# Gonzalez may have lied to Congress; Dem calls for special prosecutor **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 10, 2007, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gonzalez-may-have-lied-to-congress-dem-calls-for-special-prosecutor/411261 "2007-07-10T21:05:45Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2007, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gonzalez-may-have-lied-to-congress-dem-calls-for-special-prosecutor/411261/1 "2007-07-10T21:05:45Z")
Today’s WaPo [reports](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/09/AR2007070902065.html?hpid=topnews) AG Gonzalez was briefed on incidents where the FBI had used its expanded powers to acquire information it was not entitled to have. Six days later, on April 27, 2005, he testified to Congress that "“There has not been one verified case of civil liberties abuse.” In response, Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY) is [demanding the appointment of a special prosecutor to investigate.](http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Gonzales_told_of_FBI_abuses_claimed_0710.html) Issues for debate: 1. Was Gonzalez’ statement perjury or not? (He is very good at weaselwording – witness [this](http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/000622.php) exchange between Gonzalez and Nadler in a hearing in April 2006.) 2. Is appointment of a special prosecutor appropriate? (The Independent Counsel statute expired in 1999. Patrick Fitzgerald investigated the Plame affair as a “special counsel” under a DoJ regulation – see [here.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_prosecutor#Federal_government)) ---
**Author:** ![Don\_t\_Call\_Me\_Shirley](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@Don\_t\_Call\_Me\_Shirley](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Don_t_Call_Me_Shirley)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2007, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gonzalez-may-have-lied-to-congress-dem-calls-for-special-prosecutor/411261/2 "2007-07-10T21:14:14Z")
My guess is that the issue will revolve around the word “verified.” ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2007, 9:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gonzalez-may-have-lied-to-congress-dem-calls-for-special-prosecutor/411261/3 "2007-07-10T21:19:16Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] 2. Is appointment of a special prosecutor appropriate? [/QUOTE] So we can suffer another multiyear investigation? Far better to just cut Gonzales’ salary from the Justice department budget. Let the RNC pay for him, if they want to keep him on. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2007, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gonzalez-may-have-lied-to-congress-dem-calls-for-special-prosecutor/411261/4 "2007-07-10T21:45:18Z")
I can’t imagine a situation where a special prosecutor would be more essential. Pelosi and Reid shouldn’t wait around as the Bushies drag their feet; they should draft legislation requiring the appointment of a special prosecutor, preferably with some group of high-level career Justice lawyers selecting the prosecutor, and rush it to a vote. If the GOP wants to filibuster it, make 'em filibuster the old-fashioned way. ---
**Author:** ![Malodorous](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e47774/32.png) [@Malodorous](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malodorous)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2007, 11:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gonzalez-may-have-lied-to-congress-dem-calls-for-special-prosecutor/411261/5 "2007-07-10T23:00:31Z")
[QUOTE=Squink] So we can suffer another multiyear investigation? Far better to just cut Gonzales’ salary from the Justice department budget. Let the RNC pay for him, if they want to keep him on. [/QUOTE] I hardly think its a good idea to have salaries of public servants paid for by one or another political parties. If they want him out they should remove him. Not taking a position on whether or not they should do this, but out of curiosity, assuming they had enough votes to prevent a filibuster, Congress could remove the AG by a simple vote, right? Since its a position created by statute, they wouldn’t need to mess around with impeachment, correct? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2007, 11:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gonzalez-may-have-lied-to-congress-dem-calls-for-special-prosecutor/411261/6 "2007-07-10T23:02:50Z")
[QUOTE=Malodorous] Not taking a position on whether or not they should do this, but out of curiosity, assuming they had enough votes to prevent a filibuster, Congress could remove the AG by a simple vote, right? Since its a position created by statute, they wouldn’t need to mess around with impeachment, correct? [/QUOTE] They could abolish the office, but the DoJ needs somebody at its head. Otherwise, short of impeachment, they can’t remove him. ---
**Author:** ![Blalron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/35a633/32.png) [@Blalron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blalron)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2007, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gonzalez-may-have-lied-to-congress-dem-calls-for-special-prosecutor/411261/7 "2007-07-10T23:08:03Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] They could abolish the office, but the DoJ needs somebody at its head. Otherwise, short of impeachment, they can’t remove him. [/QUOTE] Couldn’t they simply rename the office “Executive Attorney General” and declare the office of Attorney General no longer exists? Then the President would have to nominate someone to fill this new office that does exactly the same thing as the Attorney General once did… ---
**Author:** ![MovieMogul](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f08c70/32.png) [@MovieMogul](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MovieMogul)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2007, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gonzalez-may-have-lied-to-congress-dem-calls-for-special-prosecutor/411261/8 "2007-07-10T23:32:39Z")
Sigh. From Salon: > [@](#): > > In Gonzales’ defense, Justice Department spokesman Brian Roehrkasse explained that when he testified, Gonzales was speaking “in the context” of previous department inspector general reports, which had found no violations. > > Even better, Roehrkasse went on to assure the Post that “The statements from the attorney general are consistent with statements from other officials at the FBI and the department.” > > There is one other possible defense for Gonzales: The Post reports that “Justice officials said they could not immediately determine whether Gonzales read any of the FBI reports in 2005 and 2006 because the officials who processed them were not available yesterday.” Of course. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2007, 11:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gonzalez-may-have-lied-to-congress-dem-calls-for-special-prosecutor/411261/9 "2007-07-10T23:35:32Z")
The Attorney General is not a fact-checker. ---
**Author:** ![Malodorous](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e47774/32.png) [@Malodorous](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malodorous)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2007, 11:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gonzalez-may-have-lied-to-congress-dem-calls-for-special-prosecutor/411261/10 "2007-07-10T23:52:36Z")
[QUOTE=Blalron] Couldn’t they simply rename the office “Executive Attorney General” and declare the office of Attorney General no longer exists? [/QUOTE] Screw saying it doesn’t exist. They should just reduce its duties to “clean the Capitol Hill bathrooms every weekday” and “wear this ridiculous looking hat”, until he resigns. ---
**Author:** ![alphaboi867](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alphaboi867/32/3898_2.png) [@alphaboi867](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alphaboi867)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2007, 11:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gonzalez-may-have-lied-to-congress-dem-calls-for-special-prosecutor/411261/11 "2007-07-10T23:54:12Z")
[QUOTE=Blalron] Couldn’t they simply rename the office “Executive Attorney General” and declare the office of Attorney General no longer exists? Then the President would have to nominate someone to fill this new office that does exactly the same thing as the Attorney General once did… [/QUOTE] Of course Congress could abolish the office of Attorney-General (which predates the DoJ by over 80 years and has existed since the Washington administration), but doing so would take an act of Congress which Bush could of course veto. Now if there were enough votes in Congress to overide a veto there’d be more than enough votes to impeach and remove Gonzales. No cabinet secretary has been impeached since the Reconstruction era, but it is possible. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2007, 1:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gonzalez-may-have-lied-to-congress-dem-calls-for-special-prosecutor/411261/12 "2007-07-26T01:34:42Z")
[Documents contradict Gonzales’ testimony](http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070726/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/congress_gonzales_9) > [@](#): > > Documents indicate eight congressional leaders were briefed about the Bush administration’s terrorist surveillance program on the eve of its expiration in 2004, contradicting sworn Senate testimony this week by Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. ---
**Author:** ![marshmallow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df705f/32.png) [@marshmallow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/marshmallow)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2007, 1:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gonzalez-may-have-lied-to-congress-dem-calls-for-special-prosecutor/411261/13 "2007-07-26T01:54:23Z")
Gonzalez may have lied to Congress. The Iraq war may not have been about freeing the oppressed Iraqis. The news media may be a propaganda service for those in power. Movie at 11. This is actually an illuminating case of why it’s insane to expect Bush to be impeached, have any of his staff held in contempt as they defy subpoenas, have serious investigations into matters which may upset the applecart, etc.: this guy is still AG. That says it all, really. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2007, 2:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gonzalez-may-have-lied-to-congress-dem-calls-for-special-prosecutor/411261/14 "2007-07-26T02:10:47Z")
[QUOTE=marshmallow] have any of his staff held in contempt as they defy subpoenas… [/QUOTE] Gonzo’s staff and former staff have shown up for their hearings. It’s the president’s staff, [Bolten and Meiers](http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19962268/) who got contempt citations for blowing off subpoenas. ---
**Author:** ![marshmallow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df705f/32.png) [@marshmallow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/marshmallow)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2007, 2:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gonzalez-may-have-lied-to-congress-dem-calls-for-special-prosecutor/411261/15 "2007-07-26T02:17:47Z")
The “his” was referring to Bush (see earlier item). Sorry for any confusion. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2007, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gonzalez-may-have-lied-to-congress-dem-calls-for-special-prosecutor/411261/16 "2007-07-26T15:31:36Z")
Now [Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy is talking about a perjury investigation of Gonzalez.](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/25/AR2007072502284.html?hpid=topnews) ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2007, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gonzalez-may-have-lied-to-congress-dem-calls-for-special-prosecutor/411261/17 "2007-07-26T15:35:07Z")
[Documents just obtained by the AP contradict Gonzalez’ testimony.](http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-07-25-documents-gonzales_N.htm) ---
**Author:** ![plnnr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/7ea924/32.png) [@plnnr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/plnnr)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2007, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gonzalez-may-have-lied-to-congress-dem-calls-for-special-prosecutor/411261/18 "2007-07-26T15:39:00Z")
I saw portions of his testimony, and the guy is either hopelessly inept (how long as he been aware that he’s going to be called again to testify? and then to get up there and answer “I don’t know,” or “I don’t recall” to questions he knew were coming (Leahy sent his questions in advance, IIRC) or an outright liar. Why the President keeps him on is beyond me, except for Bush’s huge ability to deny what’s right in front of his face in the name of loyalty. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2007, 4:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gonzalez-may-have-lied-to-congress-dem-calls-for-special-prosecutor/411261/19 "2007-07-26T16:08:04Z")
[QUOTE=plnnr] I saw portions of his testimony, and the guy is either hopelessly inept (how long as he been aware that he’s going to be called again to testify? and then to get up there and answer “I don’t know,” or “I don’t recall” to questions he knew were coming (Leahy sent his questions in advance, IIRC) or an outright liar. Why the President keeps him on is beyond me, except for Bush’s huge ability to deny what’s right in front of his face in the name of loyalty. [/QUOTE] Another reason is that the Senate would have to confirm his replacement. Imagine the things that would come up in the confirmation hearings. ---
**Author:** ![OttoDaFe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ottodafe/32/356_2.png) [@OttoDaFe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OttoDaFe)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2007, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gonzalez-may-have-lied-to-congress-dem-calls-for-special-prosecutor/411261/20 "2007-07-26T16:51:22Z")
Replacing Gonzalez would present Bush with an unpleasant Hobson’s Choice (as if there’s any other kind). He’d have to to find a candidate who could a) get confirmed, and b) be counted on to keep the lid on the current crop of [White House Horrors](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House_horrors). [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gonzalez-may-have-lied-to-congress-dem-calls-for-special-prosecutor/411261.md?page=2)