Beleaguered US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales came under heavy fire in a five-hour Senate panel hearing on Thursday, as Senators from both political parties openly questioned his honesty, judgment and fitness to continue leading the Justice Department.
Members of the Senate Judiciary Committee also grew impatient with his apparent memory lapses during questioning over the firing of eight federal prosecutors last year. Mr Gonzales responded “I don't recall” more than 50 times.
When the scandal broke, Mr Gonzales at first denied that he was involved in any discussions about the dismissals, but was forced to change his story when the Justice Department released emails and other documents which revealed that he had attended critical meetings where the purge was discussed. He also backed away from his earlier claim that the White House had not been involved in the dismissals, since the documents confirmed the participation of top Bush administration advisor Karl Rove and former White House Counsel Harriet Miers.
“The reality is that your characterization of your participation is just significantly, if not totally, at variance with the facts,” said Senator Arlen Specter (R-Penn.).
Mr Gonzales could not say who determined the fate of the prosecutors and said he could not recall who at the Justice Department and the White House had been involved. He firmly denied partisan political motives.
He conceded that at the time of the prosecutors’ removal, he had not seen their performance reviews and did not know why two of them were being dismissed. He could not recall a final high-level meeting that took place in his office in November to discuss the imminent dismissals, nor did he remember when he decided to carry out the decision to remove the attorneys.
“While the process that led to the resignations was flawed, I firmly believe that nothing improper occurred,” Gonzales said. “It would be improper to remove a US attorney to interfere with or influence a particular prosecution for partisan political gain. I did not do that. I would never do that.”
Senator Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) asked Mr Gonzales, “How can you give us those assurances, since you had a limited involvement, the process wasn’t vigorous, and you left it, basically, to somebody else?”
“Well, Senator, since then, of course, I have gone back and looked at the documents made available to Congress,” responded Mr Gonzales, who added that he had also since discussed the matter with other officials at the Justice Department.
By the end of the hearing, it was clear that Mr Gonzales had not inspired the confidence of the Committee. Republican Senators were among his harshest critics.
Senator Specter, the Committee’s ranking Republican, said that the “panorama of responses” offered by Gonzales had contributed to a further “loss of credibility”. He said he will privately offer President Bush his opinion about whether Mr Gonzales should remain Attorney General.
Other Senators were more forthcoming with their opinions.
“There are some very serious problems, Mr Attorney General,” said Senator Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.). “Your ability to lead the Department of Justice is in question.”
Senator Tom Coburn (R.-Okla.) was even more direct. “I believe there’s consequences for mistakes. And I believe the best way to put this behind us is your resignation,” he said.
However, White House spokeswoman Dana Perino stated that President Bush was “pleased” with the testimony of Mr Gonzales, who still has the “full confidence” of the President.
In the course of the Senate hearing, Mr Gonzales was asked whether he thought he would keep his job if he were subjected to the same vague criteria that he offered as reasons for the dismissals.
“You said something that struck me, that sometimes it just came down to, ‘These were not the right people at the right time’,” said Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.). “If I applied that standard to you, what would you say?”
“Senator, what I would say is, is that I believe that I continue to be effective as the Attorney General of the United States. We’ve done some great things,” said Mr Gonzales.
If Hillary Clinton "cannot recall" then why not Gonzales. He certainly had more to do than she. Of course Republicans are expected to remember in detail what they had for breakfast on their 21st birthday. Libby was expected to remember every conversation he ever had with everyone in exact order. Who is to say that those who differed with him did not remember correctly. If there is a reason for firing Gonzales it should be that Sandy Berger is walking around free after stealing and destroying documents from the National Archives and that William Jefferson is not on trial. Just what is the hold up on that one anyway? The Judiciary Committee (on both sides) are known for their love of "face time" on camera and their visions of power they do not have but wish to take anyway. Political appointees are subject to "firing" at any time or reason. The Congress now seeks to prevent this President from making recess appointees of Ambassadors no less. All of this seems a Legislative Branch trying to take powers from the Executive Branch. Just another end around the Constitution by a bunch of "old guys" who will never be President but want the power anyway. How sad.
Written by Sharon
on 4/22/2007
Senatorial privilege is what this is about. Those Senators are worked up because Senator Pryor was whiplashed when DOJ went around him after Gonzales promised different. They are upset that their advise and consent was taken away by a law they never saw. They are, after all, the Judiciary committee.
Add up how much of this is other issues and how much comes down to thumbing nose at Senate and it is very revealing.
Written by Branch Observer
on 4/21/2007
I just don't know what I should do. Sam with the war, what should I do? Gosh, I really never know what to do
Written by George W Bush
on 4/21/2007
How sad! The worst, most corrupt, most inept, most dishonest administration ever.
An AG with no support from his own party and yet the "repubbies" attempt to blame others for this loser. Seems the only ones in the administration with support for poor Alberto is Bush and Cheney, and we now know their judgement is suspect.
Written by Robert Hamner
on 4/20/2007
Alberto Gonzales was under examination by a hostile committee for actions which may have been overly political, but substantively legal. Ridicule is being heaped on him for saying "I don't recall," fifty times in yesterday's testimony.
Would someone pull the tapes of Hillary Clinton's 1993 Congressional testimony about the activities of the Health Care Task force? There were actual legal propriaty questions being raised because of failure to hold open meetings. How many times did the then First Lady say "I don't recall" in that testimony? Care to lay a bet on which testimony was more forgetful?
Written by John Firestone
on 4/20/2007
This is yet another failure of the White House and their lying friends.
Written by Chris Goga
on 4/20/2007
I say all those who want to Join the band wagon against Bush now is the time to get on the wagon. WHAT GREAT DIGNITY ALL OF THOSE WHO ARE ON THE GRILLING OF ALBERTO HAVE (I GUESS THAT IS CALLED POLTICS). I Of course none of those people have ever forgotten anything or screwed up!!!!!
Written by vivian mares
on 4/20/2007
Who do you hold to a higher standard, the first lady, or the Attorney General?
Despite the insistence that nothing 'improper' happened, the AG came off looking like he had no control over his department. He doesn't know who came up with the idea to fire the attorneys, he doesn't know who chose what attorneys to fire or why, yet he stands by the decision, despite testifying that he has no idea how it came about. He said he thought the idea of circumventing senate approval was a bad idea, but it was still implemented. Under his leadership, the DOJ has all but merged with the White House, and he doesn't seem to understand why that might be a bad thing.
Written by john
on 4/20/2007
seems like our dealing with our congress would be alot like being urinated on by an opinionated drunk.
Why can't we have adults lead us instead of children who smack you when they don't get their way.
Written by Dealing
on 4/20/2007
Hillary said "I don't recall I was baking cookies"
and she's running for president
Written by L C
on 4/20/2007
It was a pitful performance, not only by the Attorney General
but by Senator Orrin Hatch (rumored to be his replacement) who
went way offside attempting to put himself in a position that
would be characterized as "above reproach line of questioning"
if he is nominated, as many expect.
Written by Joe Sheehan, Wells, Maine
on 4/20/2007
The story never says what the scandal is. An entire news story about a scandal, and it never actually says what the scandal is, how amazing.
Written by Scott
on 4/20/2007
The problem is not, per se, the firing of the US Attorneys. As has been pointed out repeatedly, they serve at the pleasure of the President.
Problem #1: You can fire them for any good reason, or no reason at all, but you can't fire them for a bad reason.
Problem #2: Gonzales apparently was either clueless about a major decision being made in his department over nearly two years, (early 2005 to late 2006), or lying about his involvement. Either option is not good.
Written by Webster
on 4/20/2007
As bad as Gonzales is at AG, he's much better than the former AG, Janet Reno. Despite all she did, I don't remember Ted Kennedy calling for her resignation. In fact, all those demoRats, who now say Gonzales should resign, were harping on what a great job Reno did, despite Waco, Ellian Gonzales, firing 93 U.S. Attorneys. Oh, I forgot, Republicans aren't allowed to fire U.S. Attorneys.
Written by Bill
on 4/20/2007
NO ONE should fire attourneys in the middle of investigations which the attourneys themselves can sway the outcome. Wake up from the nightmare that this republican administration has become and open your eyes to the facts. The republicans themselves admit Gonzales was wrong.
Written by RT
on 4/20/2007
I find the comments amusing. The simple will continue to remain simple and I guess there is no remedy for it. Fortunately we live in a country where as long as they present no danger to themselves or any others, they are free to wander about wherever the wind blows them. . Since the primary reason why Gonzoles must resign is because clearly he is the village idiot. I guess his supporters find him a kindred spirit.
Written by Sayer
on 4/20/2007
The democrats could find a scandal in cure for cancer, If the republicans discovered it. They would find fault with solving world hunger, if the republicans solved it. They would find a criminal act in world peace, if the republicans were behind it.
When are the fools on the left going to wake up and see the democrats for what they are? They can not distinguish good from evil, or right from wrong. They are led around like sheep by what ever biased BS spews from the media.
If I cared, it wouldn't be so amusing.
Written by
on 4/20/2007
I cannot see why this story lingers, I as an owner of a company, now retired, could hire or fire at will as the need arose, Does not the Preesident of our country have as much power as I did in running my small business? I recall former President clinton hired and fired at will. Why did this even become a story? Come on republicans in house and senate, quite caving in.
Written by David
on 4/20/2007
Written by
on 4/20/2007
Machiavellian ethics.
Would you expect different from the Dems?
They want there agendas and damn the rest.
Written by us
on 4/20/2007
Wow, I can't believe some of the comments.. How can anyone (if you actually watched the AG speak) support this idiot. I do not care if you are a Republican or Democrat...To have the position of Attorney General and not be able to remember anything is unbelievable to me...."Oh, he was under oath" That would explain why he could not answer anything.. This administration is incapable of telling the truth! And for the record the ignorant Limbaugh listeners that keep talking abour Pres Clinton Firing 93 Attorneys...You Idiots, every Administration Fires 93 when they take over...However, only 3 US Attorneys have ever been fired mid term in the History of the US and there was cause for those......These morons fired 8 MIdterm and most have great records..The Attorney General could not give one reason and remember, these were Republican US Attorneys.....
Written by Rick Haynes
on 4/20/2007
To repond to David and Scott...David, yes you can fire anyone you want and the AG could have done that and it would have been over...But when he was asked why US Attorney's were fired, He said due to poor job performance.....The AG just opened the box...Now, the "Good" Republican Attorneys had their reputations on the line and complained to Congress - that ius how this whole thing started...The AG is an idiot....Period.He did not have to give a reason, but when he gave a reason for poor performance, when the fact of the matter is some of those attorneys were in fact terrific with great job reviews and then the AG admits he did not even read the reviews.....Do I need to say anything more....And to answer Scott, you poor guy, can't believe you do not understand what the scandal is about - Don't get all your news from Fox or Limbaugh.....You will find yourself as ignorant as Bush himself.
Written by Rick Haynes
on 4/20/2007
The Atterny General fits right at the White House with President Bush and his Posse. The whole administration is very disheartening. Ican not understand why we have not started impeachment procedings against this president and his staff.
To
Buzz Right Back on this article