Gonzales: special prosecutor or impeachment

The Justice Department is now facing a massive conflict of interest: it needs to investigate itself.  It seems clear that multiple Justice Department officials, and probably Gonzales himself, lied to Congress over the attorney purge matter.  But as Josh Marshall pointed out, a cloud also hangs over the heads of the US Attorneys who were not fired: what did they agree to do?

Congress cannot prosecute someone for perjury or contempt on its own.  If it cites someone for contempt, it is still up to a US Attorney and a grand jury to bring a criminal case, as we saw with the Libby matter.  The problem is that any senior attorney working for Gonzales' Justice Department is tainted.  Only an independent party, perhaps a prosecutor that served under previous administrations, would have any credibility. We need a Fitzgerald.  Hell, a Starr would serve them right, but I'm interested in justice, not persecution.

Gonzales will, of course, resist.  How should we make him comply?
Calling John Conyers.  more ...

The Justice Department cannot investigate itself.  That leaves two possibilities: a special prosecutor or impeachment.  It seems to me that lying to Congress and obstructing the independent investigation of the Justice Department would suffice.  Republicans tried to put fear into the hearts of their contributors by raising the specter of Chairman John Conyers.  Let's make their nightmares come true.

Rep. Conyers, as House Judiciary Chair, can launch hearings into impeachment, and can agree to suspend the impeachment process for some limited period (say, six months after the appointment of a special prosecutor) if one is named.  Even if the process drags out, once a special prosecutor is named the Justice Department will be forced to be squeaky clean, if people don't want to wind up in jail.

The special prosecutor would be chartered to investigate the truthfulness of statements made to Congress on the matter, as well as whether there was obstruction of justice when prosecutors were threatened over their testimony, whether investigations were shut down for political reasons, and whether any serving US Attorneys made improper deals in exchange for their jobs.