Try to be best / ‘Cause you’re only a man / And a man’s gotta learn to take it

Try to believe / Though the going gets rough /That you gotta hang tough to make it

History repeats itself / Try and you’ll succeed / Never doubt that you’re the one / And you can have your dreams!

You’re the best! Around!

Nothing’s gonna ever keep you down!

You’re the Best! Around!

Nothing’s gonna ever keep you down!

Ganzalez is behaving like a 'defendant,' because that is how the Senate Judiciary Committee is treating him. It makes sense to me. I'd do the same thing.

have a classical education? Apparently not, or they would have learned by now...oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive...

Now when he blows it, it won't be because he wasn't "prepared" by his handelers. Now when he answers to questions about his lies, he will have had expert liars show him how to be, well, an expert liar. Imagine, if you will, that the highest attorney in the land needs to be preped like a criminal to answer why he wasn't/isn't a criminal. That alone should convince anyone he should be launched. Not in Bush's little world though.

Maybe if he just told the truth, he wouldn't have to train so hard. How hard is it to remember "I can't remember?"

It's hard work because they need to tailor Gonzales' testimony around what the Democrats know or are likely to be able to prove. He isn't going to tell the truth, or at least not the whole truth, any more than is absolutely necessary.

Which is what any moderately competent cross-examiner will make of his tortured, halting and lame attempts to justify not just the firing - but the lying about the firing - of US Attorneys.

Story of the day: Part of the reason given for the termination of David Iglesias - who I just learned was the model for the Tom Cruise character in A Few Good Men - was his absence from his office.

Apparently, Iglesias is still a reserve military officer - his absences were based on required military service - and to fire him based on honoring of his miltary commitments is a violation of USERRA (The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act).

These idiots shoot themselve in the foot at every opportunity!

but this reminds me of: "Innocent people are not suspects, and suspects are not innocent people."

A hour before this was posted, TPMMuckraker.com commented on this same WaPo article using the same Rocky reference about Eye of the Tiger.

TPMMuckraker.com: "It's a scene reminiscent of a training montage from the Rocky movies...(excerpt) You can almost hear "Eye of The Tiger" in the background."

In my line of work, when you take someone else's ideas and don't give credit for it, that's called plagiarism. And if someone beats you to it, you don't get to claim that you came up with on your own.

Am I missing something?

Alex Koppelman, please respond.

Guantanamo Bay with corpus delicti for our 3,254 + 250K Iraqis.

NO SECRET HERE Al. Too bad that Nuremburg is as RMN said of the American People:

"How quickly they forget".

GIG'EM Dr. Gates,

Clean up WRAMC and the House of "We the People", that Housecleaning must come First and Gonzales will help as he does the NSA "cut and run" Secret Oval Office Dance.

BUSHCO "A National Security Threat".

Just a coincidence -- I hadn't read TPMMuckraker on this until you pointed it out. The idea that Rocky was the best thing to refer to was the first thing that sprang to mind when I read the WaPo article, and since I haven't seen any of the movies, "Eye of the Tiger" was the only reference I could think to make. An editor suggested the allusion to Mickey, Rocky's trainer. Thanks for your concern.

You missed a development -- David Iglesias, the fired New Mexico US Attorney is filing a claim under Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA). So what is USERRA -- well it's that statute that says that prohibits dismissing military reserve and National Guard members for doing their duty.

The thing is, the Justice Department, when trying to make a case that Iglseias had been fired for performance and political reasons made a big deal about the amount of leeave he took, and called him an absentee landlord. Problem, the leave he took, 45 days, was to fulfill his obligations as a reserve Captain in the US NAVY JAG Corps. Other problem, the Bush administration has cited enforecement of USERRA as a very major policy priority (i.e., Justice department officials who do not push this policy should be fired for not following policy.

However, the other problem is that if Iglesias was fired for annoying Pete Domenici, Rep. Heather Wilson, Rove, etc, and the Republicans by not bringing voter fraud cases, or at the behest of Karl Rove, well that is a violation fo the Hatch Act, a serious offense, which should land Rove, Gonzales, Domenici, Wilson et al in very hot water indeed.

But, oh dear, Justice, with Gonzales apparent approval already gave the absentee landlord explantion to the Senate, and well, if they withdrew that, well then that is more lying to Congress, which is what has Gonzales and Justice in hot-water already.

So now you see a quandry -- how can Gonzales maintain that Iglesias was fired for the perfomance reasons given (Navy Reserve duty) and not have to resign and face trouble under USERRA (or given the firing criteria fire himself for ignoring Bush Administration priorities), or withdraw the performance reason leaving only the political, and have to resign becuase of the Hatch act efforts to influence an ongoing case with political connotations. He cannot really argue incompentence ("I did not know it was illegal," from an AG who recently issued a press release over his name about USERRA), although that too should get him fired.

What it coems down to is he gets to pick, either:

* the USERRA rope, and hang with Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty, who referenced this reason in e-mails, or William Moschella who gave this reason to the House Judiciary Committee -- of course they are probably also in trouble if it was a Hatch Act violation; or

* The Hatch Act rope and hand with Rove, Pete Domenici, Heather Wilson and nice company from Justice and the White House.

Of course the problem is self important Senators, who preen for the camera. When will one of them realise that talking about what a great guy he is is less important than showing what a great Senator he is by getting straight down to asking the tough questions:

"So, Attorney General Gonzales, are you familiar with USERRA?"

"So, Attorney General Gonzales, are you familiar with the Hatch Act?"

"So Attorney General, was the statement that the US Attorneys were fired for performance reasons false"

"So Attorney General, was the specific reason given for Iglesias false"

"So Attorney General doe you stand by the absentee landlord explanation?"

"So Moschella lied?" 'How long did you know this statement was false"

"So Attorney General, if Iglesesias was not fired for performance reasons that just leaves the political, right?"

"Are you familiar with the Hatch Act?"

"So why are you not resigning?"

"Have you appointed an independent prosecutor to investigate whethe the firing or any of these US Attorneys violated Federal Law?"

"If a Justice Department or White House official takes the fifth in such an investigation will you dismiss them or insist on their immediate resignation?"

"Isn't everything you said so far and argument that you are not guilty because you are an incompetent?"

"Why has the President not asked for your resignation on performance gorunds then? Should you be fired on performance grounds?"