A new week has begun and Attorney General Gonzales must be feeling very claustrophobic. He is slowly, but increasingly hemmed in by Department of Justice documents, which are limiting his options to reinterpret statements he made in the past. An examination of the most recent Department of Justice documents, disclosed on Friday, shows Gonzales and his aides held a meeting on the Nov. 27, to discuss the dismissal of the U.S. Attorneys. Sen. Arlen Specter, a ranking Republican stated the documents “appear to contradict” Gonzales denials of participating in discussions involving the dismissals. On another front, Tasia Scolinos, a spokeswoman for the Justice Department, confirmed Gonzales was in attendance at the Nov. 27 meeting where the topic was the dismissals of U.S Attorneys, but that is not inconsistent with his past statements. Sen. Specter and Ms. Soclinos statements are offering a little wiggle room for Gonzales, by suggesting the problem of Gonzales credibility may lie in what was meant by ‘participation’ and ultimately by the nature of information he received.

It is easy to dismiss these statements as nothing more than a public relations campaign to shore up any support Gonzales might have left. But there is a far ranging defense being floated here. One based on the idea someone, presumably in White House, decided on a policy and ordered Gonzales to have it carried out and he in turned farmed out the responsibility to a subordinate. In this case, the subordinate was Kyle Sampson, who at the time was his chief of staff. Gonzales had such faith and trust in Sampson’s abilities, and integrity, the task was given without conditions or guidelines. Sampson had a free hand to operate as he saw fit, with only the most cursory supervision by his boss, Gonzales. This is where the wiggle room for defense comes into play. By allowing Sampson to plan and execute the dismissal policy with such independence, it guaranteed limited access to the information, mainly to those directly involved. Gonzales can claim information he received from Sampson dealt with the progress of implementing the policy, and nothing more. An allusion to the old, “If I had only known” defense, where ignorance is fundamental.

While appealing to ignorance, Gonzales may avoid any charges of wrongdoing. At most he can be accused of being inept and having extremely bad judgment, grounds enough for congress to ask him to move on. Without documents or testimony by others in the government to clearly contradict his claim of ignorance, the defense works. The real problem is, a limited success of this defense allows for a chain of ignorance to reach high into government and give other officials wiggle room as well. Best for congress to end ignorance before it spreads and the absolution for all wrongdoing it will grant.

During the 2000 Presidential campaign we were told that G. W. Bush would approach the presidency as a CEO, he would be the first with an MBA to hold the office, and would bring to it the discipline of a business leader. That the people bought in to this to any extent speaks more to the salesmanship of Karl Rove and the echo chamber of the main-stream media than it does to any sound reasoning.
The myth of the CEO Presidency has a corollary, that Bush was a good businessman. He wasn’t. With the exception of his ownership of the Texas Rangers baseball franchise he was a failure. But in his involvement with that team we can see the kind of business acumen he brought to the White House: cronyism.
Bush was supported and ultimately bailed out in the Rangers by cronies in much the same way that cronies have supported and bailed him out in his Presidency. Time and time again his administration has been marked not by shrewed, decisive actions of a Chief Executive but by the old-boy-network inculcated in college fraternities. From Brownie at FEMA to Gonzales at DOJ, we see the same effect time after time.
An important book which shows just how devastating the effects of cronyism are is Babylon By Bus, by Ray LeMoine and Jeff Neumann. A chronicle of the radical adventures of two buddies who decide to go to Baghdad on a lark to see if they can get involved in the early days of the American viceroyship following the cessation of major combat operations. They soon takeover an American administered agency which provides aid to Iraqi NGOs. In between their often hilarious antics and drug and drink fueled adventures there is much pathos as they and the Iraqis and American servicemen they befriend try (often in vain) to make a new functioning civil society.
They are bereft at the treatment of those they see as trying the hardest to improve their lot, and are constantly frustrated by the power that be within the viceroyship; L. Paul Bremer and the National Endowment for Democracy and State Department political hacks. Many of these people were in Iraq not because they had specific skills, but because they had worked on Bush’s campaign, or the campaigns of other influential Republicans.
The inept and ultimately severely damaging decisions made by the CPA (as the viceroyship was commonly called) have left as their lasting legacy a badly broken country in the heart of the most fragile region in world politics today.
George Packer, in a recent New Yorker article “Betrayed: The Iraqis who trusted America the most”, examines in-depth the horrendous treatment of the Iraqi civilians hired as translators and aides by the American military, diplomats and civilians. The same theme rings out here, as well: Incompetent cronies making bad or entirely political decisions, leaving in their wake a frustrated and embittered people.
In the current DOJ/US Attorney scandal we see again the actions of political hack employees breaking an otherwise honorable institution, the US Attorney’s office. Or, as revealed by The Washington Post in this article, we have political hackery at the GSA leading to seminars and video conferences instructing GSA administrators on how they can help Republican candidates in the next elections.
Its time for the shareholders in this democracy, the American people, demand that our CEO President stop filing false quarterly reports and take some responsibility for this disastrous modus operandi.

Aside from erstwhile Presidential ambitions, according to this Union Leader article they both won an award from the New Hampshire Political Library for their long time support of the New Hampshire Primary.

This is an example of a formatted note note

Elizabeth Edwards needs some kind thoughts right now. We don’t know much, but we do know that whatever is happening is important enough that her husband, John Edwards, has curtailed his Presidential campaign to be with her. Elizabeth has battled breast cancer, which she wrote about in her book “Saving Graces.”
Pawn hasn’t endorsed anyone in the 2008 Presidential race, and isn’t saying that Edwards is his choice, but feels a strong affinity for the sonofamillworker who has come a long way since his awkward introduction to national politics in 2004.
You see, John Edwards has a black mark against him for having been the signing majority senator on the original (and poorly named) U.S.A. Patriot Act in 2001. That shameful bill, written largely by Viet Dinh (currently at Georgetown Law) needed a respected Democratic senator with legal credentials to “author” it for introduction, and John Edwards was just the man. You would be hard pressed, given his current, populist spiel, to deduce that. But, so it is.
All that aside, Elizabeth Edwards is immune from all of that. She is just a dedicated woman who deserves all of our kind thoughts as she weathers whatever her newest travails are. And John, we’ll cut you a break, too.

Some time back Pawn penned a rant about the role of an opposition. There is new currency on this issue, given the state of affairs in Washington (and across the country). This recent posting on Politico details Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean’s efforts to reach out to leaders both domestic and overseas, and to build an opposition mentaility. Here is a quote:

“I am trying to build relationships with other governments in preparation for a Democratic takeover,” Dean told me. “I want to make clear that there is an opposition in America and that we are ready to take power and that when we do, we are going to have much better relationships with them.”