Precedent shows that you need a substantive crime to get removed through impeachment (for instance bribe taking), removing Gonzales through impeachment over some attorney firings doesn't seem realistic

bl968 are you even in the united states? I know we have a lot of brits and europeans, and I assumed you were one too.

also Gonzales is the lynchpin for the whole bush administration. They really can't fire him. Imagine a replacement for Gonzales. Now imagine how much covering-up the replacement would have to do.

This video is from a January hearing. When Gonzales was asked about it again 4 months later, he said he hasn't "really thought about Habeas Corpus"

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/05/10/gonzales-habeas-2/

Important part from Wikipedia:
Card is known to have headed the White House Iraq Group (WHIG), whose members include Karl Rove, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Condoleezza Rice, Karen Hughes and Mary Matalin. This group is known for controlling public relations for the Iraq War.


In March 2004 Card tried to convince Attorney General John D. Ashcroft to reauthorize a domestic surveillance program, which the Justice Department had just determined was illegal. Ashcroft lay ill in an intensive-care unit when Card and White House Counsel Alberto R. Gonzales urged him to sign the papers. Ashcroft refused. [4]

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/city_region/breaking_news/2007/05/umass_protestor.html

Heh, priceless.

Now, since you [didn't] ask, some trivia!

Here's what I've heard, devoid of any personal description, opinion or experience because, let's face it, a guy's sexual resume on the internet is about as trustworthy as an Alberto Gonzales testimony. What I've heard is that size matters, but not in the obvious way. Firstly, there is such a thing as too big (particularly for girth, i.e. circumference) and that's smaller than most guys thing and even than many woman realise. This guy would definitely be too big for most women's comfort. Great potential as a porn star but for a normal sex life, not suitable. Secondly, the amount size matters in the bigger = better theory is reversely proportional to the guy's technique. A small guy who doesn't know what he's doing will generally be worse in bed than a large guy who doesn't have a clue, but a small guy who knows what's where can please just as well as an experienced large guy.

I've heard about loads of surveys and the results vary, surprise surprise. In self test surveys, the average is around 6.2". In professionally done tests (I shudder to think how), this mysteriously drops by about half an inch. FWIW, one survey I found gave Oriental men averaging 4.8", Caucasian men averaging 5.8" and African men averaging 7.0", so there you are!

This is length along the top of the penis, when erect. Girth is also important but much less recognised as a status symbol.

Bush Crime Family in action. Gonzales needs to be in jail. If not for torture memo, then for domestic spying.

No respect for the Constitution. When ASHCROFT (father of the Patriot Act) won't sign something.. It has to be bad. Good thing they replaced non-compliant, unloyal Bushies with these crooks like Gonzo et. al.

WTF happened to this country 9 out of 10 candidates love them some Enhanced Interrogation Techniques. I mean.. you can stick your fingers in your ears and say "it's not torture" all you want. But it is torture by everyone but Pentagon lawyers definitions. Literally Bush and US leaders are going to go to jail over US torture.. (assuming we remain active members of NATO, UN, etc)


I understand this is a Fux News audience, but come on.. APPLAUDING TORTURE!! This is not your father's GOP, that's for sure. Applauding doubling Gitmo? This is insane, they are trying to out 9/11 Bush!! They trying to seem more pro-war pro-torture than Gonzales!

Look you can't get information out of people who are willing to die for their cause. You can't torture out accurate info. It is false, tell you what you want to hear stuff. Even McCain can't fuckin' say, no TORTURE, no enhanced anything. McCain probably had it easier than people in cages in Gitmo.

Tags changed from "olbermann, maddow, schlozman" to "olbermann, maddow, schlozman, gonzales" by gold star member sbchapm.

The scary thing is that was just House of Reps... Can you imagine the perp walk in another 2 years... Scooter, probably Rove, half of Gonzales staff..

Hey DIRT--Yep! That's an apt name for you! By the way if you are going to attempt to insult me the word you like to use against those of us who disagree with your hateful and arrogant pea-brained view is spelled "M O R O N" not "M O R A N".
The cases you cite: "US v. Verdugo-Urquidez and Martinez-Aguero v. Gonzales are truly laughable. Sounds like corrupt Government politicking to me .The petitioners were obviously illegal Mexican immigrants like you probably are. Hope you choke on that next burrito. The complexities of Democracy are failing when criminals are given protections concerning their criminal wrongdoing. It doesn't make it right. This is exactly where our Constitutional protections as citizens are eroding. I know you don't care and you're happy about these cases because your probably a criminal. I hope the next thief who breaks into your home and beats you to a PULP and then robs you is fully protected under the laws of this country, and maybe he will even sue you for tripping over the garbage on your floor and hurting himself as he's leaving your crappy place. Yep! That's the government you like!

BGW, the only reason George Washington is blue is because sad sacks like you throw his name around in some kind of I-ride-the-short-bus attempt at patriotism. You better think twice before you start calling people here traitors, because most folks around here are more informed than you, more literate than you, and care a hell of a lot more about the USA than you.

Anyone that parrots semi-retarded, oversimplified talking points about immigration is no patriot or fan of the Constitution (or whatever the last hate buzz-words is - islamofascist, gay marriage, etc.)

Look, immigration has always been what makes this country great. If it wasn't for H1-B, student Visa, illegal workers... this country would not have had a dot-com boom. There are more companies than you can imagine started by immigrants and people you hate. In fact, the US is the only major first world country with positive population growth, which can be attributed to ... guest what? You like your Social Security? Guess what is paying for it when you retire? Illegals who pay in and never collect. Guess what makes your WalMart profitable and running smooth? Guess why your stock portfolio goes up? Guess who picks your fruits and vegetables?

What I initally addressed is the LAPD violation of the Constitution. You would willingly give over your Rights in order to spew some "illegal immigrant" hatred. First of all, the Constitution should strive to protect all humans, anywhere. Secondly, go read some constitutional law. (Obviously other than rights to taxpayer funded programs, protection from deportation, and voting..)

Immigration proceedings are matters of administrative law, not criminal law. (Until Ashcroft and Abu-Gonzales created Gitmo detention centers)

http://www.slate.com/id/1008367/
http://www.nlg.org/resources/kyr/kyr_english.htm

the Bill of Rights applies to everyone, even illegal immigrants. So an immigrant, legal or illegal, prosecuted under the criminal code has the right to due process, a speedy and public trial, and other rights protected by the Fifth and Sixth Amendments.

(US v. Verdugo-Urquidez) Implies the Fourth Amend search and seizures does not apply to non-residents (in the case of border issues)

(Martinez-Aguero v. Gonzales) "aliens stopped at the border have a constitutional right to be free from false imprisonment and the use of excessive force by law enforcement personnel."


(Plyer v. Doe) No State shall…deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

U.S. CONST. amend XIV, § 1. (No State shall…deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law[.])

I'm not sure where half-breeds like you learned how to read the Bill of Rights and see where it says "citizens" have the following rights, but I still maintain, this country (and George Washington's memory) would be better off if you choke on a taco.

Authorized illegal wire taps:
Latest News: 8/18/06 - In response to a lawsuit filed by the ACLU, US District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor ruled that the wiretaps are unconstitutional.

1. The Bush wiretaps violated US law because he was required to get approval from FISA. He can start a wiretap of a suspected terrorist at any time but must then seek approval to continue within 72 hours.
2. Attorney General Gonzales claims HJR114 gave Bush authority to conduct the wiretaps. But HJR114 only grants use of the "Armed Forces". HJR114 does not explicitly suspend the Constitution. Also HJR114 requires "The President shall, at least once every 60 days, submit to the Congress a report on matters relevant to this joint resolution, including actions taken pursuant to the exercise of authority granted in section 3". Congress was not notified of these wiretaps. [HJR114]
3. Bush may have bypassed FISA because he wanted to listen to and analyze all international signals, not just those of suspected terrorists. He knew this was blatantly illegal so he hid it. Bush says "We use FISA still. But FISAs is for long-term monitoring. What is needed in order to protect the American people is the ability to move quickly to detect." Then later "There is a difference between detecting, so we can prevent, and monitoring. And it's important to note the distinction between the two." The distinction is that "detecting" requires listening to lots of calls with a computer to see if someone says certain keywords like "bomb" in Arabic, or maybe even "impeach Bush" in English. Monitoring is listening to a specific suspected terrorist. The problem with detection is that you have to listen to all calls, including yours and mine. [This NY Times article confirms this interpretation. Also CNN.]
4. More evidence that Bush wants to listen to all signals is in Bob Woodward's book "Bush at War," on page 303. " Bush summarized his strategy: 'Listen to every phone call and close them down and protect the innocents.'" [WaPost]
5. Investigators may have found that Bush applied for an expansion of wiretap capability from FISA, was rejected, and then went ahead and did it anyway. [FindLaw] [FAS]
6. Bush claims going through FISA is too slow but legal emergency wiretaps helped capture terrorist Mosquera.
7. According to a report in USA Today, the NSA is collecting the phone records of tens of millions of Americans - most of whom aren't suspected of any crime. The agency's goal is "to create a database of every call ever made" within the nation's borders. The stated goal is to be able to identify who is involved in a network of terrorists. But this same technique can be used to determine who is involved in a network of political activists who might, for example, oppose the Bush administration. Under Section 222 of the Communications Act, first passed in 1934, telephone companies are prohibited from giving out information regarding their customers' calling habits. All of the major telecommunications companies cooperated with this program except for Qwest. Joe Nacchio, CEO of Qwest, was troubled by the fact that there was no FISA approval and that the program was so pervasive.
8. 8/18/06 - In response to a lawsuit filed by the ACLU, US District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor ruled that the wiretaps are unconstitutional.

Other crimes:
# Bush violated the Geneva Convention by torturing prisoners of war.
# Bush violated International Law by invading a sovereign country for illegal purposes.
# Bush held prisoners without formal charges and without legal representation. [CNN]
# Bush illegally used government funds for domestic political propaganda related to the administration's Medicare package, paying commentator Armstrong Williams, etc. [NYT, requires free registration] TruthOut: [1] [2] [3]
# Bush used uniformed military personnel for Republican party political purposes. [TalkingPointsMemo] [Coloradoan]
# Bush was negligent in his slow response to help victims of Hurricane Katrina.
# Bush shows contempt toward our Constitution and our democratic ideals.

-- compiled by anonymous source

Condoned torture of prisoners:
The evidence below shows that Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Gonzales are guilty of violating "Federal Torture Act" Title 18 United States Code, Section 113C, the UN Torture Convention and the Geneva Convention by ordering and condoning the use of torture. Many prisoners have died as a result.

1. 1/25/02 - White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales wrote a memo advising the President of "the threat of domestic criminal prosecution under the War Crimes Act," a federal statute, for torturing prisoners. He advised Bush to invent a legal technicality --declaring detainees in the "war on terror" to be outside the Geneva Conventions --which, he said, "substantially reduces" the chance of prosecution. Gonzales was later promoted to US Attorney General. [Nation]
2. 2/7/02 - Bush took Gonzales' advice and signed an order declaring that members of Al Qaeda and the Taliban are not covered by the Geneva Convention. The memo requires that "detainees be treated humanely and, to the extent appropriate and consistent with military necessity, in a manner consistent with the principles of Geneva." While seeming to call for humane treatment, it is carefully worded to allow for violations of the Geneva Convention when necessary.
3. Bush moves prisoners to Guantanamo Bay in Cuba and holds them for years without charges, trials, or access to lawyers. This is ruled illegal by a Federal Judge on Jan 31, 2005.
4. Bush sets up secret prisons run by the CIA in foreign countries to escape US laws against torture. Rice claims European countries supported this plan. [WashingtonPost] [CNN] [FindLaw]
5. 9/26/02 - Canadian Maher Arar was arrested at JFK airport and sent to secret prison in Syria for torture under "extraordinary rendition" program. He was released a year later without charges. He sued the US government but the suit was dismissed by a federal judge David Trager on 2/17/06 citing the need for secrecy. He wrote, "One need not have much imagination to contemplate the negative effect on our relations with Canada if discovery were to proceed in this case and were it to turn out that certain high Canadian officials had, despite public denials, acquiesced in Arar's removal to Syria." Thus the reason for the secrecy is not for national security but simply to avoid embarassing guilty parties in government. This sets a dangerous precedent that may allow Bush to kidnap and torture anyone he pleases. On 1/26/07 the Canadian government apologized and awarded Arar compensation. [Wikipedia]
6. Dec '02 - Alberto J. Mora, the general counsel of the United States Navy, tried to halt what he saw as a disastrous and unlawful policy of authorizing cruelty toward terror suspects. His 2004 memo details his unsuccessful struggle with the White House to stop the torture. [NewYorker]
7. 12/31/03 - German national Khaled al-Masri says he was abducted by the CIA arrested in Macedonia and flown to Afghanistan. He was then tortured for five months and released. CIA has admitted making a mistake in this case.
8. April 2004, photos of prisoners being tortured at Abu Ghraib prison make headlines around the world. Low ranking soldiers are convicted of torture charges, falling on their swords for the White House. [Wikipedia] [NewYorker]
9. 5/24/04 - Seymour Hersh releases article detailing how Rumsfeld's program encouraged torture. "President Bush was informed of the existence of the program, the former intelligence official said." [NewYorker]
10. October 2005, Senator McCain adds an amendment to a defense bill that would outlaw torture by the United States. Bush and Cheney fight this tooth and nail to block this amendment but eventually give in after the McCain amendment is weakened by the Graham-Levin amendment. When Bush signs the bill he adds a signing statement that basically says he can ignore the prohibition against torture under his powers as "unitary executive" and "Commander in Chief ".
11. 6/29/06 - Supreme Court rules in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld that the Geneva Convention applies to prisoners at Guantanamo.

Awesome, thanks for this one Winkler, Jon summed it up really well.
Naturally they are talking about this particular Bush moment. And John Oliver provided this excellent report

I do remember Bush saying this display raised his confidence in Gonzales.