PBS has a series on the Inquisition.

Is it deja vu "all over again?"

What a "waste!"

Scary, isn't it? Seemingly intelligent US Attorneys...and yet, they all voted for Bush and Cheney.

That's the part I have trouble getting around.

I think the question is, is it more important to uphold the Constitution by using the impeachment process to remove a totally corrupt administration, or is it better to keep them in office constantly on the defensive for two years? The former is certainly the best move if you want to maintain the ability to use the impeachment procedure for anything but political hard ball. But, doing that gives the new President, most likely a Republican, a big lead for the 2008 election. (If both Bush and Cheney are impeached, one resigns, the other appoints a replacemtne, who becomes president.) I don't have an answer yet.

Specter is the dog that didn't bark now isn't he. When is the last time you heard him say anything at all close to defending the AG or the administration? He now knows how thoroughly rotten the whole deal is and he also knows he himself may be in the cross-hairs on the Patriot Act treachery.

Congrats om the scoop, Ms. McGann.

Ms. McGann, way to fight! You write 'em, I'll read 'em. That is to say, I'll read 'em here first.

These Republican politicians are what get me. They still vote lock step with what the president wants- even after the White House repeatedly lied to them and Bush's approval ratings are dragging them down as well.
Code Word: crush
As in crush the GOP from here on out.

Holy shit. I sure hope the Dems are livid because the DOJ has repeatedly given them a big FUCK YOU! Check this out from the Washington Post article linked above:
"The same month he was asked to step down, Graves's name was included in a Jan. 9, 2006, list assembled by Gonzales's then-chief of staff, D. Kyle Sampson, of seven U.S. attorneys the administration was considering forcing from their jobs. That April, Sampson sent another e-mail noting that two of the prosecutors on that list had already left. Three names, including Graves's, were redacted when Justice officials released the January list."

More from the Washington Post:
"Now a lawyer for the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys, Schlozman was tentatively scheduled to testify next Tuesday before the Senate Judiciary Committee. But Justice and legislative aides said yesterday that Schlozman has requested more time to prepare his testimony."
HELL NO! No more time- stop playing the White house stall game Dems! I'm sick of the pussyfooting around. Pick up the pace! We've still got the Interior Department, EPA, FDA and other agencies to expose. Trace this shit back to Rove in the next two months and let's move on to the other crooked bastards. And don't think we've forgot about you Lurita Doan, you crooked Rovian Hatch Act violator. You're not gonna get a free pass. So many crooks, so little time.
Code word: step
As in step up the pace!

good job!
If it is now impartially being called 9 USAs, some people have committed perjury, no?

First one Big Attaway To Go Ms.McGann !Second sure wish we could get the MSM to give TPM more credit for these ""gets" that keep coming from your site. Heck Racheal Maddeaux was on Olbermann the other night-and might as well been channeling TPM without nary an acknowlegement.
And I have been saying loudly ,a good long while , that the TurdBlossom Grand Plan had pissed off way to many good, law abiding ,career federal employees for the BushCo not to be ratted out to the Democratically controlled Congress,
And yes the Impeachment train has left the Station - President Pelosi does have a nice ring to it- does it not !! (Remember kids it wasn't Watergate that got Nixon -it was the endless War in Vietnam- history does repeat itself - Watergate was just the vehicle for Tricky Dick's removal )

According to a source with detailed knowledge of the conversation, Graves was told that his removal was not based on his performance as a prosecutor, but that it was simply time to let someone else have a chance at the job.

Interesting to learn that the one who deserved to be given a chance to gain experience at this type of job was Bradley Schlozman, who, among all those who deserved to be given such a chance, was then an assistant attorney general in charge of the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division!

Interesting also is to learn that once he got a stab at this new job (read mission accomplished), he was right back in Washington……

Does one even consider moving there for such a short time, if it were not to execute a mission? Did he intend to spend some time there, or was his return to Washington arranged in advance?

These are some of the questions that should be asked… Did the DOJ really reserve this position as a training post for career employees? If so, then did Schlozman really need to gain this type of experience?

Two comments.

1) Did the call to Graves precede the 'secret order' document? If DOJ did call to kick him out before the 1st secret order memo was written, what are the implication's? Was a law broken?

2) There is a parallel timeline with all of these fired USA's for 'voter fraud'. The polling numbers of the Incumbent vs. Democratic challengers should be considered. Does anyone know if McCaskill (sp?) was really doing well in Missouri senate race back in Dec of '05 to early Jan '06 timeframe? That would have been about the time Rove would have decided to remove the USA to help the incumbent.

Remember what Battle said under sworn testimony?
http://mediamatters.org/items/200704160005

The article noted that Gonzales "is certain to be asked on Tuesday about his own recollection of events" and that "Michael A. Battle, the former director of the department's United States attorney liaison office," has apparently contradicted Gonzales' claim that he "was not involved in seeing any memos," and "was not involved in any discussions about" the dismissals. However, according to Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-NY), Battle -- the official who informed the U.S. attorneys that they were to be fired -- told the committee that shortly before the firings, he was unaware of "performance problems" with all but one of the fired U.S. attorneys, even though Gonzales has claimed that the prosecutors were dismissed for performance reasons. By contrast, The Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, the Chicago Tribune, and the Associated Press all reported Schumer's statements about Battle.

....

Battle told investigators that he was "not aware of performance problems with respect to several" of the prosecutors, until just days before he called to fire them, Schumer said in a conference call with reporters yesterday. Aides later said that Battle, whose job was to supervise the department's 93 U.S. attorneys, was aware of performance-related issues only with Kevin Ryan, the U.S. attorney for San Francisco.

Schumer said Battle also contradicted Gonzales's assertion at a March 13 news conference that he had not seen any documents or participated in any discussions about the firings. A memo related to the dismissals was passed out at a Nov. 27 meeting attended by Gonzales and others, Battle told investigators.

"Mike Battle remembers a memo was distributed," Schumer said.

Similarly, an April 16 Los Angeles Times article noted, "Schumer told reporters that Michael Battle, former head of the Justice Department office that oversees U.S. attorneys, knew nothing about any performance problems of several of those who were fired until shortly before he was directed to call them Dec. 7 and tell them they were being removed." An April 16 Associated Press report also stated that "Battle also said he 'was not aware of performance problems with respect to several of the U.S. attorneys' when he called to fire them, according to Schumer."

Civil rights prosecutions seems to be a common thread in these firings. Ironic that a conspiracy to deny people voting rights is being orchestrated out of the Department of Justice. And I use the word "conspiracy" in the legally prosecutable way.

There is no need to prepare to tell the truth. We saw what happened when Gonzales had a month to prepare his truth. If Schlozman doesn't want to testify next week, subpoena his ass for tomorrow. He can come back later with more information if that turns out to be necessary.

Question for Gonzales today:

The firing of Missouri U.S. Attorney Todd Graves within days after the passage of the Patriot Act, which included a provision that allowed the President to appoint U.S. Attorney without congressional approval. Mr. Graves was immediately replaced by Barry Schlozman, the first U.S. Attorney to be appointed under the new provision. The close timing of these events seem to be more than just coincidental.

Mr. Gonzales, what do you know about the circumstances surrounding the insertion of that special provision into the Patriot Act under the name of Senator Arlen Specter? Who was the source of the provision that worked it's way into the Senate's bill?

Gonzales is looking shakey- very uncertain of himself. I think he realizes he is in deep shit after the reports released last night about a ninth attorney- can you say "perjurer". So long Gonzo!

Recall how Rove smugly stated that he "had the math." The math included the Missouri Senate seat in 2006 (read the antics of goon Schlozman). But, unlike Florida in '00 and Ohio in '04, things didn't work as planned. Oops!

Ugh...did you see this paragraph from Eric Lipton's story in the Times today? I nearly spit my cereal at the paper.

"The administration saw such lawsuits as a way to combat voter fraud. But Democrats have said the lawsuits were politically motivated because poor and elderly voters were more likely to be taken off registration rolls."

Oh, did the administration really see them as a way to combat voter fraud? Yes, that's what they say, but isn't the truth of that statement rather highly contested, isn't that, in fact, the heart of this whole fucking matter? To report that as if it were a fact (particularly juxtaposed against the "Democrats say" construction of the following sentence) just floors me.

Shame on Specter for "letting his aids" modify the law without his oversight.

And shame on the democrats for not reading what they were voting for/against. Any casual reading of the infamous blurb (by anyone) would have set off alarm bells.

The voter registration purge in the case of Graves is a RED HERRING. The real story is which public-corruption cases were dropped when Graves was replaced by Shlozman, who had never prosecuted a case before.

Has no one yet connected the dots? The Rovian aide who replaced Cummins in AR has as expertise "oppo". Hillary is running for president. Recall all the false scandals which originated in AR, and which were slung at Clinton? And Ted Olson being head of the "AR Project"? And that Olson is "Federalist Society"?

It's part of the setup for '08: expect Hillary to be the lead candidate on the Democratic side, and endeavor to destroy her, exactly as they -- Cummins' replacement -- targetted both Gore and Kerry.

I don't know where these people are from (Rove, et al.), but they are clearly not Americans.

bziu iaztmpdus heajskwx lzdabg juki riube uvzlwhopc

MSN I NIIPET
MSN