wow. LEAHY! CONYERS!

a driveby ZED?

Christy! Go get ‘em!

Rosemary!

WoOT!

Let’s go on this!

Great job, Christy.

Blub @ 69

Eli.. another overreach quote today, from today’s NYT

Quoting Thomas Mann, Brookings
“There is a risk of overplaying their hand,” said Thomas Mann, a congressional expert at the Brookings Institution. “Thus far, the Democrats have been judicious in their use of subpoenas and focused mainly on Iraq-related matters. The U.S. attorney firing (controversy) is of a different order and needs to be handled carefully and fairly — with Republicans participating in the oversight.”

From a few threads back (lost track of how many). Need to listen to Thomas Mann here. There are RINOs that we need to bring into the fold. And maybe even a few hardnosed Repubes. Remember, the Republicans convinced Nixon to resign.

Bwwwaahhhhhhhh!!!!!!!

Bush has to be able to get his confidential advice from his staff.

Right.

It is utterly clear by now just what all that advice has gotten the nation.

A TOTAL CLUSTERFUCK.
.

speaking of Nixon, is this too much of a coincidence (18 minutes and 18 days)????

BobbyG @ 7

Bwwwaahhhhhhhh!!!!!!!

Bush has to be able to get his confidential advice from his staff.

Right.

It is utterly clear by now just what all that advice has gotten the nation.

A TOTAL CLUSTERFUCK.
.

This ‘getting candid advice’ crap is just that, CRAP. If you want immoral, illegal or unethical advice, by all means protect your staff from Congressional oversight. If you have nothing to hide, you should not have to worry.

can you please make some calls to end the war too?

Can Roves multiple GJ testomonies be used to show he is a prevaricator in the likely impending suit over the subpoenas?

Can we assume that the MSM was scooped big time on the missing 18 days? By the bloggers?!

And who will be the first elite member of said MSM to admit it?

Not only is Executive Privilege not any sort of absolute right, but if I remember correctly, no privilige applies to conversations with government counsel, so they can’t claim that one for Harriet. I think that was one of the precedents set by the Clinton Monicagate fiasco…

Impeach.

and where does Karl send all those crackberry messages? inquiring minds want to know.

You forgot this, the missing performance review trail:

I yield the floor to TPM Reader JD:

This isn’t a comment about what has been found in the document dump of last night, but about what HASN’T been found. (Note: my question/comment is inspired by this 3/16 interview of [U.S. Attorney] Bud Cummins).

If the USA’s had been forced to resign for performance related reasons, wouldn’t you expect to see a huge paper trail of the performance review process itself? Take the case of [U.S. Attorney for Western Michigan Margaret] Chiara. If the problem was office management/morale, I would expect the following in the record:

1) Some document sent to the someone in the AG’s office, saying, “Hey, I’ve been hearing there are some morale/managerial problems in Chiara’s office.”;

2) A formal letter to Chiara saying, “We would like to review your management of the office. We’ll be sending officials out to your district to discuss.”

3) A report to the DAG saying, “We went out to her office and, in fact, we believe there are managerial problems. Chiara offered to takes steps A, B & C to correct. Will review in 6 months.”;

4) Then, 6 months later, there would be another report saying, “It’s been six months since the last review. Nothing’s changed. It may be time to consider removing her.”;

5) A follow-up from the DAG saying, “Nope, her time is up. We’ll recommend her removal and replacement to the AG.”;

6) Then a series of letters/emails between offices about “Should we remove her?” and “Yes, we should remove her. Set it up.” and “Here’s how and why we’re removing her.”;

7) Finally, a series of documents setting up her formal removal, communicating that to the AG and the WH.

But, there’s none of that. You’d think if such documents existed, they’d be definitive and the first set of docs the Justice Department would release. If the attorneys in the AG’s office are anything like the private attorneys I know, they wouldn’t do anything as significant as forcing the resignation of any single USA, without first creating a paper trail a mile long. Should be 1000 pages of docs for each USA removal, right?

Everybody seems to be looking for a smoking gun, but the real story is that the evidence we’ve been given is of a gun that’s never been fired.

As I wrote yesterday, the Justice Department actually brainstormed on the justifications for the firings after they happened.

warm up the impeachment machine, get the Sergeant at arms on speed dial, and find a hoosegow in the Capitol building basement. oops. gotta go. breaks over.

Sorry, that was from Paul Kiel at TPMuckraker.

Someday Christy karma will reward you by naming a coffee bean in your honor.

epu’d -

I am just blown away by the knowledge/memory base (long- and short-term) of the bloggers who’ve been sifting thru’ these documents! Tidbits that staffers might well have overlooked.

Here’s one heart-felt {{{Thank you}}} !

Good Morning Christy,

happened to mention Jane’s favorite DOJ employee downstairs -

did I mention she was a recess appointment ???

Gonzales aides had been counting on Alice Fisher, President George W. Bush’s pick to head the Criminal Division, getting confirmed before the Senate went out of town last week for summer recess. But Michigan Democratic Sen. Carl Levin rebuffed a personal plea from the attorney general last Friday night to permit a vote on Fisher’s confirmation. His reason: continued questions about what Fisher knew regarding FBI complaints about allegedly abusive interrogation techniques by the U.S. military at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba

.

really, where is she ?

Wow. Yesterday I was afraid of what would happen in a SC showdown. Somehow, today I’m really encouraged. It looks like we might really be ready for this fight. It’ll be high noon with subpoenas at thirty paces.

Committee just called to order –

Administration has not been as cooperative as we had hoped –

You can see it live online from

http://boss.streamos.com/real-…..070212.ram

Christy – this is great – thanks for encouraging us to take action.

This reminds me of the months leading up to the 2006 elections, when you encouraged us to work hard for our local candidates, to give money, and just generally to do everything we could to get Democrats in office so that real oversight could begin.

Now the Democrats are in the majority, and it is time to begin a full-scale progressive blogosphere grass-roots calling campaign to remind our representatives of who helped them get into office and what they were elected to do.

Al Gore is talking about way more than just global warming as he gives Congress a pep talk.

Everybody seems to be looking for a smoking gun, but the real story is that the evidence we’ve been given is of a gun that’s never been fired.

Sort of like the dog that never barked.

Conyers/Sanchez meeting now and avaiable here.

http://judiciary.house.gov/schedule.aspx

(Cannon says the minority objects to the subpoenas)

Well, he always wanted to be like Nixon. You got it, toyota.

There are RINOs that we need to bring into the fold. And maybe even a few hardnosed Repubes. Remember, the Republicans convinced Nixon to resign.

and a whole herd of ‘em voted against the Chimp in the Senate yesterday – true, a vote for institutional pride, but I believe plenty of ‘em can be had on this issue

Absolutely we need more spine – but we need to recognize too that Bushie intends to use this as a rallying point for his own base. In calling Rover and Miers “honorable public servants” (emphasis on “honorable”) yesterday, he was (quite deliberately) following the same propaganda line as the “Pardon Scooter” crowd shouted oh so loudly, last week. He waited, and drew out the Rethug base’s anticipation that something bad was going to happen, then came out swinging to bring them back to life.

So, the best way to address this is, as posted elsewhere on FDL – Broaden the Investigation.

The other thing – keep it rational and keep their base de-energized.

Slightly O/T, but I wanted to put this out there before I forget and it gets buried.

The other day, Looseheadprop had a post on Rule 6(e) materials and the cans and can’ts of what Fitz can give Congress. It seems pretty clear that grand jury testimony which was not released in court cannot be disclosed.

My question for the criminal law experts in the crowd: can Fitz provide to Congress just the questions which were asked in the grand jury? Questions are not testimonial, after all.

Re-asking the same witnesses the same questions and getting a (materially) different answer the second time, spells perjury, obstruction of justice, and contempt of Congress in my book.

GAAHHHH! Rosemary was the first thing that came to mind this morning after reading the previous post!

The “W”art on the presidency is movin’ the lips again, sublime supoena time is nye – no? On record, in daylight, in person!!!!

Mention of Alice Fisher makes me think of the Alaska corruption raids. Wonder where those boxes of stuff are now?

cbl @ 29

There are RINOs that we need to bring into the fold. And maybe even a few hardnosed Repubes. Remember, the Republicans convinced Nixon to resign.

and a whole herd of ‘em voted against the Chimp in the Senate yesterday – true, a vote for institutional pride, but I believe plenty of ‘em can be had on this issue

Contempt of Congress is a matter of institutional pride also.

Mutant Poodle @
13

Not only is Executive Privilege not any sort of absolute right, but if I remember correctly, no privilige applies to conversations with government counsel, so they can’t claim that one for Harriet. I think that was one of the precedents set by the Clinton Monicagate fiasco…

Does anyone have the case citation?

Tim O. at 16: — Everybody seems to be looking for a smoking gun, but the real story is that the evidence we’ve been given is of a gun that’s never been fired. — great observation.

The ides are on the march:

A certain seer warned Caesar to be on his guard against a great peril on the day of the month of March which the Romans call the Ides; and when the day had come and Caesar was on his way to the senate-house, he greeted the seer with a jest and said: “Well, the Ides of March are come,” and the seer said to him softly: “Ay, they are come, but they are not gone.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ides_of_March

for those not watching al gore on c-span3 right now…

right now – the house judiciary committee hearing to consider issuing the subpoenas is meeting, and the webcast can be streamed here (or at the committee website if that doesn’t work)

UPU’d, Re: the The KarlsNewMath 18 Day Gap:

From http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/002809.php
Posted by: Donp
Date: March 20, 2007 02:19 AM

The email of Nov 15 ends with “Who will determine if this requires the President’s attention” and Meiers says it will take a while as he is gone. The plan attached (page 15) to that says to begin making calls on Nov 15. Sampson had also recommended informing Karl.

The next email is dated Dec 4! From William Kelley at 4:48 pm it says:
“We’re a go for the US atty plan. WH leg, political, and communications have signed off and acknowledged that we will have to be committed to following through once the pressure comes.”

I don’t think it would hurt for the community to contact our White House, either. I’m recalling the video of those telegrams pouring into Nixon’s office demanding he release the Watergate tapes.

Mailing Address

The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500

Phone Numbers

Comments: 202-456-1111
Switchboard: 202-456-1414
FAX: 202-456-2461

TTY/TDD

Comments: 202-456-6213
Visitors Office: 202-456-2121

Let’s not forget the context of those 18 days. Sampson had laid all the groundwork and was hoping for a greenlight to fire the attorneys… and then the Repubs lost not just the House, but suffered a stunning setback by losing the Senate.

The original 11/15 firing plan must have needed a little tweaking. As in, can we still do this?

And wasn’t the White House (finally) dumping Rumsfeld right after the election?

Guess we have to take the blog microscope (blogoscope?) to this very recent history, not just to the 18 days but to the timeline of 11/7 to 12/7.

In the last thread I named this Rosemary’s Baby.

Pathfinder -

Any chance of some live blogging?

Christy -

Just called my NC rep; got straight thru’. Busy line might have been more hopeful, tho’.

To have to listen to Tom Feeney, one of the most corrupt members of our government, is almost enough to make my stomach turn Blech!

Christy:

Morning. I’ll call Keith Ellison, my Congressman.

HotFlash @ 33

Mention of Alice Fisher makes me think of the Alaska corruption raids. Wonder where those boxes of stuff are now?

Bet Ed*ard Teller and Diane Benson would like to know also.

HotFlash @
33

Mention of Alice Fisher makes me think of the Alaska corruption raids. Wonder where those boxes of stuff are now?

Um, yeah, that would be the THIRD investigation that should have gone somewhere and didn’t.

DeLay — still walking around;

Lieberman and his $387,000 donations — still being an annoying pain in our backsides (you would think Republicans would be jumping all over themselves to investigate a Democrat, yes?)

Stevens and Son — big gaping black hole of inactivity

Can you think of any more examples?

Don’t forget to fax these guys above if you can’t get through by phone. You can find their fax info at Congress.org.

Christy says: So let the sun shine in….

Gotta love it, DFHs all across the blogosphere tuned in. Sing it, pups…

Long beautiful hair, gleaming waxen flaxen….

Salut!

Oversight. Accountability. Under oath. The whole slithering, slimy can o’ worms. Not just individual scandals…connect the dots. Pattern of corruption that pervades every fiber of the Cult of Bushie.

Rayne–NH phone jamming case. Didn’t that just fade away? Odd.

They’re so big on “VOTER fraud” which is code for people of color trying to vote. Marcy notes that immigration investigations might be voter suppression among Hispanics.

We should focus of “ELECTION fraud” which is trying to tamper with voting results.

Rayne @ 47
HotFlash @
33

Lieberman and his $387,000 donations — still being an annoying pain in our backsides (you would think Republicans would be jumping all over themselves to investigate a Democrat, yes?)

He’s NOT a Democrat!

If I could type fast enough –

Mr. Conyers recognized for 5 minutes –

I appreciate that some of the members of the minority would consider voting for the recommendation for the issuance of subs, not the issuance of subs -

Talking about the deadline of last Friday that was ignored by the WH

Meanwhile, newbies can go to urban dictionary.com for definitions of most FDL shorthands.

I’m pretty sure Karl Rove fell short of amassing enough credits to graduate from college: The missing class? Math.

TiredFed @
17

warm up the impeachment machine, get the Sergeant at arms on speed dial, and find a hoosegow in the Capitol building basement. oops. gotta go. breaks over.

Biodun @ 45

Christy:

Morning. I’ll call Keith Ellison, my Congressman.

Biodun, good plan, though you can rest assured that he is fully onboard for subpoenas and more.

egregious @ 49

Rayne–NH phone jamming case. Didn’t that just fade away? Odd.

Add Abramhoff and Guam to that list too. That was the “9th” US Atty., but seems to have been bumped for Yang leaving in the beginning of the Lewis investigation.

Pectopah @ 26

Sort of like the dog that never barked.

I used the same analogy a few days ago regarding the nonexistent internal White House investigation into the Plame leak. As James Knodell confirmed, that was another gun that never smoked.

RATING OF PRESIDENT NIXON- March 1973

EXCELLENT 13%
GOOD 35%
ONLY FAIR 24%
POOR 26%
DK 2%
TOTAL PERCENT TOTAL* 100%
____________
Bush Gallop Poll-March 2007
APPROVE 32%
DISAPPROVE 65%
BRAIN DEAD 3%
_____________

EPU’d, 707, *g*: These are just samples of definitions you can find at urban dictionary.com.

Interesting how often Bush agrees only to private interview, not under oath, no public transcript — 9/11 commission, Plame case, US Attorney firing.

Conyeers – To have the conversations as outlined by the WH could take place in a Pub, but doesn’t serve the purpose of getting to the truth of the matter

Executive Priv. – We don’t think it is a problem with this issue

All we’re asking today is to have these subs available – not necessarily to be used immediately.

I will give you my word that we will not move in a reckless or angry or tempermental way at all

Feeney again –

Subs not appropriate unless the Branches have not been able to work out their differences. If this is a witch hunt I won’t vote with it…

Conyers – I won’t do anything political, That would tarnish the Committee’s reputation, but what Fielding offered, with no transcript, etc. is not acceptable.

done and done.
that sneaking weasel bastard may finally get what’s comign to him.

Conyers is measured and conciliatory but very much has a focus and a plan.

re: ‘tv’ coverage.

Nobody has mentioned the missing 18 days – the Minority is talking about the “release of Documents” as if it were complete

While I relish the possibility of ratfucking the repukes, I simply don’t think the Dems have the spine to do it.

I suspect it’ll be a clone of the old Arlen Specter “Bluster and babble,” and then they’ll fold like a tent, cave in to Clusterfuck and it’ll be business as usual.

I wish I could say I have a shred of confidence, but I don’t. I’ve made the calls, not only to Leahy and Conyers, but to my own, regrettably spineless legislators (Feinlieber, Boxer and Honda) and I can safely say I was completely blown off.

I detest the spinelessness of most Dems. This is damn near a civil war right here…and we need to be fighting with confidence.

Naah, never happen. No one else sees it that way, except the repukes.

What measurement are we using for this scandal?

The 18 days gave Rove time to plot the states he most badly wanted to target.

oh god, fuzzy memory, but believe somewhere in those old linked threads there was mention the Alaska cases were supposed to be run out of DC

NH Phone Jamming ended in plea deal and no further scrutiny to def claims about direct WH connection

oh and

the bogus claims of Ohio RNC about their offices being vandalized – Pros. determined it wasn’t Dems, but gee, who was it then and why isn’t there word on that ?

*xyz @ 24

Christy – this is great – thanks for encouraging us to take action.

This reminds me of the months leading up to the 2006 elections, when you encouraged us to work hard for our local candidates, to give money, and just generally to do everything we could to get Democrats in office so that real oversight could begin.

Now the Democrats are in the majority, and it is time to begin a full-scale progressive blogosphere grass-roots calling campaign to remind our representatives of who helped them get into office and what they were elected to do.

it wasn’t only oversight (as critically important as that is), let’s not forget – they were elected to end the war, not to continue it.

no to funding the war for an additional 18 months – until 2 months before 2008 election (in order to make it an election issue? – i hope not).

TiredFed @
8

speaking of Nixon, is this too much of a coincidence (18 minutes and 18 days)????

Or . . . is it Fred Fielding, back in his old office?

/tinfoil

Still, you’d think that FF would have learned SOMETHING from watching Nixon implode.

You know, I look at Rose Mary Woods in that very influencial photo of the implausible reenactment of the 18 1/2 minute “accidental” tape erasure, and I think….

Hmm… another women in a blue dress… what is this about presidential scandals and blue dresses.

zhiv @ 55
egregious @ 49
Rayne–NH phone jamming case. Didn’t that just fade away? Odd.

—————

Add Abramhoff and Guam to that list too. That was the “9th” US Atty., but seems to have been bumped for Yang leaving in the beginning of the Lewis investigation.

Black doesn’t count in this round. The 8 or 9 are just the ones fired and putsched out at the end of 2006. There were LOTS of others who were forced out in the preceding six years. We need to learn who they are and what they were investigating.

this is great, christy!

here’s a telling sound-bite, to
offer some historical perspective,
when we make these calls today:

“. . .I’m not going to let anybody come down
at night like Nicodemus and whisper something
in my ear that no one else can hear. That is
not executive privilege; it is poppycock. . .”

– senator sam ervin, then the
chair of the senate select committee
investigating the watergate scandal. . .

accept no substitutes, under oath, in public.

we need to remind them that these
“small details” — missing 18 days;
missing 18 minutes — are salient

i n d i c i a. . .

of a much-broader disregard for the
rule of law, and the principles of
ordered liberty. . . more here.

Rayne @ 47

Um, yeah, that would be the THIRD investigation that should have gone somewhere and didn’t.

DeLay — still walking around;

Lieberman and his $387,000 donations — still being an annoying pain in our backsides (you would think Republicans would be jumping all over themselves to investigate a Democrat, yes?)

Stevens and Son — big gaping black hole of inactivity

Can you think of any more examples?

The Ohio election fraud (machine tampering) was a fizzle, one underling convicted sorry, can’t find link and client coming soon, gotta tune.

Calling Conyers gets results, so do it! In addition to thanks for my support, I got the reassurance that “we already know about” the 18 day gap and “plan to do something about it.”

Morning everyone!

Ohmy what a nice picture. I’ve been seeing Mary Rose Woods all week in my mind’s eye, trying to remember her name. Was just too lazy to look it up. Thanks! Cool ref, heh?!

Good post Christy!

And incredible research by the terrific hounds who sniffed out the 18 day pile that wasn’t. Yahoo!

Ralphbon got EPU’d with a poem I personally think is front-page worthy :)

Since November 7th a showdown between the Congress and the chimperial presidency has been inevitable. I thought it would be over the war and involve Cheney. In my opinion this is better turf to fight on.
First, taking it out of the war context deprives them of their terrorism/troops blather.
Second, Gonzales is an easier opponent than Cheney.
Third, ever since US v Nixon was decided the executive privilege dodge, where national security is not involved, is a sure loser.

Pathfinder -

OMG! They’re only voting wrt having the subs in their back pocket….not actually *issuing* them? No wonder all this government ever does is take ten steps backward.

Aaaaaarg…………(and “mercy buckets” for the updates)

The Alaska thing should be looked at because there is a sweet deal in which ‘local companies’ get ‘huge’ contracts which are then sub-contracted out to some really interesting companies i.e. Haliburton etc..

Subpoenas authorized in the House!

Um, would it not be better to stare Bush down all the way to impeachment on something larger, like whatever arises out of pursuing the Plame/Niger/treasonous lying to the US, than the USAs? —- probably, but it seems the Committees have just about enough members with the guts to keep going, so far. Once the attack has been launched, the single aim of that attack can deliver a number of different Shwere Punkte until there appears a main one. Thus a number of attack points may well cause the whole evewntually to crack.

I just wonder about Cheney’s recurring leg problem — presaging at the least an excuse for bailing out?

Thank You, FDL, for the EMail links.

I just offered Arlen a chance for redemption by recommending he vote ‘yea’ on the subpoenas for the White House principals.

Ayes have it – Motion carried!

Whoooo Hooooo!!!!!

Contact members of the media, too. We need to make this outrage part of the national discourse (at least until Britney goes back into rehab and grabs all the headlines again!).

I can’t find the quote and if someone can help me out I’d appreciate it

I don’t even know who said it and this is paraphrased but I want to make a point off of it;

“it is congresses right and obligation to investigate…”

there is a missplaced sequence in this statement

I don’t want cogress to claim “it is our right”, that would indidate that their oversight is discretionary and it is not, it’s obligatory

I want congress to go straight to the statement;

“it is our swonrn OBLIGATION to provide oversight”

that has to be the core, it should actually get more direct then that, like so;

“it is congress’s sworn obligation to investigaste this matter and the president has some kind of nerve seeking to obstruct the legal obligations of this body…the president would be well advised to STOP obstructing justice, the president should start fullfilling HIS OATH to protect our constitution and IF HE HAD COMPETANT COUNCIL they would advise him to facilitate and help congress investigate this matter” inseead of imepede the investigation

BAH DA BING, GA ZING…hit all the interview RIGHT AT HIS BASE

In Salon, Glenn Greenwald says the obvious:

(snip)

First, the President began his Press Conference by admitting that the administration’s explanations as to what happened here have been — to use his own words — “confusing” and “incomplete.” Why, then, would Congress possibly trust Bush officials to provide more explanations in an off-the-record, no-transcript setting where there are no legal consequences from failing to tell the truth?

Once a party demonstrates a propensity to issue false explanations and refuses to tell the truth voluntarily, no rational person would trust that party to make voluntary disclosures. One could trust (if at all) only on-the-record testimony, under oath, where there are criminal penalties for lying (if they have questions about that motivational dynamic, they can ask Lewis Libby).

(snip)

Pathfinder @ 83

Ayes have it – Motion carried!

Whoooo Hooooo!!!!!

Help me out here. I just arrived, & had just put up a tiny window to the committee streaming video. Was this a vote to issue subpoenas?? House Judiciary?

CNN report systematically going through each of the fired attorneys showing they were doing great work, had been praised. good stuff.

Latest report: House Committee votes to authorize use of subpooenas in prosecutor firings probe. Dana Bash reporting. Dems called the Bush offer “insulting.”

Helene R. @ 74

Calling Conyers gets results, so do it! In addition to thanks for my support, I got the reassurance that “we already know about” the 18 day gap and “plan to do something about it.”

I am so happy to hear that :) I’m on the phone to Leahy’s office again this morning – Good to be a constituent!

Hmmm. Haven’t heard a peep yet from the chickenflock that is the MSM re the missing 18 days.

Could it be they’re busily behind the scenes working to confirm it? Calling Snowjob and wringing hands together on what kind of evasive doublespeak nonanswer to “report”?

A double-rasher of grit to the first MSM person who actually reports this.

OT
Gore just finished direct testimony (don’t think he was sworn in). Whatta windbag. They waived time constraint, so he spoke for 20-25 minutes (usual=5-10?), in a wandering fashion. Bad job. Anyone who wants him to run for prez ought to replay his testimony & think what it would be like to listen to him for 8 years.

Let’s not forget the firing of the US Attorney for the Northern Marianas, by special request to Susan Ralston from Jack Abramoff in November of 2002.
Black

This example from Bush’s first term needs to be re-examined in light of the recent firings.

See also this article: Abramoff accessed secret FBI info

Rove’s signature is all over this one, too.

I forgot to suggest…… I have emailed my Reps…. Gallup shows the Dems to have a sudden only 28% Approval. I told my reps it is because of their gutlessness concerning i). the Presidency, and, ii). Iraq/Iran.

Thanks guys! Whoo Hooo!

I knew this was NOT the day to try to get other work done. Dang!

Demand as much action/pursuit of accountability from the MSM as from the majority party.

Which is more absurd: (1) a mouse crawling up an elephant’s tail with sex in mind, or (2) GWB saying, “Trust me; I promise not to lie”?

eCAHNomics @ 91

OT
Gore just finished direct testimony (don’t think he was sworn in). Whatta windbag. They waived time constraint, so he spoke for 20-25 minutes (usual=5-10?), in a wandering fashion. Bad job. Anyone who wants him to run for prez ought to replay his testimony & think what it would be like to listen to him for 8 years.

I have listened to the boy president for six years. Gore would be a welcome relief.

Adie @ 87

Pathfinder @ 83

Ayes have it – Motion carried!

Whoooo Hooooo!!!!!

Help me out here. I just arrived, & had just put up a tiny window to the committee streaming video. Was this a vote to issue subpoenas?? House Judiciary?

Greetings!

This vote was to authorize the issuance of the subpoenas – It was not unanimous, as Conyers asked it to be, there were at least 2, possibly 3 nays -

TiredFed @ 8

speaking of Nixon, is this too much of a coincidence (18 minutes and 18 days)????

I think it means Bush is 1440 times worse than Nixon.

It Wasn’t Just a Bad Idea. It May Have Been Against the Law.

exerpts below

it was not hard to spot that White House and Justice Department officials, and members of Congress, may have violated 18 U.S.C. �� 1501-1520, the federal obstruction of justice statute.

1. Misrepresentations to Congress. The relevant provision, 18 U.S.C. � 1505, is very broad. It is illegal to lie to Congress, and also to “impede” it in getting information. Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty indicated to Congress that the White House’s involvement in firing the United States attorneys was minimal, something that Justice Department e-mail messages suggest to be untrue.

If Mr. Sampson withheld the information from Mr. McNulty, who then misled Congress, Mr. Sampson may have violated � 1505.

2. Calling the Prosecutors. As part of the Sarbanes-Oxley reforms, Congress passed an extremely broad obstruction of justice provision, 18 U.S.C. � 1512 (c), which applies to anyone who corruptly “obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so,” including U.S. attorney investigations.

3. Witness Tampering. 18 U.S.C. � 1512 (b) makes it illegal to intimidate Congressional witnesses. Michael Elston, Mr. McNulty’s chief of staff, contacted one of the fired attorneys, H. E. Cummins, and suggested, according to Mr. Cummins, that if he kept speaking out, there would be retaliation.

4. Firing the Attorneys. United States attorneys can be fired whenever a president wants, but not, as � 1512 (c) puts it, to corruptly obstruct, influence, or impede an official proceeding.

Let’s take the case of Carol Lam, United States attorney in San Diego. The day the news broke that Ms. Lam, who had already put one Republican congressman in jail, was investigating a second one, Mr. Sampson wrote an e-mail message referring to the “real problem we have right now with Carol Lam.” He said it made him think that it was time to start looking for a replacement.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03…..56800&
en=ffab854496251b4b&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

A recent report by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service (released Feb. 22, 2007) revealed that since 1981, no more than three U.S. attorneys had ever been FORCED OUT UNDER SIMILAR CONDITIONS.

http://www.buzzflash.com/archi…..y_rprt.pdf

Wigwam @ 96

Which is more absurd: (1) a mouse crawling up an elephant’s tail with sex in mind, or (2) GWB saying, “Trust me; I promise not to lie”?

even the wing nuts would not presume to claim this president has any credibility at all

the walls are indeed crumbling down

when we won congress this is what I had hoped but I surely did not expect such swift occurances

THIS IS GRRRR 8888888 !!!!!

Christy,

did you see this NYT Op/Ed ?

What I Didn’t Find In Albuquerque

I have listened to the boy president for six years. Gore would be a welcome relief.
I’m not an R, I’m a D. I don’t want my party to, in any way, be held up to theirs. A chimp could do better than W. Let’s not use him as our basis of comparison.

Adie @ 94

Thanks guys! Whoo Hooo!

I knew this was NOT the day to try to get other work done. Dang!

Are any of them, latley?

Wigwam @ 96

Which is more absurd: (1) a mouse crawling up an elephant’s tail with sex in mind, or (2) GWB saying, “Trust me; I promise not to lie”?

Is that one of those “simple answer to simple question” thingies I’ve been hearing about? *g*

OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR
Why I Was Fired
By DAVID C. IGLESIAS
The argument that eight federal prosecutors – including
myself – were fired for “performance related” reasons is
starting to look more than a little wobbly.

This, in today’s NYT — Why I Was Fired — sounds like Amb. Wilson’s What I Didn’t Find in Africa. I only hope it doesn’t take three years (and counting) to remedy the injustice.

old gold @ 76

Since November 7th a showdown between the Congress and the chimperial presidency has been inevitable. I thought it would be over the war and involve Cheney. In my opinion this is better turf to fight on.
First, taking it out of the war context deprives them of their terrorism/troops blather.
Second, Gonzales is an easier opponent than Cheney.
Third, ever since US v Nixon was decided the executive privilege dodge, where national security is not involved, is a sure loser.

While I’ve got my hopes, it’s important to recognize that US v Nixon involved a subpeona issued by a prosecutor, after criminal indictments had been issued by a grand jury and charges were filed in federal court.

US v Nixon said that the President is not above the law, when it comes to court orders to produce evidence for criminal proceedings. You’d have to take it a step further to say it applies to Congressional oversight inquiries. Not that that couldn’t be done, mind you, but just want to be clear about what US v Nixon actually ruled on.

JF @ 50

He’s NOT a Democrat!

For some folks I will have to make sure I add the “/snark” tag.

Capice?

Per the Wikipedia:

By Article II of the U.S. Constitution, the President “shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment. [emphasis added].” So even when there is no chance of conviction in the Senate, if follow-on prosecution in the courts is likely, there is strong reason for a president to resign before getting impeached. Richard Nixon, for example, resigned while he was still pardonable and was pardoned one month later by his presidential successor, Gerald Ford.

I suggest that Nancy offer a twofer.

Interesting post at HuffPo on how Bush trying to frame the discussion. Jeff Feldman catches the point where Bush described the firings as “resignations.”

eCAHNomics @ 91

OT
Gore just finished direct testimony (don’t think he was sworn in). Whatta windbag. They waived time constraint, so he spoke for 20-25 minutes (usual=5-10?), in a wandering fashion. Bad job. Anyone who wants him to run for prez ought to replay his testimony & think what it would be like to listen to him for 8 years.

i’ve been listening to president bush for 6 years.

listening to gore for 8 years sounds great to me.

p.s. gore opening was more like a conversation – not a speech. but i’ve also been listening to his speeches since 2002… and imo, he is very, very good. in case you want to listen to some of his speeches too, i’ve made a list of those i could find on the web – here.

from CNN.com:

Do you agree with President Bush that requiring White House advisers to testify under oath would damage their ability to give the president ‘candid advice’?
Yes 26% 4797 votes
No 74% 13352 votes
Total: 18149 votes

The House Judiciary has voted for subpoenas!

Who could forget such a gifted contortionist as Rose Mary “Stretch” Woods?

Rayne @ 108

JF @ 50

He’s NOT a Democrat!

For some folks I will have to make sure I add the “/snark” tag.

Capice?

Sorry, missed the snark. Now, where’s my coffee?

was it mentioned yet that the shrub’s argument that Rove and Miers can’t testify due to Executive Privelege is bogus because the communications were between Rove and the DOJ and Miers/DOJ?

some guy on some tv show mentioned that last night… but my head’s all stuffed up and my mind isn’t right..

gifted contortionis

Jirque du Soleil

I would dearly love to hear much more from President Gore.

:)

Any challenge to the (bullshit) Unitary Executive pipe dream will be fought to the death by the Bushies, so, as we saw with the “nuclear option” crap, any backing down by our side simply postpones the inevitable. We’ve been in a Constitutional crisis for years; might as well bring it to a head.

Since all of this administration’s outrages are a microcosm of its ultimate purpose–namely, to co-opt the institutions of this government to install and maintain monocratic rule–this particular inquiry will simply be one of many routes to the same destination.

They are the Saracens inside the gates. We’ve got a hell of a mess to clean.

here’s what I want to happen;

IA want congress to be AT THE READY with a difiance of subpeona, I want them to go behind closed doors and have their strategy

NO WAITING

I want them to be READY with a response if the subpeonas are defied with the following;

“the constitution of the united states of America has set demands upon congress for a situation which might arise where by the executive seeks to dilute the branches of government that were written into our law by our forfathers to provide oversight and to prevent an executive from assuming the power they fought to eliminate from our government.

Congress, by our aoth of office and to this constitution to hereby issue warrant for the arrest of those who have defied our law”

of course that was off the top of my head and needs to be re worked for best affect

but what I am saying is congress nees to be READY with certain ACTION if the president in public refuses to abide our law

Why not call Specter and Hatch too? Should only Democrats feel pressure? They’re already on our side.
BTW, one would kind of expect email to be lighter during the Thanksgiving break. Not absent altogether but lighter. What is more troubling is that, as I understand it, no WH email was included. I haven’t looked at many documents but I am assuming that the threads from the WH were carefully scrubbed as well.

egregious @ 71

Black doesn’t count in this round. The 8 or 9 are just the ones fired and putsched out at the end of 2006. There were LOTS of others who were forced out in the preceding six years. We need to learn who they are and what they were investigating.

Respectfully disagree, since Black may have been not only a method for dealing with an emergent issue, but a proof of concept.

They proved they could remove a USA and Congress would turn a blind eye to it. They decided to play it safe by adding that clause to the PatAct to cover their keisters, slowly ramping up in the meantime until the Pearl Harbor Massacre.

Remember that Moschella said there were (18). By my count I have (23).

That’s more than 20% of the USA’s replaced inside a four-year period; a corporation would typically be panicking about such a rate of turnover in staff (except in retail sales and food handling, mind you).

Scarecrow @
59

Interesting how often Bush agrees only to private interview, not under oath, no public transcript — 9/11 commission, Plame case, US Attorney firing.

As emptywheel has pointed out, that may not have been such a good idea in the Plame case. Bush and Cheney’s “interviews” are not protected by GJ secrecy laws.

ONE MORE LIE!

Bush said he sent down “all records and emails”…but someone at TPM found traces of what looked like writing bleeding through the photocopied email.

http://i164.photobucket.com/al…..s/p39b.jpg

Apparently the DOJ had people write notes ON THE BACK of the emails they received so that if the emails had to be made available any contemporary notes that accompanied them would not be on the copies.

THESE HANDWRITTEN NOTES WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE DUMP!

But when the person who discovered the writing reversed the image, extracted the email script and magnified the remainder one could see a rather extensive set of notes with references to PARDONS, the AUSA Phone Call Program, and a Mexican Investment reference!

Clearly the WH is keeping back materials. That’s proof!

THIS IS A HUGE COVER-UP!

Scarecrow @ 110

Interesting post at HuffPo on how Bush trying to frame the discussion. Jeff Feldman catches the point where Bush described the firings as “resignations.”

The ultimate in framing is replacing “oversight” with “overreach.” Clever wordsmiths, these wingnuts.

Red rover Red rover send Abu right over!

portia.vz @ 120

Why not call Specter and Hatch too? Should only Democrats feel pressure? They’re already on our side.

EXACTLY. We need to make it HURT not to be utterly transparent with the public.

Besides, it gives fence sitters cover; they can always say they were responding to constituent pressure.

FireDogTechs = FDL is loading SLOWWWLY on individual threads here. I get the banner and the background quickly then it takes another four miutes before it loads. I mention it in case its not only me.

Subpoenas!!

Neil @ 127

FireDogTechs = FDL is loading SLOWWWLY on individual threads here. I get the banner and the background quickly then it takes another four miutes before it loads. I mention it in case its not only me.

Ditto.

Black doesn’t count in this round. The 8 or 9 are just the ones fired and putsched out at the end of 2006. There were LOTS of others who were forced out in the preceding six years. We need to learn who they are and what they were investigating.

wait a minute, is this guy one of the 7 ?

http://www.law.com/jsp/ca/PubA…..8941743472

forgot to include -

indicted the first case to come out of the nationwide stock option backdating investigations, as well as several large environmental cases.

TiredFed @ 9

BobbyG @ 7

Bwwwaahhhhhhhh!!!!!!!

Bush has to be able to get his confidential advice from his staff.

Right.

It is utterly clear by now just what all that advice has gotten the nation.

A TOTAL CLUSTERFUCK.
.

This ‘getting candid advice’ crap is just that, CRAP. If you want immoral, illegal or unethical advice, by all means protect your staff from Congressional oversight. If you have nothing to hide, you should not have to worry.

If you have nothing to hide, you should not have to worry!!! This is the very “War on Terra” argument they’ve shoved down our throats. Give ‘em hell and use their own arguments against them!

cinnamonape @ 123

ONE MORE LIE!

Bush said he sent down “all records and emails”…but someone at TPM found traces of what looked like writing bleeding through the photocopied email.

http://i164.photobucket.com/al…..s/p39b.jpg

Apparently the DOJ had people write notes ON THE BACK of the emails they received so that if the emails had to be made available any contemporary notes that accompanied them would not be on the copies.

THESE HANDWRITTEN NOTES WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE DUMP!

But when the person who discovered the writing reversed the image, extracted the email script and magnified the remainder one could see a rather extensive set of notes with references to PARDONS, the AUSA Phone Call Program, and a Mexican Investment reference!

Clearly the WH is keeping back materials. That’s proof!

THIS IS A HUGE COVER-UP!

You know, it’s funny that they wouldn’t have remembered what happened to Dan Rather. Makes it seem more and more likely to me that was Rovian ratfuck. Because if the blogosphere had done it on its own, they wouldn’t have been this hamhanded.

Sweet revenge for Josh. The Rather mess cost him a 60 minutes story on the Niger forgery. They spiked after the forged TNG story. One wonders, now, whether they knew that story was in the works, and got double duty from the Rather brouhaha.

the House committee just annouced it will subpeona Rove and Miers (CSpan crawler).

What this scandal will do is show if there are any members of the Republicans who have any morals left.

If not, the Republican brand is destroyed for a very long time. The up and commers are the yellow elephants, The Turdbuds, Turdblossom proteges who have yet to bloom, and various other shades of the whithered, old white boys network.

On the other hand, we can keep the pressure up, keep accountability in the forefront, and demonstrate once and for all the Democrats are the party of truth and justice. And that progressive principles benefit the majority.

It’s going to take A LOT of work, however think about how bleak it would be if the toobzs didn’t connect us all.

It is loading slowly because it is infinitely the busiest blog site….. it is even busier than Drum’s when rdw, Mike K, Norom, jay, tbrosz, al etc are all wingnutting away!

cbl @ 130

Kevin Ryan of CA is one of the Gonzales 8.

i think gore’s experience today testifying on capitol hill may confirm his decision to NOT run for public office EVER again.

Going down the list making my calls. Hold music interesting, Cornyn’s office favored patriotic, Coburn’s office country western, heard a line “don’t stop what you’re doing” or something like that. Unintentionally funny.

Pathfinder THANKS!

Even if not unanimous vote, this is a good day indeedie!

mods. are margins whacko? or is it just my end of the toobz?!

I’m all a-tumble today…. but a whole lot happier than watchin’ jr huff’n’puff yestidie afternoon(!)

thanks Rayne . . .happened to find that link while googling Ms. Fisher

so when I am fired for not doing what I was tasked at work, will I be subsidized by you guys?

this is killing my adcancement prospects I have to say

Front page of the online NYT:

By voice vote and without dissent, a House Judiciary subcommittee decided to compel the president’s top aides to testify publicly and under oath about their roles in the firings of prosecutors.

No dissent. That cuts both ways. The republicans may be fleeing the sinking ship, or may be trying stop the bleeding here.

That was another edition of the badly mixed metaphor.

Hey Rayne—

I’m not sure we disagree. You probably have better info about Black.

My only point is there were more USA’s forced out than just the 8-9 from December.

jayackroyd,

excuse me, but did you just say the comm. Repubs voted with their Chairman ?!!?

jayackroyd @ 142

Front page of the online NYT:

By voice vote and without dissent, a House Judiciary subcommittee decided to compel the president’s top aides to testify publicly and under oath about their roles in the firings of prosecutors.

No dissent.

that needs to be the talking point from democrats, they need to point that out in EVERY interview

House OKs subpoenas for top Bush aides

A House panel on Wednesday approved subpoenas for President Bush’s political adviser, Karl Rove and other top White House aides, setting up a constitutional showdown over the firings of eight federal prosecutors.

perris @ 141

so when I am fired for not doing what I was tasked at work, will I be subsidized by you guys?

this is killing my adcancement prospects I have to say

NO but if you are fired for doing you job as these USA’s were you might have a shot at it!

egregious @ 143

My only point is there were more USA’s forced out than just the 8-9 from December.

Mos’ def. If folks look, they will see that some appear to be shuffling, like a USA shuffled to a judgeship, but the replacement not going through normal Senate confirmation process. Stuff like that going on.

Would love to know what the hell is going on in Southern IL and Tennesee. Twisted.

I called Specter’s office — they are keeping a tally. Please call, especially if you are in PA.

cbl @ 144

jayackroyd,

excuse me, but did you just say the comm. Repubs voted with their Chairman ?!!?

Times said voice vote, without dissent.

Sorry. AP on the times home page.

no dissent in subcommittee

I must chime in to tell you all how awesome you are for paying such close attention to these issues. I was becoming pretty numb and am now starting to wake up from the poppy pollen. Thank you. Thank you!

That said, does anyone else think W’s legacy will be a nightmarish parody of Trading Spaces? That is, exporting “democracy” to Iraq, and importing a dictatorship?

Anyone remember how W explained his pre-midterm election support of Rumsfeld to the press by saying “I had to [lie] because otherwise it would have affected the elections” like it was perfectly acceptable SOP. Duh!

Congress: stop pleasuring the president.

There was dissent, though.

cinnamonape @ 123

That could be a huge story – do you have a link to the TPM article or comment that discusses this? It deserves attention.

Public service announcement:

If you find that FDL is loading slowly, it may be because of an ad server – dg.specificclick.net – that is taking too long to respond, according to a message that appears on my monitor.

angie @ 152

There was dissent, though.

oh, nevermind then

WaPo says some Repubs voted no, but there was no count

Scarecrow @
110

Interesting post at HuffPo on how Bush trying to frame the discussion. Jeff Feldman catches the point where Bush described the firings as “resignations.”

Just read feldman’s post – it was excellent! Kinda like the antidote to WH talking points.

Under oath before Congress on January 18, Alberto Gonzalez said:

“I would never, ever make a change in a United States attorney position for political reasons or if it would in any way jeopardize an ongoing serious investigation. I just would not do it.”

If you parse this statement very carefully, he is saying he still could fire an attorney for political reasons, provided it does not jepoardize, in his view, an ongoing investigation.

So looked at very carefully this statement still gives him latitude to fire an attorney for political reasons. It is all a matter of timing and his professional judgement, you see.

tbsa @ 147

perris @ 141

so when I am fired for not doing what I was tasked at work, will I be subsidized by you guys?

this is killing my adcancement prospects I have to say

NO but if you are fired for doing you job as these USA’s were you might have a shot at it!

Or you might have a lawsuit for wrongful termination on your hands…and we’d encourage you to pursue it.

My apologies. I just copy and pasted the headline.

From the body of the story:

By voice vote, but with some ”no” votes heard, the House Judiciary subcommittee on commercial and administrative law decided to compel the president’s top aides to testify publicly and under oath about their roles in the firings.

My letter to Grassley of Iowa.
They hate me in their office because I am a burr on the elephants ass.
Dear Senator Grassley,

I urgently conveyed the following to poor Caleb verbally. I apologize if I was too impolite. But Ivoted for you twice and You, Senator Grassley, WORK FOR ME.
1.What is the Senator’s position visavis IG Fine regarding FBI abuse of NSL Letters?
2. What is your position regarding subpoenas of Miers and Rove?
3. Isn’t executive privilege limited to National Security issues? How does this apply to this situation(USA scandal)
4.What is your position on the politization of judiciary?
5.What does the nomination of Matt Dummermuth have to current scandal? What was your communications with Mr. Sampson?
6.Why the 18 day gap in the 3000 page document dump visa vis USA Attorney scandal?

I wait your answers with bated breath.

Very respectfully your,

Jim Clausen, US Citizen

Rayne—

Federal judges not being confirmed properly?
Shifting US Attorneys from their posts to become judges, without Congressional oversight, out of the public eye…

That combination doesn’t sound good.
Yoo hoo, Congress?

On CNN: Bob Barr, former USA, slamming the DoJ and WH for undermining integrity of the USA system and defaming honest, qualified USAs. I’d say so far the Prez is “losing the narrative.”

*xyz @ 153

cinnamonape @ 123

That could be a huge story – do you have a link to the TPM article or comment that discusses this? It deserves attention.

was this photocopy bleed through of a mostly “redacted” page? that’s what it looks like to me.

more here.

Scarecrow @ 110

Interesting post at HuffPo on how Bush trying to frame the discussion. Jeff Feldman catches the point where Bush described the firings as “resignations.”

He also offered to share “key” documents. Guess who gets to pick and choose?

*xyz @ 153

cinnamonape @ 123

That could be a huge story – do you have a link to the TPM article or comment that discusses this? It deserves attention.

Link: http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/002809.php

Suggestion: search for occurrences of the word photobucket on that thread, and you should be able to find not only what you’re looking for, but also possibly even more.

dreamcatcher @ 158

Under oath before Congress on January 18, Alberto Gonzalez said:

“I would never, ever make a change in a United States attorney position for political reasons or if it would in any way jeopardize an ongoing serious investigation. I just would not do it.”

If you parse this statement very carefully, he is saying he still could fire an attorney for political reasons, provided it does not jepoardize, in his view, an ongoing investigation.

So looked at very carefully this statement still gives him latitude to fire an attorney for political reasons. It is all a matter of timing and his professional judgement, you see.

There is no way to parse it in the way that you suggest. He says he would never fire for political reasons or if it jeopardizes an investigation. No latitude that I can see.

I just got off the phone with Conyers office and Leahy’s.

Conyers office said “the World has called today” When I metioned the 18 days of emails missing — she said they are going thru all of it very thoroughly” She thanked me for my support.

Leahy’s office had to put me on hold. They said they were aware of the missing emails and would make note of the support too.

We cannot let up on this. We need to shower the MSM about the emails and support for the subpeonas and truth!

Tim O @ 16

You forgot this, the missing performance review trail:

I yield the floor to TPM Reader JD:

This isn’t a comment about what has been found in the document dump of last night, but about what HASN’T been found. (Note: my question/comment is inspired by this 3/16 interview of [U.S. Attorney] Bud Cummins).

If the USA’s had been forced to resign for performance related reasons, wouldn’t you expect to see a huge paper trail of the performance review process itself? Take the case of [U.S. Attorney for Western Michigan Margaret] Chiara. If the problem was office management/morale, I would expect the following in the record:

1) Some document sent to the someone in the AG’s office, saying, “Hey, I’ve been hearing there are some morale/managerial problems in Chiara’s office.”;

2) A formal letter to Chiara saying, “We would like to review your management of the office. We’ll be sending officials out to your district to discuss.”

3) A report to the DAG saying, “We went out to her office and, in fact, we believe there are managerial problems. Chiara offered to takes steps A, B & C to correct. Will review in 6 months.”;

4) Then, 6 months later, there would be another report saying, “It’s been six months since the last review. Nothing’s changed. It may be time to consider removing her.”;

5) A follow-up from the DAG saying, “Nope, her time is up. We’ll recommend her removal and replacement to the AG.”;

6) Then a series of letters/emails between offices about “Should we remove her?” and “Yes, we should remove her. Set it up.” and “Here’s how and why we’re removing her.”;

7) Finally, a series of documents setting up her formal removal, communicating that to the AG and the WH.

But, there’s none of that. You’d think if such documents existed, they’d be definitive and the first set of docs the Justice Department would release. If the attorneys in the AG’s office are anything like the private attorneys I know, they wouldn’t do anything as significant as forcing the resignation of any single USA, without first creating a paper trail a mile long. Should be 1000 pages of docs for each USA removal, right?

Everybody seems to be looking for a smoking gun, but the real story is that the evidence we’ve been given is of a gun that’s never been fired.

As I wrote yesterday, the Justice Department actually brainstormed on the justifications for the firings after they happened.

Excellent observation! However, I’m sure all that must have occurred during the 18 days. ;)

cinnamonape @ 123

ONE MORE LIE!

Bush said he sent down “all records and emails”…but someone at TPM found traces of what looked like writing bleeding through the photocopied email.

http://i164.photobucket.com/al…..s/p39b.jpg

Apparently the DOJ had people write notes ON THE BACK of the emails they received so that if the emails had to be made available any contemporary notes that accompanied them would not be on the copies.

THESE HANDWRITTEN NOTES WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE DUMP!

But when the person who discovered the writing reversed the image, extracted the email script and magnified the remainder one could see a rather extensive set of notes with references to PARDONS, the AUSA Phone Call Program, and a Mexican Investment reference!

Clearly the WH is keeping back materials. That’s proof!

THIS IS A HUGE COVER-UP!

The document dump strikes me as an old school tactic of asking the opposing side in a lawsuit to find the needle in the haystack under the guise of full disclosure.
It’s so ironic that the “full disclosure” reveals a non-disclosing gap. [backwards sommersault cheer “yay!”]

Please pardon my ignorance: were all the documents provided emails? That in and of itself is not full disclosure, is it? The government still churns with forms in triplicate doesn’t it? Where are the non electronic documents? Just askin’

Doncha just hate having your intelligence insulted over and over again?

Again FDL totally rocks! I can’t say it enough.

perris @ 145

jayackroyd @ 142

Front page of the online NYT:

By voice vote and without dissent, a House Judiciary subcommittee decided to compel the president’s top aides to testify publicly and under oath about their roles in the firings of prosecutors.

No dissent.

that needs to be the talking point from democrats, they need to point that out in EVERY interview

In an unprecedented UNANIMOUS vote today, the house judiciary committee voted to subpeona…

I think the Senate Committee should ACCEPT the presindet’s terms. Then the Senate can proceed and dig up the dirt, then the house can question under otah.

jayackroyd @ 142

Front page of the online NYT:

By voice vote and without dissent, a House Judiciary subcommittee decided to compel the president’s top aides to testify publicly and under oath about their roles in the firings of prosecutors.

Thought I heard somewhere on the tv that it was a *partisan* vote?

Wigwam @ 109

Per the Wikipedia:

By Article II of the U.S. Constitution, the President “shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment. [emphasis added].” So even when there is no chance of conviction in the Senate, if follow-on prosecution in the courts is likely, there is strong reason for a president to resign before getting impeached. Richard Nixon, for example, resigned while he was still pardonable and was pardoned one month later by his presidential successor, Gerald Ford.

I suggest that Nancy offer a twofer.

NO NO NO! That bunch of pardons led directly to the situation we have now. It was like not taking all your antibiotics — the bug just gets srtonger. Our grandchildren will have enogh to bear with the legacy of this war, don’t make them clean up this gang *again*.

FWIW, a cooking site I participate in was loading very slowly a while ago. Maybe it’s a toobz thing. Contact Sen. Stevens’ office.

Stephen Parrish, CPA @ 154

Public service announcement:

If you find that FDL is loading slowly, it may be because of an ad server – dg.specificclick.net – that is taking too long to respond, according to a message that appears on my monitor.

FireDogTechs – I’ve experienced that problem before where the adservers keep the website pages from loading a a reasonable pace. Fixing that should be the ad companies top priority.

From Mary4 — EPUed in prior thread:

“Possible crimes:

1. Conspiracy to Obstruct and Obstruction of Congress – legislative tampering. The 11th hour action by the Executive aides in slipping language into lengthy, complex legislation that had been hammeered out in committee, without notice to Congress, the House or Senate committees, or any of the individual Senators on those committees.

2. Conspiracy to Obstruct and Obstruction of Congress and to violate Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution of the United States of American “and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

Principal officers are not sole Presidential hires, they are required, by the Consitution, to be joint hires by the Senate and the President – the President can nominate, but he cannot appoint except with advice and consent of the Senate. A conspiracy by the Executive branch to violate Congressional powers and avoid Constituionally required advice and consent is about as big a violation of separation of powers as you could structure. To the extent the President might have been directly involved in a Conspiracy to violate the Constitution and circumvent Congress, that is important info as well.

3. Arkansas appointment of Rove’s friend Tim Griffin. Conspiracy to Obstruct Congress and Obstruction of Congress and violation of Article III, Sec. 2 of the Constitution of hte United States of America. Refusal to allow first assistant to become acting USA based on pregnancy – possible violation of statute. Perjury and obstruction related to lies under oath to Congress related to circumstances of removal of prior USA and appointment of USA. Conspiracy to lie to Congress and to obstruct Congress and violate Art III Sec 2 are very laid out in the Sampson email related to Phillips, where he says that the Executive Branch aides and DOJ will pretend to cooperate with Congress in quote good faith endquote, while “running out the clock” and having no intention of getting Senate consent to the appointment. Remember, the Constitution is our CHIEF legal document.

4. Lam. [All the USA removals have the same Art III, Sec 2 issues]. Conspiracy to obstruct and obstruction of justice under applicable sections of 18 USC 1503 et seq for interference with a court officer in the performance of their duties (note that not only are USAs jointly appointed with the Senate to be legally appointed, but also they act as an officer of the Judiciary branch and each branch is entitled to protect their claim on USAs allegience). Possible perjury and conspiracy to commit perjury related to the emails indicating that on the day following Lam’s applications for Foggo search warrants emails went out stating she had to be removed. None of this was revealed to Congress in the testimony given.

5. Iglesias. Obstruction of Congress, etc. as for all USA removals. Obstruction of Justice and conspiracy relating to efforts to influence an investgation (the voter fraud) AND violations of Senate rules and possible related ethics or other obstruction charges related to the calls by Domenici and Wilson.

etc.

There’s a boatload of violations and potential violations of criminal statutes and constitutionally prohibited interference with Congress by the Executive, all of which need thorough investigation.

To revise the old quote, there are lies, damn lies, and statments from Bush’s DOJ.

Two helpful summaries relating to Congressional subpoenas and testimony by Exec aides:

http://www.senate.gov/referenc…..L31836.pdf

http://www.fas.org/irp/crs/RL31351.pdf

But I don’t see how you get anywhere quickly or thoroughly without independent counsel. Not a Spec Pros, like Fitzgerald, but Indep Counsel.

And while they are investigating the removals, it would be nice to get someone at DOJ to confirm, in writing, that there was no modification of, or interference with, the Special Prosecutor’s delegation of authority in the leak investigation and a request for the Rove letter. JMO”

egregious @ 162

Federal judges not being confirmed properly?
Shifting US Attorneys from their posts to become judges, without Congressional oversight, out of the public eye…

I believe the judges did go through or are going through confirmation; it’s what happened after the USA was appointed to the judgeship that is interesting, as the replacement process goes cattywhompus.

I’d sent off an email to the head of my local congressional office supporting the supplemental, and pointing out that the DFHs ftmp, did not want the perfect to be the enemy of the good, even though the bill is not what we wanted, pointing her to a myDD post.

She happened to write back as the 18 day gap was breaking, and so I told her about it. How ’bout them internets!

listening to denny haster lecture gore now… about how we must protect the workers in manufacturing jobs…. by not having environmental regulations.

bleh.

Made the calls to Leahy and Conyers. Burn up those phone lines, people!

Scarecrow @ 176

Thank you for that, Scarecrow, from Mary4.

Yes, it is time to demand a reauthorization of the Office of Independent Counsel.

The Republicans can’t complain about the neutrality, nor can they complain about a tool they used against Clinton.

Senator Levin handled the last reauthorization; I’m overdue to send him a note making this request.

do-si-do @ 170

The document dump strikes me as an old school tactic of asking the opposing side in a lawsuit to find the needle in the haystack under the guise of full disclosure.
It’s so ironic that the “full disclosure” reveals a non-disclosing gap. [backwards sommersault cheer “yay!”]

Please pardon my ignorance: were all the documents provided emails? That in and of itself is not full disclosure, is it? The government still churns with forms in triplicate doesn’t it? Where are the non electronic documents? Just askin’

Doncha just hate having your intelligence insulted over and over again?

Again FDL totally rocks! I can’t say it enough.

DOJ provided hard copy of all the emails, etc., and the Judiciary committee made the pdfs and posted them on their site. (OK, probably unpaid Judiciary interns working overnight, not actual members of Congress. But I digress.) They probably figured that by printing out all the emails, rather than burning a CD-ROM of them, they would slow down the examination of everything. “Let’s give it to them on paper, and with all that paper to go through, it’ll take ‘em weeks!” CNN showed a box filled with rubber-band bound reams of paper being unloaded, that I assume were the documents in question. No discs, no CDs, just paper.

But Alberto, there’s this little thing called a scanner . . . and interns know ALL about using it.

If there are notes on the back of any documents, I think the members have the documents themselves to examine already.

I called both my senators yesterday (Feinstein and Boxer). I also e-mailed Leahy.

We’ve all waited long enough for this administration to be held accountable.

BTW – Great photo for this post. Could it be a premonition?

Just called both Leahy and Conyers’ offices, and got through fairly quickly. The woman that picked up at Conyers’ office was really nice and we chatted a bit about the subpoenas, and what it must be like working during these exciting times.

She said that she never expected this sort of excitement when she started working there, and I should have asked how long she has been on Conyers’ staff. She said that there was a sit-in yesterday, and I thought it might have been some right wingnuts, since Conyers is on our side, but she said that it was Code Pink. She then said that she knows Code Pink, and that “they are not all that they say they are.” Hopefully, if it really was Code Pink, they were demanding that subpoenas be issued.

Give her a call and flesh out the story, if you can.

We are winning!!

Styve

EPU’d, but you gotta see this: Mary4 weight in with a resounding thud.

Mary4 @ 172

Possible crimes:

1. Conspiracy to Obstruct and Obstruction of Congress – legislative tampering. The 11th hour action by the Executive aides in slipping language into lengthy, complex legislation that had been hammeered out in committee, without notice to Congress, the House or Senate committees, or any of the individual Senators on those committees.

2. Conspiracy to Obstruct and Obstruction of Congress and to violate Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution of the United States of American “and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

Principal officers are not sole Presidential hires, they are required, by the Consitution, to be joint hires by the Senate and the President – the President can nominate, but he cannot appoint except with advice and consent of the Senate. A conspiracy by the Executive branch to violate Congressional powers and avoid Constituionally required advice and consent is about as big a violation of separation of powers as you could structure. To the extent the President might have been directly involved in a Conspiracy to violate the Constitution and circumvent Congress, that is important info as well.

3. Arkansas appointment of Rove’s friend Tim Griffin. Conspiracy to Obstruct Congress and Obstruction of Congress and violation of Article III, Sec. 2 of the Constitution of hte United States of America. Refusal to allow first assistant to become acting USA based on pregnancy – possible violation of statute. Perjury and obstruction related to lies under oath to Congress related to circumstances of removal of prior USA and appointment of USA. Conspiracy to lie to Congress and to obstruct Congress and violate Art III Sec 2 are very laid out in the Sampson email related to Phillips, where he says that the Executive Branch aides and DOJ will pretend to cooperate with Congress in quote good faith endquote, while “running out the clock” and having no intention of getting Senate consent to the appointment. Remember, the Constitution is our CHIEF legal document.

4. Lam. [All the USA removals have the same Art III, Sec 2 issues]. Conspiracy to obstruct and obstruction of justice under applicable sections of 18 USC 1503 et seq for interference with a court officer in the performance of their duties (note that not only are USAs jointly appointed with the Senate to be legally appointed, but also they act as an officer of the Judiciary branch and each branch is entitled to protect their claim on USAs allegience). Possible perjury and conspiracy to commit perjury related to the emails indicating that on the day following Lam’s applications for Foggo search warrants emails went out stating she had to be removed. None of this was revealed to Congress in the testimony given.

5. Iglesias. Obstruction of Congress, etc. as for all USA removals. Obstruction of Justice and conspiracy relating to efforts to influence an investgation (the voter fraud) AND violations of Senate rules and possible related ethics or other obstruction charges related to the calls by Domenici and Wilson.

etc.

There’s a boatload of violations and potential violations of criminal statutes and constitutionally prohibited interference with Congress by the Executive, all of which need thorough investigation.

To revise the old quote, there are lies, damn lies, and statments from Bush’s DOJ.

Two helpful summaries relating to Congressional subpoenas and testimony by Exec aides:

http://www.senate.gov/referenc…..L31836.pdf

http://www.fas.org/irp/crs/RL31351.pdf

But I don’t see how you get anywhere quickly or thoroughly without independent counsel. Not a Spec Pros, like Fitzgerald, but Indep Counsel.

And while they are investigating the removals, it would be nice to get someone at DOJ to confirm, in writing, that there was no modification of, or interference with, the Special Prosecutor’s delegation of authority in the leak investigation and a request for the Rove letter. JMO

There’s apparently a difference between “authorization” and “approval.” From the NYTimes via AP:

Republicans called the authorization premature, though some GOP members said they would consider voting to approve the subpoenas if Conyers promises to issue them only if he has evidence of wrongdoing.

Conyers agreed. ”This (authority) will not be used in a way that will make you regret your vote.”

The discovery of this “18-day gap” in the doc dump is an excellent example of the power of the blogosphere — what some sage, during the Libby trial, called “the world’s largest multiply-connected supercomputer” — that’s us, each of us able to think and communicate with the others.
Samizdat/feuilletons on steroids!! :)

excuse me if this has already been addressed – i just heard about the subpoenas & got so excited i jumped in at the end of the thread w/out reading whats been posted.

does anyone know/has anyone posted anything about the person (judge? us atty?) in DC who will get the case after the admin refuses to comply w/ the subpoenas?

obviously he/she was appointed by the admin, but i wonder just how “bushie” are they?

Stephen Parrish, CPA @ 166

*xyz @ 153

cinnamonape @ 123

That could be a huge story – do you have a link to the TPM article or comment that discusses this? It deserves attention.

Link: Link

Suggestion: search for occurrences of the word photobucket on that thread, and you should be able to find not only what you’re looking for, but also possibly even more.

someone needs to get this to Conyers and Leahy right quick.

HotFlash @ 173

NO NO NO! That bunch of pardons led directly to the situation we have now. It was like not taking all your antibiotics — the bug just gets srtonger. Our grandchildren will have enogh to bear with the legacy of this war, don’t make them clean up this gang *again*.

amen

Wonder if this company is making alot of “House” calls this week…

Tweety Bird was outrageous last night.
He’s lost his mind

bonkers @
191

Wonder if this company is making alot of “House” calls this week…

Oh, now isn’t that interesting? That post at Wonkette with the pic of the shredding truck is dated 30-OCT-06.

At the time I thought DeadEye was merely cleaning house before the election a week later…

But that post is dated roughly 2 weeks before the 18-day gap began. Hmm.

Did something happen that set them in a HUGE panic, encouraging them to proceed with the USA sweep and clean out DeadEye’s records, too?

edit: Shredding truck photo dd. 19-OCT-06. One month before the gap started.

Rayne @ 177
egregious @ 162
Federal judges not being confirmed properly?
Shifting US Attorneys from their posts to become judges, without Congressional oversight, out of the public eye…
————-

I believe the judges did go through or are going through confirmation; it’s what happened after the USA was appointed to the judgeship that is interesting, as the replacement process goes cattywhompus.

All right, I’ll bite, what happens after they become judges?

Surely not interference…nah, they wouldn’t do that.

From this side of the toobz, the margins are badly broken. Is it just me?

will repost if this gets epu’d due to slow loading………..

Christy et al -

Here’s a very relevant article from NC that points out potential problems (past, present & future) when there are questions about the ASUs & political influence:

http://www.realcities.com/mld/…..941877.htm

2 things – someday can we have the power of Firedoglake turned on the Congress to prevent a war with Iran? to say that “all options”, including pre-emptive nuclear attack on a non-nuclear country, are NOT on the table? when Impeachment, according to Pelosi, is not on the table?

And seriously, what are the consequences if/when the Washington dems fold on this one, or get bogged down and stonewalled and nothing comes of it?

Will everyone here vote for Hillary/Obama/Edwards or is there ANYTHING they can do, or opportunity they can flub, that will finally put them beyond the pale?

It’s an easy call for me – if a candidate allows themselves to be manipulated to put the interests of a foreign power over those of this country, then there is no chance of support, they are already bought and paid for, and I don’t care how they promise to re-arrange deck chairs better than their opponent.

TiredFed @
189

Stephen Parrish, CPA @ 166

*xyz @ 153

cinnamonape @ 123

That could be a huge story – do you have a link to the TPM article or comment that discusses this? It deserves attention.

Link: link

Suggestion: search for occurrences of the word photobucket on that thread, and you should be able to find not only what you’re looking for, but also possibly even more.

someone needs to get this to Conyers and Leahy right quick.

See peterr’s 8:40 am comment; since Congress already has the paper documents, they (Conyers, Leahy, and their staffers) may already know about it.

Fresh thread, up and running for everyone.

New thRedd

can we send email? not much of a caller.

selise @
111

eCAHNomics @ 91

OT
Gore just finished direct testimony (don’t think he was sworn in). Whatta windbag. They waived time constraint, so he spoke for 20-25 minutes (usual=5-10?), in a wandering fashion. Bad job. Anyone who wants him to run for prez ought to replay his testimony & think what it would be like to listen to him for 8 years.

i’ve been listening to president bush for 6 years.

listening to gore for 8 years sounds great to me.

p.s. gore opening was more like a conversation – not a speech. but i’ve also been listening to his speeches since 2002… and imo, he is very, very good. in case you want to listen to some of his speeches too, i’ve made a list of those i could find on the web – here.

Hey! ;->

Next we’ll be hearing he’s too “prolix”, like looseheadprop supposedly was the other day, tra la. reminds me of a long-ago schoolboard exec. session with a blunderbuster bozo whose “word of the day” for that day was “pro forma”. ooooohhhhhhggggaaaawwwddd!

I’m w/ you Selise. May we PULEEZE hear LOTS more Gore in the future, any time he chooses to tune up! ;->

angie @ 152

There was dissent, though.

Yes, the article I read (WaPo? now I can’t remember) said there were some “no” voice votes and that Arlen *Wrinkle Drawers* Specter was downplaying the need for testimony under oath (predictably). I can’t find the article now, sorry.

Educated Plaintiff @ 188

does anyone know/has anyone posted anything about the person (judge? us atty?) in DC who will get the case after the admin refuses to comply w/ the subpoenas?

obviously he/she was appointed by the admin, but i wonder just how “bushie” are they?

Shuster addressed this on Olbermann last night, that it would go to US Attorney in DC, Jeffrey Taylor (sp?), who was appointed by Abu last Fall.

Hmmmmm.

You can see this on the video titled “White House Document Release.” (This part’s at about 8:25 — didn’t yet see a transcript)

I think some video of piled up old-fashioned snail-mail on the subject might actually do some good. Maybe even telegrams to maximize the symbolism.

EPU’d from last thread but on topic here:

There’s apparently a difference between “authorization” and “approval.” From the NYTimes via AP:

Republicans called the authorization premature, though some GOP members said they would consider voting to approve the subpoenas if Conyers promises to issue them only if he has evidence of wrongdoing.

Conyers agreed. ”This (authority) will not be used in a way that will make you regret your vote.”

LindyH @ 195

From this side of the toobz, the margins are badly broken. Is it just me?

Try refreshing the whole page, see if that helps. My margins look all right after that.

eCAHNomics @ 91

OT
Gore just finished direct testimony (don’t think he was sworn in). Whatta windbag. They waived time constraint, so he spoke for 20-25 minutes (usual=5-10?), in a wandering fashion. Bad job. Anyone who wants him to run for prez ought to replay his testimony & think what it would be like to listen to him for 8 years.

Yes, I agree that his argument was more than us versus them. Must be tough for a two minute mindset to actually get to the real moral imperitives like doing what’s right rather than doing what’s profitable. Why do I suspect you are a part of the former rather than the latter?

sporkovat @ 197

Some of us have been trying to get others to join us writing to Pelosi to tell her that her doing what AIPAC tells her in deleting the No War on Iran clause is an Un-American activity, because attacking Iran would be a proxy war on behalf of Israel, just like that on Iraq.

notjonathon @
92

Let’s not forget the firing of the US Attorney for the Northern Marianas, by special request to Susan Ralston from Jack Abramoff in November of 2002.
Black

This example from Bush’s first term needs to be re-examined in light of the recent firings.

See also this article: Abramoff accessed secret FBI info

Rove’s signature is all over this one, too.

Thanks notjonathon. Important story, then and NOW.
GO FDL!

110 – the point where Bush described the firings as “resignations.”

And the “they serve at ‘our’ pleasure.”

I’m telling you, Bush dug a big hole with his and his press persons’ attempts at teflon (the PReisdent never spoke to anyone about specific USA, the President didn’t know anything about this, YOu can’t lay this at the President’s door, etc.)

Now he has a big big problem on how to justify the removals under 541. He’s desparately hoping to make an argument that forced resignations after being told they had to go by certain dates were not, somehow, “removals” under the statute. But they are.

So either a cabal illegally removed the USAs without Presidential authority, even after the 11-15 query as to the need for Presidential authority, and pursuant to a long planned strategy that involved tampering with Congressional legislation and conspiracies to lie to Congress, in which case we have a lot of people who should be looking at jail time and a bunch of illegal removals

or

The President himself participated (so no 541 violation) in a scheme to obstruct Congress (which is still obstruction of Congress)and justice etc. .

Then he lied.

Repeatedly.

“Bush has to be able to get his confidential advice from his staff.”

(snort) Big loss. No one tells him anything he doesn’t want to hear anyway.

S.O.S. from MA @
187

The discovery of this “18-day gap” in the doc dump is an excellent example of the power of the blogosphere — what some sage, during the Libby trial, called “the world’s largest multiply-connected supercomputer” — that’s us, each of us able to think and communicate with the others.
Samizdat/feuilletons on steroids!! :)

You said it!!

You caught that, too? That’s exactly how I saw the weasel’s statement.dreamcatcher @ 158

Under oath before Congress on January 18, Alberto Gonzalez said:

“I would never, ever make a change in a United States attorney position for political reasons or if it would in any way jeopardize an ongoing serious investigation. I just would not do it.”

If you parse this statement very carefully, he is saying he still could fire an attorney for political reasons, provided it does not jepoardize, in his view, an ongoing investigation.

So looked at very carefully this statement still gives him latitude to fire an attorney for political reasons. It is all a matter of timing and his professional judgement, you see.

Has anyone come up with a link between the Staffer for Specter, who was hired to insert the language into the partriot act and the WH? Would be interesting to know if he was inserted for a specific reason like putting an end to the pending cases against the republicans.

Maunga @ 209:

good work, I wish you success. It’s amazing to me that the Bay Area is represented by someone so bereft of principle.

You should have someone like Wellstone out there someday — maybe a tech millionaire wants to jump in a primary and draw in authentic Left support?

Should wake up some sleepy Donkey’s, like Lamont tried to….

Just read that Spector plans to run again in 2010. That might make him somewhat more vulnerable to pressure. I’m off to call him now.

I have gathered all of the information on Daniel Bogden from all 3000 documents and have listed it with other relevant information on my website http://misterapologist.blogspot.com/

I have direct copies turned into pictures of ALL Daniel Bogden information…

Highlighting all inaccurate statements plus identifying files and emails that are still missing (One Email from Daniel Bogden was conspicuously damaged to remove several lines)

Visit http://misterapologist.blogspot.com/
for this story and Updates.

egregious @
42

In the last thread I named this Rosemary’s Baby.

And you were/are a wise and snarky one!!

We applaud you.

eCAHNomics @
91

OT
Gore just finished direct testimony (don’t think he was sworn in). Whatta windbag. They waived time constraint, so he spoke for 20-25 minutes (usual=5-10?), in a wandering fashion. Bad job. Anyone who wants him to run for prez ought to replay his testimony & think what it would be like to listen to him for 8 years.

I totally disagree. And it’s unfortunately you turned off the tv. You should have seen him deal with the questions from the mentally challenged Republican members of the Committee: they were nasty, bullying, etc., but he blew them back with courtesy & knowledge.

Also, in his testimony & answers, Gore showed an incredible breadth of knowledge and some welcome flexibility in responding to concerns of various members.

It reminded me of when politics was good, inspirational, inclusive.

Sorry about the margin issues. We’re working on fixing them.

Apologize if this is redundant;
Senate Judicial Committee

Patrick J. Leahy (202) 224-4543
CHAIRMAN, D-VERMONT

Edward M. Kennedy (202) 224-4242
D-MASSACHUSETTS

Arlen Specter (202) 224-4254
RANKING MEMBER, R-PENNSYLVANIA

Joseph R. Biden, Jr.(202) 224-5042
D-DELAWARE

Orrin G. Hatch (202) 224-5251
R-UTAH

Herb Kohl
D-WISCONSIN (202) 224-5653

Charles E. Grassley (202) 224-3744
R-IOWA

Dianne Feinstein (202) 224-3841
D-CALIFORNIA

Jon Kyl (202) 224-4521
R-ARIZONA

Russell D. Feingold (202) 224-5323
D-WISCONSIN

Jeff Sessions (202) 224-4124
R-ALABAMA

Charles E. Schumer (202) 224-6542
D-NEW YORK

Lindsey Graham (202) 224-5972
R-SOUTH CAROLINA

Richard J. Durbin (202) 224-2152
D-ILLINOIS

John Cornyn (202) 224-2934
R-TEXAS

Benjamin L. Cardin (202) 224-4524
D-MARYLAND

Sam Brownback (202) 224-6521
R-KANSAS

Sheldon Whitehouse
D-RHODE ISLAND (202) 224-2921

Tom Coburn (202) 224-5754
R-OKLAHOMA

Hello again,

Sorry if my previous point wasn’t clear. I was inquiring about DOJ docs that might not exist in non electronic form, not electronic docs printed into hardcopy. IOW, the handwritten notes, phone messages, etc. where are those?

Also, I think Tony Snowjob, Bush & co., are COMPLETELY missing the point about truth plus TRANSPARENCY!!! Geez, the press conference was sublime with pretzel logic.

Wonder which way Hon. Rep. Issa (R-CA, 49th) is gonna come down on the issue. Hahahahahaha!!!

Scarecrow @
163

On CNN: Bob Barr, former USA, slamming the DoJ and WH for undermining integrity of the USA system and defaming honest, qualified USAs. I’d say so far the Prez is “losing the narrative.”

During yesterday’s American Freedom Agenda press conference Barr lambasted Abu G for his contempt of the writ habeus corpus. I wish I had written down the direct quote. It came at the end of the Q&A session. My jaw dropped. I’ll keep looking for it.

There is a second gap in the document paper trail as well, covering the final 48 hours prior to the firings. The last pre-massacre email is from AM December 5 (in which Paul McNulty actually expresses reservations “again” about firing USA Bogden). The next message in the document dump is on December 7 after the phone calls had started.

Has anyone commented on the uncanny resemblence of Ms Woods of the Nixon era time cover to Harrit Miers?

Just saying…

Just read the post – no doubt epu’d – butI’m thinkin’ – the 18 min./ 18 day coincidence – could that be an omen?
I’m off to make some phone calls. Then back to (obsessively) read my FDL.

*xyz @ 153

cinnamonape @ 123

That could be a huge story – do you have a link to the TPM article or comment that discusses this? It deserves attention.

There is no TPM story yet on it that I know of…I don’t think that THEY know what they’ve got. I think if you go to the TPM article where they request help in searching through the document dump and put in the www address of the above in a Search you’ll find the post.

I don’t even know what emails were on the obverse side of these handwritten notes.

But it’s clear to me that they haven’t submitted these as no one has mentioned handwritten materials being assessed in the documents.

I suspect that folks need to look at all the documents for stuff like this bleeding through. That is where the dirt will be because it will go to the THINKING (i.e. motivation) that went behind the firings. The emails themselves may be superficial material vetted for presentation.

BUT WHEN BUSH STATES THAT HE’s COMPLYING FULLY WITH ALL THE RELEVANT DOCUMENTS IT’S CLEAR HE’S LYING…there are HUGE GAPS…and stuff like this that he’s held out!

*xyz @ 153
cinnamonape @ 123

That could be a huge story – do you have a link to the TPM article or comment that discusses this? It deserves attention.
———–
Stephen Parrish, CPA @ 166
Link: link

Suggestion: search for occurrences of the word photobucket on that thread, and you should be able to find not only what you’re looking for, but also possibly even more.
———–
TiredFed @ 189
someone needs to get this to Conyers and Leahy right quick.
———–
Stephen Parrish, CPA @ 198
See peterr’s 8:40 am comment; since Congress already has the paper documents, they (Conyers, Leahy, and their staffers) may already know about it.

But if they were not originals then this would be evidence of non-compliance.

It would be strange that the Congressional intern wouldn’t have flipped over the document and sent out the scan of the obverse, wouldn’t it? I’d think that they’d want someone to try and see if someone could parse out handwritten text EVEN MORE than email stuff.

http://editthis.info/images/tp…..-11-38.pdf

[Mod Note; please don’t re-quote more than twice, to be kind to your mods. Thanks]

Not just missing 18 days . . . but someone else at TPM noticed that there were no emails in the 48 hours leading up to the dismissal phone calls. i.e. Nov 5-7. You would think they’d be talking about it then, no?

BREAKING NEWS:

18 Day Gap Culprit Revealed

Rove’s Hairy Wood admits deleting 18 days of White House emails!