On ...fuck, I give up...
Back in 2004, when he was still a White House counsel and really had no business in the Justice Department, Alberto Gonzales and Chief of Staff Andy Card decided it would be a good idea to talk shop with John Ashcroft -- doped up and incapacitated from gallbladder surgery as he was. Then Deputy Attorney General Comey described the episode an attempt to take advantage of a very sick man.
I am indeed aware of the irony that the story makes people feel sorry for John "Cover Up Those Statues' Indecent Stone Tits" Ashcroft.
Today, Gonzales endured more grilling than the Fourth of July, where he was asked to explain himself in this incident, and proceeds to directly contradict Comey's account... and then contradicts himself. He first claimed that he was indeed sent to talk about renewing the White House's warantless wiretapping program -- he claims at the behest of many of the same Senators who were giving him a hard time today -- but that it was a perfectly reasonable visit. But he then admitted that Ashcroft was in no state to conduct business. Did he just not realize that Ashcroft had transferred his powers to Comey while the former recovered? What the hell was he doing there? Gonzales couldn't (or wouldn't) say, only that there was other business to conduct.
You. Fucking. Liar.
I just relized that Attorney General and Alberto Gonzales have the same initials. How clever! He didn't even have to change his monogram.
[Update]
I actually got to hear a lot of the testimony, rather than read it from a second-hand source, and the spectacle was just amazing -- Gonzales has absolutely no credibility with this body, and his answers were circular and almost contemptuous. Basically, he tells Congress one thing, and that testimony conflicts with someone else's account. He's then called back to clarify, but always stands by those arguments, explaining how they where technically correct despite being seemingly incorrect on their face. Over and over again this happens.
For instance:
Dec. 2005 - Bush reveals there was a new warrantless wiretapping program. In light of this info, several provisions of the PATRIOT Act initially fail to be renewed, and Congress quickly corrects several holes in the law.
? - Gonzales testifies that there are no breaches of protocol or misuse of the act
Mar. 2006 - Congress renews PATRIOT Act and provisions (with modifications)
Mar. 2007 - Gonzales claims there was not any dissent within the Executive branch about the warantless wiretapping program.
May. 2007 - Former Deputy Attorney General Comey testifies regarding an incident where Gonzales -- then White House Counsel -- and Andy Card appeared at then-Attorney General Ashcroft's bedside (while he was sedated) to discuss an intelligence gathering issue. Comey was angry about this because he thought they were trying to take advantage of Ashcroft while he wasn't coherent. Besides, Comey had the powers of Attorney General while Ashcroft was incapacitated.
May. 2007 - Gonzales confirms that the program Comey was talking about was indeed the warrantless wiretapping program Bush revealed in Dec. 2005.
Yesterday -
1) The Ashcroft meeting
-Gonzales claims that they did go to see Ashcroft, but only to keep him "up to speed", and wouldn't press him if he wasn't coherent. (Huh?)
-Gonzales later admits that Comey would not renew the program under question, and went over his head to Ashcroft (apparently thinking they were in disagreement?)
-Gonzales now says that the program they discussed at that point was NOT the warrantless wiretapping program, but "other intelligence gathering".
-When asked to clarify, Gonzales says "I'm being told that after that press conference [in May], I clarified it to the reporter." He names the reporter (I missed it), who works for the Washington Post.
-Gonzales later admits he did not talk to the reporter personally, "I'm being told that" his spokesperson did it. Upon further pressing, Gonzales says he has no idea what his spokesperson told the reporter in question (and therefore has no idea if it was ever clarified).
2) Monica Goodling's testimony
-Gonzales claims he knew about Goodling's possible improper use of considering political affiliation pretty much after the first US Attorneys were fired (even though he previously testified that he was not aware of any such breach). Almost in the same setence he maintains he feels she didn't do anything wrong.
-As a result of this investigation, he has clarified the guidelines in the Justice Department for hiring employees (which he initially claimed weren't breached, so why the need to clarify?). Guidelines for similar hirings within the White House were not clarified, and Gonzales says he doesn't believe he discussed it with anyone there. "Don't you think you should?" [Laughter]. "They're in the book. Look them up."
Apparently several posts within the Justice Department remain empty as people have been quitting or plan to quit as a result of the investigations (such as Goodling), and no one is stepping up to fill those vacancies. The agency is crumbling, but Gonzales refuses to quit, insisting he can fix this mess. That was a statement he made prior to this fiasco where he could not admit he's ever done anything wrong ever. His presence is crippling the department because people refuse to work for him. It can't function as long as he's there. He needs to do the right thing.
A bunch of protesters thought so. Clad in comical prison garb, they stormed into the room as the Committee filed out, shouting at Gonzales to "Do the right thing! Resign!"
~Sean
I am indeed aware of the irony that the story makes people feel sorry for John "Cover Up Those Statues' Indecent Stone Tits" Ashcroft.
Today, Gonzales endured more grilling than the Fourth of July, where he was asked to explain himself in this incident, and proceeds to directly contradict Comey's account... and then contradicts himself. He first claimed that he was indeed sent to talk about renewing the White House's warantless wiretapping program -- he claims at the behest of many of the same Senators who were giving him a hard time today -- but that it was a perfectly reasonable visit. But he then admitted that Ashcroft was in no state to conduct business. Did he just not realize that Ashcroft had transferred his powers to Comey while the former recovered? What the hell was he doing there? Gonzales couldn't (or wouldn't) say, only that there was other business to conduct.
You. Fucking. Liar.
I just relized that Attorney General and Alberto Gonzales have the same initials. How clever! He didn't even have to change his monogram.
[Update]
I actually got to hear a lot of the testimony, rather than read it from a second-hand source, and the spectacle was just amazing -- Gonzales has absolutely no credibility with this body, and his answers were circular and almost contemptuous. Basically, he tells Congress one thing, and that testimony conflicts with someone else's account. He's then called back to clarify, but always stands by those arguments, explaining how they where technically correct despite being seemingly incorrect on their face. Over and over again this happens.
For instance:
Dec. 2005 - Bush reveals there was a new warrantless wiretapping program. In light of this info, several provisions of the PATRIOT Act initially fail to be renewed, and Congress quickly corrects several holes in the law.
? - Gonzales testifies that there are no breaches of protocol or misuse of the act
Mar. 2006 - Congress renews PATRIOT Act and provisions (with modifications)
Mar. 2007 - Gonzales claims there was not any dissent within the Executive branch about the warantless wiretapping program.
May. 2007 - Former Deputy Attorney General Comey testifies regarding an incident where Gonzales -- then White House Counsel -- and Andy Card appeared at then-Attorney General Ashcroft's bedside (while he was sedated) to discuss an intelligence gathering issue. Comey was angry about this because he thought they were trying to take advantage of Ashcroft while he wasn't coherent. Besides, Comey had the powers of Attorney General while Ashcroft was incapacitated.
May. 2007 - Gonzales confirms that the program Comey was talking about was indeed the warrantless wiretapping program Bush revealed in Dec. 2005.
Yesterday -
1) The Ashcroft meeting
-Gonzales claims that they did go to see Ashcroft, but only to keep him "up to speed", and wouldn't press him if he wasn't coherent. (Huh?)
-Gonzales later admits that Comey would not renew the program under question, and went over his head to Ashcroft (apparently thinking they were in disagreement?)
-Gonzales now says that the program they discussed at that point was NOT the warrantless wiretapping program, but "other intelligence gathering".
-When asked to clarify, Gonzales says "I'm being told that after that press conference [in May], I clarified it to the reporter." He names the reporter (I missed it), who works for the Washington Post.
-Gonzales later admits he did not talk to the reporter personally, "I'm being told that" his spokesperson did it. Upon further pressing, Gonzales says he has no idea what his spokesperson told the reporter in question (and therefore has no idea if it was ever clarified).
2) Monica Goodling's testimony
-Gonzales claims he knew about Goodling's possible improper use of considering political affiliation pretty much after the first US Attorneys were fired (even though he previously testified that he was not aware of any such breach). Almost in the same setence he maintains he feels she didn't do anything wrong.
-As a result of this investigation, he has clarified the guidelines in the Justice Department for hiring employees (which he initially claimed weren't breached, so why the need to clarify?). Guidelines for similar hirings within the White House were not clarified, and Gonzales says he doesn't believe he discussed it with anyone there. "Don't you think you should?" [Laughter]. "They're in the book. Look them up."
Apparently several posts within the Justice Department remain empty as people have been quitting or plan to quit as a result of the investigations (such as Goodling), and no one is stepping up to fill those vacancies. The agency is crumbling, but Gonzales refuses to quit, insisting he can fix this mess. That was a statement he made prior to this fiasco where he could not admit he's ever done anything wrong ever. His presence is crippling the department because people refuse to work for him. It can't function as long as he's there. He needs to do the right thing.
A bunch of protesters thought so. Clad in comical prison garb, they stormed into the room as the Committee filed out, shouting at Gonzales to "Do the right thing! Resign!"
~Sean