So what is your issue with him?
the article claims that Gonzales did not fulfill his obligations as the governor's lawyer in reporting on the Board of Pardons and Paroles cases involving capital punishment.
Note that his job was not to be an added defense lawyer, but merely to inform the governor of the legal aspects of a case, and they only refer to one case, and it's 29th motion of appeal.
Nowhere do they illustrate how and why he fails at this job, only that he didn't do all that he should've, by the standards of the article writers, not the standards of the law. They link to an article that you must be a subscriber to view. The small portion of the article they do show also contains no specific evidence of anything.
So, given that this article doesn't really have one shred of real information, what is it that you find to be so amazing?