NEWS ANALYSIS
Gonzales' plight puts Bush at risk
Aides focus on keeping the controversy at
Justice from spreading.
By Doyle McManus
Times Staff Writer
March 18, 2007
WASHINGTON — As more Republicans called last week on Alberto R.
Gonzales to resign, President Bush's aides began to look beyond the
attorney general and focus on preventing the controversy over the
firing of federal prosecutors from spreading — and endangering Karl
Rove, the president's top political advisor.
"This is not going to go away," warned Joseph E. DiGenova, a former
U.S. attorney in the Reagan administration. "I'm sure the president is
going to let it go as long as he can … but there's only so much
bleeding he can take."
The fracas over the fired prosecutors reflects a larger underlying
problem for Bush: His political standing as president, already battered
by the war in Iraq and domestic missteps like the handling of Hurricane
Katrina, has only continued to erode since his party lost control of
Congress in November.
Initially, the dispute centered on the Justice Department, Gonzales and
his top aides. But documents released last week suggested that Rove and
former White House Counsel Harriet E. Miers were also involved in the
decision to fire eight U.S. attorneys after the 2004 election. That
brought the issue to the threshold of the Oval Office and prompted
reporters to ask whether Bush had been involved.
"I want you to be clear here: Don't go dropping it at the president's
door," White House spokesman Tony Snow said Friday when asked about
Bush's involvement.
Although U.S. attorneys are presidential appointees who can be removed
at the president's discretion, the firings have flared into a
potentially damaging issue for the administration because of
indications that they may have resulted from political pressure.
Gonzales and his aides initially told Congress that the prosecutors
were fired because their performance was unsatisfactory. But documents
released last week showed that officials also discussed whether the
U.S. attorneys had been "loyal Bushies," in the words of one Justice
Department e-mail.
Democrats, with their new majorities in the House and Senate, quickly
jumped on the issue.
Bush's diminished popularity, combined with his administration's
disdain for Congress' view of legislative prerogatives, have given the
president a slimmer margin for error — even with members of his own
party.
"You've got Republicans in Congress who have run out their string with
him," said Norman J. Ornstein, a congressional scholar at the largely
conservative American Enterprise Institute.
The shift to Democratic control has accelerated the controversy.
"Elections matter," Ornstein said. "If the Republicans were still in
charge of Congress, even by one vote, the reaction to this would have
been that it was just a personnel matter. The administration might
still have had a problem, but it would have taken a lot longer to
develop."
Several leading Republicans said they expected Gonzales to resign in
the next few weeks.
They asked to speak on condition of anonymity because their comments
conflicted with Bush's public position that his attorney general does
not need to leave.
Two Republican senators, John E. Sununu of New Hampshire and Gordon H.
Smith of Oregon, and one Republican congressman, Dana Rohrabacher of
Huntington Beach, have publicly called on Gonzales to resign.
Others have said privately that the attorney general should leave.
And no leading Republican in Congress has stepped forward to defend
Gonzales — a sign that any political support he once enjoyed has
virtually disappeared.
Democrats in the Senate and House have said they want Miers and Rove,
President Bush's chief political strategist, to testify about their
roles in the decision to fire the prosecutors. Rove, Miers and Gonzales
have been among the president's closest aides for more than a decade;
all worked for him when he was governor of Texas in the 1990s.
Early reports had indicated that the idea of the firings originated
with Miers, but on Friday, Snow said that may not be the case. "At this
juncture, people have hazy memories," he said.
Snow said the White House has not decided whether Rove or Miers should
testify or whether to release internal documents to Congress, which has
the power to subpoena witnesses — Justice Department officials and
others.
But the president can assert a counterclaim of executive privilege to
shield internal deliberations at the White House.
White House Counsel Fred F. Fielding spent much of last week on Capitol
Hill trying to determine what Congress would insist on, officials said,
but he gave no indication of what the administration was prepared to
give.
"This is one more chapter in the defense of Karl Rove," said one
leading GOP figure who insisted on anonymity because he was speaking
ill of the president's most powerful aide. "This isn't accountability,
it's damage control, and it's protection for Karl."
But other Republicans defended Rove.
"There's no suggestion of illegality in anything he has done," DiGenova
said. "He wasn't the one making inaccurate representations on Capitol
Hill. I would think that would trump any demand [from Congress] for
testimony."
Rove, speaking at a university last week, dismissed the controversy as
groundless. "We're at a point where people want to play politics with
it," he said.
Some Republicans in Congress have been gauging the electoral
cross-currents along with the Democrats.
The two Republican senators who have called on Gonzales to resign face
reelection campaigns next year.
Another senator who faces reelection, John Cornyn of Texas, normally
one of the White House's most reliable allies, has said he was
disappointed in the attorney general.
"The appearances are troubling," Cornyn told reporters last week. "But
in Texas we believe in having a fair trial, and then we have the
hanging," he added.
Gonzales compounded his own vulnerability by being high-handed with
Congress, Ornstein noted.
"He has treated Congress with the back of his hand," he said. "He
stonewalled everything, even when he had Republican chairmen. He built
no reservoir of support."
As a result, he said, "we're seeing what I call the battered Congress
syndrome. After years of being slapped around by the White House, at
some point there's a counter-reaction."
Finally, the Justice Department and White House made matters worse by
repeatedly issuing inconsistent and incomplete accounts of how the U.S.
attorneys had been fired.
"The incompetence has been amazing," DiGenova charged. "Managing
crises, beginning with preventing crises, is what life in Washington is
about…. But these guys didn't have a plan ready to answer questions
once the problem became public. They still don't have their stories
straight.
"There are too many Stepford husbands in this administration:
young men who are perfectly coiffed and have great clothes, but very
few of them have ever been in a courtroom," he added.
Charles O. Jones, a presidential scholar at the University of
Wisconsin, said the controversy had weakened a presidency that was
already fragile.
"By the normal measures of electoral support and popular support, Bush
had the lowest political standing of any president on record when he
was reelected in 2004," Jones said.
"He argued that his reelection alone gave him political capital, but it
was damned slim," Jones said. "And since then, there has been a decline
in his position — a steady decline. There's not a whole lot of
political capital left for him to draw on."
The fragility of Bush's mandate, Jones said, stems partly from his
governing style: an "executive approach" that rests on unilateral
action instead of a "legislative approach" that relies on patient
negotiation with Congress.
"That approach can produce positive results … and you can argue that it
did after Sept. 11," Jones said.
But "it means you'd better get it right, because if you screw up,
you're going to lose your supporters too.
"It's Bush's governing style, and no one can expect that someone like
Bush can simply switch styles," he added.
Copyright 2007 Los Angeles Times