Gonzales resigns as U.S. attorney general

WASHINGTON - Embattled Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, under fire from congressional Democrats and even some Republicans, announced Monday that he has resigned from his post.

?It has been one of my greatest privileges to lead the Department of Justice,? Gonzales said at a news conference, announcing his resignation effective Sept. 17.

?I often remind our fellow citizens that we live in the greatest country in the world and that I have lived the American dream,? he added. ?Even my worst days as attorney general have been better than my father's best days.?

Gonzales sent a letter to the president on Friday stating his intention to step down, a senior official told NBC News, but the president did not accept it and instead invited Gonzales to his Texas ranch to talk about it.

That meeting did not change Gonzales' decision, a source said, and Bush ?very reluctantly accepted? the resignation.

Bush is expected to make a statement around 11:50 a.m. ET, as he prepares to depart for a fundraising event in Albuquerque, N.M.

The 52-year-old Bush loyalist was at the center of a political firestorm over the firings of eight federal prosecutors.

Full Story

Thank.

f***ing.

God.

Of course Bush "reluctantly accepted" his resignation - Gonzales was pretty much his last line of defense.

Why are you rolling your eyes?

Gonzales was one of the most ineffective Attourneys General this nation has ever had. Even beyond his incompetence, he apparently had some deep-seated hatred for the Constitution of the United States. I picture him wiping his a** with it while the entire Justice Department sits around sucking their thumbs because their boss is a worthless prick.

Which of his actions would make you think he has any hatred for the Constitution?

Let's see.

He explicitly denied that the Constitution grants habeas corpus.

He defended the NSA's warrantless wiretapping program and lied about his actions on the matter while under oath in front of Congress.

He illegally fired US District Attorneys for political reasons and lied about his actions on the matter while under oath in front of Congress.


Gonzalez was a cronie and representative of the President of the United States. The office of Attorney General, however, is meant to represent the people of the United States. He s*** on the people to appease the President.

Good riddance.

Hey - I know nothing about any of this. Just wanted to know what the guy did wrong?

Preferably an impartial opinion!

I'm impartial in the matter. I'm not a Democrat or anything. I have no stake either way, except that I want an Attorney General who respects the Constitution of the United States.

Anyway, here is a starting point:
https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6965602.stm

Considering the 200 hours of paperwork that must be done to get a wiretap on a single phone number, I can see why he would defend the use of them.

Don't the U.S. District Attorneys work at the whim of the president? If so, can't they be fired for any reason or no reason? Clinton fired all of them and I don't remember too much whining about it.

Ok. I don't know enough to know who is impartial,

Thanks for the link!

Awesome attitude. How Libertarian of you.

Interesting point, Clinton's bulldog fired 93 of them yet the left gets upset over a handful that Bush's bulldog fires.

And for the warrantless wiretapping, they were not necessarily unconstitutional but they did violate the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978.

"Notwithstanding any other law, the President, through the Attorney General, may authorize electronic surveillance without a court order under this subchapter to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of up to one year if the Attorney General certifies in writing under oath that?

(B) there is no substantial likelihood that the surveillance will acquire the contents of any communication to which a United States person is a party;
https://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode50/usc_sec_50_00001802----000-.html

What bush has supposedly been doing is authorizing warrantless wiretaps of communications between people in the US with people outside the US and where one or both parties are under the suspicion of having ties with terrorism. That action violates FISA.

However shortly after the 911 attacks the US congress passed the Authorization for Use of Military Force

SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.

(a) IN GENERAL- That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.
https://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c107:S.J.RES.23.ENR:

That is what Bush and Gonzales claim gives them the authority for the warrantless wiretaps that may include a US citizen.


On habeas corpus. What Gonzales said is this- ?There is no expressed grant of habeas in the Constitution; there?s a prohibition against taking it away,?

Gonzales?s remark left Specter, the committee?s ranking Republican, stammering.

?Wait a minute,? Specter interjected. ?The Constitution says you can?t take it away except in case of rebellion or invasion. Doesn?t that mean you have the right of habeas corpus unless there?s a rebellion or invasion??

Gonzales continued, ?The Constitution doesn?t say every individual in the United States or citizen is hereby granted or assured the right of habeas corpus. It doesn?t say that. It simply says the right shall not be suspended? except in cases of rebellion or invasion.?
https://baltimorechronicle.com/2007/011907Parry.shtml

That right there should be enough reason for any freedom loving American to be happy to see Gonzales go.

Three cheers for AG... Hip. Hip. Hooray.