Comments (38)

POed Lib wrote on March 28, 2007 9:43 AM:

He'll soon be learning about the job of US attorney. When you are a criminal defendent, the US attorney is an important person.

What dems need to do is 1) win the next election and 2) ensure that all the records are retained.

After all, if this skanky weazel is prosecuted now, either deliberate mistakes will be made like in New Hampshire or Bush will pardon him. Solution: Try him and convict him under a Democratic administration.

malcontent wrote on March 28, 2007 9:50 AM:

Dick Cheney has had an industrial shredding truck at the Naval Observatory (the VP's official residence) for something like three months now.

Does anyone think these guys are planning on leaving any paper trail at all? The crimes they've committed potentially carry the death penalty or life in prison, so they're not going to take any chances and start playing by the rules now.

The only way to insure that documents aren't completely destroyed is to literally remove - by force - every person loyal to this administration from a position of power. Then we could start the long and tortuous process of having a truth and reconciliation committee to make sense of the true extent of their criminality.

RockGolf wrote on March 28, 2007 10:01 AM:

In a comment below the WP article, someone claims "Monica Goodwin" (Monica GoodLING?) has skipped the country and gone to Israel. This is the woman who is, perhaps illegitimately, attempting to plead the fifth on her role on the attorney firings. (Although, I don't think she was actually listening in on Domenici's call to Iglesias - just sloppy writing at the KOBTV website.)

Mrs Pabstreppon wrote on March 28, 2007 10:06 AM:

The Sampsons do not appear to have taken a mortgage when they purchased their $425K house in June 2004. If they didn't, there may be a perfectly legitimate reason why not. Then again, the reason may be perfectly illegitimate.

Inquiring minds want to know.

Dennis wrote on March 28, 2007 10:17 AM:

"A devout Mormon born and bred in Utah...."

Somewhere along his "devout" religious upbringing, he didn't learn the lesson of humility.

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

buck turgidson wrote on March 28, 2007 10:31 AM:

RockGolf, you're a crackpot! It would be utterly irrelevant if Goodling tried to go to Israel since under no circumstances could she ever claim citizenship there. Israel might not extradite her, but it would kick her out even if her potential crimes were minor. As for the "listening in" on Domenici's calls, judging from the fact that she was deferred to by others on "sensitive" issues in this case, she probably did not just listen in, but led the conversation.

FMArouet wrote on March 28, 2007 10:35 AM:

Mrs. Pabstreppon,

D. Kyle Sampson is the son of Dennis and Carolyn Sampson of American Fork, Utah. A little scrutiny of their public records may indicate whether it is possible that they could have paid for their son's house with cash.

Lindsay wrote on March 28, 2007 10:45 AM:

Can somebody please ask David Iglesias, the fired USA from New Mexico, to run for Rep. Heather Wilson's seat?? She won by only a handful of votes last cycle and he would be a formidable candidate. And he definitely has a reason to switch parties!

jawbone wrote on March 28, 2007 10:47 AM:

Remember how ferociously the MCM* told the Democrats, when Clinton took office, that they had to get on with their governing and not investigate all those silly things which had happened under Reagan and Bush I? They had to move on and look to the future, not waste their time investigating old, well-forgotten scandals and illegalities. And, since Poppy had pardoned so many, just give up. That there was "scandal fatigue" and the people just weren't interested?

Sounds so much like "legislate, not investigate."

Gee, I wonder where that one actually came from....

Plus, with such small majorities, especially in the Senate, the MCMers know damn well most of the output from the "legislate" side will never become law.

Do not listen to MCMers, Dear Dems!

*MCM-Mainstream Corporate Media (for which I cannot take credit; I read it long ago in a comment on a blog I cannot remember where; but, it is so fitting as it brings in the corporatism which seems to be choking real journalism. I don't see it catching on, but I will plow on!

Kim McCall wrote on March 28, 2007 10:52 AM:

Humility is not the only essential precept Mr. Sampson seems to have failed to absorb.

Stick with me for a tiny bit of context. To be a Mormon in the best standing (which Sampson needs to be to remain a "bishop"), you must hold a current "temple recommend," a piece of paper signed by two local authorities that testifies of your worthiness to enter an LDS temple. [There are 124 temples around the world. Anyone is welcome in a regular house of worship, but temples are held to be especially sacred and the recommend process is intended to preserve that.]

To obtain a temple recommend, you have to give the correct answers to a list of questions. One of these is "Are you honest in your dealings with your fellow men?"

It is clear to me from his emails (see especially the "gum it to death" email) that Mr. Sampson encouraged other public employees to lie and deceive Congress. He used "good faith" as a slogan to be bandied about rather than actually observed.

Basic personal and public integrity are core principle of Mormon ethics, and it is a shame to see how ambition, loyalty to conniving superiors, and partisan greed seem to have trumped them.

DallasNE wrote on March 28, 2007 10:55 AM:

Isn't it wonderful how justice works.

Let's compare and contrast Republican efforts regarding the filing of charges into the leaking of a CIA agents name and blowing her cover with some minor election impropriaties in New Mexico.

In the case of the outing of a CIA agent the Republican were successful in getting that moved until after the 2004 election and the trial until after the 2006 election. The evidence in this case was substantial and a guilty conviction was handed down against Libby.

In the New Mexico case Republican were doing everything in their power to get an indictment handed down before the 2006 election. The old US Attorney was fired and a croney put in his place. But guess what, there still has been no indictments handed down, suggesting that there is not sufficient evidence for filing an indictment.

As we can see in each of these cases the driving force for Republicans was not justice but crass politics.

RockGolf wrote on March 28, 2007 11:28 AM:

Buck: Believe me, I'd be delighted if the whole White House staff were led away in chains for what they've done to America, and if that makes me a crackpot so be it. All I'm suggesting is that the original wording of the article about Goodling is that it makes no specific reference to her being "in on the call" and that we're reading more into it than there is. There's enough real scandal going on without having to invent any. As to the Israel trip, I'm only reporting what is mentioned in the WP article comments. I'd like to know if there's any truth to it. If Monica has left the country for Israel or Indonesia or Ireland for that matter as an attempt to avoid testimony, then, my friend, we have a smoking gun.

Mooser wrote on March 28, 2007 11:40 AM:

So the US Attourney imbroglio is shaping up as "The Battle Between the Robertson Fundies and the Utah Mormons"
My money is on the Mormons. It is historically unarguable that they will kill when ordered to.
It was the "birth" of an inland nation.

Kim McCall wrote on March 28, 2007 11:52 AM:

Mooser,

I, for one, would appreciate it if you could be a bit more concrete in your slurs and innuendos. Also, be careful about tarring an entire group based on the sins of one subgroup.

That said, I will agree that the Mountain Meadows Massacre was one of the most horrible acts of domestic terrorism in the history of the US. More?

Anonymous wrote on March 28, 2007 11:55 AM:

Brigham Young, eh? Figures. Did you know that they're #3 on the list of Universities most likely to get you a scholarship from the Heritage Foundation? I wonder if he got one...

TCinLA wrote on March 28, 2007 12:02 PM:

Like the professionals have been saying: "home-indoctrinated graduates of bible colleges" in describing your standard issue Bushie. These Boys and Girls from Brazil are going to be tough to eventually deal with in the re-education camps.

/snark

Anonymous wrote on March 28, 2007 12:16 PM:

FMArouet@March 28, 2007 10:35 AM

Sampson's parents bought a house in American Fork in 1998 which has 2006 market value of $170k but that tells me nothing because I don't anything about property values in Utah.

If anyone other than a relative of Kyle and Noelle Sampson financed the purchase of their house, someone in charge better start asking questions.

Kyle and Noelle are registered to vote in Utah which means they are claiming Utah residency which would probably be done for income tax purposes.

Check out my latest comment in the Monica Goodling thread. I posted some of the details of the three criminal cases she purportedly was prosecuting.

All three cases were initially filed between 10/28/04 and 12/23/04. The cases involved passport fraud, I-94 fraud and gun charges. Relatively minor stuff, imo.

In two of the three cases, the defendants were represented by the federal public defender. The file is not updated in the third case so I don't who represented the defendant.

If Monica was prosecuting these cases to enhance her credentials to support an appointment to a USA or AUSA position, these cases were fixed and the defendants never had a chance.

The DOJ would have been looking for a 100% prosecution success rate and you better believe the judges would have been told to rule for the plaintiff.

Someone in the press or the Dems need to find out why Goodling was prosecuting criminal cases while she was the DOJ WH liason. Someone also has to find out the outcome in the three cases.

I'm going to post a federal appeals case next that has Monica listed as the special assistant prosecutor. Luttig was the judge so you know the defendant never stood a chance of winning that appeal.

LOL - If Monica lost the cases, her chances of being a USA or an AUSA would have gone out the window and I would be relieved of a very troublesome thought.

Mrs Panstreppon wrote on March 28, 2007 12:17 PM:

FMArouet@March 28, 2007 10:35 AM

That last post was mine, obviously.

RobbyLove wrote on March 28, 2007 12:18 PM:

I am a Christian Democrat and I wish my fellow Dems would assist in taking back the moral high-ground in the public debate when it comes to our faith. Just because I believe the death penalty is morally wrong, only God can judge our personal decisions, and charity to those who are less fortunate is a virtue...I get labeled a "bleeding-heart liberal". My faith is the foundation for those beliefs, not the ideology of liberalism. How did we allow the so-called Christian Right to be the only group that is referred to as Christians?

Think about it. When someone refers to "Christians" people automatically think "Republican" or "Right-wing".

Based upon the track record of these reactionary Christians it seems that we Christian Democrats have a prime opportunity to show what a true believer really is: Forgiving, Charitable, Loving, Tolerant, and Moral.

It pains me that my representatives are hesitant to proclaim their faith. It's seen as a "Republican thing". I don't care if the person is Mormon, Protestant, or Southern Baptist. If they behave the way this administration has with their actions and policies I would not want them to be viewed as Christians.

The "Christian Right" has soured the nation's, and even the world's, view of Christianity. I for one am sick of it and wish we could find someone in the party who would support us so that we can stand up proudly and proclaim: "I'm a Christian. I'm a Democrat. And I won't have my faith smeared by you wolves-in-sheeps-clothing any longer."

/rant off

-Robby

brians3 wrote on March 28, 2007 12:29 PM:

The "Slow your motor" comment prompted me to look at the photo of Sampson at the same time and this sudden realization came over me.

This guy is George, from Seinfeld.

Look. It's George.

Has anyone else noticed this, too?

Maybe a little more hair. But he's George, no doubt about it.

readerOfTeaLeaves wrote on March 28, 2007 12:36 PM:

Just a quick note, should anyone read it. Kyle Sampson may have graduated from BYU (Brigham Young Univ), and I wouldn't trust the guy to collect my garbage and get it to the landfill.

That being said, I grew up in a community with many Mormons, and simply want to note that confusing Sampson with Mormonism is foolish. After all, Abu Gonzales is a Harvard Law grad.

Both men sully the reputations of the institutions that granted them diplomas, and both men have shown themselves to be mendacious, foolish, and partisan.

But that shouldn't smear Mormons, or Harvard.
I know some Mormons that I would trust my life to; same is true of a long-time friend of mine who graduated from Harvard Law.

DallasNE wrote on March 28, 2007 12:36 PM:

It is fun to watch as the Bushies eat their own, a spectator sport akin to March Madness. In this case it is a different kind of dribbling.

A nice summary can be seen here.

http://www.btcnews.com/btcnews/1620#more-1620

Robert Green wrote on March 28, 2007 12:45 PM:

objectively, can we all agree that having people in extremely important positions in government who went to schools such as "Messiah College" and "Pat Robertson Law School" and Brigham Young...

do i need to finish this thought? are we all supposed to be so polite about people's silly beliefs? i'm sorry, but there are many many many better schools teaching actual non-mygodisbetterthanyours knowledge out there. it makes me sick to think that people who are professionally misled (by choice, in many cases!) are out there ruining our country. can you please (and yes that includes you christian democrat above) just leave you damn religion out of our commonweal? please?

FMArouet wrote on March 28, 2007 12:51 PM:

Mrs Panstreppon,

Hmmm. Very interesting. In view of the home purchase that you uncovered, it looks as though Sampson's parents are likely ordinary middle class folks living a normal middle class life in American Fork, Utah. It seems unlikely that they could give D. Kyle Sampson $425,000 for the cash purchase of his house in 2004. Maybe Kyle's parents are wealthy and still live extremely modestly, like Warren Buffet does, but such people are extremely rare. It seems increasingly likely that there is an interesting story behind the $425,000 (or more) that entered D. Kyle Sampson's life in 2004 or perhaps shortly before.

Together with the outstanding loose end about the identity of the $91,000 tax scofflaw (also a Kyle Sampson) with a Washington, DC post office box address, you may end up uncovering a $500,000 "commission" for "unofficial" services rendered to a lobbyist.

Good luck to you in your detective work. Maybe someone will read your post and chime in with a worthwhile lead for your line of questioning.

RobbyLove wrote on March 28, 2007 12:54 PM:

Mr. Green,

No reason to turn this into a debate on religion as you have done me a favor by illustrating my point in spades.

One question however: How is someone's belief in God any less valid then your belief that there isn't a God? Your attitude is intolerant and narrow-minded, and contributes to emboldening the reactionaries.

Mrs Panstreppon wrote on March 28, 2007 12:56 PM:

FMArouet@March 28, 2007 10:35 AM

Think about this one. In the middle of a presidential election, Monica hauls herself down to the USA-EDVA's office and takes on two public defender cases. One of the defendants even needed a Spanish interpreter. On 12/23/04, she takes on another case. (Did Goodling actually appear in court on 12/23/04)

On 2/24/05, Kyle Sampson prepared a summary evaluation of USAs. In 3/2/05 email to Miers, Sampson refers to the summary that he gave to Miers. I don't think we have the original email from Sampson to Miers in which he transmitted the
summary.

Sampson surely would have known if Goodling was in line an USA or other similar position. He probably would know about Goodling prosecuted criminal cases and why she was prosecuting them.

I wonder if the SJC will ask Sampson about the Goodling issue.

FMArouet wrote on March 28, 2007 1:16 PM:

Mrs. Panstreppon,

There seems to be no rational explanation other than that the DOJ and Bushies were padding Monica's flimsy, virtually content-free resume to put her in line for something else.

Two questions that need answers:

(1) What, exactly, was that "something else" intended to be?

(2) Did Monica actually meet whatever requirements the court had in place for her to prosecute these seemingly slam-dunk, but relatively routine and trivial cases? Or was she granted a "waiver" of the standard court qualifications for prosecutors?

(I apologize if this question has already been answered by you or someone else in one of these threads.)

Al Brito wrote on March 28, 2007 1:17 PM:

This guy is the re-incarnation of George Constanza...

Mrs Panstreppon wrote on March 28, 2007 1:20 PM:

FMArouet@March 28, 2007 12:51 PM

I've gone as far as I can go with these questions. I know Paul Kiel reads the comments so maybe he will pass the questions on to someone who can get them answered.

I'm surprised that no one in the TPM MR has commented as to why Monica Goodling was prosecuting criminal cases while she was the DOJ WH liason. If there is a straightforward answer to questions here, someone usually provides it.

I'm not a lawyer and I have no idea how a US Attorney's office operates and how cases are assigned. I doubt that whoever was the USA-EDVA then called Monica at Main Justice and asked her if she wanted to prosecute some criminal cases for fun.

I am sure Chuck Rosenberg, Gonzales' new chief of staff, knows why Monica Goodling was handling criminal cases out of the USA-EDVA office. Rosenberg was a AUSA in that office at the time and bringing in the DOJ WH liason to prosecute low-level criminal cases would have been a big deal. You can bet Rosenberg discussed the Goodling issue with his colleagues.

Hello? Is anyone in the press going to ask Chuck Rosenberg why Monica Goodling was prosecuting low-level criminal cases out his office the fall of 2004?

Mrs Panstreppon wrote on March 28, 2007 1:36 PM:

FMArouet@March 28, 2007 01:16 PM

I don't want to jump to the conclusion that I want the conclusion to be but for the life of me, I can't come up with an even halfway reasonable idea as to why Monica was prosecuting low-level criminal cases in the fall of 2004 other than to pad her resume.

We don't even have evidence that Monica Goodling ever passed the bar exam. I saw her name on an Excel spreadsheet posted at the Memory Hole that supposedly is a list of a Virginia lawyers but so what? No dates, no source, no anything - just an Excel spreadsheet that happens to have Monica Goodling's name on it.

On the other hand, Monica Goodling is not listed in Martindale or Westlaw which seems odd to me.

In the appeals case I posted in the Monica thread, Monica is listed as a "special" assistant attorney. What does "special" mean? Does it mean someone who hasn't yet passed the bar?

If Monica never passed the bar, that is a big deal and especially if she was under consideration for a USA or other similar position.

The blackout in the press on Monica's background is suspicious. As we discussed, if Monica is related to former GOP congressman William "Bill" Goodling, that is newsworthy. You better believe that if Monica was related to a Democratic politician, it would be all over the news by now.

So many questions, so few answers.

feckless wrote on March 28, 2007 2:24 PM:

SUBPOENA ALL WHITE HOUSE HARD DRIVES NOW.

It doesn't matter what they delete or what hard copies they shred, its all still on the hard drive. The only way to really destroy it is to physically smash the harddrive or to run a scrambling program. Both of which leave obvious evidence of a cover up.

I would be suspicious of a sudden tech upgrade in the whitehouse. Is Lurita in charge of facilities like government issued personal computers?

ed wrote on March 28, 2007 2:31 PM:

Not all lawyers are listed on westlaw or m-h or findlaw. I don't believe I am.

AS for Prosecuting cases, Some Offices let loaners prosecute cases. THese are very busy offices and sometimes large law firms ask to have some of their young "trial" attorneys take cases. SOme at PD's offices and some at prosecutors. Beyond that Some Law students are allowed to prosecute minor cases. I seriously doubt that the fix was in on any of these cases. Most cases in criminal court, state or fed are pretty simple.

Mrs Panstreppon wrote on March 28, 2007 3:36 PM:

ed@March 28, 2007 02:31 PM

All very well and good but why would a high-level DOJ official become a "loaner" in the fall of 2004?

I'm not sure if Monica was the WH liaison at the time or the DOJ spokeswoman but there was an presidential election campaign ongoing at the time . You'd think she would have been needed at Main Justice to handle communications.

AG John Ashcroft might know the answer because he was still in office.

You are right. I shouldn't assume the judges were involved in fixing the outcome of the cases. What was fixed is Monica's prosecution rate if she was handed no-brainer cases.

Again, there may be a perfectly legitimate reason why Monica was prosecuting low-level criminal cases out of the USA-EDVA's office in the fall of 2004 but I don't see it.

ed wrote on March 28, 2007 3:54 PM:

Oh, I agree that there is no reason that someone with such a high level job would take up cases at A USA office other than resume padding for a USA position. the loaners are usually first or second year lawyers that big firms want to cut their teeth beore taking real client's cases.

Incidently that was the track the FBI director was on before he took either a PD or a DA loaner assignment in the 70's.

Mrs Panstreppon wrote on March 28, 2007 4:52 PM:

ed@March 28, 2007 03:54 PM

I'm so darned curious about the outcome of the cases prosecuted by Monica, I think I will phone the federal public defender's office tomorrow and ask someone.

I have two names from the case file:

Anne Michelle Chapman @(703)600-0800
Suzanne Little@(703)600-0850 or (703)600-0800

LOL - I'd like to ask about how Monica handled herself in the courtroom but I doubt Ms. Chapman or Ms. Little will respond.

PatchC wrote on March 28, 2007 5:43 PM:

You didn't think this part was funny?! -
W alking into the FBI gym for a basketball game in 2003 or 2004 to play against John Ashcroft and his boys, you would have found it easy to dismiss the former attorney general's point guard, D. Kyle Sampson. He was, and, well, still is, short and balding and chubby, looking like a smaller Karl Rove. But then at tip-off you would have discovered that Sampson was not a throwaway player or fill-in but a guy with legitimate skills. In a blur he'd take over the game as the best one-guards do: firing no-look passes to open teammates (including Ashcroft, the team's forward), passing the ball behind his back, breaking through a crowd for a layup and taking terribly accurate jump shots that left you and any of the other people he played against--FBI agents, U.S. attorneys, other members of the Justice Department--deflated and quite frankly stunned.

J Marra wrote on March 28, 2007 11:42 PM:

MCM-Mainstream Corporate Media

Why limit it to mainstream? Haven't you noticed that Corporate Media is on the web, and on the coffee cups, and the feel-good rallies and Walk For The Umpteenth Cure too? They even disguise themselves as real people with real blogs. Very viral. Maybe call it the Bloodstream Corporate Media, it's infected us so. They want to get in every stream they can, main, secondary, tributary, creek, trickle.

BJ Fogg wrote on March 30, 2007 6:11 AM:

When I attended BYU, Kyle Sampson lived in my apartment building. I knew him fairly well. I am a progressive California resident now, but I can say Kyle was a good guy -- an honest, likable person. The comments on this page about Kyle as a person are wrong, unless he has completely changed. As a psychologist who teaches at Stanford University, I find this dramatic change unlikely. I would wager he's the same old Kyle I knew -- a good guy.

I haven't agreed with Kyle's political views. Personally, I believe Bush has committed crimes and should be impeached. But after reading the unfair comments about Kyle here, I need to say something. Many of the comments on this page are not true. The personal attacks people have written about Kyle -- his appearance and his ambition -- reflect poorly on the people who wrote them.