Gonzales Resigns

stlgph · Mon Aug 27, 2007 9:17 pm

CNN's blurbing it.

Looks like a large number of people have their wish ... whether that wish being he would just a) resign, or b) everyone would just shut up about it in general.

halls120 · Mon Aug 27, 2007 9:18 pm

Quoting STLGph (Thread starter):
CNN's blurbing it.

Looks like a large number of people have their wish ... whether that wish being he would just a) resign, or b) everyone would just shut up about it in general.

Hmmm. Nothing about it yet on the internal e-mail......

stlgph · Mon Aug 27, 2007 9:22 pm

New York Times is reporting.

CNN is reporting.

ABC is working to confirm.

stlgph · Mon Aug 27, 2007 9:24 pm

NY Times --
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/27/wa...-gonzales.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

ABC/NewsOne has confirmed as well.

itsonlyme · Mon Aug 27, 2007 9:28 pm

Yea its on Sky News and Fox, interesting timing. I wonder who wil replace him? Rumours in some places about Chertoff.

ltbewr · Mon Aug 27, 2007 9:31 pm

Thank God!!!! I hope the Democrats keep up a lot of pressure in the confirmation process to get a far better qualified, less political Republican/Bush butt kisser and someone with some serious concerns as to human rights as his replacement. Michael Chernoff, the Homeland Security head and a former Federal District Court Judge is early on the most probable replacement. I also hope Gonzales can never travel overseas for the rest of his life in fear of getting arrested for human rights violations and tried for them.

Pope · Mon Aug 27, 2007 9:40 pm

Quoting LTBEWR (Reply 5):
Thank God!!!! I hope the Democrats keep up a lot of pressure in the confirmation process to get a far better qualified,

Here's what I don't understand. The same people who criticize the AG and the Patriot Act voted in favor of (a) his confirmation and (b) its passage.

Seems like some want there cake and to eat it to.

halls120 · Mon Aug 27, 2007 9:51 pm

Quoting Itsonlyme (Reply 4):
Yea its on Sky News and Fox, interesting timing. I wonder who wil replace him? Rumours in some places about Chertoff.

If that happens, there will be a flood of people looking for jobs outside of DC.

Blackbird · Mon Aug 27, 2007 9:52 pm

Now you know what's going to happen right?

Gonzales resigned, but now Bush is going to appoint a person more clever, devious and more willing to erode and destroy the constitution to fight the war on freedom.

Andrea Kent
BTW: When the new Attorney General does get in -- should I, or anybody who's a critic of this administration disappear, you know who's to blame for it.

halls120 · Mon Aug 27, 2007 9:54 pm

Quoting Itsonlyme (Reply 4):
Rumours in some places about Chertoff.

It's looking like a pretty good rumor.

allstarflyer · Mon Aug 27, 2007 9:56 pm

Quoting Itsonlyme (Reply 4):
I wonder who wil replace him?

Somebody with a death wish. Ashcroft was unpopular and Gonzales had a bullseye on his dome. A big problem with Gonzales is that he was already part of the current establishment, which tied him with a lot of activities that have taken place throughout the Bush years. If Bush wants an AG that will be anywhere close to effective, he'll likelly have to go outside the current establishment to find one. Ted Olson would be a fine choice, IMO, just to throw out a name.

Bush must be at least somewhat relieved, though, regardless of what people think of Gonzales. A lot of the negative press associated with the White House has had his name attatched in one way or another.

I think this is, though, as far as resignations. Hastert (didn't resign, but called it quits as of next election), Rumsfeld, Tony Snow, Gonzales - there's nobody else I can see who's itching to get out.

JGPH1A · Mon Aug 27, 2007 10:01 pm

Quoting Allstarflyer (Reply 10):
I think this is, though, as far as resignations. Hastert (didn't resign, but called it quits as of next election), Rumsfeld, Tony Snow, Gonzales - there's nobody else I can see who's itching to get out.

Don't forget Rove (teehee)

itsonlyme · Mon Aug 27, 2007 10:03 pm

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 7):
f that happens, there will be a flood of people looking for jobs outside of DC.

Really? Why do you say that? Another name is being floated is Paul Clement, Solicitor General. I think Gonzales seems like a perfectly nice guy, but his leadership sucked. Because of his inability to communicate clearly with the public and the politicians he created more problems and seemed to have become a drag on the admin. Loyalty has to end somewhere i guess.

Dougloid · Mon Aug 27, 2007 10:08 pm

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 7):
Quoting Itsonlyme (Reply 4):
Yea its on Sky News and Fox, interesting timing. I wonder who wil replace him? Rumours in some places about Chertoff.

If that happens, there will be a flood of people looking for jobs outside of DC.

You got that right, brother. I'm sure there'll be an exodus of attorneys from his office. Look for lots of people in the hustings hiding their pals from DC out until the smell dies down a little. That, of course, will mean that other people in the hustings will get the boot to make way for the carpetbaggers who will be calling in their notes.

Thus is it ever.

I b'lieve I hear Dandy Don Meredith tuning up for "Turn Out the Lights, the Party's Over"

Big version: Width: 130 Height: 97 File size: 3kb

max headroom

OU812 · Mon Aug 27, 2007 10:09 pm

Quoting Pope (Reply 6):
Here's what I don't understand. The same people who criticize the AG and the Patriot Act voted in favor of (a) his confirmation and (b) its passage.

Seems like some want there cake and to eat it to.

Agreed Pope,
The Liberal media & dems vilified Bush and conservatives in the 06' mid term elections regarding the NSA wiring tapping issue. Yet, passed it just this month, out of fear of appearing weak on national security & missing their summer recess.

Political expediency at its finest! bigthumbsup

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn.../AR2007080401744.html?hpid=topnews

By Ellen Nakashima and Joby Warrick
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, August 5, 2007; Page A01

The Democratic-controlled House last night approved and sent to President Bush for his signature legislation written by his intelligence advisers to enhance their ability to intercept the electronic communications of foreigners without a court order.

The 227 to 183 House vote capped a high-pressure campaign by the White House to change the nation's wiretap law, in which the administration capitalized on Democrats' fears of being branded weak on terrorism and on a general congressional desire to act on the measure before an August recess.

OU812 · Mon Aug 27, 2007 10:57 pm

Quoting LTBEWR (Reply 5):
I also hope Gonzales can never travel overseas for the rest of his life in fear of getting arrested for human rights violations and tried for them.

What human rights violations?

Falcon84 · Mon Aug 27, 2007 11:06 pm

Quoting OU812 (Reply 14):
Agreed Pope,

Boy, there's a shock. Yeah sure

Good riddance, but his replacement, allegedly, Chertoff, is not better, in my mind. Just another Bush crony.

cfalk · Mon Aug 27, 2007 11:31 pm

Quoting LTBEWR (Reply 5):
I also hope Gonzales can never travel overseas for the rest of his life in fear of getting arrested for human rights violations and tried for them.

Uhhh... WTF???

Quoting Blackbird (Reply 8):
Gonzales resigned, but now Bush is going to appoint a person more clever, devious and more willing to erode and destroy the constitution to fight the war on freedom.

Coming from the left, which has done more to rip up the Constitution since the FDR in the 40's, that's hypocracy at its finest. The US government is fu&%ing HUGE. It pokes its nose into every industry, every employer, everyone and everything. In my little company which we are trying to grow, we have to spend half our time filling out government paperwork regarding antiquidated federal regulations on our industry every month. And that is the fault of the Dems, who in the 1930s decided that the 10th amendment was something to be ignored, and that the government should get into everyone's business, Constitution-be-damned.

As Reagan said, Government is the problem, not the solution. The current crop of Repubs seem to have forgotten this, but that is hardly an excuse to bring in the party most responsible for intentionally destroying the fabric of our constitution in return for political power.

Dougloid · Tue Aug 28, 2007 12:15 am

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 17):
The US government is fu&%ing HUGE. It pokes its nose into every industry, every employer, everyone and everything. In my little company which we are trying to grow, we have to spend half our time filling out government paperwork regarding antiquidated federal regulations on our industry every month. And that is the fault of the Dems,

One thing you'll find as you move forward is that for any given rule, regulation, or engineering change order, if you follow the paper trail back far enough there was usually a pretty good reason for it somewhere. Maybe it's not relevant in the present day but there was a good reason for it.

Your post seems to suggest that the road to hell started with the election of 1932. I'd have to say that was the start of a lot of regulation of business, but that's primarily because business-in particular the financial sector-was unable to police or regulate itself effectively and give the little guy a fair shake and a level field.

Self policing by industry is all very well, but if I have a choice of evils, I'd rather have a bunch of bureaucrats without a financial stake in the outcome making decisions for me than a bunch of Ivan Boesky-Michael Milken types that can't keep their frickin' hands out of the till.

We're making a great to-do about the Utah mining disaster, but the reason why we have 45 0r 50 deaths in underground mining every year instead of several thousand a year like China does is because we have some regulation that makes the worst excesses of the mining industry unprofitable for the operators.

Likewise, in the current contretemps a/k/a mortgage meltdown, you can and will see increased governmental regulation of mortgage lending here. Why? Because of the abuses in the field which may yet trigger a recession.

AirportSeven · Tue Aug 28, 2007 12:29 am

It's OK, Gonzalez won't be able to recall even being the Attorney General by the end of the week. And that'll be convenient for him the next time he appears before a congressional committee.

I wonder why they announced this on a Monday morning instead of during the standard news dump hour of 5 pm on Friday?

S12PPL · Tue Aug 28, 2007 12:31 am

About damn time. They're dropping like flies around Bush, now.

ConcordeBoy · Tue Aug 28, 2007 12:44 am

Quoting JGPH1A (Reply 11):
Quoting Allstarflyer (Reply 10):
I think this is, though, as far as resignations. Hastert (didn't resign, but called it quits as of next election), Rumsfeld, Tony Snow, Gonzales - there's nobody else I can see who's itching to get out.

Don't forget Rove

...if you're going to include him, may as well throw in Meiers to boot.

halls120 · Tue Aug 28, 2007 12:47 am

Quoting Itsonlyme (Reply 12):
Quoting Halls120 (Reply 7):
f that happens, there will be a flood of people looking for jobs outside of DC.

Really? Why do you say that? Another name is being floated is Paul Clement, Solicitor General. I think Gonzales seems like a perfectly nice guy, but his leadership sucked. Because of his inability to communicate clearly with the public and the politicians he created more problems and seemed to have become a drag on the admin. Loyalty has to end somewhere i guess.

Why do I say that? Working for Chertoff is no bed of roses, that's why. He already had one stint over here as the Assistant Attorney General of the Criminal Division, and his impact still reverberates. He's brilliant, but.....

You don't see this in the press, but there has been a steady exodus of people leaving DHS HQ ever since Chertoff got there.

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 20):
One thing you'll find as you move forward is that for any given rule, regulation, or engineering change order, if you follow the paper trail back far enough there was usually a pretty good reason for it somewhere. Maybe it's not relevant in the present day but there was a good reason for it.

True enough, for those regulations that see the light of day. But where the system breaks down is when you need a regulation, you often can't get it because of internal politics.

ShyFlyer · Tue Aug 28, 2007 1:20 am

Quoting STLGph (Thread starter):
Looks like a large number of people have their wish ... whether that wish being he would just a) resign, or b) everyone would just shut up about it in general.

b) won't work, since this whole mess will be back in the headlines and be the lead story on the nightly news programs again.

Quoting Blackbird (Reply 8):
When the new Attorney General does get in -- should I, or anybody who's a critic of this administration disappear, you know who's to blame for it.

We can only hope....

RJdxer · Tue Aug 28, 2007 1:25 am

Quoting Blackbird (Reply 8):
Gonzales resigned, but now Bush is going to appoint a person more clever, devious and more willing to erode and destroy the constitution to fight the war on freedom.

Whomever gets the job has to know it will only last 18 months or so. You call that "caretaking" in most professions.

Quoting Blackbird (Reply 8):
When the new Attorney General does get in -- should I, or anybody who's a critic of this administration disappear, you know who's to blame for it.

Santa Claus.

Quoting Itsonlyme (Reply 12):
Another name is being floated is Paul Clement, Solicitor General

My money is there.

Quoting S12PPL (Reply 22):
They're dropping like flies around Bush, now.

Again, this probably has more to do with the Chief of Staff's edict that if you stayed on past labor day you were expected to stay on to the end of the term. When you look at the people leaving, Rove, Snow, Gonzalez, they can all make far more in the private sector, and are happier there, than in public service.

oldeuropean · Tue Aug 28, 2007 1:33 am

Quoting S12PPL (Reply 22):
About damn time. They're dropping like flies around Bush, now.

The rats are leaving the sinking ship. (Some voluntary and others nonvoluntary) Big grin

Tom in NO · Tue Aug 28, 2007 1:40 am

Quoting Itsonlyme (Reply 4):
Rumours in some places about Chertoff.

We're screwed.

Signed, all of us here in New Orleans
(and I mean that seriously)

seb146 · Tue Aug 28, 2007 1:44 am

Maybe someone will be appointed who can remember something!

But, I doubt it...

Quoting Blackbird (Reply 8):
Gonzales resigned, but now Bush is going to appoint a person more clever, devious and more willing to erode and destroy the constitution to fight the war on freedom.

That is what I am fearful of, too.

Quoting OU812 (Reply 14):
The 227 to 183 House vote capped a high-pressure campaign by the White House to change the nation's wiretap law, in which the administration capitalized on Democrats' fears of being branded weak on terrorism and on a general congressional desire to act on the measure before an August recess.

So, the president says "pass this, or else!" and it is the Dem's fault? Threats are now politics? Great...

Quoting OU812 (Reply 25):
comment was debunked by Pope's recent thread

That the rich have gotten richer since 1980!

Quoting ShyFlyer (Reply 26):
Quoting Blackbird (Reply 8):
When the new Attorney General does get in -- should I, or anybody who's a critic of this administration disappear, you know who's to blame for it.

We can only hope....

So, you are fearful of a leftist regime in Venezuela, but a rightie regime would be okay in the United States. Scary...

Quoting RJdxer (Reply 27):
When you look at the people leaving, Rove, Snow, Gonzalez, they can all make far more in the private sector, and are happier there, than in public service.

My opinion but: This could also be a ploy by the administration to make themselves look good at the end of their term. In their minds, putting more centrists in at the end of the term will make the administration look good and show history that the administration was not so bad. In the future, they can say "See? We did good!" All of the feel-good politics will simply wipe away the torture camps, Katrina, Iraq, illegal wiretaps, My Pet Goat and the last 7 years so they can re-write history.

Yellowstone · Tue Aug 28, 2007 1:55 am

The only bad part about this resignation is its timing. Jon Stewart and the Daily Show are on vacation for the next two weeks! It will be old news by the time he gets back. Of course, I wouldn't put it past the administration to have noticed that. Smile

ShyFlyer · Tue Aug 28, 2007 1:58 am

Quoting Seb146 (Reply 30):
So, you are fearful of a leftist regime in Venezuela, but a rightie regime would be okay in the United States. Scary...

Oh give me a freaking break. Yeah sure

People criticizing the administration, whether it be Bush's or the next one, or the one after that, have nothing to fear.

RJdxer · Tue Aug 28, 2007 2:10 am

Quoting Tom in NO (Reply 29):
We're screwed.

No, we're screwed here in Houston. 2 years after the event yet another Katrina evacuee that can't seem to find his way back to New Orleans to help in the recovery has shot and killed a High School football standout that had committed to play with the Oklahoma Sooners.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/sports/5083279.html

Why don't you do us a favor and come over and police up these losers and take them back where they came from. Know what? Never mind. We can give him some permanent aid in the form of a death sentence here in Texas.

Quoting Seb146 (Reply 30):
All of the feel-good politics will simply wipe away the torture camps, Katrina, Iraq, illegal wiretaps,

What torture camps? As described above, more than a few Katrina evacuees don't need help, they need prison. Congress voted to fund the Iraq war how many times? With democrats joining in on the "Yes" votes? What illegal wiretaps? So easy to condemn when you use half truths and outright lies to back up your supposition isn't it?

seb146 · Tue Aug 28, 2007 2:12 am

ShyFlyer: You are the one who said:

Quoting ShyFlyer (Reply 26):
We can only hope....

In response to:

Quoting Blackbird (Reply 8):
When the new Attorney General does get in -- should I, or anybody who's a critic of this administration disappear, you know who's to blame for it.

Which I took to mean you would be okay if those critical of the administration to be disappeared but when Chavez calls Bush the devil that is wrong wrong wrong! Whatever. I don't see how one is better than the other. I am no fan of Chavez, but I have, on more than one occasion, thought the Bush administration is evil. So, if I suddenly quit posting and there are no records of me ever being, you would be okay with that? If Blackbird suddenly quits posting and there are no records of her ever existing, you would be okay with that? Cheer leading this administration should only go so far.

ShyFlyer · Tue Aug 28, 2007 3:05 am

Quoting Seb146 (Reply 35):
So, if I suddenly quit posting and there are no records of me ever being, you would be okay with that? If Blackbird suddenly quits posting and there are no records of her ever existing, you would be okay with that?

First of all, neither you nor Blackbird, or anyone else have anything to worry about. No one is going to disappear because they are critical of any Presidential administration. This whole "if I disappear, you know who to blame" is nothing more than BS conspiracy theorist malarkey. It's old, played out, and downright annoying. I was addressing a particular user, not everyone who disagrees with the administration.

Quoting Seb146 (Reply 35):
Cheer leading this administration should only go so far.

Agreed. I'm glad Gonzales is gone.

halls120 · Tue Aug 28, 2007 4:37 am

Quoting ShyFlyer (Reply 32):
Quoting Seb146 (Reply 35):
Cheer leading this administration should only go so far.

Agreed. I'm glad Gonzales is gone.

Not until September 17th, that is.

Dougloid · Tue Aug 28, 2007 7:14 am

Gonzales has said "Even my worst days as the attorney general were better than my father's best days."

Is that as swinish as it sounds?

I mean, my old man's dead too, and he had some bad days but I would never presume to measure what I do by the yardstick of what I thought I knew about my old man.

Is Alberto G that ashamed of his father being a construction worker from Humble, Texas? I'd be proud of that. At least he earned every dollar and every plate of food that Gonzales ate as a boy.

What disrespect. What ingratitude.

Angry

flyingbronco05 · Tue Aug 28, 2007 8:55 am

Can somebody post a list of all the people that have resigned/quit/been fired since the 2nd term?

cfalk · Tue Aug 28, 2007 9:31 am

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 34):
What disrespect. What ingratitude.

By saying that his father's generation succeeded in that their children's life was better than their own? I could argue that it was gratitude beyond your grasp.

Quoting Flyingbronco05 (Reply 35):
Can somebody post a list of all the people that have resigned/quit/been fired since the 2nd term?

I'd like to see a side-by-side comparison between the departures under GWB and Clinton. This it seems to me that people are trying to trick people into thinking that such departures have been more common under GWB, which would imply a more scandalous element. I think that is false. Just on the issue of Chief of Staff, Clinton had 3 or 4 of them fired/left on their own, one after another.

Gonzales was not a particularly effective AG - I don't think there is any question. But it bugs me how much sheer glee people seem to dwell on his (and our country's) misfortune at the Peter Principle being exemplified at his level.

AeroWesty · Tue Aug 28, 2007 9:53 am

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 36):
But it bugs me how much sheer glee people seem to dwell on his (and our country's) misfortune at the Peter Principle being exemplified at his level.

The glee I see is that we're seeing those who've benefitted from the Peter Principle lose their benefits before they can do any more harm.

baroque · Tue Aug 28, 2007 5:10 pm

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 34):
Is Alberto G that ashamed of his father being a construction worker from Humble, Texas? I'd be proud of that. At least he earned every dollar and every plate of food that Gonzales ate as a boy.

Second mistake, feeding the b*****. I will leave you to work out what the first one was.

Any chance of the US getting a justice system now that it could advertise to the rest of us? optimist

halls120 · Tue Aug 28, 2007 8:35 pm

Quoting Baroque (Reply 38):
Any chance of the US getting a justice system now that it could advertise to the rest of us?

We have a very functional justice system in place, thank you. It worked before Gonzales was AG, it worked while he was AG, and it will work after he leaves.

His downfall was precipitated by political mistakes, not a failure of the justice system.

Halcyon · Tue Aug 28, 2007 8:45 pm

Quoting JGPH1A (Reply 11):
Don't forget Rove (teehee)

I can't believe that I just about laughed to death over such a nightmarish thought. embarrassed

baroque · Tue Aug 28, 2007 9:37 pm

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 39):
Quoting Baroque (Reply 38):
Any chance of the US getting a justice system now that it could advertise to the rest of us?

We have a very functional justice system in place, thank you. It worked before Gonzales was AG, it worked while he was AG, and it will work after he leaves.

Not sure today is the day for advertising the US justice system when Sunny Jacobs gave an hour long interview on our radio today. Atypical, maybe, but not a good advert and the fate of her late husband even less so. The deliberate corruption of a justice system would be a description that comes to mind??
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesse_Tafero
http://arts.guardian.co.uk/features/story/0,,1713534,00.html

Dougloid · Tue Aug 28, 2007 10:39 pm

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 36):
Quoting Dougloid (Reply 34):
What disrespect. What ingratitude.

By saying that his father's generation succeeded in that their children's life was better than their own? I could argue that it was gratitude beyond your grasp.

When a fella says "I could argue that ............... "or "we would submit that............" what it means is that he isn't really sure of his ground and wants to distance himself from his argument a little. It's a subtle yet real distinction. I never use that phraseology for that reason. Is that what you intended?

Maybe what you SAY is what Alberto G. MEANT, but I'm more or less of the opinion that if that is what he MEANT, he would have SAID it and he did NOT.

Look at it again and tell me how he can say that his worst days were better than his fathers' best days, when his father's a dead man who can't speak for himself and many of his father's days were before Alberto was born.

He just doesn't frickin' know, does he?

cfalk · Tue Aug 28, 2007 11:00 pm

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 42):
Maybe what you SAY is what Alberto G. MEANT, but I'm more or less of the opinion that if that is what he MEANT, he would have SAID it and he did NOT.

You seemed to naturally assume that Gonzales wanted to insult his father. I assume that he wanted to say the opposite, but phrased it poorly. Most people in public (especially politicians) are very respectful towards their parents, so I think my interpretation is the correct one, although without question, Gonzales said it in a way that came out all wrong.

baroque · Tue Aug 28, 2007 11:09 pm

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 42):
Look at it again and tell me how he can say that his worst days were better than his fathers' best days, when his father's a dead man who can't speak for himself and many of his father's days were before Alberto was born.

He just doesn't frickin' know, does he?

I agree Dougloid, it does not appear to me either that "he knows". While your point about insulting his father is well taken, of more general concern were he still in office is his assumption that "his days" were positive contributions to the life of the US when all the evidence points to this not being the case, and not being the case in spades! I would be confident of a bet that most of his father's days were of more positive benefit to wherever he was living than son Gonzales days have been.

halls120 · Tue Aug 28, 2007 11:12 pm

Quoting Baroque (Reply 41):
Quoting Halls120 (Reply 39):
Quoting Baroque (Reply 38):
Any chance of the US getting a justice system now that it could advertise to the rest of us?

We have a very functional justice system in place, thank you. It worked before Gonzales was AG, it worked while he was AG, and it will work after he leaves.

Not sure today is the day for advertising the US justice system when Sunny Jacobs gave an hour long interview on our radio today. Atypical, maybe, but not a good advert and the fate of her late husband even less so. The deliberate corruption of a justice system would be a description that comes to mind??

It might come to your mind, but to few others. Other than a slanted piece against the death penalty, do you have anything relevant to offer to the discussion?

baroque · Tue Aug 28, 2007 11:26 pm

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 45):

It might come to your mind, but to few others. Other than a slanted piece against the death penalty, do you have anything relevant to offer to the discussion?

Well, it was more the incorrect use of plea bargaining, neglect of evidence that neither had fired a gun, failure to disclose that the main witness against them had failed a lie detector test that suggests to me that all might not be well in Florida. We will not go into the saga of accepting evidence of a witness when they were addicted to a drug but rejecting evidence from her when she had overcome her addiction - on the grounds that she had been a drug addict.

I had not mentioned the circumstances of Jesse's execution which you obviously know about but do feel free to tell us all.

And just go ahead and think things are perfect. I would have thought that the departure of Gonzales might be a time to wonder how the system could be improved. You do not really seem to have the equivalent of a Royal Commission. Possibly it is one aspect of the UK system that you could find useful.

cfalk · Tue Aug 28, 2007 11:52 pm

Quoting Baroque (Reply 46):
You do not really seem to have the equivalent of a Royal Commission. Possibly it is one aspect of the UK system that you could find useful.

On that I agree. A Royal Commission is appointed by the Queen to investigate a certain issue, and as the Queen is presumably beyond politics (does she vote Labour or Tory - who knows?), you have a decent chance that the inquiry is impartial.

About the execution thing, now that we have widespread use of DNA and other technology that can more certainly finger a culprit (or exonerate him) we are becoming more and more certain with time that convictions are correct - far more so than was the case 10, 20 or 100 years ago. This would lead us to believe that capital punishment is more justifiable now than it was back then.

Personally, I am all for executing child-murderers and other assorted scum.

baroque · Wed Aug 29, 2007 12:45 am

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 47):
About the execution thing, now that we have widespread use of DNA and other technology that can more certainly finger a culprit (or exonerate him) we are becoming more and more certain with time that convictions are correct - far more so than was the case 10, 20 or 100 years ago.

While DNA is an important tool, it will only work within an appropriate system. The Jacobs case in instructive because there was evidence available to demonstrate that those two did not commit the murders, but the way the system was working it was ignored, concealed and possibly worse.

Had this happened here, a Royal Commission would almost certainly have been wheeled out. As you say, HM is a-political, but the critical person for a Royal Commission is the judge. Arguably judges in the UK and Aus are less involved in the political process, and that allows stronger commissions of enquiry.

However, the lack of political influence in relation to judges is not guaranteed. Quality in judicial appointments is not easy to ensure.

halls120 · Wed Aug 29, 2007 2:40 am

Quoting Baroque (Reply 46):
Quoting Halls120 (Reply 45):

It might come to your mind, but to few others. Other than a slanted piece against the death penalty, do you have anything relevant to offer to the discussion?

Well, it was more the incorrect use of plea bargaining, neglect of evidence that neither had fired a gun, failure to disclose that the main witness against them had failed a lie detector test that suggests to me that all might not be well in Florida. We will not go into the saga of accepting evidence of a witness when they were addicted to a drug but rejecting evidence from her when she had overcome her addiction - on the grounds that she had been a drug addict

And what, pray tell, does any of the above have to do with soon to be former AG Gonzales?

Quoting Baroque (Reply 46):
And just go ahead and think things are perfect. I would have thought that the departure of Gonzales might be a time to wonder how the system could be improved. You do not really seem to have the equivalent of a Royal Commission. Possibly it is one aspect of the UK system that you could find useful.

Where have I said or suggested that our justice system was perfect?

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net