Skip to comments.Alberto Gonzales and the impeachment card
Posted on 05/14/2007 10:59:55 AM PDT by SmithL
One theory for Alberto Gonzales's unexpected survival -- and/or, the president's apparent determination to keep him -- comes from a perhaps equally unexpected quarter.
Writing in The Weekly Standard, Tod Lindberg, a Fellow at the Hoover Institution, says Gonzales's departure would be a "catastrophic defeat" for the administration.
Democrats with good memories, such as former Rep. Elizabeth Holtzman, who served on the House Judiciary Committee when it voted to impeach Richard Nixon in 1974, recall with precision the sequence of events that led to the resignation of the 37th president of the United States.
In brief: Then-Attorney General Richard Kleindienst resigns, giving way to Eliot Richardson, confirmed by a steely-eyed, Democrat-controlled Judiciary Committee, under the condition that he appoint a special prosecutor to look into Nixon administration wrongdoings. Enter Archibald Cox, and the rest is ... well, you know.
[Holtzman] is hardly alone among Democrats in slavering over the prospect of a new "independent counsel"-style investigation of the Bush administration -- one that would succeed where Patrick Fitzgerald failed by finding and charging a conspiracy and coverup all the way to the top,, writes Lindberg.
Holtzman makes many of the same points herself in a recent Los Angeles Times op-ed. And as Lindberg reminds us, it isn't so much the "triggering event" that topples an edifice, it's the stonewalling, memory lapses, contradictory testimony, missing documents, and lies under oath that constitute the real meat of a Washingtonscandal....
[Holtzman] understood the risks to Bush, as did some graybeards on the other side of the aisle. Whether Bush got effective counsel about the danger of caving...
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
// it’s the stonewalling, memory lapses, contradictory testimony, missing documents, and lies under oath that constitute the real meat of a Washingtonscandal.... //
.....unless it’s, say, sandy burglar.
No wonder they want Gonzales to resign. They get to vote on his replacement.
These idiots see two identical piles of grands of sand and make the error of believing they represent two 100% identical situations.
While Bush must seek Senate approval for his Cabinet nominations, if the Dims believed they could “force” their nominee on Bush, he would continue to defer the AG’s authorities it the Deputy AG’s and at next recess of Congress appoint a “temporary” AG, who can legally serve until after the end of the next session of Congress’ and again to the end of 2008 of needed - legally.
The Dims have nothing and “Gonzales” is simply a hunting expedition. Bush can keep them fishing all the while he is in office.