Posted on 04/22/2007 10:49:59 AM PDT by veronica
CORALVILLE, Iowa - Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney said Attorney General Alberto Gonzales should be ousted if he interfered with a prosecution.
The former Massachusetts governor, however, stopped short of calling for Gonzales’ resignation, saying not enough details were known about the firing of eight U.S. attorneys.
“If he removed someone to interfere with the prosecution or an intended prosecution, then that would be wrong and would justify his removal,” Romney said after a campaign event in eastern Iowa. “A president can change people for any reason he wants, but interfering with a prosecution would be wrong.”
Many Democrats have called for Gonzales to step down, and some Republicans have done the same. Romney recommended lawmakers not be hasty in passing judgment.
“I wouldn’t convict until I heard the witnesses and the evidence, and that’s something which is an ongoing process,” he said.
Romney made his remarks after speaking before about 400 people at a luncheon. He repeatedly said change was needed in Washington, but he expressed support for some Bush administration policies and hailed the president’s strategy in Iraq - from the initial invasion to the latest troop increase.
“Right now the president’s posture and my position on Iraq may not be the most popular,” he said. “And I understand that, but that goes with the territory with doing what you believe is the right thing.”
During a campaign appearance Friday night in Carmel, Ind., Romney said he was shocked that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) would say that the war has been lost.
“It’s not worked anywhere near as well as we had hoped it would and there have been setbacks and there are huge challenges,” Romney said at a state GOP dinner. “That’s a very different thing than saying we’ve lost the war in Iraq.”
Reid’s remarks encouraged violent jihadists “to parade to their believers around the world that they beat America, and that’s not what happened,” Romney said.
He added: “Is there something wrong among the Democrats that they can’t form the words ‘win’ and ‘success’ on their lips?”
“A president can change people for any reason he wants, but interfering with a prosecution would be wrong.”
At least he said that, but it was obvious and the last part of the sentence was NOT necessary. He needs to remember that he does not need to win over Democrats or the MSM.
They hate him anyway just because he is a Republican.
Craven political opportunism, a la McCain. A mark against Romney.
Why is he commenting if he does not know the details? Doesn't seem to be ready for prime time.
|
Misleading headline alert.
Maybe, maybe not. There was nothing particularly wrong with what he said, and you'll notice the phrasing of the question was *not* included in the story. What if the question was "Should Gonzales be fired if it's proven he interfered with a prosecution?" or something like that?
Please realize this is a bit of a hit piece from the AP; they do *not* include the phrasing of any questions asked. They would rather you think the comments were unprompted, which is unlikely.
Lol, this is in the vein of “So Mitt, when did you stop beating your wife?”
Any pol who is foolish enough to be scammed by the RATs on this after Klinton fired all of them, ain’t qualified to be prez. of anything.
‘Rats just want Gonzo scalp just like Libby...with that said though Alberto is not the man for the job of AG... Ashcroft was much more effective... we need someone with Big Cojones and intestinos for the job...
But we should not be hasty in judgment on this matter and “I wouldn't’t convict until I heard the witnesses and the evidence,”
Romney is just stating his independence and that he is a man of principle and not party. Note the use of the word IF in front of his statement. Headline is misleading.
>Craven political opportunism, a la McCain. A mark against Romney.<
Ah, yes. As the cream rises, the milk sours!
Romney said, "“If he removed someone to interfere with the prosecution or an intended prosecution, then that would be wrong and would justify his removal,” referring, I believe, to Bill and Hil firing the US attorneys who were investigating Whitewater when Clinton was elected.
“A president can change people for any reason he wants, but interfering with a prosecution would be wrong.” Again, a reference to the Clinton removal and replacement of every single US attorney.
I don't know much about Romney, and am on the Fredhead PING list, but I hate to see a man's words twisted into something he never meant to say.
You'd think I would have learned by now!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.