Marie Cocco, of the Washington Post Writer’s Group has a good post on Truth Dig:
It is time to stop referring to the “fired U.S attorneys scandal” by that misnomer, and call it what it is: a White House-coordinated effort to use the vast powers of the Justice Department to swing elections to Republicans.Meanwhile, the Senate Democratic Caucus has sent a letter to Alberto Gonzales in which they contrast testimony from Deputy Attorney General James Comey to his testimony in which he stated “that the disagreement that occurred was not related to the wiretapping program confirmed by the President in December 2005, which was the topic of the hearing.” The letter concludes: In light of Mr. Comey's testimony yesterday, do you stand by your 2006 Senate and House testimony, or do you wish to revise it?”
…
In a fledgling democracy, we would consider this shocking corruption. The chilling truth is that it can happen here—and apparently it did.
That’s a different scandal: the Attorney General committed perjury in Congress.
Monica Gooding asserted a privilege against self-incrimination and received limited immunity so that she will testify in Congress. Ms. Goodling moved to block the hiring of prosecutors with résumés that suggested they might be Democrats, even though they were seeking posts that were supposed to be nonpartisan, two department officials said. That’s a violation of the Hatch Act, which is yet another scandal. See, Bush’s Monica and the Plot Against the Hatch Act.
In its efforts to investigate the goings-on at the Department of Justice we learned that the White House was using Republican National Committee servers for email. It looks like a violation of the Presidential Records Act. But we can’t say for sure because apparently Karl Rove deleted the emails that Congress is seeking. Is that one or two more scandals?
So many scandals. But they lack the sex appeal of a good-old fashioned Clinton scandal. That is, unless you buy into the thread at Wayne Madsen Report where he is flogging the D.C. Madam story. He reports, “The net may also ensnare two 2008 GOP presidential candidates, one declared and the other, as yet, undeclared.”
If that doesn’t pique your interest consider this May 14, 2007 posting: “WMR has received additional credible information on the patronage of Vice President Dick Cheney, while he was President and CEO of Halliburton in the mid to late 1990s, of the DC Madam's escort service.”
Keeping track of all these scandals makes a person tired.
“… and tell ’em Big Mitch sent ya!”
2 comments:
My better self is sad that these scandals have occurred. My worser self is delighted that they are seeing the light of day. Shall I weep or shall I laugh? Decisions. Decisions.
"Meanwhile, the Senate Democratic Caucus has sent a letter to Alberto Gonzales in which they contrast testimony from Deputy Attorney General James Comey to his testimony in which he stated “that the disagreement that occurred was not related to the wiretapping program confirmed by the President in December 2005, which was the topic of the hearing.” The letter concludes: In light of Mr. Comey's testimony yesterday, do you stand by your 2006 Senate and House testimony, or do you wish to revise it?”
"That’s a different scandal: the Attorney General committed perjury in Congress."
Wait a minute. Reread that carefully: Schumer had asked Gonzales about reports of disagreement about the NSA program. Gonzales expressly says that there wasn't disagreement about that program [why assume he's lying on that point?] -- _then says there was disagreement about some other program_, which he refused to identify.
Comey also refused to (publicly) identify the program over which there was disagreement.
Now ask yourself: Why would the FBI Director threaten to resign over a program that wasn't in the FBI? Was the that _other program_ in the FBI?
Post a Comment