TPMmuckraker | Talking Points Memo | Goodling: "I Can't Give You The Whole White House Story"

Goodling: "I Can't Give You The Whole White House Story"

By Paul Kiel - May 23, 2007, 1:23PM

Well, at least it's clear. When Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX) asked whether the committee needs to go to the White House to get answers about the White House role in the firings, Goodling conceded, "I can't give you the whole White House story."

Comments (59)

Anonymous wrote on May 23, 2007 1:33 PM:

Security code "bell" as in "ding, ding, ding": Ms. Jackson is the only able body so far, Kudos to her and her fine line of inquiry.

Buck wrote on May 23, 2007 1:38 PM:

That wasn't a slam dunk. They need to grill her on this one some more. She was hedging and knows more.

John H. Farr wrote on May 23, 2007 1:43 PM:

You folks who follow these issues minutely may see "bombshells" and contradictions in the testimony of people like Goodling, but this lay person's overall impression of this hearing is that:

a) Conyers needs to retire, and

b) democracy in the U.S.A. is a hollow fraud.

My reason for b) is that when one side refuses to play by the rules (i.e., the Constitution), IT DOESN'T WORK, especially if the other side thinks it's still operative. There isn't remotely enough outrage or sense of the clear and present danger we're in.

My reason for a) is that the Republic is dying in front of our eyes, and the same old clubbiness will not do. None of our so-called leaders on the Democratic side seem willing to confront the reality of the Bush administration. All that's being accomplished here is to put a "see, we did something about it" veneer on the corpse of liberty, and I can't stand it.

phil james wrote on May 23, 2007 1:43 PM:

She just described the WH political office sign-off on the plan. Seems to me that is enough to call turdblossom on the carpet, which is exactly the point Ms. Jackson stressed in cutting off MG.

psyberdawg wrote on May 23, 2007 1:45 PM:

I've be watching CSPAN3 all day, but I think I'm gonna have to switch to waiting for these editted clips ...

... BECAUSE I'M GOING TO FRICKING LOSE IT IF I HAVE TO LISTEN TO ANYMORE REPUBLICAN LYING BULLSHIT!

bordersmuggler wrote on May 23, 2007 1:47 PM:

They do not seem to be considering it, but the Republican Congressman are going on record as blind supporters of the Bush crime family.

It will be interesting to see how many will not be in Washington in January '09.

Anonymous wrote on May 23, 2007 1:53 PM:

Laughing, "well Monica can you stay out in the hall for awhile?" This way Congress might not know that you were involved? Then at the recess in testimony: "Heh Monica can you get a cab back to 13th St. so we can blame this debacle on you?" and then finally: "Yes I used political axes in my decision making when of course two A-type women personalities were not in a (p) urinating battle." And of course the "well of course he did not tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth" as Regent doesn't require it when Gawd is on your side. Plain and simple she acknowledges what everyone knows. As to the statement that this doesn't have legs, well if it doesn't then there is no integrity whatsoever in Congress, DOJ, and the rule of law.

security code: "5th ammendment" as to why that was evoked initially.

boat wrote on May 23, 2007 1:55 PM:

Does this grant of immunity extend to the Senate? What I mean is, can Ms. Goodling be compelled to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee?

These house hearings are like watching a single A ball game. They are horrible!! The senate is much better at this!

kjp wrote on May 23, 2007 1:56 PM:

Trent Lott's comparison of the House to an "anthill" is looking dead-on. The House will not investigate its own. Until "Doc" Hastings, Pete Domenici, Heather Wilson and Rick Renzi (all of whom either made improper calls to US Attorneys or had their staff do so) answer questions about what they did in the wake of those calls, this investigation is going to end with a grade of "incomplete."

TheraP wrote on May 23, 2007 2:06 PM:

Mr Farr, I'm with you

Seems to me this is a wake we're holding. Either we've all gone mad or the republic as we knew it is gone.

Anonymous wrote on May 23, 2007 2:11 PM:

Goodling worked directly with Rove staffer J Scott Jennings.

Goodling worked directly with Rove staffer Jane Cherry.

Look for a bombshell on Cherry shortly.

Anonymous wrote on May 23, 2007 2:16 PM:

why hasn't anyone blogged about the term she used in her opening statement...caging?

SamSara wrote on May 23, 2007 2:20 PM:

Cherry Bomb

ferher wrote on May 23, 2007 2:21 PM:

Who's this religious persecution clown?

One of Rev. Pat's Lap Dogs?

nadja S wrote on May 23, 2007 2:24 PM:

There is such a "hive" mentality going on with these second-tier apparatchiks. No one will admit to anything. Who compiles the lists? Who makes the decisions? There are admissions of fault at certain points, and then denials later on. Their loyalty to the Constitution and any adherence to ethical behavior has been completely subsumed by some rabid zeal to keep Republicans in power, via the judiciary, for ever and ever.

bordersmuggler wrote on May 23, 2007 2:39 PM:

Hank Johnson rocks...

Richard L. Adlof wrote on May 23, 2007 2:39 PM:

Not interested in what you can't tell us. Interested in what you can.

What about AG the AG's letter granting you the power to do this behind McNulty's back? Why are you blaming him?y

As liason between justice & the WH, what did the WH know? What was their input . . . And if you don't know shit about it . . . What the fuck did you do to earn your salary . . . MONICA?

mayan wrote on May 23, 2007 2:46 PM:

HEADS UP: Are folks aware that there was a document dump dated yesterday? It's at the HJC and I think it's different material than what was given on the May 21...there appears to be at least two sets of docs...I'm not sure but this could be what Monica proferred:

http://judiciary.house.gov/Media/PDFS/OAG1646-1705.pdf

r€nato wrote on May 23, 2007 2:53 PM:

Let's Gitmo-ize these DoJ flunkies, use on them the same tactics which Abu Gonzales decided were legal.

That will get the truth out of them, since nothing else will.

range wrote on May 23, 2007 2:56 PM:

RE: Monica Dump:

It has redactions on email addresses and within the text of emails?!?

Delia wrote on May 23, 2007 2:56 PM:

Thom Hartmann was talking about caging on his show this morning. Said that Monica inadvertantly opened the doors when she introduced the term in a quite matter of fact way, without any awareness that it was a crme.

Ken wrote on May 23, 2007 2:58 PM:

Isn't Goodling contradicting herself when she professes dismay at McNultey not giving up the White House role in all this, even as she admits to staying out of sight lest her role as W/H liason raise questions with Congress? She was part and parcel of the coverup by following orders to stay out of sight... but now it's all McNulty's fault?

JNagarya wrote on May 23, 2007 2:58 PM:

"My reason for a) is that the Republic is dying in front of our eyes, and the same old clubbiness will not do. None of our so-called leaders on the Democratic side seem willing to confront the reality of the Bush administration. All that's being accomplished here is to put a "see, we did something about it" veneer on the corpse of liberty, and I can't stand it.

"Posted by: John H. Farr
Date: May 23, 2007 01:43 PM"

The Committee (excepting Republicans) is concerned with issues of law. You are making political deamdns. The two are not the same.

Delia wrote on May 23, 2007 2:58 PM:

SPENCER ADAMS wrote on May 23, 2007 3:01 PM:

Perhaps Congress needs to talk to White House political director Sara Taylor, her deputy Scott Jennings and Chris Oprison, the associate White House counsel.

See the Time link for the private testimony released yesterday by the committee:

http://time-blog.com/swampland/2007/05/monica_goodling_testimony.html

Dem-agog wrote on May 23, 2007 3:03 PM:

Obviously, the Republicans on the comittee see no problem with America moving from a democracy to a christian theocracy (one member even threatened other members!). I am so disgusted by this hearing and its implications that I'm ready to throw my hands up in resignation and say - we'll get what we deserve.

Goodling is a first class liar.

JNagarya wrote on May 23, 2007 3:05 PM:

"Does this grant of immunity extend to the Senate? What I mean is, can Ms. Goodling be compelled to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee?"

No, it doesn't. It's a deal only between Goodling and the House Committee. (And not, also, with any other House Committee.)

"These house hearings are like watching a single A ball game. They are horrible!! The senate is much better at this!"

The Senate is better at it in part because Seante committees have fewer members.

"Posted by: boat
Date: May 23, 2007 01:55 PM"

SkippyFlipjack wrote on May 23, 2007 3:05 PM:

Why are people so obsessed with the security codes? It's like some remote tribe ascribing some significance to the particular colors of the airplanes that pass overhead. "Look! An Orange-and-Blue! That means we'll have rain tomorrow!"

security code: "hobgoblin of little minds"

Nina Katarina wrote on May 23, 2007 3:08 PM:

Anybody else noticing that Monica tends to get snippy and crabby when she's being questioned by a woman, especially a minority? She's 'sweet and flirty' with the Rs, and doesn't talk back to the male Ds, but Sanchez, Jackson-Lee and Waters really seemed to get under her skin.

gcs wrote on May 23, 2007 3:08 PM: