any Democratic leanings.

I don't see anything about Michael Chertoff that would recommend him to that position. His intimate knowledge of the whys and wherefores of the PATRIOT ACT would tend to be problematic for people who already have major problems with trusting this government.

1. Is this a surprise to you?

Hello - Bush's nickname for Gonzales was Fredo. "I can handle things! I'm smart! Not like everybody says... like dumb... I'm smart and I want respect!" I suppose it wasn't inevitable that Fredo would break the godfather's heart, but anyone who didn't see this coming probably hates Hollywood.

Seriously, though, I must admit that it does always come as something of a surprise when anyone connected to this White House does - at long last - the right thing. I was not, of course, expecting President Bush to ask for his resignation - most of the scandals surrounding Gonzales are directly linked to the Oval Office and Bush (or his handlers) couldn't risk appearing to acknowledge wrong-doing because it would be as good as admitting his own criminal activities. Gonzales might, of course, be hoping to spare his own tail by fleeing Washington (though if Congress now drops their investigations into Gonzales and his high crimes and misdemeanors, they'll prove to be the idiots that I've taken them for so far), but he's probably just tired of being out of his depth and weary of subjecting himself to public ridicule almost every time he opens his lying mouth. In short, I think he's had his fill of the limelight - especially as it's so reminiscent of a searchlight spotting an escaping convict against a prison wall. And, I suppose, he now avoids the possibility of impeachment - not that the Congressional jellyfish would finally have done their sworn duty to uphold the Constitution themselves. So we're still being denied a palliative for this dark interregnum.

2. Is it appropriate at this point for Gonzales to resign?

No. It would have been "appropriate" for him to have resigned as White House Counsel before he was involved in crafting the "torture memo" in January 2002 or before he signed off on reauthorizing the illegal wiretapping program in early 2004. That he continued working for the Bush administration at all in the wake of the Ashcroft episode demonstrates that he never had any regard for the Constitution or the law - not that he was simply ignorant and unqualified. It would have been "appropriate" to have resigned before overruling Gates' suggestion that the Guantanamo Bay facility be shut down. It would have been "appropriate" to have resigned before approving a detailed plan for executing the purge of US Attorneys for political purposes. At the very least, it would have been "appropriate" to have resigned before lying to Congress repeatedly. And it would certainly have been "appropriate" to have resigned before committing what John Nichols at The Nation argues was his worst crime: making John Ashcroft, at least by comparison, look like a good guy.

But is it appropriate at this point? No. "Past due" doesn't even come within spitting distance. That Alberto Gonzales is still in office as I type this is inexcusable and unconscionable. The man is as shameless as anyone else connected with this amoral administration.

3. Who do you think would make a good replacement?

Frankly, I think it is beyond the capacity of this administration to come up with someone who is even qualified, never mind "good". I just hope it's someone who will do absolutely nothing for the next sixteen months. In fact, it would be better for the world if the post remained vacant.

Chertoff's name has been bandied about by talking heads (and Seamus) this evening). I can think of few less qualified (okay, he was a judge, but I can think of no one with poorer judgment) and, more importantly, no one left in the general vicinity of the White House who answers to his nickname. I can also think of few that would produce more hand-wringing bombast among Democratic senators. He's practically a shoo-in.

As to Chertoff's replacement, Clay Johnson III's name has been similarly bandied about. He's currently the Deputy Director for Management at the Office of Management and Budget and, more importantly, was George Bush's DKE roommate at Yale. No qualifications, answers to nickname, generates bombast = another shoo-in.


But on the dark side, Alito and Roberts did.

Well, yeah, ya got me there.

But on the bright side while Alito and Roberts on the Court are very bad, Alberto "Gonzo" Gonzales and Harriet "He's So Fine" Miers with lifetime appointments under their robes would have been far worse.

Of course "scores" gets your point across better than "3." Did you consider, however, that if the number is really 3 and not 20 / 40 / 60, maybe that undermines your point?

I am much less impressed with the weeping and wailing about the so-called 'torture memo' and 'attorneygate' than I am this tidbit. The Justice Department that Gonzales headed is co-sponsoring an "Islamic Convention" here in Chicago. That convention is being held by Islamic Society of North America, an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood and an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terrorists financing trial. Is that really what we want the "justice" department doing? It would be like the DoJ sponsoring "hemp fest" while simultaneously prosecuting Tommy Chong for selling bongs. Crazy.

Don't worry, I'm sure if you continue to vote Republican enough US soldiers can be killed to please you. Your nitpicking seems to indicate you don't care about US soldiers dying, just the numbers. I guess it's no big deal, huh?

And that's the point, Wertz--why have Gonzales step down now? That is the surprise. So many people have been calling for his resignation for so long. Is there something magic about August?

Maybe the pundits are right in speculating that Bush will have quite enough on his plate with the September report on Iraq coming from Petraeus and the grim realities he will once again choose to ignore.

(As far as "hating Hollywood"--and yes, I know you were joking--I like Hollywood just fine except for the mostly blonde, bimbo factor--Paris Hilton, Lindsay Lohan, Nicole Ritchie, and Britney Spears--who are teflon-coated when it comes to paying for crimes most of us would end up serving time in jail for without negotiation or even a How-Do-You-Do for committing in our quiet little lives of desperation. )

Many are saying that its for one of the same reasons Rove resigned. I guess the tradition is that if you stay until Labor Day you stay for the rest of the term.

We need a new AG and I am glad to see him go – he was used and abused by the Dems – a strong AG would have crushed the stupid AG debate on day one. Instead we got months of nonsense.

Little wonder the approval rate for Congress is at an all time low of 18%!!

You might consider not just repeating Bush’s words on the matter. Notice how closely your words mirror his. It's called talking points.



It’s not just Democrats, Ted. The Ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, Aerlen Specter, had some rather rough words for Gonzales.



http://www.reason.com/blog/show/121588.html

According to Real Clear Politics, Congressional approval is from 18 to 25 percent. These figures also reflect the Republican minority.

You’ll also notice in the bottom poll that Democrats are favored in the three polls listed, including a 9% spread by Rasmussin, which generally gives Bush about 5% higher ratings than most other polls.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/polls/


C’mon Ted, you and the president can do better.

I suspect it's related to the presidential directive that anyone not intending to finish out his term should head off into the sunset by the end of August - the same out that Rove used. Gonzales may have feared that he wouldn't make it through the next sixteen months, voluntarily or otherwise, and decided to get out while the going was good.

And so have I BoF if you look back and my statement wasn’t talking points – it’s clear he and the administration did squat that was wrong. The Clinton firing of all the attorneys, including the one investigating him and his wife, stinks far more than this firing of eight did.

My disappointment with this dope is that he didn’t just say – we had the right to replace them and we did – end of story.

Instead we have had a multi million dollar witch hunt that has yielded squat and all because this dope thought he needed to make excuses for legal actions.


Let’s hope his replacement has half a brain – at least.