« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Today's Must Read
Let's take a look at one of the key lines of questioning that Alberto Gonzales is sure to face during his hearing tomorrow -- a line of questioning made all the more damaging by the revelation in today's papers of a senior Justice Department official's testimony.
Michael Battle, until recently the director of the Executive Office for United States Attorneys which is the liaison between the U.S. attorneys and main Justice, told congressional investigators earlier this month that he was not aware of any "performance issues" for "several" of the prosecutors. The first he heard of any problems was when the order came down to fire them.
Let's look at how this reflects on Gonzales.
Let us assume, as Gonzales wants us to assume, that he had nothing to do with the nitty-gritty aspects of the firings. He got the process rolling (placing it in the hands of the 30-something staffer who'd prosecuted a single case in his life), flitted in and out for the occasional and brief conversation with Kyle Sampson about how it was going, and then signed off on the list. Why they were fired? That was a niggling detail best left to subordinates. The big picture was that there were performance related reasons for the firings.
And Gonzales held on to that storyline, even when the very people tasked with managing U.S. attorneys abandoned it.
On February 6th, Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee. He said that seven of the eight fired U.S. attorneys had been terminated for "performance related" reasons -- but one of them, U.S. Attorney for Little Rock Bud Cummins, had not. Cummins had been asked to step aside for no other reason than to install Tim Griffin, Karl Rove's former aide.
Now, McNulty's testimony -- with regard to Cummins, at least -- was accurate. But it veered from the story.
And Gonzales was angry, or "extremely upset," according to a February 7th email from his spokesman, Brian Roehrkasse: "The AG is extremely upset with the stories on the US Attys this morning. He also thought some of the DAG's statements were inaccurate."
When this email was released along with thousands of others last month, Roehrkasse explained just what Gonzales had been so upset about -- because he believed that "Bud Cummins' removal involved performance considerations and it was that aspect of the DAG's testimony that the Attorney General was questioning."
Now, one of the traditional roles of the deputy attorney general is to be the senior official in charge of the U.S. attorneys. If there had actually been a performance issue with a U.S. attorney, McNulty would have known about it, because it would have been his responsibility to do something. But even though the supposed performance issues with regard to a number of the U.S. attorneys were so shaky as to be something of a mystery even to McNulty (in a December 5th email, he wrote that he's "skittish" about firing Nevada's Daniel Bogden and admits to not having seen a performance review), he'd been unwilling to lie about Cummins.
And remember that Gonzales claims to know little or nothing about why these U.S. attorneys were actually fired. But he knew the reason they were supposed to be fired. And McNulty had screwed that story up.
In that February 7th email, Roehrkasse also wrote that Gonzales wanted to know what he could do to strike back, to clear the air. "I suggested a clearly worded op-ed," Roehrkasse writes.
One month later, the day after another senior Justice official, William Moschella, testifed to Congress and enumerated the supposed performance reasons behind the firings, that op-ed finally appeared in USA Today.
The seven U.S. attorneys fired in December, Gonzales wrote (apparently excluding Cummins), "simply lost my confidence." The whole scandal was "an overblown personnel matter."
But why had those U.S. attorneys lost his confidence? Did Gonzales even know?
When Gonzales testifies, you can bet that Battle and McNulty will be as interested to hear what he says as the rest of us.
Comments (60)
steambomb wrote on April 16, 2007 10:24 AM:Key conservatives have written a letter to Bush calling for the firing of Fredo. Damn it! Dont fire him yet. We still have an investigation to finish! NO RESIGNATION IN LIEU OF JUSTICE!
Code word blood!
Anonymous wrote on April 16, 2007 10:35 AM:I've thought a lot about this and think the age bias is a little unfair.
The facts show that Kyle Sampson, Monica Goodling and Tim Griffin are all in their 30's, and woefully unqualified for the jobs that they were given (or were in theprocess of trying to get at DOJ). Maybe that means all 30-somethings are not qualified for DOJ jobs, maybe not.
But there are, and have been, some extraordinary 30-year olds doing extraordinary things in this country. Heck, RFK was Attorney General in his 30's.
I'm just not holding out hope that there's much hope of talented 30-something political appointees in the present Administration.
But don't tag us all as Kyle Sampson!
Dem-agog wrote on April 16, 2007 10:39 AM:Gonzo will put on his usual show. The Repubs will lob softballs at him & claim there's no scandal here ("it was just handled poorly..."). The Dems will grill him, he'll deflect ("..to my knowledge..", "..I misspoke..", "..I can't recall.."). The hearing will end. At the worst, Gonzo will resign and move on. This is the teflon administration.
Shouldn't special prosecutors be appointed to pursue these scandals in the courts so that *maybe* there will be some real, potential punishment?
code word "book", as in "book 'em!"
Virginia Dutch wrote on April 16, 2007 10:41 AM:I think mental, not physical, age is the issue here.
By that measure, our President clearly doesn't meet Constitutional requirements for the job, having just turned seventeen.
Anonymous wrote on April 16, 2007 10:43 AM:Expect Gonzales to "take responsibility" (TM).
"Taking Responsibility" (TM) requires members of the GOP to say they "take responsibility" (TM) for various things that go horribly wrong as a result of their management. Then they proceed ahead as if nothing had happened, making no changes.
"Taking Responsibility" (TM) is presently happening over at the World Bank as Paul Wolfowitz's hand in inflating his girlfriends plum job salary has been reveled. "Confident of the World Bank's role to aleviate poverty," (as if that were ever in question), Wolfowitz "took responsibility" (TM). He then refused to resign and refused to ask his girlfriend to resign - or to bring her pay in line with policy.
Nope, he "took responsibility" (TM).
Expect nothing less from the Attorney General tomorrow.
Jim wrote on April 16, 2007 10:44 AM:From TIME: In what could prove an embarrassing new setback for embattled Attorney General Alberto Gonzales on the eve of his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, a group of influential conservatives and longtime Bush supporters has written a letter to the White House to call for his resignation.
The two-page letter, written on stationery of the American Freedom Agenda, a recently formed body designed to promote conservative legal principles, is blunt. Addressed to both Bush and Gonzales, it goes well beyond the U.S. attorneys controversy and details other alleged failings by Gonzales. "Mr. Gonzales has presided over an unprecedented crippling of the Constitution's time-honored checks and balances," it declares. "He has brought rule of law into disrepute, and debased honesty as the coin of the realm." Alluding to ongoing scandal, it notes: "He has engendered the suspicion that partisan politics trumps evenhanded law enforcement in the Department of Justice."
The letter concludes by saying, "Attorney General Gonzales has proven an unsuitable steward of the law and should resign for the good of the country... The President should accept the resignation, and set a standard to which the wise and honest might repair in nominating a successor..." It is the first public demand by a group of conservatives for Gonzales' firing. Signatories to the letter include Bruce Fein, a former senior official in the Reagan Justice Department, who has worked frequently with current Administration and the Republican National Committee to promote Bush's court nominees; David Keene, chairman of the influential American Conservative Union, one of the nation's oldest and largest grassroots conservative groups, Richard Viguerie, a well-known GOP direct mail expert and fundraiser, Bob Barr, the former Republican congressman from Georgia and free speech advocate, as well as John Whitehead, head of the Rutherford Institute, a conservative non-forit active in fighting for what it calls religious freedoms.
warren wrote on April 16, 2007 10:46 AM:I guess Gonzales is going to get a taste of the fruits of loyalty to W. How did we get to a place where the attorney general has so little regard for the law? Was he really so deluded about the infallibility of the secret circle at the WH?
bobh wrote on April 16, 2007 10:47 AM:http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/20070415/pl_bloomberg/a8zc7nyappek
Finally this schmuck says what should have been said by repugs months ago.
Rusty wrote on April 16, 2007 10:49 AM:Firing/Impeachment is far too little to fix this sad affair. Justice will not be served until Gonzales has been barred from any practice of law (he clearly doesn't understand how it work) and banned from holding any government position (he obviously doesn't know how that works either). Then he need to be prosecuted for the abuses of the FISA laws. Afterwards, he needs to be tried in the International Court for the torture memos, rendition and other illegal practices under US and International Law.
A messge need to be sent. You cannot behave in this fashionand escape by resignation. Losing your job is not enough for complicity in War Crimes and abuse of the Constitution. The American people and other members of the world community MUST demand it.
nellieh wrote on April 16, 2007 10:49 AM:Hopefully the concerned questioners will dispense with the phony "I have high regard for AG Gonzales" but... and go after him tooth and nail! He is a proven liar (NSA, USAs, prisons, torture)and he deserves no respect. How much of a weasel and liar do you have to be to call a duck a duck? This can be no more contentious than Watergate , Iran-Contra or Whitewater. The Republicans spent $50,000,000.00 on a spot of gizz. Get this incompetent, lying asshole. Code word tooth
Nina wrote on April 16, 2007 10:52 AM:The only setback an immediate resignation of AG would cause is to the pursuit of justice. Remember Monica Goodling? Is she still in the Congress's sights? Aren't we going to hear from her? Like Goodling, it seems Gonzales treasures loyalty above public service, or possibly conflates the two. AG's op-ed piece in WSJ is pathetic.
ken melvin wrote on April 16, 2007 10:57 AM:LBJ said pay attention to what they don't say. In the hearings, what Gonzales wasn't saying told you that he didn't make the decision. What he isn't saying speaks volumes.
Richard L. Adlof wrote on April 16, 2007 11:00 AM:This is a potential criminal matter . . . Complete with conspiritors. Whether the Torture Czar decided to hop the midnight train to Dubai or not . . . This thing requires a complete public airing and several referrals to the Justice Department for investigation and prosecution.
It is also about time to start another set of hearings on any of the other criminal doings by the White House. The more off balance they are in the Wbite House the better. Starting the war in Iraq is perfect . . . Especially in light of the Chimp-in-Charge's bluster of late on the subject.
Bill Peterson wrote on April 16, 2007 11:06 AM:The facts are simple: Rove likes to use "election fraud" as a cover for his dirty tricks. Some of the US Attorney's weren't "playing ball", so Rove had them fired. Simple as that. How is Gonzales supposed to spin that?
BP
Richard L. Adlof wrote on April 16, 2007 11:07 AM:FISA!!! RICO is more appropriate.
Sorry about the tenor of the thought . . .
melior wrote on April 16, 2007 11:07 AM:I predict "taking responsibility" won't be enough this time around for AG^2.
No, this time he will pledge to "take full responsibility".
PA citizen wrote on April 16, 2007 11:08 AM:From today's Wapo article:
"Sen. Arlen Specter (Pa.), the committee's ranking Republican, also said Gonzales should consider reinstating the fired U.S. attorneys."
Senator Specter needs to be questioned regarding the circumstances surrounding the insertion of the provision into the Patriot Act -- USA appointments without Senate confirmation -- which lies at the heart of this conspiracy.
Jim wrote on April 16, 2007 11:09 AM:It is interesting to hear what the replacment USA for Carol Lam has been doing. SCOTT SCHOOLS has been busy trying to retry a marijuana advocate after the person was already tried and sentenced to 1 day in jail. This attempt is apparently pay back retribution for the man getting off with a light sentence. Obviously the man was a Democrat as all liberals are Democrats and only Democrats smoke pot. It is comforting to hear that Carol's replacement is focussed on such high-profile cases and double persuing any Democratic wrongdoer even after they have been convicted.
Rusty wrote on April 16, 2007 11:10 AM:BTW - Good luck. Hope TPM wins the Pulitzer. You guys deserve it, whether you win or not. Keep up the good work.
tpmfan wrote on April 16, 2007 11:21 AM:Just think. Before Gonzalez became an heroic figurehead/role model in Washington, he was appointed to the Texas Supreme Court by you know who, where he sat in Judgement on more death row appeals than any other state in the country. Wonder if he just did what he was told then.
C Turner Joy wrote on April 16, 2007 11:24 AM:I just found this:
"Emanuel is credited with making the dismissal of eight U.S. attorneys a major issue for Democrats."
here:http://www.suntimes.com/news/novak/341058,CST-EDT-novak15.article
Says who? Novak? This is the first I've heard that Rahm is credited with this. Did I miss something?
lucky wrote on April 16, 2007 11:25 AM:codeword: Smile.
Couldn't pass that one up. Smile - something much more likely to be seen on my face than Alberto's the next few days .
varney wrote on April 16, 2007 11:39 AM:I wish Senators would follow up on an "I take responsibility" statement.
For example: "Atty Gen Gonzales, please tell us more. Does your statement of 'I take responsibility' mean anything more than simply saying it here? What actions are you intending to take that exemplify 'taking responsibility', sir.?"
Arkansan wrote on April 16, 2007 11:43 AM:"Says who? Novak? This is the first I've heard that Rahm is credited with this. Did I miss something?"
""Emanuel is credited with making the dismissal of eight U.S. attorneys a major issue for Democrats."
Was just a mistake, it should read:
"Emanuel has claimed credit for making the dismissal of eight U.S. attorneys a major issue for Democrats."
Books Alive wrote on April 16, 2007 11:45 AM:Jim, re the American Freedom Agenda:
I listened to their presser on March 20 on C-Span via XM radio. Have always wondered how Bruce Fein could live with himself after supporting Bush twice. Not willing to abandon the party, he and these other Conservative Republicans (or former, as in Barr's case) have decided on this letter as their initial course of action.
No doubt the truths in this letter will fall on deaf ears, but even if Gonzales should be fired or resign, Leahy has said he will not confirm a replacement Atty Gen until this investigation is concluded.
mbbsdphil wrote on April 16, 2007 11:51 AM:Mr. Gonzales is an autopen, at the DOJ for his signature. He's smart enough to know that, and to know that Rove's Shoppe made all the USA decisions, including whether to tell the President. Mr. Gonzales had just come from the White House staff and knew precisely how much control Mr. Rove and Mr. Cheney had over "Furious George" (Neil Kinkopf).
The question is how long Rove will make Mr. Gonzales twist in the wind before he cuts him down. Since impeachment seems unlikely, it will be until Republicans in Congress tell him their election prospects are harmed rather than helped by having Dennis the Menace remain at the DOJ.
bobh wrote on April 16, 2007 11:52 AM:Considering how conservatives have finally started calling for his resignation and this:
http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,131412,00.html?ESRC=dod.nl
Reservist May Have Been Wrongly Fired
gets play on Military.com no less
i think they finally realize the threat Gonzo poses to their continued hold on the presidency.
All the more reason to rake him over the coals tomorrow.
tekel wrote on April 16, 2007 11:55 AM:Alberto Gonzales: dead man walking. Gonzales is the final firewall for Rove. If Bush gave the order, he would fall on his sword- so the simple fact of his continued presence as AG means he's still just following orders now, and Bush must think he's still doing a heckuva job.
RandyR wrote on April 16, 2007 11:57 AM:The most important thing to happen tomorrow is for the Senators to remember that this is about asking questions not making speeches. If the public perceives this lack of discipline it could go against the Dems.
The focus should be about crime. Why did Lam have to wait months for indictments?? The phone calls in New Mexico? Attempted interference in the Washington State Governors race? Interference in the Plame outing case, why was there no other indictments? The letters to Rove and political prosecutions in Wisconsin?
There has been tons of prosecutorial interference for political purposes and Gonzolozes must answer.
So, Senators put away those egos and go get 'em.
Security Code: round What goes around comes a round.
jrcjr wrote on April 16, 2007 11:58 AM:I thought only the President could fire the state attorneys.
wonder if AG AG will be asked about bush's involvement.
nattyb wrote on April 16, 2007 12:03 PM:Don't these guys have any shame? Any other country, administration even - Wolfowitz and Gonzales would've resigned months ago over these scandals.
Shameless
JEP wrote on April 16, 2007 12:03 PM:"This is the teflon administration."
Hasn't it been determined that teflon is carcinogenic and contributed to the depletion of the ozone layer?
Bush LIPS sink ships. wrote on April 16, 2007 12:06 PM:" "Families gathered here understand that our troops want to finish the job."
Bush doesn't remember: mission was accomplished almost 4 years ago.
mbbsdphil wrote on April 16, 2007 12:07 PM:Security Code: bent.
Mr. Bush does not need a good reason to fire a US Attorney, or most other political appointees (cxcept for those, like the National Archivist, who fulfill statutory terms.) But he may not fire them for corrupt reasons.
The MSM and Shout Media will call this a distinction without a difference, echoing their "no underlying crime" falsehood from the Libby trial. Alternative Media must call them on those falsehoods.
Cheryl wrote on April 16, 2007 12:17 PM:TIME Magazine
The two-page letter, written on stationery of the American Freedom Agenda, a recently formed body designed to promote conservative legal principles, is blunt. Addressed to both Bush and Gonzales, it goes well beyond the U.S. attorneys controversy and details other alleged failings by Gonzales. "Mr. Gonzales has presided over an unprecedented crippling of the Constitution's time-honored checks and balances," it declares. "He has brought rule of law into disrepute, and debased honesty as the coin of the realm." Alluding to ongoing scandal, it notes: "He has engendered the suspicion that partisan politics trumps evenhanded law enforcement in the Department of Justice."
HEY, since when do Republican organizations or politicians EVER cared about time-honored checks and balances, the rule of law, any disrepute, or debased honesty?
As the ever diligent Josh Marshall has shown the public at large, that it’s not Gonzales per say but rather this administration that cares absolutely nothing for time-honored checks and balances, the rule of law, any disrepute or honesty.
Oh those damn Republicans, please don't make me retch, as if they really give a damn about ethcial behavior.
Since WHEN?
The loyal Bushies FIRE Ashcroft for not doing what the Pres and his closest cohorts (Dick and Rove) told him to do, namely wiretapping without court oversight, torture or whatever else Bush wanted to do. So Gonzales, in order to keep his job, cleary and precisely took all his directives ONLY from the Bushies, law breaking, political or otherwise.
The Bushies simple wouldn't have had it any other way. And these Repugs want to hypocritically pretend that this was all Gonzales doing? Jeebus.
Bush has waited to long to fire Gonzales - this scandal exposes the heart of this administration. The American Freedom Agenda must have as hard a time dealing with "honest" reality as does the loyal Bushie administration.
Firing Gonzales WILL NOT make this nasty, fetid administration smell any better. Firing Gonzales won't solve anything, and you think those stupid lawyers who say they are promote conservative legal principles would at least be that much clued into the facts in issue here.
Nope, they should just keep right on praying to their GOD Bush and see if he can answer all their prays. At least their demigod has been the answer to Dems prays these days, so keep right on pretending that Bush is the almighty icon of Republican virtue. Pretend that Gonzales wasn't doing exactly what Bush told him to do.
br wrote on April 16, 2007 12:18 PM:The "pleasure of the president" argument is like saying that since I have every right to give $10,000 to a federal judge (for example, if I buy a used car from him), there's nothing wrong with me giving him $10,000 to decide a case the way I want.
JohnVA wrote on April 16, 2007 12:25 PM:As he attempted to do in his recent Op-Ed, Gonzalez is going to try to so say that no one was fired for any "improper" reasons. "Improper" is the key word here. He will try to draw the line in the sand that the only "improper" reason would be to disrupt an ongoing investigation and that anything else is legit because they serve at the pleasure of the President and he can do whatever he wants.
Obviously this doesn't hold water when the case being made is that these US Attorneys were fired because they wouldn't abuse the legal system in order benefit Republican political candidates.
When you look at everything together, you can see the situation clearly. Looking at Wisconsin, Washington (State), and New Mexico it becomes obvious that the Republicans had come to expect help in elections from the Justice Department and when the US Attorneys in Washington & New Mexico wouldn't deliver an election to them by investigating non-existent voter fraud or illegally announcing secret grand jury investigations focused on state Dems; they were quickly fired. In Wisconsin, the US Attorney played ball just well enough to keep is job in the end bringing charges against a number of poor minority voters.
Watch out for "Improper" tomorrow and I wonder who will force Gonzalez to explicitly define what "improper" means to him.
Neal wrote on April 16, 2007 12:27 PM:Regarding 30 year olds-while it is clear that age is no guarantee of competence (as is proved by Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc), it is striking how many 30 year olds were placed in important positions in this administration (including one being chief advisor on Iraq). Why would that be? Perhaps the lack of independant experience with the accompanying lack of a habit to separate good ideas from bad ideas is of value to this administration. Or, erhaps the untempered idealism of youth is valued. Maybe the ethics-negating drive for advancement of the relatively new worker is valued. Hero worship could be a big motivation for the younger worker. A lack of exposure to constitutional and legal issues appears to be an asset. A black-and-white worldview is held more easily by the inexperienced. And, if you hire the incompetent and inexpereienced, they will always live in fear for their jobs so they are much more malleable. Not saying all 30 year olds exhibit these characteristics, but it certainly is a proven factor in many of the administration appointees.
drational wrote on April 16, 2007 12:45 PM:Ask Gonzales why they have not been fully forthcoming with congressional document requests:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/4/16/91725/6916
bjobotts wrote on April 16, 2007 12:46 PM:What a joke. Every single person appointed by Bush has proved to be incompetent. Every single political appointee has demonstrated their incompetence or corruption and are rewarded for it. Think about it...insert any name from Rice on down...and they are there merely to promote Bush/Cheney/Rove agenda and not the constitution or American Democracy. Bring out the roach spray.
rlogan wrote on April 16, 2007 12:50 PM:You can't have it both ways.
The president wasn't involved...
The president appoints and fires USA's as is his perogative.
ce wrote on April 16, 2007 1:51 PM:Even if Gonzales resigns,....wasn't or isn't there still some political collaboration from the whitehouse that needs to be addressed. The storyline that he mishandled the situation doesn't come close to explaining what happened and why to the American people. It just itches our curiosity of a full explanation. Or will congress say ok, we're satisfied with that?
Anthony wrote on April 16, 2007 1:53 PM:Gonzo says he "simply lost my confidence." Simply lost confidence? Based on what? There really is no explantion here.
Anthony wrote on April 16, 2007 2:00 PM:"simply lost my confidence" isn't a real explanation. It's a non-explanation. It's like saying I did X because. Why? Just, because. It's suppose to cover all the other stuff that has gone wrong with the Justice Dept. handling of the fired AGs. I cna't imagine he intends to tell Congrees that I fired them just because.
Austin Cooper wrote on April 16, 2007 2:03 PM:"You can't have it both ways."
Sure you can.
Impeach Gonzales. On the current issue, he's shown himself as a political hack -- whose incompetence and lack of understanding that the office of AG is not just that of being Bush's bum-boy -- whose priorities are personal and partisan and have nothing to do with justice;
** and **
Impeach Bush and Cheney for critically fouling the United States of America -- legally, ethically, economically, and spiritually.
Get rid of them all, before what they've done becomes a mortal wound.
Austin Cooper wrote on April 16, 2007 2:10 PM:On a lighter note, someone earlier described Attorney General Alberto Gonzales as AG AG.
I believe that's pronounced "AG!AG!", like the murderous little green guys in MARS ATTACKS! (Actually, it was ARK ACK!, but I'm not picky when it comes to ridicule).
If Gonzales maked the "International Sign Of The Doughnut" at any point tomorrow, I'll consider my theory proven.
Sara wrote on April 16, 2007 2:18 PM:It is time for Democrats to lay down some markers on what kind of replacement for Gonzales would be acceptable. Yes, it should be a Republican, but NOT one tightly associated with Bush operatives. It should be someone with extensive experience administering a large organization -- a law firm, a State AG's office, perhaps even a former Governor. Perhaps we should demand some leadership experience in the ABA regarding ethics and/or Civil Liberties matters. What we want, I think is someone with a highly crediable career in the law, quite independent of the Bush Organization. We also need to exclude current elected officials who have direct involvement with the Ashcroft-Gonzales tenures at DOJ.
What I think is being missed in looking at the 30 somethings Bushies tend to appoint, is that they are drawn to people who have no independent political base which might lead an appointee to act in terms of their own expertise, reputation, career and associations rather than act only in terms of Bush interests. I think this accounts for the Brownie/Goodling pattern of appointments.
Democratic Senators could begin to deal with this by demanding independent expertise, or at least making it an issue.
erichwwk wrote on April 16, 2007 2:22 PM:As we attempt to ascertain esactly what happened re allegations of WH subverting the judiciary to act for the personal benefit of the Heather Wislon and Pete Domenici, and against the interests of the people, here is the link to what OUR Senator Pete Domenici had to say on the record in February, 1999, from the Washington Post.
Well worth a read to hear Domenici's standards for impeachment in the case of acting to make the judiciary biased, on the record, Fe. 1999.
Without taking a serious FLIP-FLOP position, Pete and Heather are toast.
tinyurl.com/25ccdx
THE IMPEACHMENT TRIAL
Statement of Sen. Domenici (R-N.M.)
Following is a statement from the Senate's closed deliberations on the articles of impeachment against President Clinton, excerpts of which senators were allowed to publish in the Congressional Record for Friday, Feb. 12.
In case that doesn't work, try: tinyurl.com/25ccdx
Michael B wrote on April 16, 2007 2:24 PM:Millions of Emails missing along with the story itself that millions of emails were deleted by rove and others. Im sure there would be great insight to how things are being run in the WH.
Corporate media is done with this news story.
Got to find those emails at all cost.
erichwwk wrote on April 16, 2007 2:28 PM:As we attempt to ascertain esactly what happened re allegations of WH subverting the judiciary to act for the personal benefit of the Heather Wislon and Pete Domenici, and against the interests of the people, here is the link to what OUR Senator Pete Domenici had to say on the record in February, 1999, from the Washington Post.
Well worth a read to hear Domenici's standards for impeachment in the case of acting to make the judiciary biased, on the record, Fe. 1999.
Without taking a serious FLIP-FLOP position, Pete and Heather are toast.
tinyurl.com/25ccdx
THE IMPEACHMENT TRIAL
Statement of Sen. Domenici (R-N.M.)
Following is a statement from the Senate's closed deliberations on the articles of impeachment against President Clinton, excerpts of which senators were allowed to publish in the Congressional Record for Friday, Feb. 12.
In case that doesn't work, try: tinyurl.com/25ccdx
"The first virtue of all really great men is that they are sincere. They eradicate hypocrisy from their hearts." -- Anatole France
lkh wrote on April 16, 2007 2:29 PM:Those 'conservatives' are not at ALL. It just another shot in the second civil war. From insurgents inside.
parrot wrote on April 16, 2007 2:41 PM:Another reason to impeach Bush and Cheney et al is also the emotional factor. What sort of rug has been pulled over America's head by these bozos? Think of how hard it is to breath with them in power...if they were gone tomorrow, more than half of America would rejoice...no matter what their political party affiliation.
John S wrote on April 16, 2007 2:51 PM:If Gonzales goes through the hearing tomorrow as predicted, using a faulty memory as needed to avoid perjury and obstruction, the next step would be to bring up the Texas Youth Commission pedophile scandal where the DoJ refused to prosecute clear evidence of sexual abuse at a Texas Youth Detention facility. Investigators from the local USA office drew up indictments, but "higher ups" at the DoJ refused to prosecute. The explanation was that the victims failed to claim that they were in physcial pain and therefore the abusers couldn't be prosecuted. As unbelieveable as that is, it's true, and worse. Read the letter. http://www.lonestarproject.net/files/DOJletter.pdf Tie this to the recent DoJ comments about the Minn USA Career Prosecutors failing to get on board with the AG's initiative to "protect children from sexual exploitation" and you realize the degree to which the current DoJ just doesn't care about anything except party politics.
Sharon A wrote on April 16, 2007 3:00 PM:I believe the TYC scandal will be the final straw. Wave goodbye to AG AG.
BC Bush and Cheney
These initials once belonged to another famous duo who went about breaking the law, Bonnie and Clyde.
So if you're going to be a lawbreaker, you go all out. None of these guys could live long enough to be punished long enough to satisfy justice for their crimes. Guess the risk is the same whether one breaks one law or many.
It's not difficult to figure out why Bush/Cheney parked incompetent chair plugs in critical and strategic positions. In doing so, they sucked the life out of legitimate processes appropriating those powers to themselves. It's a pyramid power structure. We can all stop being surprised now over all their evil doings. All new revelations are going to conform to this archetype.
lysias wrote on April 16, 2007 3:27 PM:Battle says there WAS a memo distributed at the Nov. 27 DOJ meeting: Washington Post: Ex-Justice Official's Statements Contradict Gonzales on Firings.
Karen Johnson wrote on April 16, 2007 3:30 PM:John VA: In Gozales' letter to the commitee he does explain the definition of improper resons. He quotes Water Dellinger, (from "What Congress Gets to Know", " In order to speed or impeed particular criminal investigations for illegitimate reasons". (such as party affiliation)
What he does not quote from Dellinger is, "but if there is plausible basis for believing that the Bush Aministration replaced the USA's to improperly obstruct an investigation or improperly prompt an idictment, or that earlier congressional inquiries were improperly impeded, then executive privlege claims should give way for evidence pertinent to that charge." (anyone else find it funny that Bush is specifically mentioned here?!) Dellinger is not talking in the general, but in the specific!
I find it interesting that AG follows the definition but not the solution. I wonder will any distinction be made between "particular investigation" and particular TYPES of investigations. (As the case for "particular invesigations" may be weak, the case for "specific types" of cases seems quite strong!)
No one forced AG to give this definition and I think it will be easy to show that AG didn't read passed the first paragraph. It seems an action indicative of Repub strategy as a whole. Pick the part that supports your case.
AG (for starters)beware: false or misleading statements to a congressional commitee are a crime, even if unsworn, even if the statements are "true"; and so is wrongdoing in response to an investigation!
How can he be certain there was no wrong-doing if he wasn't involved?
Of course AG is the fall guy, he as much as says so. We know he was following orders! But you must dimantle the puppet and follow the strings back to the masters!
ahem wrote on April 16, 2007 3:43 PM:One question that has to be asked of Abu G tomorrow:
Kyle Sampson said he didn't make any executive decisions over who to add or remove to the list of US Attorneys to be fired. You've said you made no executive decisions until the end. So who made those decisions? And if you don't know the answer: who, in your department, or outside your department, would you consider to have that authority?
lysias wrote on April 16, 2007 3:51 PM:U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton was allegedly also involved in the failure to follow up the scandal at the Texas Youth Commission.
He seems to have played a role in the U.S. Attorneys scandal as well. He was one of those who had to be informed early of what was being planned, according to the DOJ documents.
Al in Austex wrote on April 16, 2007 9:49 PM:Lysias,
Charles Bowman wrote on April 17, 2007 1:30 AM:Also USA Johnny Sutton was he who put the two Border Patrol agents in jail for shooting the Mexican drug smuggler in the buttocks. The two BP agents going to jail is a real hot button issue for the conservatives ( as opposed to Neo Cons ).
We all need to start thinking strategically about how we bring the Neo Thugs to account within the context of our body politics. How do we best strategically make the Impeachment and final Conviction of BushCo et al stick .
The Conservatives are starting to really speak out against the Neo Thugs- Congressman Rohrbacher has called for Gonzales to resign -Bob Barr has called for Gonzales to resign. I'm betting that Conyers & Leahy will come up with the tactical solution for this street fight - ie Impeachment Charges that could stick & lead to Conviction , But we must start acting strategically - who will be the Conservative Republican to fill the Howard Baker role -maybe Senator Hagel- He himself has bandied about the "I " word. We must make common cause with the Bob Barr's -Cong Barr did after all introduce VP Gore before a major policy address regarding the Orwellian tactics used by BushCo-ie the illegal NSA spying .
Ben Franklin said a we had a Republic if we can keep it -lets get to work folks.
Since Alberto's preliminary statement presents his obvious refrain that he will not be able to comment due to an internal investigation, why would the Senate Judiciary Committee not want to simply postpone the hearing after grilling him briefly in his most vulnerable area to demonstrate that their hearing is not simply politically inspired. Lambast him from beginning to end and leave him twisting in the wind!The one thing that the Bush Administration does not want is to continue this firestorm indefinitely while legions of investigators plow up new evidence and put the finishing touch on that already in hand.Bush in righteous indignation may fire the scamp and try to move on, but the prospect of an honest broker in the AG office will probably drive them back into the shadows. Therefore impeachment is the necessary course forcing Gonzalez probable resignation.