Comments (66)

cervantes wrote on June 12, 2007 10:20 AM:

"expect things to move along much as they have."

In other words, glacially slowly, ineffectually, and largely ignored by the corporate media.

The House has the power to impeach Gonzales. The only way this is going to make any difference is for them to use that power.

Stephen Johnson wrote on June 12, 2007 10:24 AM:

The poll on the Dems chances seems odd. Hillary was leading against all Republican challengers for the presidency. Suddenly she is losing to all of them??? I do not buy it. Someone is playing with the numbers.

zipporah wrote on June 12, 2007 10:25 AM:

Sorry to nitpick, but it's "sights" not "sites."

via wrote on June 12, 2007 10:30 AM:

I think the Dems have thrown in the towel. They caved to Bush with the Iraq bill, and if they don't issue subpoenas for Rove and Miers it is all over except for the crying of those who are losing loved ones in the war.

Long Memory wrote on June 12, 2007 10:31 AM:

The Democrats should give their Republican friends every last opportunity to block the body from taking action. When the Democrats were in the minority that was known as "obstructionist" action. So be it.

Trent Lott yesterday mentioned that the Senate hasn't accomplished anything in three years. Is there any wonder why? Suddenly Lott and his pals are all for moving forward. I have my doubts that the public is gonna buy that.

Americans have shown that they like a divided government, and with good reason. But the voters had six years of the government in the total power of the GOP. It doesn't appear that they like what they got. Perhaps they'll unite the government under the Democrats in hopes that our country can find its moral compass.

rmadilo wrote on June 12, 2007 10:34 AM:

I've started to warm up to the slow is good perspective. For one, it is like a defense attorney taking weeks to present his case so that the jury at least has time to focus on the issue. Congress needs time for the public to realize that this is a problem that isn't going away, and the reason it isn't going away is because of the intransegence of the president and the AG.

A slow simmer also keeps the issue there for any additional issues which involve the AG: gitmo, TSP, voter suppression ... essentially everything which has pissed off most non-neocons for six years.

My only question is what are we missing? Is this simply another distraction for some bigger problem we don't yet know about? At the moment the tradeoff seems good, but never underestimate these thugs.

poetry wrote on June 12, 2007 10:35 AM:

I hope you understand that even if the House can muster the votes to impeach Gonzales, such an action would be meaningless unless there are 18 Republican votes in the senate to convict Gonzales and remove him from office. It would require 67 votes in the senate to convict and remove Gonzales.

Impeachment is nothing more than an indictment, an accusation.

Unless you know where the Democrats will find those 18 Republican senators willing to remove Gonzales from office (when there were not even eight Republican votes to chastise Gonzales), an impeachment is nothing more than one more symbolic and fairly useless exercise.

jhhugo wrote on June 12, 2007 10:37 AM:

Yesterday the Rupublicans had another chance to start rebuilding their credibility as a party interested in the national interest and principles that have allowed our country to work. Like so much else they have done over the past six years their refusal to step up and challenge Gonzales how out of touch they have become. Note to Republicans, if Arlen Spector actually feels he cannot back down from criticism he has made of fellow Republicans, things are really bad, and don't let Karl Rove tell you otherwise.

JohnW1141 wrote on June 12, 2007 10:43 AM:

The Dem Congress is producing nothing of substance
regarding controversies at the Bush White House.
On the contrary, they're allowing the Bush gang to run out the clock on Iraq, Gonzalez, Justice Dept political corruption, Cheney, Rove etc.

Little more than a lot of huffing and puffing.

Tentakles wrote on June 12, 2007 10:46 AM:

The papers I saw led with the AP headline "GOP blocks Gonzales no-confidence vote". Works for me.

I want a special prosecutor. Where's my special prosecutor?

Of course, I'd also like a constitutional amendment making presidential pardons subject to Senate approval, but that's not likely to happen until after the Shrub pardons himself.

-- Tentakles

Meah Bottoms wrote on June 12, 2007 10:47 AM:

It is moving slowly as the president chides, but it does so because of Whitehouse stonewalling. Hopefully there will be subpoenas issued, to force their hand. At some point Karl Rove needs to be held accountable for being the real attorney general sans bar approval. This is really the crux of the infestation of all of the aspects of the government by unqualified right winged religious zealots who do not know what they are doing. This shameful heist is the Rovian legacy and the reason this country's institutions have eroded beyond, perhaps, repair. It has been rampant, and egregious. No criticism of the Democrats "slowness" holds water. It took six years to foment this disaster. Republicans will just have to be patient. One thing is for sure. Legislation has been put on hold because of this undoing of our institutions and constitution. Democrats are charged with putting things back together, and they require a step by step approach. As we have found, Republicans from the Whitehouse and DOJ thought they covered their own asses, but truth does tend to come out eventually. I personally have nothing better to do in the next eighteen months, than to watch this lame duck spectacle of an administration unravel. We must all watch carefully for the lies and hubris, to prevent most especially, warring by the neocons that extends beyond the Iraq borders. This must be stopped. The Armed Services and Intelligence Committees have a large job on their hands. Sanity must prevail.

jeffgee wrote on June 12, 2007 10:47 AM:

Meanwhile, Bush will continue to to define the DOJ as the Department of Just Us.

Austin Cooper wrote on June 12, 2007 10:49 AM:

It's dispiriting and embarrassing that this couldn't have gone through -- that the investigations will now 'quiet down'. I understand to some that uttering anything which appears to be criticism is tantamount to being a concern troll, or worse, but that's too bad.

It only provides more fodder for the Right's public vomitorium about Democrats -- well, you know the sort of made-up crap they spout. When do we do *more*? When do we show a greater level of awareness in the Congressional leadership of the need for stronger action in the face of so many clear and presnt dangers?

Something more than a slow, careful march to the polls in 2008 is needed.

The professionals will say that action at the grassroots, building the party with the long view in mind, is where elections are won and how new directions are possible.

That's all true. But I'd argue that the thungs running the government are counting on us to meet their low expectations -- they don't believe Democrats have the balls to play, let alone lead, because they're bonded to ruthlessness and greed so that you can't say the word Republican without immediately thinking of corruption.

It would be more effective, and provide the kind of positive feedeback which builds political parties, if the Democrats could both push at the roots, and provide what polls and observers (more gifted and succinct than I) have been explaining that People hunger for: Leadership -- resolute, unified, sharp and decisive.

If you want people to believe in a better country, where the kind of nightmare of the past six years wouldn't be tolerated -- then *make people believe you're the kind of leaders who can provide it*.

Otherwise, we look like people who don't believe in themselves, or can't quite figure out who we are. People don't follow that kind of vision.

Otherwise, it's business as usual. And the Repubs are counting on apathy in '08 to delay what should be an inevitable victory -- one which is ours to lose.

Ghost of Tom Joad wrote on June 12, 2007 10:49 AM:

Poetry,
I have no confidence in Reid at all. He sure must have been one timid boxer. Reid is always seemingly afraid to call the Republicans bluff. What is with symbolic resolutions? Why not up the ante? If you are Reid, what better way to make the case that the Democrats will stand strong. Impeaching Gonzales is the only way Commander Guy is gonna take notice. Bush wants Gonzales to stay, and Gonzales has Bush's back. You won't find out about Rove's involvement unless you start kicking doors down. The Republicans are drowning. You don't throw them a life raft.

Jane wrote on June 12, 2007 10:52 AM:

Much of politics is about how symbolism is used to convince voters and politicians to adopt positions which move the country forward.

The most important goal is retaining a democracy in which every vote is counted. This is under threat from black box electronic voting with no paper trail given the Publican Parties immorality.

So if the House votes to impeach -- which they can if the House Democrats stick together as well as the Senate Democrats have -- and present the case for impeaching Gonzales for endangering the electoral system so strongly as to convince enough voters to turn against the Publican party before it is too late we will have won far more than a symbolic victory even if too few Publican party senators can be convinced to impeach as most know they should.

My current slogan: It's all about the voters, stupid.

It's all about the voters,stupid.

nation wrote on June 12, 2007 10:55 AM:

The Dems have to take a page from the Repub's playbook now!!!

They have to start hamering home that the repub senators are NOT interested in defending the rule of law and NOT interested in protecting the constitution - How do we know this?? They defended AG AG by stiffling the no-confidence vote -

Throw in a couple dozen clips of AG AG saying "I can't recall" variations. Mix in a couple of Bushie "I think AG AG is doing a terrific job" statements and finish it off with a mention of 'Heck of a job Brownie' in there as well.

That ought to give the Dems' a big enough hammer to beat up the repub's with.

I also thought that that Paris Hilton Judge was pretty effective in his approach:

Every couple of minutes, whenever ANY Democratic Senator has the floor, Announce the time, and the fact that Congress still hasn't recieved the missing 5 million emails, and the Repub's still support AG AG.

The approach has to change....or nothing ever will.

Andrew Foland wrote on June 12, 2007 10:58 AM:

Once you vote "no confidence" against the Attorney General, there's no going back. On the other hand, if you vote for AGAG, you can later change your vote to against.

So this vote did have the practical effect of ratcheting the "hard" opposition to AGAG by 7 GOP senators. As a tactical move in a long game, I like it. Of course, if the Dems are planning to leave it here, then it's a disaster.

So as usual, it depends what they do with it next.

caligirl wrote on June 12, 2007 10:59 AM:

the person with the real power to change anything in side the beltway is LARRY FLYNT. We must be patient.

Salmo wrote on June 12, 2007 11:02 AM:

While the right choice is impeachment, the only possible avenue that might put the Department of Justice back on track is a special prosecutor. What does it take to get one?

Crust wrote on June 12, 2007 11:06 AM:

Ghost of Tom Joad:

"If you are Reid, what better way to make the case that the Democrats will stand strong. Impeaching Gonzales is the only way Commander Guy is gonna take notice."

That should be "if you are Pelosi." Impeachment starts in the House. What Reid should be doing is demanded a special prosecutor.

cervantes wrote on June 12, 2007 11:07 AM:

Of course I know that impeachment is followed by a trial in the Senate - but that's the best thing about it. It means an investigation, and putting on a prosecutorial case in front of a national TV audience. The impeachment trial can't be filibustered either. Those Republican Senators, including Joe Lieberman, who filibustered the no confidence vote on the grounds that they don't have confidence in Gonzales but the vote would have been a meaningless distraction won't have that excuse any more. They'll have to lay it on the line.

If they can't get 2/3 to convict after the case has been presented, the Republicans will just come out looking like hyperpartisan hypocrites with no loyalty to the rule of law or the constitution. That's what it's all about. I say go for it.

Crust wrote on June 12, 2007 11:11 AM:

Unprecedented? In 1886, Grover's AG was censured for insufficiently explaining the firing of a federal prosecutor (just one mind you). That sounds like a pretty good precedent to me. (I'm not sure what the difference if any is between a "non-confidence" vote and a "censure" vote. They're both non-binding as I understand it.)

From http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/003264.php:
"In 1886, for instance, the Senate voted to censure President Grover Cleveland’s attorney general, A.H. Garland, because he did not provide documents about the firing of a federal prosecutor."

mayan wrote on June 12, 2007 11:17 AM:

I have to look at this as a strategic move in a game whose rules elude me.

I go back and forth on Schumer. I was quite down on him but my feelings began to change as I watched him conduct questioning during the hearings. He strikes me as being somewhat savvy and not politically flatfooted. Thus, I find it hard to believe that he would bring a toothless resolution before a body either knowing it was going to be defeated OR having no idea what the "math" was. If I'm wrong in my estimation...so be it. To echo a poster above it would be a disaster.

BUT if this was a maneuver to widen the Overton Window with the public, demonstrate that the rethugs are obstructionist and/or lay the case that they have taken every single possible step to dislodge this cancer from the body politic, without impeachment...and that now they have NO ALTERNATIVE...then I think it's a very interesting ploy. In particular, I think it can be VERY potent were the Dems able to keep building the momentum and a prima facie case regarding the voter suppression. If the trajectory of this keeps building, it could be quite powerful given the looming 2008 elections.

Given the continued hearings, I'm still leaning toward the latter scenario. But if I'm wrong, boy...is this country fucked. So...which is it?

Goldspinner wrote on June 12, 2007 11:18 AM:

Zipporah,

The correct usage is "sights". Bang, bang!

lower tiberius wrote on June 12, 2007 11:22 AM:

the whitehouse's brazen indifference to political pressure, if fact the whitehouse's support of a corrupted Attorney General defines clearly it's (the whitehouse's) originating the ideas and illegal policy's implemented attempt to commit the crime's ultimate goals.

An Attorney Generals office, and entire Deparment of Justice that works only for the Whitehouse on a political agenda, developed for Republican control of the country and it's citizen's and their society.

George W. Bush is incapable of a complete coherent sentence much less any sort of leadership in any capacity. A total lack of sense or understanding of what is right and just. Not only that but even if he did, he has no intention of caring about it It's more like "Hey screw what the citizens of this country think, this is MY government and I'm the Decider". Talk about moral ineptitude, this guy fully supports the crimes of Delay. Abramoff, and complete parade of corrupted criminal enemies this country has acquired during his fraundulent tenture.

Meah Bottoms wrote on June 12, 2007 11:23 AM:

If there is going to be an impeachment, it should be directed toward VP Cheney who seems to work in the shadows with the neocons, beating the wardrum. He has gone far beyond his job description, even if he does not agree. Don't waste impeachment energy on Alberto. Cheney is far more dangerous.

poetry wrote on June 12, 2007 11:28 AM:

I agree with "nation" that the Democrats need to do a better job of using Republican tactics and using Alberto Gonzales's actions and testimony to remind everyone, at every opportunity, of what a sycophantic crook he is. As in, reminding everyone how often Gonzales said "I don't recall" in order to avoid perjuring himself.

I think Rhode Island Senator Whitehouse did an exquisite job yesterday in enumerating all of Gonzales's "misdemeanors" and other crimes. If you didn't hear Sen. Whitehouse, try to find a transcript of his remarks ... then, you might consider using those statements to write letters to newspapers all over the country to wake up news editors to the reality of Gonzales's criminality and his politicization of the Justice Dept.

USA Today, The Washington Post and The New York Times are just some of the newspapers that will publish letters from all over the country.

xyz wrote on June 12, 2007 11:29 AM:

Democrats have screwed up.

Why go for a no confidence vote if you don't have the votes? It makes you look weak and ineffective, which is what they are.

Impeach him.

Johnsnottoodistracted wrote on June 12, 2007 11:30 AM:

At some point,now will do,congress must put 2 and 2 together for all to see.In fact they can put 2 and 2 and 2 and 2 and 2 more together and let everyone have a good look at what has taken place just at doj and these hearings.It's a pretty one sided lose for anyone who hasn't sucumbed to the toxic fumes and lost all self worth.Nothing anyone has said makes sense, no one in doj has enough working brain cells to remember anything, and it all doesn't matter because no one can do anything about it.
It's time for ann cee to get us back on track.
It may not be kool-aid.It may be the whole water system.You know the sewer lines and the drinking water lines run next to each other and they both leak.

Sparkle Plenty wrote on June 12, 2007 11:31 AM:

So this vote did have the practical effect of ratcheting the "hard" opposition to AGAG by 7 GOP senators. As a tactical move in a long game, I like it. Of course, if the Dems are planning to leave it here, then it's a disaster.

So as usual, it depends what they do with it next.
Posted by: Andrew Foland
Date: June 12, 2007 10:58 AM

That's how I see it, too, AF. It seems like theater just now, of which we've had enough. But if ongoing investigations establish more evidence of Abu perfidy, Reid can call for another no-confidence vote. Utimately Gonzo, the prez and any supporters left will have to face the question, "when is enough enough?"

AusJeb wrote on June 12, 2007 11:52 AM:

Why did the Sen. Dems schedule this vote if they couldn't pull it off? They would have been much better off continuing to build momentum with subpoenas and investigations. Harry Reid is the big loser here.

KYJurisDoctor wrote on June 12, 2007 12:00 PM:

Alberto Gonzales' fate on this issue, is, and should be, ONLY in Bush's hands.

http://osi-speaks.blogspot.com/2007/06/republicans-rightfully-show-no.html#links

poetry wrote on June 12, 2007 12:00 PM:

There are only 49 Democratic senators.

One of the Democratic senators,Tim Johnson, is OUT on medical leave, so that leaves 48 Democratic senators.

There are two Independents, both of whom "caucus" with the Democrats -- giving the Democrats just enough of a majority (51) to control the senate committees and control the agenda.

Unfortunately, one of the Independents caucusing with the Democrats is Joe Lieberman who votes WITH the Republicans MOST of the time (on anything we care about). In fact, good ole Joe has said he might very well vote for the Republican nominee for president! He has also intimated he might switch to the Republican caucus, effectively taking control of the senate AWAY from the Democrats. That's the thanks we get for honoring him with the vice presidential nomination in 2000 .

It takes 60 votes to stop any debate or filibustering ... it is clear that there are NOT 60 votes in the senate to stop any debate or filibuster.

That means that although the Democrats do have a majority in the senate, there is not much legislation they can pass unless they get Republican support for it.

It is unfair to blame Harry Reid ... what he needs is a bigger majority, MORE Democratic senators.

The best thing all of us can do is to WRITE letters to newspapers and to the media people, making sure they understand we KNOW the FACTS and that we EXPECT them to REPORT the FACTS and not just make stuff up.

When the House Judiciary Committee voted to impeach President Nixon, the Democrats had large majorities in the House and senate ... that's why Nixon knew the jig was up.

That is NOT the situation today ... the Democrats have a narrow majority in the House and an almost invisible majority in the senate. That is not Harry Reid's fault ... it is the math of the situation.

JT wrote on June 12, 2007 12:06 PM:

UP OR DOWN VOTE! UP OR DOWN VOTE!

Oh, sorry, the GOP's not running the Senate any more, so the previous battle cry is inoperative.

/Hypocrisy FTW!

1970cs wrote on June 12, 2007 12:07 PM:

The Republicans who voted in favor of the AG appear to have taken an enourmous leap of blind faith.

There are NSA eavesdropping programs that have not yet been revealed to the public (or the Senators?) that very well could be of shaky legal standing to say the least. If other NSA programs prove to be explosive with the public upon revelation, supporting Gonzales would not be a good position to try and manage.

Jason T wrote on June 12, 2007 12:08 PM:

UP OR DOWN VOTE! UP OR DOWN VOTE!

Oh, sorry, the GOP's not running the Senate any more, so the previous battle cry is inoperative.

/Hypocrisy FTW!

1970cs wrote on June 12, 2007 12:09 PM:

The Republicans who voted in favor of the AG appear to have taken an enourmous leap of blind faith.

There are NSA eavesdropping programs that have not yet been revealed to the public (or the Senators?) that very well could be of shaky legal standing to say the least. If other NSA programs prove to be explosive with the public upon revelation, supporting Gonzales would not be a good position to try and manage.

mbbsdphil wrote on June 12, 2007 12:19 PM:

No administration has ever understood symbolism better than this one. That's one reason it won't allow front-page pictures of flag-draped coffins, and why it won't allow this resolute president, knowingly bearing the burdens of his office, to officiate at a single military funeral. (Arlington National Cemetery is about a five minute motorcade ride from the White House.)

It's no wonder the Bushies pulled out all the stops to prevent an unprecedented No Confidence vote on 'Fredo from taking place in the Senate. (Not that it would take much to pull out all of Holy Joe's stops; they jingle in Mr. C's front pocket.) The Dems were right to try. But it doesn't look like they tried very hard. Where was the whip, for example (a legislative term, not something you could learn more about from Susie Bright's Journal), requiring all Democratic Senators to attend and vote? Nada.

Democrats should make no mistake. The less they do to expose this administration's malfeasance, which the public has already concluded amounts to ten pounds of manure in a two pound bag, the worse they will do come election day. But it's not just about winning votes; any Republican can think that far. It's about exposing the widespread corruption of government.

That corruption extends beyond the billions in conracts, tax subsidies and waivers of liability extended by this administration to the corporate wasp larvae eating their way through the US Treasury. It's about how they've eaten their way through the intestines of government, cutting away its ability to function as a government.

If they can't remove the parasites, they have to incapacitate them. Otherwise, the patient will be much worse off in January 2009 than it is today.

mbbsdphil wrote on June 12, 2007 12:25 PM:

No administration has ever understood symbolism better than this one. That's one reason it won't allow front-page pictures of flag-draped coffins, and why it won't allow this resolute president, knowingly bearing the burdens of his office, to officiate at a single military funeral. (Arlington National Cemetery is about a five minute motorcade ride from the White House.)

It's no wonder the Bushies pulled out all the stops to prevent an unprecedented No Confidence vote on 'Fredo from taking place in the Senate. (Not that it would take much to pull out all of Holy Joe's stops; they jingle in Mr. C's front pocket.) The Dems were right to try. But it doesn't look like they tried very hard. Where was the whip, for example (a legislative term, not something you could learn more about from Susie Bright's Journal), requiring all Democratic Senators to attend and vote? Nada.

Democrats should make no mistake. The less they do to expose this administration's malfeasance, which the public has already concluded amounts to ten pounds of manure in a two pound bag, the worse they will do come election day. But it's not just about winning votes; any Republican can think that far. It's about exposing the widespread corruption of government.

That corruption extends beyond the billions in conracts, tax subsidies and waivers of liability extended by this administration to the corporate wasp larvae eating their way through the US Treasury. It's about how they've eaten their way through the intestines of government, cutting away its ability to function as a government.

If they can't remove the parasites, they have to incapacitate them. Otherwise, the patient will be much worse off in January 2009 than it is today.

mbbsdphil wrote on June 12, 2007 12:29 PM:

Sorry for the double post; connection hiccup.

poetry wrote on June 12, 2007 12:35 PM:

Even if Biden, Dodd and Obama had returned to Washington to cast their vote, that still would NOT have provided the 60 votes required to stop the debate (filibuster). Add their three votes to the 53 YES votes and you get 56 YES votes. Not enough.

Every Democrat present voted FOR the "no confidence" vote, including Hillary Clinton, who was there in the senate. For all the Hillary bashing that goes on, it might be nice to see a little recognition that at least she DID return to Washington to vote ... the others stayed out on the campaign trail.

Daddy Love wrote on June 12, 2007 12:37 PM:

Let's keep our perspective.

Re:"running out the clock." Of course they are. And it would have been great to have had a Dem majority in 2002 0r 2004, but we didn't. The fact is simply that we didn't take over until January 2007 and we have to deal with what we have.

I think the Congress could be playing the propaganda game better, but keep in mind that they DO say effective and hard-hitting things that just don't get the play that the GOP STILL does in the mass media. We all know this. Keep the faith.

The inexorable march to the truth and accountability on which we are now embarked is hard to endure because of is pace, but is intended to a) keep the issues live for the public, b) hang onto these guys like a bulldog, and c) drive the administration crazy. I think they're succeeding.

It would be great to stop them in their tracks, but the reality is that it takes 60 votes to move the Senate. Let's get 'em.

anonymous wrote on June 12, 2007 12:58 PM:

Have the Dems yet passed a law to force Mercer back to his post?

The lamely worded resolution was a waste of time.

If you aren't going to say what you mean and mean what you say, don't bother speaking, or even trying to speak, at all.

They didn't even specify why Gonzales fails the test of confidence!

As wimpish as their war funding bill.

willyjsimmons wrote on June 12, 2007 1:14 PM:

Now, if Hillary managed to 'not vote' on this symbolic resolution...

LOL!

The irony is THICK amongst progressives today.

markg8 wrote on June 12, 2007 1:15 PM:

Neither Iraq or the DOJ scandal is going away. In fact the reality is both are going to get worse for Repubs and not just politically. The surge isn't going to work. Just how badly Repubs have politicized the DOJ for their party's benefit is going to become glaringly obvious too. That's the gateway to exposing all the other damage they've done to our government as mbbsdphil so eloquently explains above.

Getting them on record obstructing oversight and the clean up of these messes will rightfully bind them to the disasters. Bush has forced Dems to hand out dixie cups to the Republican party which they have no choice but to clutch as he pours the poison kool aid. They can choose to drink it down
in September and gasp their last political breaths
come November 08 or they throw the cup to the ground and start voting with Dems to end the occupation and repudiate the ongoing damage their party has done to our government.

Anonymous wrote on June 12, 2007 1:24 PM:

I second nation's comment. And beyond the actual legislative action, Democrats have to constantly hit the GOP in the media- for instance, respond hard to Lott's ridiculous statements.

ralph489 wrote on June 12, 2007 2:05 PM:

I thought there was one instance of a no-confidence vote against a Cabinet official... or am I thinking of an impeachment?

parrot wrote on June 12, 2007 2:14 PM:

I think you are all missing the point. Basically, most of the Senatorial presidential candidates with star power were absent for this vote. Why? Because, they would actually *draw attention* to the situation in Washington with regard to the perfidy of the GOP. The only conclusion is that the Democrats are not even training their big guns on this yet. But they could...at any moment. And when you have McCain, Hagel, Clinton, Obama all on the same page, in the public spot light, about getting rid of the Attorney General of the United States...then either it happens or impeachment happens. So, the plan is to just keep the fire hot on the DOJ issue until the emails come out...or intentional obstruction vis-a-vis those emails occurs.

Criminal conspiracy can be undone in many ways. Right now, the presidential candidates are raising money and jockeying for position, and not interested in campaigning on the Senate floor. That may change rather quickly when going up against the so-called President and his thugs becomes something that cannot be avoided. Right now, contrary to my own sense of common sense, decency, and respect for the law, that seems to be the game the Senate is playing.

The fact is that I think everyone in the Senate is afraid of what exactly would be the remedy if it turns out that the GOP has, in fact, been guilty as an organization, of conspiracy and subversion of the Constitution. In that case, where do we go? The Republic would have to basically disband the GOP...and that may be harsh, and difficult, but also necessary so that there is a sense of justice restored to America. The point is getting it so that 18 GOP Senators agree that that is necessary...and that might happen if all the spotlights were focussed at once on the infestation. So far, no one seems to think we've reached that point...and when I say "no one", I actually mean a majority of the US House and the US Senate, not the populace at large. Frankly, We The People are getting really, really fed up with the crap in Washington...and fortunately, Bush doesn't seem to be the solution...no matter how the thugs around him want to spin it.

Mcboo wrote on June 12, 2007 2:57 PM:

Ultimately the problem rests in the fact that our entire political system is so corrupted and broken that it can not (or at least will not) police itself.

It's become quite clear over the years that although there may be divergences in ideologue between parties and even within parties, the core operating procedures, drive for person gain, and self preservation mires politicians from all sides. Washington is now full of people that love what they ARE and not what they are supposed to be DOING.

Tom Simon wrote on June 12, 2007 3:12 PM:

This is all VERY depressing. We are being governed by people who are better suited to Albania than to this once proud land.

phil james wrote on June 12, 2007 4:11 PM:

A previous commenter says:
"This is really the crux of the infestation of all of the aspects of the government by unqualified right winged religious zealots who do not know what they are doing. This shameful heist is the Rovian legacy and the reason this country's institutions have eroded beyond, perhaps, repair. It has been rampant, and egregious."

You are correct about the Rovian legacy because this is most definitely his government, not the lame mouthpiece from Texas who fronts the show. So far as the "unqualified right wing religious zealots" that infest the government, let's be perfectly clear about their role. They are there, not because they forced themselves into power but because they are role player's in turdblossom's grand vision of restructuring the Federal government as a front for the RNC and one-party rule for the next thousand years. They are green enough and perhaps "idealistic" enough to believe they are doing something good. At least I think some of them are. They may in fact not realize they are simply pawns in turdboy's mega-con game. A huge part of the con is the stonewalling we are witnessing now. So long as the Dems operate without a veto-proof or filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, they are virtually hamstrung in doing anything substantive to thwart the boy-king. The other and perhaps the most vitally important part of the con is the role of corporate media in carrying the White House talking points (i.e. the con) to the masses. What has been clear most recently is that the con did not work in the Nov 2006 elections and does not appear to be working in terms of overall public sentiment as shown by national polling, but nevertheless, the White House cannot give up the con. Why? Because they have nothing else but the con. No compelling ideology. No fresh approaches to solve domestic or foriegn policy issues. Nothing...but the con. They won't give it up and, until the Senate too is in our hands...it's almost impossible to force them to. It might help to have a Democrat in the White House but the overriding need is a 60 or greater-vote majority in the Senate.

bjobotts wrote on June 12, 2007 8:00 PM:

It does both sides good to just "gum it to death" till '08 elections. The congressional Dems are content to just show us and tell us ablut the corruption but not "do" anything about it.
The Repubs don't have to worry about actually being called to account and can just continue to deny deny deny and claim the Dems are just trying to get political points.
Meanwhile the DoJ continues to serve at the pleasure of the president, keeping all the contamination operable till it can be undone 20yrs into the future.
Congress already has enough evidence to impeach the whole administration but they don't and they won't. Makes you want to get good and drunk and start blathering comments like "when are we gonna stand up and take 'em on, huh? huh?".
Unless they get more revealing stories like Comey's testimony no one will be shocked in the least at the underhanded dealings between the DoJ and the WH. How many more denials and "I don't recalls" will it take before the senate just announces what we already know...the administration turned the DoJ into an arm of the WH, they tried to influence and change elections and block democratic voters, they blocked ongoing investigations into corruption, they got a large chunk of the judicial bench under their control. One look at Gonzales and Schlozman in front of the senate and you just know all allegations are true.

Don wrote on June 12, 2007 10:43 PM:

We have a majority yet the Republican minority prevented our no confidence vote. Why weren't we using these available tools to thwart the Republicans during their reign?

P.S. As an aside, the code word I'm being asked to enter to enable my post seems particularly appropriate... screw!

phil james wrote on June 12, 2007 10:58 PM:

We were using the threat of filibuster during the Senate Republican's reign. But remember the gang of 14 that undercut the effort? Wasn't jumpin' joe Neo-con from CT in that group? And by the way. Where have Harry and Nancy been these last couple of months? Have they run out of steam? Are they playing it cool so as not to outshine the 2008 presidential hopefuls? Are they being just as political as the thugs they replaced? Certainly they could not have run out of agenda items.

Charles Bowman wrote on June 12, 2007 11:55 PM:

There is so much more to come of discovered Republican corruption that must be revealed before the GOP can begin to recover,that it makes no sense to formulate any program only to have its merits deflated by another horrendous scandal. While this malaise continues the Republicans, having nothing else, will try at least to hover together hoping for a sea change eventually that will wash away the footprints of Bush and his crooked cronies. The only victories possible for them now are obstructionist like the Iraq supplemental and the procedural prevention of a sure vote of no confidence for Gonzales. Such retrograde obstructionism will not enlarge the hem of their political garments and soon each candidate will be forced to look to his own survival. Given the ephemeral nature of politics at its best, the short shelf life of even the gravest issues, and the nauseated and totally cynical electorate ready to spit up even the most calculated political smooze, and the party knows that whatever resurgence that it can possibly make will not be soon coming. They are in the Star Chamber now, in the dark without any believers with which to converse. The dark future of the Grand Ole Party is that it gambled that it would never lose again and when you do somthing so atrocious, it is extremely difficult to discover a footing sure enough to bring them back.

Charles Bowman wrote on June 12, 2007 11:56 PM:

There is so much more to come of discovered Republican corruption that must be revealed before the GOP can begin to recover,that it makes no sense to formulate any program only to have its merits deflated by another horrendous scandal. While this malaise continues the Republicans, having nothing else, will try at least to hover together hoping for a sea change eventually that will wash away the footprints of Bush and his crooked cronies. The only victories possible for them now are obstructionist like the Iraq supplemental and the procedural prevention of a sure vote of no confidence for Gonzales. Such retrograde obstructionism will not enlarge the hem of their political garments and soon each candidate will be forced to look to his own survival. Given the ephemeral nature of politics at its best, the short shelf life of even the gravest issues, and the nauseated and totally cynical electorate ready to spit up even the most calculated political smooze, and the party knows that whatever resurgence that it can possibly make will not be soon coming. They are in the Star Chamber now, in the dark without any believers with which to converse. The dark future of the Grand Ole Party is that it gambled that it would never lose again and when you do somthing so atrocious, it is extremely difficult to discover a footing sure enough to bring them back.

Charles Bowman wrote on June 12, 2007 11:58 PM:

There is so much more to come of discovered Republican corruption that must be revealed before the GOP can begin to recover,that it makes no sense to formulate any program only to have its merits deflated by another horrendous scandal. While this malaise continues the Republicans, having nothing else, will try at least to hover together hoping for a sea change eventually that will wash away the footprints of Bush and his crooked cronies. The only victories possible for them now are obstructionist like the Iraq supplemental and the procedural prevention of a sure vote of no confidence for Gonzales. Such retrograde obstructionism will not enlarge the hem of their political garments and soon each candidate will be forced to look to his own survival. Given the ephemeral nature of politics at its best, the short shelf life of even the gravest issues, and the nauseated and totally cynical electorate ready to spit up even the most calculated political smooze, and the party knows that whatever resurgence that it can possibly make will not be soon coming. They are in the Star Chamber now, in the dark without any believers with which to converse. The dark future of the Grand Ole Party is that it gambled that it would never lose again and when you do somthing so atrocious, it is extremely difficult to discover a footing sure enough to bring them back.

Charles Bowman wrote on June 13, 2007 12:05 AM:

I am sorry for the triple posting!

JNagarya wrote on June 13, 2007 5:15 AM:

""expect things to move along much as they have."

"In other words, glacially slowly, ineffectually, and largely ignored by the corporate media."

It is moving at an adequate pace. But I'll ask again anyway: Why do you twits ignore the facts: even when you don't know it, the investigation is continuin behind the scenes.

"The House has the power to impeach Gonzales. The only way this is going to make any difference is for them to use that power."

The House has the Constitutional authority to impeach. It does not YET have SUFFICENT votes to impeach.

Again: Why do you twits refuse to accept that reality?

"Posted by: cervantes
Date: June 12, 2007 10:20 AM"

Pro-Bushit troll.

JNagarya wrote on June 13, 2007 5:22 AM:

"I think the Dems have thrown in the towel."

They havent yet sufficient votes to do as you deamnd. That is because of foot-dragging REPUBLICANS.

So who do you bash because of those realities? The DEMOCRATS.

Does that make sense? Yes -- if one is a pro-Bushit troll.

"They caved to Bush with the Iraq bill, . . . ."

No, they did not, disengaged ass. Rather than sending the same bill that was vetoed again and again and again -- which would have been political theater accomplishing _NOTHER_ -- they decided to get something constructive done. They forced Bushit to compromise -- a first in six years, and a major voctiry on which to build.

Included in the bill is domestic spending to which Bushit was adamantly opposed -- including monies for veterans affairs.

And including an increase in the minimum wage.

Why do you twits refuse to accept those facts and instead continuie to whine against reality?

Because pro-Bushit troll.

". . . . and if they don't issue subpoenas for Rove and Miers it is all over except for the crying of those who are losing loved ones in the war."

The investigation is nowhere near over -- which whining pro-Bushit trolls like you will use to bash Democrats -- even though the obstacle is foot-dragging REPUBLICANS.

"Posted by: via
Date: June 12, 2007 10:30 AM"

JNagarya wrote on June 13, 2007 5:30 AM:

"The Dem Congress is producing nothing of substance
regarding controversies at the Bush White House."

Por-Bushit troll. The foot-draggers are the REPUBLICANS. So you bash -- Democrats?

"On the contrary, they're allowing the Bush gang to run out the clock on Iraq, Gonzalez, Justice Dept political corruption, Cheney, Rove etc."

Believe what you want. Or make the effort to become informed about the fact that "politics is the art of the _POSSIBLE_". Or remian a neophyte whiner.

And pro-Bushit troll.

"Little more than a lot of huffing and puffing.

"Posted by: JohnW1141
Date: June 12, 2007 10:43 AM"

You have in front of you the results of an effort to hold Gonzales accountable. Was that vote sufficient, in your view, that the Democrats could do things they aren't doing yet you insist on demanding of them?

Pro-Bushit troll.

JNagarya wrote on June 13, 2007 5:40 AM:

"Poetry,

I have no confidence in Reid at all. He sure must have been one timid boxer."

Do you know his record as a boxer? I thought not.

"Reid is always seemingly afraid to call the Republicans bluff. What is with symbolic resolutions? Why not up the ante? If you are Reid, what better way to make the case that the Democrats will stand strong. Impeaching Gonzales is the only way Commander Guy is gonna take notice."

Damn you ignorant pie-in-the-sky twits! FIRST: Impeachment begins in the HOUSE. Reid is in the SEANTE.

SECOND: The Democrats in the HOUSE don't yet have sufficient votes to even raise the question of impeachment in committee, let alone get it to the floor for deabtes.

Why is that? Because of foot-dragging REPUBLICANS.

So in view of that reality who do you bash? The DEMOCRATS.

Is that smart, or stupid? It is STUPID.

"Bush wants Gonzales to stay, and Gonzales has Bush's back. You won't find out about Rove's involvement unless you start kicking doors down. The Republicans are drowning. You don't throw them a life raft."

No one has thrown them a life raft, ass. ACCEPT THE REALITY FOR WHAT IT IS: DEMOCRATS DON'T YET HAVE SUFFICIENT VOTES TO DO AS YOU DEMAND. STOP BASHING THEM FOR THE FACT THAT _REPUBLICANS_ ARE FOOT-DRAGGING.

Or continue to be a pro-Bushit troll with his head up his ass.

"Posted by: Ghost of Tom Joad
Date: June 12, 2007 10:49 AM"

JNagarya wrote on June 13, 2007 5:53 AM:

"Democrats have screwed up.

Why go for a no confidence vote if you don't have the votes? It makes you look weak and ineffective, which is what they are.

"Impeach him.

"Posted by: xyz
Date: June 12, 2007 11:29 AM"

I'd ask that you make sense, but that isn't within the capacities of pro-Bushit trolls.

If the Senate Democrats don't yet have sufficient votes to pass a non-binding no-confidence resolution, then impeachment -- which begins in the HOUSE -- also wouldn't have the votes.

Prove you aren't a pro-Bushit troll: bash the Republicans for foot-dragging, not the Democrats because the Republicans are foot-dragging.

JNagarya wrote on June 13, 2007 6:07 AM:

"Alberto Gonzales' fate on this issue, is, and should be, ONLY in Bush's hands.

"http://osi-speaks.blogspot.com/2007/06/republicans-rightfully-show-no.html#links

"Posted by: KYJurisDoctor
Date: June 12, 2007 12:00 PM"

Yet again the "Christ-centered" "lawyer" shows no regard for morality -- or for the specific rules -- Commandmnets, not "Requests" -- which apply to Christians, as in Thou shalt not lie.

If Gonzales -- an alleged Christian -- wasn't lying every time he said "I don't recall" and the equivalents, then he is clearly not mentally qualified for the job. If he was lying, then he isn't qualified for the job.

No one in the Executive on a cabinet level serves _only_ "at the pleasure of the president," Mr. "Christ-centered" "Lwmayer": they can be impeached and removed by the Congress.

Though it is self-servingly convenient -- and dishonest -- to leave that fact out --

There are two forms of lying:

1. Commission: telling a known falsehood;

2. Omission: withholding a known truth.

Try again to persuade that the self-descriptor "Christ-centered" "lawyer" is other than a cover-lie.

SC = sheep. As in, Beware avowed "Christians" in sheep's clothing.

JNagarya wrote on June 13, 2007 6:26 AM:

"When the House Judiciary Committee voted to impeach President Nixon, the Democrats had large majorities in the House and senate ... that's why Nixon knew the jig was up."

No: Nixon knew the jig was up because sufficient Republicans voted for impeachment.

"That is NOT the situation today ... the Democrats have a narrow majority in the House and an almost invisible majority in the senate. That is not Harry Reid's fault ... it is the math of the situation."

Correct. But try getting that through to the pro-Bushit trolls who bash the Democrats instead of the Republican foot-draggers.

"Posted by: poetry
Date: June 12, 2007 12:00 PM"

Mark wrote on June 13, 2007 3:41 PM:

It's all about the voters,stupid.
Posted by: Jane

Almost... It's all about the stupid voters.

The ignorance, laziness, and stupidity of the public at large is sickening. Whatever happened to critical thinking? It must be true if it's on the news, or "Liberal Media".

It is alleged that the DOJ's destruction is "too complicated" for John and Jane Q. Public to understand. If that's the case, then those folks are too stupid to vote.