What's All This Buzz?
Prosecutors Assail Gonzales During Meeting
Like many Americans, I have been concerned about the degree of politicalization that has occurred via AG Gonzalez and the DOJ under the banner of this Bush administration, as well as that which occurred under the previous Bush, Reagan and Nixon administrations. Nixon was so persecutorial--and perhaps a bit paranoid--that he went after the Public Broadcasting System (PBS) though DOJ investigations ordered by his Chief of Staff and through efforts to deliberately cut PBS funding (which is why we now have so many damn fund-raising programming periods and a hell of a lot of "commercial ads" occurring on a supposedly non-commercial television network). Nixon, of course, was part of the reason that the Church Commission reported to congress on the abuses of power and violation of civil liberties via electronic surveillance and FISA was formulated and passed into law. Now we have an entire set of laws that not only undermines FISA, but has resulted in serious abuses of civil liberties by the DOJ, FBI, NSA, NSC, IRS, SEC, as well as state and local police (c.f. the reports on the NYPD conducting illegal and invasive surveillance and investigations into protesters during the GOP National Convention that brought Bush back to power.
Reagan and Bush (Sr.) both conducted a lot of behind the scenes influence on what groups were the target of FBI, DOJ, IRS and Secret Service investigations. There were several occasions when the power of the White House reached out through the DOJ and FBI to investigate advocates against poverty, homelessness, addiction services and treatment, and other "progressive causes" like the environment, public health, taxation reform, etc.
But this latest hubbabalou about the firing of several US Attorneys has me puzzled. I am not puzzled by the outrage over these firings. The political litmus test used by Gonzo Gonzalez and the White House (specifically Special White House Counsel Harriet Meiers) is an assault on the very form of independent exercise of justice and due process that is an obligation of those holding such high office, especially those holding cabinet-level and special appointment offices. But what puzzles me is why the entire congress is in an uproar over these abuses, which directly affects only 8 or 9 persons, and indirectly undermines our entire system of justice and juris prudence, when the abuses of civil liberties, foreign policy, violation of constitutional oath and duties, and the overall disregard of the Constitution receives only a minor voice of outrage and a shrug of our collective shoulders.
Not being one to buy into too many conspiracy theories, I hesitate to point out that what has occurred here is recognition of a specific assault on a specific class of people within our nation. If the assault were on the poor, the middle classes, or any of the minority groups within our society, it would receive a lot of media attention for a short while and maybe a word or two from a few well-intentioned congress critters. But this assault has targeted lawyers. Since over two-thirds of congress are lawyers, such an assault is taken very much to heart and proves that congress is more interested in self-preservation of power and influence than actually representing the people of our nation.
I think the attention to these issues involving the political ideology of Bush and his gang of fascist thugs undermining our entire system of justice is nothing less--and certainly nothing more--than congress reacting to the idea that some of them could be next to be lined up in the sights of the Bush dragnet for enemies of state. Since lawyers, as a professional group easily identified in our society, have a long history of protecting themselves (themselves, not the profession or the Constitution) and their long-term interests, it is not surprising that our congress critters are outraged and emotional about the actions of Gonzo Gonzalez.
When will they start showing the same amount of outrage and spunk in protecting the rest of us?
Like many Americans, I have been concerned about the degree of politicalization that has occurred via AG Gonzalez and the DOJ under the banner of this Bush administration, as well as that which occurred under the previous Bush, Reagan and Nixon administrations. Nixon was so persecutorial--and perhaps a bit paranoid--that he went after the Public Broadcasting System (PBS) though DOJ investigations ordered by his Chief of Staff and through efforts to deliberately cut PBS funding (which is why we now have so many damn fund-raising programming periods and a hell of a lot of "commercial ads" occurring on a supposedly non-commercial television network). Nixon, of course, was part of the reason that the Church Commission reported to congress on the abuses of power and violation of civil liberties via electronic surveillance and FISA was formulated and passed into law. Now we have an entire set of laws that not only undermines FISA, but has resulted in serious abuses of civil liberties by the DOJ, FBI, NSA, NSC, IRS, SEC, as well as state and local police (c.f. the reports on the NYPD conducting illegal and invasive surveillance and investigations into protesters during the GOP National Convention that brought Bush back to power.
Reagan and Bush (Sr.) both conducted a lot of behind the scenes influence on what groups were the target of FBI, DOJ, IRS and Secret Service investigations. There were several occasions when the power of the White House reached out through the DOJ and FBI to investigate advocates against poverty, homelessness, addiction services and treatment, and other "progressive causes" like the environment, public health, taxation reform, etc.
But this latest hubbabalou about the firing of several US Attorneys has me puzzled. I am not puzzled by the outrage over these firings. The political litmus test used by Gonzo Gonzalez and the White House (specifically Special White House Counsel Harriet Meiers) is an assault on the very form of independent exercise of justice and due process that is an obligation of those holding such high office, especially those holding cabinet-level and special appointment offices. But what puzzles me is why the entire congress is in an uproar over these abuses, which directly affects only 8 or 9 persons, and indirectly undermines our entire system of justice and juris prudence, when the abuses of civil liberties, foreign policy, violation of constitutional oath and duties, and the overall disregard of the Constitution receives only a minor voice of outrage and a shrug of our collective shoulders.
Not being one to buy into too many conspiracy theories, I hesitate to point out that what has occurred here is recognition of a specific assault on a specific class of people within our nation. If the assault were on the poor, the middle classes, or any of the minority groups within our society, it would receive a lot of media attention for a short while and maybe a word or two from a few well-intentioned congress critters. But this assault has targeted lawyers. Since over two-thirds of congress are lawyers, such an assault is taken very much to heart and proves that congress is more interested in self-preservation of power and influence than actually representing the people of our nation.
I think the attention to these issues involving the political ideology of Bush and his gang of fascist thugs undermining our entire system of justice is nothing less--and certainly nothing more--than congress reacting to the idea that some of them could be next to be lined up in the sights of the Bush dragnet for enemies of state. Since lawyers, as a professional group easily identified in our society, have a long history of protecting themselves (themselves, not the profession or the Constitution) and their long-term interests, it is not surprising that our congress critters are outraged and emotional about the actions of Gonzo Gonzalez.
When will they start showing the same amount of outrage and spunk in protecting the rest of us?
Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales endured blunt criticism Tuesday from federal prosecutors who questioned the firings of eight United States attorneys, complained that the dismissals had undermined morale and expressed broader grievances about his leadership, according to people briefed on the discussion.
About a half-dozen United States attorneys voiced their concerns at a private meeting with Mr. Gonzales in Chicago.
Several of the prosecutors said the dismissals caused them to wonder about their own standing and distracted their employees, according to one person familiar with the discussions. Others asked Mr. Gonzales about the removal of Daniel C. Bogden, the former United States attorney in Nevada, a respected career prosecutor whose ouster has never been fully explained by the Justice Department.
While Mr. Gonzales’s trip was part of a long-scheduled tour, he has been meeting in recent days with prosecutors in an effort to repair the damage caused by the dismissals. President Bush has backed Mr. Gonzales, but his tenure at the Justice Department may still be in peril as lawmakers in both parties have called for his resignation, questioned his credibility and raised doubts that he can lead the department.
His former chief of staff, D. Kyle Sampson, is to appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday. In his prepared testimony, Mr. Sampson, who resigned two weeks ago, said the prosecutors were fired not for political reasons, but because they failed to follow the president’s priorities. He is likely to be closely questioned about the extent of Mr. Gonzales’s involvement in planning the firings.
posted by Jim Downey at 4:16 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home