Comments (122)

Peter Duffy wrote on June 5, 2007 3:52 PM:

Shifty Schloz!!!!!!

Peter Duffy wrote on June 5, 2007 3:54 PM:

Shifty Schloz!!!!!!!!!!!

Peter Duffy wrote on June 5, 2007 3:54 PM:

Shifty Schloz!!!!!!!!!!!

Ron Byers wrote on June 5, 2007 3:55 PM:

Damn I wish I was retired and could spend time watching this stuff live. I really want to know if there is going to be a rerun of his testimony. It's better than survivor.

Pinson wrote on June 5, 2007 3:55 PM:

Anyone else getting the impression that Mr. Shlozman has a severe case of little-man syndrome?

Anonymous wrote on June 5, 2007 3:55 PM:

He can't say "Missourah". Only we can say "Missourah."

Code word sharp, as in not the sharpest.

jay severin has a small pen1s wrote on June 5, 2007 3:57 PM:

Love the voice!!!!

He should do voiceover for kids cartoons for a living.

joejoejoe wrote on June 5, 2007 3:57 PM:

I've found my Senate testimony goes better if I don't huff helium before giving my answers. Nice commanding voice from Schlozman. He can wreck the Department of Justice but he can't order pizza over the phone. Nice government we have working for us. Ugh.

iggy wrote on June 5, 2007 3:57 PM:

Has he been sucking helium? Sounds like a cartoon character! Acted like a cartoon character! Although that is taking a shot at cartoon characters in gerneral!

sspt wrote on June 5, 2007 3:58 PM:

Sen. Leahy is D-VT. I can only wish he was from PA. Fantastic questioning in this hearing!

Mark wrote on June 5, 2007 3:59 PM:

OMG!!!!

That voice!!!!!!

mc wrote on June 5, 2007 3:59 PM:

watching fred thompson on c-span3 during the recess. he is AWFUL. simply AWFUL.

Mark wrote on June 5, 2007 3:59 PM:

OMG!!!!

That voice!!!!!!

Buck wrote on June 5, 2007 4:00 PM:

Is Specter there at all?

nolo wrote on June 5, 2007 4:02 PM:

What. A. Weasel.

J Edgar wrote on June 5, 2007 4:05 PM:

If the Simpson Comic Book Guy had become a lawyer.

tekel wrote on June 5, 2007 4:06 PM:

"Leahy raised his voice and sharpened his tone..."

It sounded to me like Pat was yelling at Brad, when Brad tried to tell a lie.

SteveW wrote on June 5, 2007 4:06 PM:

Why is it so many of these Bushies voices like Sampson and Schlozman sound like they're in the middle of female hormone replacement prior to a sex change?

What a little tool! The likes of Schlozman, Sampson, and Goodling highlights just how low in the barrel the Bushies have scraped to find these hacks.

Seriously, this is a "public servant"...oh I forgot, he's a "loyal Bushie" and they're above the law and only loyal to the boy king.

grim wrote on June 5, 2007 4:06 PM:

Where's the helium tank? That cannot be his actual voice. What's the deal with these Rethug creampuff Casper milquetoasts who in text read like steely-eyed Clancy heroes and sound like well, you know, maybe somebody is overcompensating for too many knuckle sammiches back by the flagpole at the bus stop. I'm looking at you Abu Gonzales and Kyle Sampson. This btw, coming from someone (skinny, debate club, D&D kid) who took his share of beatings but somehow emerged without any visble authoritarian tendencies so far.

Anonymous wrote on June 5, 2007 4:06 PM:

Hav you noticed all the DOJ Bush guys ..and Monica--
have the same type of voice? High, tinny and ever so grating...
...even Gonzo has a high sharp tone to his voice.

And Bush..

hmmm..maybe that is how they recognize each other.....

Ellie wrote on June 5, 2007 4:07 PM:

Seriously, is he Sponge Bob's long lost wingnut brother?

justthetruth wrote on June 5, 2007 4:07 PM:

The questioning is certainly withering. However, the absence of the Republicans detracts from its impact, especially in the media.

Does anyone know why the Republican members of the committee are absent?

SteveW wrote on June 5, 2007 4:07 PM:

Why is it so many of these Bushies voices like Sampson and Schlozman sound like they're in the middle of female hormone replacement prior to a sex change?

What a little tool! The likes of Schlozman, Sampson, and Goodling highlights just how low in the barrel the Bushies have scraped to find these hacks.

Seriously, this is a "public servant"...oh I forgot, he's a "loyal Bushie" and they're above the law and only loyal to the boy king.

SteveW wrote on June 5, 2007 4:07 PM:

Why is it so many of these Bushies voices like Sampson and Schlozman sound like they're in the middle of female hormone replacement prior to a sex change?

What a little tool! The likes of Schlozman, Sampson, and Goodling highlights just how low in the barrel the Bushies have scraped to find these hacks.

Seriously, this is a "public servant"...oh I forgot, he's a "loyal Bushie" and they're above the law and only loyal to the boy king.

Munchkin wrote on June 5, 2007 4:10 PM:

He could easily be a member of the Lollipop Guild!

Please admit that TPM dubbed his voice.

I can't imagine what it must have been like in the Civil Rights Division being yelled at by Helium Boy.

No wonder all the legitimate attorneys bailed.

KilgoreTrout XL wrote on June 5, 2007 4:10 PM:

Using a phrase I normally reserve for IM...

Schlozman PWNT.

saysyes wrote on June 5, 2007 4:10 PM:

The voice is disconcerting, but I find it a bit unfair to pick on. It's very refreshing to see follow-up questions. Love how Leahy didn't let him get away with "individuals" when asked "who?"

tekel wrote on June 5, 2007 4:10 PM:

yeah, it's like a mating call for halfwits...

T. Atkinson wrote on June 5, 2007 4:11 PM:

You know, David Sedaris is a lot funnier when he's not testifying.

T. Atkinson wrote on June 5, 2007 4:12 PM:

You know, David Sedaris is a lot funnier when he's not testifying.

T. Atkinson wrote on June 5, 2007 4:12 PM:

You know, David Sedaris is a lot funnier when he's not testifying.

sophie brown wrote on June 5, 2007 4:12 PM:

I can almost discern a faint ring of cheeto dust around his mouth.

eric wrote on June 5, 2007 4:12 PM:

It is shallow, but I do wonder how a guy with such a high voice has made it so far. Others are correct - Monica and Kyle Sampson had unsually high voices. They not only seem young but they don't really carry any authority. It's odd. With lawyers, it is usually about appearance and presentation. Not with these people.

sophie brown wrote on June 5, 2007 4:13 PM:

I can almost discern a faint ring of cheeto dust around his mouth.

sophie brown wrote on June 5, 2007 4:13 PM:

I can almost discern a faint ring of cheeto dust around his mouth.

SteveW wrote on June 5, 2007 4:14 PM:

Maybe the Cheney had his testicles removed and that accounts for his voice?;)

Close your eyes and he's a girl.

Munchkin wrote on June 5, 2007 4:15 PM:

Does anyone know if you have to have a high pitched feminine voice to join the Federalist Society.

Its striking: Gonzo, Kyle, Monica and Brad all seem to be taking hits off the same helium tank.

vox clamantis in red state wrote on June 5, 2007 4:17 PM:

Craven creepy singsong twit this slutty s.o.b. called schloz. And liars lik him won't let gays in the military?
Our DOJ is composed of neutered dogs.

RW wrote on June 5, 2007 4:18 PM:

The testimonies all fall on intent not their actions in violations of the law or spirit of the law or following the policies and procedures.

Intent....it is a safe lawyer up attempt....they got to get them for their actions....

Ironically the code word is calling it like it is a 'spade' in this case Schoz....is shoveling it deeper

vox clamantis in red state wrote on June 5, 2007 4:18 PM:

Craven creepy singsong twit this slutty s.o.b. called schloz. And liars lik him won't let gays in the military?
Our DOJ is composed of neutered dogs.

Anonymous wrote on June 5, 2007 4:19 PM:

The cut of his goatee made his chin look as strange as his voice sounds.

Candyce wrote on June 5, 2007 4:21 PM:

Nice, Leahy. Brad can do it the easy way, or the hard way, but either way, he will do it. Leahy is sure lethal when he gets going.

Jon H wrote on June 5, 2007 4:21 PM:

He looks like the kind of guy who, in school, would copy your work then get *you* busted for cheating.

Isn't it funny: All of these Rovian apparatchiks have appearances that just scream "weak-willed poor-character ratfink" much like Rove himself. Except maybe Monica, which just means that the Rovians prefer a pretty cog over a female version of their own unimpressive selves.

It really stands out if you put these cretins up next to the attorneys who got kicked out. They have generally been square-jawed, deep-voiced, probably tall, emanating competence at the very least, and having the kind of bearing that leads one to presume decent character.

I'd love to see a lineup of before-and-after photos of the attorneys and the lumpenapparatchiks who replaced them.

gcs wrote on June 5, 2007 4:25 PM:

jesus H, he sounds exactly, and I mean EXACTLY like the "high talker" in Seinfeld. I hope to hell Jon Stewart picks up on that.

Anonymous wrote on June 5, 2007 4:25 PM:

Amazing the consistency in comments here regarding this guy's squeeky voice and the poor impression it makes.

If he were competent and a man of integrity would we have the same perception?

'tis a puzzlement grasshoppers, but he's certainly a little bushie turd.

Legalize wrote on June 5, 2007 4:27 PM:

My god, another Karl Rovian weenie. I wonder if I walked into any Executive Department, if all I would see are these little, short, dweeb-ish, flunkies slinking about the hallway. These guys also have zero rheotical skills; good thing they work for the DoJ, where, you know, being a convincing arguer isn't really important or anything.

Jon H wrote on June 5, 2007 4:28 PM:

Well, now we know John Yoo's comment about crushing testicles wasn't purely theoretical.

Supposedly Schloz was quite the shouter at work. That must have been counterproductive - I myself would have lost it and laughed and laughed and laughed.

Mike Conwell wrote on June 5, 2007 4:30 PM:

>Amazing the consistency in comments here regarding this guy's squeeky voice and the poor impression it makes.

Contrast that with the strength expressed by the fired USA's when they appeared before Congress.

Jon H wrote on June 5, 2007 4:32 PM:

I can imagine the kind of hiring lunch Rove and Gonzo would throw...

"Welcome Schozman, we shall call you SCHLOZMASTER! We shall now welcome you into the He-Man-Minority-Hater Club!"

"Gooble Gobble, Gooble Gobble, We accept you, We accept you, One-of-us! One-of-us!"

jdw wrote on June 5, 2007 4:33 PM:

Schumer is roasting his nuts.

Candyce wrote on June 5, 2007 4:33 PM:

Schumer is just cracking me up. No one does the "gotcha" quite as good as he does.

mark wrote on June 5, 2007 4:36 PM:

It was asked before, but any reason republican members of the committee aren't present for the hearing?

Anonymous wrote on June 5, 2007 4:36 PM:

Schumer is having a fine time being oh so very sarcastic now, and Schlozman is clearly getting irritated and defensive.
The caption over his read would read about now:
Just let the floor open and swallow me..
betcha he will go back to the office and kick an underling...

and where are the Repubs in the committee ?????????

Legalize wrote on June 5, 2007 4:37 PM:

"It really stands out if you put these cretins up next to the attorneys who got kicked out. They have generally been square-jawed, deep-voiced, probably tall, emanating competence at the very least, and having the kind of bearing that leads one to presume decent character."

Good point. The guys and gals who got fired all exude competence and command attention - whether I agree with their politics or not, they struck me as honest individuals who respect the rule of law, which is all any of us want. It seemed to me that it would be fun to work for them - demanding as hell, but fun.

These Rovian weenies, on the other hand, strike me as little incompetent rats who couldn't pass first year Con Law, and who later will throw you under the bus at any given opportunity in order to kiss up to the chain of command.

I've worked for and with people in both categories; the fomer are generally universally respected, while the latter are universally despised.

jdw wrote on June 5, 2007 4:37 PM:

Whitehouse is going to kick him some more.

Security Code: Horse, as in "beat a dead..."

terry carter wrote on June 5, 2007 4:39 PM:

I know one should not criticize physical characteristics in such a situation, but, jeez, Schlozman's voice sounds like that of one of the munchkins in the Wizard of Oz.

oldtree wrote on June 5, 2007 4:40 PM:

you are likely witnessing what karl the dog would sound like, or dick the shooter if they had to undergo real questioning about their roles in government. Can you imagine what the squealing would sound like if they had to testify in criminal proceedings?

don't worry, you will. shooter may luck out and have a heart attack but karl will get the iron handshake. or there won't be a justice system.

lampwick wrote on June 5, 2007 4:40 PM:

Studies have shown that when two random people get into a conversation, the more deferential of the two will unconsciously raise their voice a few tones as a sign of deference.

You can see the appeal all these Bush DOJ types, from Gonzo on down, have for guys like Bush: the naturally high voices say, "I serve at your pleasure, sir; I shall do whatever it pleases you to command."

Just like the Byzantine empire, we have our court eunuchs.

vrk wrote on June 5, 2007 4:42 PM:

Sounds like Mike Tyson's brother.

anon wrote on June 5, 2007 4:43 PM:

Weird. Why does he keep saying he can't talk about an investigation into voting fraud? I don't understand. Wasn't he just talking about a part of the investigation? He can't talk about the "National" part of the investigation? But he can talk about some specific investigations? What am I missing? What "National" investigation is he talking about?

Jon H wrote on June 5, 2007 4:44 PM:

OMG! He just jumped up and ran out, screeching "I'M WEARING BOOTS OF ESCAPING! I'M WEARING BOOTS OF ESCAPING!"

No, not really. But you just *know* nobody liked playing D&D with young Brad.

Candyce wrote on June 5, 2007 4:45 PM:

Oh man. Whitehouse is just all over his obfuscation.

Whitehouse, after a long stare and smile: I've had just about enough here.

We're done.

Emanuel wrote on June 5, 2007 4:46 PM:

security code: crush

Which is exactly what Schumer is doing to Schlozbo right now.
Personally, I love the latest tack by HeliumBoy which is to blame everything on the aptly named Public Integrity Section (the next stop on the Grand Ol' Corruption Tour?).

Schumer has had an effective here pressing home the fact that:
A) He's not experienced enough or otherwise competent to manage these sorts of sensitive operations;

B) Schlozbo had no intention of actually communicating the Missouri/ACORN indictment to anyone who would object;

C) Schlozbutt functions based on clearly Rovian objectives, therefore he didn't need to actually read the "Red Book" which guides Justice Dept. officials in bringing these bullshit indictments;

Again all perfectly logical, right?

Now, onto Todd Graves!!!

Anonymous wrote on June 5, 2007 4:46 PM:

Lordy...Whitehouse et. all clearly just washed their hands of Schlozman, and curtly dismissed him.

Repub Comm. members are boycotting the hearing???

Mark Richards\ wrote on June 5, 2007 4:47 PM:

It's only by video that I discover the voice behind the next sleaze-ball sent forth to "testilie" before the Judiciary Committee is actually NOT a midget person. Midget-people are quite nice, and this scum is not, so the only other image that comes to mind is that the voice of "Brad" (how classic) never advanced beyond puberty.

His lying, so gross and obvious, came through despite the squeaking.

Karen Johnson wrote on June 5, 2007 4:48 PM:

For me the most upsetting part of his testimony was the cavalier way he addmitted to knowing that Acorn supported "poor" people. So they didn't taget Dems; they targeted the "poor"?!!!! I believe THAT is the truth, in effect, a class war.

jb wrote on June 5, 2007 4:49 PM:

Yea, that voice. But try watching on mute -- not just to save your ears but to really get a look at his body language. He demonstrates just about every "tell" of a liar, especially when he's passing responsibility to Donsanto (sp?), head of election crimes branch. Whoever Donsanto is, he's probably watching at home with smoke tooting out of his ears.

Thanks to the Bush admin., we have a new iconic villain. Gone are the days of big & booming; the 21st century villain is short & squeaky. Comic books take note.

stevix wrote on June 5, 2007 4:51 PM:

Holy shit the guy is a weasel. Imagine Rove, Simpson and Schlozman getting sloshed in a back room somewhere, strategizing a permanent Republican majority for the rest of us!!

Wordsmith wrote on June 5, 2007 4:52 PM:

Damn I wish I was retired and could spend time watching this stuff live. I really want to know if there is going to be a rerun of his testimony. It's better than survivor. [Posted by: Ron Byers - Date: June 5, 2007 03:55 PM]

Dude, I'm with ya! Since the cats would be homeless I have to break away & be content with checking in or reading after the fact.

Wordsmith wrote on June 5, 2007 4:54 PM:

["Damn I wish I was retired and could spend time watching this stuff live. I really want to know if there is going to be a rerun of his testimony. It's better than survivor." {Posted by: Ron Byers - Date: June 5, 2007 03:55 PM}]

Dude, I'm with ya! Since the cats would be homeless I have to break away & be content with checking in or reading after the fact.

rumpole wrote on June 5, 2007 4:59 PM:

Voice aside, he just didn't come off as credible. In order to get anywhere, there probably ought to be a special prosecutor to look into it. It seems pretty clear that Justice is not likely to investigate itself. The head of the public integrity section, after all, supposedly authorized the indictment.

PJ White wrote on June 5, 2007 4:59 PM:

Why is it that all these little worms are chubby guys with sneers, sparse facial foliage and high squeaky voices? Where do they find them? Of, that's right, "Christian" colleges. It's like they've all popped out of the mold. They hem, they hedge, they obfuscate UNTIl they are asked if they ever talked to anyone, anyone at all, in the White House; then they ring out a solid, "NO." They can't seem to remember anything else, but on that one point they are very clear. This mealy-mouthed twerp is no exception.

klicker wrote on June 5, 2007 4:59 PM:

Yet another whiny, clueless lapdog. So laughable and so pathetic at the same time.

Wow, my security code is SCREW. I'd have preferred to see that word when Monica Goodling was speaking, instead of this bozo.

some dude named steevo wrote on June 5, 2007 5:03 PM:

Bush Administration - No Liberals, Or Baritones Allowed (except Cheney)

That guy looks like a frightened chipmunk. I hope the Senate keeps leaning on these people, the house just doesn't seem to have the same vitality. They need to bring Goodling into the Senate.

Damian wrote on June 5, 2007 5:07 PM:

Close your eyes and just listen to Schloz ....

It's Porky Pig!

A-thas-a-thas-athat's all, folks!

Doofus wrote on June 5, 2007 5:10 PM:

Time to send in the clown -- Jeff Gannon-Guckert.

Anonymous wrote on June 5, 2007 5:10 PM:

Boy, ask Graves what time it is and he will blather on about how to build a clock..
but at least he wants to talk, freely...
chattily...

joe wrote on June 5, 2007 5:12 PM:

Aha. Mike Elston in Dep AG McNulty's office signed off on the ACORN indictments.

this is getting very good.

Steve5117 wrote on June 5, 2007 5:13 PM:

Todd looks like a young Burt Lancaster, maybe in Elmer Gantry.

Chesire11 wrote on June 5, 2007 5:15 PM:

Of all days to work from home WITH dial up!

Security code is "Snake" as in slimey, cold blooded, belly-crawling worm.

pmse57 wrote on June 5, 2007 5:16 PM:

I guess I am still naive, but I watch & listen to these obvious liers and I wonder how they can look each other in the eyes. It is easy to fool yourself, but when your whole group is lying with every other word, when they all know it, and they continue to portray their group as Christian conservatives, how can they continue the farce?

suzanne wrote on June 5, 2007 5:18 PM:

Sen Whitehouse is our special gift from the 2006 election.

At DoJ, they are always fond of throwing up AG guidelines and US Attorney Manual rules to justify their actions or inactions. How are they going to explain NOT following DoJ guidelines by saying they are "Just guidelines," not rules.

The entire Bush administrations follows rules/laws if they suit their purposes and violate them if they don't. This is appalling and has not occurred in either Rep or Dem administrations in the past 50 years, or maybe ever. including Nixon.

Anonymous wrote on June 5, 2007 5:18 PM:

Whitehouse want to know where the language for impropriety came from. He just needs to read Muckraker!

TheOtherWA wrote on June 5, 2007 5:19 PM:

Check the CSpan website later today to see if this hearing will be rerun. http://inside.c-spanarchives.org:8080/cspan/schedule.csp

They usually do rerun on cspan or cspan2, but because they have to carry the floor sessions live, they don't schedule much until the congress finished for the day.

I sure hope it's rerun, since work interferes with my web only cspan3 viewing. :)

samuel wrote on June 5, 2007 5:22 PM:

Scholzman is such a liar Whitehouse is speechless!!!!!!

Karin Byars wrote on June 5, 2007 5:22 PM:

I could not tear myself away from c-span. That voice, those shifty eyes, those hands, I could picture them fondling something small or illegal... whom does he think he is fooling? And my tax dollars are paying for that farce!

OCPatriot wrote on June 5, 2007 5:25 PM:

So you can get your rocks off by watching our Senators get angry at some guy from the GOP-led groupies, when what they need to do is inform them that they're under oath and lying is a prosecutable offense (that is, if they're under oath), and if they don't tell the truth they may go straight to jail. This is just game playing and I get tired of it. Getting our rocks off is not what it's about; getting these miscreants back in line with our democratic institutions is what has to happen.

Anonymous wrote on June 5, 2007 5:27 PM:

So you can get your rocks off by watching our Senators get angry at some guy from the GOP-led groupies, when what they need to do is inform them that they're under oath and lying is a prosecutable offense (that is, if they're under oath), and if they don't tell the truth they may go straight to jail. This is just game playing and I get tired of it. Getting our rocks off is not what it's about; getting these miscreants back in line with our democratic institutions is what has to happen.

JoanneK wrote on June 5, 2007 5:28 PM:

Todd Graves is seriously pissed off at Goodling, and for good reason. She misled the Committee and publicly disparaged him about "misconduct" that never occurred.

she is so low it is hard to breathe thinking of her as a high official at the US Department of Justice.

unbelievable.

Agathena wrote on June 5, 2007 5:32 PM:

Just watched Graves giving testimony and then Scholzman. These people actually look and sound like who they are. Graves looks like an independent, honest man who values integrity and his own reputation among his peers.

Scholzman, does he have any peers. He sounds like a whiney little weasel. AND he was sent to replace Graves????!!!!

foggylady wrote on June 5, 2007 5:33 PM:

If you watch the hearing re-runs,
( they will be on web cspan and prolly on tv cspan tonight..)
if you watch them, see if you can hear the Lilliputian give 2 different names for the head of Office of Public Integrity..
I swear I heard him say "TOM Don Santo" to Leahy, and later
"Craig Don Santo" to Feinstein..
coulda been my old ears

Anonymous wrote on June 5, 2007 5:35 PM:

If you watch the hearing re-runs, see if you can hear the Lilliputian give 2 different names for the head of Office of Public Integrity..
I swear I heard him say "TOM Don Santo" to Leahy, and later
"Craig Don Santo" to Feinstein..
coulda been my old ears...
or that irritating voice of his...

The Schloz wrote on June 5, 2007 5:41 PM:

I hate stoopid librulz.

Karen Johnson wrote on June 5, 2007 6:06 PM:

I know something a Senator doesn't know
How fun! As I am watching Senator Whitehouse interview Todd Graves, he asks where did the language come from that everyone keeps repeating...'that an impropriety has occur ed only if a "particular case" is concerned...?

Oooh, I know...(always was teachers pet)! In the link below I quote the author, Walter Delinger, that the admin. is using as it's definition of an improper reason to fire an atty. (Gonzales tried to get everyone to agree to the definition when he testified, luckily at least one bright person mentioned that it was low standard indeed, considering the amount of responsibility that the position requires.)

Guess the Sen. didn't read my blog: http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-2esZEvU6cakszBVGy.Rvetu0Pg--?cq=1&tag=internet...

Jim P wrote on June 5, 2007 6:26 PM:

What a weenie! I've seen his type many times before. He became a big scary Republican operative to take his revenge on all the guys who pantsed little Bradley back in high school.

Adam Cole wrote on June 5, 2007 6:28 PM:

All the comments on Schlozman's voice are a bit depressing for what they reveal about human nature (or is it American society?). In my field (music), Mr. Schlozman might well be prized as a countertenor. But in the public sphere, any man who can't muster a decent baritone (or at least some gravel, a la Leahy) is automatically suspect.

I'm not shedding too many tears for Schlozman or Gonzales, mind--but I really wonder about the reverse situation, where public figures with authoritative voices often get an undeserved pass. Dick Cheney, for instance, speaks lie upon lie in his commanding "father figure" voice. His public approval is in the toilet, but the media seem invariably to approach him with a certain residual respect that even a zero in the polls couldn't diminish.

This goes way back in American culture--the '40s film stars all had that hard-edged, deep-voiced delivery, as do most newsmen, sportscasters and radiomen to this day. The high-voiced guy is always the pipsqueak, the fool, the object of japes and ridicule.

I don't think this trait is as characteristic of some European cultures--take the French, for instance--or of places like Japan, where women often deliberately cultivate a high, squeaky tone.

lulu wrote on June 5, 2007 6:30 PM:

He ate helium before he went in.

SteveW wrote on June 5, 2007 6:32 PM:

Just look at Gonzo, Rummy, Rove (Jeff Gannon's best friend who signed him in every day), Tim Griffin, Sampson, Schloz, David Frum (speaks with a clear lisp), Scott McClellan, Ari Fleischer, and Libby to name just a handful of the cretins (has anyone seen Libby walk?) it's as if he's sashaying down the runway...for Versace:)

All of the weenies are clearly latent homosexuals or I'm completely confused about everything I've learned in my life in working with guys like these (not that there's anything wrong with being gay) who clearly, as several folks highlighted above, are overcompensating for 1) either being picked on as a kid (and I'm totally against kids being picked on and I wasn't one who was picked on...instead I was the guy saving all those who were getting picked on, so I don't want to hear anymore sympathy for this jerk, because we're making fun of him). The latter is why the Dems are always losing; they're afraid to grow some and get tough with these creeps.

Lastly, one thing you learn when dealing with bullies, especially this type of bully, is they will totally melt (see Sampson and Gonzo testimony) under very pointed questioning...let alone poop their pants if confronted alone in a parking lot after backstabbing or bullying someone below them on the organizational chart.

Anonymous wrote on June 5, 2007 6:33 PM:

"Todd looks like a young Burt Lancaster, maybe in Elmer Gantry.
Posted by: Steve5117"

Steve, that's a mean thing to say about Burt Lancaster, who was rather studly. You certainly can't say that about Brat. He was clearly rattled by being under the magnifying glass on a sunny day. I thought he would pop! He probably went home and beat up his wife, just to feel in control again. His introductory statement was just laughable. He wishes he could write his own recommendation letter. He'll need one to get a job as a clerk in the prison warden's office. "We did a magnificent job." Or words to that effect. Leahy was chuckling about it too.

chuck wrote on June 5, 2007 6:38 PM:

My God - am I the only one amazed at how many effeminate males are employed by this administration, one which has practically run on a platform of phony hypermasculine ideals? I mean, just in the course of this investigation alone, we've had effete males all over the place: Gonzales himself, lil' Samson, now this fu&%er.

It's not just ironic, it's creepy.

Creepy, I tell you . . .

Steve5117 wrote on June 5, 2007 6:44 PM:

Posted by: Adam Cole
Date: June 5, 2007 06:28 PM

I sing Bass II and believe the tenor of Mr. Schlozman voice would improve if he was castrated.

SteveW wrote on June 5, 2007 6:49 PM:

I forgot number two after getting carried away with number 1...

2) Or they are self-loathing homosexuals and that's why they're okay with anti-gay baiting etc.

harriett wrote on June 5, 2007 6:59 PM:

That is one slimy little hyena. Hey Bradleee, do you really think the entire world knows you're lying? Just like all the rest of BUSHCO. Every last one of them.

thepeoplechoose wrote on June 5, 2007 7:16 PM:

We keep watching these absolutely horrific scenes unfold in various hearings. What I have seen and heard has absolutely cemented my very firm belief that the Bush administration is a criminal enterprise, top to bottom. And their primary motivator is greed. Everything they do is about political and economic disenfranchisement of regular working class people.

Leahy knows the score. I wish the U.S. House of Representatives had the balls to go after Bush in the way the law requires. And just so there is no confusion, the immigration bill is principally about the continuance of downward pressure on wages without regard to the fact that prices for everything continue to escalate. The Bush administration and republican congress have busted the budget in the last six years and they'll see to it that as many working class people as possible are busted as well.

Schlozman is just another criminal whose lies we are forced to listen to knowing full well not a fucking thing will happen. Same as Goodling who was as guilty as hell of breaking our laws. Bush and his hirelings have committed crime ater crime and they'll mostly just walk away after having presided over the most significant, nationally degenerative episode in our entire history. I wonder if these people realize just how much hate they have sewn, both abroad and in this country, and if they appreciate how seriously harmful that is to our country. And do they even care?

harriett wrote on June 5, 2007 7:25 PM:

SpongeBrad Schlosspants!

starwheel wrote on June 5, 2007 7:25 PM:

Perhaps we're all a little giddy watching another Bush partisan appointee getting a good tongue-lashing but the adolescent remarks about his high pitched voice are something I'd expect from the other side.

I'm more interested in the fact that he was just another tool in Karl Rove's tool chest to dissemble our democracy than whether he sounded like Porky the Pig, sucked helium or is a self-hating closet homosexual because he has a high pitched voice.

Josiah Bartlett wrote on June 5, 2007 8:14 PM:

If they don't do anything else to these lower level enablers, I think they need to file a congressional level complaint with all US bar associations recommending/demanding that they are permanently and forever disbarred from precticing law in any court in the United States.

They may land in cushy corporate positions but they will forever have the stain of disbarment. Of course these crooks will probably wear it as a badge of honor. At least until bush the brush farmer, shooter, gonzo, rumsfelt and rice are convicted of was crimes at the Hague.

Dawn wrote on June 5, 2007 8:52 PM:

I turned on cspan radio in the car hoping to catch the hearing, and when I heard the testimony I thought it had to be a woman testifying before Shlozman came on. Maybe that Doan woman - now she had some cojones!!!! Just when I thought there couldn't be a more annoying voice than Gonzo's. They are almost taking all the fun out of the hearings. Maybe that was the master plan.

Then late I heard Graves. What a difference. It IS very interesting that the straight arrows like Comey and Graves also sound the part. You could say that their voices add at least a little bit to their believeability, but I mostly think it is the other way around.

James wrote on June 5, 2007 9:19 PM:

There are people here who READ. There are people here who do not have the ability to get high speed internet because of where they live. DAMN! Give us something to read. It is frustrating to have to download something for a half hour. Big city Bastard Liberals! From a small town liberal. James Sarzynski

James wrote on June 5, 2007 9:37 PM:

There are people here who READ. There are people here who do not have the ability to get high speed internet because of where they live. DAMN! Give us something to read. It is frustrating to have to download something for a half hour. Big city Bastard Liberals! From a small town liberal. James Sarzynski

improper wrote on June 5, 2007 9:58 PM:

What a shifty eyed lying weasel fat tub of goo poor excuse for a male with an oppressive mother I'm sure. Someone needed to kick his fat cowardly ass a long time ago. He would have been better for it, as would all of US.

Slippery Slope wrote on June 5, 2007 10:27 PM:

I am disappointed at the majority of the posts here today...

Big tent? Liberal? Open minded?

And it seems greater than half the comments are about voice inflection, sexual inference, "shifty eyed", etc.

Now I wonder just how many are trolls. I think the Enquirer has a blog for you. Go there!

That said, could we center a bit more on the content of the hearing.

JNagarya wrote on June 6, 2007 2:21 AM:

"Why is it so many of these Bushies voices like Sampson and Schlozman sound like they're in the middle of female hormone replacement prior to a sex change?"

It's a requirement of being a Republican. Knowing their word can't be trusted, it is taken as proof that the individual is a chickenhawk.

"Posted by: SteveW
Date: June 5, 2007 04:06 PM"

He's not exactly a sharp lawyer. The answer that the DOJ doesn't time prosecutions to elections was obviously and flatly false. A sharp lawyer would be thinking on all cylinders, so would have found a way to answer Leahey's question on that point in a way that wouldn't have been a blatant admission that denial of truth is the intent.

Of perhaps greater interest: He defended his claim that he was ordered to do it -- "I was only following orders" -- by stating that the evidence for that fact is "in the email traffic".

Let's get that traffic.

SC = snake. As in, Schlozman is the weakest of the litter.

JNagarya wrote on June 6, 2007 2:35 AM:

"The testimonies all fall on intent not their actions in violations of the law or spirit of the law or following the policies and procedures.

"Intent....it is a safe lawyer up attempt....they got to get them for their actions....

"Posted by: RW
Date: June 5, 2007 04:18 PM"

_Mens rea_ -- state of mind. In most instances, finding guilt of having committed a crime is based upon intent: that the defendant intended to do that which was illegal.

In such cases as this, though, on one hand he admits he knew the DOJ policy prohibiting filing election fraud cases just before an election, yet he filed anyway -- an admission that he is willing to violate rules.

And as having had a major position in the DOJ's Civil Rights Division, a major concern of which is enforcement of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, he cannot plead ignorance of its purpose.

I'm wondering if Leahey has emails from/to Schlozman which has him talking about filing the case before the election for political reasons.

One of the problems with the Republicans is that they are willing not only to sacrifice others for political gain, but that they are willing to sacrifice themselves for "the cause," so long as it advances that.

amount wrote on June 6, 2007 8:01 AM:

JNagarya,

I just want to say that I value your comments. You bring a no-nonsense, legal based, view of events.

I have also come to believe that you should have a conversation with the Senate & House Judiciary investigations. They seem to be drifting aimlessly without a clear objective or goal, other than positioning themselves for the next election. Your grasp of the conspiracy would kick the investigators into overdrive.

Steve5117 wrote on June 6, 2007 8:26 AM:

JNagarya
June 6, 2007 02:35 AM

Just what is the cause that Schlozman and the others are sacrificing themselves for? It certainly isn't Truth, Justice, and the American way of life.

I'd opt for crucifiction for those found guilty, with their crosses lining Pennsylvania Ave., since they seem to want to be sacrificed for their beliefs.

TLV wrote on June 6, 2007 9:36 AM:

I hate to admit I'm from Ohio because we were right at the center of much of the controversy about the possibility of voter fraud around the time of the 2004 election.
The Democratic candidate for Secretary of State, Jennifer Brunner, was running for office in 2006 when I attended one of her speeches. She said that voter I. D. was a ridiculous notion because Ohio had only FOUR incidents of voter fraud in the history of free elections in the state. She, obviously, did not agree with it.

The law requiring voter I.D. was just one of the GOP's tricks to discourage voting by minorities, the poor, and the mentally challenged. They have a whole bag of those dirty tricks.

JNagarya wrote on June 6, 2007 1:12 PM:

"Just what is the cause that Schlozman and the others are sacrificing themselves for? It certainly isn't Truth, Justice, and the American way of life."

"Posted by: Steve5117
Date: June 6, 2007 08:26 AM"

Permanent Republican majority.

Alex wrote on June 6, 2007 3:21 PM:

It seems to me that the lack of Senate Republicans at this hearing is sending the same message as the Republican Debates are sending the administration:
We no longer will support you and your lame (or lamely administered) policies.
Can anyone smell veto-proof legislation?

Debra wrote on June 10, 2007 1:33 PM:

Just saw re-airing of Hearing - trying to find out more about Don Santo and the function of the Public Integrity section at D.O.J.; where Schlozman states he received order to proceed with indictment of Acorn.

Anybody know???

Debra wrote on June 10, 2007 1:33 PM:

Just saw re-airing of Hearing - trying to find out more about Don Santo and the function of the Public Integrity section at D.O.J.; where Schlozman states he received order to proceed with indictment of Acorn.

Anybody know???

Bill wrote on June 12, 2007 5:13 PM:

MSN I NIIPET
MSN