Gonzales’ departure good for nation and maybe even for Bush

THE ISSUE The attorney general has decided to end his disastrous tenure.

IT is unusual that the resignation of a U.S. attorney general is met with relief, but Alberto Gonzales' long-overdue exit will provide a beleaguered Justice Department an opportunity to restore integrity, trust and independence in its administration of law.

In quitting, Gonzales unburdens President Bush of one of his biggest liabilities as he struggles against a tide of investigations and battles with Congress about the Iraq war, among other issues. Though it is unlikely Democrats will drop probes into the firing of U.S. attorneys or of the administration's possibly illegal surveillance activities, Gonzales had become, in Bush's words, a "harmful distraction."

Gonzales' departure and that of Bush's political adviser, Karl Rove, will leave the president without the circle of Texas intimates he brought with him to Washington. However, the change might do him -- and the country -- good with a new set of voices telling Bush what he needs to hear, rather than what he wants to hear.

As White House counsel and the nation's top law enforcement officer, Gonzales was given responsibilities that exceeded his capabilities. Harvard law education aside, his chief qualification was being a good and loyal friend, owing his ascent from Houston real estate lawyer to attorney general all to Bush.

It was as White House counsel that Gonzales veered off the path, advising that the president could waive anti- torture laws and international treaties protecting prisoners of war, leading to such abuses as seen at Abu Ghraib, and endorsing military tribunals for terrorism suspects, both of which were rejected by the Supreme Court.

But it was his baffling and suspect testimony in hearings about the attorney dismissals and in pressuring his predecessor John Ashcroft to sign off on Bush's no- warrant wiretapping program that infuriated Democrats in Congress and lost him support among Republicans.

Gonzales was at a loss to coherently explain what role he played in removing prosecutors who were not viewed as "loyal Bushies," first saying he was not briefed on the firings, in conflict with testimony from his top aides, then acknowledging that he was but was not fully engaged.

Gonzales' recounting of the bizarre visit to Ashcroft's hospital bed conflicted with those of a respected deputy attorney general and FBI Director Robert Mueller, both as to what took place and the subject matter.

Meanwhile, dozens of career lawyers and political appointees have quit the department. Bush had to reach down to the department's No. 4 position to find a temporary replacement for Gonzales.

Whoever is nominated will have the unenviable task of rebuilding a tarnished department while contending with myriad problems in the battles between Congress and the administration. It is not an easy job, as Gonzales can verify.