Comments (41)

nofltwlt wrote on March 18, 2007 10:38 AM:

It wouldn't be good to have it and not use it - illegal wiretaps that is.

While the administration is circling wagons and collaboration on their collective story (lies), wouldn't it be good to wiretap their telephone calls to each other and intercept their email messages?

j swift wrote on March 18, 2007 10:44 AM:

The question on my mind: If Gonzo resigns or is canned on, say, Wednesday is the committee still going to drag Rove's ass in for grilling or does he get to skate?

Dennis wrote on March 18, 2007 11:21 AM:

The problem with White House officials appearing before Congressional committees is that the committee is always so damned polite/fearful instead of getting on with the business at hand.

You don't have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.

Dennis wrote on March 18, 2007 11:27 AM:

"My view is that the country paid a huge price for a Congress that acted like it was not an equal branch of government," said Rep. Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill., chairman of the Democratic Caucus.

---

You don't have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.

Mrs Panstreppon wrote on March 18, 2007 11:29 AM:

Don't forget Rep. John Conyers wants AG Gonzales to respond immediately to his questions about why the Bush and Gonzales shut down the DOJ OPR investigation into the warrantless domestic surveilliance program after Gonzales learned he would be a traget of the investigation.

Observor wrote on March 18, 2007 11:36 AM:

If we're talking about doing the GOP's bidding and prosecuting Democrats, former US Attorney Deborah Yang Wong can not be ignored. Her office drove Mayor Jim Hahn from office and unsuccessfully prosecuted a Clinton fundraiser. After her office gets the investigation of Appropriations Chair Jerry Lewis and right before the White House throws the grenade, she suddenly realizes she needs more money and quits to join Ted Olson at Gibson, Dunn - which is defending Lewis. Did somebody let her know a purge was in the works? She sure jumped to the next rock at the right time.

Mrs Panstreppon wrote on March 18, 2007 11:46 AM:

Observor, Laura Rozen at WarandPiece.com had an interesting post about Debra Yang Wong yesterday. Wong apparently got an unheard of $1.5 million + signing bonus when she joined Gibson Dunn, the law firm representing Rep. Jerry Lewis.

http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/005815.html

Mrs Panstreppon wrote on March 18, 2007 12:39 PM:

NPR has a copy of Kyle Sampson's subpoena from the Senate Judiciary Committee online:

http://www.npr.org/documents/2007/mar/sampson_sub.pdf

Sampson is commanded to testify about what he knows about "the Committee's inquiry into the preservation of prosecutorial independence and the Department of Justice's politicization of the hirings and firings of United States Attorneys."

Sampson is instructed to bring "all documents, files, memoranda, reports, evaluations and any other material relevant to the termination of any US Attorney."

Game over, Kyle. You are not dealing with a rubberstamp GOP-controlled Congress anymore.

Mrs Panstreppon wrote on March 18, 2007 12:57 PM:

Tim Russert said AG Gonzales turned down an invitation to appear on Meet The Press today. Maybe the AG now considers this issue to be more than an overblown personnel matter.

Hollywood wrote on March 18, 2007 1:08 PM:

Wong's well hyped investigation of "pay to play" in the Hahn administration, which ended his political career, found no "pay to play," so they indicted two lowly PR execs for billing errors totaling about $350K over six years -- an amount most federal prosecutors would laugh at!

Want another coincidence? Gibson Dunn defended one of the PR execs.

Anonymous wrote on March 18, 2007 1:58 PM:

White House is expected to announce whether it will let ...

Whether it will let?

The WH can kiss my lil brown starfish....

Subpoena the war mongering, war profiteering, jack--booted, pink panty wearing, sociopaths

JEP (John Edward Patterson) wrote on March 18, 2007 2:20 PM:

On topic, from previous thread;
Let me press the issue of the SURVIVING US-A's, if Iowa is any indicator, there is an ongoing conspiracy against Democrats, by Republican planted US-A's, and it may have actually accelerated since this exposure of their colleagues questionable removal and replacements.
Matt McCoy, the Democratic state senator from Des Moines' south side, is being persecuted in a classic case of entrapment, by the US-A that was appointed to that district.
If it is proven that there's a provable passle of politics in this process, wouldn't these US-A's themselves be subjest to some serious scrutiny from Conggress?
One thing is for certain, it certainly opens the door for McCoy's defense attorney to demand charges be dropped.
This political hackery makes our US-A's impotent.

When they can't be trusted to keep politics out of the legal process, they surrender their legal credibility and provide a very good case for the defense to use against all of them, regardless of the guilt or innocence of the defendant.
But am I using the term "conspiracy" too loosely here?

Or is it really quite accurate? If there is an agreement (8 to 1 prosecutions against Dems vs. Reps should be proof enough) between these Loyalists to "go after" Dems, and more thanone of them agreed to this plan, isn't that, essentially, a conspiracy?
From what I've read about "bushies" in these emails, it would appear there are about 85 co-conspirators we can be sure were involved (93-8), and at least two DOJ administrators, AND old TBlossom hissef', it all seems to be in those emails.

drits'n'dravy wrote on March 18, 2007 2:31 PM:

Could someone explain what might happen if the WH tries to defy subpoenas by invoking executive privilege? Would Rove and the others be in contempt of congress or is there in fact such a privilege? If the privilege does exist, why were the Iran-Contra and Watergate WH figures compelled to testify?

How is such a potential showdown resolved? Thanks for anyone's input.

Chabuka wrote on March 18, 2007 2:32 PM:

The Democrats are coming, the Democrats are coming!!!..well some of them anyway...!

bob wrote on March 18, 2007 2:52 PM:

"Could someone explain what might happen if the WH tries to defy subpoenas by invoking executive privilege? Would Rove and the others be in contempt of congress or is there in fact such a privilege? If the privilege does exist, why were the Iran-Contra and Watergate WH figures compelled to testify?

How is such a potential showdown resolved? Thanks for anyone's input."\\\

The congressionwal leaders have already asserted and the white house has been told directly they cannot use executive privelege...the law does not apply to matters other than military or diplomatic - period.

Mrs Panstreppon wrote on March 18, 2007 3:41 PM:

According to Kyle Sampson's 12/4/06 email to Jane Cherry, the Bush administration expected to have 19 USA slots to fill with loyal Bushies, i.e. GOP political operatives.

I'll bet the Bush administration planned to then run out the clock on Senate confirmations for the 19 "interim" USAs just as it is doing with Tim Griffin's appointment.

In his email, Sampson points out to Cherry that they need to get names generated pronto.

Sampson cc'ed Scott Jennings. Both Cherry and Jennings are Rove foot soldiers.

What input does Karl Rove have in the USA nomination process?

JEP (John Edward Patterson) wrote on March 18, 2007 3:43 PM:

"the law does not apply to matters other than military or diplomatic - period."

Didn't seem to stop Cheney and his Energy Industry Task Force.

Maybe we can get that info out of him during impeachment hearings?

Mrs Panstreppon wrote on March 18, 2007 3:53 PM:

Jeez, the Chicago Tribune is going after Alberto Gonzales on personal issues and digging up dirt on his family.

http://www.buffalonews.com/180/story/34944.html

J Dalessandro wrote on March 18, 2007 4:11 PM:

Can someone else explain to me how, after six dreary years of deceit and lies, the Roves still managed to sneak appointment of new US attorneys without Senate approval through the Patriot Act re-authorization witout someone, anyone in the US Senate reading the freaking bill that they were voting on?
I really want to believe that the Dems are trying to clean up this mess, but sometimes they remind me of the French Third Republic, circa 1939 i.e. freaking incompetent.
Maybe these morons can spend less time on cable and more time doing their jobs?

Dab wrote on March 18, 2007 4:54 PM:

"Can someone else explain to me how, after six dreary years of deceit and lies, the Roves still managed to sneak appointment of new US attorneys without Senate approval through the Patriot Act re-authorization witout someone, anyone in the US Senate reading the freaking bill that they were voting on?"

I've been asking myself this same question all morning. Do these people actually vote "yea" on bills they've never read?

J DAlessandro wrote on March 18, 2007 5:04 PM:

I clerked for a Judge for 25 years, and if I prepared an opinion that said the opposite of what he meant to order, I'd be fired. [probably investigated too.]
So how does a Senate staff member read a bill and tell his boss, Mr. or Ms. Senator, that it has nothing new in it and he/she can vote for it? And not one Senate staffer; theoretically, hundreds of them! No one read it? Was it printed in invisible ink? Did anyone get fired? Why not? Am I missing something here/living in the past?

dianaw wrote on March 18, 2007 5:07 PM:

I've lost track of what's happened to the Democrats' bill that would reverse the lack of oversight on the U.S. Attorney appointments that was created by the
Homeland Security provision Specter claims he "overlooked." The Dem's legislation would restore the Senate power of confirmation for any U.S. attorney in place for more than 120 days. I know that it was being stonewalled by Sen. John Kyl, but I wonder if things have now gotten so bad that this bill pass. Anyone know??

Diana W.

Mrs Pansteppon wrote on March 18, 2007 6:07 PM:

Am I missing something? I thought William E. Moschella was Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legislative Affairs (OLA). On the DOJ OLA website, Richard A. Hertling is named as the Acting Assistant Attorney General.

http://www.usdoj.gov/ola/

Did Moschella get re-assigned? As far as I know, he hasn't gotten the boot or resigned (yet).

drits'n'dravy wrote on March 18, 2007 7:04 PM:

Now the NY Times has just published a front page story saying Leahy intends to subpoena Rove and other WH employees, but that a fight over exec privilege is expected. How will such a fight be resolved? Do the courts have jurisdiction over this? Do all WH employees have blanket privilege whenever they want to invoke it? If so, how did the Iran-Contra and Watergate figures get hauled before congress?

Sorry to keep harping on this, but I'm really confused by the legal issues. Anybody with some info out there? Thnx!

Zach Edwards wrote on March 18, 2007 7:41 PM:

The firings of US attorney Carol C. Lam and Daniel Bogden were connected through one case that just so happened to be the first time the Patriot Act was used in a non-terrorism related case. The investigation, and the subsequently comprehensive search for financial records ended up getting Sheldon Adelson, the 6th richest man in the world and fervent Bush supporter, involved by highlighting $190,000 of contributions he gave to the now convicted ex-County Commissioner and Lobbyist Lance Malone. It is a highly complicated case that demonstrates that Mark Corallo, who has worked as spokesman for both Karl Rove and Attorney General Gonzales, and also at the Republican National Committee was most likely the go-between to help spur these firings on behalf of Sheldon Adelson.
Visit my blog for the story and for future updates: http://misterapologist.blogspot.com/

sshard wrote on March 18, 2007 7:57 PM:

I am unclear about something I hope someone knows the answer to. Brett Tolman seems to have had a role in getting the necessary change in the Patriot Act allowing for appointees to federal attorneys positions to avoid Senate confirmation. What role did he have?

RandyH wrote on March 18, 2007 8:01 PM:

Just wait until they get around to looking into the Department of Homeland Security's ICE division. There's so much potential for corruption in that place, it's hard to predict just what they will find. It will likely put the crimes of the FBI and NSA to shame...

melior wrote on March 18, 2007 8:22 PM:

ABC News says the Seattle Times reported that the Washington state USA candidate pushed by the White House, Rick White, was not even licensed to practice law in the state. Smooth move, Rove.

Mrs Panstreppon wrote on March 18, 2007 9:56 PM:

I answered my own question. William E. Moschella was promoted to Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General in October 2006. I suppose that was his reward for his role in sticking that nasty business about USA appointments in the Patriot Act.

justintime wrote on March 18, 2007 10:05 PM:

We should demand that the eight fired prosecutors be reinstated in their offices so they can complete their investigations.

Pinson wrote on March 18, 2007 10:22 PM:

IIRC, the Patriot Act provision moving US-A appointment authority from the Senate to the White House was inserted at the last moment by one of Arlen Specter's staffers. Can't remember his name. The point, though, is that during the years the GOP controlled both houses, democrats were not allowed to take part in most meetings where House/Senate versions of bills were synched up. You can read more about it here.
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/002357.php

The point is that democrats had no idea the change was being made, and didn't catch it in time. This was S.O.P. procedure with Hastert and gang.

RAM wrote on March 18, 2007 10:36 PM:

Generally, they do these big data dumps on Friday to dilute the impact. That they decided to wait all weekend, suggests that there might be some really explosive stuff they've had to work hard to come up with some explanation of. This could get really interesting.

J DAlessandro wrote on March 19, 2007 7:03 AM:

Thanks for the link Pinson. I don't see it as much of an excuse for the Dems, though, do you? Surely they didn't trust Spector to look out for them!

foggylady wrote on March 19, 2007 2:23 PM:

Another piece of the same pattern emerges re: The Office of Public Integrity. Some may remember (citing the WaPo story at the time
here ):
"that Bush "promoted" the head of the Public Integrity Section, Noel Hillman, to a federal judgeship in New Jersey. Hillman had been running the section’s investigation into the lobbying activities of Jack Abramoff. Three weeks prior to his nomination, Abramoff announced his guilty plea and agreed to testify against others, including members of Congress and White House staff. Colleagues at the Justice Department said Hillman had been involved in the day-to-day management of the investigation since it first began in 2004. Democrats, among others, questioned the timing of the decision.Bush’s press secretary, Scott McClellan, assured reporters that the allegations were “nothing but pure politics,” noting that “The Justice Department is holding Mr. Abramoff to account, and the career Justice prosecutors are continuing to fully investigate the matter."
Notice the "nothing but pure politics" remark by McClellan....
Same act, different verse....

Michael wrote on March 19, 2007 7:06 PM:

Perhaps it's time to purge Congress?

Become a Purger; start your own Purge Team.

Meah Bottoms wrote on March 19, 2007 8:47 PM:

J Dalessandro

Being in the minority does this to you. The Democrats were virtually powerless for four years, and fooled badly regarding Iraq when they were in the majority after Jim Jeffords became an independent in 2001. It didn't have anything to do with spending time on cable. They were simply outvoted. Period.
The worst travesty was rescinding of Habeus Corpus just before the 2006 elections. We still have torture, and the administration covered its own ass with the Habeus Corpus debacle. 12 Democrats crossed overb to pass this. Unbelieveable.

The Oracle wrote on March 19, 2007 9:54 PM:

I wonder if Mark Foley's name will appear in any of these documents getting ready to be dumped.

Remember, Mark Foley and the House page scandal dominated the news in the month before the November elections last year.

At the same time, Republicans strategists like Rove and Gonzales (as well as some Republicans in Congress) were exerting pressure on U.S. Attorneys around the country to bring charges against Democrats.

Connection? To drive stories about Mark Foley and his Republican enablers in the House of Representatives off the front pages of newspapers? To claim that Democrats were guilty of voter fraud even as reports surfaced that Republican "Get out the vote" ?volunteers? were collecting voter registration forms from both Republicans and Democrats, and turning in Republican voter registration forms into election authorities while dumping Democratic voter registration forms into the trash?

Apparently, eight U.S. Attorneys refused to play along with this "dirty tricks" campaign in October 2006 against Democrats so in December 2006 these USAs were all fired, and were scheduled to be replaced with ultra-right-wing partisan Republican hacks who would not hesitate to file "dirty trick," unwarranted charges against Democrats just before an election.

Hey, there's another election coming up in November 2008, and Rove was just planning ahead.

kate@gmail.com wrote on April 30, 2007 10:17 PM:

hello

jimmy@gmail.com wrote on May 1, 2007 10:36 AM:

hello

jimmy@gmail.com wrote on May 1, 2007 10:36 AM:

hello

jimmy@gmail.com wrote on May 1, 2007 10:36 AM:

hello