« Previous | Main | Next »

Prominent Republican on Gonzales: We Know How It Will End

Share

March 20, 2007 5:18 PM

ABC News' Jonathan Karl and George Stephanopoulos Report: In the latest sign of Republican angst over Attorney General Alberto Gonzales' involvement in the firing of eight U.S. attorneys, a prominent Republican close to the White House said of Gonzales: "It's a [xxxx]-ing mess.  I don't see how they live through another year-and-a-half with an Attorney General as wounded as he is."

This friend of the White House says Gonzales should go and go soon, but worries the White House is digging its heels in.

"We all know how it is going to end," he said.  "The question is how long it drags on."

Keeping Gonzales "re-enforces the perception out there that there is no accountability in this administration."

Earlier today, after the Senate voted to end the Bush administration's ability to fill U.S. attorney vacancies, the White House offered up Karl Rove and former White House counsel Harriet Miers for congressional interviews but no testimony under oath in the investigation of the prosecutor firings.

In a press conference, Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said he would press for testimony under oath from White House aides even though White House counsel Fred Fielding indicated "he didn't want to negotiate."

Over at the White House a senior White House official drew hard lines: "We are not going to blink on this one. The President is not going to buckle to the threat of subpoenas."

The senior official describe the White House offer as reasonable and the Democratic response will show "they want to know what happened" or they want to "pursue a broader partisan agenda.  Our offer brings transparency to their motivations."

The official also pointed out that giving a false statement to Congress is a crime whether or not the testimony is provided under oath, indicating that the White House might be willing to compromise on making a transcript of conversations.

The official acknowledged the lack of strong G.O.P. support on the Hill but believe the offer will keep most of them quiet for not and also insisted that the President was not involved in this decision.

March 20, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (95)

User Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Why is it they don't want to swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? Could it be because they want to lie?

Posted by: Nancy | Mar 21, 2007 12:48:15 PM

RE: Posted by: Max Khan | Mar 20, 2007 8:02:51 PM

Hang on to Gonzales, George! With a little luck he'll take you and DICK down with the him!!

Posted by: billofatlier | Mar 21, 2007 12:49:46 PM

Who does GW think he is? I guess he believes he can do what he wants irregardless of our Constitution because he was never legally elected to the office of President. This scandal should bring him and all his neocons down. These people not only need to be Impeached and removed from office, they need to go to jail.

Posted by: Lloyd Herrman | Mar 21, 2007 12:51:18 PM

I have to try to put myself in the Bush administration's shoes. If I were the president, what would I do? If I had nothing to hide I would do whatever I could to facilitate matters instead of wasting taxpayers' money stalling. I would do the right and honorable thing to know the truth. I would not only allow the subpoenas, I would make everyone available to testify. If I had nothing to hide.

Posted by: melfeasance | Mar 21, 2007 1:02:12 PM

Agreed - let the AG stay, dig in the heels, feels familiar huh? Stonewall! Stonewall! Don't give in (thanks Tom Delay)! Ahhhhh the fresh smell of Watergate and Iran-Contra still lingers....

Posted by: James | Mar 21, 2007 1:05:53 PM

Are we impeaching yet?

Posted by: Random | Mar 21, 2007 1:06:36 PM

This admin. lied about Plame, the war, WMD's, environment, Katrina, Prosecutors and on and on and on. Enough is enough IMPEACH, CONVICT and throw in JAIL.

Posted by: Dennis | Mar 21, 2007 1:07:58 PM

"Over at the White House a senior White House official drew hard lines: "We are not going to blink on this one. The President is not going to buckle to the threat of subpoenas."

Get ready for reruns of the never ending Beano & the Chimpster Show.

Posted by: Xster | Mar 21, 2007 1:08:13 PM

Isn't it an interesting comparison:
When the NSA is accused of spying and checking on American citizens, the administration puts out a line that says "If you didn't do anything wrong, then you have nothing to worry about".
Now the door has swung the other way. If they have done nothing wrong, then they have nothing to worry about.
They need to be held accountable by having real checks and balances.

Posted by: John | Mar 21, 2007 1:08:20 PM

It reminds me of the Wicked Witch of the West's problem with Water. Does the truth scare these people that much that they can't bring themselves to honor the will of the American people and testify under oath? Will they melt? What exactly are they afraid of here?

If they have nothing to hide, then they should have nothing to fear.

Posted by: Teresa | Mar 21, 2007 1:08:43 PM

History is not on the side of Bush in this matter, executive privilege, and when Nixon invoked executive privilege he lost. Google United States vs Nixon and read the decision. As we all know many that testified during that time went to prison. Clinton failed in the same type of case in the SCOTUS.
The SCOTUS that is stacked with Bush footkissers will be forced to overturn two cases regarding this issue if they side with Bush. Not likely.

Bush has refused three invitations for his aides to testify to Congress a first since Nixon in 1972. Clinton did not refuse any. 31 of Clintons top aides testified 47 different occasions, Bush has allowed one, Tom Ridge. Republicans in have no credibility on this issue and Bush is the most dreadful President this country has ever been forced to endure.

Posted by: Roafer | Mar 21, 2007 1:09:38 PM

Bush makes Nixon look like a god damned saint. I hope the whole batch of them get sent to The Hague.

Posted by: s_gundam | Mar 21, 2007 1:09:41 PM

They have lied, and lied, I think the only way we will get the truth is under oath. In the mean time what is congress going to do about the appointees that were placed in the positions by Rove? They need to be removed and what about the voting machines? They need to be fixed.

The only way the Republicans have "won" is by cheating so the system needs fixing before 2008.

Posted by: Diana | Mar 21, 2007 1:10:44 PM

Please be real journalists and stop quoting an anonymous "senior administration official" when the only point of anonymity is to keep the "official" from being embarrassed. If you can't get a straight quote, don't use them as a source.

Posted by: Paul | Mar 21, 2007 1:11:15 PM

I-M-P-E-A-C-H now. Cut to the chase and drag these incompetent fools out of their offices kicking adn screaming like babies.

Posted by: robert lewis | Mar 21, 2007 1:18:25 PM

I'm amazed at how the approval rating for Bush is low...however, he cruised into reelection.

i'm not mad at bush, i'm upset with the idiots who voted for him AGAIN.

Did you not see his incompetence the first time?

Posted by: didn't vote for bush | Mar 21, 2007 1:19:30 PM

I too am fed up with the lying, the evasion and the incompetence. There should only be one logical, natural response to the administration's proposal: "If the administration really wants to tell the truth and has nothing to hide, then there's no reason why they can't do so under oath, in public, and with a written transcript. If they'll only agree to questioning in private, not under oath and without a transcript, then it's obvious that they want to lie to Congress and to the American people." It's really that simple.

Posted by: Jeff | Mar 21, 2007 1:19:59 PM

I am tired of the President interrupting The View with his scrambled justifications of a "Misson Not Accomplished". I'd like nothing more than a big assed trial. Starting with Rove and that substandard hack Harriet Myer. NOW, they stopped stupid from appointing her, time to send them all to jail.

Posted by: Joseph | Mar 21, 2007 1:23:19 PM

Why is it ok when Clinton lets go 93 attorneys, keeps one?

and note: The fired Clinton attorney's were "in-process" of investigating Democrat Rostenkowski, now that didnt seem to look shady at all...to the media or the left...why is that?

And, why is it ok when Carter removed attorneys mid-term, as Bush has done here?

I'll tell you why it was ok...one it was a Democrat doing the firing (so the media didnt say a word), and two, the attorneys served at the pleasure of the President (and if he didnt want them, they're gone.).

What I learn from all this; Democrats are hypocrites annd scum, Republicans are spineless slime. I'll still stay with the repubs spinelessness, because the dems want to Give Al Queda a whole country to train and attack us from (Iraq)..too friggin dangerous for my liking.

I am literally ticked off that we are NOW going to spend millions of taxpayer dollars investigating this nonesense...(the democrats and media know it) and at the same time the dems added fluff spending to the war funding bill, which translates into more of the same execssive spending, which will result in excessive taxtation, which will NOW result in no democrat will get re-elected. No way. We gave them a chance and they are already spending worse than the republicans...so therefore they are WORSE than the republicans.

Posted by: Jim | Mar 21, 2007 1:23:27 PM

This is such crap. The entire Bush Administration belongs in a maximum security penitentiary for life. They are the most opprobrious of all miscreants.

Posted by: deb | Mar 21, 2007 1:25:02 PM

Post a comment