With the U.S. Senate preparing for an afternoon “No Confidence” vote on Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, the word is that senators are receiving relatively few calls on the subject, with those coming in falling substantial against Gonzales (ie, for the vote.) Sure, the vote is purely symbolic, but symbolism counts, and this is a great opportunity for Democratic and Republican senators alike to display their displeasure with the Bush administration and its cynical politicization of the justice system.
So if you have a few minutes to spare, here are some toll-free numbers for the U.S. Senate switchboard — give ’em a call and let the other Washington know that you have no confidence in AG Gonzales.
1 (800) 828 – 0498
1 (800) 459 – 1887
1 (800) 614 – 2803
1 (866) 340 – 9281
1 (866) 338 – 1015
1 (877) 851 – 6437
Update:
…or call your Senators directly:
Senator Maria Cantwell (202) 224-3441
Senator Patty Murray (202) 224-2621
More Senate office numbers.
I called and actually got a human on the other end of the line.
1 That probably means that this vote is underneath just about everyone’s radar.
Either that, or too many people are fed up with symbolism and have given up on seeing anything else.
Impeachment would be more effective. It requires “high crimes and misdemeanors” — something which we have more evidence of every day. Just look at the story in the Seattle Times today, about how immigration judges are being appointed for political reasons, with connected attorneys getting these plum jobs, despite the lack of any immigration experience whatsoever:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.c.....ges11.html
I don’t know much about how immigration judges are supposed to be selected, but apparently this is a civil service position. Sort of like administrative law judges — which role these men and women perform, through enforcement of basically administrative law in the immigration area.
But apparently they are legally supposed to be chosen based on merit, and not based on political considerations. And at least one applicant for immigration judge (an experience immigration prosecutor for the Justice Department) has been allowed to maintain a lawsuit based on racial discrimination in hiring (apparently almost no Latinos have been hired, while unqualified whites with Republican ties were hired for the position this fellow applied for).
So, if there are serious enough violations of the law, the House of Representatives should take up impeachment, and have the appropriate hearings before the Judiciary Committee. The House should only pass the articles of impeachment that are legally warranted — and there probably would be several that are. The Senate would then be required to try Gonzales. True, there are enough Republicans to block a conviction. But if the bases for impeachment are compelling enough, this will impose a political price on voting for acquittal.
So why doesn’t Bush just fire Gonzalez? He has gotten rid of many Cabinet secretaries simply because they were less popular and it was politically expedient to do so. Clearly, no one in his Cabinet has been less popular than Gonzalez. And no one in Congress has ever suggested making the political statement of a “no confidence” vote against any of Bush’s cabinet members before — not even those who weren’t so popular or who had been viewed as failure or less effective.
In my opinion, it is this “loyalty” thing. Gonzalez isn’t going to prosecute any prominent Republicans for corruption and wrongdoing. And Gonzalez’s administration will do what they can to steer Justice Department actions in favor of the Bush administration and its supporters.
Obviously, Gonzalez would be replaced by another Republican. Bush has that basic political right, since he is the President. But Bush would have to pick someone of stellar reputation for honesty, integrity and competence to get past Senate confirmation. And an honest and principled Attorney General would be dangerous to the Bush Administration. So Gonzalez will stay, unless he is impeached or Congress can make the price of keeping him just too high for Bush.
Gonzales deserves more than a no-confidence vote but this is a good first step toward handing him (and his bosses) over to the Hague.
Roger Rabbit @ 4
That is an excellent suggestion. When is Gonzo coming to town to raise money for my opponent?
@3 “Just look at the story in the Seattle Times today, about how immigration judges are being appointed for political reasons, with connected attorneys getting these plum jobs, despite the lack of any immigration experience whatsoever”
I take it, Richard, you applied and failed to get a clean bill of health from KCGOP …
Hey Richard, here’s a job idea for you: http://tinyurl.com/yrcz3l
@3 “Gonzalez isn’t going to prosecute any prominent Republicans for corruption and wrongdoing. And Gonzalez’s administration will do what they can to steer Justice Department actions in favor of the Bush administration and its supporters.”
Gosh, Richard sounds more like a Democrat every day! Maybe he’s serious about this county council thing.
Hey Richard! If you get elected to the county council, and need help figuring out how to act like a Democrat, I’m available as a consultant for $30 an hour.
3 “Bush would have to pick someone of stellar reputation for honesty, integrity and competence…”
Huh? That would be rather novel. Does he actually know anyone like that?
What the Hell!!!! Richard, if you are elected to the county council, and need help on how to act like a Democrat, I’m available as a consultant at minimum wage. That is a better deal than from that silly wabbit.
I’m actually more inclined to expect Bush to let Gonzo sit there and take the heat for as long as possible. Assuming that the emergent evidence that the maneuverings in the Justice Department may be aimed at large-scale monkey wrenching of next year’s election isn’t entirely a mirage, the last thing Bush/Rove want is the possibility of someone with a trace of conscience becoming AG. Being as the Dems in Congress talk tough but aren’t particularly voting that way, the “safe” gamble would be to try and stonewall for 15 months and then put the plan in motion, even if everybody and his dog knows about it.
9/11 Betcha Richard turns out to be a quick study.
The thought just flew through my head that with Pete von Reichbauer being a former Democrat who turned Republican before running for the Council, Richard’s candidacy might provide a sort of ying-versus-yang symmetry.
I think impeachment will be the only efficacious move with regard to any of these criminals. Bush will keep Gonzales in place at any cost. . .he is key to the strategy for stealing the 2008 election. The only times this criminal administration has blinked is when they are confronted with eminent defeat.
ArtFart@14 While we are bringing up old dirt, a search of Olympia News Papers archives will bring up the contretemps that led to Von Reichbauer moving off Vashon Island. I believe he was found in questionable circumstances with an underage boy in a park restroom. At the time Von Reichbauer screamed about legislative immunity and I do not believe any charges were filed. . .but the resultant furor made his departure from the island ‘politic’.
16 My, how times do change!
Tony Snow on Alberto Gonzales: The morning after seven Senate Republicans joined Democrats in calling for a no-confidence vote on Gonzales, Snow denied, in an interview with NBC’s Matt Lauer, that the attorney general is now a political liability for the president.
“Number one,” he said, “Alberto Gonzales is an effective and loyal and also competent attorney general. The president supports him.”
Of course the president supports him. The president also supported other incompetent friends like Rumsfeld, Brown, Libby, Rice, Cheeny and the list goes on. After all, when you look at his own performance it is obvious that he has little to no standards for professionalism.