Gonzales’s testimony to the Senate today suggests that the Bush Administration may be daring Congress to impeach Gonzales.
This invites broader consideration of what GOP strategy and tactics are likely to be for the (interminable) 18 months that remain in Bush’s presidency. First, let’s consider (below the fold) what they hope to accomplish over that time.
For starters, recognize that they do not consider their presidency to be a failed one. They’ve been able to significantly shift government policy in practically every area, from foreign policy, to health care, to law enforcement, to resource management, to environmental regulation. They will be vested in trying to protect these "gains."
They also recognize by now that Bush’s low popularity dooms any prospect of moving any new legislation – so there is no incentive, whatsoever, to "play nice" on any topic.
So what are their objectives? I think there are five main ones:
- Ensure that it will be the next President who has to oversee the withdrawal from Iraq, frought with the risk of complete civil war erupting (the best prospect of preventing this will be to draw in the international community to begin serious discussion of an alternative peace-keeping force that might have a chance -- and that cannot happen 1. until it is clear that the US will actually withdraw, and 2. until it is clear that Bush is leaving the White House, voluntarily or otherwise; in the interim, it appears that the Bushies are investing most of their energy in arming the Sunnis -- once more doing the bidding of the Saudis -- and likely making a civil war that much more inevitable)
- Try to mitigate damage to the GOP in the 2008 elections: a. Block any progress by the current Congress, on any issue, wherever possible; b. Try to shift the "national debate" back to themes they think they can win with
- Try to consolidate, to the extent possible, all of their regulatory and cronyism gains. To the extent that they can, they will try to dismantle and/or dispose of any offices, capabilities, personnel, and/or records that might enable future Administrations to restore effective oversight over the GOP’s corporate financiers (for this, administration minions will be rewarded handsomely by those they’ve helped with cushy jobs come February 2009). Of course, they will also try to shovel as much cash at their buddies as possible on the way out the door.
- Institutionalize, to the extent possible, their vision of the "imperial presidency" for what they believe will be the benefit of all future presidents
- Avoid impeachment of President Bush
With today’s apparent gambit of daring Congress to impeach Gonzales, they may be advancing several of these goals.
To begin with, they probably assume the Democrats would be way too chicken to actually initiate articles of impeachment. Democratic inaction would demonstrate, yet again, that they are weaklings not to be feared, or negotiated with. Moreover, it would help establish the desired precedent that the executive branch can do whatever the hell it wants, and that Congress should have no pretension to real oversight. Presidential proclivities were not challenged in 1988 (after Iran Contra) or in 2007 -- given these precedents, what would be the grounds for challenging them in the future?
If Democrats did go after Gonzales, the administration would likely view it as a positive -- a welcome side-show. This is, after all, what recent experience has surely taught them.
Lessons from Libby
If one steps back to consider the net impact of the Scooter Libby fiasco, it was really to misdirect and consume vast amounts of attention, energy and resources on a trivial aspect of the larger treason – attention, energy and resources that arguably might have otherwise been directed at bigger crimes, and more senior figures in the Administration.
At the end of the day, Libby gets off scot-free, everyone else gets off scot-free, they are a year closer to the finish line, and all it cost them was 1 or 2 points of Presidential popularity (the difference between ~27% and ~25%).
Fitzgerald did just fine by the GOP. (I’ll leave to the imagination of others the appropriate punishments for anyone who ever uttered the word "Fitzmas" – which played absolutely perfectly into the GOP’s overall framing of this fiasco.)
What Happens if Gonzales is Impeached?
Looking forward, then, Rove probably figures that, if articles of impeachment against Gonzales were passed:
- The hub-bub would gum up the works with respect to Democrats moving any useful new legislation
- The effort required would interfere with provision of effective oversight (again, as the GOP looks to consolidate their gains and conceal all of their misdeeds and graft) [Note: to be fair, its not like there is going to be any effective oversight, anyway, if subpoenas are ignored – and there are doubtless good reasons that they will fight for their "imperial presidency" line to the death]
- The GOP would try to transform Gonzales into a martyr in the run-up to the 2008 elections, and accuse the Democrats of "just playing politics." And this may be a decent ploy: Gonzales’s actions as Attorney General look less patently illegal than, say, his actions as Presidential Counsel -- or the actions of other senior administration officials in domestic spying, torture, and forging intelligence. From their perspective, Gonzales's misconduct may well be the best turf on which to fight what might be their last major corruption-denial battle.
And at the end of the day, there would be one of two outcomes:
- Gonzales gets impeached. Yay, rah, boom. He would then be tried in court for breaking the law? (I’m all tingly with anticipation of the punditocracy breathlessly handicapping whether he should contest charges, or just plead guilty in order to accept a full pardon before Bush leaves office.)
- Gonzales does not get impeached. And we’re pretty much where we are now – the GOP can claim vindication for their imperial presidency outlook, and they would be, say, another 8 months closer to the finish line without their kingpins being touched.
Hmm. What to do?
Conclusion: To hell with Alberto Gonzales. He is as close to a finger-puppet as any cabinet officer of any Administration has been in the last 100 years. Now he's being dangled as bait.
If anybody is going to be impeached, it should be those who really deserve to be held accountable for the incalculable damage wrought in the last 6 years on the United States, its citizens, and its future citizens: namely George Bush and Dick Cheney.
Consider an alternative scenario that might have played out: if Congress had hit the ground running in January, with some sense of history and commitment to constitutional justice, and focused impeachment inquiries on, say, the obviously illegal domestic spying program, we would probably be approaching the denouement of a Bush impeachment right about now. Bush would either be removed in disgrace, or at the very least, clawing at the walls for his political survival – in which case he might be subject to leverage to stop pointlessly sending American soldiers into dismemberment and/or death in Iraq prior to the inevitable pull-out.
Instead, impeachment was off the table, Democrats have lost their political momentum (they are headed toward Bush territory in their own approval ratings), and we as a nation are paralyzed with respect to addressing the obvious problems threatening our liberty, security, and prosperity.
What to do now? Does it matter what we think? Democratic legislators dodged an honest debate in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq because they feared that voting "no" would make them look weak in the 2004 elections.
They will avoid an honest pursuit of justice in the near term because they worry that it would hurt their prospects in 2008 elections by making them look "too political." They take majority support by the American people in 2008 completely for granted.
Unfortunately they do not realize a fundamental truth: if at some point you are not willing to stand up for justice and for principle -- for something, for anything! -- you may as well just sit down, and shut up.
Its not as if Bush, Cheney and friends care what names Democrats call them, if name-calling is all Democrats are willing to do.
And its not like Democrats will get a lot of credit from the electorate for standing by and watching the ongoing train wreck when they could have done something to try to stop it.