The resignation of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales on Monday marks the ends of a troubled era for the U.S. Department of Justice. As soon as word of his resignation became public, the pundits and commentators began to analyze his rise, his fall and his place in history.
The reasons for his rise are clear: His friendship with the president going back to their Texas days assured that he would be part of the current administration. There is, however, irony in his rapid ascension through the president's patronage.
Had John Ashcroft (himself a controversial attorney general) remained in office, Gonzales would have stayed in the White House where his unswerving loyalty to the president would not have led to his professional downfall. But John Ashcroft resigned, and Alberto Gonzales was nominated to take his place.
At the time of his nomination as attorney general there were many dissenting voices. There was concern that he was not experienced enough either in law or politics to be attorney general of the United States. There was concern about his independent judgment after his role in the administration's post-9/11 handling of crucial legal issues such as torture and surveillance. And there was concern that Gonzales' loyalty to the president would stop him from discharging fully the duties of attorney general.
But these questions were never fully addressed by a Congress dominated at the time by those who did not want to challenge the president and those who were willing to confirm anyone after their negative experience with Ashcroft. Gonzales, as a loyal servant of the president, went along with his nomination. Whether he himself ever had doubts about whether he should accept the nomination, we are likely never to know.
To my mind, the story of Alberto Gonzales' time as attorney general has about it the air of a tragedy. In the end, the Justice Department's independence was severely damaged and many capable employees left in despair. Now it is, in the words of several insiders, a department suffering from low morale and disorganization.
Law enforcement in the United States has suffered a blow to its reputation for integrity because of, among other things, the attorney general's poor performance in his congressional testimony. For months, the American public has been forced to witness its senior law enforcement official appear to lie about, or at least misrepresent, crucial facts.
The image of Gonzales attempting to get the then-seriously ill Attorney General Ashcroft to approve the president's secret surveillance program and counter the deputy attorney general's ruling from his hospital bed is one few Americans will soon forget. That his testimony was contradicted by none other than Robert Mueller, the director of the FBI, is nothing short of scandalous.
But as tragic as Attorney General Gonzales' time in office has been for the Justice Department and for American law enforcement, it has also been tragic for him personally and for his family. He must now leave Washington as a defeated man.
I am reminded very much of another Bush loyalist, Harriet Miers, whose nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court led to her very public humiliation. There is a pattern here, I think. The president and his closest advisers, in nominating personal friends and loyal supporters for offices that require independence and outstanding credentials which the nominees lack, do neither the country nor the individuals so nominated any favors. It is time for the president to abandon this strategy.
We may only hope that whomever the president nominates to replace Gonzales will not be a "friend of George" but instead be a nationally admired lawyer with substantial legal and governmental experience who can exercise the independent judgment and skill the highest law enforcement position in the United States requires.
Comments
LJWorld.com doesn’t necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.
aeroscout17 (anonymous) says…
Hope you didn't write the headline as you would be contradicting your own argument. He was not a mistake (at least to W.); he was another Bush puppet, hired to say "Yes". I do agree that he has caused/supported immeasurable damage In the Justice Dept. and to our constitutional rights.
hoeflich (Mike Hoeflich) says…
I not only don't write the headlines, I don't even get to see them until the paper is published.
aeroscout17 (anonymous) says…
I don't think that "radical centrist" is necessarily bad unless you are confusing this with being a lackey.
mick (anonymous) says…
Bush said of the Constitution, "It's just a g.d. piece of paper!" (Capitol Hill Blue, Dec 9, 2005) Gonzales was the perfect person for the job in Bush' eyes. Beware of what comes next.
camper (anonymous) says…
"Radical Centrist"? This is a new term.
yourworstnightmare (anonymous) says…
Gonzales was an ideologue and a loyal Bushie. This was his first priority, the law being a second or possible lower priority.
Typical of Bushco: loyalty and ideology trump competence, professionalism, skill, and knowledge. Indeed, these things are viewed with suspicion. Bushco doesn't want someone thinking about things and possibly disagreeing with their dogma.
chet_larock (anonymous) says…
"These are three of the most destructive people in the federal government today-hands down."
----
Someone doesn't know how to read, watch and comprehend current events in the news.
Roadkill_Rob (anonymous) says…
Summer's Eve has no clue...hand's down, end of discussion, don't even think about refuting my claim.
Right_Thinker and Colonel Angus should get a room and practice family values, neocon style.
Roadkill_Rob (anonymous) says…
Whatever, Colonel.
I know you like to do it neocon style. You know, bash a certain lifestyle and then secretly try to engage in that lifestyle. Then, if you get caught, blame the democrats.
Roadkill_Rob (anonymous) says…
Right_Thinker wrote:
"Bring back John Ashcroft, heck even Janet Reno-when she wanted to incinerate a bunch of Christian men, women and children, she didn't sit on her handsshe had a big Texas style BBQ!!"
And then wrote:
"Some on the left can hurt with their exceedingly hateful comments."
Right_Thinker is brilliant at picking a fight and then playing the victim. It's another touching neocon trait.
Roadkill_Rob (anonymous) says…
Colonel_Angus wrote:
"Thank Gaia for Home Depot and liberals or we'd be stuck with only American democrats to perform our necessary murders and pedophilia instead of a more diverse group of murderers and pedophiles."
Is this your idea of "a few good ideas, a few opinions", Colonel? You've got playing the victim down, though. I'll give you that.
yourworstnightmare (anonymous) says…
I wonder who would have been a bigger embarrassment as AG, Gonzales or Harriet Meiers?
yourworstnightmare (anonymous) says…
I think it is time to re-post my limerick.
There once was a dipstick named ferd,
who changes his username often, I've heard.
More faces than Janus,
He's now Colonel Anus
And what comes out of him is mainly turds.
b_asinbeer (anonymous) says…
"....I will continue to respect them...."
That's the funniest line I've heard you say today. :o) Keep it up!
sourpuss (anonymous) says…
"Gonzales was a mistake"
Well, I guess his parents should have used protection then...
ASBESTOS (anonymous) says…
I Voted for this President TWICE and he lost me on his second push for illegal alien amnesty! By reviewing his "appointments", it seems as if "Cronisim" was alive and well fed in the Bush Admin. Gonzalez was a terrible appointment, and mentally a legal lightweight, along with Harriet Myers. When Gonzales stated that Habeous Corpus was not in the constitution, was when this idiot lost me.
Now there is plenty to criticize the Bush Admin on, and I urge ALL GOPers to start holding our own accountable, and I also URGE the DNC to police their own as well. The day and time of these lying fundraisers staying in power by servicing the lobbyists at the expense of their constituency is bad on both sides of the isle. Take Tom Delay, IF he stayed with "Conservative" political principals (not religious bible beating), he would have paid attention to the grassroots and the constitutin instead of making K Street a cash register. The Dems were suppored to clean this up. Well the ear marks are still there, and that is what drives this crapola, on both sides of the isle.
Both parties principales would make the Unitesd States a great nation again, however on both sides of the body politic alligeance is given to the polarizing issues, and the necessary are ignored to the detriment of our country.
I am hoping for leaders in both parties to emerge, however I still see only fundraising liars, on both sides of the isle!
yourworstnightmare (anonymous) says…
Asbestos: "I Voted for this President TWICE..."
Not sure you want to go advertising that, buddy.
Interesting that it was Dubya's immigration proposals that lost your support. Things like cronyism, incompetence, undermining the Constitution, torture, lying about entering a war of choice, didn't faze you, but offer amensty to some immigrants, and BAM! That's it.
Very curious.
Agnostick (anonymous) says…
right_thinker (Anonymous) says:
"RKR breaks LJW user rules, and it stays. I'm not into suggesting removal, I'm not a big baby-but do the moderators 'spot check' or do the overly sensitive lefties hit the S/R button robotically?"
________________________________________________
Their ball.
Their playground.
Their rules.
The whining, though... seems to be all yours...
--Ag
ASBESTOS (anonymous) says…
Yourworstnightmare, you ned to get things in context. BTW, MY post was about "reflection and introspection" what can I do better as it were.
YOUR post is as per usual attack the political ideas that you do not agree with by atacking the person. where is your introspective look at your own political party of choice? Do you believe that surrrendering American Soveirnety to the US, Illegal aliens, countries sending US illegal aliens, or the US or AL Queada is a good poltical strategic plan for the dnc?
do you think that us citizens need to be taxed more and denied benefits to be given to the illegal aliens? DO you think the majority of americans agree with that stupid pov?
very interesting!
scott3460 (anonymous) says…
Nice article, prof, but no one seems to be responding to one of the central points - how hollow the victories of bush and the republicans have, ultimately, been as, one after another, they crash, burn out and slink back to what every mediocre rock they crawled out from under in Texas. In instance after instance these people lusted after the reigns of power & then failed, often miserably, to take advantage of what they had worked so hard to achieve. With a Republican majority and the right wing/corporate propaganda spewed daily by the media and talk radio, the last 5 years should have probably resulted in the cementing of republican rule for the next 20-30 years. Lord knows vast swaths of our increasingly stupid society thoughtlessly accepted their rantings and slogans (it is simply incredible that there are still 30% that support the Texas fool, but then I digress.) Instead it will likely be an extended period of centrist or even progressive rule (or the emergence of a third way) that results from the experiment in right wing rule conducted in the last 10-15 years. How tragically bush and company played the advantages they were granted and what fools they were after exhibiting such fiendish skill at attaining power. And how strange so few of those here on the right side of the political spectrum ever seem to mention or comment on bush's failure, at the end of the day, to do much of anything to permanently advance their cause. What gives? If you cannot call this bum a bum, then how bad does it need to get?