Gonzales:  We were there on behalf of the president.

Schumer:  You will not answer that question as well.  Is that correct?

Gonzales:  We were there on behalf…if I can …  I’d be would be happy to take back your question if we can respond to it we well.

Clearly, Gonzales will not answer any question that implicates Bush as ordering the visit, thus participating in a conspiracy to commit illegal acts, as outlined in Comey’s May 18, 2007 testimony before Sen. Schumer.

Sen. Schumer On Point

Senator Schumer was amazingly on point during this line of questioning; even more so than when his questioning of Comey established the probability of crimes committed by Bush, Card, and Gonzales.  When Schumer clearly became aware that he would get no answer, he only gave Gonzales one chance to bring up attorney-client privilege.  Schumer asked, “Well can you explain to me why you can’t answer it directly?” 

Schumer also stayed tightly focused, to his great advantage, when Gonzales tried on several occasions to bring national security into the testimony as an excuse for the act he won’t acknowledge Bush committing (ordering the visit).  At the very beginning, Gonzales tries to divert the discussion to national security by referring to a “very important meeting …one of the most important…”  Schumer responded quickly with “I didn’t ask you that” to put Gonzales back on task, Schumer’s task.  A bit later, Gonzales refers to one of the “premier programs” and “an important program.”  Had Schumer taken the bait, Gonzales would have raised the terrorist threat that was the excuse for the domestic surveillance program they were trying to legitimize (after the fact, perhaps).  Schumer stayed on task, focused on who ordered the visit.

Gonzales was damned if he answered and damned if he didn’t.  Had he said  “Well attorney client privilege applies,” Schumer might have responded:  “So the president told you not to answer any questions about his ordering you and Card to the hospital to Ashcroft’s sick bet in order to obtain a signature from a highly sedated man who was not in a position to sign legally in the first place.”

By not explicating the attorney-client privilege excuse, Gonzales looks like a fool to the public.  “Why won’t he answer those questions,” the typical viewer asks.  At this point, Americans are well beyond a willingness to decipher the hidden meanings between the lines.  It simply looks like Gonzales is a slippery character, one they don’t particularly trust in the first place.

Here’s Why Gonzales Won’t Answer

Obviously Bush ordered the visit to get the signature.  Card and Gonzales would have broken the first rule of the Bush White House, disloyalty to the boss.  Is there anyone in America who has been awake for any of the past seven years who thinks that they would free lance, cross the boss? 

Since Bush did order the visit, he’s part of a group action, also known as a conspiracy, to commit illegal acts.  Those are outlined above and in the May 18th article.   Participation in such an activity is clearly defined in federal code:

Section 371. Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud United States

If two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. 18USC371 U.S. Code as of: 01/19/04

Senator Charles Schumer’s questioning of Gonzales lays the groundwork for impeachment of the president based on the most odious crime imaginable, trying to take advantage of a sick man, a man recovering from surgery, a man whose wife has insisted that there be no visitors.  It’s not only a “high crime,” it’s a heinous one as well.

 1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5