As for why now, it was reported when Rove resigned that Bush's Chief of Staff had put out the word that people were to resign by the end of August or they would be expected to remain through the end of the term in 2009.

Additionally, it's the end of August, nothing is happening, Congress is in recess, and therefore, arguably, this does not appear to be connected to the investigations into Gonzales.

To me, the why at all is more interesting. He was pretty apparently committed to not backing down to congress despite his obvious incompetence, perjury, and the politicization of the DOJ.

The real question, though, is who will take over at DHS. I believe Josh over at the Mothership suggested that Gonzales would never resign because he knows too much and Congress would only approve someone who will answer their question. In other words, that Gonzo needed to stick around to protect all the administration's secrets. So, we can expect Chertoff to do that at DoJ, but what about the person who replaces him at DHS? Dems need to stick it to Bush on that confirmation.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

HE DIDN'T EVEN OFFER A REASON FOR HIS RESIGNATION!

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

=== As for why now, it was reported when Rove resigned that Bush's Chief of Staff had put out the word that people were to resign by the end of August or they would be expected to remain through the end of the term in 2009. ===

My guess is that AGAG was stonewalling the Abramoff, Weldon, Wade and other public corruption investigations and someone was about to blow the whistle on him.

Or yet another example of the frightening unwillingness of Bush appointees to think for themselves...

Josh Bolton says we have to resign by August or we have to stay through 'til the end....OK! I'll leave!

If this is, in fact, the reason, then the "Karl Rove is a mastermind" is an appallingly ludicrous theme perpetuated by traditional media...A mastermined without a backbone? Who blindly follows orders? I might be willing to believe that Gonzalez stepped down because Bolton finally forced him out. But Rove?

I'm thinking Bush will put up Meier as a replacement.

Heh, no seriously... Now we get to see if the Reid-Bush "agreement" on recess appointments will stand firm.

~~~~~~~~~~~
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur.

Come visit PROJECT: Lucidity
Where everybody knows your name...
unless you use a pseudonym

I think Gonzo's replacement will be that other bastion of honor and integrity, Ed Meese.

Why now? Two words:

Recess appointment.

Or did you think they wouldn't do what they said they wouldn't do?

I think he resigned because a decision to pursue perjury and obstruction has been made and that the WH gets a little distance from it if the subject is a civilian.

J. McCutchen

Why now?
No great mystery. Been obvious to those familiar with how Bush operated as Guvnuh of the Grayte Stayte and should have been obvious from the very start of his presidency

Each and every time Bush gets a hard push back he caves.

So much for the famous Bush Loyalty!!! All thrown under the bus. Another lie bites the dust

The House should open impeachment proceedings against Cheney

Be gone by Crimmus

An iron rule of his reigns. The only way to deal with bush is to tell him to eff off

Alberto Gonzales lost his job,
Because he always liked to fob;
When Bush saw what Al had done;
He gave him the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

I have to admit I am surprised.  I expected Gonzales to stonewall for the duration so now I am wondering: 

Just how big are Rove's and Gonzales' safety nets and who is holding them?  It is difficult to imagine W would easily relinquish two such loyal lieutenants who between them probably know all his secrets.  And both men's fortunes are so closely linked with W's that it is equally difficult to think that they would leave without a really soft spot to land.

Who from W's Texas posse, those loyal to W personally and not his family, are now gone and how many remain?  What positions do those remaining hold?

Is W being isolated?  If so, by whom?  The Chenyites or the realists?

Interesting times, aren't they.

After being waterboarded at an undisclosed location, he now recalls everything. And that is why he had to resign.

What I see is a lame duck trying to cure lameness by replacing its appendages - don't think it's going to work.

I'll take a stab at the timing that assumes some planning & political logic. Gonzales quit near the time of Rove, Snow, and other lesser lights. Not only is there some kind of clearing out going on but also one of the most controversial Bush advisors. They are leaving in front of another Congressional round on Iraq. Although Bush has gotten his way eqach time. It keeps getting harder. Could it be an effort to improve the administration's image as at least quasi-reasonable in its efforts to win support for the surge?

I doubt my own reasoning here, but one always looks for a larger pattern. Probably it's something more venal and sleazier.

I am thinking that the new appointment, confirmation process and hearings are going to be a prime fighting keyboardist concern and suck a lot of blogosphere coverage away from the primary race and Iraq

Well what about this consideration. Who is suppose to represent the legal arm of Congress to enforce subopenas, investigations and perjury and any illegal acts of the executive branch.  Would that not be the Atty Genreral?

Nothing was going to proceed with Gonzales, a bogged down confirmation hearing means the people do not have an Atty General, right?

So it sounds like a pretty shrewd move. Similiar to when Rove's aide inserted the lack of confirmation for 'interim AG appts' in the new Patriot Act bill and the planning was to have the interim's serve until the end of the administration by either not submitting names or stonewalling on confirmations.

I suspect that all these folks leaving justice are simply the players Rove needs to execute the legal tsunami he plans to unleash to steal the 08 Presidential elections.  Virtually all of the recent resignations in Justice have been his minions, Scholzman, Gonzales, Griffin and Gonzales chief of staff, along with Monica were the masterminds behind the entire 'voter fraud' and indictments before elections, no?

Gonzo's resignation gets Leahy off the hook, now he can show indignation and not be expected to do anything of substance.

"He's argued that the administration can hold American citizens as enemy combatants, without guarantees of trial."

Good Heavens!! THIS is suppose to be the 'people's Attorney? 

Clements makes Yoo and Gonzales look like eminent legal scholars. And he is characterized as having a precise and clear intellect based on such arguments. The American citizen is doomed our civil liberties are imperiled and habeus corpus along with the US Constituiton are nothing but paper to Clements.

The petulance of Bush in announcing the Gonzales resignation made me think that Gonzales was a trade for something. Maybe, Warner's silence? Perhaps, Warner told Bush you either send Gonzales packing or I will lead the GOP rebellion against Iraq and possibly call for impeachment?

Sidney Blumenthal has an interesting answer to the question of "why now" over on Salon.com. In short, his suggestion is that it's the inevitable result of Karl Rove's resignation two weeks ago:

In the weeks leading up to his resignation, Gonzales was undoubtedly aware of the various investigations into his activities, the avenues being pursued and the witnesses questioned, not all of them in public. As a practiced attorney, he knew that once he left government service he would become less interesting to investigators and that whatever revelations were unearthed would have less political impact. The logic of his resignation became indisputable from his own narrow interest and the larger interest of the administration. But the resignation of Rove severed his lifeline to his political control agent. Without Rove, Gonzales was adrift.

From the beginning of his rise with George W. Bush until the day of his abrupt resignation, Alberto Gonzales was anointed, directed and protected by Karl Rove. At the Department of Justice, Gonzales served as Rove's figurehead. In the real line of authority, the attorney general, a constitutional officer, reported to the White House political aide. Bush did not nickname Gonzales "Fredo," after the weak brother in "The Godfather," without reason.

<snip>

From the start, Rove and Gonzales were secret sharers. But one was "the Architect" and the other was "Fredo." With Rove's resignation, Gonzales lost the political and policy hand that had guided him all along. When the puppet master departed, the puppet collapsed in a heap.

I really don't think it's all that complicated. Bush never fires anyone under pressure. That would make him look weak. While the heat is on, he stands firm, spits at the enemy, and refuses to back an inch on anything.

Then when the pressure is off, it's the knife in the neck for 'bringing all this heat down on the family.' Getting caught is the ultimate disloyalty, but executions are not to be done in front of outsiders.

And of course, there's a safety factor. Congress has already demonstrated that it will not contest the Bush White House's overruling of its subpoena's. So it doesn't matter where Abu Gonzales goes.

He can be pardoned for any crimes, and he can also, even in private life, rely on executive privilege, so he can't be brought up before a grand jury or subpoenaed by congress.

What's the downside. We've seen this before, we'll see it again.

There are two possibilities:

1) As, Josh, a couple of people noted above, a recess appointment is a distinct possibility. If ever there was a time when Bush needed to do an end-run around Congress to save his hide, it's now. And he's played the card enough times for it to be clear that even in lower-stakes situations (e.g., Bolten at the UN), he doesn't hesitate. If Bush goes this route, it's AG Chertoff. Be very afraid.

2) This is Rove's parting shot at the Dems. This is a little counter-intuitive, but, let me explain. Bush will almost certainly nominate someone who the Dems will never accept. The Republican machine will paint the Dems as unreasonable and obstructionist; part of the "problem with Washington." The "F" word (filibuster) will be brandished far and wide. Bush can probably ride this until the next time Congress heads out of Washington, then make the recess appointment. And that's probably Chertoff.

What Reid needs to do now is call the Senate back in session, arguing that it is indeed urgent that we have a new, permanent AG and that the Democrats are looking forward to working in a bi-partisan fashion to make this happen quickly. This averts the imminent threat of a recess appointment (this idea is not mine) and preempts the Republican charge of obstructing the process of appointing a new AG.

--Ken Riley

yep, I agree.

HAHAHAHAHHAHA :-)

Favorite comment about Lil' Fredo Loyal Hispanic American Bushie:

“Alberto Gonzales is the first Attorney General who thought the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth were three different things....”

Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel

First off, kudos to Josh and crew for the big scoop and the classy follow-through. Must be fun around TPM HQ today.

However, I don't think I'm the only one who is uneasy about this for a reason I can't place. Maybe it's just the seven-year hangover, but none of the explanations I've seen (in dozens of comments) satisfies me.

For now, I'll just conclude that my uneasiness IS the result of seven years of absurdity and that this development is actually a good thing.

Amazing, isn't it, the place we've arrived at? Where the AG blatantly flouts the law, makes war against civil liberties, tells bold-faced lies to the Legislature, has a massive pile of evidence and testimony against him, and then when he resigns, it's taken for granted that the resignation is part of an even bigger plan to usurp more power, curtail more liberties and tell even bigger lies?

But that's where we are.

Either way, there's no denying the credit that TPM so richly deserves. Cheers.

(duplicate post deleted)

It may sound far-fetched, but my first thought when the Democrats caved on FISA was, "What did they get in return?" Could the resignations of Porky and Fredo be the price Bushco paid for immunity on FISA violations? If so, then is all the bluster about continued investigations just posturing?

By the way, Sen. Reid, what ever happened to that Phase II investigation you made such a show of closing down the Senate over a few years back?

But why would he have announced the Sept 17 date at all if the plan was to allow the president to make a recess appointment?  The two of them are bound to have discussed the timing.

I've also been puzzling over this exact question for a long time. This is the best explanation I've been able to come up with:
It's obvious their behavior is simply not consistent with someone who expected to be held accountable in a way that would be the norm with past Administrations. But what if they had been anticipating from the beginning that by the end of Bush's term, "normal" accountability (and fair elections for that matter, and major parts of the Constitution) would be a thing of the past? If this were their primary goal from the beginning, then someone would have much less inhibition about taking place in all sorts of crazy actions, and counting on the end justifying the means, so to speak. Some days I wake up and think this is literally true, other days I consider it be paranoid. The only other possible explanation in my opinion is unbelievably simple-minded, moronic incompetence on every level. Is that the real explanation though, or just the cover for these actions?

I'm surprised that no one (that I saw, at least) has posted their "favorite" moment as being when Gonzales denied that habeas corpus was protected by the constitution. (By "favorite", I mean "most cringe-worthy", of course.) I would have thought that he would have lost all credibility then, well before the whole US attorney thing came out.

What is your favorite Gonzales moment?

Back in May '06 when he stepped on his own dick and stated that journalists at the NYT and Wapo had broken the law. And the kicker was that he subsquently never clarified exactly which law it was that these journalists and supposedly broken ...

National Security, the Press and the First Amendment

After this one, let's just say that any good light on coverage for Gonzo pretty much went right in the crapper.

~OGD~

Although of course I take it with a grain of salt, but this was my best guess. The rumors that he was going to leave over the August break started in July. Knowing this crew, it seems the choice of August (assuming a recess appointment was off the table per the agreement between Bush and Reid) was for media control, hoping folks in Congress would be too busy with vacation to put much effort into releasing statements and so on. And, if that hypothesis is correct, it the choice of this particular week in August could well be tied to the Daily Show/Colbert vacations.

That's a good point -- the mud that Gonzales helped to shovel on the Constitution and the Bill Of Rights, and on the overarcing concept of Fealty To The Law, hasn't been scraped off. It's still sitting there, and we haven't seen the last of its effects.