Considering his failing grade on his last two investigations, how might the President fare on his examination of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales' behavior in the firing of eight state AG's? History would suggest poorly.
After the CIA agent name leak, the President promised an internal investigation which was never conducted. Bush never completed the promised task. His other failed investigation was the White House Lessons Learned Report after Hurricane Katrina. It left out critical information about hospital patients. Completely absent from his post mortem included:
1. The hospital with the highest death toll. (LifeCare Hospitals purchased by the Carlyle Group just weeks before landfall)
2. The trade group that coordinated the evacuations from dead facilities. (the Lousiana Hospital Association)
3. The flipping of evacuation triage priorities. (which resulted in the stranding of two patients, left to die in sweltering cesspool surrounded facilities)
So why would Bush do better this time with the hazy memoried Al Gonzales. Will his memory improve enabling the zoned out AG to actually answer a question? But most of all, why is the Attorney General's failure to answer questions about his managerial decisions not considered wrongdoing? After all,
"It's management's job to know!"-Dr. W. Edwards Deming
Might the investigation be dragged out by Alberto's shaky memory more so than political theater? It's a sad day when a leader cannot state the specific performance reasons for firing someone...