Comments (74)

PeteInTx wrote on May 17, 2007 3:05 PM:

" Gonzo " Reminds me of an old indian saying,
"Little does a peocock know when showing off his feathers, that his naked butt is visible for the rest."

Anon wrote on May 17, 2007 3:08 PM:

Oh please. If more than one of those Republicans votes no confidence, I'll be shocked. Hagel will, because he's trying to boost his indy cred, but the rest will say it's a partisan stunt, and that the President has to decide what's best. It'd be great, but it ain't going to happen.

Chad wrote on May 17, 2007 3:10 PM:

It will be interesting if, as the heat turns up, Specter's spaghetti spine will once again turn into a noodle.

I bet it will.

jayackroyd wrote on May 17, 2007 3:10 PM:

Bush won't push him out. He'd have to accept a real attorney general as a replacement, and that just won't do. Congress will have to impeach.

mycotropic wrote on May 17, 2007 3:15 PM:

I think that there will be a vote, it will be against AGAG and w will 'stay the course'. It will have to come to impeachment.

Crust wrote on May 17, 2007 3:16 PM:

Suggestion: You may want to add that Viguerie has gone further and called for Republicans in Congress to impeach Gonzales (assuming no resignation/firing first):

http://www.conservativesbetrayed.com/gw3/articles-latestnews/articles.php?CMSArticleID=1318&CMSCategoryID=19

Dreggas wrote on May 17, 2007 3:17 PM:

@ jayackroyd

I bet that is just what this is intended to garner. If the dems see they have the votes for no confidence then the next logical step is impeaching the AG which can be done.

Spencer's Mom wrote on May 17, 2007 3:20 PM:

It's time for Gonzo to be voted off the island.

Followed by Cheney.

Followed by Bush.

Once that's take care of, throw a bucket of water on Rove and he'll melt like the wicked witch he is.

PEACE

gbear wrote on May 17, 2007 3:23 PM:

Add Norm Coleman to the R-senate list. The St. Paul paper just posted a story saying Norm wants him gone too.

http://www.twincities.com/allheadlines/ci_5917593

chisholm wrote on May 17, 2007 3:25 PM:

This is all so very Euro and parliamentarian. Does anyone know what a vote of no confidence actually means in actionable terms? Anyone? Anyone? Broder?

Bearpaw wrote on May 17, 2007 3:26 PM:

A no-confidence vote is only important if it sets the stage for impeaching Gonzales. As others have pointed out, BushCo can't get rid afford to get rid of him. He's their cover.

So set him up, get him out of the way, and get on with it.

tekel wrote on May 17, 2007 3:27 PM:

McCain won't show up for the vote. He's too busy sitting at home, thinking about the Presidency and wishing he hadn't been such a worthless whore for the last six years.

C. Stephen White wrote on May 17, 2007 3:28 PM:

Is ther any potential replacement A-G candidate upon whom Dems, GOP and W could AGREE would get a fast-tracked confirmation hearing as a condition for the resignation?

More generally, is there ANYTHING upon which they could all agree? "1+1=2" for example! I sincerely, yet regretfully, doubt it.

As for impeachment - when pigs fly!

Andrew Foland wrote on May 17, 2007 3:28 PM:

I don't see the point of releasing the pressure on Republican Senators. They've been praying for something consequenceless they can do to show how shocked they are.

The only thing that matters is whether you can get to 67. If so, you impeach. If not, you keep hearings going, until you can get to 67.

Nina Katarina wrote on May 17, 2007 3:29 PM:

Yes, but does he have Holy Joe's support?

Anonymous wrote on May 17, 2007 3:30 PM:

Isn't it amazing that Congress continues to have such a high approval rating: 29% ? Perhaps that is because the media spends more time on Britney, Paris, and Anna than it does on perjury by the AG.

chisholm wrote on May 17, 2007 3:33 PM:

They will need another Gonzalez. An apparatchik. And if Ashcroft---Ashcroft!!!--had a problem with the surveillance program then the gene pool is going to be muy, muy small.

I'm getting very strong "beginning of the end" vibes here people.

bobh wrote on May 17, 2007 3:37 PM:

bullshit again

no confidence votes are for the europeans

Anonymous wrote on May 17, 2007 3:39 PM:

Monica's testimony could prove to be a bombshell. Now I don't know when this vote is supposed to be happen but if it happens before her testimony some Repubs might be afraid to go on record supporting Gonzo- especially if Goodling's testimony is particularly damning. If the house of cards begins falling with what Goodling has to say they might not want to have been on record showing support for an obvious lying crook like Gonzo.
Code Word: crime

AlleyCat wrote on May 17, 2007 3:42 PM:

C. Stephen White,

Comey for AG, Fitz for DAG.

bordersmuggler wrote on May 17, 2007 3:55 PM:

"Comey for AG, Fitz for DAG."

Posted by: AlleyCat
Date: May 17, 2007 03:42 PM

And for Special Prosecutor, one of the fired U.S. Attorneys with an axe to grind.

Sam Sara wrote on May 17, 2007 3:58 PM:

There will not even be a vote. Mitch McConell will never let this thing get to the Senate floor. It takes 60 votes for cloture before they can even vote on it. Remember how he cut off the Iraq War Resolution debate until he forced Majority Leader Reid to compromise on format of the debate. What possible reason would McConell have for allowing this onto the Senate Floor? Do you think any of these Republicans has the guts to cross the Minority Leader? This whole thing is a media play and a joke.

Woodhall Hollow wrote on May 17, 2007 3:59 PM:

I think this is an excellent move. It keeps the story in the headlines while they continue to capture pawns.

And will make sure that the Goodling testimony next week is being closely watched (it would be great if the Senate Dems could pull this off on Monday or Tuesday--before her testimony).

With Goodling immunized, she will HAVE to answer some very dicey questions. She has herself a very fancy lawyer who will not allow her to lie (& in the process is likely learning some things about the law that was not taught to her at Regent). None of it will look good for either Gonzo or the Whitehouse.

The endgame is either resignation or impeachment. Either way, the truth will out (and it will be a good thing for Gonzo to be either out of the DOJ or incapacitated due to hearings which will prevent him & his henchmen from doing more damage).

stephen wrote on May 17, 2007 4:11 PM:

There can only be one reason Idiot in Chief is tenacious in keeping Gonzo in place. The Next attorney G is not going to be a lackey and eat it for Bush legally speaking. Gonzo has his finger in the hole in the dyke....If he goes the rush of illegality that will come puking out of that dirt dyke holding back the sludge of this administration will send a smell across the land that even the most strident Bushie will have to admit is not very pleasent and should be expunged pronto!!!

Anonymous wrote on May 17, 2007 4:20 PM:

"Yes, but does he have Holy Joe's support?

Posted by: Nina Katarina
Date: May 17, 2007 03:29 PM "

If there is a one vote margin on the filibuster vote Joe will serve his masters. If there is a two vote margin, either way, Joe will vote against Gonzales.

Joe “contemplates” until the last minute, when his vote won’t impact the outcome he acts to preserve his “liberal” voting record, it is quite predictable.

asdf wrote on May 17, 2007 4:22 PM:

Speaking of Joe Lieberman, what do you want to bet he’d be the choice to replace Gonzo? The Republicans will want to get something for their money.

Neill wrote on May 17, 2007 4:22 PM:

Don't get your hopes up, ladies. Jawboning is one thing, voting another. I'll believe this only when it happens.

kthejoker wrote on May 17, 2007 4:22 PM:

At the Comey testimony, Specter also said:

"[I]t is hard to see how the Department of Justice can function and perform its important duties with Mr. Gonzales remaining where he is."

and

"... I think the resignation of Mr. McNulty is another significant step and evidence that a department really cannot function with the continued leadership or lack of leadership of Attorney General Gonzales."

Buck wrote on May 17, 2007 4:31 PM:

Latest letter to Gonzales at Pelosi's blog:

http://speaker.gov/blog/

Michael Stevens wrote on May 17, 2007 4:46 PM:

I'm not so sure McConnell will try to block this. He may not even *want* to block this.

I expect most of the Senate Republicans see Gonzales as a boat anchor dragging down the entire party. I think a lot of these Senators want to see Gozno out. At the same time, they don't want to look like they're caving to Democratic pressure.

I think Comey's revelations have been so shocking and unseemly that they take this beyond a Republican / Democrat issue. I think this has now become an issue of a man with no common decency.

The Comey revelations give the Republican Senators some much needed political cover to call for Gonzales's resignation.

10 Republicans are now on the record calling for Gonzo's ouster. Depending on how many show up for the vote, only one or two more may be needed for cloture.

That's assuming McConnell's even tries to block a vote. If the Dems were smart, they may force him to actually stand up and filibuster the motion.

I can't imagine McConnell wants to tie himself directly to a dead man walking. Even if McConnell wants to block this vote, I think he'll read the tea leaves and let it go through.

Mike Valentine wrote on May 17, 2007 4:48 PM:

This is ugly and goes well beyond Fredo.

We need to get the stain of Bush off the national fabric.

NCBlueneck wrote on May 17, 2007 4:51 PM:

If they make "Leiberman for Leiberman" the AG, does the state governor get to make an interim appointment to the vacant seat? Would this not be a good thing? I say "Leiberman for Leiberman for Attorney General"!

code word: attack (good advice)

atxcommie wrote on May 17, 2007 5:01 PM:

Ummmm.... peacocks are native to Asia, so I'm not sure if that's an "old Indian saying", probably its more a Texanism that is attributed to the natives, but as the old Indian saying goes:

"you can grease the weasel, but you can't teach it to dance."

MaxGowan wrote on May 17, 2007 5:05 PM:

Well then let's call the Republican's bluff - Specter, Hagel, Roberts and the rest of them - see if they actually have the courage of their convictions. We know most don't; let it be on the record, then. It should play well in 08.

gcs wrote on May 17, 2007 5:07 PM:

Let's think about this for a moment. I think the no confidence vote is actually a brilliant ploy for a couple of reasons.

First, it forces Republican Senators to pick a side. Gonzo has been obviously lying in his testimony and the more witnesses hauled before the Judiciary Committee, the more clear that becomes. So, the no confidence vote means that you either go on record as siding with a liar and his puppet master Bush - or - you go on record as voting no confidence.

In that case things get interesting. Because as the drumbeat grows, the lies come out, the pressure grows and let's say sometime this fall a bombshell drops and the chorus grows for impeachment. Now those Republican Senators who voted no confidence ar eonce again forced to make a choice - remain consistent with their previous no confidence vote - or chickenshit out and protect Gonzo and Bushie and subject themselves to charges of flip-flopping ("I voted against him before I voted for him.")

I think the move the Dems are making are being severely underestimated by a lot of people on here. Let's be patient. The fun has only just started.

Michael wrote on May 17, 2007 5:16 PM:

With an office like the AG that has to have the confidence of the legislature in order to do its business, I'm not so sure that a 'no confidence' vote is meaningless. But, it is true that it's essentially nothing more than a 'sense of the senate' concept rather than something that would actually fire the guy -- This isn't a parliament after all.

Dumb question: Do non-binding resolutions have the same rules for getting to floor as would a bill? Is cloture even relevant? I honestly don't know -- Anybody?

Aside: The peacock thing might well be both an Asian saying and an old Indian saying -- Last I looked, India is in Asia! (After all, he didn't say what kind of Indians had that saying, did he?)

The Password is 'every.' As in:

Every breath you take
Every move you make
Every bond you break
Every step you take
I'll be watching you

noshrub wrote on May 17, 2007 5:25 PM:

Normie signs on to make 10 Republicans? The wind must have been blowin in the right direction for Norm. The recent low approval rating in MN (MPR poll) might have something to do with it.

Robin Boerner wrote on May 17, 2007 5:33 PM:

The Republicans in Alaska had the Corrupt Bastards Club according to the FBI warrant...CBC hats, jackets and all.

Maybe we can start the Gonzo Must Go club.
I want my GMG windbreaker.

They will be worth more on EBAY then Spiro is our Hero buttons any day.

dean moriarity wrote on May 17, 2007 5:35 PM:

atx: maybe Indian = India (asia, peacocks)

tcement wrote on May 17, 2007 5:49 PM:

Given AG's demeanor before Congress along with his espousal of enhanced information gathering techniques (I will not mention any liguistic/ethnic heritage issues lest I be seen as politically incorrect), should he not be henceforth and ever after termed: The Bland Inquisitor?

Gordon Hill wrote on May 17, 2007 5:55 PM:

Yes, AG Gonzales seems to be an inadequate defender of the Constitution and he should resign... if...

1. He feels he is incompetent in the job or
2. He is unwilling to serve as his boss requires or
3. He has a better offer or
4. If his college age children need tuition or
5. He wants to go on a speaking tour somewhere.

Otherwise, he should stay until President Bush asks for his resignation, which appears unlikely because the Prez's performance looks so good by comparison.

The AG is part of the Bush legacy being built for posterity.

thomas wrote on May 17, 2007 5:57 PM:

he will not be fired
he will not be retired
the president desired
and he was hired
to do what was required
as they all conspired
to f*#^ the Constitution

sorry - couldn't get a fit

MaxGowan wrote on May 17, 2007 6:06 PM:

gcs - I'm in total agreement. This could be more effective than, say, impeachment (regardless how richly that would be deserved). The fun is not over, it's getting better. Time for Slate to bring back the prematurely retired Gonzo-Meter.

Vulture Breath wrote on May 17, 2007 6:19 PM:

Yet, something tells me Hannity & Colmes tonight will be focusing on Sandy Berger forfeiting his law license.

nuncamas wrote on May 17, 2007 7:26 PM:

I still kinda think Gonzo will resign ahead of Monica's testimony--perhaps a "normal" Friday news dump. Bush doesn't like it when even the MSM joins the chorus against him--he's not used to it. Of course, that could be way wrong.

But unless miz Monica is a far better liar than it appears, her testimony will throw a wrench into the engine of their machinations. Then the resignation couldn't possibly be the "noble act of a persecuted man"--it'll be in even more profound disgrace than he's in now.

My $.02.

John wrote on May 17, 2007 7:34 PM:

ah too bad...I was hoping to see both Torture Boy and Wolfie go on the same day...

John wrote on May 17, 2007 7:35 PM:

ah too bad...I was hoping to see both Torture Boy and Wolfie go on the same day...

JNagarya wrote on May 17, 2007 7:42 PM:

"I don't see the point of releasing the pressure on Republican Senators. They've been praying for something consequenceless they can do to show how shocked they are.

"The only thing that matters is whether you can get to 67. If so, you impeach. If not, you keep hearings going, until you can get to 67.

"Posted by: Andrew Foland
Date: May 17, 2007 03:28 PM"

Exactly. And I've been saying since the outset of this criminal enterprise -- 12/12/2000 -- that impeachment is inevitable. Bushit, the consistent loser, will not, in effort to win for the first time in his life, will not allow for any alternative.

Yes: it is essentially a "sense of the Senate" vote. And an effort to put the Republicans on the spot -- force them to decide one way or the other. But let's not forget that impeachment begins in the House, not the Senate. So as much as the Senate has the higher profile, the effect of the vote on the House is for that reason more important. There it is qa bit slower, as the Republicans are better able to hide amid the larger crowd.

But it is also the fact that matters are farther along than the bashers of the Democrats realize. We are at the point at which the Senate is doing "show cause" to the judge and jury: We the people.

This is without question beginning to be high stakes fun.

SC = like. As in, like, watch closely, 'cuz, like, you're seeing history in the making.

JNagarya wrote on May 17, 2007 7:49 PM:

""Comey for AG, Fitz for DAG."

"Posted by: AlleyCat
Date: May 17, 2007 03:42 PM

"And for Special Prosecutor, one of the fired U.S. Attorneys with an axe to grind.

"Posted by: bordersmuggler
Date: May 17, 2007 03:55 PM"

Like you, Bushit believes "vengeance" is "justice". You are both wrong. One of the fired prosecutors could not be Special Prosecutor because it would be a conflict of interest for exactly the reason you indicate.

By contrast, some of us are genuinely for rule of law, and actual ethicality.

SC = book. As in, the reason Comey was hated was not simply because he wouldn't bend the rules; but more pointedly because he conducted himself by the book.

And as in, Throw the book at Gonzo; if he ducks, he admits being a law-dodger. Then book 'im down.

Publius wrote on May 17, 2007 8:47 PM:

From the February 2006 hearing -- questioning of the Attorney General. Worth a quick read:

FEINSTEIN: OK, fair enough. Let me move along.

In October 2002, at a public hearing of the Senate-House joint inquiry into NSA activities, the then-NSA Director General Michael Hayden told me, quote, "If at times I seem indirect or incomplete, I hope that you and the public understand that I have discussed our operations fully and unreservedly in earlier closed sessions." As I mentioned, the Intelligence Committee has not been notified.

Let me ask you this: If the president determined that a truthful answer to questions posed by the Congress to you, including the questions I ask here today, would hinder his ability to function as commander in chief, does the authorization for use of military force or his asserted plenary powers authorize you to provide false or misleading answers to such questions?

GONZALES: Absolutely not, Senator. Of course not.

FEINSTEIN: Thank you. I just asked the question. A yes or no...

GONZALES: Nothing would excuse false statements before the Congress.

oleeb wrote on May 17, 2007 9:45 PM:

The longer he stays the better it is for the good guys! I say keep the heat and lightning directed at him and all the various horror stories he is responsible for at the DOJ. It will help solidify Republican corruption in the public mind and if the DC Dems have any brains at all they will turn this into the symbol of Republican corruption for a generation to come, but I'm not holding my breath since they are spineless.

Phill wrote on May 17, 2007 10:58 PM:

McConnell can't stop a cloture vote which is essentially the same thing as the no confidence vote on Gonzalez. The real question here is not whether the Democrats have 51 votes or 60, they need 67 or at least a very good chance of getting 67.

Nobody expects Gonzalez to be impeached, nobody (apart from Gonzo) think he is going to survive either. The Democrats don't want to take him out, they want to see where the path leads first.

If Gonzo had resigned a couple of months ago the whole affair would be over. Bush would install the replacement in a 'fuck you' recess appointment.

The WH does not want Gonzo to go because he is their heat shield, for the time being at least. They will discard him as soon as he is no longer taking the hits for whichever one of Cheney, Rove or Bush turns out to be behind this.

I don't think its Rove. Even Gonzo would know to send him packing. Sure the scheme comes from Rove, but not the authority. Gonzo is a fool, but he doesn't know that. This can only come from the personal authority of someone Gonzo would defer to. Would he defer to Cheney? That does not make sense either. Why would Rove go to Cheney for support when he has the President?

TheraP wrote on May 17, 2007 11:12 PM:

Court fool, Phill, say I about gonzo.

The fool of a fool. But his boss, the king fool, is unfortunately the Decider. Sometimes I wonder if, once they installed bush as "front man," whether the cabal was surprised when the power went to his head - as indeed it has.

I wonder if we will ever truly disentangle this mess. Or rectify it.

oldtree wrote on May 17, 2007 11:12 PM:

criminals talk a lot to each other, and rarely to the police.

we will find that some of these turds have reason to hide their involvement, and are happy that the AG is taking heat. nothing is happening, the same crappy bush appointees that toed the line and did their bidding are the ones that are supposed to bring charges against their bosses?

what a joke. justice is done.

eyeball wrote on May 18, 2007 12:08 AM:

not to change the subject too drastically, but did you guys see this link? maybe we could get gonzo a ticket and be done with him.
http://www.nrcruise.com/
anyway, can you imagine being stuck on this boat of boredom?

also, sted of a no-confidence vote, can we rename it a "he's an unfathomable jackass" vote?

Anonymous wrote on May 18, 2007 2:22 AM:

John Dean over at findlaw opines that Congress could send fifteen undercover officers in to arrest Gonzales and that Congress has the lawful power to hold him until the end of the 110th Congress. He says either the Senate or the House could legally do this after voting him in contempt.

Code: attack

webdems wrote on May 18, 2007 2:23 AM:

John Dean over at findlaw opines that Congress could send fifteen undercover officers in to arrest Gonzales and that Congress has the lawful power to hold him until the end of the 110th Congress. He says either the Senate or the House could legally do this after voting him in contempt.

Code: attack

PJ White wrote on May 18, 2007 4:16 AM:

to Stephen White: I would nominate Comey, although he is such a smart honest man, he probably would not touch it with a ten foot pole. But he is what is needed to help recover some of the confidence we need to have in OUR Department of Justice, for gawd's sake!

big brother wrote on May 18, 2007 6:16 AM:

Gonzo is the patsy. POTUS is the mule for the corporate Republican Oligarchy who will throw him under the Bus in a New York minute. Georgi Porgi violated the Constitution in a power play for political dominance for his money base. He is busted because the neocons can't take 17 more months of pounding. Cheney and Bush get Impeached and Pelosi is President (the first woman POTUS in US history)The left agenda will get done!) Who can unseat her in 2008?

big brother wrote on May 18, 2007 6:16 AM:

Gonzo is the patsy. POTUS is the mule for the corporate Republican Oligarchy who will throw him under the Bus in a New York minute. Georgi Porgi violated the Constitution in a power play for political dominance for his money base. He is busted because the neocons can't take 17 more months of pounding. Cheney and Bush get Impeached and Pelosi is President (the first woman POTUS in US history)The left agenda will get done!) Who can unseat her in 2008?

chuckles wrote on May 18, 2007 6:50 AM:

We just keep waiting for the Mexican to bail...chuckle chuckle

chuckles wrote on May 18, 2007 6:50 AM:

We just keep waiting for the Mexican to bail...chuckle chuckle

chuckles wrote on May 18, 2007 6:52 AM:

We just keep waiting for the Man to bail...chuckle chuckle

YeahSure wrote on May 18, 2007 10:23 AM:

Are you kidding? Arlen (talk tough - vote with the Bushites) Spectre will continue his traditional of bowing to the will of Bush whenever the rubber really meets the road. Also not likely half of the listed Repugs will actually vote against Bush's wishes. Will likely not get all of the Dumbocrats votes either. Just another ongoing MEANINGLESS GESTURE when the only real option to protect our country is the impeachment of Bush, Cheney, Rice, and Gonzo.

Peter Duffy wrote on May 18, 2007 11:12 AM:

Will McCain turn up to vote?

Peter Duffy wrote on May 18, 2007 11:12 AM:

Will McCain turn up to vote?

dee illuminati wrote on May 18, 2007 12:01 PM:

The whitehouse is calling the Gonzalles vote a 'stunt' and called the Wolfowitz issue a 'smear.' I think that the Democrats got specifically what they wanted, the clear impression that the decisions are being made in bubble fashion or group-think. What is at issue is GOP decision making.

code: 'bubble' as in bubble boy.

KB wrote on May 18, 2007 2:02 PM: Nathanael Nerode wrote on May 18, 2007 4:35 PM:

Five more Republican Senators and Lieberman -- or six more Republican Senators -- and the Congrrss can not only impeach Gonzales, but have a decent chance of convicting him.

Maybe he really will be removed, regardless of Bush.

SamSara wrote on May 21, 2007 12:50 PM:

There will not even be a vote. Mitch McConell will never let this thing get to the Senate floor. It takes 60 votes for cloture before they can even vote on it. Remember how he cut off the Iraq War Resolution debate until he forced Majority Leader Reid to compromise on format of the debate. What possible reason would McConell have for allowing this onto the Senate Floor? Do you think any of these Republicans has the guts to cross the Minority Leader? This whole thing is a media play and a joke.

Posted by: SamSara
Date: May 17, 2007 03:58 PM

And Big Mitch come through again.
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/05/20/mcconnell-resolution/

Bill wrote on May 31, 2007 11:42 AM:

MSN I NIIPET
MSN

Bill wrote on May 31, 2007 11:42 AM:

MSN I NIIPET
MSN

Bill wrote on May 31, 2007 11:43 AM:

MSN I NIIPET
MSN

epenisa wrote on January 11, 2008 3:28 AM:

Hi all!
Nice work from your side... have a nice time with yoru blog :)
G'night