Is a conspiracy theory still a conspiracy theory if a ‘White House adviser’ believes it? Many have suggested that Alberto Gonzales is not resigning because he acts as a bulwark against direct attacks against the castle White House. By keeping Alberto in place, it makes it harder to get at Karl and Harriet. You might expect people that are, you know, holed up in the castle White House to dispute that theory. According to Michael Isikoff, you would be wrong:
But Gonzales himself was hanging tough. “We believe the burden is now on the Democrats to prove that something improper occurred here—and they haven’t done that,” said a top Justice official (who asked not to be ID’d talking about nonpublic matters). Publicly, the White House was standing by its A.G. One White House adviser (who asked not to be ID’ed talking about sensitive issues) said the support reflected Bush’s own view that a Gonzales resignation would embolden the Dems to go after other targets—like Karl Rove. “This is about Bush saying, ‘Screw you’,” said the adviser, conceding that a Gonzales resignation might still be inevitable. The trick, said the adviser, would be to find a graceful exit strategy for Bush’s old friend.
Is it me, or does this represent a kind of palace White House revolt? Where is the message discipline? Where is the loyalty? Since when do White House advisors portray the President as engaged in a cover-up?
Things are going south, fast.
