|
Alberto Gonzales, the Symptom,
begs for Prosecution
By William Sumner Scott, J.D.
11/22/07 "ICH"
-- -- – On March 13, 2007, Alberto Gonzales, U.S.
Attorney General, said, "I never saw documents. We never had a
discussion about where things stood," to describe his lack of
involvement in the replacement of eight US District Attorneys.
Subsequent releases of documents and testimony have proved he
was actively involved.
On March 23, 2007, in response to a Senate subpoena, an
appointment calendar was produced that disclosed that Gonzales
was presided over an hour long meeting on November 27, 2006,
which resulted in approval of a detailed plan for the dismissal
of the eight District Attorneys.
On March 29, 2007, one of his aides, D. Kyle Sampson, gave
testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee to confirm that
Gonzales had participated in the deliberations that led to the
dismissals. One of the Senator’s questions forced Sampson to
admit that Gonzales had been less than truthful during his March
13 press conference.
Why would a person of Gonzales intellect make false statements
to the press? He was within his rights to obey direction from
the President. The USA Patriot Improvement and Reauthorization
Act of 2005 granted the Attorney General, with the consent of
the President, the right to replace the District Attorneys at
anytime without Senate approval. This law authorized the
President and the Attorney General the authority to remove the
competent eight and replace them with Bush loyalists.
Gonzales is too bright and experienced to lie unless he deemed
it his only course of action under the circumstances. After
all, he had been a Texas Supreme Court Judge. He knows the
consequences of false statements by a public official. Under
these circumstances, it is not enough to merely remove him from
office. An investigation into why he lied is important. He had
to believe at the time he lied that the adverse consequences of
the truth would be catastrophic. What were those consequences?
The only way Gonzales could possibly escape detection would be
for members of his staff to also lie. It would require his
assistant, D. Kyle Sampson, to say he was solely responsible for
all communications to obtain Presidential approval for the
replacements.
But Sampson, a Mormon, is a lawyer who learns by example. On
March 6, 2007, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Jr. was convicted of
four felony charges, two for perjury, one for obstruction of
justice, and one for making false statements to federal
investigators. None of the offenses Libby was convicted of had
anything to do with the underlying charge that someone
wrongfully disclosed to the public that Valerie E. (Plame)
Wilson was a CIA agent. Had Libby told the truth, there would
not have been any indictment against him. In fact, there have
been no indictments against anyone for the wrongful disclosure.
Since the
replacement of the eight District Attorneys was legal, Gonzales
and his staff’s only exposure to criminal prosecution is to lie
to the Senate Judiciary Committee and other investigators. The
Libby conviction made Sampson’s course of conduct obvious to
everyone but Gonzales. Gonzales’ motive was to cover-up
complaints of torture and wrongful denial of habeas corpus
committed by the Department of Justice under his leadership.
The eight fired District Attorneys were deemed insufficiently
loyal to remain silent on these issues. They were fired because
they refused to bring unfounded corruption claims against
opposition candidates that were to distract the public and
persuade the opposition to keep their mouths shut about the
civil rights abuses committed at the direction of President
George W. Bush.
Gonzales boxed-in himself several ways: the videos of his press
conferences to first deny, then admit, participation in the
replacement of the District Attorneys; the evidence supplied by
Michael A. Battle, his former Executive Office Director, to
admit that the eight were dismissed for other than just cause;
the testimony of D. Kyle Sampson, his former Chief of Staff, to
admit that Gonzales participated in the firings; and, the
statement by Monica Goodling, his former Aid for White House
Relations, that the Senate request for her testimony was nothing
more than a “perjury trap.” Gonzales now has no plausible alibi
that will allow him to escape public humiliation and possible
prosecution for his prior false statements.
Rather than face Gonzales pressure, Battle and Sampson elected
to immediately resign.
Monica Goodling, Gonzales’ last hope, was taught that God would
lead her through tribulation in undergrad training at Messiah
College (formerly Messiah Bible School and Missionary Training
Home). She honed her reliance on faith at Regent University Law
School. Regent University was founded by Dr. M.G. "Pat"
Robertson, televangelist, who also founded the Christian
Broadcasting Network (CBN). Dr. Robertson had an inspired
vision from his television work to establish a graduate-level
institution that would train men and women for the challenge of
representing Christ in their professions, including government
“faith based initiatives”.
Gonzales’ request for help from Goodling was met with her
assertion of the Fifth Amendment against self incrimination.
When asked to explain why she did that, she said that testimony
before the Senate was nothing more than a “perjury trap.” To be
a trap requires that she either lied in some prior statement or
would have to lie to keep her Department of Justice position.
When her “perjury trap” explanation failed all rational
evaluation, she too elected to resign.
Gonzales could do good work for the Country. He could
acknowledge that his initial statements to the press were
incorrect. The pressure to shield the President temporally
clouded his judgment.
He could admit that the present appointment system puts too much
political pressure on the Attorney General. Under the present
system, the Attorney General, no matter who that is, must
replace any or all District Attorneys immediately upon request
by the President.
The law must be changed to remove the President from the
selection process. Gonzales would justify this change with an
honest explanation of his motive for his false press conference
and his understanding of the President’s motives for the
dismissal of each of the eight District Attorneys.
He would further urge that the best interests of the public
would be served by a change in the administration of justice.
The Executive Branch of government can no longer be trusted to
participate in the selection of the Attorney General or the
District Attorneys.[1] These functions must be delegated to the
legal profession to allow potential candidates for office to be
reviewed for competence. Candidates for these offices must be on
a non-partisan basis. Once appointed, the Attorney General and
the District Attorneys would serve against their record, such as
cases worked, reduction in crime, and other standards to be
developed. Politics must be removed so that political motivation
is eliminated from the process.
To adopt this reform would require that Congress and the
President surrender their right to replace Department of Justice
personnel. Admittedly, this would be a rather utopian result.
It would be refreshing for Gonzales and the Congress to put the
good of the Country ahead of partisan politics.
But he has not
done that. He resigned with the claim that he did nothing
wrong. He went out of the limelight. With a low profile he
could escape criminal prosecution and investigation by his legal
license regulators. But as the act of a fool, he could not
remain quiet. He has elected to go on a public speaking tour.
His first speech was to the students at the University of
Florida on November 19, 2007. The results are on
youtube
for all to see. The civil rights abuses committed under his
leadership have been brought to mind again. Are his criminal
prosecution and disbarment proceeding far behind?
William
Sumner Scott is a author and television film producer. He can
be reached at
wmscott@bellsouth.net
Note -
[1] The same argument applies to the appointment of Federal
judges.
Copyright William Sumner Scott, J.D
Click on "comments" below to read or post comments
Comment Guidelines
Be succinct, constructive and
relevant to the story.
We encourage engaging, diverse
and meaningful commentary. Do not include
personal information such as names, addresses,
phone numbers and emails. Comments falling
outside our guidelines – those including
personal attacks and profanity – are not
permitted.
See our complete
Comment Policy
and
use this link to notify us if you have concerns
about a comment.
We’ll promptly review and remove any
inappropriate postings.
Send Page To a Friend
In accordance
with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material
is distributed without profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational
purposes. Information Clearing House has no
affiliation whatsoever with the originator of
this article nor is Information ClearingHouse
endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)
|
