Comments (32)

jrw wrote on March 13, 2007 10:15 AM:

Sounds like an angry man. Let's hope the anger comes with a committment to follow through.

john o. wrote on March 13, 2007 10:16 AM:

If the blow job standard applied to this administration, the white house would be empty.

Ad Absurdum wrote on March 13, 2007 10:20 AM:

While they're at it, perhaps they should also summon Ken Starr in and have him testify under oath about leaks, his political agenda and external pressure.

EasyRider wrote on March 13, 2007 10:20 AM:

Hey Patrick,

The AG lied under oath. Have some teeth, show some teeth. Impeach the son of bitch.

Impeach the son-of-bitch, yesterday!

Stop with making nice words. You and Democratic Party sounds like pussies. The American PUBLIC want action and with teeth. Not the political correct sound-bites you guys are put out.

Nice got America into this shit with this administration being selected in Supreme Court, it got us the Florida Voter fraud counts, and the Ohio Voter Fraud.

Goddamn it. Show Cheney and his gang they are not the only one you know how enforce the statement, "Go Fuck Yourself!"

Show some balls, stop being a pussy.

Punchy wrote on March 13, 2007 10:22 AM:

Just watch--all of this will be soon cloaked in "national security concerns". As in "we cannot comment on any of the questions by any Senators due to the sensitivity of the information".

Investigation over. Hearings over. Gonzo smirks and schlepps off. I've lost count on how many scandals they've gotten out of using this excuse.

Can't let the terrorists win, ya know.

Dungheap wrote on March 13, 2007 10:24 AM:

This should be good. I imagine the White House role wasn't discussed in the private meeting with the Judiciary Committee last week and whatever private assurances Gonzales gave are likely out the window.

"What else do you want us to do?"

I imagine we'll have a pretty good response to that question quite soon.

burro wrote on March 13, 2007 10:25 AM:

How could I not take advantage of my Security Code word, "muscle".

It's time to put Abu G. in a headlock, Senator Leahy, and give him a Mega-Nukular Noogie. Then put his tiny little peanut head between your buff and ready thumb and index fingers and squeeze until he's nothing but paste. Crush Abu G. Senator. He deserves nothing less.

r€nato wrote on March 13, 2007 10:36 AM:

Leahy is 'outraged'... but hopefully, not surprised.

Legalize wrote on March 13, 2007 10:46 AM:

I'm bored with "outrage" on behalf of Dem Senators. If all the public wanted was "outrage," we'd still have a GOP majority acting and omitting to act in outrageous ways. We elected you clowns to hold this administration accountable; they have not. In fact their behavior has gotten more egregious by the hour.

If Abu Gonzales lied to you under oath, he is a criminal and should be treated as such. Impeach his ass and force Bush Co. to send you a real candidate for AG - a person who will enforce the laws of the United States and uphold her constitution without passion or prejudice (if the Bushies even know of such a person).

You Dems will be held to account for you actions and failures to act according to the will of the American people.

sholom wrote on March 13, 2007 10:50 AM:

Can somebody help me out (this is breaking too fast for me).

What -- specifically -- did the AG say last week that turned out to be a lie?

JohnW wrote on March 13, 2007 10:58 AM:

I agree with Legalize, simply being "outraged" is an emtpy announcement.

Fathom wrote on March 13, 2007 11:00 AM:

Gonzales flat out LIED--and took an arrogant tone while he did it--, and as long as that's characterized as being "less than forthcoming" we can expect the usual kabuki theater, gloves-on treatment from Dems.

JohnW wrote on March 13, 2007 11:01 AM:

I think the "lie" was when Gonzalez said he would NEVER fire a U S Att. for political reasons.

mbbsdphil wrote on March 13, 2007 11:06 AM:

Knowningly false testimony under oath equals what, Mr. Libby?

Mr. Gonzales, like Mr. Ashcroft, is among the weakest post-Second World War Attorneys General. But he is smart enough to know that perjury and contempt of Congress are impeachable offenses. He is also savvy enough to know that the president could simply have replaced any or all US Attorneys at his pleaseure, for No reason. He could have done so by submitting new names to the Senate, or by exercising his newly acquired Patriot Act II authority to ignore them.

So what gives with the false reasons? Mr. Rove knew that a newly Democratic Congress would not let go a rotting fish smell once it waffed its way up Pennsylvania Avenue. He knew that more than a half dozen of the Republican Party's top lawyers would not go quietly into that good night, put out on the street in unprecedented, potentially career withering abruptness, as if they were Dan Quayle applying for a MacArthur grant.

So what gives? Is this hubris, gross mismanagement, an intentional distraction? Cover for the president's needless involvement and needlessly personal, "Take Names and Kick Butt to Save the Party"? What?

sholom wrote on March 13, 2007 11:08 AM:

I was thinking it was more objective than that -- something along the lines of what the White House knew and when. I.e., perhaps something in Kyle Sampson's emails directly contradicted what he said. But I can't seem to find it.

(Yes, yes, we all know he lied when he said it wasn't for political reasons, but I don't think Leahy was talking about that)

DallasNE wrote on March 13, 2007 11:08 AM:

I have a simple solution for Sen. Leahy. Issue a Contempt of Congress citation. That will get their attention in a hurry. Perjury got Scooter Libby's attention pretty fast.

EH wrote on March 13, 2007 11:16 AM:

There seems to be at least a couple of people here who could stand to be reminded that impeachment starts in the House of Representatives. Pat Leahy is a Senator.

If you are serious about impeachment, do you mean to tell us all that you called up your Rep and told them to "impeach the son of a bitch yesterday?" I can't imagine much traction being gained with that approach.

mbbspdhil wrote on March 13, 2007 11:18 AM:

What about the rumors that Shrub is off the wagon, drinking heavily, and publicly dissing Ms. Laura?

http://www.waynemadsenreport.com

Accurate, parody, wishful thinking?

bob wrote on March 13, 2007 11:38 AM:

It doesn't matter where they lie EH. Let the Dems work on it. They've only had power for two months. Give em a chance to be as evil as the Repugs.

EH wrote on March 13, 2007 11:41 AM:

I can't quite figure out what your point is supposed to be, but if it's that Democrats can be corrupt and dissembling, then you'll get no argument from me. That doesn't mean that it shouldn't be dealt with where it is found, though.

Arkansan wrote on March 13, 2007 11:53 AM:

Saying they’re outraged is meaningless, we’re all outraged. They can do something about it! At very least they should be throwing us some crumbs and suggesting they will pursue it with contempt or impeachment. These angry statements are almost more frustrating than if they said nothing at all.

Ron Byers wrote on March 13, 2007 11:53 AM:

This scandal won't get to Gonzales' impeachment. He will be lucky to last the week. Sooner than later he will resign. The interesting questions have to do with Karl Rove and Harriet Miers. This scandal is now right their laps. It also goes to the heart of the American system of justice. They are two of the President's closest advisers. Ultimately this scandal will come down to "what did the President know and when did he know it." This will be a very interesting week.

Frank wrote on March 13, 2007 12:03 PM:

Gonzales doesn't know whether his grandparents entered this country legally from Mexico. For a lawyer this is an admission that results in an obvious surmise. This certainly explains why there is no law enforcement to prevent illegals from entering this country. He has an "illegal heritage" to uphold, and boy is he doing this "upholding" in spades and in more areas than one.

bob wrote on March 13, 2007 12:05 PM:

Wow. Notice now that homosexuality is being dragged out again...general pace is in a public dustup over calling gays immoral. I wonder what else they will drag out just to FUD the march to impeachment of gonzales and the public humiliation of Rove?

And all the news organs ar reporting the whitehouse wanted to fire all the attorneys - as if that excuses firing 8 for political reasons.

groan

chimpeach wrote on March 13, 2007 12:42 PM:

Considering the enormity of this thing--it's way beyond calling it a "scandal" now--is somebody going to nudge the MSM outlets awake in time to see Gonzales leaving the AG's office for good? I don't want them to be embarassed at having to ask "Hey, who's that new guy? Where'd Gonzales go?"

Richard Hall wrote on March 13, 2007 12:44 PM:

Don't you just miss those two little sweet words, "Under Oath". It is good to be accountable to one's own mouth!

Alaska2 wrote on March 13, 2007 1:01 PM:

http://www.waynemadsenreport.com I just checked out this website. Says that the press corps is aware that Bush is drinking again. Could this be true and not just blogger hype? If so then most Senators must know it,too. Is this (Bush drinking again) an "Open secret" in Washington? For a recovering alcoholic this is scary.

John wrote on March 13, 2007 1:05 PM:

Impeach him even if he resigns.

Capt. Jean-Luc Pikachu wrote on March 13, 2007 1:48 PM:

"less than forthcoming"

Why isn't a Senator allowed to call a liar a liar?

Margaret wrote on March 13, 2007 4:34 PM:

This would be a good time to start a war in Iran.

Change the subject.

Nick Kasoff - The Thug Report wrote on March 14, 2007 8:50 AM:

Leahy was elected to the Senate in 1974, when Gerald Ford was President. Was he such a stickler for accountability during the twelve years of Democratic Presidents? I'm guessing not ... which would make his stern pronouncements of accountability nothing more than partisan hogwash.

Nick Kasoff
The Thug Report

epenisa wrote on January 11, 2008 1:01 AM:

Hello
Nice work from your side... have a nice time with yoru blog :)
Bye