Actually, I feel the country would be better off if Senator Schumer were to go. If fact, I demand his resignation!

Gonzo should definitely GO, as should Rove and Cheney.  They have done nothing but lie, cheat, and steal from the citizens of this nation.  While the sitting administration does have the right to replace federal prosecutors, doing so for purely political reasons cannot be what is meant by this law.

If he works for the people, why is the fate of his job not decided by the people but one man alone?

Gonzales is one of the architects of an unprecedented imbalance in our democratic process.  His justice department's intrusion into the private lives of ordinary citizens, and disregard for the constitution in general, present a clear case for his dismissal.

I believe many of his actions border on, or are outright, criminal.  Perhaps justice will prevail.

Gonzales will be the latest lackey to fall on his sword for George Bush.

Its time for all of the BUSH administration to go.  I think most Americans would agree.  

AG Gonzales is the worst kind of ineptitued in office. Purely put in place to be an operative. I've looked at this picture all morning and still only come away with the obvious intent of the photographer placing bobby behind Gonzales....the blaring contrast between the worst(A. Gonzales) and possibly the best a/gen.s in history. John Ashcroft should be thanking his god.

* rolls eyes at THIS week's ridiculous propoganda/bs/spin. us attorneys are hired and fired at will, period. there is nothing wrong in it. it is both legal and common practice. yes, including both the most recent presidents, clinton and bush both. do we have no real issues that need thought and action? like, say, comprehensive immigration, victory in iraq for both countries and peoples, etc, etc?

"Don't blame me, I only work here...  Psst... he's over there [points to Karl Rove at the White House]"

[... do we have no real issues that need thought and action?  Mike]

SEN. LEAHY: This is not the only thing that's going on in the Congress. We have everything from the budget to the war in Iraq going on.

But I think it's extremely important if somebody is trying to manipulate how prosecution is done in this country. It's hard to think of many things that are more important than that. After all, that affects your liberties, my liberties, and it affects the safety of all Americans.

[Sen. Leahy Interview: http://www.npr.org/templates/rundowns/rundown.php?prgId=2&agg=0&prgDate=03-13-2007&view=storyview]

gee whiz.....that righteous indignation is cute but this isn't a pic of comprehensive immigration.....

Gonzales, as with all of the current admninistration, represent the absolute worst attitudes concerning the rights of citizens.  GW, Rove, Cheney, Ashcroft, etc, have all done everything in their power to increase the power of themselves and their friends in high places at the expense, and lives, of the citizens.  If Congress wasn't so inept they would have all been impeached for their blatant lies  and disregard for the US Constitution.  I hope our Republic can survive the current debacle we call the Presidency and Congress.

Why has this become such a big deal? And do the people who are calling for his head (along with any and every other person in the Bush administration) NOT remember all the nonsense committed by the Clinton bunch when they were in power? This is continuing testamony to the fact that the liberal bias in the US  mainstream media is determined to eliminate conservatives from the face of the earth. Anybody remember Waco? Whitewater? Vietnam??? Rest assured that if Janet Reno had tried to defend this action, she would have been given a pass and this story would have ended the next day.

Gonzales was personally responsible for crafting the Bush Administrations legal rationalizations for the torture of prisoners as well as the current putsch of our legal system. Herr Gonzales belongs in prison for war crimes not the lowly soldiers like Lindsey England who were just following orders.

What exactly does "I accept full responsibility for what happened." mean when Gonzalez refuses to resign?

For that matter, what does it mean when Bush says it?

Bobby Kennedy possibly the best attnorney general you must be making a joke!

ABSOLUTELY NOT!! NO APOLOGIES EITHER!! These attorneys work for the President, and if he wants to fire them for something as simple as the color of their hair, he can do that, and if they are not working towards the agenda of the President, good bye. How convenient the press and the MSM are for forgetting and forgiving Clinton, when he fired 90-something of them!! They also tried to fire the entire Travel Office Staff.  What blatant hypocrisy! I now hope Gonzales fires mores of them, and President Bush tells the Democrats and liberals to go to hell. Enough is enough. This constant attack, attack, attack is really beginning to make my teeth hurt!!

On the one hand, if you acted this way in the private sector, you would be legally castrated for it. You simply don't treat people that way.

On the other hand, you expect me to feel sorry for ANY attorney? That is just plain stupid. It's a wash.

Oh please, the democrats have done the same things the republicans are doing now. Stop trying to look innocent. You only make yourself look even less believable than you already do.

It's unfortunate the democrats have become the "chicken little" party.  They do nothing more throw darts and hope one sticks.  Where's all the brave new intiatives to lead this country?  They're nothing more than rats looking to pick a scab.

Perhaps it is time to highlight that Janet Reno fired all 93 US Attorneys in 1993 during the Clinton Era.  Somehow Hilary must have overlooked that when she was calling for Gonzales' resignation today. The Clinton Double-Standard lives on.  

The uproar by Schumer over this is laughable. US attorneys are hired by the president and can be fired by him as well. Clinton fired 93 US attorneys, including the one that was heading the Whitewater investigation, yet nobody seemed to care about that. If any firings could have been politically motivated it would have been those. The democrats continue to do everything in their power to discredit the administration and create dissent in this country over non-issues such as this. There are things much more important than this that should be taking up ou elected representatives time>

Whats the big deal.  Why not go for the record?  Go for a Clinton/Reno coup.  Fire ALL of them just like 1993!

 What is the big deal ???  Clinton fired all 93 when he came into office. they work FOR the president at HIS discretion. He can fire any one of them for smiling wrong , if he wants to...  They work for the president and as such he can fire them ANTTIME  he wants.... What about Bill Clinton firing the Federal Prosecutor tha twas trying to get Hillary in Travelgate ?? The democrats seem to want to JUMP at anything that will make Bush look bad, but I think this one should backfire.

Nobody asked Janet Reno to resign when she fired 93 US attorneys while working for Clinton. One of whom was heading the Whitewater investigation. If any one should go it's Schumer. He is the epitome of the democrats hatred for the current administration. The continued attacks on President Bush over issues like this weakens our standing in the world and only serves to embolden our enemies.

What bothers me about this "discussion" group is someone at msnbc controls what is published.

EDITOR'S NOTE:   MSNBC.com edits profanity, racist comments and personal attacks.

well....if we are gonna get upset with people being fired....shouldnt we be upset if bush were to fire gonzalez? fire...bad
But seriously...there is enuff to be upset with the administration about that we dont need to Fabricate a mountain of a molehill.  Upset with the war, sure. That deserves an honest dialog. but the firing of 8 out of 93 or so federal prosecuters, when previous presidents (clinton comes to mind) have fired as many if not more? please....shouldnt even be newsworthy.
just my 2 cents

When Americans voted in the November 2006 elections, they voted for accountability.  The AG needs to remember that and hold himself accountable, and leave the office of the Attorney General.

Clinton fired all 93 U.S. Attorneys shortly after taking office.  This was described as a 'normal' function of the incomming administration.  (Its also been described as conveniently removing the prosecuters investigating and preparing prosecution for White Water Gate and Dan Rostinkowski).  Bush fired 8 U.S. Attorneys for failure to carry out their orders - specifically NOT proscuting voter fraud. (This is charerterized as "politicising" the judical process).
Do the Democrats and their allies in the mainstream media really think they ccan fool/cheat/bamboozal the American Public this way?  If they can, it raises some frightening prospects.

It's amazes me the lack of credible leadership and adequate job performance in this administration under George Bush. Paul Bremer, Michael Brown, Donald Rumsfield, Dick Cheney, Mark Foley, Karl Rove, and now Gonzales. For what reason President Bush owes such loyalty to such failed administrators is beyond me? That good old boy network of his is using him like a pawn.

If he had any common sense he would resign; Bush has ordered him to place the blame on himself and take one for the prezz, new (ag)kleenex please.

Yes he should go and everybody they appointed. I sure wouldn`t admit to being a democrat if I ever ended up in one of there courts

Quote

First GOP senator calls for Gonzales firing - Politics - MSNBC.com


Gonzales says he is here to serve the president. Ah, isn't he here to serve the LAW? We already know that if President Bush don't like a law, he has historically either tried to change it or skirt around it. So Gonzales has admitted in public that what the President wants is more important than the law.

That is just plain wrong, no matter how you look at it!

Get rid of Gonzales. I am an American Citizen married to a Germany who was deported last year. I wrote many times to his office and never received any type of a response. The whole department needs to be revamped and put people in who cares about  human rights.

Well lets think about this for a second,..... OK they all need to be fired. All of your time is almost over just go in peace and retire or do what ever you people do..

What troubles me about this whole situation is the lack of separation of powers between the executive branch and the judicial branch.  I'm concerned that justice is not blind, that politics are used in the judicial system to determine right and wrong, which laws to prosecute, and to further political agendas. I'm not under the illusion that justice is fair, blind, or apolitical; I’m concerned that justice is increasingly unfair, perceptive, and political.  Gonzales should be removed from office as this occurred under his watch.  The difference between this event and the one orchestrated by Clinton is one was done by the AG and the other by the President—neither are good for the justice system, this country, nor Democracy.

"No, he should not go!  There was nothing inappropriate about the firings. The attorneys are employed at the pleasure of the president, and subsequently his representative the attorney general . What's all the fuss? Clinton fired all 93 when he came to office. Why the big stink over Bush letting go of eight?  Just another spin by the Democrats and liberal media"

Amazing...this whole situation....you fire 8 US attorneys and they are calling for the Attorney General's resignation...People have very selective memories....They forget Waco and Elian Gonzales...Allowing a mass killing of citizens and the forcible entry into a family's home in Miami with M16s in hand pointing at the heads of people hiding in a closet..But this doesnt come close to this now does it....Oh my why should it....And of course, the Clintons were in the White House but don't remember them stepping up and trying to stop it or even any Democrats coming forward to even come close to demanding Janet Reno's resignation....Democrats today aren't the Democrats of 20 years ago..They are a different bread hiding behind the guise of the Democratic party, It's just smart politics to be a Democrat, The problem is that they are just as rich and self-serving as their right wing counterparts...Wake up people, this is nothing more than a witch hunt against an administration during an election year....Of course, nothing from the side of the Democratic presidential candidates on this to date...I guess they are just waiting it out to see how they can spin it to help their campaigns....

Uhhh... John ....  Reno did get a big pass on Waco. They're still very dead and she didn't  get canned over it, did she?

This is just another example that this administration is underhanded if not outright criminal on so many issues.  There are provisions in the constitution for Congress to deal with a criminial administration, however since the Congress under Clinton turned impeachment into a "political" tool - now when it is justified due to real "high crimes" nobody will even bring it up

Wow, it's great to see that the ol' excuse that Clinton did it too is still in use these days...nothing like a little gradeschool finger pointing.

What else could we expect.

Bush & Co. have made a mockery of our constitution, sent us war...all under the pretext of saving us from terrorists.

More schoolyard bully antics.

This is not a separation of executive and judicial powers issue.  The "Prosecuters" are there to go after criminal activities the way a City or State District Attorney does, and they are told by the Judicial Department (Which works for the Executive Branch) what priorities they have.  If they are not doing thier job, they get fired.  The "JUDGES" are the ones in the Judicial BRANCH of our government, who interpet the laws and decide cases, and are the ones protected from the Executive BRANCH.  All firing a prosecuter does is affects which criminal activities will be focused on by the Judicial Department of the Executive BRANCH, and brought to the judges in the Judicial BRANCH for adjudication.

I love all this "liberal media" whining.  The media has given these thieves free reign for six years.  Now that they are reporting all the wrong doing, the head in the sand crowd is crying fowl.  My only objection to this is that far worse misdeeds and crimes are going under reported.  Gonzales should be fired, but not for this.

Tonight, FOX TV, "Am I smarter than a fifth grader".  I reccomend all Libs watch.  Maybe they will have some American Government questions that will enlighten you on how the process actually works.

ATTORNEY GENERAL GONZALES SHOULD RESIGN IMMEDIATELY!

This has nothing to do with Clinton, so why beat a dead horse? The good Republicans lie and pass the buck about everything. AG GONZO has disregarded the law of the land shredded the constitution, tortured countless, changed laws to suite their needs, illegal wire tapping i could go on and on and all the nazicons can do is cry about Clinton, get real. In the real world if you get fired you best have a very good reason or the law prevails, i guess when you think your the law your unstoppable i say impeach and sack the whole bunch.

How do the 2006 elections apply to Gonzalez? The AG is an appointee, he is not elected. I believe that he should be given a chance to look into the matter, uncover the facts and report them to Congress.

In my personal oppinion, the members of Congress should take a good and lasting look into the mirror. The speaker of the house should be deeply ashamed of herself for treating our military personnel currently in harms way as pawns for purely political purposes. Irag isn't Vietnam all over again, but Congress is Vietnam all over again.

Stop the play ground finger pointing (Clinton did it na na) Bill  had his  butt kicked plenty when in office.  Bush is in power and we need to send a message you can break ours laws end of discussion. The US government needs to tell the truth and stop lying to the citizens and they won't need to keep telling lies to cover  up the first one. You losers voted for Bush the D+ President and he will be the worst president we had in a long time. What a shame we have to carry because of his administration.

Are you really that ignorant that you cant see the parallels between Iraq and VIetnam?????  The AG  should resign immediately if not sooner.  Im not a democrat or a republican.  Im an american and everyone should view things as such.  Do whats best for the majority of America not what politically expedient!!

This entire administration has committed acts that warrant examination.  From A to Z they have virtually eviserated the constitution, enacted laws for "homeland security" that allows torture, in front of children if need be.  What kind of justice does this represent.  Blowback, how backing despots in far-off places inevitably comes back to haunt the orginial source. But those who do not know or remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

If Janet Reno gets to stay after firing all 83 prosecutors during Clinton's administration, then Gonzales gets to stay. This is just another hypocritical straw dog thrown out by the Democrats. When you hear a Democrat whine about Republican "misdeeds", you can bet they started the practice in the past and probably did it bigger and better. Democrats are better liars and spinners than Republicans ever thought of being.

It amazes me that none of the so-called big three (NBC, ABC, or CBS)have mentioned the fact that in 1993, Clinton fired all 93 U.S. Attorneys two of which were investigating him and his wife at the time.

And amusingly, at the time the so-called big 3 didn't think it was newsworthy, either. What's even more amusing is liberals, when asked about the apparent difference in reporting claim that firing 8 attorneys is worse than firing 93 attorneys.

Just another example of liberal hypocrisy, I suppose.  I should be used to it by now.

There is no question in my mind that the sooner AG and the rest of this corrupt administration go, the sooner the immense damage done to this nation can be repaired.

There is a fundemental flaw in the process of selecting the Nation's "Top Cop".  If this position is in the Presdient's Cabinet, and is appointed by the President and its adminstration, then she/he will be to some degree (100% in this case) beholden to the President.

If this position is truely "for the people", then it should be selected "by the people".

To kill a weed you must carve out the roots. We can pluck the leaves all we want, but its the underlying administration that needs to go. That is the sad truth of it.

Gonzales works for the people?  Is this a joke?  This is a man who, by parsing words has torn our Constitution apart.  He seems hell-bent on taking power away from the people and giving it to the government.  We should fire him. Let's all stand up and take back our power.  These abuses are not going to change unless we, the people, do something about it. Join the march in Washington on March 17th and get your voice back.

It seems that there are a lot of folks that beleive because Clinton did something no matter how many years ago, it's okay for the Bush administration to do whatever it wants.  What a lame excuse "do you remember what Clinton did?"  So what, this administration, which I'll point out has been in office for over 6 years now, is responsible for what it does, not Clinton.  OR, you can of course continue to wallow in you hypocracy.  2 wrongs do not make a right my friends.  If it was wrong for Clinton to do it, it's still wrong for Bush to do it.  We are a nation of laws not score settlers.

1)  Prosecuter works for Justice Dept.
2)  Justice Dept works for White House
3)  Prosecuter told to focus on Terrorists
4)  Prosecuter wants to focus on parking tickets
5)  Prosecuter gets fired

Good god its simple..............

He should stand his ground against the real terrorist, the pathetic liberal/ democrat party.If the democrats have it their way the united states has met its demise.

Gonzales will be out when the new administration gets in. You KNOW he was just following orders from his boss. And NOBODY'S got the b_lls to demand HIS resignation.

heavens no. they fired 93 of them during the clinton administration, what is the big deal about 8. if this was a democrat in office it wouldn't have even made the news. i am sick of the medias who always blame the republicans. it's no big deal. they can fire who they want.

What continually shows up when the Administration or political parties are shown to have stepped over the line in legal matters,is that too often citizens tend to speak to the issue based on their political affliation. Thus we are quickly becoming a society for which there is no wrong or right...only MAYBE and that MAYBE has to be with personal politics. There is no sliding scale on right and wrong...legal or
illegal. When are people in this country gonna get it! If you are willing to allow another person's rights to be trampled--what comes around -goes around and at some point it will be your turn. I am not talking about perceived slights--I am talking about someone smacking you upside the head as they trample on your rights.
Too many Americans behave like 5 year olds on the schoolyard---yah yah, Bill Clinton behaved like an idiot-so we get to have our idiots too!

We are talking about a legal system that is the basis for our Democracy-Nobody, Democrat or Republican gets the mess with it--Gonzales, hitch em up and move em out!

Gonzales as a educated and trained attorney has to know that his rigorous mis-use of the legal system is dead wrong. Nobody questions his loyalty to the President who appointed him. But just as he attests that he WORKS for the American people, he has to put his loyalty aside in that office when it is in direct opposition to what is legal, decent and right!

There really is nothing to talk about here!  Gonzolas should STAY!

The US Attorney's are an at-will employee and they too serve at the pleasure of the President!  THEY ARE IN THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH and THANK GOD there is no "Labor Union" in the Executive Branch...

He should have fired these eight Clinton Hacks YEARS ago!

It is amazing to me the ignorance of some (obviously neo-cons) who believe Clinton fired all 93 US attorneys while he was in office.  According to the emails from Kyle Sampson (who represents the Bush White House)clearly state that Clinton and Reagan both allowed US attorneys to stay in office after their terms had expired.  http://www.slate.com/id/2161865/fr/flyout  Those of you who are continuing to spread lies and misinformation about Clinton in this way are uneducated and misinformed.  If the Bush White House can clearly state Clinton DID NOT fire ANY US Attorney, then we can rest assured that he did not.

And yes.  You fire 8 US attorneys for political reasons and you should be fired. Gonzales has been party to the gutting of the Constitution he is supposed to be protecting, he has had an utter disregard for the Geneva Conventions, he okayed an illegal war on a sovereign nation (Iraq for you neo-cons), and he has violated what it means to practice ethical law for so long now he has basically been a rubber stamp for whatever part of the Constitution Bush wants to break.  He should be held in front of a criminal court at the Hague for crimes against humanity, along with Bush, Cheney and Rove.

when the American taliban, IE Christian conservative republican's, stated loud, and clear they are restoring theintent of the framers of the constitution, what exactly did you think they meant?
When the American Taliban publically states: "liberal activist judges are legislating from the bench denying the will of the people," what exactly do you think they mean?
The federalist, the framers of the constitution, omited a Bill of Rights, legalized slaver, denied woman all rights, and prohibited 95% of American's from voting.
Now do you understand why this is so appealing to the American Taliban republican party?
If the moralist hypocrites were not blotting out the Bill of Rights in the first place those pesky liberal judges wouldn't have to legislate the Bill of Rights from the bench.
Frankly I don't know what all the fuss is about with the AG. The Supreme Court ruled last year inalienable rights are not inalienable. If that doesn't piss you off enough to pick up a gun like our forefathers, why the outrage over religious control freaks stacking the courts?

Let's see - didn't Clinton fire some 93 prosecutors while in office? Gee, that wouldn't be for "political purposes" would it? These folks serve at the pleasure of the President. Period. Each administration can pick and choose as they please. When the Democrats do it its OK, when the Republicans do it its an outrage. Hillary in '08? hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah

I believe that the differences between the firing of 93 attorneys by the Clinton administration and what happened recently are very important: 1) In 1993, it was a new administration and all of the attorneys had been appointed by the previous president, and 2) Much more importantly, the replacement attorneys in 1993 had to be confirmed by the Senate. Due to the provision inserted into the reauthorized Patriot Act, this is no longer the case. This provision allows the AG to appoint anyone they want (even me, if I were politically connected) to one of these positions.

In my opinion, that is the most troubling part of this story, given this administrations history of political appointments (remember Mr. Brown's FEMA performance?)

This is a non story being stirred up by the libral media and the Democrats

Of course he should stay. Clinton fired 93 attorneys (and, since when did attorneys become victims?) including the prosecutor in Arkansas handling the Whitewater investigation. This is just another example of dem hypocrisy and an obsession with undercutting Bush no matter what the consequences to our country, our troops, or our place in the world. Oh, and PLEASE stop saying that you "stand with the troops" because it must be their troops, not ours, Nancy...

Wait no. Bush, Cheney and Gonzales should be tried in front of a military tribunal as "enemy combatants" of the United States according to their own Military Tribunal Act for their complete disregard of the Constitution they swore to uphold.

bush endorses gonzales and that’s good enough for me. Fire him!

1. Some prosecutors should have been fired. Others were victims to Congressional displeasure and refusal to "toady" to their congressional whims. Gonzales, along with the White House, is guilty of perpetuating illegal intervention by certain Congress members.
2. Gonzales is ultimately responsible, and an architect of the legislation, that has led to the FBI transgressions. He has shown oversight can't protect from abuse of the Constitution and that he is incapable of such oversight.
3. This man, who would be AG and responsible for law enforcement, feels he interprets Constitutional law, but this responsibility only lies with the Judiciary.
4. Job performance being the reason for firing the prosecutors should then apply to the AG - fire him.
5. Best scenario: Impeach the entire present administration and rid the Executive branch of the worst, most incompetent, greatest threats to the Constitution, the United States has ever seen in it's history.
6. Really begin to worry – Congress in being inactive in pursuing Constitutional wrong-doing just means the individuals involved want to enjoy the same adventures for themselves in making a neo-fascist state of the United States.
7. Every totalitarian state has had the same flow of history, save the people from some external threat by removing the protective covenants of the existing state.

I don't think this is that big a deal. These days everyone just likes to yell, be the center of attention and whine about the "others actions".

The president should be able to pick his administration members. It's just politics as usual, only now its the other side. It's an on-going cycle every 4 years. There is not one bit of difference between them; Politicians or 4-year cycles. Sadly none of them are for the people only for themselves.

Having said that I also don't believe that Gonzales should have been given the position to begin with. It's not like he was or is qualified to be the Attorney General. He may well be a very nice person but his loyalty is to Bush not the American people. It's the same as when Bush nominated Harriet Mier for the Supreme Court. That was a truly laughable idea, only it was sad and typically myopic of the "It's all about what I want" President and Vice-President. Cronyism was, is and continues to be alive and well within the Bush Administration.

Their place in the history books is going to be a very rude shock to them.

This is much ado about nothing. US Attorney's serve at the pleasure of the president and can be removed for no reason if the president elects to do so. President Clinton fired all of them when he took office. Was there no political agenda there? When you compare Gonzales to Reno it is clear that no matter what he would do at this point, he would never reach the level of incompetence of her tenure as the AG.  

Mr.Gonzales, is a good example of someone who got where he is because of who..not what he knows.
Has he even ever tried a case? I do not think so.
This is another example of someone who was LOYAL to Bush (Bushs' prime criteria for who he likes or dislikes) and because of that got an appointment to a very important position, but one which he is much to immature and unskilled to fill.

This, like the war, will come back to bite the democrats.  They have spent so much time telling their followers that every single thing the White House has done for 6 years is illegal or politically motivated (even when its not), that when they get in charge and have to do it themselves, the lefty loonies will go berserk.  They have trained an entire group of people who truly do not understand the law, or will listen to facts, but who emotionally jump to unsupported conclusions about everything done in DC.

The Bush administration ??? What can you say ??? Alot of us are were absolutely amazed-dumbfouned etc. he ever got elected anyway. Now after all the lies and deception -again his team of crooks, liers and thieves still are able to pull some crap like this.  
I just hope the barrel of monkeys running this white dont do any more damamge than whats already been done.
MAY GOD SAVE THE REST OF US WHO HAVE ANY SENSE !

Another fearmongering facist in the bush administration runs roughshod over our constitution, civil rights and the laws of our country.  All in the name of fighting terrorists and "protecting" us.

The proof of how far this situation has gone lies in the reaction of our government and the self-righteous thugs (ibid.) who continue to show support for their regime.  

Yeah, when Clinton does it its OK. When Bush does it its an outrage. Typical liberal media BS. These prosecutors serve at the pleasure of the President. Period.

The Bush White House is a self-serving descrimanatory group of Anti-Americans the country has ever witnessed.

We need Britan's No-Confidence Rule so we can oust these bast...s.

They're killing America!

Alberto Noriega... ooooops, I mean Alberto Gonzales is a YES MAN for the Bush administration.  HE IS ANYTHING BUT A PATRIOTIC AMERICAN.  Alberto and company are systematiclally destroying CONSTITUTIONAL JUSTICE.

Gonzalez should have been gone after
the torture approval as WH consel

It's interesting the fact that the AG did nothing illegal, it happened 2 years ago, and the Congress was informed, that this has become a reason for holding investigations about the administration again. For you that think he should go, why? For doing what he was supposed to do? For getting rid of lazy, underperforming employees?
Oops, I forgot, it happened under Bush so it can't be right. And for you people that do the defense of Clinton, understand this. What he did was legal also, and to compare them is appropriate. If you can't do that then you are so blinded because of your hate for Bush then it doesn't matter what is said.

I totally understand the concern from both sides of the aisle. But, we can't blame everything on the Clinton Admininstration.  This administration has made it's own set of mistakes from the beginning.  I thought we were looking for Bin Laden in the mountains of Afghanistan and now we're in Iraq, and contemplating going to Iran. This is definitely not staying the course. Notice when the President travels abroad there are violent protests.  We can't demand or convince other countries to be like us. We must accept other people's beliefs and idealogies.  The Middle East have been fighting since the beginning of time about things our president does not understand.
Get over it and get out of it.

Democrats are destroying the strength of this nation. In their hatred of this President they attack the Attorney General, our troops, the President and his administration. Better to destroy a nation rather than have someone you hate serving?

Pot meet Kettle...

Clinton fires all of them almost immediately after taking office and that's just okie dokie fine with everyone, then Bush/Gonzales fire 8 and them and it's a scandal?

WTF is wrong with this country?

Take some time to read the history of politics in America. This sort of partisan fighting is as natural to our political fabric as the rising of sun everyday. If it didn't happen, you would wonder what was going on.

This is unbelievably ludicrous...You fire 8 US Attorneys and all of a sudden it becomes a National Issue...We got bigger problems folks...We have soaring gas prices, a broken Social Security System, and Iraq..We know you have Bush but give it a rest...let's focus our energies on solving these "IMPORTANT" issues...Democrats have control know...step up to the plate, stop the petty arguing and work with the right and put forth some good legislation...It's ridiculous news items like this that is making the US the joke of the world...

Why is it that Democrats are blind and deaf to ANYTHING that happened prior to 2001 when President Bush took office? So many of the things that Democrats use to call for any Republican's resignation, beit from the President down to a freshman Congressman's staffer, were done by THEIR OWN PEOPLE?!! Yet it was okay back then. Janet Reno admitted that it was political when President Clinton fired ALL of the judges back in '93. What's different now? The President is Republican.

It is unconcionable that the people of this country are more interested in American Idol than the laws of this land and yet, can't help themselves when it's time to sound off about something about which they have not clue.  These people hold their positions with the blessing of those elected officials who put them there.  It's unfortunate that at a whim they are all released unconditionally, but that is the situation.  What most folks on the right are trying to point out is that while the Clintons cleaned out 93 prosecutors, this administration is vilified at every turn during a very difficult time.  Keep howling liberal America.  Hopefully, you'll cry wolf at least once too often, and even the press will stop getting you whipped into a frenzy over nothing.  

of cource not, anyone w/ half a brain can see this is politics.and they call this the govt for the people.

History will tell the story of this President and his actions and nonactions.  It will tell of the failings and the successes.  
I forgot, what successes?

Republicans are as bad as the Taliban, you're all just fascists trying to impose a theocracy.

I can't stop laughing!!!
All the Libs on here keep saying "just because Clinton did it years ago, that doesn't make it right for Bush now - two wrongs don't make a right".
DEAR GOD, THEY JUST DON'T GET IT!!
IT WASN'T WRONG FOR CLINTON !!!
AND IT'S NOT WRONG NOW, EITHER !!!
Any president can fire any federal prosecutor at any time for any reason.
THEY SERVE AT HIS PLEASURE!
Get a clue.  Learn the law and the constitution before you start spouting it.

All of this is BS. The President has the right to appoint and fire Attornies General, so what's the big deal. Let's get on with more pressing issues, like Irag maybe? Or our relationship with Mexico or lack there of.

OK!!!! Stop the whining, BOTH SIDES! ANY misdeeds by ANY presidential administration are WRONG! What the sticking point the right is making is that the former president was the media darling, no matter what he or his crooked administration and WIFE did. What the left is saying is that even the implication of impropriaty is enough to can someone.

So no one wants to mention the firings Clinton did? Well, Fox news let it slip out as did a at least one conservative talk show.  What's the big deal that Bush cleans house of a few Liberals he simply can't trust to persue liberal law breakers.  Oh, I forgot it does give the Democrates a chance to yell "Off with their heads, put us back in charge".

I also believe that it is time for the country to tell Senator Schumer and the rest of the demecrated controled congress were to go. If fact, I demand their resignation for wasting our time and money on the subject.  Janet Reno fired ten times more.

He will eventually have to take the fall as public outcry continues and the news frenzy feeds the fire. The only thing that will save him and ultimately others would be another terrorist event to upstage the otherwise boring news day.  Having said that why not start with the entire bunch of them.

I wholeheartedly endores what Dan Clinton wrote earlier in this discussion, when he noted Gonzales many abuses of the rights of individuals in the service of deranged policies of the current administration.  He obviously doesn't respect the constitution of the USA, and the American people.  This attitude, unfortunately, is shared by far too many in the present administration.  I'm reminded of the callous disregard of American principles which we had to endure during the Nixon presidency, with multiple violations of Americans, and of our laws committed by many influential people of that adminstration, including the Vice President, the Attorney General, and many folks who were chief counsels and staff in the White House.  It's almost dejavu how we seem to be revisiting those problems.  I advise George Bush and his entire administration to enroll themselves in basic civics courses, and to reread American history.  It didn't work in the past, and it won't work now.  The American spirit can't be destroyed, and the American people refuse to be lied to, no matter how many "so called" public servants attempt to do it, sadly, again.  

The buck stops with 'WE THE PEOPLE'.  If we are dissatisfied with the conduct of any 'Public Servant(s)' intrusted with the protection of our Constitutional Rights and Laws of this Nation, it is our collective duty and resposibility to replace.  See you at the ballot box.

Why should he have to resign. If you look back at Clinton when he took office he fired over 90 US Attorneys.
This is typical of the Democrats looking for something when they need to get off their behinds and pass some legislation on immigration, social security and other important matters. Most of our politicians are noting more than rats and I say "No more cheese"....

Everyone has a different opinion, just because yours may be different than someones elses in this blog doesn't mean theirs should not be printed. This is a discussion about people's different opinions, that is what makes it interesting.

Yes it was all Bill Clinton's fault. Isn't EVERYTHING. Clinton replaced the prosecuters when he took office as do all NEW Presidents. Please read this link.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17627519/site/newsweek/

As has been the case as far back as I can remember, all the liberal media & politicians want to blame all our problems on the GOP and any GOP administration. It's liberal ideology and politcial correctness that will bring down our way of life in America as we know it.

Where are you liberals now, liberally speaking I believe this is racially motivated to oust a hispanic government offical, LULAC ??

You can spin it any way you want. As I see it if this were a Democrat Administration (God forbid) this wouldn't have even made the papers.

The Dem's don't lie - Remember,it was Slick Willie who said, when asked by reporters if he had asked Monica to lie on her deposition, "I never asked Monica to lie on her deposition, I asked her yo lie in this position"

He is the one wh should have been impeached.

Clinton fires 92 of 93 attorneys in his first months of office, literally setting the halt to all legal actions as the system was re-loaded (including the Whitewater investigation) and it was simply "what is expected from a new prosident's office.....even though it was Unprecedented in history.

Yet, 8 of 93 by Bush and it is the sad old "right wing Conspiracy" lets hop Hillary doesn't stop running, as if her momentum ceases then we will have the entire left side of the country ass to nose for a line that circles the globe.

When will the left truy start to be the creative people they state they are and deliver solutions, versus being the angry hate screaming broken record.

How about meeting half way and ending all the failures of all the politicians by holding these professionals accountable across the board??

Most of us don't know all the facts yet.  Yet everyone has to voice an opinion and call for him to resign.  Why wasn't Janet Reno brought on the carpet when she fired much more than 8.  Guess how many were republicans?  Liberals do what they do best all talk and nothing to back it up except talk and back stab.

Lets pull out of Washington DC because there are more murders per month in DC per 100,000 than in Iraq.

jeeze, isn't the government now batting 1000. hasn't all of gb's appointments been proven to be corrupt or inept or both. why are we surprised. how do you think they were selected in the first place.

 Give the Man a chance , He should stay. He will fix it.

Just another "CROOK" in the Bush administration.   This one just happens to be the "AG".  What a JOKE.

Can we all take a breath? AG Gonzoles, along with most of the individuals that were fired, will talk to congress. Let the system work. scammersmurf - Why the hate speech? How do Christian conservatives fit into your "fire the AG" logic?

Help me understand the argument that what's going on is OK because Clinton did things too.  Are the Bush supporters saying that they're expectations of Bush are no higher than those for Clinton?!?  As a Democrat, I appreciate y'all saying that Bush isn't any better than my guy!

CORRUPTION CORRUPTION CORRUPTION CORRUPTION CORRUPTION CORRUPTION CORRUPTION CORRUPTION CORRUPTION CORRUPTION CORRUPTION CORRUPTION CORRUPTION CORRUPTION CORRUPTION CORRUPTION CORRUPTION CORRUPTION

To: RogerM


That's the thing, Roger, we don't 'SERVE' the president, he is supposed to serve the people--but that's the problem, he thinks that Americans are there to serve his will, even if it is wrong, and if we won't do it willingly, there has been quite a HUGE amount of evidence that there's some serious manipulation to force us!

You don't see that after monthly, weekly, daily, having our dignity as people taken away by an administration that treats us as idiotic puppets, some of us (a majority) have had enough!  It's not just about loyalty, but when the people in power have given so much evidence that they do NOT have America and Americans in their best interest, why WHY WHY!? should we still show such blind loyalty?  That doesn't make any sense in a Democracy, does it?  I can't understand logic like yours sometimes.


Our own Attorney General is going to be shown up as a LACKY to the political system.  It won't happen, you say?  Okay, we'll have to see--BUT, i guarantee you, if it happens that he was a lacky in a horribly corrupted, slap in the face to the American people episode--there will still be people who blindly support those the 'SERVE'.  Open you eyes, will you?

Roger, the strength of this nation was destroyed when the constitution was dismantled. The only thing left in the Constitution which has not yet been assualted by this administration is the right to not have to give quarters to the military in our homes. After the debacle  which has come to light this past week regarding our wounded vets and their apparent lack of care, that may be next on "Georgy Boys List"

No surprises here, AG is just another one of Bush's cronies.  I can't wait for 2008!  

The Bush adminstration is the most corrupt I have ever seen. What does America stand for today?????? They all should go!!!

"Mistakes were made" seems to mean "We got caught" I have seen no remorse from anyone in the Bush administration for contuning to undermine the rule of law nationaly and internationaly. Considering how they got into the White House that should not be a surprise.

Bush is not liked in the world, I can't understand how you americans can sit idly by and let him do what he does. Americans are strong and wise! Use it to unite, not sqabble with politics. Replace the administration next voting term!

I am amazed at the number of 29%ers that are commenting.....and still using the same old tired rove-o-matic talking points...clinton did it...reno....look a ufo!

Why is this a "scandal"? I don't recall any furor when Bill Clinton replaced ALL the US Attorneys when he was in office. But then again this is politics.

I think that they all should be tossed out and brought up on WAR Crime charges against the Geneva Convention! Emilofo, you are vary right, this is his last term in office and he will be replaced with someone else we just need to figure out what party is going to be in next.

Where was this OUTCRY when Reno fired ALL attorney's ???  You serve at the call of the President, period.  Also, you want to critize Gonzales; I haven't seen a Waco or agents taking a small child out of a home in Miami on his watch, ummmm.

Historically, when a president first enters office, all 90-some US attorneys are replaced.  Clinton did it in 93 (after he won the 92 election) and other presidents did the same.  GW Bush appointed HIS attorneys after the 2000 election.  However FIRING your own attorneys -- especially 8 of them -- in the middle of your term is just unheard of.  Clinton fired ONE during his 8 years (after 93).  That's why everyone is in such an uproar.  

Some of you are missing the point (thomson is a prime example).  Cinton fired all prosecutors at the beginning of his term (not midway through).  if these idiots did that there would be no problem.  however, to select only a few only for political purposes ruins the comparison.  here is something novel,lets see if this administration can actually tell the truth on something.

Where was the democratic outrage when former President Clinton fired over 100 US Attorneys?

The difference with Clinton was that he did it when he first took office.  Thats understandable, he didn't assess their politics, he did a clean sweep when he first came to power.  Bush waited 4 years and apparently assessed which attorneys would bow to his "political" will and dismissed those who actually believed in what they were there today, not just prop up the administrations party.  The attorneys dismissed didn't jump just because the Republican party snapped their fingers. A one party system is what the Republicans have been trying to create in this country (in most countries that have that we call them dictators.)  Fortunately, there are still enough fair minded people in this country who actually believe in a two party system.  

It's pity that Attorney General Gonzales' days are numbered. Americans should appreciate likes of Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld, and now Gonzales for making them realize how incompetent this administrations is, and show disgust for all those who voted for Bush. I can't hardly wait for the 2008 elections. After 8 years of a corrupt and incomptent administration lead by Bush, Cheney and Rove, who wasted half trillon dollars in Iraq, and trampled on our constitutional rights, we need someone like Gonzales to remind us never to vote Republican.

You are exactly right Gene.  What Clinton did was the same thing that many other Presidents have done....What Bush, Rove and Gonzales did is practically unheard of.  This administration is doing anything it can to trample on the rights of American citizens.  The only thing that concerns me about this investigation is that its taking attention away from Iraq, Iran, Afganistan etc. and where are the investigations about what got us into Iraq in the first place?  

I love the way  liberals rationalize away the 93  attonneys fired by Clinton.( one of which was very aggressive in getting to the bottom of Whitewater) One of the major differences between Conservatives and libs is the fact that we Conservatives admit when our own err and run them off.(Nixon,Packwood,Livingston,Gov. Ryan)to name a few, while libs NEVER EVER see any problems with their own!!!!!

Clinton fired 93 U.S. Attorneys when he took office.  The U.S. Attorney position is a political position; just like Attorney General, Secretary of State, and National Security Advisor.  Presidents have always fired U.S. Attorneys for their politics.  These should be the only soundbites we hear from Gonzalez and any other members of the administration, but they're all too spineless to assert the truth.  This whole situation is pathetic and sickening.

The argument is not "Because Clinton did it, Bush can too."  The argument is "It's not wrong, never has been regarded as wrong, and here are other Presidents who've done the same thing without people regarding it as wrong."  Bringing up Clinton is not childish finger-pointing.  It's citing historical evidence that this whole 'scandal' is contrived.  These facts should open eyes that maybe, just maybe some of the other scandals you've heard and read about Bush are equally contrived.  Speaking of straw-men, the attorney firings have absolutely nothing to do with Iraq, torture, etc.  Can we stay on topic, and discuss whether or not a crime has been committed in this case?  Leave those other topics to another forum.

Wow... I completey agree with what Rove said, insofar as the entire Bush admistration being grossly malfeasant & all deserving of indictment! However, I disagree with his assessment of Gonzales being good for the USA. He has shown that he is eager to eviscerate the Constitution just as quick as Bush & Cheney! He has been a mere henchman & minion of this administration!

RON PAUL FOR 2008!!!

It's strange that people talk about Clinton firing all 93 attorneys as acceptable since he did not have time to assess their politics.  Then are we to believe those firings were not politically motivated?  Those attorneys were appointed by the previous administrations, Republican administrations, and they prosecuted the law from conservative viewpoints.  Unlike judges, prosecutors are supposed to come at the law from an angle, they are supposed to have a bias for the executive branch.  The executive branch is their client.  Let's not pretend that after the firings Clinton appointed new attorneys randomly.  He didn't.  He appointed left-leaning attorneys, ones that could better represent his administration.  The attorney's AG fired refused to take cases.  Wouldn't you fire your lawyer and find another if she refused to represent you in court????

I think this a non-story.  Clinton fired 93 atty's during his admin, and this was multi tasking while getting his knob polished.

Did Clinton fire 93 US Attorneys when he took office, yes.  Did he lie about why they were fired?  No.  The Bush administration continually lies and then when they're caught they first deny that the event happened, then they throw in some more lies and say they can't quite recall what was discussed and by whom, then when there is documentation they pick out a scape goat.  They tried pinning it on Miers, since she's already out, but it didn't work.  Rove and Gonzales need to be worried, Georgie and Dick will be pinning this on one of them.  If they had just announced that they were replacing some of the attorneys in the first place, it probably would have been newsworthy for two minutes and then the focus would have been back on the botched war in Iraq.  

The AG serves at the pleasure of the President., The only one who should have a say so in this is the President.  Shumer is just throwing mud at ANYTHING republican at this point.  The Democratic party has to make a mountain out of every mole hil to hope people will not actually pay attention to THEM and their NON Ideas about the country.

Totally agree with Corey,
Clinton didthe EXACT same thing , but no one says a peep.  I blame that on  the Media. They report what fans flames, not what is the truth. Why have they not mentioned the Clinton firings?? AND isnt this well within the President's power to do so if he chooses? Of course you are going to fire these guys for political reasons, you want people that believe the same ideals as you dont you? Would anyone want attorneys that that fight you on your points ??

WOOOOOOOOOOO.  Bush Senior commits the completely legal act of replacing all 93 Prosecutors.   WOOOOOOOOOO.  Clinton commits the completely legal act of replacing all 93 prosecutors.  WOOOOOOOOO.  Bush junior commits the completely legal act of replacing 8 prosecutors.    GET OVER IT AND MOVE ON!

I like his tie.

Having read all of these comments I am left with two pretty obvious questions:
1. Can it be that there are really that many people out there who still buy off on this liberal press bias garbage -- for heavens sake, wake up and watch something other than the Fox channel. Most of us recovering Bush supporters have had to wake up over the last 6 years and recognize that lying and abuse of office are wrong regardless of who does them. This isn't a liberal v. conservative issue. There are many right wing legal and political analysts and republican policy makers and politicians who recognize the problem with what Gonzales and the Bush White House did. And even Bush, upon recognizing that a critical line has been crossed and that he is losing what remains of his scarce political capital, has had to throw Gonzales under the bus for his improper conduct.
2. Why is Clinton still perceived as a suitable target to throw up as a defensive foil when Bush is caught doing wrong? I detested Clinton when he was in office, but in retrospect, he seems like a towering figure when compared  to what Bush has made of himself and his administration. Clinton was certainly no more dishonest than Bush has proven to be and his actions were certainly no less principled.

I thought U.S. attorneys serve at the pleasure of the president? If they begin as "political" appointee's, what's so surprising if they do or do not end as "political" casualties?

So----what else is new?Just another disgraceful scandal and many corrupt officials in the most corrupt Administration in US history.The Nation and the entire WORLD will be much better off when this Administration is done.

How many Bush Administration officials does it take to change a light bulb??.........NONE! THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THE LIGHT BULB. THAT LIGHT BULB HAS SERVED HONORABLY. ANYTHING YOU SAY ABOUT THE LIGHTBULB UNDERMINES IT'S CANDESCENSE AND EMBOLDENS THE DARKNESS ALMOST TO THE POINT OF TREASON. THIS CAN ONLY BE CONSTRUED AS TYPICAL LIBERAL MEDIA SPIN. WHY DO YOU HATE FREEDOM?!

Byron AND Corey:And just how do the both of you explain away the fact that there has been one scandal after another BEFORE the preceeding one has even stopped glowing never the less cooled off? There is no explaining away or excusing away the pertinent FACT that this Administration is by and large the most corrupt and scandal ridden in American history.There is NO defense of wrongness no matter who commits the offense.The nation deserves representation not subgugation and manipulation= Misrepresentation.You people are die hard Republicans that will NEVER admit when you are wrong.

Alberto Gonzales is another mistake of George Bush, he was George's little boy in Texas, and now he is his little boy in D. C. They are both liars and Terrorist, and they both protect Terrorist in this country, Luis Posada Carriles is a terrorist that the Bush family are protecting along with Alberto Gonzales, they are keeping him safe right here in the U. S. look this guy Luis Posada Carriles up if you think this is crazy.

I don't understand something, why is it okay for Bill Clinton to fire NINETY-THREE attorneys, yet when Bush fires a mere EIGHT, it touches-off a political firestorm and everyone suddenly wants the Attorney General's head on a stick?

And please, let's hear a better reason than "Clinton did it at the start of his administration."
We both know that excuse wouldn't wash if Bush had done it at the start.

Bottom line: the Constitution gives the President, whoever he may be, the right hire and fire such attorneys at his leisure.
This is nothing but muck-raking, pure and simple.

Bush may not be the best president (far from it in a lot of ways), but at least he's not afraid to take on the terrorists, unlike the much-vaunted Bill Clinton, who was too busy with interns to even bother.

It's amazing how these right wing "analysts" lack any understanding of the justice system. This so-called right wing "double standard" analogy with Clinton, is unsupported trash. Like it or not, The Clinton hirings and firings were neither unethical nor unprecedented. Whenever a newly elected president begins his term, a new staff is created in the White house, and in the Justice department. And there is nothing corrupt or unethical about choosing attorneys whose political views reflect the President's. Bush did the same thing. He appointed ALL REPUBLICANS, as was expected.
Yet, once appointed, judges and attorneys are expected to carry out their duties, independent of the views of those who placed them there. The Clinton administration knew this, and no attorneys were fired DURING his terms in office, and certainly not, as in the case of this administration, for the purpose of furthering the Presidents agenda in order to sway elections. There's no double standard here. Read the full story.

Whose painting is that on the wall?

The "Big Deal" about the current firings of 8 US attorneys, is the use of a provision in the Patriot Act to appoint "interim attorneys" WITHOUT the Senate's confirmation (as is REQUIRED by the US Constitution).

On Jan 18, Gonzales lied to the Senate about the use of this provision.

This is the second time in which Gonzales in KNOWN to have lied under oath to the Senate.  The first time (About warrantless wiretaps) occurred during his Senate Confirmation Hearings.

He lied under oath twice to the Senate.  You don't need to fire him, charge him with perjury and throw him in jail.

When people are so opposed to the President that they pretend like firing a lawyer who is not doing their job (which is to represent the Executive branch in court) is unethical and unprecedented when it is neither by any stretch of logic or the imagination, it demonstrates that they will turn anything and everything into a scandal.  Scandal after scandal, and investigation after investigation.  And when the investigations have reached conclusions, no wrong doing is found.  Where are the charges?  Where is the impeachment?  I know you'll point to the Plame situation.  I will too.  Let Plame be an example.  She wasn't a covert agent, not as defined by the law or the CIA or the fact that her friends and family knew she worked for the CIA.  One man in the administration either doesn't remember something or gets scared and lies about what he knew and when he knew it in an investigation and is found guilty . . . guilty of the lie, not of outing a covert operative.  But if you aren't paying attention to the facts of the case, you'd think he was found guilty of leaking classified info.  He wasn't, but that doesn't stop the news reports from relaying the democrats asking if the White House was responsible for leaking classified info, the fact that Plame worked for the CIA.  But if Plame was not covert, the fact that she worked for the CIA was not classified.  The investigation was investigating an event that was not a crime.  It's the 'cover-up' that got Libby.  So here's yet another non-issue fabricated by vitriolic Democrat politicians looking to ride a wave of Republican blood into office.  Hey, it worked for them in '06, it'll probably work for them in '08, and it'll probably work for them as long as the Republican politicians are spineless and refuse to call them on their outrageous, divisive behavior.  Republicans are going to die from 1000 paper-cuts; that's the democrat strategy, and it's working.  That's my explanation for Buddy.

Dyoder, you misunderstood the memo.  Clinton did fire all 93 U.S. Attorneys when he first took office.  The memo states that he did not seek to fire attorneys when he one a second term.  The law states that the attorneys are appointed for a term of 4 years and after the 4 years, they serve at the pleasure of the President.  In other words, after those 4 years are up, whether they stay or go is up to the President.  If the President wants to let go of some of those Attorneys, that's the prerogative of the Attorney General.  The president has the option to carry-over Attorneys to his second term from his first, but is not required to because their term is up at the end of the first term (or shortly after depending on when they were confirmed by Congress).  

These U.S. Attorneys are obligated under the Executive branch of the government to enforce the law by prosecuting offendors. If one of these Attorneys refuses to do so and his or her four year term is up, it is the Executive branch's right to let that Attorney go.  The U.S. code is clear on this.  This is not the making of a mountain out of a molehill as someone suggested.  This is the making of a mountain out of mud-slinging.

It's nice to see that the flags are very well guarded by the secret service.

I have standards and I hold my president to standards.  That's why I say impeach this clown (and his vice-clown).  Then, when we have a competent leader, we can get Osama and REALLY fight the war against terror.

The ignorance displayed here by some Americans is scary. Perhaps it is just the mindless regurgitation of Fox News propaganda by a few, but it is still frightening to see anyone so ready to sacrifice their country to protect their party.

The firings themselves are not the issue. As has been repeatedly pointed out the US Attorneys serve at the will of the President, and are often replaced en masse when the white house changes party.

But USAs, like all prosecutors, are supposed to be investigating and pursuing cases according to the law. If they are becoming partisan attack dogs; inventing charges against political opponents and allowing political allies to break the law without consequence, then our system of justice is literally coming apart.

The issue here is whether these US Attorneys were fired as punishment for resisting political pressure to do precisely that, and early revelations are beginning to indicate that's what's happened. Investigation is also needed to determine whether other USAs have been responding to political manipulations. The simple fact that 7 times as many Democratic officials are under investigation as Republicans by the DOJ is a huge red flag.

This isn't a Republicans versus Democrats issue, or at least it shouldn't be. If you care at all about your country you should be extremely concerned about fully uncovering and correcting a corruption of our legal system.

This is a NON STORY other than the fact that it exposes the left for the phonies they are..Average Democrats seem to have no idea that their party has been taken over by the Marxist left...Gonzales did NOTHING wrong..It is common practice to release opposing parties attorneys after their term is up. The left media knows this..Clinton released 90 + attorneys after 10 days in office, with nary a protest, which WAS a story but was ignored by the mainstream media. To now present this story in a negative light is disingenuous at best. It's right up with man made global warming as far as fiction goes...

My question?  What political deals did the other 85 US Attorneys who were kept on agree to?
 If you fire 8 for political reasons, I assume Pres Bush and company kept the rest because they are political. There is no justice when we have unjust political leaders adn that is the real problem.

The previous writer shares the misunderstanding that is now troubling the Bush administration. There is NO basis under the Constitution or the laws of the United States to say that the role of the US attorney is to "represent the Executive." It absolutely is not. The role of the US attorney is to act as the chief prosecutor and civil lawyer for THE UNITED STATES -- not an advocate for one political party. What the administration is in the soup for doing is trying to pressure America's legal representatives into being partisan functionaries. And the reason people are up in arms about the present imbroglio is that (leaving aside the fact that it is legally and ethically wrong) what Gonzales and the administration did doesn't even sound right -- and in fact it sounds dangerous that a political party is free to try to pressure their nation's top lawyer into using the enormous weight and power of the US government to express one party's dissatisfaction against an individual or group of individuals. And people with enough time on deck and experience to see the danger understand that sanctioning this kind of misuse of power has unfortunate implications when the power shoe is on the other foot. The problem for this administration is not that the Scooter Libby issue, or the Al Gonzales issue or even the absentee WMD issue in isolation should result in it being removed from power (though one could argue that any one of them is) -- the problem is that all are symptomatic of an attitude that the administration and its support group are above the law -- that they can bend or even entirely abrogate any law or ethical principle to advance what they desire. Mr. Libby will pay the price of what everyone can see has been a long-standing White House policy to selectively disclose information (classified or not, true or not) in order to discredit political opponents when the White House's perogatives are challenged. Nobody misunderstands that Mr. Libby was prosecuted and convicted for lying under oath. And most thinking people on reflection will understand that Mr. Libby took the bullet for the White House. If the White House has any loyalty or integrity, it will pardon Mr. Libby who was doing no more or less than carrying out the will of the president. Pardoning Mr. Libby would be the ethical thing for the White House and would confirm what everyone already knows -- that the disclosure was done to implement a White House decision. Most people also understand that what is in issue in the Al Gonzales - US attorney mess is corruption of the US attorneys' role as advocate for the United States (all of the United States) for partisan political purposes. Most people understand the danger in what the present administration was trying to do even if they don't understand the legal nuances. In other words -- nobody cares about fine, hairsplitting arguments that the firings and demotions were technically permissible under law. And most people also understand that the Bush administration's immediate press spin through its press functionaries of comparing its conduct to something the Clinton administration did is the standard administration response -- don't attack the problem, attack the opposition (in this case, specifically the Democrats). There's an old legal saying that goes like this -- when the facts are against you attack with the law: when the law is against you attack with the facts: and when the facts and the law are against you attack the other lawyer." That's the present adminsistration's way. The reason the Republican party is going to lose control of both chambers Congress and the Executive branch really has little or nothing to do with Democrats or Democratic political strategy. The Democratic party has shown itself (through serial elections) to be totally inept in implementing political strategy. The problem has to do with the Republican party being driven by extremist influences and having become drunk with power to the extent that it has been caught trying to exempt itself from law and bend Constitutional principles to suit its partisan purposes. And what is the bullet to the brain of the party is its attack dog strategy and strident efforts to defend the indefensible by attacking to motives of the people who would make it account for itself.

Misskatvb & Gabe....I totally agree. Where were all these people when the 93 attourneys bit the dust? I can't believe all the radical Bush haters. You can start a blog on how to torque head bolts on a Chevrolet and before it's all over someone will use that blog to tell you the sequence is all wrong because of the Bush administration. I won't say I'm in total agreement or disagreement with the president, but I don't use every opportunity to bash him.....or support him. It's impossible for anyone to be absolutely aware of, or in control of everything, but since 911 we have more on our plates to handle than any other time in history. Let's cut him some slack.  

BTW DavidStrongAustinTX -- the painting sure looks like Bobby Kennedy -- and its a pretty interesting pose for an official painting of a former Attorney General (at least compared to most you see).

Jose you are the man!!

The U.S. attorneys do indeed represent the interests of the Executive branch, simply from the standpoint that the Executive branch is the branch of the government under which they serve.  The Executive branch has the task of executing the laws of the land.  As agents for the Executive branch of government, the U.S. Attorneys are tasked with prosecuting offenders of the law.  That is the bias they are supposed to have, and the one I am referring to when I say they are supposed to represent the Executive branch.  They most certainly do.  I do not mean that they are supposed to have a bias for a party.  However, the fact that we elect an entire party to lead the Executive branch, rather than have the Executive branch be a more representative body, we should not be surprised to see prosecutors under a conservative administration to more aggressively pursue enforcement of laws that conservatives favor, and similarly prosecutors working for a liberal administration to more aggressively pursue enforcing laws that liberals favor.  This is neither unconstitutional nor new.  

I do not have any statistics to state what percentage of people under investigation by the DOJ are democrat and what percentage are republican.  If we use the logic of a democrat commentator from above who indicated that we should presume the Bush administration guilty of something evil and criminal just because there are so many scandals, then should we not consider that more democrats are guilty of crimes if the DOJ is investigating more democrats?  No, neither situation is indicative of anything other than the fact that the parties look at issues differently.

Accusing me or others of being mindless political drones of the Bush administration just because we are calling this mud-slinging what it is a way of avoiding the issue.  It's a logical fallacy.

Kevin, it's not a hairsplitting argument to point out that what AG did was permissible under the law.  That's the entire issue.  Everything else is partisan mud-slinging.

Why are Republicans always so comfortable with the two-wrongs-make-it-right defense? Maybe it's because they have had to justify, applogize for, deny, spin, & defend so many wrongs lately. Just wake -up for your nightmare and admit to yourselves that the people you have supported and voted into office have completely failed. They never care about your anyway.

Maybe it's time for a change in the laws since nobody seems to like the way they work. It's 2007 for God's sake , not 1963, times have changed since my grandpa voted. He's dead now.

Seems like it was Barney Frank who said words to the effect, "...I can read it to you but I can't understand it for you...."
Those who are arguing that this is in any way comparable to the routine dismissal of all State's Attorneys that Clinton and his predecessors (routinely) do when they come into office.
Really, educate yourselves before coming here and showing such profound ignorance of the facts.

I don't get it!  Clinton can fire every judge when he talkes office, but Bush fires 9 and that's a crime??
What am I missing??

Again, Corey, you are confusing what is within the statutory scope of authority of the AG with what is legally permissible. No one is seriously arguing that the executive branch (generally only the president)cannot remove  a US attorney. The issue IS whether the AG improperly used his office compromise the integrity and neutrality of properly appointed US attorneys in the conduct of their duties. Whether what the AG did is permissible is, at best highly questionable and, in any event is the subject of ongoing investigation that is objectively reasonable by any standard. Federal law and the US Attorneys' handbook make it relatively clear that use of the US Attorneys' office's "official" capacity to advance purely partisan interests is not permissible. A US attorney is generally not to do anything that might "materially compromise their efficiency or integrity as employees or the neutrality, efficiency or integrity of their agency." It would be dead wrong for an AG to attempt to cause a US attorney do do something improper and in violation of the very laws they both swore to uphold. As for your comment that the US Attorneys' office represents the executive, you (and apparently a lot of other RNC bloggers and activists) probably ought to go back to the books on that one. The US attorneys are appointed by the executive with advise and consent of the congress, but once they are appointed, they work for the US government (and that means us), not the Republican National Convention. In fact they take an oath of office to  that forbids political partisanship. Nothing has yet been "found" against the AG, but the information produced to date certainly justifies the level of attention it is getting. When the issue is whether the nation's top prosecutor and civil advocate is violating the law and using his office for partisan purposes, that my friend is not muckraking -- its a matter for concern for all of us. And while it has become old hat under the present administration, it's not particularly useful to political discourse to start every discussion of a Republican party official's conduct with the contention that the questioner is un-American or a "muckraker."

I'm with Kevin on the notion that the position of U.S. Attorney is not supposed to be partisan.  However, let's not forget that partisan and ideological are two different words with two different meanings.  The U.S. Attorney's position should not be used to further a political party, but it certainly can be used to further a political ideology.  If the latter has happened, it is neither unprecedented nor illegal.  It is the way the system works and is designed to work.  Let's see the evidence of the former, and I'll support join this witchhunt.  So far, I've only heard very weak circumstantial evidence that falls apart upon the least amount of scrutiny.  

By the way, no one is calling anyone "un-American".  Can we grow out of our McCarthy era hypersensitivities?  As for calling anyone a muckracker, I have not done this either.  Saying that this 'scandal' is nothing more than mud-slinging is as far as I have gone.  There's no name calling in that, only classification of a particular kind of behavior.

Let us say that it is as simple as this. If your job is to uphold "truth and justice" and you are invested to the degree in which your decisions will affect the "will of the People" and the Constitution of the U.S. and  you are found to be a liar or worse you are lying to cover for yet another liar who may be higher up than you, then  you should be removed. PERIOD.
As  for the justice system in this country it is quite clear to me that the lawyers have turned "lady justice" into a "blindfolded prostitute with an inner ear infection"! The judges, the lawyers and the legislators are her pimps. The police are merely the enforcers in a scheme to keep us all down and of course make money.
I am sick and tired of hearing ignorant people from the right talk about family values like it actually means something. It is pathetic. They would be hard pressed to name 5 family values. Bear in mind that togetherness can be found at any club or downtown. The other thing that really gets under my skin is the "wars" to " protect our interests"! When will americans wake up and start asking the all important questions like "what exactly are our interests there and why are we interested"? That should be demanded in rigorous detail. Perhaps many of us need to drop our dosage of "Foxnewsium" down to safer levels, with the help of our Psychiatrists of course.
I am not sure about the rest of you, but I am so disturbed by this administration and it's apparent lack of integrity. Worse still I am appalled that the spineless majority in congress will not attempt to bring some indictments against Bush personally or his band of merry theives. Clearly we are in trouble as a people. I am troubled to think that Plato was correct when he said that "democracy will never last because the masses are not smart enough to self -govern and that you will ultimatley end up with an oligarchy" . Oligarchy appears to be what we are heading for. However there  is a more contemorary term for where we are heading it  is called "Facism".
I have been sober and clean for over 19 years but I am ready to " take bong hits for jesus "!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The fruit doesn't fall far from the tree. Look to the top. Stopspp.com

Like the emails from Rove & company say, either you are a "Bushie" US Attorney or you're out!  So much for the founding father's plan of separation of powers.  I'm surprised Bush didn't put a provision into the Patriot Act that would allow him to dismiss Supreme Court Justices.

Wake up people!  This Administration has been hard at work consolidating power and stripping us of our freedoms.  Welcome to the New World Order.

Gonzales is just another example of the ineptitude of the entire Bush administration.  What amazes is that the finger repeatedly points to Bush, Cheney and Rove but nothing is being done about them.  We no longer live in a democracy.  It's time to impeach.

I BELIEVE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL IS DOING HIS JOB THE BEST WAY POSSIBLE, GIVE ALL THE MATTERS AT HAND. LET US NOT FOOL OUR SELFS, THE WHITE HOUSE RUNS HIS OFFICES

I can't believe all of these sheep who follow the Mafioso creed of loyalty to Bush.  Didn't Clinton get rid of the 93 attorneys at the BEGINNING of his presidency?  There's a big difference when a new president takes over and a regime that fires them IN THE MIDDLE  of its term in office.  It's so hilarious when the GOP point their finger at Clinton all the time, just like little kids, even when there's really nothing to compare.  The Bush administration's way of covering up a scandal is to have another scandal.  It's too bad the Democrats are a bunch of cowards and are Republican-Lite and refuse to do anything about the Bush administration's crimes.

Idaho,

What you are missing is that every president, including George Bush, typically replaces all US Attorney's at the beginnings of their terms.  I suspect that is the reason that they are appointed for a 4 year term.  This replacement at end of term does not equate to a firing.  The 9 who were fired under the guise of poor performance were fired for apparently political reasons.  For example in the case Arkansas where the person who was put into the "vacated" office is a Karl Rove favor that neither senator from Arkansas wanted to be appointed.  Or here, in Washington State, where the Bush Administration wanted him to prosecute a case of voter fraud over our extremely tight governors race.  However the finding by the courts and the US Attorney was that there was "zero" evidence of fraud.

The further reason this should be an issue for all of us, regardless of our political leanings, is the obvious deception and abuse of power that was granted under the Patriot Act.   Regardless of who is in the Oval Office, we do not want such actions to be accepted.

Two wrongs don't make a right, but however, under the law there was no wrong.  The attorneys serve at the pleasure of the executive.  They are not protected civil servants, but the Democrats and the press seem to think they are for this President.  The firings may have been dumb and the failure to come out and say that they were fired because they weren't following the game plan or that the executive was displeased was dumb.  But as long as they were not fired in violation of federal labor laws, it is legal.  It is the hypocrisy of the whole matter that is readily apparent.  One side can fire but the other can't.  If you don't like the process change it prospectively, not retroactively.

It is my understanding that the AG operates under the executive branch, and at the moment Gonzales does have the power to dismiss anyone in his office for any reason he sees fit. So there is nothing wrong, not even criminal, in his actions.
The cry of outrage comes at the fact that he fired people associated with the Democratic party. But come on now! Well so what! The Dems come to power and they bring their own people. That is how it works. Afterall, how'd you get anything done with underlings whose political philosophy would be contrary to yours, even perhaps to the point of sabotage. All the railing and pontification by Democrats about the sanctity of the office of AG and its role as some impartial arbiter of Justice is just a cover. Janet Reno proves this. Bush should show some brass ones here and tell the Media and critics to go Hell. They sure as Hell talk worse of him now and have no love for him or his policies. You Dems want things your way in the executive then win the White House.

I read Franz' comments with much sympathy and even more alarm. The justice system just can't win. When it does what it is supposed to do and applies the law impartially without regard to passing political trends and reaches a result that the political powers that be disapprove of, it is branded as being "activist" and out of step with the will of the people. The political powers that be then use that claim as an excuse to stack the Courts and judicial offices with people who will do what the political forces want. Then people seeing that happen, come to the conclusion the process is corrupted and that it cannot be trusted. And that conclusion in turn feeds and reinforces the rhetoric that the judiciary is busted and must be fixed. And throughout all of this, since the party in power has the power of appointment of judges and judicial officers, it simply uses that political sentiment as a pretext to claim the need to appoint ever more political operatives to judicial roles. And all of this is fed by money -- interests that know what they can buy in a president and congress, but are uncomfortable with the idea of a truly independent judiciary that they don't get to replace through elections if their bidding is not carried out. And ultimately the Courts stacked with political operatives will cease to have a judicial role and simply serve to rubber-stamp political actions; and US attorneys will cease to function as representatives of the interests of the people under the laws of our country and simply be another arm of the party in power. The judicial branch does have a problem and that problem is a lack of respect for its function in our form of government. And a lack of integrity on the part of governmental officials who on the one hand will raise their hands in an oath to uphold the Constitution and institutions of our nation while with the other hand doing everything they can to subvert them for political and economic gain. The judicial branch has been purposefully and systematically dismantled by the Bush administration who have no respect for it; and because Bush has had the benefit of an aligned Congress that on the one hand has done everything in its power to empower the president to act in ways our Constitution does not allow and on the other has cooperated in appointment of judges who are avowedly political and believed to be willing to rule favorably to the politics of the the Republican party (and who may be willing to overlook the Bush administration's unconstitutional excesses) the damage he has done to that branch of government has been intstitutional and will be long-lasting. The old saw is right "you don't know what you've got til'its gone." I'm afraid we're all well down the road to finding out what we've lost. Move over Frans -- whatever you decide to do, I may join you.

14 years ago, Reno fired ALL federal district attorneys early in Clinton's first term.  As AG Gonzales has said, they "serve at the pleasure of the president" and Clinton had the absolute authority to do this.  The fact that it is now being questioned by certain legislators is suspect.  This is a huge non-issue that I believe is driven mainly by election cycle politics.  It is customary for the President to provide reasons for their dismissal and, generally speaking, resignations are demanded early in the President's term.  Politicians are exploiting the timing and reasoning for the dismissals to manufacture scandal.  Now that Democrats control congress, they would be able to effectively block appointees they didn't like.  Essentially, the only thing Gonzales did wrong was that he simply failed to engineer reasons for their dismissals as every administration before this one has.  No laws have been broken.  But, Dems hate Rove and would not miss an opportunity to parade him out in front of a committee to answer meaningless questions even if it's a total waste of everyone's time.  I think they see it as their sweet revenge for the past 13 years of minority status.  But I'd prefer they settled scores on their own time and with their own money.  If they were elected in '06 to end the war, then maybe they should get down to business instead of bothering with this nonsense.

Of course, they wouldn't want to take any substantial risks before '08...I guess ending the war will have to wait until there's a Dem in the White House.

The Law says that the Executive Branch can hire or fire these US Attorneys for any or No reason.  Past President Bill Clinton fired all 93 US attorneys; and 30 more of the ones he hired, (even while there were on-going investigations). So now, what is the problem again?  

all republicans are traitorous dogs.

Gonzalez should stay!  Just long enough for them to indict him, so he can't fade into obscurity into a rich private sector job without first suffering the consequences of being a corrupt, fascist Government official.

Vote him out and take out the garbage! Garbage = The entire Bush Administration. How about we abolish the Federal Reserve, IRS, CFR, Tri-Lateral Commision, Bilderberg Group. It seems that they are not doing anything productive, but causing negativity on a global scale. Enough is enough!!!!!!!!!

is the ag allowed to fire prosecutors?
yes. do i feel sorry for someone who lost their job. no. happens all the  time. you got canned. quit belly aching and find something else to do. prosecutors serve at the whim of the president. what about that do you complete idiots not understand?

Yes, he should resign--------but so should the instigators of all the deceptions against the American people since the Bush Administration took office, including GWBush, Dick Cheney, Karl Rove and those aides who have masterminded the attempted neocon takeover of the United States and, as a result, compromised our international standing.
They should all go or be impeached.

I believe it is time that the whole Bush administration goes!

Why don't you people get your facts straight. All presidents come into office and get rid of the "93" attorney generals and put in their own people. Reagan did it, Carter did it, Clinton did it, they all do it. George W. DID IT TOO! These are his own appointees he is getting rid of. Or should I say, "Bush's handlers", did it too. I don't know if he has a clue as to anything that's going on. If you ask me it's a obstruction of justice. Anyway it's obvious the Repubs talking points are making their way thru the airwaves since you are all spewing out Druggie Limbaughs and all the other right wing propangandist talking points without knowing the FACTS!!! OFF WITH THEIR HEADS!

Gonzalez should stay to prove that he can do a good job. If he thinks that he should stay because president Bush backs him, the he should resign.
If president Bush has nothin to hide or if he is not afraid, then Bush should let congress subpoena White house personnel regarding the US attorney's issues!!!

Law enforcement and our judicial system DOES NOT serve at the pleasure of the president.  They serve the law.  That is the heart of the debate and why we have a constitution, and checks and balances.  When we inject politics into law or enforcement, what good is law or our constitution? Obsolete! Why don't we say the consitution serves at the pleasure of the president then?  Why don't we dismiss the Geneva conventions too and impose our own definition of what is torture and just do whatever the hell the adminstration wants too? Just because previous administrations dismissed US attys does not mean ANY dismissal is at the pure pleasure of the president.  That is not a valid argument. Congress not backing down is proof.  

Marc is absolutely correct that the judicial system does not serve at the pleasure of the president.  However, since the U.S. Attorneys are part of the Executive branch they absolutely do serve at the pleasure of the president.  And if that logic is not sufficient to convince you, the law explicitly states as much.

Michelle, the fact is, when Bush was re-elected the terms of his previously appointed U.S. Attorneys ended.  The president has the right to keep those attorneys, carry them into the next administration, or get rid of them at any time.  Maybe conservatives do not get all the facts from talk radio, but liberals don't get all the facts from the mainstream media either.

The new uproar - Bush doesn't want his aides to testify. The truth of the matter is no president would want his aides to have to testify under oath because they would forever guard their conversation and not provide the president their true opinions on issues. The dems just want a show to gain political capital. The penalty for lying under oath - perjury carries a potential 5 year sentence. The penalty for lying to congress whether under oath or not - the same.
Why the need for public hearings then. The dems got back into power on the strength of their anti-war message and the promise to put this type of stuff behind us and start anew. Same old same old back to the GOP

I think people who say what is on there mind are brave. I wonder if they know what an IP address is?

The Dems yelling foul over firing of attorneys? I thought the whole idea was to force all cabinet members to resign! Are they just angry that they didn't get to holler?

which brings me once again back to the basic question: why aren't we starting the impeachment process now?

It is amazing how low the congress and senate will go to retaliate against this President. This is not the last topic of attack that will be forthcoming from them in the name of OPEN AND HONEST government. What A sham. I for one am watching my district to see how my congressman and senators behave

Corey, that is a good point about the US attys serving as part of the executive branch. I should have stated something differently; my whole point is from an objective, non-partisan philosophy that any injection of politics into our legal or judicial system ultimately hurts our nation.  Law enfocement (US attys) and our judicial system needs to remain free of politics for the good of America. I think good things will come out of this ultimately and in the future, neither a democratic nor republican admin. should be able to arbitrarily fire, influence, or bully any part of the law enforcement or judicial system. (US attys are part of law enforcement.)I think Gonzales should understand this logic and resign now for his part in it.

I have some sorry news for you Marc this administration has already dismissed the Geneva Convention as quaint and largely anachronistic for todays "freedom fighting nation-state".
Ok, Question. How many rightwing Republicans in this Blog missed  the whole part about the fired US attorneys being in the middle of POLITICAL CORRUPTION INVESTIGATIONS at the time of their firings??? Raise your hands! Let's see here,yup, that's what I thought, all of them. You all just conveniently overlooked the obvious and resort to a childish schoolyard retort of " they were doing it tooooooo" !
Does not take a "political Columbo" to figure this one out. What we need to find out is what/who in fact they were investigating and then the poo will certainly hit the fan blades and the smell I am sure will be left upon the Republican Party for perp(perp)etuity. Hopefully people will not be so quick to forget how they operate. That is, not like they forgot about Watergate. I still think Gerald Ford was a criminal in the conspiracy for letting Nixon off. I am not just saying that because he was also on the Warren Commission that told us that a " magic bullet" just happened to be able to go in 12 different directions and manage to stay in a four foot radius. There it is again the Plato thing " we the american people are not smart enough to self govern".
For those of you that are seething right now ....know this  " I LOVE THIS COUNTRY " however " I HATE THIS GOVERNMENT " This government operates by one rule the RULE OF GREED. PERIOD.  

Franz and the rest of the Dems and media saying that the dismissed U.S. Attorneys were 'in the middle of political corruption investigations' is mostly untrue, and, where partly true, very misleading.  By my count of the eight U.S. Attorneys who resigned, three had political corruption cases awaiting completion.  Of these three, one case was, for all intents and purposes, finished.  The suspect was under lock and key having plead guilty to charges, and it might interest you to know that they haven't released him simply because a new prosecutor is in charge of his case.  Another of these cases was investigating Democrats. (That's the guys with a D next to their name.  Bush's people have R's next to their names.) Only one of the cases was in the midst of investigating Republicans.  Three out of eight might seem like a lot.  One could argue that the other five were asked to resign to provide a smokescreen for getting rid of the three.  However, the statistics are nowhere like three out of eight.  Each U.S. Attorney's office handles a multitude of cases at any one time.  How many exactly?  Reporters don't ask that question.  They'd rather let us believe that it was 3/8ths of the cases when it might be more like 3 out of 80 or 800 or more.  Go ahead, Google for me and tell me if you can find out how many cases a U.S. Attorney handles at once.  I could not find this information, regardless of how pertinent it seems to the charge that these Attorneys were let go because of three specific cases they were working on.  (Awefully nice of Bush to get rid of the prosecutor investigating Democrats, isn't it?)  It's for glaring omissions like this that conservatives tend to think the media is biased towards the Democrats.

For six years, the Bush administration has enjoyed an invorinment of free, careless dictating.  During that six years, America has grown accustom to a lack of checks and ballances.  A lack af investigation.  American government is now fully functional, and that is a hard pill for some to swallow.  It appears to me that Bush just plain can't handle it (he can't handle his possition either).  Politics is a grand game, and Bush just isn't smart enough to play it well.  This is how America works.  Thank god it's finally working again.  And while people are being fired for poor job performance, I would like to see Bush fired for the worst job performance.

Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Simple!

All political appointees can be canned "at will".
Gonzales is the ONLY Hispanic in a high office - are you all being racist?

Dems. = 93       Repubs. = 8

Attorneys General that is.  Seems like the media has a different agenda being controlled by the Dems. and Trial Lawyers.  Gonzales did nothing wrong.  He serves at the President's pleasure as do the U.S. Attorneys.  They are political appointees and can be fired at the President's will.

This media witch hunt is a waste of taxpayers time and money while you try to catch Administration officials in a "Lie".  This is tit for tat politics at its worst.  

Let me say this, while the Dems on the Hill are flexing their political muscle and with the cooperation of our major media and Hollywood, if there is an attack on our soil and we endure another attack here at home.  All American will hold you responsible.  Remember this while you send deplorable messages through your reporting and photos to our enemy overseas.  Bush is not your problem, Jihadists are and they are coming.  Its just a matter of time.

Arlingtonmiss - "...witch hunt is a waste of taxpayers time and money while you try to catch Administration officials in a "Lie"".  It's called checks and ballances.  It's not a waste of taxpayers money, it's what they are meant to do - oversee.  Good job Dems, and good job media.  Keep up the good work.  And let me point out that the terrorists goal is to terrorize, or to scare, and you are sending a deplorable message through your fear.  "The jihadists are coming, the jihadists are coming, we're all gonna die"!  And if your not really scared, then judging by your comments, you WANT an attack to happen just to prove your point.  That's pretty sick, but I'm getting off the topic.  Liars have no place in politics (actually, they're all liars, what I mean is bad liars who get caught).  This guy has got to go.

As I see it, millions are being made from private companies supplying the military. No-bid contracts? Halliburton? I also firmly believe VP Dick Cheney will be remembered as the most unethical, greedy and dishonest vice-president in history. The situation in the justice dept. is one more indicator, of the most corrupt administrations ever. VP Cheney padding his pocket for untold future Cheneys to live the life of splendor, at the cost of American lives, disgusts me.

We finally have minorities in powerful positions to give us increased diversity and all everyone wants to do is blame this all on them.  Come on!  Give the guy a break. Is it that the media don't care for hispanics if they are rich and powerful - I suppose they want to keep them as a poor abused version of a human being.

all politics aside, 8 people lost their jobs over nonsense period

"Mr. Gonzales, could you please point in the opposite direction of the James Dean picture?"

"You, over there, paint a picture of me, immediately.  Who's this Kennedy bastard?"

as a lawyer,how was he ever able to pass any exams, if he can never seem to "recall" certain events. must have been as good at cheating as lying.

hey buddy, the president doesn't like the fact that you don't like the way he thinks, not a good career move. Oh ya, You're FIRED!!!!! I bet Donald Trump can do the job better then Gonzo. At least donald has the BALLS to tell you why, and to your face on national TV.  

Pull my finger, I need to clear my head.

Who's Alberto Gonzales ?
H D

Alberto will be asked to leave shortly by the President that is my prediction.

you! over there! bring me some nachos!

I've got a finger and I'll use it I swear to God I will.

Now, if the mediots will just stop trying to convince me that I am biased toward the dems. Or the reps  just give me the news. I understand English. I don't need anyone to recap - tell me what they want me to believe he said/

A respectable man, a fine suit and the flag of America in the pictures background. oh and a bodyguard in the background! Very nice picture