After watching the Justice Department Oversight Committee hearing going on right now, the only conclusion you can come to is that we are no longer a nation of laws, but a nation of king george.
Attorney General Mukasey is not willing to enforce the law when it is not what the administration wants or against itself. This makes the law subservient to the administration, not the administration subservient to the law.
Mukasey points out several real problems we have in our nation right now. One is that the quality of our judges, Mukasey for instance, is very, very suspect. He doesn't believe in the rule of law, rather the rule of the administration he serves. Loyalty is thus put in his line of command, not in the law and following the Constitution. This is the same problem that Gonzales had. It makes the rule of law in the U.S. a farce. Mukasey was touted as an honorable judge before his confirmation hearing. Obviously this was incorrect or his honor is for sale, something very troubling for the quality of the judges we have sitting at the highest level of the government.
How a man like this was approved by the Senate is also troubling. It shows the inability of the Senate to approve men of character who can not or will not carry out the law of the land.
The last recourse is for Mukasey to be impeached by the House of Representatives, just as they should have done to Gonzales (who went out with a big party, not the tail between his legs as should have been the case for the obfiscation of his duties to the country).
So we have a president willing to break the law, the Senate to approve Attorney Generals who will not enforce it, and a House of Representatives who will not take up issues so important to the continuation of our democracy---the rule of law, not the rule of king george.
This is as bad as the king georges that parliament battled when moving from a monarchy to a republic.
We have a House of Representatives who don't have the courage to save our country. They will probably just use their power to continue selling the public interest to the highest bidder or their self interest.
We have to demand more from our leaders.
Attorney General Mukasey is not willing to enforce the law when it is not what the administration wants or against itself. This makes the law subservient to the administration, not the administration subservient to the law.
Mukasey points out several real problems we have in our nation right now. One is that the quality of our judges, Mukasey for instance, is very, very suspect. He doesn't believe in the rule of law, rather the rule of the administration he serves. Loyalty is thus put in his line of command, not in the law and following the Constitution. This is the same problem that Gonzales had. It makes the rule of law in the U.S. a farce. Mukasey was touted as an honorable judge before his confirmation hearing. Obviously this was incorrect or his honor is for sale, something very troubling for the quality of the judges we have sitting at the highest level of the government.
How a man like this was approved by the Senate is also troubling. It shows the inability of the Senate to approve men of character who can not or will not carry out the law of the land.
The last recourse is for Mukasey to be impeached by the House of Representatives, just as they should have done to Gonzales (who went out with a big party, not the tail between his legs as should have been the case for the obfiscation of his duties to the country).
Brad DeLong's Weblog Archive Page
« Why Oh Why Are We Ruled by These Criminals? | Main | The Future of Latin America: Another Such Victory and We Are Lost »
December 18, 2005
Impeach Attorney General Gonzales for Lying to Congress
Impeach Alberto Gonzales for lying to Congress. Impeach him now:
Think Progress: According to President Bush's radio address today, as White House counsel, Alberto Gonzales personally approved Bush's program for warrantless domestic wiretaps. By circumventing the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, those wiretaps violated federal law.... During his confirmation hearings for Attorney General in January 2005, Sen. Russ Feingold asked Gonzales about this precise issue:
SEN. FEINGOLD: I -- Judge Gonzales, let me ask a broader question. I'm asking you whether in general the president has the constitutional authority, does he at least in theory have the authority to authorize violations of the criminal law under duly enacted statutes simply because he's commander in chief? Does he -- does he have that power?
After trying to dodge the question for a time, Gonzales issued this denial:
MR. GONZALES: Senator, this president is not -- I -- it is not the policy or the agenda of this president to authorize actions that would be in contravention of our criminal statutes.
In fact, that was precisely the policy of the President.
And immediately afterwards:
SEN. FEINGOLD: Finally, will you commit to notify Congress if the president makes this type of decision and not wait two years until a memo is leaked about it?
MR. GONZALES: I will to advise the Congress as soon as I reasonably can, yes, sir.
Is there any reason for Alberto Gonzales to continue to serve as Attorney General?
December 18, 2005 at 04:32 PM in Moral Responsibility, Politics: Bushisms, Politics: Civil Liberties, Utter Stupidity | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/106400/3876880
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Impeach Attorney General Gonzales for Lying to Congress:
» Gonzales Defends Domestic Spying from Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said President Bush has the authority to conduct "very limited" su [Read More]
Tracked on December 19, 2005 at 01:08 PM
Comments
Who of the founding fathers said: Gentlemen you have your republic if you can keep it. To me it sounds like we have lost it. The pres said to congress, impeach me if you can.
I think our republic is down the tubes.
Posted by: dilbert dogbert | December 18, 2005 at 05:07 PM
Why haven't House Democrats started to demand impeachment hearings? The president and his attorney general have violated FISA. Even if a declaration of war was passed, the president would have only 15 days to conduct warrantless surveillance (50 USC 1811).
The president and cabinet officers swore to uphold the Constitution. That includes the 4th amendment.
Posted by: Christopher ball | December 18, 2005 at 07:14 PM
Well, allegedly the White House has notified the heads of the Intelligence Committees about the NSA wiretapping. Does that count on question 2?
Posted by: trotsky | December 19, 2005 at 08:11 AM
'Those who would sacrifice freedom for security deserve neither' - Benjamin
Franklin.
I don't know whether Iraqis have more freedom now than a few years ago, but I do know that US citizens have less now. Well, our "freedom fighting" president has at least accomplished something here.
Posted by: pat | December 19, 2005 at 08:20 AM
So we have a president willing to break the law, the Senate to approve Attorney Generals who will not enforce it, and a House of Representatives who will not take up issues so important to the continuation of our democracy---the rule of law, not the rule of king george.
This is as bad as the king georges that parliament battled when moving from a monarchy to a republic.
We have a House of Representatives who don't have the courage to save our country. They will probably just use their power to continue selling the public interest to the highest bidder or their self interest.
We have to demand more from our leaders.