NY TIMES CALLS FOR ALBERTO GONZALES' DISMISSAL. WHERE ARE THE DEMOCRATS?

I can hardly expect someone with the moral compass of George W. Bush to fire Alberto Gonzales. He probably can't imagine what all the fuss is about-- or thinks it's the commies or the paintings on the wall out to get him. Nor would I expect someone so lacking in depth of understanding as Gonzales to resign. But what I don't understand is why the Democratic majorities in Congress haven't moved to begin impeachment proceedings. Maybe someone can explain that to me. Sunday's New York Times editorializes about The Failed Attorney General, pointing out that Gonzales apparently can't grasp the basic difference between serving as a shyster for Bush and the defender of the Constitution and chief law enforcement officer for all Americans.

He has never stopped being consigliere to Mr. Bush’s imperial presidency. If anyone, outside Mr. Bush’s rapidly shrinking circle of enablers, still had doubts about that, the events of last week should have erased them.

First, there was Mr. Gonzales’s lame op-ed article in USA Today trying to defend the obviously politically motivated firing of eight United States attorneys, which he dismissed as an “overblown personnel matter.” Then his inspector general exposed the way the Federal Bureau of Investigation has been abusing yet another unnecessary new power that Mr. Gonzales helped wring out of the Republican-dominated Congress in the name of fighting terrorism.

The F.B.I. has been using powers it obtained under the Patriot Act to get financial, business and telephone records of Americans by issuing tens of thousands of “national security letters,” a euphemism for warrants that are issued without any judicial review or avenue of appeal. The administration said that, as with many powers it has arrogated since the 9/11 attacks, this radical change was essential to fast and nimble antiterrorism efforts, and it promised to police the use of the letters carefully.

But like so many of the administration’s promises, this one evaporated before the ink on those letters could dry. The F.B.I. director, Robert Mueller, admitted Friday that his agency had used the new powers improperly.

Mr. Gonzales does not directly run the F.B.I., but it is part of his department and has clearly gotten the message that promises (and civil rights) are meant to be broken.


It was Mr. Gonzales, after all, who repeatedly defended Mr. Bush’s decision to authorize warrantless eavesdropping on Americans’ international calls and e-mail. He was an eager public champion of the absurd notion that as commander in chief during a time of war, Mr. Bush can ignore laws that he thinks get in his way. Mr. Gonzales was disdainful of any attempt by Congress to examine the spying program, let alone control it.

The attorney general helped formulate and later defended the policies that repudiated the Geneva Conventions in the war against terror, and that sanctioned the use of kidnapping, secret detentions, abuse and torture. He has been central to the administration’s assault on the courts, which he recently said had no right to judge national security policies, and on the constitutional separation of powers.

His Justice Department has abandoned its duties as guardian of election integrity and voting rights. It approved a Georgia photo-ID law that a federal judge later likened to a poll tax, a case in which Mr. Gonzales’s political team overrode the objections of the department’s professional staff.

Gonzales is now in full damage control mode, as is the FBI's Robert Mueller who embraced empty, meaningless "responsibility" with no consequences.

The Times ends it's editorial with a call for Gonzales' dismissal... by Bush. That brings us back to the Democrats. I know I heard Arlen Specter (R-PA) hinting at it the other day. But the Democrats are in the majority and it's their duty to move on this.


UPDATE: EARLIER I ASKED, WHERE ARE THE DEMOCRATS?

According to Reuters, two very Establishment Democrats, Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Joe Biden (D-DE) seem to be calling for Gonzales' resignation And Arlen Specter is getting closer.
Schumer (on Face the Nation): "I think we need a change in the top at the Justice Department. Attorney General Gonzales is a nice man, but he either doesn't accept or doesn't understand that he is no longer just the president's lawyer, but has a higher obligation to the rule of law and the Constitution even when the president should not want it to be so." And afterwards: "From the mishandling of the U.S. attorney firings to the now-documented abuses of the Patriot Act to wiretapping without a warrant to decimating the Civil Rights Division, there has been a continuing pattern of mismanagement and disrespect for the rule of law."
Biden (on Late Edition): "I think we'd be better off if he did (resign), but that's a judgment the president is going to have to make... I think Gonzales has lost the confidence of the vast majority of the American people."
Specter (also on Face the Nation): "I do think there have been lots of problems."

Biden and Specter made it clear that it is Bush's call and Bush says, as expected, he has complete confidence in Gonzales. "The attorney general has shown leadership by demanding a new and higher level of accountability over the FBI's use of national security letters in terrorism investigations." Oh.