I posted this on April 23rd of this year, but I would like to post it again, slightly amended for any who may have missed it. There is an addendum at the end... this is for you SMID
By now, most of you will have heard about the recent terminations of many (8) U.S. Attorney's by the Attorney General of The United States, Alberto Gonzales. No doubt you have heard about all of the controversy that has been generated.
As a result of the irregularities surrounding the dismissals, the Senate Judiciary Committee wanted the persons involved, including Karl Rove...
and Attorney General Gonzales...
to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee.
The White House fought tooth and nail, citing executive privilege, to keep White House staff members from having to testify under oath. Hmm. Am I the only person that has a problem with this?
Let's look at it this way: How well do you think it would go over when I make an arrest and then tell the judge, "Your honor, I'm happy to testify in this case, but I won't do it under oath, and I won't do it with a court reporter present, and only if you agree not to tell the public"? How do you think it would go from there? Not well, I can assure you... but this is what the White House wants. The President doesn't want his staff compelled to tell the truth.
Something is wrong with that, my friends.
We shouldn't be surprised, though. The President is a bloody liar, himself, and has surrounded himself with like-minded people.
Eventually the testimony conditions (after some compromising) were agreed to by all parties, and AG Gonzales was compelled to testify, under oath, with a court reporter, and on television. Before his testimony, however, Mr. Gonzales had several weeks of rehearsal and preparation time for his hearing, even cancelling his scheduled vacation around Easter, in order to have more time to prepare.
**News Flash** YOU DON'T NEED TWO WEEKS OF PREPARATION TO TELL THE BLOODY TRUTH!
On the day of his testimony AG Gonzales used the term "I don't recall" or words to that effect at least 45 times.
This man is the Attorney General of the United States, as such he is the chief law enforcement officer in the United States. He is supposed to be the guy in charge of enforcing our laws. This is a man who was once the Chief Justice of the Texas Supreme Court... he should know a bit about the law, and about testimony. Saying "I don't recall" so many times while on the witness stand must make anyone hearing this question this man's integrity or fitness to testify.
According to documents that surfaced through this investigation, AG Gonzales has attended meetings (which he earlier claimed he didn't attend), and detailed briefings (which he claims not to remember) on terminating the employment of 8 U.S. Attorneys. He doesn't remember any of it? He doesn't remember signing documents? His staff is making these decisions for him and he isn't even consulted? Is the Attorney General suffering from Alzheimer's?
I'm sorry, Mr. Gonzales, or "Gonzo" as President Bush calls you, but this isn't good enough.
Either you fired those people for political reasons in some sort of partisan shaking of the law enforcement tree, in which case you should resign, or the Department of Justice is completely out of control because of your incompetence, in which case you should be fired. In either case, you should leave office.
Regular rank and file cops can lose their jobs even at the hint of impropriety. This is because you can't hold a position of public trust if you are a liar, a thief, or someone who when under oath, is prone to dissemble.
You, sir, are a sleazeball. I wouldn't trust you, or any of your lickspittle coterie of thugs, liars, wingnuts, and Regent University graduates, to guard the most rancid whorehouse in Olongapo (in the Philippines).
You disgust me.... but this is what we get from people that think torture is alright, as long as you don't call it torture, and the Geneva convention on the treatment of Prisoners of War is irrelevant as long as you call them "detainees", not prisoners of war.
When I was sworn in as a law enforcement officer, I took an oath. The most important part of that oath is that I swore to "support and defend the Constitution of the United Sates, against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and to bear true faith and allegiance to the same..." I took that oath very solemnly. I wasn't just mouthing the words. I meant it then, and I still mean it.
When Mr. Gonzales was sworn in as AG, he took this oath:
I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.
Seems to me he got lost somewhere in all of this.
Part of what is required of me, in order to remain a credentialed officer is that I am truthful. That when I am asked a question, whether it is under oath giving testimony in a case, or during an investigation, I can be trusted to tell the truth.
If, at any time, it can be shown that I am untrustworthy, even in an internal, administrative matter, my ability to to give testimony is damaged or destroyed. When it can be shown that I am untruthful, my testimony can be impeached. After all, do you REALLY want someone who is empowered to impartially enforce the law, when it can be shown that said person is a liar? Do we really want a person with the power of life and death over the citizenry to be untrustworthy?
Of Course not.
We require honesty and truthfulness from our rank and file cops. We require truthfulness from our criminal investigatotrs, lawyers and judges. We require truthfulness from all who serve in positions of public trust.
My friends, I have a badge in my pocket. With it, I carry credentials that discuss my permission to conduct searches, make arrests, give testimony, and use deadly force in the name of the United States government. I take these responsibilities very seriously. I wish that our President and Attorney General did the same.
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, has, in the intervening months since the original post, shown us time and time again that he cannot be trusted to give truthful, unvarnished testimony. The President has shown us that he cares more about protecting his loyalists than he cares about criminal acts carried out by members of his cabinet.
Attorney General Gonzales has spent an incredible amount of time, lately, testifying before Congress regarding his activities, and the activities of his senior staff concerning the firing of the aforementioned U.S. Attorney's. During his testimony, Mr. Gonzales has shown that whatever legal acumen that he might possess, his real talent lies in distortion and obfuscation. Coupled with his flat out refusal to answer questions that might paint himself or The President in a bad light, this talent for distortion can only assure us of one thing.
The Attorney General of The United States can't be trusted to tell the truth.
Now some of you are probably snorting to yourselves, thinking, "well, what's new about a liar in the Bush administration?" I might tend to agree with that, but I find it chilling when the Attorney General gets in on the act. No... I'm not talking about being political... and I'm not talking about being partisan. I'm talking about lying.
The Chief law enforcement officer of the United States is a liar.
His only boss, the President, thinks that the lying Attorney General "can still be effective" and has retained him in office.
What does that tell you about the President?
This administration spent a lot of time, in it's early days, talking about morality,and truth. Not so much anymore.