McCain's Famous Temper: There is a clinical word for it.

Rage disorder, often associated with PTSD.


Interesting, what's happening in this country, around 45 years after Nikita Khrushchev announced that the Soviet Union would bury the U.S. with a teaspoon.


Old Nikita had a theory. He believed that the U.S. would not survive because we, as a nation, had not gone through the era of the serf. In other words, we never had a monarchy in our nation. Instead, we threw the king's men out and formed a nation. Unlike the democracies of Europe, we did not overthrow our own government of rule by monarchy as the peasants of Europe did. We were colonists who broke free of the British Empire and set up a democratic republic, a big experiment, actually. There is a huge difference in the two experiences and the myths that grow up around them.


Today, it is possible that Russia could bury us (don't know so much about the teaspoon). Maybe we are only now going through some kind of half-baked serfdom; a corporate driven one.


One thing is the same, however. The mentally ill seem to be rising to the top of the nation. Be it mad king George or mad Prince George, the outcomes of their reigns will be similar. Add Insane McCain to the line-up and this government will fail. Of that, there can really be no doubt.


Perhaps that is what must happen now. The universe is always seeking balance.

History of the Hot tempered John McCain

By: John Amato on Monday, September 8th, 2008 at 1:00 PM - PDT

This video is no shock to any of us, but Digby says that:

It seems to me that this would be a exceptionally effective chain email. And it has the added virtue of being true.

She also says to read this article too.

Read the whole article for a long, shocking list of incidents, most of which I’d never heard about before…

“McCain’s history of hot temper raises concerns“

McCain called Cornyn’s claim “chicken-s—,” according to people familiar with the meeting, and charged that the Texan was looking for an excuse to scuttle the bill. Cornyn grimly told McCain he had a lot of nerve to suddenly show up and inject himself into the sensitive negotiations.

“F— you,” McCain told Cornyn, in front of about 40 witnesses.

It was another instance of the Republican presidential candidate losing his temper, another instance in which, as POW-MIA activist Carol Hrdlicka put it, “It’s his way or no way.”

There’s a lengthy list of similar outbursts through the years: McCain pushing a woman in a wheelchair, trying to get an Arizona Republican aide fired from three different jobs, berating a young GOP activist on the night of his own 1986 Senate election and many more…read on

---

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

Whistleblowers In Peril. What We Can Do About It...

By truthista
05/11/2008 12:42:32 PM EST

[Posted with permission from Deep Harm at ePluribus Media/Daily Kos]

As the Bush administration enters its final six months, truthtellers in government positions should take care: government officials will be tempted to sweep their agencies clean of evidence and whistleblowers before a new administration takes over.

Already, the Bush administration has issued a new executive memo allowing government agencies to conjure up their own penalties for disclosing information covered by a new, broad and poorly defined controls on information (thanks, smintheus). It's a bad portent of things to come.
Saving truthtellers and restoring government integrity depends on proposed legislation that would give whistleblowers badly-needed protections; legislation that is now stalled.

Next week, whistleblowers from around the country will meet for a conference in Washington, D.C., to describe the perils of exposing corruption, waste and abuses of power, hopefully to convince Congress to pass legislation that would save others from suffering similar fates. But, their success will depend heavily on public support - a good turnout of citizens attending the conference events or calling their representatives to urge stronger whistleblower protections.

Even the best laws demanding integrity and transparency are useless if insiders fear reporting abuses. As the speakers at next week's conference will describe, whistleblowers are critical to exposing negligence and corruption that threaten public safety, national security and fiscal soundness.

The International Assembly of Whistleblowers invites the public, members of Congress and journalists to attend the workshops, forums and other events scheduled for May 12-18, in Washington, D.C. There is no charge to attend, but please register if you can.

Monday, May 12

Monday's schedule include the following events sponsored by the Government Accountability Project. [Note: Information from GAP publications used with permission.]

"Secret Domestic Surveillance,"
(9:00 - 9:50 am, Stewart Mott House, 122 Maryland Avenue, NE).

This workshop will discuss the implications of the National Security Agency (NSA) eavesdropping program on the First Amendment. It will also address warrant-less wiretapping in the context of attorney-client communications, terrorism investigations, the "state secrets privilege," and consider the implications for pending congressional showdowns such as telecom immunity in FISA legislation. (GAP news release)

Jesselyn Radack, a frequent diarist on Daily Kos and now GAP Homeland Security Director (congratulations, Jess!), will moderate a panel that also includes:

o Eric Lichtblau, Pulitzer Prize-winning New York Times journalist who broke the government's secret surveillance program.
o Michelle Richardson, Legislative Counsel, ACLU
o Babak Pasdar, telecommunications whistleblower whose disclosure is credited with turning the tide in the House of Representatives denying corporate immunity in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). (GAP news release)

(I am also a panelist, and will describe USDA training that urged employees to spy on members of citizen organizations at their offices and homes.)

"Are We Safe When We Fly?: Issues of Aviation Safety & Security"
(10:00 - 10:55 am, Stewart Mott House, 122 Maryland Avenue, NE).

This panel focuses on the federal government's dangerous and deceptive policy of shielding the industry from liability; failing to execute genuine protections against terrorism while fostering a false pretense of safety; and retaliating against federal and aviation industry employees who witness and report threats to aviation safety and security.(Government Accountability Project)

Panelists include:

o Ingrid Drake (Moderator), Fellow, Project on Government Oversight
o Bogdan Dzakovic, Transportation Security Administration, FAA Red Team Whistleblower
o Gabe Bruno, Former FAA Manager
o Shawn McCullers, Former Federal Air Marshal (FAMS), TSA/DHS (GAP news release)

"Scientific Freedom & the Public Good"
(11:30 am - 12:25 pm, Stewart Mott House, 122 Maryland Avenue, NE).

This panel, co-sponsored by the Union of Concerned Scientists, addresses the effects of scientific censorship across a wide range of issues, including prescription drug safety, climate change, and mercury emission levels. (Government Accountability Project)

Panelists include:

o Celia Wexler (Facilitator), Washington Representative, Union of Concerned Scientists
o Rick Piltz, Former Senior Associate, U.S. Climate Change Science Program and Director of GAP's Climate Science Watch Program
o David Ross, FDA drug safety whistleblower
o Tim Donaghy, Researcher/Analyst, Union of Concerned Scientists (Government Accountability Project)

The public can also support whistleblowers (and learn a lot about how the system really works) by purchasing books by whistleblowing authors.

Book Signing
(6 pm, The Warehouse Arts Center, 1017-1021 7th St., NW)

Buy a whistleblower's book and have it autographed at the Warehouse Arts Center, one block from the Mt. Vernon Square metro stop. The event is sponsored by the VA Whistleblower Coalition (www.VAWBC.org). [Information from VAWBC flyer]

Authors tentatively scheduled to appear include:

Darlene Fitzgerald
Mike German, Rosemary Dew
Arthuretta Martin
Scott Harrington
Tom Devine

Here's your chance to assemble a library of whistleblower books that (tentatively) includes:

Col. (ret) Ann Wright's "Dissent: Voices of Conscience,"
German's "Thinking Like a Terrorist"
Fitzgerald's "BorderGate"
Jesselyn Radack's "Canary in the Coalmine"
Martin's "Speaking on Success"
Harrington's "Nursing Process"
Kohn, Kohn and Colapinto's "Whistleblower Law"
Dew's "My Life as Female Special Agent"
Devine's "The Art of Anonymous Activism.

While you're at the Warehouse, have some refreshments, enjoy the guitar music of "The Senior Lifeguards," and mingle with some great folks.

IF YOU CAN ATTEND ONLY ONE EVENT

I strongly recommend the following as an opportunity to learn about whistleblower legislation and issues, and to let Congress know of your support for whistleblower protections.

Joint Congressional Forum: Congress at the Crossroads for Your Rights (1:00 p.m. - 3:00 p.m., Dirksen Senate Office Building, Room 342)

Several members of Congress or their staff members have been invited to attend. This forum includes a panel that will describe the pending legislation.

A speaker from Public Citizen will offer introductory remarks. Beth Slavet, former Chair of the U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board, will moderate the discussion, which will include the following NGO's (with specialized expertise on specific issues):

o National Employment Lawyers Association (Corporate Whistleblower Protection)
o Government Accountability Project (Jury Trial Rights)
o National Whistleblower Center (FBI/Intelligence Agency WPA Coverage)
o OMB Watch (Hybrid Secrecy Categories, State Secrets Privilege)
o Project on Government Oversight (Contractor Whistleblower Rights)
o Semmelweis Society: Alliance for Patient Safety (Medical Whistleblower Rights)
o Union of Concerned Scientists (Scientific Freedom)
American Federation of Government Employees (TSA/Screener whistleblower rights) (Government Accountability Project)

With healthcare so much in the news, the patient safety discussion is timely. Ditto for protecting FBI whistleblowers in the wake of the FBI's raid on the Office of Special Counsel. Global warming reminds us daily of the importance of scientific freedom.

Conclusion

We depend on many government agencies to watch out for our health, safety, rights and pocketbooks. But, who is watching the agencies? Their employees - the ones who face career-ending retaliation if they report wrongdoing. Without insiders to stand up for integrity, Congress cannot exercise its oversight responsibilities. And, as the White House imposes more layers of secrecy on the workings of government, those insiders need to be braver than ever.

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

Top Dems Stall Miers, Bolten Contempt Vote

Can it possibly be true that members of Congress are only now realizing the dire situation of the U.S. economy, not to mention Asian and other economies around the world? Is it really possible that they are all that out-of-touch?

Many of our financial lives began getting shaky as far back as late 2000. Since 9/11/01 it has been a steady down-hill slide, even though many of our membership saw the writing on the wall when the towers came down. (The initial expense of getting as far off the grid as possible is a bit staggering, especially if your name isn't Rockefeller or Kennedy, Gates or Winfrey, and it takes time.)

Or could it be that the world economies, especially that of the U.S., have become so obviously in deep trouble that even the most concrete among their constituents cannot help but see it, so Bush and Congress have no choice but to get their act together (even if it is way too late to do anything but, maybe, kick the can down the road (which was the Bush plan all along) until he is no longer in office? Of course, the latest quakes on Wall Street are always another excuse for a few more billion in corporate welfare. The Democrats will be all too happy to give a rebate to taxpayers of the poorest kind, who will have no choice but to spend it....on a tank of gas, maybe.

Those who are too poor to even pay taxes are still invisible, as they always have been and always will be, no matter what Hillary says, until they realize that invisibility has its advantages and decide to use those advantages in some fairly creative ways to begin stirring the waters of revolution. It has been a very long time, if ever, since the poorest of the poor stood a chance of being joined by others of higher socio-economic levels in a true revolt against a system that is killing them and will leave their children with no future at all.

So, why delay contempt citations when no one, not even Bush the Dumber, can refuse to get on-board with the stimulus package? What does one have to do with the other?

By: John Bresnahan January 23, 2008

House Democrats will postpone votes on criminal contempt citations against White House chief of staff Joshua Bolten and former White House counsel Harriet Miers, while congressional leaders work with President Bush on a bipartisan stimulus package to fend off an economic downturn, according to party leaders and leadership aides. Senior Democrats have decided that holding a controversial vote on the contempt citations, which have already been approved by the House Judiciary Committee as part of its investigation into the firing of nine U.S. attorneys, would “step on their message” of bipartisan unity in the midst of the stimulus package talks. Bush, citing executive privilege, has refused to allow Bolten or Miers to testify before the House Judiciary panel about the prosecutor purge. And former deputy White House chief of staff Karl Rove was barred by the administration from appearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee on the same issue. “Right now, we’re focused on working in a bipartisan fashion on [the] stimulus,” said House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.), indicating that the contempt vote is not expected for weeks, depending on how quickly the stimulus package moves. Brendan Daly, a spokesman for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), said “no decision has been made” as to when a criminal contempt vote would be held by the House. The Judiciary Committee approved contempt citations against Bolten and Miers on July 25, but Pelosi has yet to bring the measures to the floor. The Senate Judiciary Committee approved similar contempt citations against Bolten and Rove shortly before Congress adjourned in December. Stimulus fever hits Capitol Hill Schwarzkopf to endorse McCain Congress' black women favor Hillary The White House has declined to turn over internal documents sought by House and Senate Democrats looking into the U.S. attorney firings. And White House counsel Fred Fielding has offered only very limited circumstances under which current and former top White House aides can be interviewed about the firings. Miers, a lawyer now back in private practice in Dallas, cited a White House claim of executive privilege and declined to appear at a July 12 hearing of the House Judiciary Committee. White House aides have dismissed the prospect of a contempt battle with the Democratic-controlled Congress as a distraction from more pressing work, such as dealing with the war in Iraq and the nation’s sagging economy. Former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales also threatened to prevent Jeffrey Taylor, the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, who would represent the Congress in a legal battle with the White House, from going to court to enforce the subpoenas. And Gonzales’ successor, Michael Mukasey, declined during his confirmation hearing to say definitively how he would handle the issue. Pelosi, who personally supports the contempt citations, has gotten mixed messages from her own leaders, as well as rank-and-file members, on whether to move ahead, although it is clear that there are not now enough votes for the citations to be approved by the House, according to Democratic insiders. “When we have the votes, we’ll go ahead with this. Right now, the votes are just not there,” said one top House Democratic insider, speaking on the condition of anonymity. House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.) and other members of his panel have pressed Democratic leaders to hold the contempt vote, arguing that a failure to move would set a dangerous precedent that could weaken the Congress in any future investigations of the White House. Conyers’ staff declined to comment Tuesday. The Senate Judiciary Committee has not received any word from Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) when a floor vote on contempt citations might occur. “Sen. Reid is consulting with Sen. [Patrick] Leahy [D-Vt.] and others when to hold a vote,” said Reid’s spokesman, Jim Manley.

TM & © THE POLITICO & POLITICO.COM, a division of Allbritton Communications Company

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

What A Freakin' Shock: W.H. Is Writing Pertaeus' Report

Just kidding about the "shock" part!

Petraeus must have the brownest nose we've ever seen.

Who is this guy? The sorta white Colin Powell?

Petraeus’ September Report Will Be Written By The White House

The Los Angeles Times reports that Gen. David Petraeus’ upcoming Sept. 15 report on Iraq will be authored by the White House:

Despite Bush’s repeated statements that the report will reflect evaluations by Petraeus and Ryan Crocker, the U.S. ambassador to Iraq, administration officials said it would actually be written by the White House, with inputs from officials throughout the government.

And though Petraeus and Crocker will present their recommendations on Capitol Hill, legislation passed by Congress leaves it to the president to decide how to interpret the report’s data.

In other words, the Sept. 15 report promises to be much like the July mid-term report which purported to show “satisfactory performance on 8 of the 18 benchmarks.” A closer look into those claims revealed that the progress was purely White House spin. Yet, the report accomplished its primary objective of producing media reports which suggested that the overall picture in Iraq was “mixed.”

The White House has repeatedly employed Petraeus as a PR flack, using him to promote failing Iraq policies and the war czar nomination.

President Bush had previously said he would “respect the command structure” and not intercede in the Petraeus report:

I will repeat, as the Commander-in-Chief of a great military who has supported this military and will continue to support this military, not only with my — with insisting that we get resources to them, but with — by respecting the command structure, I’m going to wait for David to come back — David Petraeus to come back and give us the report on what he sees.

Apparently, Bush doesn’t plan to wait for a report; instead, he’ll have it drafted prior to Petraeus’ return. Markos writes: “Let me predict the future: The report: ‘Success!’ The interpretation: ‘Smashing success!’”

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)

The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

More Bushit; The Stonewalling Continues.....

A Court fight could take years? I don't recall the court fights during the Nixon insanity taking years.....

But, OK, let's say they will. Is that such a bad thing? By the time it all comes to a head, Bush will be out of office and the power to pardon will no longer be available to him.

Wouldn't it be a complete hoot if Scooter, the scape goat, is the only one of them to get away with his crimes?.

Bush aide will stonewall Congress

July 11, 2007 - 7:39am.

Unless a court orders her to testify

President Bush and Attorney General Gonzales: Defiant to the end (AFP Photo)

Two Murder-Monkeys, grinning like mules eating briers

By LAURIE KELLMAN

President Bush's former political director says she intends to follow his directive and not answer questions about her role in the administration's firing of federal prosecutors — unless a court directs her to defy her former boss.

"While I may be unable to answer certain questions today, I will answer those questions if the courts rule that this committee's need for the information outweighs the president's assertion of executive privilege," Sara M. Taylor, who left her White House job two months ago, said in remarks prepared for presentation to the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday.

"Thank you for your understanding," she added in the statement, made available in advance of the midmorning hearing.

Democrats insist that there are plenty about the firings that Taylor can discuss — and is compelled to reveal under a subpoena — that are not covered by Bush's executive privilege claim.

Her lawyer was expected to advise her as the hearing progressed on which questions she could or could not answer under the president's directive.

The same goes for a second former Bush aide, one-time White House counsel Harriet Miers, Democrats say. Miers, subpoenaed to appear before the House Judiciary Committee on Thursday, said through her lawyer this week that she "cannot provide the documents and testimony that the committee seeks."

"Ms. Miers is thus subject to conflicting commands, with Congress demanding the production of information that the counsel to the president has informed her she is prohibited from disclosing," Miers' lawyer, George Manning, wrote to House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers of Michigan and ranking Republican Lamar Smith of Texas.

The two former aides are now private citizens, and some congressional officials have argued that it is not clear Bush's executive privilege claim covers them even though White House Counsel Fred Fielding told lawyers for Miers and Taylor that the president was directing them not to answer questions or provide any information about the firings.

"Ms. Miers has no choice other than to comply with the direction given her by counsel to the president in his letters," Manning wrote.

Taylor's message was much the same. "I intend to follow the president's instruction," she said in her statement.

A court fight could take years, dragging on even after Bush leaves office.

So opens the latest round in the dispute over the administration's firing last winter of eight federal prosecutors. The congressional probe, now in its seventh month, has morphed into a broader standoff over what information the president may keep private and what details Congress is entitled to receive as part of its oversight of the executive branch.

The Taylor and Miers appearances this week are as much about Congress pushing back against Bush's executive privilege claim on subpoenaed documents and testimony as they are about the firings.

Claims for executive privilege are based upon the separation of powers set forth in the Constitution. As a separate but equal branch of government, it is argued, the executive can resist efforts by the legislative and judicial branches to encroach on its authority. Presidents have argued against releasing some documents to Congress and against forcing administration officials to testify about private discussions, contending that such disclosures could damage the executive branch's ability to function independently.

Most presidents have also added a practical argument: They say they won't be able to get unvarnished advice from advisers who worry that their words will be made public later.

Also looming over the proceedings is the fate of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Democrats have widely called for his resignation and a few Republicans have joined them. But Bush remains supportive of his longtime friend, and Gonzales shows no signs of stepping down.

Taylor and Miers were among Bush's closest aides during the period the firings were planned. E-mails released by the Justice Department up to, including and in the aftermath of the firings show Taylor and Miers were participants in the exchanges. At one point, the White House has said, Miers proposed firing all 93 of the nation's prosecutors, but Gonzales rejected that suggestion.

Democrats want to know if the prosecutors were fired at the White House's direction, perhaps to make room for Bush loyalists. Bush and Gonzales have denied that there were improper political motives behind the firings. The White House has pointed out that federal prosecutors are political appointees, and the president can hire and fire them for almost any reason.

Copyright © 2007 The Associated Press

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)

The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

CIA Warned W.H. Of Possible Bad Consequences Of Invasion of Iraq

Tenet's book lists failures in war run-up

By Scott LindlawAssociated Press
April 28, 2007
SAN FRANCISCO --

The CIA warned the Bush White House seven months before the 2003 Iraq invasion that the United States could face a thicket of bad consequences, starting with "anarchy and the territorial breakup" of the country, former CIA Director George Tenet writes in a new book.

Agency analysts wrote the warning at the start of August 2002 and inserted it into a briefing book distributed at an early September meeting of President Bush's national security team at Camp David, Tenet writes.

The CIA analysis painted what Tenet calls additional "worst-case" scenarios: "a surge of global terrorism against U.S. interests fueled by deepening Islamic antipathy toward the United States"; "regime-threatening instability in key Arab states"; and "major oil supply disruptions and severe strains in the Atlantic alliance."

While the CIA and other U.S. intelligence agencies have been widely criticized for being wrong about much of the prewar intelligence on Iraq, the analysis Tenet describes concerning postwar scenarios seems prescient.

But he cautions against concluding that the agency predicted many of the difficulties that followed. "Doing so would be disingenuous," because the agency saw them as possible scenarios, not certainties, he writes. "The truth is often more complex than convenient."

A copy of Tenet's book, "At the Center of the Storm," was purchased by a reporter Friday at a retail outlet, ahead of its scheduled Monday release. Tenet served as CIA chief from 1997 to 2004.

The book is highly critical of Vice President Dick Cheney and other administration officials, who Tenet argues rushed the U.S. into war in Iraq without serious debate -- a charge the White House rejected on Friday.Chastising Cheney, Tenet writes: "Policymakers have a right to their own opinions, but not their own set of facts."Tenet also contends the administration failed to adequately consider what would come in the war's aftermath.Senior White House counselor Dan Bartlett dismissed Tenet's portrait of an administration that rushed to war in Iraq without serious debate."The president did wrestle with those very serious questions," Bartlett said.

And while calling Tenet a "true patriot," Barlett said he might have been unaware of the breadth of the prewar debate that led Bush to dismiss other options, such as diplomatic means, for reining in then-Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.

In the book, Tenet offers a litany of questions that went unasked:*"What impact would a large American occupying force have in an Arab country in the heart of the Middle East?"*"What kind of political strategy would be necessary to cause the Iraqi society to coalesce in a post-Saddam world and maximize the chances for our success?"*"How would the presence of hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops, and the possibility of a pro-West Iraqi government, be viewed in Iran?
Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune


(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)

The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

Only Bush Can Save His Pal, Gonzo

But Does Gonzo Know Too Much To Be Fired?

He's known Junior for a very long time and has probably participated in many cover-ups for the family Bush.

Maybe he will settle for a Medal of freedom. and take the hit for Junior and Rover.These guys are like the Mob.

We can't help but wonder how willing they will be to take the fall when prison terms are involved?


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Several administration officials and the House Republican Conference chairman said Friday that Attorney General Alberto Gonzales should step down, following the harsh response to his Senate testimony on last year's firing of eight U.S. attorneys.

Members of the Senate Judiciary Committee grilled Gonzales for hours Thursday about the dismissals.

The attorney general has been roundly criticized for his handling of the shakeup and for the shifting explanations Justice Department officials have given for the changes. (Watch how pressure on Gonzales to resign is growing )

Gonzales said more than 60 times that he "couldn't recall" certain incidents. His former chief of staff, Kyle Sampson, used that explanation 122 times during his testimony weeks ago.
Detractors say the Justice Department has not been straightforward about the reasons the attorneys were dismissed. The controversy has led to allegations of political interference with pending investigations.

"He did not distinguish himself in the hearing," said Rep. Adam Putnam, House GOP conference chairman. "There remains a cloud over the department."

"I think that they would be well-served by fresh leadership," said Putnam, who is often a spokesman for House Republicans. He said no one was doing "high fives" after the testimony.
During the hearings Thursday, while Democratic senators criticized Gonzales' leadership, some of the sharpest criticism came from Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee, including one who called for his resignation.

Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Oklahoma, said Gonzales should resign. (Coburn? Damn, Alberto is toast1)

"The communication was atrocious. It was inconsistent -- it's generous to say that there were misstatements; it's a generous statement. And I believe you ought to suffer the consequences that these others have suffered," Coburn said, adding, "I believe the best way to put this behind us is your resignation." (Watch Coburn tell Gonzales he must "suffer the consequences" )

On Friday, another Republican, Sen Jeff Sessions of Alabama, told CNN that Gonzales should consider leaving office. (Whoa! Sessions too? Now, this really is bad.)

"I think the attorney general ought to take the weekend and think about this and ask himself whether he can effectively reconstitute the attorney general's office," Sessions said, "and I'll be thinking about the same thing.

"If he feels like he cannot, then it would be best for the president and the country to resign."

Justice official: Gonzales 'feeling good'

According to a senior Justice Department official, Gonzales spoke to some senators Friday. The official would only say they included Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pennsylvania, "and others" and was not sure whether he spoke to any Democrats. "The conversations went well," the official said but provided no details.

The official also said, "Attorney General Gonzales is in good spirits. He's optimistic, feeling good."

(Lil Alberto seems delusional, unless he knows something the rest of us don't.)

"He is eager to get on with the other important work of the department," the official added.
The attorney general plans to participate in private and public events in the coming week in Washington.

After Gonzales' testimony Thursday, White House deputy press secretary Dana Perino said Gonzales has the full backing of the president:

"President Bush was pleased with the attorney general's testimony today. After hours of testimony in which he answered all of the senators' questions and provided thousands of pages of documents, he again showed that nothing improper occurred. He admitted the matter could have been handled much better, and he apologized for the disruption to the lives of the U.S. attorneys involved, as well as for the lack of clarity in his initial responses," Perino said.

(We all know Junior is delusional!)

White House insiders: Gonzales hurt himself

But White House insiders told CNN after the testimony that Gonzales hurt himself during his testimony.

The sources, involved in administration discussions about Gonzales, said two senior level White House aides who heard the testimony described Gonzales as "going down in flames," "not doing himself any favors," and "predictable."

"Everyone's putting their best public face on," one source said, "but everyone is discouraged. Everyone is disappointed." (Watch a recap of the testy hearing )

And the administration officials who talked to CNN on Friday agreed that Gonzales' statements did little to help him regain credibility on Capitol Hill and, in fact, may have lost him the few supporters he had left.

One official, who works closely with Gonzales, described him as "out of touch" with the political pulse in Washington. The official said the attorney general is still optimistic that he can remedy the situation.

The White House sources acknowledge that no one knows what the president will do. No one is looking for a replacement yet, sources said, and the White House is waiting to see how this plays out with the public and members of Congress over the next couple of days.

Another White House insider said it's up to the president to save him. (Strategy Session: Should Gonzales go? )

"He and Al have to work this out ..." he said. "There is no indication that Gonzales thinks he needs to leave."

Former solicitor general mentioned as possible replacement

Several other officials said Republicans have begun discussing a possible replacement.

One name that consistently comes up is Ted Olson, former solicitor general. Olson is seen as having the experience, reputation and credibility needed to steer the department for the next year and a half, through the end of Bush's term.

(Anyone suprised by this? Olsen. That was predictable. Google and a few D.C. insiders are our friends.)

However, officials note that Bush has been a longtime defender of Gonzales, whom he hired as his general counsel in 1994 when he was elected Texas governor.

He may not be willing to give in to congressional demands to remove him, unless he becomes convinced that keeping Gonzales will hinder his agenda, they said.

Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, indicated to CNN that he is ambivalent about the possibility that Gonzales might leave.

"If Al Gonzales were to quit tomorrow, it wouldn't end it. It would just, I think, add fuel to the fire, especially with Democrats controlling the Senate," he said.

"We'd have a confirmation hearing with the new attorney general, with a year and half left to serve in President Bush's second term in office. I think it would be more chaotic than it would if he were to stay and try to do the best job he can under very difficult circumstances."

CNN's Terry Frieden, Kelli Arena, Dana Bash, Ted Barrett, Kevin Bohn and Suzanne Malveaux contributed to this report.


(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.