Gingrich joins call for Gonzales to step down

[Joeychgo]

Gingrich joins call for Gonzales to step down
The former speaker is the latest Republican to break ranks with the administration, which still stands behind the attorney general.
By Richard B. Schmitt, Times Staff Writer
April 9, 2007


WASHINGTON — Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich on Sunday urged Atty. Gen. Alberto R. Gonzales to resign, saying the "self-created mess" over the firings of eight U.S. attorneys last year had hampered his ability to do his job.

"I cannot imagine how he is going to be effective for the rest of this administration," Gingrich said on "Fox News Sunday." "They're going to be involved in endless hearings, which is going to take up an immense amount of time and effort.

"I think the country, in fact, would be much better served to have a new team at the Justice Department, across the board," he said.

Gingrich, who is believed to be considering a run for the 2008 GOP presidential nomination, is the latest prominent Republican to speak out against the attorney general, and Democrats said the remarks were evidence of waning support within Gonzales' party.

"This is another important voice who believes that the attorney general should step down for the good of the country and the good of the department," Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), a Judiciary Committee member who has led the investigation of the dismissals, said in a statement. "We hope both the attorney general and the president heed Speaker Gingrich's message."

More......

 

[Calabrio]

"This is another important voice who believes that the attorney general should step down for the good of the country and the good of the department," Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), a Judiciary Committee member who has led the investigation of the dismissals, said in a statement. "We hope both the attorney general and the president heed Speaker Gingrich's message."

Schumer is a disgusting and dishonest man. Gingrich's point is simply that the Democrats have now created such a toxic environment that it will be near impossible for the justice department to function for the next two years.

So, the administration is left with two options- sacrifice another Republican administration member at the Democrat alter, in the name of efficiency. In doing so, emboldening the Democrats to continue their agenda of destroying their political enemies through he media and courts. Or they have to go to battle and as a consequence, the country suffers because the Justice department is rendered virtually useless.

All the while, NOTHING illegal or unethical has taken place. This is just another example of Democrat politicians displaying their politics of destruction and synergy with the media.

 

[Joeychgo]

But he blames Gonzalez for the mess.
From the Republican National News Service (AKA Fox News)
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,264837,00.html

Gingrich argued that the Justice Department doesn't need to give any justification for the decision to dismiss the federal prosecutors, who serve at the pleasure of the president. But as a result of misstatements and backtracking, Gonzales has made it impossible for the department to conduct its business since continuous questioning from congressional Democrats distracts officials, he said.

Its the misstatements and backtracking that fuel this issue. Cant get a straight story.

But administration allies like Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and John Cornyn of Texas have suggested that Gonzales could still recover if he explains himself quickly.

"I think the confusion and the ham-handed way that these firings was done certainly undermines the confidence of the Justice Department," Kyl said Sunday. "And part of his effort to come up and testify before the Hill will be to restore some of that confidence."

Gingrich isnt alone in calling for his resignation:

Several Republicans have joined the calls for Gonzales' resignation, including Sens. John Sununu of New Hampshire and Gordon Smith of Oregon and Reps. Dana Rohrabacher of California, Tom Tancredo of Colorado and Lee Terry of Nebraska.

The heart of the problem really:

"The fact that the attorney general is the president's friend and president's counsel for years does not alone make him qualified for attorney general."

GW did too many important appointments like this. What qualifications did Michael Brown have to qualify him for Director of FEMA? GW tried to put Harriet Meyers on the Supreme Court. That went well. This kind of thing undermines every appoitment.

 

[JohnnyBz00LS]

Cronyism (sp?), GW bought all this on himself by surrounding himself w/ incompetents. Apparently to help hide his own.

 

[Calabrio]

But he blames Gonzalez for the mess.

A mess isn't a crime. Arguably, the POLITICS of this could have been handled better, but that's not criminal, nor is it unethical.

This is a purely political issue that has been misrepresented by the opportunistic Democrats as an ethical and legal one.

And stop with the "Republican News Service," that's foolish statement.

Its the misstatements and backtracking that fuel this issue. Cant get a straight story.

No, the story is perfectly straight. Things weren't communicated well initially, but that was cleared up in no uncertain terms. But, again, NOTHING ILLEGAL OR UNETHICAL, simply improperly explained.

GW did too many important appointments like this. What qualifications did Michael Brown have to qualify him for Director of FEMA? GW tried to put Harriet Meyers on the Supreme Court. That went well. This kind of thing undermines every appoitment.

What qualifications SHOULD the director of FEMA have?
A degree in public administration?
A law degree?
An Administrative Assistant in a city who had oversight of emergency services?
Chairman of the state Senate Finance Committee?
Someone who served as the General Counsel of FEMA?
Or the person who was the acting deputy director of FEMA?

What specific qualification makes someone a good director of FEMA have?

And Harriet Meyers was clearly "qualified," but a bad choice.

It completely makes sense to appoint people that you are familiar with and that share your goals. But this has nothing to do with the Democrat showboating and campaign of personal destruction taking place right now.

 

[Calabrio]

Cronyism (sp?), GW bought all this on himself by surrounding himself w/ incompetents. Apparently to help hide his own.

Foolish throw away statement that has no foundation in reality. One you won't even bother to defend when challenged.

 

[Joeychgo]

A mess isn't a crime. Arguably, the POLITICS of this could have been handled better, but that's not criminal, nor is it unethical.

This is a purely political issue that has been misrepresented by the opportunistic Democrats as an ethical and legal one.

Sooooo... What your saying is that the Republicans aren't very good at politics... The dems have outdone them politically. So the republicans look like idiots despite having the 'truth' on their side....

Do I have this correct?

 

[Joeychgo]

Foolish throw away statement that has no foundation in reality. One you won't even bother to defend when challenged.

Um.....

Harriet Meyers
Alberto Gonzolez
Michael Brown
John Snow
Mike Leavitt
David Safavian
Sam Fox

Thats barely scratching the surface. There have been long standing allegations that GW is more interested in Cronyism then qualifications.

 

[Calabrio]

Sooooo... What your saying is that the Republicans aren't very good at politics... The dems have outdone them politically. So the republicans look like idiots despite having the 'truth' on their side....

Do I have this correct?

The Republicans have not done anything illegal or unethical. And, yes, from a purely "political" view, they have been outflanked by the morality deprived Democrats, who aren't interested in truth, facts, or the issue, only how they can manipulate the issue and deceive the public in order to expand their power.

This is a non-issue. These attorney's serve at the Presidents pleasure. There is nothing unethical about firing the handful he did.

But, the Democrats have masterfully, and unethically, spun the story, with the assistance of their will assistants in the media, deceived the public, and will continue to perpetuate this "issue" inorder to weaken the President and the GOP.

 

[Joeychgo]

And your going to tell me that republicans have never "unethically, spun the story" ?

 

[Calabrio]

Um.....

Harriet Meyers
Alberto Gonzolez
Michael Brown
John Snow
Mike Leavitt
David Safavian
Sam Fox

Thats barely scratching the surface. There have been long standing allegations that GW is more interested in Cronyism then qualifications.

Are you saying that those people were completely unqualified for the demands of their position?

Harriet Meyers was his respected legal counsel, one that he knew intimately and he thought highly of. Are you saying that she was not qualified to serve on the Supreme Court? Or are you saying that she is not qualified to act as White House Counsel? Specifically what qualification did she lack?

Alberto Gonzalez is serving as Attorney General. Are you saying that a former White House Counsel, General counsel in Texas, and a respected lawyer in private practice for over a decade is unqualified? What qualifications do you think he lacked?

Michael Brown as director of FEMA. As stated before, he has a degree in public administration and a law degree. He was an Administrative Assistant in a city who had oversight of emergency services. He was the chairman of the state Senate Finance Committee. He served as the General counsel of FEMA. And he served a couple years as the acting deputy director of FEMA before being appointed the Director of FEMA. What qualification does he lack?

John Snow was the Secretary of Treasury. He was widely respected and resigned in 2006. The guy had been in public service since Nixon. He was the Assistant Professor of Economics at the University of Maryland. He had a law degree and practiced in D.C. He was named a Distinguished Fellow by the Yale School of Management. He was unanimously confirmed by the Senate.
There's a lot of stuff, just take a look for yourself:
http://www.treas.gov/organization/bios/snow-e.html
Now, what qualification did he lack?

Micheal Leavitt is the Secretary of Health and Human Services. He was the only 3 term governor of Utah. He was the administrator of the EPA. So how is he unqualified for this position?

David Safavian was nominated for the Administrator for Federal Procurement Policy. He graduated from the top of his class in law school. He was Senior Advisor and Acting Deputy Chief of Staff at the GSA and later Chief of Staff of the GSA. Whether he was corrupt or not, how was he not qualified?

Sam Fox.... he's the stinkin' ambassador to Belgium.
These cushy, meaningless ambassador jobs are routinely, historically, and traditionally, given as to donors, friends, or as a gesture of thanks.

But, you tell me, how is he unqualified? He's founded a multi-billion dollar investment firm. The only reason his nomination didn't sail through the confirmation process was because John Kerry resented him for donating to the Swift Boat Vets for Truth.

So did I. Does that mean I'm automatically disqualified from any federal position? John Kerry seems to think so, as do the other dishonest Democrats that make up that party's leadership.

So, there's the list. Which one of them is unqualified? What qualifications are these bureaucratic pencil pushers all missing?

 

[Joeychgo]

All ya gotta do is surf around Google for a bit for plenty of information.

Cronyism bush

 

[Calabrio]

All ya gotta do is surf around Google for a bit for plenty of information.

Cronyism bush

I wrote you a very detailed response and asked very direct questions.
I wouldn't be surprised if it took you a little while to compose a response, but posting a link to a GOOGLE search isn't going to cut it.

How are those people not qualified. What qualifications do they lack. You made the charge so I'd expect you can defend it.

 

[MAC1]

So Gingrich joins call for Gonzales to step down. BIG DEAL!