Thursday Roundup: Gonzo Lies Again

So Attorney General Alberto Gonzales had to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committe again just this Tuesday, and already he's been caught in another lie.

Gonzales drew a lot of ire after former Deputy Attorney General James Comey recounted an impromptu meeting where Gonzales and then-White House chief of staff Andrew Card came to an ill and sedated John Ashcroft's hospital bedside trying to talk him into overturning Comey's decision not to renew authorization for the Terrorist Surveillance Program, or TSP. As Josh noted yesterday, Gonzales testified again on the subject on Tuesday, and stated that the discussions with and prior to the encounter with Ashcroft were not about the TSP at all, but about "an intelligence program he would not describe." Before you worry that he tacitly and unintentionally confirmed that there is yet another program heretofore unknown where Americans are having their privacy rights invaded — well, never mind, go ahead and worry about that, as I suppose there's no reason to think there isn't, but a memo from the office from then-Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte to then-Speaker Dennis Hastert addresses the prior meeting and confirms that it was, indeed, regarding the TSP.

Senator Chuck Schumer was understandably steamed:

"It seemed clear to just about everyone on the committee that the attorney general was deceiving us when he said the dissent was about other intelligence activities and this memo is even more evidence that helps confirm our suspicions," Schumer said.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy was steamed as well — steamed enough to threaten to open a perjury investigation against Gonzales. From the Washington Post's report:

Leahy (D-Vt.) told reporters he is giving Gonzales until late next week to revise his testimony about the surveillance program or he will ask Justice Department Inspector General Glenn A. Fine to conduct a perjury inquiry: "I'll ask the inspector general to determine who's telling the truth."

Justice Department spokesman Brian Roehrkasse said yesterday that Gonzales "stands by his testimony," and that "the disagreement . . . was not about the particular intelligence activity that has been publicly described by the president. It was about other highly classified intelligence activities."

If you haven't picked a date on your "Gonzo Gets Fired" office pool, now may be a good time. (Hey, we can hope, right?)

It is inevitable in most presidential races that, no matter how much candidates play nice-nice with each other at the beginning, at some point the gloves end up coming off. MSNBC thinks that just happened. Obama, in what is not his first time going on the attack, but in what may be the first time that someone is calling him on his "different kind of politics" not being all that different, responded strongly to the portrayal of his answer to a foreign policy question in the last debate as naive by equating Clinton's stance on foreign policy with what "Bush and Cheney have maintained over the last six years." That seems like a little much, considering that the entire Democratic field is pretty much in agreement and has gone on the record as stating that we need to talk to foreign countries, whether or not we agree with them. If we're really going to take the gloves off now, I sincerely hope we find a better topic to fight over than this.

On a side note, Republicans seem to be more aware of who they're actually competing against in the coming elections: Republican presidential candidates Mitt Romney and John McCain took turns taking potshots at Democrats yesterday. McCain jumped on Obama for his recent claims that his foreign policy judgment was better than anyone currently running for President ("Well, I also think I'm the most qualified to run the decathlon because I watch sports on television all the time." Ouch!), while Romney effectively called Hillary Clinton left of France. If anyone ever gets the idea that perhaps I'm just a smidge frustrated at how we tend to ignore the big-tent aspect of our party and waste so much time looking for reasons to dislike other Democrats instead of reasons to support them all, this is why. Those who do so hurt the party and hurt our chances for electoral success every time they do so. Republicans have been attacking us for the past two or three decades while we sit around quibbling over whether we should run an 80% Democrat over a 90% Democrat in a losing general election. It's about time we learn not to do that.

Speaking of snubs, the DLC is also feeling a bit slighted today. The centrist Democratic Leadership Council is having their summer meeting this weekend, and not one of the Democratic candidates is attending. The article takes a look at how both parties are basically ignoring the political center, instead looking to strengthen support among their ideological base, and questions how effective that tactic can be and has been in the past. It's an interesting read.

Finally today, the Lancaster School District has made a request that the Texas Education Agency doesn't hear too often: they have asked to be allowed to implement a four-day school week for the upcoming school year. Why would they want a four-day school week? According to the Statesman's article, to "boost academics and... save as much as $1.9 million, helping close a funding deficit in this year's budget."

I can't help but wonder how much of the impetus comes from the former reason and how much from the latter. I'm no education expert, but it seems to me that Texas school districts have never really clamored for more progressive and uncommon approaches to improving education like shortening the school week. This really seems more like a subtle hint that, hey, we're underfunded. You know school systems are suffering when they are seriously considering cutting a day off of the school week to save money. It is possible the request may not be given consideration, as they may have missed a deadline for requesting such waivers. But whether or not the request itself is approved, I think the underlying message behind the request may not be a very good omen for the Texas public school system.