Why go to the mat for Alberto Gonzales? Co-dependency, of course

frank rich agrees with me, or i agree with frank rich, take your pick...

[W]hy go to the mat for Alberto Gonzales? Even Bush loyalists have rarely shown respect for this crony whom the president saddled with the nickname Fredo; they revolted when Bush flirted with appointing him to the Supreme Court and shun him now. The attorney general's alleged infraction -- misrepresenting a Justice Department purge of eight U.S. attorneys, all political appointees, for political reasons -- seems an easy-to-settle kerfuffle next to his infamous 2002 memo dismissing the Geneva Conventions' strictures on torture as "quaint" and "obsolete."

That's why the president's wild overreaction is revealing. So far his truculence has been largely attributed to his slavish loyalty to his White House supplicants, his ideological belief in unilateral executive-branch power and, as always, his need to shield the Machiavellian machinations of Karl Rove (who installed a protege in place of one of the fired attorneys). But the fierceness of Bush's response -- to the ludicrous extreme of forbidding transcripts of congressional questioning of White House personnel -- indicates there is far more fire to go with all the Beltway smoke.

i've been saying the very same thing since this story broke... with gonzales gone, bush would have his entire flank exposed... gonzales is a critical element of protection for george, and, as rich speculates, bush is a critical element of protection for gonzo... it's the worst kind of co-dependency and co-dependency always ends badly...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Bush has given the green light to the surveillance state

it's not like this stuff hasn't gone on before, or for a long time... what's different is the scale and the overt nature... reading this kind of story ten years ago would have ignited outrage, thirty years ago it would have precipitated resignations, and forty years ago, there would have been mass protests in the streets... today...? we read it and think, hey, no surprise here...

"For at least a year before the 2004 Republican National Convention, teams of undercover New York City police officers traveled to cities across the country, Canada and Europe to conduct covert observations of people who planned to protest at the convention, according to police records and interviews," the New York Times will report.

Records show that in hundreds files labeled "NYPD Secret," the NYPD intelligence operations "chronicled the views and plans of people who had no apparent intention of breaking the law."

The files included members church and anti-war groups, environmentalists, and even three New York City elected officials.

In some cases, records of lawful activities were shared with police departments in other states.

there's a real downside to being informed... it's no longer possible to just go about your daily business and pretend everything's ok, when you know it's anything but...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Yes, dear lord, let THIS be the way it works

as much as i DON'T follow sports (and, believe me, i don't, other than the occasional playoff that features a team from somewhere i have geographic allegiance), this at crooks and liars caught my eye...



yeah, yeah... you probably have a few more names you'd like to add... i know i do...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

An extraordinary diary about an even more extraordinary claim

is anyone but a precious few paying any attention at all to this kind of crap...?

devilstower, front-paged on daily kos...

When Tony Snow made the rounds of talk shows this week, some might have been surprised at his message.

Snow to CNN: "There's another principle, which is Congress doesn't have the legislative -- I mean oversight authority over the White House."

Snow to NBC: "Congress doesn't have any legitimate oversight and responsibilities to the White House."

Snow to NBC: "First, the White House is under no compulsion to do anything. The legislative branch doesn't have oversight."

Snow to ABC: "The executive branch is under no compulsion to testify to Congress, because Congress in fact doesn't have oversight ability."

Just in case you missed it the first time, Snow repeated himself to make sure the public gets the message: the White House has declared itself, a law unto itself, beholding to no other authority. This goes quite a bit beyond the already massive expansions of "executive privilege" previously claimed by this administration.

[...]

Though it may have passed as just another incidence of Snow being trotted forth to distribute the day's right wing talking points, what was said on Friday should not go without notice. This is the single more amazing declaration in an administration that has already produced more extraordinary claims than the fountain at Lourdes.

[...]

The only question now is whether we will drive them back to the bank, or admit that we are only play-acting at democracy.

the bush administration is only spelling out the logical extension of what they have set out for themselves since day one - absolute, total, unfettered executive power, controlling de facto totalitarian state... we either confront this constitutional crisis or we risk losing our country...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

So, where DID the Patriot Act provision come from, anyway?

god bless TPMmuckraker... they're poring over the third document dump and, as per usual, are finding all sorts of interesting things...

One central aspect of the U.S. attorneys firing is that the Justice Department (via a staffer for then-Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter (R-PA)) was able to slip in a provision to the Patriot Act Reauthorization bill that made it possible for the administration to appoint interim U.S. attorneys for an indefinite period without Senate confirmation. That way, the administration could install who they wanted for the rest of Bush's term -- like, say, Karl Rove's former aide.

Justice Official William Moschella told McClatchy ten days ago that he'd sought the change "without the knowledge or coordination of his superiors at the Justice Department or anyone at the White House." Just a rogue operator.

But look at what's in the emails:

However, Moschella's e-mails suggest that he discussed the need for proposed changes with other Justice Department officials on Nov. 11, 2005, around the time when the bill was being drawn up.

"We support eliminating the court's role" in appointing interim U.S. attorneys, Moschella wrote to officials, including Michael Battle, the director of the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys, "and believe the AG should have that authority alone."

now, when is someone going to dig into arlen specter's involvement and start quizzing him or his staff to find out who lied...?

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

A creature legally dead while biologically still alive

this analysis by slavoj zizek in today's nyt is very, very good... let me say that again - very, VERY good...

While the scope of Mr. Mohammed’s crimes is clear and horrifying, it is worth noting that the United States seems incapable of treating him even as it would the hardest criminal — in the civilized Western world, even the most depraved child murderer gets judged and punished. But any legal trial and punishment of Mr. Mohammed is now impossible — no court that operates within the frames of Western legal systems can deal with illegal detentions, confessions obtained by torture and the like. (And this conforms, perversely, to Mr. Mohammed’s desire to be treated as an enemy rather than a criminal.)

It is as if not only the terrorists themselves, but also the fight against them, now has to proceed in a gray zone of legality. We thus have de facto “legal” and “illegal” criminals: those who are to be treated with legal procedures (using lawyers and the like), and those who are outside legality, subject to military tribunals or seemingly endless incarceration.

Mr. Mohammed has become what the Italian political philosopher Giorgio Agamben calls “homo sacer”: a creature legally dead while biologically still alive. And he’s not the only one living in an in-between world. The American authorities who deal with detainees have become a sort of counterpart to homo sacer: acting as a legal power, they operate in an empty space that is sustained by the law and yet not regulated by the rule of law.

his bottom line...

This is why, in the end, the greatest victims of torture-as-usual are the rest of us, the informed public. A precious part of our collective identity has been irretrievably lost. We are in the middle of a process of moral corruption: those in power are literally trying to break a part of our ethical backbone, to dampen and undo what is arguably our civilization’s greatest achievement, the growth of our spontaneous moral sensitivity.

i believe that people are fundamentally good... i also believe that we all are exposed, consciously or unconsciously, and, some would say, deliberately, to a daily barrage of input that deadens our sensitivities, represses our natural empathy, and inures us to pain and suffering... this is a terrible tragedy, one which we must all struggle to change... and it's for nothing less than to save our collective souls...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Need proof of a disconnect from reality?

try this...

Nearly three weeks before seven US attorneys were asked to submit their resignations, the top spokesperson for the Department of Justice expressed little concern and told a senior White House official that the firings probably wouldn't even become a "national story."

[...]

The communications between Tasia Scolinos, Director of Public Affairs at the Department of Justice, and Catherine J. Martin (pictured above), Deputy Assistant to the President and Deputy Communications Director for Policy and Planning, transpired on Friday, November 17, 2006, twenty days before the dismissals were carried out on December 7.

that's the same tasia scolinos, by the way, who said...

“He did not participate in the selection of the U.S. attorneys to be fired. He did sign off on the final list.”

to be completely fair to tasia, had it been left to the traditional media, it WOULDN'T have been a national story... fortunately, we have utterly invaluable resources like TPMmuckraker and many, many thousands of indefatigable citizens who no longer trust the traditional media to tell them what's news and what isn't...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Aw, C'MON...! You expect us to BELIEVE this...?

i did NOT just fall off the turnip truck... i may be getting old, but i'm not getting more STUPID... i may have been born at night, but it wasn't LAST night...

Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales and senior advisers discussed the plan to remove seven United States attorneys at a meeting last Nov. 27, 10 days before the dismissals were carried out, according to a Justice Department calendar entry disclosed Friday.

The previously undisclosed meeting appeared to contradict Mr. Gonzales’s previous statements about his knowledge of the dismissals. He said at a news conference on March 13 that he had not participated in any discussions about the removals, but knew in general that his aides were working on personnel changes involving United States attorneys.

Tasia Scolinos, a Justice Department spokeswoman, told reporters on Friday evening that Mr. Gonzales’s attendance at the hourlong meeting was not inconsistent with his past remarks.

“He tasked his chief of staff to carry this plan forward,” Ms. Scolinos said. “He did not participate in the selection of the U.S. attorneys to be fired. He did sign off on the final list.”

so, no attorneys names were mentioned... no states were mentioned... no reasons for dismissal were mentioned... no possible replacements were put forward... no performance expectations for the newcomers were reviewed... no discussion was held about where the white house stood on the matter... and, most incredible of all, the attorney general of the united states, the man in charge, the one ultimately accountable for everything that goes on in the justice department, george bush's man on the scene, didn't participate in the selection of the final list... THAT, my friends, is a pile of bullshit stacked to record-breaking heights... it'll be VERY interesting to hear what mr. sampson has to say under oath...

"Mr. Sampson looks forward to answering the Committee's questions," the letter reads. "We trust that his decision to do so will satisfy the need of the Congress to obtain information from him concerning the requested resignations of the United States Attorneys."

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Authoritarianism is the means, money and power are the ends

i swiped this snippet whole from lukery at wot is it good 4, but digby says it so well, i simply couldn't resist...

I've watched this creeping authoritarianism for more than 30 years now. It's not a figment of my imagination and I'm damned tired of jaded political pundits telling me to lighten up. These same people told me that it didn't matter if Ronald Reagan had a secret government working out of the basement of the white house (Oliver North is so awesome in his uniform!) and it didn't matter if George Bush Sr pardoned all the criminals in that scandal and it didn't matter if a partisan congress impeached a president over sex. We were told to "get over it" when Bush's henchmen manipulated every political lever they could find in his brother's and father's political machinery to take office in 2000 --- and then decided to govern as if they'd won in a landslide. Then came illegal war, torture, spying on citizens, denial of habeas corpus and all the rest. Excuse me, but I'm not going to sit around and chuckle knowingly that this is "just the way it is." It isn't. History proves that very bad things can happen to good countries. Only fools pretend that great nations can't go down the wrong road.

The public is waking up and hopefully they will deny the Republicans power for a while. But until this authoritarian zombie is finally killed, the country is in danger of more of these "misbegotten, stupid, ill-advised wars" and imperial presidencies each time the Republicans manage to sully the Dems sufficiently to regain power.

I know that such silly, naive righteous indignation amuses the chattering classes to no end. That's exactly why so many people believe they are a big part of the problem.

well, digby, it isn't just authoritarianism... it's the wholesale dedication of the infrastructure of the entire country and all of the countries that the u.s. impacts to money and power, and damn anyone who gets in the way... authoritarianism is simply the tool that's used to accumulate both...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Attacking "voter fraud" for R's means nullifying voting rights

ah-HA...! NOW, we're getting down to it...

President George Bush and the Justice Department, in selecting U.S. Attorney appointments, have emphasized the prosecution of alleged voter fraud by Democrats in electoral battleground states, a report by McClatchy Newspapers finds.

"Bush, Karl Rove, the president's deputy chief of staff, and other Republican political advisers have highlighted voting rights issues and what Rove has called the 'growing problem' of Democratic election fraud since Bush took power in the tumultuous election of 2000, a race ultimately decided by the U.S. Supreme Court," write Greg Gordon, Margaret Talev and Marisa Taylor for McClatchy.

They continue, "Since 2005, McClatchy Newspapers has found, Bush has appointed at least three U.S. attorneys who had worked in the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division when it was rolling back long-standing voting rights policies aimed at protecting predominantly poor, minority voters."

fortunately, karl rove shot off his big, fat mouth...

"Last April, while the Justice Department and the White House were planning the firings, Rove gave a speech in Washington to the Republican National Lawyers Association," McClatchy reports. "He ticked off 11 states that he said could be pivotal in 2008. Bush has appointed new U.S. attorneys in nine of them since 2005: Florida, Colorado, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Arkansas, Michigan, Nevada and New Mexico. U.S. attorneys in the latter four were among those fired."

well, DAMN...! whaddaya know...?!?! WHO woulda thunk it...?!?!

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Our president is a very pathetic, less-than-human man

to dismiss the passion, emotions, agony, and dirt-under-the-fingernails hard work that went into this bill as "political theater" is tantamount to shitting on the very premises that the united states purports to live by, and to spitting in the face of every united states citizen... whether it's a good bill or a bad bill, whether it succeeds in its purpose or not, and whether george bush vetoes it or not, it is an outcome of people of deeply-felt convictions engaging with each other and trying to find a way to work together to deal with a terrible chapter in the nation's history... more than ever, i am convinced that whatever lies under george bush's skin, it is not human...

President George W. Bush this afternoon dismissed the narrowly-passed House supplemental appropriations legislation as an 'act of political theater.'

"The purpose of the emergency war spending bill I requested was to provide our troops with vital funding," the President said just after the vote in the White House. "Instead, Democrats in the House, in an act of political theater, voted to substitute their judgment for that of our military commanders on the ground in Iraq."

Warning that the bill "set rigid restrictions that will require an army of lawyers to interpret," he promised to veto it.

george bush will have his day of reckoning and i will be there in glorious witness...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

"The U.S. justice system does not serve at the pleasure of ... this president"

leahy's one tough cookie, and, if i was going up against him, i would be very concerned...

"I was a prosecutor for eight years," [Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT)] said. "I've always tried to have a few witnesses honing back in case we need them and I suspect we will have them."

Leahy added, "We saw in the paper this morning people saying we had a $130 billion case against big tobacco companies until the White House said no, you can't hit them with any kind of a fine like that. That's awful, they're friends of ours, cut it down to $10 billion. And, in fact, a career member of the Justice Department was given a summation that she was required to read word for word. I've never known of a lawyer giving a summation to the court where somebody else wrote it and they had to read it. It's never happened in my experience. She's very upset about this. A lot of other people are."

[...]

Leahy added, "This is a -- I realize U.S. Attorneys serve at the pleasure of the president, but the U.S. justice system does not serve at the pleasure of either this president or any other president. And we intend to find out just what happened."

i'm waiting as patiently as i can, which, given the 6+ years i've been waiting, isn't very...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

More of the "it's not the 'what', it's the 'how'" argument

i'm much more interested in the "why..."

Last April, Tim Griffin, a Rove aide and longtime GOP operative, sent the attorney general's chief of staff a flattering letter about himself written by Cummins, the prosecutor he was trying to replace, internal e-mails released this week show. Rove and Harriet Miers, then the White House counsel, were keenly interested in putting him in the position, e-mails reveal.

New documents also show that Justice and White House officials were preparing for President Bush's approval of the appointment as early as last summer, five months before Griffin took the job.

[...]

The e-mails show how D. Kyle Sampson, then the attorney general's chief of staff, and other Justice officials prepared to use a change in federal law to bypass input from Arkansas' two Democratic senators, who had expressed doubts about placing a former Republican National Committee operative in charge of a U.S. attorney's office. The evidence runs contrary to assurances from Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales that no such move had been planned.

"This was a very loyal soldier to the Republicans and the Bush administration, and they wanted to reward him," said Sen. Mark Pryor (D-Ark.). "They had every right to do this, but it's the way they handled it, and the way they tried to cover their tracks and mislead Congress, that has turned this into a fiasco for them."

it turns out that the "why" is very likely what we've thought all along...

Justice Department officials also have not publicly said Cummins's departure was related to his performance in office, as they have with the others. They acknowledged last month that he was fired simply to make room for Griffin.

But documents show that Cummins was clearly a target of Sampson's two-year effort to fire a group of U.S. attorneys who did not qualify as what he called "loyal Bushies." He was recommended for removal as early as March 2005.

< sigh > the united states department of justice, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the republican party...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

"I resent being conscripted as a secret informer for the government"

the informers among us...

a recipient of a national security letter speaks out anonymously... he refused to release the requested information and is engaged in a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the nsl power... he has been living under a gag order since 2004...

I resent being conscripted as a secret informer for the government and being made to mislead those who are close to me, especially because I have doubts about the legitimacy of the underlying investigation.

[...]

I recognize that there may sometimes be a need for secrecy in certain national security investigations. But I've now been under a broad gag order for three years, and other NSL recipients have been silenced for even longer. At some point -- a point we passed long ago -- the secrecy itself becomes a threat to our democracy. In the wake of the recent revelations, I believe more strongly than ever that the secrecy surrounding the government's use of the national security letters power is unwarranted and dangerous. I hope that Congress will at last recognize the same thing.

how very chilling... this is the very dark and disturbing world the bush administration has created for the citizens of a supposedly "free" country...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

The world series of poker and the jackpot is the U.S. Constitution

i'll see your bet and raise you...

With subpoenas at the ready, House Democrats wrote White House counsel Fred Fielding today to tell him that they "remain committed to seeking a cooperative resolution."

House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers (D-MI) and subcommittee chairwoman Linda Sanchez (D-CA), who oversaw a vote yesterday to authorize the issuance of subpoenas for Karl Rove and other White House officials, signed the letter.

conyers and sanchez are playing a very tight game, one very careful step at a time... the key is going to be making sure they have the cards and, when their bluff is called, that they have a winning hand... if congress folds on this one, there's not going to be another game...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

"It would deny the public any reliable record"

and THAT is the plan... no record... nothing public... just the same 6-year old game of spin, spin, spin, with a liberal side dish of plausible deniability...

froomkin...

White House officials say that the absence of a transcript is absolutely essential -- and is a reflection of their determination not to allow a friendly information-gathering session to take on the trapping of a court proceeding or political theater.

But more significantly, it would deny the public any reliable record of what was said.

It would remove the pressure from senior aides, most notably White House political guru Karl Rove, to come clean on their involvement in the firings -- while denying the public an opportunity to assess their veracity.

And it would make Congress a party to keeping important information obscured from the kind of public scrutiny that comes when journalists and bloggers have a chance to untangle the skillful evasions so common to this White House.

great point... i hadn't considered that, by accepting the white house terms, congress would become a party to a cover-up...

(thanks to joe at americablog...)

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

A Republican finger in the WaPo's eye

the "partisan witch-hunt" continues...

“Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) voted with Democrats Thursday to give Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) the authority to subpoena current and former White House officials… The panel voted by voice vote on the authority, but Grassley said he wanted the record to show that he voted ‘yes’ on the issue.”

good for chuck... and i hope the wapo is paying attention, not that it makes a goddam bit of difference to fred hiatt what the TRUTH is... he'll still keep printing bullshit like this...

The White House and congressional Democrats have drawn deep lines in the sand over who will testify, and how, as Congress investigates the dismissal of eight U.S. attorneys.

yeah, them damn democrats, drawing those lines in the sand... shame...SHAME...!

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

A clean elucidation of the "fuck you Congress" theory

from tony snow...

The executive branch is under no compulsion to testify to Congress, because Congress in fact doesn't have oversight ability.

from markos...

Interesting Constitutional theory.

It's also the cleanest elucidation of the "fuck you Congress" theory Bush has operated under the past 6 years.

it's certainly not news to any of us who have paid attention...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Well, George, what do you have to say? For yourself, that is...

anything informative besides stamping your foot and having a little temper tantrum on national television...?

The extent to which President Bush knew of and was involved with the plan to fire eight U.S. attorneys in December is at the heart of whether he will be able to successfuly exercise executive privilege in fighting congressional subpoenas of White House aides, The Hill is reporting.

In an email exchange found among the 3,000 documents delivered to Congress by the Justice Department, Kyle Sampson, former chief of staff to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, asked White House counsel Harriet Miers whether he had approval to move forward with the firings.

"Miers responded that she was 'not sure whether this will be determined to require the boss’s attention.' Her e-mail ended with the words: 'We will see. Thanks,'" reports the Hill. "Sampson, who resigned last week, responded with a critical question: 'Who will determine whether whether [sic] this requires the President’s attention?'"

The rest of the disclosed Justice Department documents do not provide evidence of whether the President was involved in those discussions. But since only two e-mails delivered to Congress were dated in the period between mid-November and December 4, it is believed that there may yet exist undisclosed e-mails from that period which provide answers.

having other people talk about what you knew and didn't know really isn't very helpful...

In response to a barrage of questions from reporters yesterday, White House spokesman Tony Snow said only that Bush had “no recollection of [the firings] ever being raised with him.”

seems to be a lot of memory issues popping up these days... fortunately, george doesn't have to reach back as far in time as scooter did...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Going after Hayden for confirming that Plame was "covert"

un-frigging-believable...

Hayden’s approval of Waxman’s statement about Plame’s covert status “confirmed Republican suspicions that Hayden is too close to Democrats,” Novak wrote. “When Hayden’s role was pointed out to one of the President’s most important aides, there was no response.”

Novak, it appears, has gone from acting as Bush’s water carrier to becoming an instigator for reprisals against public officials who are not sufficiently “loyal Bushies.”

Hiatt and his colleagues on the Washington Post editorial page apparently see nothing wrong in conveying these thinly veiled threats of reprisals to the broader Washington community.

novak and his principal enabler, fred hiatt, should be fired - immediately...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Nothing exceeds like excess

the super-rich are VERY different from you and me...

With his new boat, the Wally Island, Bassani has set sail for new territories. The 99-meter-long floating island with a 1,000 square meter deck is big enough for a garden, swimming pool, and a tennis court or helicopter landing pad. The five-story superstructure, reminiscent of an air traffic control tower, can be divided into 12 suites for 24 guests, not including the movie theater, spa, library and gym. Whether the floating luxury villa will ever be built is unclear, though interest is reportedly high.

every once in a while, i run across examples of such obscene excess that i am left gasping in horror and disbelief... this is one of those times...



A digital plan for Luca Bassani's "Wally Island," which has not yet been constructed.



What the owner would see from the windows of the master suite.

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Leahy: "They would have laughed me out of court"

the senate follows the house's lead...

The Senate's Judiciary Committee voted this morning to authorize the issuing of subpoenas for White House officials linked to the firing of United States Attorneys. The authorization came after a lengthy, tense hearing where Republican and Democratic Senators debated whether or not Members of Congress should accept the offer of an unsworn discussion with White House aides in place of a public hearing.

Senator Patrick Leahy, who chairs the Senate committee, said that in spite of the White House's statements, he would go forward with the subpoena process if required.

"They came up and said, 'This is our offer. Take it or leave it. Accept these papers where we've erased 100 pages or more so you don't even know it's on there. Do a closed- door hearing where the public has no idea what was said, and then not under oath,'" Leahy said on NBC's Today this morning.

He added, "Well, nobody's going to take that. I was a prosecutor for eight years. If I had ever done that as a prosecutor with somebody, they would have laughed me out of court."

that light at the end of the tunnel is merely the headlight of the oncoming constitutional crisis...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Great, Gonzo... Stick around... You're a better target that way...

whatever...

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales declared this morning that he will not resign from his post in the Bush administration. The remarks were delivered in a press conference after Gonzales met privately with various US Attorneys.

"I'm not going to resign, I'm going to stay focused on protecting our kids," Gonzales said, and then pointed to the record of his Justice Department as evidence for why he should keep his job.

if you're going to insist on staying, let's see if we can't work it out where you and your boss go down together... that'd be a LOT more satisfying...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Why be "fair and balanced" with Bush administration criminals?

the wapo strikes again, by first of all - no surprise - completely misstating the issue and omitting any context...

The White House and congressional Democrats have drawn deep lines in the sand over who will testify, and how, as Congress investigates the dismissal of eight U.S. attorneys. The stubbornness and overheated rhetoric on both sides threaten an unnecessary constitutional crisis that would only bog down the inquiry in a distracting fight over process.

no, no, no... the constitutional crisis is not "unnecessary," it's a must... the "line in the sand" is a line that has to be drawn if there is ever to be a halt to the bush administration's demands for ever more unfettered, unaccountable power... second, it's not just the DEMOCRATS, dammit... by making that statement, the issue is once again being labeled partisan...

note also that the wapo completely fails its readers by not noting that there are a number of republicans who are just as disturbed by all this as there are democrats...

then, it goes on to either miss or deliberately avoid a key point about bush's non-starter offer for confidential, off-the-record interviews...

Lawmakers would do well to demonstrate more understanding of the legitimate institutional concerns at stake here -- is the president not entitled to confidential advice on personnel matters?

what fails to be mentioned here became patently clear yesterday - that if there had been no discussion with bush regarding the attorney issue, then there's nothing to talk about in the first place, as reporter ed henry pointed out in a press briefing with tony snow...

Tony Snow explained that the standoff between the Executive Branch and Congress revolves around Bush’s right to “privileged communications with close staff members.” But he also stated that “the president has no recollection” of conversations about the attorney firings being raised with him. That means, as CNN’s Ed Henry noted, that the White House is now claiming executive privilege over conversations that never existed.

then they go on to make a suggestion that, while reasonable on its face, on closer reading makes no sense...

As we suggested last week, a two-step process could pull both sides back from the brink. First, Mr. Gonzales and other Justice Department officials should testify about their decisions to remove the ousted eight. If questions remain, Mr. Rove and Ms. Miers should be interviewed. They don't have to testify under oath, since lying to Congress is a crime. But their testimony must be as open as possible and should without question be transcribed.

if lying to congress is a crime and the testimony is open and transcribed, what is the problem with making it fully official and putting them under oath...? how this op-ed reads to me is that the wapo fully realizes what kind of a mess this whole thing really is but is trying to be all things to all people, or, to use the dreaded term, "fair and balanced..." bullshit, wapo... trying to achieve fairness and balance when dealing with criminals is NOT the way to go...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

As long as the Justice Department is being scrutinized, how about the tobacco case?

while they're looking into the politicization of the justice department, they would do well to dig into the tobacco racketeering case settlement, a travesty that's been questioned since june 2005, when the government made its stunning reversal...

The leader of the Justice Department team that prosecuted a landmark lawsuit against tobacco companies said yesterday that Bush administration political appointees repeatedly ordered her to take steps that weakened the government's racketeering case.

Sharon Y. Eubanks said Bush loyalists in Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales's office began micromanaging the team's strategy in the final weeks of the 2005 trial, to the detriment of the government's claim that the industry had conspired to lie to U.S. smokers.

She said a supervisor demanded that she and her trial team drop recommendations that tobacco executives be removed from their corporate positions as a possible penalty. He and two others instructed her to tell key witnesses to change their testimony. And they ordered Eubanks to read verbatim a closing argument they had rewritten for her, she said.

"The political people were pushing the buttons and ordering us to say what we said," Eubanks said. "And because of that, we failed to zealously represent the interests of the American public."

this isn't a new charge... it was already perking last fall...

A Justice Department official who slashed the amount of money being sought from tobacco companies made misleading statements to Congress, says a former government lawyer who handled a landmark lawsuit against the industry.

The comments by attorney Sharon Eubanks follow Associate Attorney General Robert McCallum's decision a year ago to downsize a proposed smoking cessation program from $130 billion to $10 billion. That's the amount the government wants a judge to order cigarette companies to pay.

A month ago, McCallum sent written statements explaining his actions to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which was considering his nomination to be U.S. ambassador to Australia. The Senate subsequently confirmed McCallum, a former Yale classmate of President Bush, to the post.

and, even at that time, had been in the news since 2005...

The lead trial lawyer in the government's landmark lawsuit against the tobacco industry has quit the case and left the Justice Department, a move that comes at a particularly sensitive time when the companies and the department could still negotiate a settlement.

Sharon Eubanks, who had aggressively pursued the racketeering case against the tobacco industry, was withdrawing effective Thursday, the government said in a one-sentence filing in U.S. District Court.

Eubanks said her supervisors' failure to support her work on the tobacco case influenced her decision to retire after 22 years with the department.

Her withdrawal follows a stunning reversal in June in which the Justice Department disregarded the recommendations of its own witness — Dr. Michael Fiore — and reduced the amount it was demanding from the tobacco industry for smoking cessation programs to $10 billion. Fiore had proposed $130 billion.

in fact, allegations began to surface immediately after the verdict...

A top Justice Department official threatened to remove a government expert from its witness list if he did not water down his recommended penalties for the tobacco industry, the witness said in an interview yesterday.

Harvard University business professor Max H. Bazerman said a career trial lawyer told him senior Justice officials wanted him to change his recommendation that the court appoint a monitor to review whether it was appropriate to remove senior tobacco company management. Bazerman said the lawyer was passing along the "strong request" the week before Bazerman was to take the witness stand on May 4 in the government's landmark racketeering case against the industry.

looks like there's enough here to warrant a separate investigation, particularly since our already-broken health care system has to deal with the consequences of what big tobacco keeps dumping on our society...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

I'm signing up

Out of Iraq Blogger Caucus or Idiot Liberals of the World Unite!

if you'd like to as well, go visit big tent democrat over at talkleft...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

"Who’s the toughest hombre"

it's the game george loves best... if he has a chance to demonstrate his swagger, he'll take it every time... it certainly doesn't help that he has so many enablers surrounding him...

Rep. Bob Barr (R-GA), who served as a U.S. Attorney under President Reagan, appeared today on CNN.

Barr blasted the White House, saying “the integrity of the Department of Justice is being used as a political football by the administration to prove who’s the toughest hombre in all this.” Rather than fighting accountability, Barr said, “the administration really ought to be going out of its way to do what prior administrations have done, such as the Bush 1 administration and Reagan administrations, and that is take whatever steps are necessary to assure the American people that the integrity of our justice system has not been compromised.”

Barr added that members of Congress “have a pretty clear right to demand information” related to the U.S. Attorney purge. “These, after all, are all people, whether Karl Rove or a U.S. Attorney or an attorney general, who are paid by the taxpayers with funds appropriated by the Congress. And Congress has a right to assure itself that these funds are being used properly.”

george's support is melting like ice shelves in the arctic... too bad it doesn't make any difference... he's going to go to the mat on this just like they said they would before the november elections...

[T]hey're going to fight it all the way to the Supreme Court on every issue, every time, no compromise, no discussion, no negotiation.

i'm ready... i just hope congressional resolve doesn't start melting in the heat...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Preparing for battle

more on the subpoenas...

The House Committee investigating the firing of US Attorneys by the Justice Department authorized the issuing of subpoenas of top aides to President George W. Bush today in a voice vote. They stopped short of issuing the subpoenas themselves.

[...]

The authorization provided for subpoenas to "secure testimony at a hearing, and to obtain documents from these individuals, as well as unredacted documents from the Department of Justice and the White House, pursuant to the Committee’s investigation concerning the recent termination of United States Attorneys and related subjects" according to a notice at the House Judiciary Committee website.

from an aide to the committee...

"We are trying what we can to avoid doing that, but this vote will allow for the possibility that the White House will definitively choose to stonewall and slow-walk the investigation."

which, of course, is EXACTLY what the white house intends to do...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

House sub-Committee authorizes issuance of subpoenas

via cnn pipeline, the house subcommittee on commercial and administrative law just authorized the issuance of subpoenas, not that they WILL be issued, just that they CAN be issued... conyers, as usual, was masterful...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Where's the paper trail documenting the discharge process?

TPMmuckraker rightly points out that, if the us attorneys were fired for performance reasons, there would and should be an extensive paper trail documenting the performance issues... but, guess what...? there isn't one, at least among the already-released documents...

i have spent numbers of years supervising others and i know from vast experience that, when an employee is being let go - and it makes no difference whether it's an exempt or non-exempt employee and whether or not they're serving under an employment contract or simply employment-at-will - you ALWAYS document, document, document... ALWAYS... it's called covering your ass against the possibility of a wrongful discharge suit...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

The irony of the constitutional crisis - it was planned this way

everything i'm reading - and i consider that to be a good thing - says we are at the moment of constitutional crisis, a moment i have been awaiting for almost six years... there have been many, many times when i believed we should have taken a stronger stand against the bush administration's efforts to create a totalitarian state, and i sincerely believe that many of those efforts could have succeeded with the proper leadership, leadership willing to step out and describe the ugly reality... now, here we are...

It’s bitterly ironic that, now that we have arrived at the eve of a constitutional showdown, the unwillingness of congressional Democrats in 2006 to filibuster Bush’s insane nomination of Samuel Alito in the name of "keeping our powder dry" might force them to face the consequences of that extremely short-sighted and unprincipled decision, in the event the White House, a la the Nixon administration 33 years ago, decides to challenge any Congressional subpoenas.

But there is no more falling back. Retreat is not an option anymore. There’s nothing behind us except despotism – and not despotism wearing the thin veneer of "democratic" trappings that we’ve become accustomed to over the past six years, but unalloyed, coarse, amoral, callous despotism that doesn’t even pretend to give a crap about the welfare of anyone other than those in power.

i am in total agreement with kagro x at kos who says this...

Realize that the resolution of this stand-off will determine the extent to which the Congress is able to investigate everything that's still on their plate. If they lose this showdown, they lose their leverage in investigating NSA spying, the DeLay/Abramoff-financed Texas redistricting, Cheney's Energy Task Force, the political manipulation of science, the Plame outing... everything.

and we must not forget the fact that the bush administration laid out its plan BEFORE the november elections...

In fact, when it comes to deploying its Executive power, which is dear to Bush's understanding of the presidency, the President's team has been planning for what one strategist describes as "a cataclysmic fight to the death" over the balance between Congress and the White House if confronted with congressional subpoenas it deems inappropriate. The strategist says the Bush team is "going to assert that power, and they're going to fight it all the way to the Supreme Court on every issue, every time, no compromise, no discussion, no negotiation."

as i posted last night, the game's afoot...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

The most distinguished U.S. attorneys in the country (by their own admission)

TPMmuckraker comments on the "poor performance" of the fired attorneys...

The best bunch of prosecutors you'd ever want to fire.

I've said it before here, and I'll say it again. One of the remarkable aspects of the U.S. attorney firings is that the Justice Department didn't select a group of mediocre prosecutors and then try to smear them as underperforming -- oh, no. They chose from among the most distinguished U.S. attorneys in the country (by their own admission), and then announced to the world that they'd canned them for "performance related" issues.

when i first read "by their own admission," i read it as by the admission of the fired attorneys themselves... maybe it's too early in the morning and i just need more coffee...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Clearly not committed to fully telling the truth

Why would anyone refuse to take an oath on a matter like this, unless he were not fully committed to telling the truth? And why would Congress accept that idea, especially in an investigation that has already been marked by repeated false and misleading statements from administration officials?

yes, why...?

Mr. Bush’s overall strategy seems clear: to stop Congress from learning what went on within the White House, which may well be where the key decisions to fire the attorneys were made.

therefore...

It is no great surprise that top officials of this administration believe they do not need to testify before Congress. This is an administration that has shown over and over that it does not believe that the laws apply to it, and that it does not respect its co-equal branches of government. Congress should subpoena Mr. Rove and the others, and question them under oath, in public. If Congress has more questions, they should be recalled.

That would not be “partisanship,” as Mr. Bush wants Americans to believe. It would be Congress doing its job by holding the president and his team accountable — a rare thing in the last six years.

the part i like the best is the first sentence...

In nasty and bumbling comments made at the White House yesterday, President Bush declared that “people just need to hear the truth” about the firing of eight United States attorneys.

in terms less suited to the op-ed page of the nyt, kos offers his perspective...

Apparently, the way to set Bush off isn't to mismanage a war in Iraq and kill thousands of our own. That gets you a medal. It isn't to stay on vacation while a major American city drowns amidst neglect from incompetent federal agencies. That got Brownie a "heckuva job!".

But you say that Bush and his administration should be held accountable for their actions, and look out! You say that his people should testify under oath, and he's outraged that they won't be able to lie!

that's our president...!

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Ah, the courage to impeach... The courage... The COURAGE...

i truly believe that "WE" have the courage... the more important question is, do the DEMOCRATS IN CONGRESS have the courage...?

Bush has given us every possible political cover and excuse for impeaching him, on an issue for which he has little to no congressional support among Republicans. It's wrapped up in a neat little package with a bowtie. It is, frankly, a generous gift to our Party, our Nation, and our Constitution.

All we need is the courage to open it.

the constitutional crisis is upon us... the game is afoot...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

More Dubya droppings, reeking of INDIGNATION!

ooooooooo... he's positively AFFRONTED...!!! how COULD you DOUBT ANYTHING he would do, when you KNOW it's only for the GOOD OF THE NATION...!!

“We will not go along with a partisan fishing expedition aimed at honorable public servants. The initial response by Democrats unfortunately shows some appear more interested in scoring political points than in learning the facts. It will be regrettable if they choose to head down the partisan road of issuing subpoenas and demanding show trials. And I have agreed to make key White House officials and documents available. I proposed a reasonable way to avoid an impasse, and I hope they don’t choose confrontation. I will oppose any attempts to subpoena White House officials.”

i would bet my last nickel and my ass too that rove supplied the tone, the key points, and much of the key verbiage of this foot-stamping session...

(thanks to think progress...)

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Partisan witch-hunts and show trials

bush speaks spins and lies...

• I will oppose any effort to subpoena members of my staff

• Congress will receive unprecedented amounts of information
  

• It is completely appropriate

• I hope they don't choose confrontation

• Such a public spectacle

• The administration has made a very reasonable proposal

• It is not too late for the Democrats to choose to work together
  

• There is no indication that anyone did anything improper

• My choice is to make sure that safeguard the... I'm worried about precedents that would make it difficult for a staff member to say what's on their mind

• If they're truly interested in what took place, I've proposed a way they can find out

• My concern is they would rather score political points

• The proposal we've put together is a good one

• Dragging White House members up there to score political points

• It shows the true nature of this debate
  

count the number of times he said "reasonable" and "score political points..."

(via cnn pipeline...)

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Tancredo (of all people) wants Gonzo gone

why don't you go in on a package deal with al, ted, and make it a two-fer...

Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo called for embattled Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to resign Tuesday, the first GOP presidential candidate to do so.

"Alberto Gonzales has repeatedly shown that he is unwilling to enforce the law and unable to effectively manage the department," Tancredo said in a statement. "While I do not believe the dismissal of these eight political appointees warrants Mr. Gonzales' removal, his total mishandling of the affair is simply the latest in a series of leadership failures at the Justice Department."

i keep forgetting that this slimy, bigoted piece of republican wingnut garbage is a presidential candidate... president tancredo...! if that doesn't send chills down your spine, you haven't got one...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Baloney

screw that... leahy ain't gonna buy it...

According to MSNBC just now, White House counsel Fred Fielding offered that Karl Rove and other White House officials be interviewed, but the testimony would be unsworn, behind closed doors, and no transcript would be permitted.

(thanks to TPMmuckraker...)

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Subpoena time

heh-heh...

According to a release, "The Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law (CAL) will meet TOMORROW, March 21st at 10:15 am in 2141 Rayburn House Office Building to consider subpoenas for Kyle Sampson, Karl Rove, Harriet Miers, William Kelley, and Scott Jennings, as well as White House and Justice Department documents, which have not been provided to date."

glad to see they're not letting any grass grow under their feet... i'm assuming that conyers is proceeding with this because he knows he has enough votes to authorize the subpoenas being issued... then we wait to see the white house response, which will undoubtedly be less than accommodating...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

The journey of Abu Omar

despite a prohibition against speaking with western journalists, abu omar gives an interview to der spiegel... it's well worth reading...



in addition to that, there's a related article with THIS fascinating tidbit...

Robert Lady, the former CIA chief in Milan, has gone into hiding. He is the subject of an extradition order from Italian authorities for the role he played in the kidnapping of radical Muslim cleric Abu Omar in Milan. Washington is seeking to derail the trial -- perhaps because Condoleezza Rice may have given the operation the green light.

trickle, trickle, trickle... drip by drip, it's all coming out...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Juan Cole's top 10 Bush Iraq mistakes

if it hadn't been for #1, the other 9 wouldn't have mattered...

Bush's Top Ten Mistakes in Iraq during the Past 4 Years

10. Refusing to fire Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld when his incompetence and maliciousness became apparent in the growing guerrilla war and the Abu Ghraib torture scandal.

9. Declining to intervene in the collapsed economy or help put Iraqi state industries back on a good footing, on the grounds that the "market" would magically produce prosperity effortlessly.

8. Invading and destroying the Sunni Arab city of Fallujah in November, 2004, thus pushing the Sunni Arabs into the arms of the insurgency in protest and ensuring that they would boycott the January, 2005, parliamentary elections, a boycott that excluded them from power and from a significant voice in crafting the new constitution, which they then rejected.

7. Suddenly announcing that the US would "kill or capture" young nationalist Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr in spring, 2004, throwing the country into massive turmoil for months.

6. Replying to Baathist guerrilla provocations with harsh search and destroy missions that humiliated and angered ever more Sunni Arab clans, driving them to support or join the budding guerrilla movement.

5. Putting vengeful Shiites in charge of a Debaathification Commission that fired tens of thousands of mostly Sunni Arab state employees simply for having belonged to the Baath Party, leaving large numbers of Sunnis penniless and without hope of employment.

4. Dissolving the Iraqi Army in May, 2003, and sending 400,000 men home, unemployed, resentful and heavily armed.

3. Allowing widespread looting after the fall of Saddam Hussein on April 9, 2003, on the grounds that "stuff happens," "democracy is messy," and "how many vases can they have?"-- and thus signalling that there would be no serious attempt to provide law and order in American Iraq.

2. Plotting to install corrupt financier, notorious liar, and shady operator Ahmad Chalabi as the soft dictator of Iraq, and refusing to plan for a post-war administration of the country because that might forestall Chalabi's coronation.

1. Invading Iraq.

it's a litany of absolute disaster that, tragically, is still being written...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

I'm your daddy and I still love you

pay no attention to what "THEY" say...

"President Bush sent a powerful message of support Tuesday for embattled Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, calling his longtime friend to express support in the face of calls for his resignation," write Pete Yost and Lara Jakes Jordan for The Associated Press.

A White House deputy press secretary also blasted as "untrue" reports that a replacement for Gonzales was actively being sought.

instead of distancing himself from gonzo, he's doing his usual schtick - digging the hole ever deeper...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Perchance, does any of this sound familiar?

one of the documents released last night actually contains talking points, many of which suggest that administration and justice department officials knew exactly what kind of mess they were stirring up... hekebolos at daily kos has a great diary up on this and includes the following...

TALKING POINTS: U.S. ATTORNEY NOMINATIONS AND INTERIM APPOINTMENTS BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

[...]

U.S. Attorneys serve at the pleasure of the president:

United States Attorneys serve at the pleasure of the President. Thus, like other high-ranking executive branch officials, they may be removed for any reason or no reason. That on occasion in an organization as large as the Justice Department some United States Attorneys are removed, or are asked or encouraged to resign, should come as no surprise. United States Attorneys are never removed, or asked or encouraged to resign, in an effort to retaliate against them or inappropriately influence a particular investigation, criminal prosecution or civil case.

i've heard "serve at the pleasure of the president" so often over the past two weeks, it makes my head spin, but i suppose "spinning" fits the nature of the talking point, eh...?

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Looks like Fitz was nearly a casualty of the purge

can you imagine the holy uproar if fitz had been dismissed...? as it is, this is going to reverberate loudly in the investigation - as it should...

U.S. Attorney Patrick J. Fitzgerald was ranked among prosecutors who had "not distinguished themselves" on a Justice Department chart sent to the White House in March 2005, when he was in the midst of leading the CIA leak investigation that resulted in the perjury conviction of a vice presidential aide, administration officials said yesterday.

The ranking placed Fitzgerald below "strong U.S. Attorneys . . . who exhibited loyalty" to the administration but above "weak U.S. Attorneys who . . . chafed against Administration initiatives, etc.," according to Justice documents.

and check this out, particularly the statement from his former boss...

Mary Jo White, who supervised Fitzgerald when she served as the U.S. attorney in Manhattan and who has criticized the firings, said ranking him as a middling prosecutor "lacks total credibility across the board."

"He is probably the best prosecutor in the nation -- certainly one of them," said White, who worked in the Clinton and Bush administrations. "It casts total doubt on the whole process. It's kind of the icing on the cake."

Fitzgerald has been widely recognized for his pursuit of criminal cases against al-Qaeda's terrorist network before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, and he drew up the official U.S. indictment against Osama bin Laden. He was named as special counsel in the CIA leak case in December 2003 by then-Attorney General John D. Ashcroft, who had recused himself.

Fitzgerald also won the Attorney General's Award for Distinguished Service in 2002 under Ashcroft.

Justice spokeswoman Tasia Scolinos said yesterday that "Pat Fitzgerald has a distinguished record as one of the most experienced and well-respected prosecutors at the Justice Department. His track record speaks for itself."

but herein lies the rub, as we certainly could have guessed...

But Fitzgerald also came under sharp criticism from many Republicans and press advocates for his aggressive pursuit of the Libby case.

let's see where this goes...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

The "leave no trace" Attorney General

the documents were dumped last night...

There are no e-mails from Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, who reportedly does not use e-mail...

and that would be because...?

(thanks to think progress...)

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Gonzo's replacement...? Why, Patrick Fitzgerald, of COURSE...!

look at this list of LOSERS...!

Republican officials operating at the behest of the White House have begun seeking a possible successor to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, whose support among GOP lawmakers on Capitol Hill has collapsed, according to party sources familiar with the discussions.

Among the names floated Monday by administration officials are Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff and White House anti-terrorism coordinator Frances Townsend. Former Deputy Attorney General Larry Thompson is a White House prospect. So is former solicitor general Theodore B. Olson, but sources were unsure if he would want the job.

Republican sources also disclosed that it is now a virtual certainty that Deputy Attorney General Paul J. McNulty, whose incomplete and inaccurate congressional testimony about the prosecutors helped precipitate the crisis, will also resign shortly. Officials were debating whether Gonzales and McNulty should depart at the same time or whether McNulty should go a day or two after Gonzales.

puh-l-e-e-e-e-eze... Chertoff...? Townsend...? we don't need more litmus-tested bush toadies...

the other day, i noted this post from jeralyn...

CBS legal analyst and author of the Washington Post's Bench Conference blog makes the case today for replacing Attorney General Alberto Gonzales with Patrick Fitzgerald.

if bush wants anyone to believe that he's serious about the integrity of the justice department, the attorney general, and the us attorneys, he couldn't do better than patrick fitzgerald... ah, well... we know he isn't serious...

(thanks to TPMmuckraker...)

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Out of the frying pan and into the fire - so much for "liberation"

kadhim al-jubouri was the leader of the crowd that toppled the saddam's statue four years ago...

Saddam, he says, "was like Stalin. But the occupation is proving to be worse".

you bet... call it for what it is - an occupation... what an incredible indictment... what a terrible tragedy... what a goddam shame...

(thanks to think progress...)

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Look out! Here come the latest documents!

i'm kind of amazed - and also quite pleased - that, probably at the urging of fred fielding, they're not stonewalling the release of these documents... the rapidity with which it's happening also tells me that they haven't been carefully scrutinized or, perhaps more accurately, sanitized...

The Justice Department is expected to release more than 400 pages of E-mails and documents by close of business today to comply with a demand from Democrats in Congress over the growing crisis regarding the firing of eight U.S. attorneys last year. The crisis has engulfed the department and threatens to cut short Attorney General Alberto Gonzales's tenure.

"You have no idea," said one Justice official, "how bad it is here."

The fear that virtually any piece of communication will have to be turned over has paralyzed department officials' ability to communicate effectively and respond in unison to the crisis, as has the fact that senior Justice officials themselves say they still don't know the entire story about what happened that led to the crisis. So they are afraid that anything they put down on paper could be viewed as lies or obfuscation, when in fact, the story is changing daily as new documents are found and as the Office of Legal Counsel conducts its own internal probe into the matter.

The paralysis will affect the calculations that Gonzales must make this week as to whether he should stay or go. If Gonzales doesn't resign, there's little doubt that he will get few of his initiatives through for the rest of his tenure and that his people will spend months churning out documents at the behest of angry Democrats who will be investigating virtually anything that moves. But this could also give Gonzales an exit strategy, officials say. He could say that while neither he nor his subordinates did anything wrong, he has decided to resign for the greater good of the department and for justice at large.

whatever calculations gonzales is making about staying or going are irrelevant... the only way he will go is at george's behest, and, at this point, sending alberto packing is the LAST thing george wants to do... gonzales is george's firewall, the only thing standing between him and the criminal, unconstitutional goings-on in the department of justice for six-plus years... i think george ought to lay in a big, big stock of depends...he's gonna need 'em...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Mark a terrible anniversary by co-sponsoring Feingold's amendment

make your voice heard...

Four years ago today, President Bush embarked on what has become the greatest foreign policy mistake in the history of our nation. The reckless and coercive drive to war, the botched handling of the reconstruction and occupation, and the recent escalation of our presence in Iraq has cost our country billions of dollars, eroded our military's readiness to respond to significant national security challenges, wounded tens of thousands of our brave service members and ended the lives of over 3,200 of our courageous men and women in uniform.

Co-Sponsor My Amendment

I've been working tirelessly to convince my colleagues that it's long past time for Congress to act responsibly and end this war. I was the first Senator, over 18 months ago, to propose a timetable for withdrawal. I also offered a second version of my flexible timetable, calling for complete withdrawal from Iraq by July of this year. Following the Democratic gains in last November's elections, I called on Congress to use its main power, the 'power of the purse', to stop George Bush's war.

Co-Sponsor My Amendment

It has become increasingly clear that the only way we are going to be able to end the President's failed policies in Iraq is by setting a date after which funding for the war will end. Those who argue that we should somehow defer to the President are wrong. The President has sent our country down a failed path and because he has abdicated his responsibility to correct the course for far too long, it's now up to Congress to provide much needed leadership.

Congress has the power and the responsibility to bring the situation in Iraq to an end. I plan to continue to press the issue by offering an amendment to the upcoming supplemental funding bill that would use the 'power of the purse' to safely redeploy our troops out of Iraq.

Co-Sponsor My Amendment

I'm looking to you, on this sad anniversary, to stand with me in our efforts to put this chapter of American foreign policy to bed and to continue moving forward with our focus on fighting the real war on terror and repairing our nation's stature in the world. Thank you for your continued support.

Sincerely,

Russ Feingold
United States Senator

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Rove is a political operative paid by U.S. taxpayers

subpoena his ass, and, if he doesn't appear, arrest him for contempt of congress...

"The Senate Judiciary Committee’s effort to land presidential adviser Karl Rove as a witness runs headlong into the Bush White House’s well-established reluctance to subject high-level staffers or internal documents to Congressional scrutiny," Rachel Van Dongen writes for Roll Call. "But intense political pressure surrounding the U.S. attorneys scandal — in which Rove has become a prominent player — could overwhelm the administration’s opposition."

A former assistant attorney general under President Reagan, Charles Cooper, believes that if the White House permits Rove to testify that it would be “extraordinary."

“I don’t think it’s going to happen because I think the president is going to react very negatively,” Cooper told Roll Call. The president has a “very serious attitude towards ... protecting the prerogatives and dignity of his office.”

by all rights, rove shouldn't even be WORKING inside the white house... he should be over at republican party hq, paid by republican party funds...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Patience, my ass

dear mr. president...

go.directly.to.hell...

"It can be tempting to look at the challenges in Iraq and conclude that our best option is to pack up and go home," Bush was to say, according to an administration official who saw an advance text of his remarks. "While that may be satisfying in the short run, the consequences for American security would be devastating."

White House press secretary Tony Snow went a step further, telling reporters in his morning briefing that a war spending bill up for consideration by the full House this week would "provide victory for the enemy." The legislation, in addition to providing funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan for the year, would effectively require the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq by the fall of 2008.

"That is not a fund-the-troops bill but a withdraw-the-troops bill," Snow said. "We think that is an approach that is conducive to defeat. It is a recipe for failure, not for victory. ... It would provide victory for the enemy and not the much-needed and deserved victory for the people of Iraq. Furthermore, it would forfeit the sacrifice that our troops have made in the field."

it may be TEMPTING to pack up and go home...? the reason it's TEMPTING is because it IS the best option...

it simply stretches all bounds of reason that they are still committed to this illegal and completely devastating war, four years in... oh, and btw, who is this "ENEMY" anyway...?

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

WaPo opts for new Attorney General

and lists requirements...

• Independence

• Loyalty to the rule of law

• Managerial skill

• Confidence of Congress

even though adhering to the constitution was included under "rule of law," i believe it deserves its own separate heading... the bush administration has been among the most egregious violators of that fundamental document in this nation's history and we cannot tolerate it any longer...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Leahy wants a constitutional crisis

and so do i... it's long overdue...

The Democratic senator leading the inquiry into the dismissal of federal prosecutors insisted Sunday that Karl Rove and other top aides to President Bush must testify publicly and under oath, setting up a confrontation between Congress and the White House, which has said it is unlikely to agree to such a demand.

Karl Rove, President Bush’s chief political adviser, is among the officials who may be subpoenaed to testify publicly and under oath.

Some Republicans have suggested that Mr. Rove testify privately, if only to tamp down the political uproar over the inquiry, which centers on whether the White House allowed politics to interfere with law enforcement.

But Senator Patrick J. Leahy, Democrat of Vermont and chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, seemed to rule out such a move on Sunday. He said his committee would vote Thursday on whether to issue subpoenas for Mr. Rove as well as Harriet E. Miers, the former White House counsel, and William K. Kelley, the deputy White House counsel.

absolutely... publicly... under oath...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Every tree we've barked up so far has had a cat in it

too good to pass up...



(thanks to crooks and liars...)

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Great news from Iraq

or not...

US general upbeat on Iraq 'surge' success

Petraeus: grounds for optimism;
7 US soldiers killed in Iraq violence.

well, i don't know about you, but i'm certainly optimistic...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Trickle, trickle, trickle

i've been sitting here, waiting for the various sunday talk shows to cough up fresh bush administration ghastliness... sure enough...

Today on Fox News Sunday, former U.S. attorney David Iglesias beat back several misleading claims by Bush administration officials, and reasserted that his firing was a “political hit,” not done for performance reasons.

He pointed out that Attorney General Alberto Gonzales agreed to write him a recommendation even after he was fired. “If [my firing] was performance based, there is no way they would have agreed to have allowed me to list them as a reference,” he said. “In fact, they agreed, telling me that the true nature was political, not performance.”

cue the iglesias smear...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

The FBI goes from out of control to REALLY out of control

this is troubling enough...

FBI counterterrorism officials continued to use flawed procedures to obtain thousands of U.S. telephone records during a two-year period when bureau lawyers and managers were expressing escalating concerns about the practice, according to senior FBI and Justice Department officials and documents.

FBI lawyers raised the concerns beginning in late October 2004 but did not closely scrutinize the practice until last year, FBI officials acknowledged. They also did not understand the scope of the problem until the Justice Department launched an investigation, FBI officials said.

but this is even more so...

The flawed procedures involved the use of emergency demands for records, called "exigent circumstance" letters, which contained false or undocumented claims.

"false claims...?" "FALSE CLAIMS...??" undocumented claims are bad... FALSE CLAIMS are infinitely much worse...

Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) wrote in a letter Friday to Justice Department Inspector General Glenn A. Fine: "It is . . . difficult to imagine why there should not have been swift and severe consequences for anyone who knowingly signed . . . a letter containing false statements. Anyone at the FBI who knew about that kind of wrongdoing had an obligation to put a stop to it and report it immediately."

it's not like the fbi started running out of control under the bush administration... howard zinn's perspective on the fbi captures that reality...

When people in the CIA and FBI commit crimes, how do they get handled? They don't. They're forgotten about. Do you know how many crimes have been committed by the FBI and the CIA? How many black bag jobs? Breaking and entering? Try breaking and entering. Really. Try breaking and entering in the daytime, or nighttime, and see what happens to you. Different punishments depending on what hour of the day. The FBI broke and entered again and again and again and again, hundreds and hundreds of times.

but it's been the bush administration that's given the green light to this kind of wholesale trampling of civil liberties...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments