Tuesday, June 12, 2007

Gonzales: What, me worry?

The question remains as to why Democrats don't seem to ever want anything to be binding? First there was a non-binding vote on the troop increase, and now an attempt at a non-binding vote of no confidence in Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales. Both attempts failed.

Meanwhile, the Washington Post reports:

Gonzales again vowed to stay in office through the remainder of President Bush's term, despite intense congressional scrutiny of the prosecutor firings and alleged politicization of other divisions in the Justice Department on his watch.
Calling it an attempt by Dems at a "gotcha" :30 sound bite, Sen. Arlen Spector (PA) was joined by Sens. Susan Collins (Maine), John E. Sununu (N.H.), Chuck Hagel (Neb.), Gordon Smith (Ore.), Norm Coleman (Minn.) and Olympia J. Snowe (Maine) in supporting the resolution.
Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) attacked Schumer's role as chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, citing its fundraising missives that have highlighted the investigation into the prosecutor firings as evidence of Democratic politicization of the probe.
I guess McConnell forgot about the 9/11 photo Bush used in fundraising for his re-election campaign.

And is anyone surprised that Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.) voted against debating the resolution?
Deputy Attorney General Paul J. McNulty, who has said that top Gonzales aides did not provide him full information before he delivered misleading testimony to the Senate in February, is now slated to testify publicly before a House Judiciary subcommittee on June 19, an aide said yesterday.

Last month, Monica M. Goodling, Gonzales's former counsel, testified that McNulty was not "fully candid" in private remarks about his knowledge of White House involvement in the firings.

More than 20 current and former officials from the White House and the Justice Department have been subpoenaed in the investigations, with Bush refusing to allow his West Wing advisers to testify or to turn over any internal documents.
It's going to be a long two years.

2 comments:

billie said...

it utterly escaped me why the dems didn't want to actually DO anything to remove these folks from office. then-- someone in the news was brave enough to say that it had to do with the 2008 elections. they want to leave the rethuglicans in office as counterpoint. see how horrible they are? vote for us. sigh. this is why i am cynical.

BAC said...

I understand ...


BAC