Posted on 06/11/2007 7:41:55 AM PDT by SmithL
WASHINGTON, (AP) -- Majority Democrats in the Senate are forcing their Republican colleagues on the record about whether embattled Attorney General Alberto Gonzales should keep his job.
No one is predicting that a symbolic resolution expressing no confidence in Gonzales will survive even the test vote Monday. Most Republicans are likely to vote no, dismissing the whole exercise as a ploy to embarrass President Bush.
At a news conference in Sofia, Bulgaria, the last stop on a weeklong visit to Europe, the president reaffirmed his support for Gonzales, a longtime friend and legal adviser.
"They can have their votes of no-confidence but it's not going to make the determination about who serves in my government," Bush said Monday. "This process has been drug out a long time. ... It's political."
Still, few of the Senate's 100 members are rushing to defend Gonzales. What goodwill remained toward him after the firings of eight federal prosecutors over the winter seemed to fade after the attorney general told a Senate committee dozens of times that he could not recall key details.
"I'm not going to comment on the kind of job" Gonzales has done, Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., said Sunday on CNN's "Late Edition.""The vote is whether we should take a vote to express a lack of confidence by the Senate. That's wrong."
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
And then what? On with the inquisition!
I think Repubs ought to dump Gonzales in the grease. Not like if they stand by him GWB is going to help conservatives on the immigration abomination...
Most Republicans are likely to vote no, dismissing the whole exercise as a ploy to embarrass President Bush.Why should Republicans worry about saving Bush from embarrassment? Bush is in league with the RATS on immigration, why not let him enjoy their company further, on the subject of Gonzalez? Why should a Republican (at least a Conservative Republican) lift a finger to help Bush right now, unless, of course, the subject is Iraq?
there is no provision for a VOC in the US Constitution. These politicians are morons.
Meanwhile...I’d like to ask the Dems what they are doing about Willie Jefferson?
What a stupid waste of time and oxygen this Congress is. Nobody out here in the real world cares that a bunch of politically-appointed lawyers were fired.
Why not have the Dim’s vote on “no confidence” for all Republicans, at the same time, to stop wasting time?
Even if a lot of Republican join all of the Dems in the no-confidence vote, the President will never replace HIS Attorney General. President Bush learned from Nixon what happens when you give your political enemies a vote in picking your persecutor.
Gonzalez appears to be getting too close to some Dem crooks for comfort. Off with his head. Meanwhile, some observers thing this is about immigration. Did I say think?
> No one is predicting that a symbolic resolution expressing no confidence in Gonzales will survive even the test vote Monday. Most Republicans are likely to vote no, dismissing the whole exercise as a ploy to embarrass President Bush.
Nothing can embarrass Bush more than his crazy support of the zamnesty bill...
The Democrat-controlled Senate, which has a 29% approval rating and is led by Dingy Harry, who has a 19% approval rating, will have a no confidence vote regarding Alberto Gonzales.
What’s wrong with this picture?
Gonzo is an absolute pathetic joke who is in way over his head. There are 2 reasons why he has not been fired:
1. He is W’s good friend (horrible reason to keep somebody as AG..the duty he owes is to the country not his friend).
2. The Dems. want him fired (more defensible).
If I was a conservative Republican Senator, I would abstain. Let Bush fight his own battles. That’s his attitude towards us.
Unless it involves, Iraq, of course. In Iraq, Bush deserves full support, no matter how stupid and evil he is on other issues.
No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.
What is a "bill of attainder"?
A legislative act that singles out an individual or group for punishment without a trial. (Source: Tech Law Journal)Former Chief Justice Renquist said:
A bill of attainder was a legislative act that singled out one or more persons and imposed punishment on them, without benefit of trial. Such actions were regarded as odious by the framers of the Constitution because it was the traditional role of a court, judging an individual case, to impose punishment." William H. Rehnquist, The Supreme Court, page 166.
It means as much as Ithica impeaching the President. But it plays on the Civic Illiteracy of the American people.
Many criticized Speaker Gringrich for acting like he was in a parliamentary system...
My take is they caught wind early on about the investigation of William Jefferson - Democrat - LA and are still steaming about the 16 indictments!
Discredit the AG and hope everything will go away.
Too late Moonbats!
Yet another useless, pointless, non-functional action by Congress. Does nothing.
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.