NOT Time To Arrest Gonzales

Gonzales said: “I think that the American people lose if I spend all my time worrying about congressional requests for information, if I spend all my time responding to subpoenas.”

Subpoena him. If he doesn't show, find him in contempt and lock him up. It's time to slap these people upside the head; they are not above the law, and if Gonzales wants some serious time in solitary to think over his contempt for the rule of law, it's time it was given to him.

Update: Kagro at the Next Hurrah points out this is impossible - since Justice is responsible for dealing with contempt cases, Gonzales is effectively the man who would decide.

Which means we're back where we started - the only way to reign in Bush is to impeach him. Which the Dems won't do. So why don't we all stop pretending the Dems are going to do anything to stop Bush or his lackeys from doing anything they want to do for the next 2 years? Bush will ignore any law he doesn't like that he can't veto, simply by using a signing statement to get rid of it. His officials can ignore any subpoena they feel like, since Justice won't enforce them. The power of the purse is overstated - Bush has the power to take money from any department's budget he feels like, if he decides it is necessary. Without repealing the AUMF, the power of the purse can't be used, because Bush can just get the money from another pot.

Bush is a dictator, and you Americans are all his subjects. You are not citizens, and it is time you stopped pretending you are - the ability to choose your dictator every four years does not make you into a Republic, it only makes you a democracy - at this point Bush can ignore any law he wants; treat any money as usable for any purpose he chooses; lock up anyone he wants at his choice; torture people at his will (because he determines what torture is); listen in on anyone he wants; use secret evidence to convict people; and go to war with any nation in the world without Congress's permission (when you've spent 60 days attacking another country the war is already on). Bush is the Decider and I suggest you all get used to it. Because it isn't going to change and the next two years are going to be very, very long.

Ian Welsh March 3, 2007 - 12:58pm

Ian Welsh's diary | printer friendly version |

he's got nerve

he's daring them to do it. which means he's either stupid, and doesn't understand that a dem majority means no more mr. i-don't-have-to-explain, or smart, in that he knows the dems will never call on him.

we'll see.

chicago dyke March 3, 2007 - 1:20pm

Nope, as Kagro pointed out,

Nope, as Kagro pointed out, he knows they can't do anything. In a power confrontation he will win. Sorry CD, you don't live in a Republic anymore, you live in an elected dictatorship.

Ian Welsh March 3, 2007 - 1:30pm

my friend, i have known that

to be true since dec 12, 2000.

but i'm glad everyone else is catching up. ;-)

chicago dyke March 3, 2007 - 3:26pm

December 12th didn't make

December 12th didn't make you an elected dictatorship, it was just a coup, and only needed to be a one time thing. The spinelessness of congress in allowing Bush to write laws and set precedents that give him dictatorial power are what made it occur.

Ian Welsh March 3, 2007 - 8:17pm

I hope that you're right about the former,

but so far a Dem. majority has meant very little.

All the president's men are cut from the same arrogant cloth and take their lead from Bush. I'm having trouble deciding who disgusts me more--the Republicans for for their "FU" stance or the Dems for theiur disarray and lack of spine.

Doug Richardson March 3, 2007 - 1:32pm

What's the process to remove Gonzales as AG?

Is it similar to impeachment? Anyone know?

Escher Sketch March 3, 2007 - 2:57pm

I believe the AG can be impeached

Judges can be impeached, so why not the AG? As an assermented official, I can't see why he couldn't. And here would be the strategy: Subpoena the AG; if he refuses, immediately begin impeachment proceedings. Then insist that the President remove Gonzales immediately.

drobert_bfm March 3, 2007 - 5:18pm

Gonzalez

John Dean thinks it's possible to impeach cabinet members.

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20061215.html

"The way the process works is that a bill of impeachment is introduced in the House, where it is referred to the House Judiciary Committee. Acting as a grand jury, the Judiciary Committee then decides if there is sufficient evidence to warrant a full inquiry. If its members believe there is, they refer the matter to the full House for a vote, and if a majority of the House agrees, the matter is returned to the Judiciary Committee for fact-finding - compelling witnesses to testify, and compelling the production of documents."

ronnie s. March 3, 2007 - 5:19pm

cut the head off the dog

and the tail dies too. (Carlos Marcello).

In reality, with spineless types like most Dems as the oppostion, there is nothing legal left.

I wonder what would happen if everyone opposed to what's happening simultaneously refused to pay income tax?

I met a guy in prison with a twenty-five year sentence for not paying income tax.

ps. I am not advocating violence nor failing to pay taxes. I like not being in jail or prison.

I did inhale.

Don March 3, 2007 - 5:19pm

Boycott da Bastaads!!

Here's something everyone can do... and, it's legal ;-)

-- National "We're not buying it!" Week --

National Boycott to Impeach for Peace and Justice

Tax Day (April 15) 'til Earth Day (April 22)

(link) --> We're Not Buying It

Dubb'ya, repeat after me... "Suicide is painless"

Flirtin with Di... March 4, 2007 - 11:49pm

He's a civil officer. At least one other cabinet member

has been impeached.

The Constitution, Article II, Section 4:
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

The Constitution, Article I, Section 3:
The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

Judgment in Cases of Impeachments shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust, or Profit under the United States, but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment, and Punishmnet, according to Law.

Mark March 3, 2007 - 6:03pm

The wikipedia precis...

...on impeachment can be found here.

"Political Islam is a dream or a nightmare, but not a sociological reality." - Olivier Roy, Globalized Islam: The Search for a New Ummah

JustPlainDave March 3, 2007 - 6:20pm

contempt

he may be ag but if he is cited for contempt he is certainly into a conflict of interest state where a special prosecutor would be I think demanded by any one even pretending to support the Constitution.

Yeah, I'd like to see a special prosecutor unleashed on this mob. Even more than an impeachment because as we learned during the previous administration, SP's are a gift that just keep on giving.

porsillo March 3, 2007 - 7:09pm

We may be headed into some

very interesting legal territory.

Mark March 3, 2007 - 9:52pm

I just heard Al Gonzalez say, "Bring it on."

Okay, any Democrats with balls in Congress?

"Death before being dishonored any more." - Col. Ted Westhusing

Jimbo92107 March 3, 2007 - 10:11pm

Are you referring to the quote

at the top of Ian's post that starts this thread or something newer?

Mark March 3, 2007 - 10:20pm

No.

eom

Doug Richardson March 4, 2007 - 10:36am

Thank you but

I live in Canada.
Wait a minute. We have Harper. A mini Bush.
What ever happens in the US eventually happens in Canada.
You are screwed first and eventually we will get screwed.
I have my KY Jelly to ease the pain.

_{repressive governments mix administrative clumsiness & inefficiency with authoritarian tendencies.}

kimmy March 3, 2007 - 10:45pm

In Terms the General Public Can Understand ..

So like, Bush, Gonzales, and co. are like Anna Nicole Smith - they are self destructing, only instead of herself, it's the country - and like Howard K. Stern is totally like the Democratic Congress - they are enabling the self destruction. Like, totally! OH MUH GAWD!!

Nominay March 4, 2007 - 7:28pm

Gonzales caves

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/002715.php

Tina March 8, 2007 - 6:53pm