Yeah, that jumped out at me, too. That's the same shit we got with Gonzalez. Ashcroft and Gonzalez both thought they were there to do the President's bidding instead of enforcing the nation's laws. Mukasey seems to continuing that proud tradition.

Posted at July 18, 2008 3:18 PM in response to Ashcroft Cites Executive Privilege, Discusses Waterboarding with House Judiciary

Exactly. Top government and business executives have complete notes and calendars of everyone they met with and what was discussed. If he can't remember what happened it's because he doesn't want to.

Posted at July 18, 2008 3:17 PM in response to Ashcroft Cites Executive Privilege, Discusses Waterboarding with House Judiciary

Please, please, please will someone please tell Ashcroft that he is *not* the President's attorney and he *cannot* claim executive privilege. The President has an attorney but the Attorney General is the country's attorney, not the Presidents. That's the whole problem we had with Ashcroft and Gonzalez--they think their job was to do the President's bidding instead of enforcing the nation's laws.

Also, only the President can claim executive privilege. Ashcroft could either refuse to answer to avoid incriminating himself or, as he has so often done, just say he can't remember. Why, oh why, don't the members of Congress call these bastards on this stuff?

Posted at July 18, 2008 3:14 PM in response to Ashcroft Testimony Brings CIA Interrogation Timeline Into Question

Even better, how would someone know if the pain was similar to that caused by death or organ failure? Think about it. How can someone know administering waterboarding know a) what pain the person being waterboarded feels, or b) if that pain is similar to death or organ failure? The whole thing is a big ruse.

Posted at July 18, 2008 3:09 PM in response to Ashcroft Testimony Brings CIA Interrogation Timeline Into Question

And what is a "career appointee"? Aren't you either an appointee or a career employee (i.e., a civil servant)?

Posted at July 17, 2008 11:52 PM in response to Deputy At Special Counsel's Office Quits Citing "Political Agendas"

Really, how much courage does it take to resign in the last few months of the Administration? You know you're going to lose your job as soon as the election takes place. Like we're supposed to believe the political agendas and personal vendettas" just started happening?

Posted at July 17, 2008 9:30 PM in response to Deputy At Special Counsel's Office Quits Citing "Political Agendas"

C'mon. Guys like Ashcroft have extensive logs and notes of whomever they meet and what they talk about. It's standard practice for high government officials. How could he run an agency if he doesn't know who he told to do what? If he can't remember it's because he doesn't *want* to remember.

Posted at July 17, 2008 4:09 PM in response to Ashcroft: Sometimes I Confuse What People Tell Me With Reality

Give it a day or two to percolate to the top. According to HuffPo, it is starting to be noticed:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bruce-wilson/amidst-possible-national_b_112769.html

Posted at July 15, 2008 1:07 AM in response to White House Distances President From Homeland Security Adviser Who Tried To Trade Access For Cash

It's interesting that Perino said twice, I believe, that Payne never worked for the White House despite never having been asked if he did. Pushing that message out there quite strongly.

Posted at July 14, 2008 5:36 PM in response to White House Distances President From Homeland Security Adviser Who Tried To Trade Access For Cash

Worse than that, it's not his privilege to assert. It's the Presidents. That's what makes his (and Bolton and Meiers before him) failing to show so serious. If they wish to refuse to testify due to executive privilege they must show up and explain why the President asserts this privilege. It then must be ruled on; it isn't automatic just because he says it.

So, despite what you hear in the MSM, Rove did not assert executive privilege. That's a legal position. No, Rove simple refused to show up for a subpoena, something he cannot legally do. Let's see what happens. If they simply let all these people walk away it will set a dangerous precedent. I can't wait until the next Democratic administration does this to a Republican Congress. Can you imagine the consternation and hand wringing about the death of the Constitution and the rule of law?

Posted at July 10, 2008 4:23 PM in response to Rove Is a No Show at House Judiciary