Gonzales to be Replaced by Chertoff?

By Mimikatz

It's just a rumor at Think Progress, but wouldn't it be like them to make such a move when Emptywheel is incommunicado?  And Chertoff?  The  brains behind the Katrina debacle?  He had friends on Capitol Hill when he was confirmed for Homeland Security head, but does he still?  And isn't he tainted by the surveillance scandals?  At least it makes sense to them as a way to keep things within the circle of capos, but he certainly isn't going to be anything but a loyal Bushie.

Comments

[bmaz]

When Chertoff was named to DHS, there were many who lauded him as a good man that was a bright and very capable prosecutor. I have seen absolutely no evidence of any of those qualities in him. So, I assume this move would contemplate a recess appointment? I thought Hard Nosed Harry Reid made a deal with Bush to not make any recess appointments; what's the deal?

[sojourner]

Perhaps it is time to summon Congress back to DC, just to make sure this does not happen... on the other hand, though, they probably would not attempt to stop it. Bush might announce a rumors of a terrorist attack or something and scare them into confirming Chertoff.

Is it my imagination, or has DHS been languishing under Chertoff? Is it capable of protecting anything? Is Chertoff capable of doing anything, himself?

How do we get rid of all, and I mean ALL, of these imbeciles we elect -- and start over?

[Mimikatz]

They didn't say recess appointment. I think that the idea would be they think he could get confirmed again, since he was confirmed pretty easily for DHS.

Of course his tenure started with Katrina and went downhill from there. And you're right. he hasn't exhibited executive abilities (managing a large organization) and he is just another Bush sycophant. Were we in 2005, he might have been a reasonable Bush choice for DOJ, since he had actual experience there (and ad a federal judge). But now he's tainted, I would think.

[bmaz]

Agreed. I have to say based on all those reviews, I thought that Bush had actually made a competent pick for once with Chertoff for DHS. Wrong again. Was one of the final nails in the coffin of knowing positively that the Bushies will NEVER do anything good or appropriate. Even if they were inclined to; I just think they are incapable of doing anything good and appropriate. It is genetically precluded.

[bmaz]

Should also have added the question: Do you think he is confirmable? Christ, he better not be!

[sojourner]

bmaz -- sure he is! We will start hearing rumors about some impending terrorist activity a few days before the hearings begin. If Bush does not get the action he wants by the time of the hearings, somehow it will suddenly become much more urgent -- and he will scare 'em into confirming Chertoff.

It's a sad state of affairs... piss poor leadership all around!

[bmaz]

Well, crap, if we are truly worried about a serious terrist attack shouldn't that militate towards NOT confirming Chucklehead Chertoff?

[sojourner]

Naw... Chertoff, Gonzales -- they're all the same. The terrorism concerns will disappear as soon as Bush gets what he wants. I am just in a really foul mood about this whole mess.

But, I save $75 on my car insurance today! ;-)

[sojourner]

By the way, I like your name -- Chucklehead Chertoff (although that could also be used with Cheney, it just doesn't have quite the same ring to it. How about "Chortling Cheney"? Or, even better, "Dipshit Dick!" Then there is the Cowardly Congress, and Babbling Bush.

[masaccio]

I am trying imagine who will lead questioning at a confirmation hearing. I imagine AG confirmation goes through judiciary. In the past that committee has not covered itself with glory as each of the senators just has to make a speech, and the questioning jumps around so much that nothing is accomplished. If, however, they just agreed to let Whitehouse handle the bulk of the questioning, we might see some real fireworks.

[Ishmael]

If this rumour is accurate, is it just as much about putting a better terror salesman in DHS than Gutcheck Chertoff and his zombie demeanour? Someone who could get out there and really scare people, while taking care of AGAG at the same time? Terror seems to be all they have left, except for the racism of course.

[Davis X. Machina]

Anybody worried that they're making sure Chertoff is already in the lifeboat before the Titanic hits the iceberg? Some stiff gets DHS just in time to get blamed for the Next One. Hell, why not nominate a Democrat, get kudos from the High Broderists for bipartisanship, fix the blame on the ringer, and throw the corpse overboard.

It's classic bureaucratic behavior.

I remember that the spring before busing started in Boston a half-dozen well-connected principals in impacted neighborhoods got quickie promotion to assistant superintendent. The assistant principals in each building got battlefield promotions -- they were expendable.

[MB Williams]

Chertoff came out of the Justice Department (used to hold the position that his protégé, Alice Fisher, now holds, Assistant Attorney General of the Criminal Division (aka, the division which oversees the PIS (Public Interest Sector), where the Abramoff investigation, and others, are held.) Chertoff was the only US Attorney hold-over in the Clinton Administration from Bush I, and was "well-regarded" in that position (I think for New Jersey.) How could Hillary Clinton and other Democratic Senator's oppose him now, if he was good enough for Bill?

This is a very smart move for Bush, and a very bad move for those of us who still believe the US is a Democratic Republic. I have such a bad feeling about this, partly because I predicted it could/would happen about six months ago. Sigh.

[bmaz]

I will go postal if they confirm that chuckleheaded douchebag.

[Sara]

Confirmation time is when you can cut deals -- such as answers to all the subpoeneas that are outstanding, a demand for special prosecutor for let's say the fired USAG's, and of course promises to not cut the white house in on deals on trial evidence in advance, investigative materials and all. Perhaps a special prosecutor to look at Hatch Act violations, perhaps hard things such as who will head the Civil Rights Division and all. Question is can Leahy extract all that, let's say sworn ten ways to Sunday with a promise to publicly F**K Cheney on a Sunday Morning Gasbag show, should he peep about the promises.

I am not sure about this -- just before Break Leahy was asking for a private appointment with Bush at the WH. Did he ever get it? I can't imagine what else he would want to discuss. Anyhow I suspect connections between Rove's departure, and the rumors now about Gonzo. Somehow, Leahy needs to get his price.

[bmaz]

Why cut a deal with these guys? Investigate them and, if appropriate, impeach and/or prosecute them; if not appropriate, say so and move on. Justice for criminal activity and decision to pursue investigation of criminal activity is simply not something that should be blithely bargained with as some kind of political chit. As far as I am concerned, doing so is not only improper and unethical, it is, in and of itself, a crime under several different theories. I can understand your position on this in relation to determination of how to proceed on the Iraq war; but not here. If there is probable cause to believe crimes have been committed, and there is, you demand investigations and one or more special prosecutors. If the Administration refuses, you impeach and then prosecute. Since when in this country do you make a deal with a criminal just to get his permission to partially investigate him? It would be immoral, unethical, and a dereliction of the Constitutional duty and oath of office to engage in a barter in this manner and any congressperson who does so should themselves be criminally prosecuted. Enough is enough.

[phred]

Well said bmaz. I understand that Leahy wants to "work with" the WH to get the information they are after, but evidence to date suggests there is plenty of criminal conduct at the root of all the various scandals. As a result, the WH has no incentive, none whatsoever, to act in good faith. If Congress fails to pursue impeachment where the WH loses all claim to executive privilege, then they will have basically confirmed the assertion that the Executive Branch is above and outside of the rule of law. So much for checks and balances, so much for our Constitution, so much for our representative democracy, c'est fini. If you are right Sara, that Rove and Gonzo are all part of some deal between Leahy and the WH, then Leahy will have utterly failed his oath of office.

By the way, over at Forbes (http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/08/24/ap4052736.html) they tell us that American citizen whistleblowers in Iraq have been imprisoned and subjected to the same abusive treatment that I thought was supposed to be reserved for enemy combatants. If true, it makes Leahy's deal cutting activities even more reprehensible. Constitution? We don't need no stinkin' Constitution. Hail Caesar.

[Sara]

After the Saturday Night Massacure we learned that Richardson had made promises to the Senate, though not in writing, regarding the conditions under which Cox could be removed, and those conditions were a long way from being met.

The next AG up to bat had to sign letters to the effect about Jaworski and other investigations. I am simply suggesting that Leahy begin not with the first watergate AG, but with the replacement, and deal accordingly. Unless you get special prosecutors properly appointed you are not going to get inside of half the stuff in Bush's administration. To get it you need a dedicated prosecutor and grand jury. (Fitz+)

I don't want to let anyone off -- I just don't think the existing DoJ can do the job. That is why I think Leahy needs to cut deals to get what is necessary, and not put the potential nomination to a vote till he has signed and sealed agreements. My model is what Sam Ervin got out of Nixon's various AG designates as they came before the committee after the Saturday Night Massacure.

[phred]

Fair enough Sara, I respect your opinion enormously. But I am still very concerned that if Leahy agrees to keep impeachment off-the-table, then in the long run we will be in a world of hurt.

[Sara]

Yea, Phred, but it is the House that does the Impeachment Process, and the Senate that holds the trial and votes on conviction.

Not the same as putting the screws to Chernoff and in exchange for Senate approval of a nomination, he offers up all of what Leahy has thus far demanded. It would be Leahy who would preside over any confirmation hearings. It has nothing to do with impeachment.

Leahy just this week called the White House in contempt. Is this part of the package that is being negotiated? He wants documents, Harriet and Rove. What is he negotiating for?

[tekel]

No more confirmations. Not without a couple of impeachments first. We must dig out the rot that has infested the heart of our democracy before we allow anyone to graft new limbs upon it- and that means Cheney, Gonzo, and Bushie must go.

Never mind that Chertoff is about the only guy they could nominate to fill Gonzo's post and hope to maintain any semblance of control. Pat Leahy needs to make a point- the rest of the Bush administration will be leaving office on our terms, not theirs.

[phred]

Sorry Sara, I was unclear. I am well aware that articles of impeachment must be voted on in the House. Nonetheless, not even Feingold over in the Senate is supportive of impeachment proceedings, so the leadersheep (thanks ACLU!) and the House members aren't getting any support (much less pressure) from Senators.

Meanwhile, if replacing Gonzo with Chertoff is part of any deal that Leahy is brokering, we will lose any real motivation for impeaching Gonzo (yeah, it could be used to withhold his pension and such, but the urgency will be gone). Without impeachment (of someone, I'll take anyone at this point) Bush can keep crowing about executive privilege. With impeachment, he has to fork over the goods.

This is why Leahey making any sort of a deal with people who have repeatedly shown themselves to be untrustworthy at every opportunity strikes me as an exceedingly poor game plan.

[orionATL]

MBwilliams' comments raise issues i am curious about,

to whit, what is chertoff's life history with the republican party and with the bushes?

sara's comments make good political sense to me.

neither leahy, nor the senate in toto, nor the congress has a lot of power right now vis-a-vis this president.

i would guess leahy, after years in the game, sees his responsibility as getting as much info as possible from the white house and the doj about what has happened and to get the doj functioning again.

any deal leahy reaches with the white house might include a "chertoff for documents" swap worked out with leahy and reid.

that's not a bad deal if the docs and subpoenas the congress gets are really useful.

personally, though, i would insist on having the docs and the subpoenas first and then i'd ok chertoff. this just to prevent being suckered by the white house as the democratic leaders were with the fisa legislation.

it would be a good deal for the nation if gonzales left.

for six years gonzales has been neck-deep in the worst of white house misconduct and illegalities

from obstructing a criminal investigation into revealing plame's identity

to wiretapping,

torture,

arrests and trials of "terrorists" for the political benefit of the white house,

the destruction ab sturpe of the doj's civil rights division,

the firing of u.s. attorneys in order to influence investigations into interconnected congressional, white house, dod, and cia fraud,

the use of govt employees and capabilities to help the republican party win elections,

filing federal lawsuits to influence election outcomes,

the expansion of the powers of the presidency at the expense of the congress and the judiciary,

etc.

furthermore, the doj, as an administrative unit of the federal government, is a shambles right now.

i suspect any leahy deal with fielding/gillespie/bolton would probably protect gonzales from impeachment,

but i'm can respect decisions not to swing for home runs (impeachment) in the remaining 15 months when a series of well-placed singles might give the nation some important wins in halting advancing presidential tyranny.

[bmaz]

Well, other than aiding and abetting a conspiracy to obstruct justice, commit crimes against the people, and a laundry list of other crimes, agreeing not to impeach Gonzales (which is the only avenue we have to properly investigate most of the crimes further) in order to install Chertoff as the Attorney General, a man who will obstruct and do everything Gonzales has done except more of it and FAR more competently, seems like a great plan. And of course, the Bushies always negotiate in good faith right? What could go wrong? This is absolute insanity.

[orionATL]

bmaz

it's a matter of power

and

it's a matter of what you can get for what you have to give.