The Firing of the US Attorneys & Administration’s PR Problem
I haven’t said much about the kerfuffle (to us a word that James Taranto often uses)* over the Justice Department’s handling of the firing of eight US attorneys. In my post last Friday on communication skills and leadership, I said that Attorney General Alberto Gonzales should resign not because I believe he did anything illegal or unethical, but because he has so far been unable to explain why it was the attorneys were fired.
So far no evidence has emerged showing that Gonzales did anything wrong (besides his failure to explain what was going on). The firing of the attorneys did not serve to prevent any cases against leading Republicans or advisors to the president (or this top aides) from going forward. Indeed, investigations against several Republican lawmakers continue apace.
Some Democrats have descended into high dudgeon as evidence emerges about cooordination between the White House and Justice Department on the firing of the federal prosecutors. But, given that these officials serve at the pleasure of the president, there is nothing wrong with such coordination. Once again, the problem has been the Administration’s ability (particularly that of the Attorney General) to explain its (perfectly legal) actions.
I’m not the first conservative blogger (or writer) to suggest that Gonzales should step down. Nearly two months ago the National Review editorialized that he should resign because he failed “defend the administration and its policies even when they deserve defense” (Via Powerline).**
This whole hullabaloo once again shows two of the key failures of the President — that he is excessively loyal to his appointees (often, it seems, putting that loyalty ahead of his policy goals) and his seeming indifference to public relations.
The job of the head of a federal agency (particularly a Cabinet Department) requires more than administrative skill (and it doesn’t seem Gonzales had shown such skill), it also involves communication. A cabinet member needs be able to explain controversial actions. And Gonzales has failed to do that.
It’s unfortunate that neither he nor his advisors anticipated that firestorm that would follow the firing of these federal prosecutors. They should have known better, given that they had been considering the actions for some time and only dismissed most of the attorneys after the Democrats had taken control of Congress. I would dare say the president would enjoy higher approval for his policies today if his advisors spent as much time as did those of his predecessor in developing an effective “public relations” shop.
Simply put, the president hasn’t learned to spin things as well as Clinton. Nor even, in the case of the firing of the US attorneys, to offer a satisfactory explanation for a perfectly legal action.
*******
*Perhaps hullabaloo might be a better word to describe the fuss over the goings-on there.
**Conservatives bloggers have faulted him for delegating decision-making and not being a “hands on” Attorney General while noting that he has not pursued pushing particularly conservative policies at the Justice Department.
25 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
This kind of ties in with your previous thread. The Democrats in congress seem to be able to muster all kinds of enthusiasm for, and put the lion’s share of their time and energy into investigating non-scandals like this and the Plame Game, while completely failing to spend any time coming up with policies to protect our country from terrorism.
That said, I have no defense for Gonzales. He is thoroughly over his head as an executive. He is the Michael Scott of the Bush Administration. And Johnny Sutton is the Dwight Schrute.
Comment by V the K — May 21, 2007 @ 11:36 am - May 21, 2007
I wonder from what state one can “descend into high dudgeon”? Presumably only from higher dudgeon.
[Maggie, I wondered if somebody would catch that. I was trying to be clever.
-- Dan]
We should evolve a system for measuring the altitude of dudgeon; perhaps related to the gruntle factor…
Comment by Maggie Leber — May 21, 2007 @ 12:00 pm - May 21, 2007
The Democrats in congress seem to be able to muster all kinds of enthusiasm for, and put the lion’s share of their time and energy into investigating non-scandals like this and the Plame Game, while completely failing to spend any time coming up with policies to protect our country from terrorism.
Dryly put, the Dems know what Cotton Mather did; hunting witches serves as a rather excellent means of diverting attention away from your own mismanagement.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — May 21, 2007 @ 12:58 pm - May 21, 2007
Dream on. BUSH FAILED TO STOP 9-11, period.
Comment by Helen — May 21, 2007 @ 1:20 pm - May 21, 2007
Gonzales has never been able to explain anything. I did not like him and did not trust him when I discovered that in the renewal of the Patriot Act, he slipped in a provision after it left the committed that DEMS were on and that provision required the Deputy AGs to be approved by the Senate but then they could be fired by the AG and replaced without approval. When the Dems took over the Senate, they changed that. It was kind of sneaky for anyone to pull off. I know everyone voted for it, but to slip something in after it left committee shows a lack of integrity. And to basically abolish the limitation on appointments by merely firing the person who was approved and appointmeing someone else without approval just seems wrong to me–whether it is D or R.
Comment by Kevin Norte — May 21, 2007 @ 4:47 pm - May 21, 2007
Gonzales’ problem was that he responded at all.
He should have told Congress to go scratch and left it at that.
Comment by Vince P — May 21, 2007 @ 5:07 pm - May 21, 2007
Gonzales supposedly fired some US attorneys – something that he is entitled to do as the head of his own department.
Janet Reno gave the orders to kill women and children at Waco and Ruby Ridge, and also had Elian Gonzales kidnapped and deported at gunpoint.
I’m sorry – who was the corrupt AG again?
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — May 21, 2007 @ 5:59 pm - May 21, 2007
Right!! If only Bush had a good PR team, everything would be, well, peachy. (The lengths to which the mental gymnastics push you….)
Comment by sean — May 21, 2007 @ 6:14 pm - May 21, 2007
Tell me, is it just a coincidence that within days of getting an Amnesty Bill that guarantees permanent Republican minority status, Democrats cave on the Iraq funding bill?
Comment by V the K — May 21, 2007 @ 6:46 pm - May 21, 2007
If being a poor spokesman for the President or the Administration’s policies is cause for firing an AG, then I would submit few AGs would pass muster beyond the first 100 days. John Ashcroft, altho a darling of social conservatives, was a lighting rod of embarassment for Bush… remember the “naked” statutes at Justice? Remember the pressure placed on midlevel Justice administrators to attend Ashcroft’s “Bible Study” lunch hour? Remember that he so botched the first PatAct, the reprise of PatAct2x coupled with Ashcroft’s miserable record and standing with former Senate (52-48) colleagues, all but insured that IF Ashcroft stayed thru Bush’s 2nd term, it’d be more division, more acrimony, more partisan battles… he’d have never made it.
Dan I wonder if conservatives continue to hold it against Bush that he chose a replacement for Ashcroft who didn’t carry the same social conservative views that AG1 played out in public with such candor? I doubt that Gonzales is anymore or anyless competent than the last 4-5 AGs. Certainly, he’s no Reno –thank God. And up to this point, he was no Ashcroft “Damn the Lighting Rods” let’s go stand in the T-storm.
I have this sense that when conservatives are tossing the faggots onto the flames for Ganzales’ burning, it’s partly sour grapes… maybe mostly since those people can be viciously vindictive and petty.
The simple truth is that if Bush wants him to stay, he ought to stay. If Gonzales thinks he’s hampering the DOJ or the Bush Administration, he can resign. It’s not the province of armchair Monday-morning quaterbacks in the blogosphere to pick Bush’s cabinet. If that were the case, I doubt the extremes represented in the blog could ever agree on anything… except the “right” to complain endlessly.
I remember some of the social conservatives damning Bush’s inner circle for pushing Ashcroft out… and then some of the rumored replacements for AG (like Giuliani) shutting down those social conservatives from any further speculation. I also recall that the social conservatives thought Ashcroft needed the time off to ready a Prez bid which, thank God, he didn’t pursue.
Gonzales is/was fine for the job that remained in the wake of Ashcroft’s tenure. Sometimes being loyal to your cabinet is an asset… like sticking to your principles when it comes to the WOT. You see it as a fault; ok. I see it as a mark of character… like RReagan thought before he knew the full scoop on Iran Contra for Lebannon hostages, sometimes being loyal to your staff is a hallmark of leadership.
Frankly, I hope Gonzales stays… just in spite of the Democrats and MSM pundits and FarRightFringe social conservatives clamoring for a bloodletting. But if he goes, I hope Bush tells the conservatives to stick it and picks a moderate to fill the position… heck, maybe even a career DOJ wonk.
Comment by Michigan-Matt — May 21, 2007 @ 8:13 pm - May 21, 2007
I’m afraid Gonzales is guilty of what a lot of lazy bureaucrats are guilty of. Doing a crappy laid back job for the American people. How bout we fire all the federal workers who exhibit the same? He was too lazy and bored to teach the media and the people why he and the President could hire and fire attorneys at will, just like other Administrations have done.Republicans have a horrible habit of assuming the people and the media will eventually figure out the truth of matters without getting dirty and explaining and teaching. In the meantime the leftists can sway the uninformed and uneducated until the well is poisoned. They need to grow up to this not so new reality. If not for the new media, the Republicans would be in full rout. And Peter above is right on the money. Reno, Clintons AG murdered 72 Texans and served her full term. She did take full responsibility though. I want AG Gonzales to stay as long as W wants him too, mostly to stick it in the eye of the Dems, who are surrounded by crooks. How bout the AG resigns the day, Jefferson, Reid, Murtha, Conyers and Kennedy do?
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — May 21, 2007 @ 9:56 pm - May 21, 2007
Bet you all thought Nixon had a little PR problem too, huh?
Comment by Kevin — May 21, 2007 @ 11:24 pm - May 21, 2007
Once again, Kevin, your snarky comments do little to advance the debate and shows a tendency of Bush Administration critics to make claims about its corruption (by comparing it to the Nixon Administration) than offer any evidence to substantiate the allegation.
Comment by GayPatriotWest — May 21, 2007 @ 11:46 pm - May 21, 2007
So how many more, in the administration, should be tossed overboard as soon as the liberals start their bitch-fest? Should they toss Rice, Chao, and/or Spellings for good measure? Hell, look at Wolfowitz. You don’t even have to be part of the administration anymore to suffer the wrath of deranged Neo-Socialists.
Would tossing everybody overboard pacify the fcuktard libs? No. SO why not tell them to shove it up, left?
Comment by ThatGayConservative — May 22, 2007 @ 1:45 am - May 22, 2007
How bout we fire all the federal workers who exhibit the same?
How about we replace them with illegal aliens on z-visas at 1/3 the price?
Comment by V the K — May 22, 2007 @ 5:10 am - May 22, 2007
As I said on another thread,
We have a war profiteer and an identity thief calling for a “no-confidence” vote on the AG and we’re supposed to take this whole bastardization of an “investigation” seriously? C’mon.
These poor, spineless twats on the left can’t get anything done and they damn well know it. Meanwhile they get to waste time and money on meaningless investigations. We were told that they would be able to “focus on important issues”. Well, it’s been five months and they ain’t started yet. They can’t legislate, so they have to waste time investigating and criminalizing their opponents.
The “American” left is completely worthless. At least a Three Stooges picture is funny. They’re just sad.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — May 22, 2007 @ 6:05 am - May 22, 2007
What’s worse, we have smarter-than-thou types who believe we should just toss whomever the libs get their panties in a bunch over. Sure good communication is an important trait for leaders, but just because they don’t tell the libs to go burn in hell isn’t a negative.
The reality is that throwing people overboard isn’t going to make the liberals like us. Bush tossed them Rumsfeld and they haven’t stopped. They won’t be pacified until Bush and any other Republican is gone and they assume what they consider their rightful seat of power. And even then they STILL won’t like you.
Instead of getting all pissy at Gonzales, how about getting mad and the Republicans who are rolling over, playing dead and allowing this wretched show trial to continue? How about grabbing your sack and telling the libs to shove it sideways?
Long story short, you can have all the hifalutin “civil discourse” you want, but you’re the only one who’s giving quarter. You’re not going to get it from the libs. They’re NOT going to like you and they’re NOT going to respect you. You’re NOT going to persuade the rabid, hate-filled sociopathic Neo-Socialists.
Quit demanding the resignation of Gonzales and start demanding the resignation of the worthless libs who are wasting time and money on this. Demand the resignation of the lying bastards who are hell bent on convincing the American public that we’re evil criminals who must be done away with. Qut agreeing with the libs and telling the American people that we’re wrong.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — May 22, 2007 @ 6:31 am - May 22, 2007
Look at it this way,
We toss Gonzales under the bus and then Bush has to waste time finding an AG THEY approve of. Do we really need that? Suddenly Gonzales doesn’t look so bad, eh? The alternative is letting the libs decide who gets to be AG. Since they couldn’t take away CIC from Bush, then they’ll settle for determining the next AG and it wouldn’t surprise me if they blocked every nomination till the end of the term.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — May 22, 2007 @ 6:50 am - May 22, 2007
If Gonzales does get tossed under the bus, at least he won’t be railroaded into prison, like he did to Ramos and Campeon.
I have absolutely zero sympathy for the bastard.
Comment by V the K — May 22, 2007 @ 7:11 am - May 22, 2007
#12 and #13. Christ, Kevin! Didn’t you know that you aren’t allowed to even marginally ape the writing style of gay patriot when commenting on gay patriot west’s posts? When commenting on GPW’s posts, you must either agree with him or write a ten page term paper outlining your arguments with complete evidence and footnotes. Otherwise, you suffer from what they call in this part of the universe “Bush Derangement Syndrome” or whatever they are callling it this week.
Further, you have to understand that they see everything through the Bush Derangement Syndrome lens. I can see, Kevin, that you were comparing the perception of the 20some% of Americans that love and support Bush with the perception of the 20some% of Americans that loved and supported Nixon. I can see that the comparison was between those unable to see the corruption of Nixon’s administration and those unable to see the corruption of Bush’s administration. But, as you can see, your comparison was twisted and turned into, in the eyes of one who believes the Bush administration problems to be solely problems of public relations, one of comparing Nixon and Bush. How convenient! Off the hook! (And not in the same way as the kids are saying these days…)
You are not advancing the debate, Kevin, unless your post looks something like a sycophantic stalker’s love letter. Get with the program.
Comment by sean — May 22, 2007 @ 10:43 am - May 22, 2007
sean, exactly who on this forum is a Bush sycophant who never criticizes Bush policy? Name names. Because, frankly, Bush and the Republicans take much more hurt from any one person on the right in this forum than you and the entire lower-case klan combined have ever leveled at the Democrats.
So, tell us, please. Who are the uncritical, in-the-tank, Bush cheerleaders in this forum? Give us names. Spelled properly if you can manage it.
Comment by V the K — May 22, 2007 @ 11:10 am - May 22, 2007
That from the 5some% that love and support the liberal Congress.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — May 22, 2007 @ 1:24 pm - May 22, 2007
gee, sean… I thought Dan nailed Kevin to the wall on Kevin’s attempt at building an alternate uberLeft universe where Nixon’s corrupt rule could be compared with the uberLeft’s ranting “corruption charge” against BushCo… even tho’ there’s been -0- corruption in the Bush Administration… and we’re almost into the last 1/3rd of his two terms.
By that time in Clinton’s Administration, he’d already been impeached, he’d been kicked to the cottage couch by his lying and corrupt wife, now Senator Clinton, for adultery… which is usually grounds for divorce in families where political convenience doesn’t trump integrity… and his cabinet was leaving his stinking, sinking ship in droves.
Hmmm, I think you got it wrong… you MEANT to compare Nixon –who was almost impeached– with Clinton, right? I can understand your confusion… they are/were both men of -0- character.
btw sean, it’s a thread about US Atty General Gonzales and the call of a conservative (Dan) pro-Bush blogger for the AG to step aside. No BDS, sean. Nice try tho
Comment by Michigan-Matt — May 22, 2007 @ 1:34 pm - May 22, 2007
True, TGC. The Air Pelosi Congress is hated much more than Bush.
Good line, vis-a-vis, the No-Confidence Vote on Gonzales, through Instapundit: “Dr. Coburn informed Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) of his intention to amend the Democrats’ resolution expressing “no confidence” in Attorney General Alberto Gonzales with a resolution expressing “no confidence” in Congress’ ability to balance the budget.”
TC, you da man!
Comment by V the K — May 22, 2007 @ 1:35 pm - May 22, 2007
Do you all realize that the Dhimmicrats have spent more time and money trying to get rid of Gonzales than they have trying to get rid of the insurgencies in Iraq?
Talk about misplaced priorities.
And even funnier – they still haven’t been able to get rid of Gonzales, much less the terrorists. Bunch of paper tigers is what they are.
I know a good way to have the Dhimmicrats back off on the AG – we’ll tell them that the hearings will be moderated by Fox News. That way, none of them will show up.
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — May 22, 2007 @ 5:11 pm - May 22, 2007