Gonzales: I am a Potted Plant

One almost has to feel sorry for Alberto Gonzales. With the ongoing fired prosecutor scandal, Gonzales has to live uncomfortably in two cognitive worlds. Gonzales would much prefer to stay in the world he's mastered, the world of "Gonzales Standard Lying" in which he issues blanket denials with the expectation that no one can refute him. In today's Washington Post for example, Gonzales boldly claims that "I know that I did not -- and would not -- ask for the resignation of any U.S. attorney for an improper reason." Like all Gonzales Standard Lying, there is an absoluteness here. Not only does Gonzales claim that he "did not" improperly ask for resignations but that he "would not" do so. It's almost as if Gonzales is saying that he is incapable of acting improperly and could not do so under any circumstances.

So innocent!

But there are other worlds than Gonzales Standard Lying. There's also the world in which people make claims that can be supported or refuted by information. This is the world Gonzales entered when Department of Justice e-mails and Kyle Sampson's testimony refuted his original lie that he was not involved in the decision-making. In fact, the claim of absolute innocence that Gonzales makes today is actually a "fall-back" lie made necessary by the fact that government investigators and bloggers like Talking Points Memo dug up a wealth of information refuting the original claim of non-involvement.

Involuntarily forced into the world of claim and counter-claim after a comfortable 12 years in the BushWorld of absoluteness, Gonzales is in a bind. With the pure version of Gonzales Standard Lying no longer accepted, Gonzales has to accompany his absolute denial with a factual claim.

And it's a beauty.

In today's Washington Post, Gonzales acknowledges that he "directed . . . Kyle Sampson to initiate this process [of firing prosecutors];" and received Sampson's periodic updates. But Gonzales also claims that "his updates were brief, relatively few in number and focused primarily on the review process." As a result, Gonzales himself "did not make decisions about who should or should not be asked to resign." At least "to [his] knowledge."

In other words, Gonzales is arguing that he served as a potted plant during Sampson's updates. He knew about "the review process" but did not "make decisions" about who should be fired. Instead, Gonzales merely "approved" the decisions of others.

I would bet that Gonzales' picture of himself as a potted plant is not going to sit well with the Senate Judiciary Committee. Almost worse than being a lie, it looks like a lie as soon as you read it. If Senators refrain from bloviating, they can ask some simple questions. How did Kyle Sampson and Monica Goodling justify the list of prosecutors to be fired? Why in fact did Gonzales approve the list? Was it because local Republicans were pressing for partisan prosecutions of Democrats for "voter fraud?" Was there any actual evidence of voter fraud in New Mexico or did Gonzales take Republican accusations "on faith." Did Gonzales know that his assistants wanted a Karl Rove protege in a prosecutor's office in Arkansas, or that there were worries that the Duke Cunningham corruption investigation was expanding outward?

As is the case with President Bush and the Iraq War, Attorney General is finding out that the world of reality can be a tough place for which he is completely unprepared. According to Arlen Specter, Gonzales has "got a steep hill to climb. He's going to be successful only if he deals with the facts." In the case of Gonzales, he's got a steep hill to climb because he has to "deal with the facts."

In the final analysis, Gonzales should just resign so he can re-immerse himself in his lying routine. I'm sure that Gonzales Standard Lying goes over better in the private sector.

And he'll feel better.