| The New York Times is reporting that Attorney General Alberto Gonzales will be stepping down later today:
Mr. Gonzales, who had rebuffed calls for his resignation, submitted his to President Bush by telephone on Friday, the official said. His decision was not immediately announced, the official added, until after the president invited him and his wife to lunch at his ranch near here.
Here's Sen. Lieberman, on voting to confirm Gonzales, February 3, 2005:
And there's a sentence in Judge Gonzales's opinion that has been quoted with great derision, laughter, as if it was over the edge. He wrote, "The new paradigm war on terrorism renders "quaint" some of the provisions [of the Geneva Conventions]."
I think Judge Gonzales was being restrained and diplomatic in using the word "quaint" to offer these benefits....
That is why I'm going to vote for Judge Gonzales and confirm his nomination, because nothing that I see in the record rises to a level high enough to overcome the presumption in favor of him as a nominee of the President. He has many outstanding qualities. I don't know if others have mentioned in this debate, but he has a certain independence of spirit, which I don't think has been much-commented on.
Sen Lieberman, in an email to a constituent on the Gonzales nomination, March 8, 2005:
I understand your concerns about Judge Gonzales' nomination, particularly about his involvement in formulating the legal positions underlying the Administration's policies in the war on terror. After considering views like the ones you expressed, reviewing the record of Judge Gonzales' confirmation proceedings, meeting with Judge Gonzales, and thinking long and hard about the nomination, I decided to vote to confirm him, largely because I believe that, although Senators have a constitutional obligation to advise and consent on nominees and should not serve as a rubber stamp on the President's choices, they nonetheless should apply a broadly deferential standard when reviewing the President's choices for his Cabinet. When I applied that standard to Judge Gonzales, I concluded that, regardless of whether I would have chosen him for the position myself, he did not fall so far out of the mainstream or have other factors in his record to justify denying the President his choice for the post.
Sen. Lieberman, on joining with Senate Republicans to filibuster the non-binding resolution expressing no confidence in Gonzales, June 11, 2007:
My vote against going ahead with more debate on this no confidence resolution is not an expression of confidence in Attorney General Gonzales. It is an expression of opposition to spending any more time on a resolution that will accomplish nothing, instead of going ahead with the next item of business, which is energy legislation.
Sen. Lieberman to Walter Shapiro of Salon, on whether he thought Gonzales should remain as Attorney General, August 3, 2007:
You were the only Democrat to oppose a no-confidence against Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. This was a vote that had nothing to do with the war in Iraq. And you are both a former Connecticut attorney general and someone who remembers the politicization of the Justice Department under John Mitchell during Watergate.
Let me reconstruct that. It was earlier in the year. I think I thought that it was essentially a political vote. And the question on Gonzales was ultimately -- he serves at the pleasure of the president. And that there was nothing but political intent to the resolution. Forgive me, I should go back and look that up.
Rather than getting into that, what do you think of Gonzales now? Do you think he should stay as attorney general?
That's the question I don't answer. Look, I will say that his credibility has really been in doubt. He has handled his appearances here -- and I must apologize by saying --
I know that you're not on the Senate Judiciary Committee.
I actually haven't focused on his appearances, so I am relying now on the media as to what actually happened. |
MLN is powered by