Gonzales' future has become uncertain

WASHINGTON -- Attorney General Alberto Gonzales wrote memos condoning torture, said the United States doesn't have to abide by the Geneva Convention's restrictions on questioning terror suspects, authorized domestic wiretaps without court warrants and says he is responsible for mistakes made in firing a raft of U.S. attorneys on his watch, although he didn't know what was going on.
He is also deeply loyal to President Bush, and Bush reciprocates. They have a long, warm friendship forged through their Texas roots. And there is absolutely no evidence that Gonzales did anything -- anything -- that was not sanctioned by the White House.
Will he stay in office? Should he stay in office?
Many thought that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld would never be ousted despite an avalanche of criticism. He was. And the betting is that the handwriting is now on the wall for Gonzales to "resign" before the Bush administration's term ends.
Gonzales has withstood withering attacks both as the president's personal lawyer and as attorney general. He replaced John Ashcroft at the helm of the Justice Department even though the administration had to disavow his so-called "torture memo" written after 9/11. He survived even though the administration lost Gonzales' interpretation of the Geneva Convention in the Supreme Court. He maintained the president's confidence even though domestic wiretaps now have to be vetted by the court set up under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
Unprecedented timing
He has done nothing illegal by approving the firing of eight U.S. attorneys -- they act as prosecutors -- midway through the president's second term, although the timing was unprecedented. Presidents usually fire prosecutors in a blanket way when they first come into office, not halfway though a term, so they can fill those slots with their own people. Some of those fired were appointed by this now-disappointed White House.
But Democrats are screaming "foul," contending the U.S. attorneys were fired for political reasons either because the White House did not want Republicans investigated or because the prosecutors didn't bring indictments the White House or congressional Republicans sought. Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton demands that Gonzales resign, arguing that he "seems to confuse his prior role as the president's personal attorney with his duty to the system of justice and to the entire country."
It is not a surprise that Gonzales disagrees and is refusing to leave.
But even some Republicans are uneasy with the prospect of the attorney general remaining in office although Bush vigorously defends him. After Gonzales conceded, a la Richard Nixon, that "mistakes were made" in firing the attorneys and then in providing misleading reasons to Congress, accepting responsibility, Sen. John Sununu, R-N.H., said it was time for the president to fire Gonzales.
Conservatives have never been happy with Gonzales, believing he isn't one of them because they think he's not passionate about their issues, such as opposing affirmative action and abortion. When Gonzales was suggested for the Supreme Court (he would have been the first Hispanic justice on the nation's top court), several leading conservatives unloaded broad hints they would fight such a nomination.
His biggest backer is the president, whose own job approval is low and whose political advisers are still ascendant, meaning Gonzales might be deemed expendable. And because of last November's elections Democrats have subpoena power to probe documents that otherwise would be pushed deep into locked file cabinets and password-protected computers.
Pleasant man
Gonzales, only 51, is the man from Humble, a tiny Texas town, the only college graduate in his family. He also became a Harvard Law School graduate and a justice of the Texas Supreme Court. He's a pleasant man, modest, non-drinking, polite, even-tempered; he's still called "the judge" by colleagues. And he counts as one of his chief blessings in life that the president likes him, really likes him. Once before, in 2005, Bush publicly defended his fellow Texan: "I don't like it when a friend gets criticized. I'm loyal to my friends. All of a sudden this fellow, who is a good public servant and a really fine person, is under fire. And so, do I like it? No, I don't like it, at all."
Scripps Howard columnist Ann McFeatters has covered the White House and national politics since 1986.