Demographics & Economics
OMB
Congressional Budget Office
The Federal Budget
U.S. Census Quickfacts
Inflation Calculator
CIA World Factbook
NationMaster
State Healthcare Facts
UN HDR stats
US Bureau of Economic Analysis
US Bureau of Labor Statistics
US CDC health stats
US DOJ Bureau of Justice Statistics
US DOJ crime stats
Constitution
The Constitution
The Founders' Constitution
The Avalon Project
The Federalist Papers
The antifederalist papers
Founding documents
Politics
ADA (liberal) Voting Records
ACU (conservative) Voting Records
Census Voter Turnout
Congressional Research Service
Memeorandum
NOW list of voting scorecards
PolitiFact
PorkBusters
Project VoteSmart list of voting scorecards
RealClearPolitics
Roll call votes--House
Roll call votes--Senate
Survey USA
WaPo Votes Database
Iraq/Terrorism
CentCom
Brookings Institute Iraq Index
Project on Defense Alternatives War Report
Nat'l Defense Univ Iraq
Nat'l Defense Univ Afghanistan
MERLIN, Nat'l Defense Univ Library Network
STRATFOR
Nat'l Memorial Inst for Prevention of Terrorism
West Point's Combating Terrorism Center
Politics blogs
Baldilocks
Blue Mass Group
Cadillac Tight
California Conservative
Jon Chait
Confederate Yankee
Crooked Timber
Democracy Project
Dinocrat
First Read
Gateway Pundit
GenerationPatriot
Horse Race Blog
Just One Minute
Hugh Hewitt
Michelle Malkin
Patterico's Pontifications
Power Line
Red State
RNCC blog
Scrappleface
Talking Points Memo
The Blogometer
The Corner
The Next Right
The Moderate Voice
Think Progress
Wizbang
Moderate / centrist
Ambivablog
Bipartisan Rules
Booker Rising
Centerfield
Charging RINO
Donklephant
Liberal War Journal
Militant Moderates
The Buck Stops Here
The Glittering Eye
The Iconic Midwest
The PoliGazette
The Walrus Said
Legal & blawgs
How Appealing
Becker-Posner
Bench Memos
Concurring Opinions
Law & Letters
Legalities
Prawfsblawg
SCOTUSblog
Sentencing Law & Policy
The Volokh Conspiracy
Christian
ADW blog
Father Z
First Thoughts
Mirror of Justice
Veritas Rex
Middle East & Muslim affairs
Eteraz
Iraq the Model
Lebanese Political Journal
Michael Totten
Michael Yon
General interest
Althouse
Ambiance
Chris Muir's Day by Day
Instapundit
IowaHawk
JAC
Professor Bainbridge
Prettier than Napoleon
Rachel Lucas
The Right Coast
Science Blog
Sippican Cottage
The Anchoress
Whatever
It's worth adding to Tully's post that while I joined the chorus line in calling for Gonzales' head, we ought to be very clear (as we've been before) that there is no actual U.S. Attorneys scandal. The partisan meme that something illegal was done is utterly meritless. Not only is the firing of a U.S. Attorney unquestionably within the inherent Article II powers of the Chief Executive, see Myers v. United States, 272 U.S. 52 (1926); Humprey's Executor v. United States, 295 U.S. 602 (1935); Wienar v. United States, 357 U.S. 349 (1958); Morrison v. Olson, 487 U.S. 654, 723 (1988) (Scalia, J., dissenting), it is expressly authorized by statute, see 28 U.S.C. § 541(c), and "[w]hen the President acts pursuant to an express or implied authorization of Congress, his authority is at its maximum, for it includes all that he possesses in his own right plus all that Congress can delegate." Youngstown co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579, 635 (1952) (Jackson, J., concurring).
Our RSS feed
You're undoubtedly correct
You're undoubtedly correct about the substance of the so-called scandal. But if Administration officials lied to Congress and/or other investigating authorities, would those potentially be separate and distinct crimes? Just wondering, as it often seems that folks get netted by the cover-up rather than the underlying offense.
I would have thought so. I
I would have thought so. I know there's a lot of folks on the right - Thompson's one of them, IIRC - who say that because Fitzgerald was out of control and there was no underlying crime, Libby really should get off, but setting aside the jurisdictional question which is pending appeal (which is serious and interesting) he still perjured himself. Just like Clinton. Just like Clinton. Now, whether Congress is a "competent tribunal" within the meaning of 18 usc 1621 is a question one can answer on many levels. ;)
Not to rehash whether there
Not to rehash whether there was a "scandal" or not, but the question was never whether the President had the authority to fire the US Attorneys, but whether he did so for partisan reasons (eg, whether an AG was fired for nor pursuing voter fraud claims before an election, when the intent of pushing the claims was to help the Republican candidate). You can believe or not believe the allegation, but I think your cites above misse that point.
Right. As you said Justin, the legality of the firings in and of
themselves is undisputed, but there is (as least as I saw it) some evidence that the whole thing was partisan, and somewhat unseemly. Let's not forget that Gonzales did gave misleading testimony to Congress.
At the end of the day, we have a potential scandal, through partisan flame-fanning and Gonzales' own evasion and incompetence, becoming a big scandal. That, with the other baggage he has, doomed him.
"In the world you will find tribulation, but be of good cheer, for I have overcome the world."
John 16:33
If that's really the limit
If that's really the limit of the claim, then it's barely a scandal worthy of the name, absent evidence that (a) a U.S. Attorney pursued a meritless charge acting on political motives (b) that they failed to persue a meritorious charge acting on political motives or (c) they were fired for refusing to do (a) or (b). Without that, once it's conceded that the President can fire his employees - and U.S. Attorneys are such - the bottom drops out of the "scandal," which is probably why the scandal has had such limited resonance outside of political circles.
Well, hopefully the
Well, hopefully the Democrats will keep investigating so we can know if anything improper happened. It would certainly be helpful if the White House provided a coherent explanation as to why the US Attorneys were fired; that's not evidence of bad behavior, but it certainly smells like rotting fish.
I just hope that Bush doesn't appoint an unqualified hack as a replacemement--it's impossible to predict what he is going to do.