Cowboy Up

[TexasTiger 12,956]

'Cowboy up,' Alberto Gonzales

A fired U.S. attorney calls on the attorney general to serve the people, not politics.

By David C. Iglesias, DAVID C. IGLESIAS was the U.S. attorney for New Mexico from October 2001 to February 2007.

May 23, 2007

WHAT HAPPENS in a presidential administration when loyalty, to borrow a phrase from "Star Trek," becomes the "prime directive"? What happens when its all-encompassing fog obscures all other values — such as fealty to the Constitution, the rule of law or simple humanity?

What happens is that terrible decisions are made, repeated and then justified by this shibboleth. That's just one of the lessons that has emerged from the U.S. attorney scandal.

This week, the Senate is threatening to vote on a resolution of no-confidence in U.S. Atty. Gen. Alberto R. Gonzales. Today, the House Judiciary Committee is scheduled to hear testimony from Monica Goodling, the attorney general's former aide, who will be asked why at least eight U.S. attorneys, including me, were put on a list to be forced from office.

What has become clear already is that the "loyalty uber alles" mentality has infected a wide swath of the Bush administration. Simple notions like right and wrong are, in their eyes, matters of allegiance, not conscience.

The chilling congressional testimony given by former Deputy Atty. Gen. James B. Comey last week provided a graphic example of loyalty run amok. Comey recounted how, in 2004, former White House Chief of Staff Andrew H. Card Jr. and then-White House counsel Gonzales visited a hospitalized Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft, who had undergone surgery for pancreatitis. Undoubtedly under the influence of powerful painkillers, Ashcroft had just enough presence of mind to refuse, as Comey already had, to approve the extension of the illegal warrantless wiretap program. Comey was right there in the darkened hospital room but was ignored by Card and Gonzales, even though both knew he was the acting attorney general while Ashcroft was critically ill. Where was the compassion, conservative or otherwise, in that dark, silent room? Where was the humanity? Subsumed by loyalty.

Loyalty is a virtue with limits. That was one of the many hard lessons from Watergate. In that scandal, some of President Nixon's staffers carried their loyalty to the president all the way to federal prison.

All federal prosecutors take a public oath when they assume office. I personally swore in about 30 new federal prosecutors during my tenure as U.S. attorney for New Mexico. The oath is to the U.S. Constitution, not to the president or his Cabinet.

Somehow Goodling did not understand this keystone concept. She appears to have placed her loyalty to the Bush administration and the Republican Party above any allegiance to the Constitution — which may have led her to believe that Bush acolytes would make the best federal prosecutors. Paradoxically, she knew enough of the Constitution to claim the protections afforded by the 5th Amendment—the right against self-incrimination.

I trust she now understands what is at stake in the U.S. attorney scandal: the rule of law, the independence of the prosecutor and the apolitical calculus of who should be prosecuted. Now, her immunity deal secured, she needs to seek redemption by clearly testifying about how my colleagues and I came to be placed on the to-fire list. It will demand moral courage, but she must name the political operatives regardless of where they sit in the West Wing of the White House. She needs, in the words of Isaiah the prophet, to "maintain justice and do what is right."

And what of the embattled attorney general? Will Gonzales stay on to be the only Cabinet officer to receive a no-confidence vote? I once said that I found Gonzales to be a personal inspiration. No one can deny him his life's story, which is the American dream writ large. It began in Humble, Texas, born of impoverished Mexican American parents. He, like me, is a veteran of the U.S. military. He went to some of the best schools in America, including Harvard Law. Yet, somewhere along the line, he drank the loyalty Kool-Aid. Watching him testify before the Senate and House was painful for me. He had been a trailblazer for the Latino community, and then, in the space of a few hours of tortured testimony, he became just another morally rudderless political operative.

Will he "cowboy up," as we say in New Mexico — that is, find the courage to do the right thing? Or will he make the Senate go right up to the precipice of a no-confidence vote?

To be sure, the Justice Department is "dysfunctional," in the words of Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), but it is also in desperate need of leaders who place loyalty to the Constitution on a higher level than politics. We don't need latter-day Haldemans, Ehrlichmans or Colsons going to jail. The nation needs leaders who take ultimate responsibility for the wrongful actions of their subordinates; leaders who do the right thing, regardless of the consequences. Mr. Attorney General, it's time for you to cowboy up and do what's best for the American people you serve.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-...-opinion-center

[GalensGhost 0]

'Cowboy up,' Alberto Gonzales

A fired U.S. attorney calls on the attorney general to serve the people, not politics.

By David C. Iglesias, DAVID C. IGLESIAS was the U.S. attorney for New Mexico from October 2001 to February 2007.

May 23, 2007

WHAT HAPPENS in a presidential administration when loyalty, to borrow a phrase from "Star Trek," becomes the "prime directive"? What happens when its all-encompassing fog obscures all other values  such as fealty to the Constitution, the rule of law or simple humanity?

I hesitated when I saw this from the LA Times.

I stopped reading at "borrow a phrase from Star Trek"

Told me all I needed to know.

[TexasTiger 12,956]

'Cowboy up,' Alberto Gonzales

A fired U.S. attorney calls on the attorney general to serve the people, not politics.

By David C. Iglesias, DAVID C. IGLESIAS was the U.S. attorney for New Mexico from October 2001 to February 2007.

May 23, 2007

WHAT HAPPENS in a presidential administration when loyalty, to borrow a phrase from "Star Trek," becomes the "prime directive"? What happens when its all-encompassing fog obscures all other values — such as fealty to the Constitution, the rule of law or simple humanity?

I hesitated when I saw this from the LA Times.

I stopped reading at "borrow a phrase from Star Trek"

Told me all I needed to know.

You NEED to know much. But you can't handle the truth.

[GalensGhost 0]

'Cowboy up,' Alberto Gonzales

A fired U.S. attorney calls on the attorney general to serve the people, not politics.

By David C. Iglesias, DAVID C. IGLESIAS was the U.S. attorney for New Mexico from October 2001 to February 2007.

May 23, 2007

WHAT HAPPENS in a presidential administration when loyalty, to borrow a phrase from "Star Trek," becomes the "prime directive"? What happens when its all-encompassing fog obscures all other values  such as fealty to the Constitution, the rule of law or simple humanity?

I hesitated when I saw this from the LA Times.

I stopped reading at "borrow a phrase from Star Trek"

Told me all I needed to know.

You NEED to know much. But you can't handle the truth.

And you're going to tell me the truth comes from a wacko left winger in Los Angeles who quotes Star Trek?

Right.....

[TexasTiger 12,956]

'Cowboy up,' Alberto Gonzales

A fired U.S. attorney calls on the attorney general to serve the people, not politics.

By David C. Iglesias, DAVID C. IGLESIAS was the U.S. attorney for New Mexico from October 2001 to February 2007.

May 23, 2007

WHAT HAPPENS in a presidential administration when loyalty, to borrow a phrase from "Star Trek," becomes the "prime directive"? What happens when its all-encompassing fog obscures all other values — such as fealty to the Constitution, the rule of law or simple humanity?

I hesitated when I saw this from the LA Times.

I stopped reading at "borrow a phrase from Star Trek"

Told me all I needed to know.

You NEED to know much. But you can't handle the truth.

And you're going to tell me the truth comes from a wacko left winger in Los Angeles who quotes Star Trek?

Right.....

Exhibit B on how much you don't know. First, you obviously don't get my reference about not being able to handle the truth. And Iglesias is a former Navy Jag Republican appointed by Bush as a U.S. Attorney. He is from New Mexico.

[GalensGhost 0]

'Cowboy up,' Alberto Gonzales

A fired U.S. attorney calls on the attorney general to serve the people, not politics.

By David C. Iglesias, DAVID C. IGLESIAS was the U.S. attorney for New Mexico from October 2001 to February 2007.

May 23, 2007

WHAT HAPPENS in a presidential administration when loyalty, to borrow a phrase from "Star Trek," becomes the "prime directive"? What happens when its all-encompassing fog obscures all other values  such as fealty to the Constitution, the rule of law or simple humanity?

I hesitated when I saw this from the LA Times.

I stopped reading at "borrow a phrase from Star Trek"

Told me all I needed to know.

You NEED to know much. But you can't handle the truth.

And you're going to tell me the truth comes from a wacko left winger in Los Angeles who quotes Star Trek?

Right.....

Exhibit B on how much you don't know. First, you obviously don't get my reference about not being able to handle the truth. And Iglesias is a former Navy Jag Republican appointed by Bush as a U.S. Attorney. He is from New Mexico.

Are you Jack Nicholson?

The article comes from the LA Times. I never liked that show JAG although Catherine Bell was hiding a bodacious body under all that stuffy wool.

We're not going to agree on this -- EVER -- and I don't want to have to rip you a new one like Elisabeth did Rosie today, so I'll stand by and let you try to convince others that the nuttiness you embrace has some legitimacy in the real world.

I LOVE Elisabeth.

She is AWESOME.

[TexasTiger 12,956]

'Cowboy up,' Alberto Gonzales

A fired U.S. attorney calls on the attorney general to serve the people, not politics.

By David C. Iglesias, DAVID C. IGLESIAS was the U.S. attorney for New Mexico from October 2001 to February 2007.

May 23, 2007

WHAT HAPPENS in a presidential administration when loyalty, to borrow a phrase from "Star Trek," becomes the "prime directive"? What happens when its all-encompassing fog obscures all other values — such as fealty to the Constitution, the rule of law or simple humanity?

I hesitated when I saw this from the LA Times.

I stopped reading at "borrow a phrase from Star Trek"

Told me all I needed to know.

You NEED to know much. But you can't handle the truth.

And you're going to tell me the truth comes from a wacko left winger in Los Angeles who quotes Star Trek?

Right.....

Exhibit B on how much you don't know. First, you obviously don't get my reference about not being able to handle the truth. And Iglesias is a former Navy Jag Republican appointed by Bush as a U.S. Attorney. He is from New Mexico.

Are you Jack Nicholson?

The article comes from the LA Times. I never liked that show JAG although Catherine Bell was hiding a bodacious body under all that stuffy wool.

We're not going to agree on this -- EVER -- and I don't want to have to rip you a new one like Elisabeth did Rosie today, so I'll stand by and let you try to convince others that the nuttiness you embrace has some legitimacy in the real world.

I LOVE Elisabeth.

She is AWESOME.

No, but Tom Cruise character is based on David Iglesias-- proud Republican. You actually prove his point in this article. If you're still defending Gonzo, your a sycophant.

[GalensGhost 0]

No, but Tom Cruise character is based on David Iglesias-- proud Republican. You actually prove his point in this article. If you're still defending Gonzo, your a sycophant.

Am not. I like women, thank you.

I'm not defending anybody. I just know that when I see Los Angeles Times as the source and the first paragraph starts quoting Star Trek, I'm done. Whatever it says might be the pure unvarnished truth, but I'm not going to pay it any attention.

[drewau02 0]

Gonzalez needs to go. Bush can ill afford to have one of his upper level cabinet members bringing down the ticket, as if the "ticket" could go down any further. Also, a lot of conservatives have lost faith in Gonzalez and some never had any to begin with. What's funny is that if Gonzalez had included Johnny Sutton, the U.S attorney who prosecuted those two border patrol agents, then conservatives and the public would probably support the decision overwhelmingly.

I agree the firings were political. Aren't they always? However, there are certain things a president cannot do when he's hovering around 30%. Like firing U.S attorneys. If Bush were at 60%, then the Dems would have made a big deal out of the firings for only a week or so and moved on. When you're blood relatives and old high school buddies are the only ones who approve of your job performance, then the opposition can afford to wage scorched earth political warfare all season long. Bush should just cut his losses and move on, before the Senate gives Gonzalez a no confidence vote. I don't think any attorney general has ever received a no confidence vote. I could be wrong.

[AFTiger 282]

GG, you are doing good. So far he hasn't called you stupid.

[CCTAU 3,327]

I agree the firings were political. Aren't they always? However, there are certain things a president cannot do when he's hovering around 30%. Like firing U.S attorneys.

Since when has Bush looked at the numbers. One thing for sure, HE IS CONSISTENT. He has said he would not make decisions based on numbers. So he made the same damn decision at 30% that he would have made at 60%? Sounds nice and consistent to me. I like consistent. Even if I don't like the decision, I know what the decision will be. That is what pisses off the dims the most. They can't force Bush to do what they want. They know what his decision will be before the issue is presented to him and they still try to force his hand. There are more folks in the US who are more comfortable with this than not. We KNOW what we have with Bush. And WE KNOW that with Bush, we will get everything he has to keep us safe. So the firings of a few judges really does not even faze me. If he wants to keep Gonzales, then let him stay. I don't see where Gonzales has affected a whole lot other than the paycheck of a few judges.

[TexasTiger 12,956]

GG, you are doing good. So far he hasn't called you stupid.

That's because he's not stupid. I only call stupid people stupid.

[TexasTiger 12,956]

I agree the firings were political. Aren't they always? However, there are certain things a president cannot do when he's hovering around 30%. Like firing U.S attorneys.

Since when has Bush looked at the numbers. One thing for sure, HE IS CONSISTENT. He has said he would not make decisions based on numbers. So he made the same damn decision at 30% that he would have made at 60%? Sounds nice and consistent to me. I like consistent. Even if I don't like the decision, I know what the decision will be. That is what pisses off the dims the most. They can't force Bush to do what they want. They know what his decision will be before the issue is presented to him and they still try to force his hand. There are more folks in the US who are more comfortable with this than not. We KNOW what we have with Bush. And WE KNOW that with Bush, we will get everything he has to keep us safe. So the firings of a few judges really does not even faze me. If he wants to keep Gonzales, then let him stay. I don't see where Gonzales has affected a whole lot other than the paycheck of a few judges.

Consistently WRONG!!!

[Tigermike 3,039]

GG, you are doing good. So far he hasn't called you stupid.

That's because he's not stupid. I only call stupid people stupid.

Usually when looking in the mirror.

[AUloggerhead 2,241]

Wasn't Iglesias appointed by bill clinton -- after clinton ordered Janet Reno to fire ALL 93 US Attorneys shortly after clinton took office? Please. Either you accept the fact that these type of appointments serve at the discretion of the current president or you are as delusional as the Dreamland-frequenting bammies.

The hypocrisy of this non-issue is simply amazing.

[TexasTiger 12,956]

Wasn't Iglesias appointed by bill clinton -- after clinton ordered Janet Reno to fire ALL 93 US Attorneys shortly after clinton took office? Please. Either you accept the fact that these type of appointments serve at the discretion of the current president or you are as delusional as the Dreamland-frequenting bammies.

The hypocrisy of this non-issue is simply amazing.

He was appointed by Dubya. Clinton appointed attorneys at the beginning of his term, so did Dubya. Dubya appointed every attorney he fired. If you had really been following this case, you would know that attorneys in several key swing states were pressured to either indict Dems before the last election, as was Iglesias, or announce voter fraud cases against Dems as was Iglesias. Some of the ones fired said there was no evidence of such fraud, but they were pressured to bring the cases anyway. The degree of orchestration to this attempt to use the JUSTICE dept for political purposes in unprecedented. They do serve at the pleasure of the president. But ithat doesn't mean the administration is supposed to meddle in their prosecutions to gain political advantage. If you can't see that, your delusional.

[quietfan 233]

Since when has Bush looked at the numbers. One thing for sure, HE IS CONSISTENT. He has said he would not make decisions based on numbers. So he made the same damn decision at 30% that he would have made at 60%? Sounds nice and consistent to me. I like consistent. Even if I don't like the decision, I know what the decision will be. That is what pisses off the dims the most. They can't force Bush to do what they want. They know what his decision will be before the issue is presented to him and they still try to force his hand.

Well, there are two ways of looking at this: Either he doesn't worry about numbers, or, he doesn't care whether he represents the will of the American people. Would you feel the same way about a Democratic president who doggedly pursued the same course when only 30% of the people agreed with him? Being consistent is not an asset if it means being consistently wrong or consistently ignoring the will of the majority in a democracy.

...and if his decision is known before the issue is presented to him, wouldn't that imply he makes decisions without concern for the facts or without considering all sides of the issue?

[TigerHeat 9]

Wasn't Iglesias appointed by bill clinton -- after clinton ordered Janet Reno to fire ALL 93 US Attorneys shortly after clinton took office? Please. Either you accept the fact that these type of appointments serve at the discretion of the current president or you are as delusional as the Dreamland-frequenting bammies.

The hypocrisy of this non-issue is simply amazing.

He was appointed by Dubya. Clinton appointed attorneys at the beginning of his term, so did Dubya. Dubya appointed every attorney he fired. If you had really been following this case, you would know that attorneys in several key swing states were pressured to either indict Dems before the last election, as was Iglesias, or announce voter fraud cases against Dems as was Iglesias. Some of the ones fired said there was no evidence of such fraud, but they were pressured to bring the cases anyway. The degree of orchestration to this attempt to use the JUSTICE dept for political purposes in unprecedented. They do serve at the pleasure of the president. But ithat doesn't mean the administration is supposed to meddle in their prosecutions to gain political advantage. If you can't see that, your delusional.

Filegate.

[channonc 466]

One thing for sure, HE IS CONSISTENT.

Bush has been consistent in only one thing: his arrogance.

[drewau02 0]

Tex, when the story first broke, you cited article after article from WaPo or the Los Angeles Times that suggested that the 8 attorneys were fired as a smokescreen for firing Carol Lamb. Lamb is who the Bush Justice Department really wanted because she was about to indict a few more California Republicans close to Duke Cunningham. That was according to the story anyway. Now, you're suggesting that Gonzalez fired the U.S Attorneys because they failed to prosecute voter fraud cases against Democrats, although there was no evidence to that effect.

So which position will you officially take? Either Gonzalez fired the attorneys for failure to prosecute voter fraud cases or because the other 7 were the scapegoats who served as a smokescreen for firing Carol Lamb.

[CCTAU 3,327]

One thing for sure, HE IS CONSISTENT.

Bush has been consistent in only one thing: his arrogance.

For dims, arrogance is not bowing down to them or the media. I guess I like arrogance.....

As a dim, you should know that polls are not right. I mean the American public are too stupid to make a decision on their own. So keeping with that, Bush is almost the perfect dimocrat.

History will show that without his dogged determination in Iraq, this situation would have been even worse on a global scale.

Now I do wish he would dial back some of the spending. But that falls on the shoulders of congress also.

[TexasTiger 12,956]

Tex, when the story first broke, you cited article after article from WaPo or the Los Angeles Times that suggested that the 8 attorneys were fired as a smokescreen for firing Carol Lamb. Lamb is who the Bush Justice Department really wanted because she was about to indict a few more California Republicans close to Duke Cunningham. That was according to the story anyway. Now, you're suggesting that Gonzalez fired the U.S Attorneys because they failed to prosecute voter fraud cases against Democrats, although there was no evidence to that effect.

So which position will you officially take? Either Gonzalez fired the attorneys for failure to prosecute voter fraud cases or because the other 7 were the scapegoats who served as a smokescreen for firing Carol Lamb.

Read what I posted again. Your comprehension is lacking. There was no "smokescreen." Each was fired for their own reasons. If you had even half-way followed this story, you'd know that there was ample evidence that some of the USAs were fired for failing to prosecute so-called voter fraud cases. In the case of Iglesias, he wasn't even on "the list" until after Sen. Domenici hung up on him when he said he would not be indicting a Dem before the election. I know this case is complicated, but you at least have to try to keep up.

-Former U.S. Attorney David Iglesias, who was fired in New Mexico, has been outspoken in his belief that politics played a role in his ouster.

Republican officials in his state complained to the White House and to the Justice Department that he wasn't aggressive enough in pursuing voter-fraud allegations against Democrats. Republicans were also upset that Iglesias resisted pressure to indict Democratic officials on corruption charges before the November election.

Iglesias said he felt "leaned on" when two prominent New Mexico Republicans, Sen. Pete Domenici and Rep. Heather Wilson, separately called him about the investigation. At the time, Wilson was in danger of losing her congressional seat, and Republicans were struggling to avoid a Democratic takeover in Congress.

A 2005 Justice Department evaluation concluded that Iglesias should keep his job. He didn't appear on a list of targeted prosecutors that circulated in October 2006. But his status seemed to have changed quickly. By Nov. 15, about a week after Republicans lost control of Congress, Justice Department officials had decided that Iglesias should go.

-Former U.S. Attorney Carol Lam was fired from her job in southern California after overseeing the investigation that led to the corruption conviction of then-Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham, R-Calif.

In an e-mail dated May 11, 2006, Justice Department official Kyle Sampson urged the White House counsel's office to call him regarding "the real problem we have right now with Carol Lam."

Earlier that morning, The Los Angeles Times reported that the Cunningham investigation had expanded to include another California Republican, congressman Jerry Lewis.

Administration officials insist that the investigation had nothing to do with Lam's dismissal and have criticized her oversight of immigration enforcement.

-Former U.S. Attorney John McKay in western Washington was fired after Republicans complained about his handling of a hotly contested governor's race. The Republican candidate lost by only 129 votes, and complaints about voter fraud poured in from angry Republicans.

McKay says he never found enough evidence to prosecute; Republicans wanted him to be more aggressive. When an aide to Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash., called with questions about McKay's investigation, McKay cut off the conversation with a warning against inappropriate political pressure.

The issue continued to dog McKay last summer when he was a candidate for a federal judgeship. McKay said he was asked during an interview with Miers and other officials to explain complaints that he "mishandled" the inquiry into the governor's election.

http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/16919399.htm