
The WaPo has a summary of this morning's proceedings up. As does the NYTimes.
And a gentle reminder to please keep comments on topic to the proceedings — the more one-liners and off-topic comments that fill the thread, the faster I have to change up due to server load, and that disrupts the flow of the liveblogging. So please, think whether it is necessary before you comment — impulse control is our server's best friend. Thanks much!
_____________________________
SEN. KYL QUESTIONS: Kyl agrees with what Whitehouse says. AG says that the do not want to send the message that prosecutors should not follow the evidence and prosecute. Kyl asks whether there has been any difference in how things are prosecuted? AG says not to his knowledge, but that he has limited information on how this is handled in individual USA office, for good reason. Kyl then tweaks Schumer for what he regards as an incorrect conspiracy standard being raised. Kyl wants to thank the AG about crime victims rights — and wants to get the AG's help in setting up a meeting on that. And then talks about internet gaming prosecutions. (CHS notes: Talk about your off-topic blather…and it goes on and on and on.)
SEN. LEAHY QUESTIONS: Late last week, we learned that a number of e-mails, including those from Karl Rove, were on RNC servers and that they may have been lost. Rove's attorney (Luskin) has suggested that Patrick Fitzgerald might have those e-mails from his investigation. If the DoJ has that information, what would we have to do to get those e-mails? Gonzales doesn't know about this. Leahy asks whether the committee could get those? We aren't talking about e-mails from the President, he doesn't use e-mail as I understand it? Gonzales says if they were transmitted over RNC servers, the WH might still have an interest. The WH Counsel's office responsible for this, you were there for 4 years, what was the policy and practice for WH employees using RNC and other outside e-mail accounts to use official WH/government business? AG says that there were a few people who used outside equipment — done to avoid problems with the Hatch Act. Intent of the policy was for those e-mails to be used for non-governmental purposes but if there were governmental transactions, that the communication ought to be preserved. AG says he thinks that the policy was that it should have been preserved — printed or forwarded througha government server. WH spokesperson has said close to 50 people had this equipment? As WH counel did you audit this or review it at all? Is anyone investigating this issue now? AG says that he thinks the counsel's office may be looking to see what happened here based on what he's said, but hasn't spoken to the WH Counsel's Office about this. Leahy says that you have been AG since 2005, have you done anything to make sure that Mr. Rove or his deputies have not used outside accounts for official government business. What was Goodling's role in choosing attorneys for termination? AG says he doesn't know everything she did. She, in essence, supported Mr. Sampson — she was WH liaison for the office. Have you told us all that you can recall, because there is a loack of discussion about conversations with Miers and Rove, among others? The AG says that he suspects that the committee members know more about what happened than he did with their review of al the materials. Ag says that he's told the committee everything he can remember. AG can't recall specifically the President telling him to fire a USAtty. Leahy says he wants to know which statement is the accurate one — goes through a litany of statements which all contain conflicting information. Which is the accurate statement? AG says that he hasn't intentionally said different things, and he accepts responsibility for his misstatements.
SEN. SPECTER QUESTIONS: Wants to talk about VT and threats to public safety. Wants to talk about amendments to law. (CHS notes: Am detecting a new GOP off-topic questioning strategy designed to emphasize all of the issues that the AG has to deal with on a day to day basis. It is the Scooter Libby my hard job hurts my brain defense all over again.) Now on to National Security Letters and the Patriot Act powers being misused. What have you done to make certain that these problems have been corrected? AG says he has asked the FBI and the national security division to work together to find out what happened — involved in the oversight and auditing of field offices so we have a better idea of what is ongoing. (CHS notes: Beacause, you know, another study by committee really fixes the problem, doesn't it?) Specter now goes on to FISA information provided to Leahy and himself — saying that the regular proceeding would be followed instead of the bypass that the President was doing of the Court. Specter says he would like to know the specifics and details to provide probable cause in light of the tremendous number of interceptions involved here, and more specifically of the quality of the factors required to establish probable cause on communications coming from outside the US in…and what is the apporach for the legislative changes. Want responses in writing.
SEN. FEINSTEIN QUESTIONS: I want to know how this list was compiled. Sampson said he didn't put people on the list — "I was the aggregator." Ballard said he had "no input." Mercer didn't know — said he just expressed concerns as they came up — and Gonzales testified this morning that he didn't know. Feinstein says that she wants to know how this list was compiled. AG says he doesn't recall. AG doesn't recall seeing this document, nor does he recall the meeting at which it was distributed. Republican Senators get the call where there is one in that particular state, in states where Democrats are Senators, the "political lead" gets the call. Not the Democratic Senator. "The talking point is that the Administration made the decision to seek the resignation." Feinstein says we still do not know who selected the individuals who were on that list. AG stammers and then says that he expected that Sampson would talk to folks at the Department and elsewhere and then would come to him with a recommendation. (CHS Notes: which doesn't really answer the question, now does it?) Feinstein says that 7 of the 8 were involved in public corruption prosecutions — and no one knows to this moment who recommended their dismissal. Feinstein says that Rove was involved with the Cummings dismissal, the President involved in Iglesias, and that Miers mentioned something about Deborah Yang from LA — now she resigned and wasn't part of all this. How could you say as little as 3 weeks ago that the WH didn't play a role in adding ot taking off names? AG says just because the President expressed a problem with a particular attorney, that the AG doesn't see that as influencing the process. Feinstein goes on to discuss the EARS reports and the fact that these prosecutors have stellar peer reviews. How did these people get on this list? AG: Gosh, I sure would like to know the answer to that question. But I don't know and all I can tell you is that I don't know the answer. (CHS notes: the aw shucks answer on this is less than credible, to put it mildly.) Feinstein says that it seems to her that the AG would want to know the answer to that — these people were very young and sometimes very ideological people. Battle says that when he called these USAs, it was a shot out of the blue — they had not been told there were problems, and these people were told "you must leave." AG says they should have done this differently. With regard to Lam, the AG says he thinks Lam knew that there were concerns from Congress. Feinstein cuts him off and says that if she were employed by the DoJ, she would want to know what her boss was thinking about her work, not what some outside person was thinking.
SEN. HATCH QUESTIONS: In an aggrieved tone, "I think we would all agree, you would agree, that this was poorly handled…how often do you have to be flagellated about this?" Going on about the AUSAs actually handling the cases, not the USA. (CHS notes: Hatch continues with his lead the witness pattern of questioning.) Why were some of the USAs not removed — crossing this line is wrong, Hatch says, in a very disgusted tone of voice, just horribly improper. AG says that the perception issue is something about which he is very concerned. Now asking office of professional responsibility to look into this matter — AG says this is very serious, he's recused himself of oversight in this matter. Hatch just wants to be sure that there is evenhandness about this.
SEN. LEAHY QUESTIONS: I just want to be sure — does the OPR operate outside political interference? AG says yes. Leahy asks whether they are subject to political influence? AG not certain what you are saying. Leahy says that he's thinking about the OPR look into the NSA domestic spying and decisionmaking, and that the investigation was curtailed because the President cut off their access to the information.
NOTE: I need to run and pick up The Peanut from preschool in a little while. I will pause the hearing on my DVR and resume when I get back. Just wanted to give everyone a heads up on this. Mr. ReddHedd is, unfortunately, stuck in a meeting and unless he gets out early, I'll have to go around 4:30 pm ET and will be back as quickly as I can.
Related posts:





Spotlight








Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search

leahy!
Toast!
Zed? Go Christy! Missed it…
Can Christy or Marcy comment (perhaps later) on the subject Leahy is pursuing now in re Fitzgerald’s possession of Rove’s emails?
Thanks AGAIN!
Presidential records transmitted over RNC??
Gonzo can’t answer about the emails. He’s dancing hard.
Leahy:
You were WH counsel. What was the policy with using the email for Rove et al?
What was the policy of Rove using e-mails?
What was your policy of oversight?
He still isn’t answering about the policy.
Please ask did you even get and e-mail for the potus? ever?
Why was Rove using RNC email account for governmental business? Abu saying it was done for legitimate reasons. Not against the Hatch act.
Leahy–here’s teh question you need to ask:
Gonzales: Did Karl Rove turn over the emails relating to Plame in the initial disclosure? You reviewed EVERY one of the files from WH. Did Rove include the RNC emails?
Abu: We were worried about Hatch Act.
L: What was the policy? Could they conduct official business?
A: If there was governmental bus done, they should have kept them.
Gonzo’s saying the stuff should have been preserved!
Leahy: What was policy for using RNC email for official biz?
Abu: User was legit, for political activity.
Leahy: What was policy:
Abu: Non-govt puposes, but if there were gov comms over RNC mail, there should be an effort to preserve.
Leahy Is policy or should be?
Abu: Policy
Gonzo did no audit, only guidance about the emails.
L: 50 people?
A: I don’t know
L: Did you do an audit
A: no
L: Is anyone investigating this?
A: I don’t know
Leahy konws something about these emails. He has something–something good.
Did ABU just say he doesn’t know what an investigation is???
Interesting line:
Pat Leahy–ask him whether he’s aware of such an investigation wrt either the Plame or the Abramoff investigation.
emptywheel @ 10
Someone please get this to Leahy.
Unfuckingbelievable. What is this tools job again? He doesn’t know of an investigation nor has he started one. How can he possibly stay?
Have you made sure they didn’t misuse the computers?
Abu is saying it’s not illegal. He has no position as AG.
Monica at last!
Texas Betsy @ 17
Said he’s not aware of an investigation into the missing email scandle, or the fact that the republic party was using RNC accounts for governmental business.
L: Monica’s role?
A: I don’t know everything. She was senior counselor and WH liaison. Supported Sampson
If there’s an investigation into emails from the White House, where I was counsel, why should I be expected to know about it?
‘That would not be illegal?’ — um, Presidential Records Act? You can’t claim an ‘interest’ in presidential records and disclaim responsibility for preservation of them.
He isn’t aware an investigationis going on into the WH e-mails. He doesn’t know anything.
Oh Monica Goodling role.
He don’t know what whe did in this issue. sUpported Sampson.
Monica supported Sampson. Abu assumes she assisted with the review process. He doesn’t know what the woman does!
epu’d from downstairs
I said this before, I wish the committee would read here at the lake because I am absolutely certain of the following;
abu torture believes he can say these usa’s weren’t fired for “improper reasons” because he believes if a person “works at the pleasure of the president” that by definition means there are NO reasons that are improper
any reason at all will do
I am telling you I know this as a fact, he believes he can swear an oath and even if these attorneys were dismissed for the purpose of obstruction of justice that doesn’t constitute an “improper reason”
I’m telling you, this is what he is doing…sort of like;
“but I had my fingers crossed”
Goodlings role?
IDK everything she did – couselor, liaison, Sampson supporter in review process
C-Span online is a few seconds behind the televised version, so the liveblogging comments from some of us are more current than .Texas Betsy @ 17
Yup.
Now a question re: Goodling. Yes!
Tell us all you can about your role.
L: Have you told us all about the plan?
A: Members of this committee know more than me.
Abu: Committee has more information than I have about the purge! He actually said that!
Hammering him about inconsistent testimony.
Which is the accurate statement?
L: Of all your statements, which is truth?
Abu: Mistakes were made!!
Waht is the accurate story on the dismissals?
Only about 7 versions of the statements
Following @27, he also uses the phrase “I don’t recall” instead of “I can’t recall.” There’s a difference, and he (and his preparers) knows it.
Which of your public statements can we accept as your defining statement? In short, you’re lying.
Leahy asked what was Monica Goodling’s role in the firing of the attorneys.
i wish he would ask what was her role in the hiring of the career attorneys.
Oh, Leahy! First emails, now Monica Goodling.
I feel like we have been waiting for a long time for talks of emails, servers, records, etc. And then Monica Goodling. And now touching on his glaring omissions of certain WH folks in their role of the US Attorney firing. Pathetic AbuG attempt to be coy – again – with his you you more than I know.
Now, a deep Leahy breath.
Which lying sack of bull is your “true” story regarding this little USAs guffaw?
PLEASE ask if he would accept the responsibility by resigning?
Specter going to distraction. Smoke break time.
bold off?
Another question to phone in, firepups:
“Would it be plausible for Karl Rove to contact Kyle Sampson or someone else at the DOJ in order to get a US Attorney added to the list, without your knowing it?”
Follow-up: “But you’d have no way of knowing that wasn’t done, would you? You’ve already said you weren’t monitoring the process.”
Spector wants to talk about Virginia Tech and campus safety. OK, let’s change the subject again!!
VT is another issue… why ask him if he is going to resign?
Republican strategy becoming apparent: Distract w/ peripheral matters. Kyl: Offshore gambling. Now Specter with VT shootings.
Specter following Kyls tactic.
Has nothing to do wrt subject.
With Gonzalez defending his ‘competence’ by treating the US Attorneys scandal as a isolated mistake, we need to hear one of the Senators asking a more general and pointed question re: competence.
Something should be asked along the lines of whether mistakes were also made with respect to management of the Civil Rights division, Monica Goodling being allowed to remain on the payroll after taking the Fifth, the Georgia Thompson case, questions about whether career employees and interviewees were asked politically sensitive questions such as party resignation, possibly in violation of the Hatch Act, etc.,
In other words, we need to recontextualize the scandal and Gonzales’s testimony within a broader pattern of overall incompetence, politicization, and lack of transparency.
During Leahy’s questioning Gonzo’s arms crossed over to the point where he almost hugged himself.
I believe AG said “I don’t recall” more times during Leahy’s line of questioning than at any other time during this hearing.
Spector is doing a Kyl. Time for lunch.
jesus – the R’s have got nothing! This guy is burnt toast.
Isn’t that typical Specteramous? Strong early on then fades under pressure. Makes me sick and he does it every time.
Quick OT.
Pentagon essentially calls Bush a liar. They say the war is bought and paid for through June.
Sorry Commander Chimp.
-GSD
Why is it that Cho’s contacts with these female students via e-mail is referred to as “stalking”? Unless that is that these e-mails were abusive.
CAN YOU DEFINE “STALKING” PLEASE
Why is the republic party acting like Abu is going to survive this?
kdh22 @ 55
Kinda reminds me of the tatics of Kim Jong Il
Arlen — quit pontificating
Oh wow. Chow Sung High. Specter is such a poster boy for solid ethnic relations.
187 people died in Iraq yesterday, not that it matters. They were all brown people. This makes me want to puke.
The Rethugs have gotten word that Abu will resign at teh end of the day (per Coburn’s statement) and are doing everything they can to make the hearings as distracting as possible so that people tune out. The C-span servers have been overwhelmed several times today.
Seriously, Kyl… Internet gambling? Asking to set up a meeting next week? Come on.
Mistakes were made….massacres happen.
-GSD
Still, Spector’s tryin’ to make him answer.
He is just plain stupid!
AZ Matt @ 53
By not asking questions about the subject at hand, the Rs aren’t giving Abu a chance to defend himself. Rs know the game is up. Questions about internet gambling or VT are the same as telling Abu to resign, you’re done, we can’t help you.
How much longer do we have left to grill him?
Is it not just great we have gotten the VT killers e-mail already ,but roves are still not
Forth come howed athunk it?
Jeebus, Abu trying to change the subject!
Should Gonzalez be worried about keeping his job, or should he be worried about staying out of jail? Why do these people, these Gonzaleses, these Toensings, these Sampsons, why are they allowed to lie so blatantly to Congress? Can anybody answer that?
Leahy’s right to let them keep talking off-topic – shows their immense weakness.
Aimish? wow, I expected this crap from Oren but not Arlen or even Kyl. Obfucating. We’ll be hearing about porn soon.
What is Spector doing? Have they all ready thrown Gonzo under the bus? Spector rolled over rather quickly.
Spector’s tryin to look good at home when he visits on the weekend: I spoke with the AG and he told me he’d do what I told him to do.
WOW! Specter on the misuse of nat’l security letters.
Shorter rethug talking point: Gonzales = child idiot.
david baerwald @ 69
Because they can. This has been another addition of simple answers to simple questions.
wooo-hooo! AG’s “moving forward,” the key mantra to loyal bushies, top to bottom.
The R Senators are saving their own hides. They know Abu is toast. So they’re trying to look tough by holding him to account now. Too little too late, jerks!
WHY is this not on CSpan regular TV so that everyone can watch? Why only Cspan3?
LJ/Aquaria @ 41
Any theories on why he’s doing that? Spector talks like Abu still has a job.
Spector, on VATech: signals, signals, signals.
Puhleaze, we need better funding for preventative mental health care, Spector. Not exactly Abu “throw ‘em in Gitmo” Gonzo’s specialty.
tbsa @
55
Won’t survive. Coburn gave him the word.
The rest is for the next AG as to what payback the Repube Sens expect taken care of.
Arlen: NSLs misused. What have you done to see that those problems were fixed?
Abu: Asked subordinates to work with FBI to see what happened
Arlen: We know what happened? What did you do?
Abu: Field audits.
Arlen: NO what did YOU do?
Sounds like they are setting Gonzo up as a shit magnet…..
All the ineptitude and screw-ups for the past few years will now be heaped upon Gonzo’s sagging shoulders.
This guy will be lucky to be a security guard after they are done with him.
-GSD
#76, He doesn’t look good to me!!! And I,m in Erie
Texas Betsy @ 78
It will be replayed on regular CSpan later.
Texas Betsy @ 77 – Because stealing elections is not news according to the “liberal” msm.
Senate Republicans are trying to take back their party from the Bush Junta.
Bush is toast.
Why do these people, these Gonzaleses, these Toensings, these Sampsons, why are they allowed to lie so blatantly to Congress? Can anybody answer that?
Because they can. It’s all high comedy as someone earlier said!
mui @ 79
They could also be doing this to let Abu have a chance to show what he could do, make himself look better. That’s the only thing that makes sense.
jayt @ 69
Yes, trust Schumer, Leahy, Whitehouse, et.al. to keep pounding (figuratively) Abu. No subject change is possible today.
Did the Bushies see this disaster coming today?
Texas Betsy @ 79
c-span has to show house floor (when in session), and c-span2 has to show the senate floor (when in session).
i would expect that this hearing will be show again on c-span later today.
Hell – if we’re gonna go off topic – somebody ask him about torture and renditions!
DiFi up.
The list…
Woodhall Hollow @ 89
Agree wholeheartedly!
Specter – asking about what is done to show probable cause to FISA court – WRT comm coming from outside US
freerepublic, from daily kos
Alberto Gonzales has been dreadful though. Embarassing is more like it.
This is not a jibe at anything other than his speaking and management skills. He just is coming across as incompetent. Does anybody think Ted Olsen would be this bad even without the month of prep time that Gonzo has had? He is embarassing himself and the president, and needs to resign. He is about to take another whacking now.
If he was an articulate conservative, he would survive this easily. He is neither of those things. He has embarassed me.
big O-U-C-H ! ! !
Feinstein up.
The Republican tactic is now to change the subject: internet gambling, Virginia Tech, drapes in the AG’s office?
The Committee waited how long for this interview? What parallel investigations are going on as we speak, with Bogden, Paulose, Lam, Iglesias? Is there no outrage about the missing list of appointees the administration assured us it would send to fill the nineteen USA slots that have not been confirmed (twenty percent)?
What does that tell us about this administration’s respect for the American people?
MelodyMaker @ 71
Well Abu just talked about Obscenity being one of three DoJ top priorities, I think. I think I can now sleep at night./snark
I’ve tried to get on Gabbly, but am having no luck, get the little window and nothing happens. If anyone has a suggestion, thanks.
Is this naptime for Abu? Specter is just reading off a laundry list here, is there a relationship between this and the focus of the hearing??
Texas Betsy @ 78
I think C-Span 1 & 2 are contractually obligated to cover the House and Senate chambers, and can only briefly switch to committee hearings.
At this point, Gonzo has had plenty of opportunity to talk about what he did not participate in. He apparently supervised no one, provided no meaninful input, had no real idea what were the skills and talents (such as they were) or his underlings. His whole defense is that “mistakes were made”, all the while ducking any personal responsibility for those mistakes. Now the stage is set for the key question: “If you were responsible for nothing and provided no meaningful oversight for the DOJ, how can you presume to take any credit for any of the positive outcomes on your watch at DoJ? And why do you think you deserve to collect a paycheck? For running around the country being a cheerleader?”
Over under on how many more days Abu has in office? 50% chance he’s gone within the week. (Hard to estimate how loyal Bush will be – but when the crap really hit the fan, Rumsfeld got ditched pretty promptly)
DiFi up: I don’t understand how the list was compiled. Kyle said he didn’t put people on the list. He was the aggregator. Battle said that he had no input. Mercer said I didn’y understand there was a list.
Anybody feel like Abu is being drilled on other subjects just to try and illustrate some sort of general incompetence ? This way they can downplay whatever dirt the dems uncover on emails, Rove, etc. If Gonzales is incompetent at everything then it’s part of a larger problem rather than a specific controversy.
DiFI: Nobody wanting to take responsibility for picking who to purge. She’s going to ask who made the call.
zennurse @ 100
Firefox worked for me, Safari, not so much.
MelodyMaker @ 71
The “Aimish” also forgave the family of the madman almost immediately. Inviting them to the memorials. Have never seen such a demonstration of forgiveness.
I wish I were “Aimish”
Daniel @ 105
Tomorrow!
My word!
He admits to recalling something.
Feinstein: I don’t understand how list was compiled – 10% of USA staff. Sampson testified that he didn’t put people on list. Sampson was aggregator. Battle said: I had no input. NO one asked for my input. Mercer said: I didn’t understand there was a list. But when I had a concern I told people.
But you said this morning that you didn’t draw up list.
G: I haven’t read transcript of Battle. I recall reasons for five USA dismissal, but not reasons for 2.
DiFi had the doc ready to give him, so he couldn’t delay by saying he couldn’t see/recall it.
DiFi: Did you get the plan at the meeting?
Abu: I don’t remember the meeting
Helen @ 106
Good on ya DiFi!
mui @ 97
I said that because Hatch will be up again. He’s the porn senator, IIRC.
DiFi: don’t just let the question hang there or get distracted — who had the authority to put people on Kyle’s Little List?
GSD @ 82
Oh, I thought it was just Arlen handing out the homework. YOu’re on target, GSD, poor little Abu.
Gonzo: “I don’t recall remembering the reasons.” This guy is the most incompetent liar I’ve ever seen.
Why are they asking him about meetings NEXT WEEK? Surely, he will be back in Texas by then…. Oh yes, this is Washington and he’s a Bushie…
We don’t know who selected the people to put on the list. Who did it? Who?
Who selected the individuals who were on that list?
Texas Betsy @ 78
C-SPAN has strict policy of gavel-to-gavel coverage of House on C-SPAN, Senate on C-SPAN2.
DiFi: Who selected people on list?
Abu: Sampson spoke to DOJ pepole, as I understand.
DiFi: He claimed to be the aggregator.
Abu: blub, blub, blub…
DiFI: Who selected the people on the list?
Abu: I understood that Sampson would speak to senior leadership and come to me with a recommendation
DiFI: Kyle said no – he was the aggregator.
Abu: Sampson more than that.
Listen people, mistakes were made! How many times do I have to tell you that…No one made them, they were self made mistakes!
-Alberto Toastzales
Feinstein ” who came up with the list”
Will Durbin come up again? Drop another bomb?
yeah, —i don’t recall remembering—that’s weak coming from a four year old.
Capital J @
117
Yeah, it’s even funnier when he starts his statements with “What I recall”…”What I viewed”
(being the rest of these statements are cherry-picked information)….
DiFi is killing him on the not knowing who picked the USAs to purge.
F: Admin made decision to persue resignation. NOt any particular person. Who made the decision?
G: Sampson would speak wiht senior leadership, consensus recommendation.
F: Sampson said no. He was aggregator.
G: if that’s what he testified, that’s what he believed. Sampson had been involved w pres personnel at filling roles
F: this has become serious matter. 7 of 8 were involved in public corruption matters. Yet no one knows who put their name on list.
Harry Reid spoke to the media today whilst Bush was holding his Town Hall Meeting in Ohio answering questions and selling the war.
“I believe … that this war is lost, and this surge is not accomplishing anything, as is shown by the extreme violence in Iraq this week,” Reid told journalists.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20…..0419180946
This is ridiculous…
Why can’t they have Sampson & Gonzo testify
together?
Damn, she should have stuck with it. Only way to call bullshit on ‘consensus’.
LiBritto @ 118
Please let him stay in DC! We’ve got enough issues to deal with here as is…..
DiFi says 7 out of the 8 involved in public corruption cases:
Lam (Foggo)
Iglesias (Democrats)
Charlton (Renzi)
Cummins (Blunt)
Who else? What am I missing?
Gotta run out for 10 minutes – keep up the play-by-play, guys, you’re doing great!
DiFi lowers the boom. Goes to Rove and Meiers input–how can anyone say there was no WH influence.
emptywheel @ 137
One in MI or MN?
F: call from Rove, call from Pres, Harriet Miers – given all these conv., how could you say 3 weeks ago that the WH was not involved?
G: I didn’t equate these conv. with “the process”
F: McNulty said reasons were performance. When we looked at EARS report we saw stellar performance reports. Rankings places 7 of them in top 10. I have a hard time w your telling me that you don’t know how these names got on this list.
It is the Immaculate Listing?
Impeach… only way to handle this bullshit
Who were the 8 again?
DiFI: McNulty said it was performance – we asked for reports. We see stellar perf reports. Many in top 10. I have a hard time that you don’t know who suggested to put them on the list.
Abu: You and the committee have interviewed the people involved in teh process. I can’t do that.
Bay State Librul @ 140
ROFLMAO. It just appeared from nowhere!
Channelling my inner Abu Gonzo:
Obviously, like Topsy, the list just growed, I guess.
Abu is starting to stutter. This is incredible.
Difi like a terrier, keeps hammering Abu about how the list got put together.
Get Monica!
EW – Wiconsin?
kdh22 @ 138
Is election fraud claimed in the Washington State Gov election?
DiFi: If I were you I would want to know how they got on the list. Senior leadership? In fact it was young idiological people making the decisios.
its the virgin mary list… unF-ing believeable
G: I’d like to know how this process worked, but out of respect for this investigation, I haven’t asked about it.
F: If i were you, I’d want to know who selected this indiv, and why did they put this indiv on the list. YOu talk of an amorphous senior leadership, people think of grey haired guys, in fact these are young ideological people.
DiFI: “Amorphous senior leadership. Ha. They’re very young and ideological. Doesn’t he want to know who made the decision? Battle said it was shot to the gut. Not told there were problems.
Here’s the deal — it’s very clear.
If Gonzales is certain that they’d reach the same result through a different process, then the process doesn’t matter and the only way that could be true is if the decisions had already been made.
Rove said “fire these guys” and they were fired. There’s no other way that you could get the same result through a different process, if the process has any meaning whatsoever.
Why can’t they have Sampson & Gonzo testify
together?
Five hours of tritones? Are you really ready for that?
Abu: Mistakes were made!!!
Could someone please clear this up? When Bush took office in 2001, did he accept the resignation of all of the Clinton appointed US Attorneys? It has not been made clear that these fired 8 US Attorneys were indeed appointed by Bush.
We keep hearing about how Clinton fired all 93 prosecutors. Did Bush do the same?
Helen @ 141
“clouds” gathering over McNulty?
He is stuttering, is that like Bush blinking
when giving info on Rove/CIA leak
Why does this Committee not laugh Mr. Gonzales’ Sargeant Schultz, “I know nussink” defense into the hallway and demand that the WH toss him out of the DOJ?
carolyn urban & Helen,
Excellent reportage!
Oh jeez, Hatch again.
DiFi: I’d be curious about what my bosses think, not what flak I would face from the public. Moschella told DiFi everything was fine. Lam never contacted about immigration.
BerkeleyMom @ 156
Clintom did this when he took office. Not in the mid stream. This was not done in the past.
F: when Battle called these USAs it was a shot to the gut.
G: re: lam, I believe based upon my review of docs that she knew there were concerns about her work w immigration.
F: we all have concerns. If I were lam I’d be concerned aboaut what my bosses think, not about flak.
2 months before she was fired, she was told her imm numbers were fine. She said she was never contacted about imm.
Clients talk like this all the time at depositions.
I don’t recall, don’t recall, etc.
My favorite was “to the best of my recollection, I can’t recall.”
Cozumel @ 163
Yes thanks very much!
Mischella told me everything was fine withLam’s immigration numbers.
Abu: STUTTERING
Leahy: Di FI time up. Wanna respond?
Abu: Nah
Hatch turn- snack time! He is insufferable. What does Rove have on him?
“So strange”! This is all beyond belief.
This is the AG who stated that Habeus Corpus was NOT guaranteed in the US. So much for his concern about ‘The People’. He only cares about The White House.
He’s toast… I hope
Orin up, cig break!
Hatch is on. I’ll take this time to stuff my hand in the garbage disposal.
-GSD
Abu’s a fucking tool. But no one, and I mean no one, is as much of a stooge as Orin Hatch.
Shorter Gonzalez on Lam:
Lam’s numbers weren’t good, but we didn’t expect anything to change when we fired her because everything is done by the AUSA’s anyway.
Hatch tees up for porn. Or maybe he’ll create his own, with this flagellating business.
Watching during lunch break – Just when I was beginning to think DiFi was fairly worthless….
back to REAL WORTHLESS – Onan Hatchet
Hatch doing another reacharound.
newtonusr @ 147
Right, but she said (if I heard correctly) public corruption, not voter fraud.
That’s part of the reason I raise this point–I think DiFi just intimated there are public corruption cases we don’t know about.
Hatch is not helping Gonzo at all. This is rehabilitation on redirect, and not a very good job.
death by a thousand cuts. it’s truly amazing that he hasn’t just melted into a puddle.
Scott McClellan is to Tony Snow as
Gonzales is to ______________
Leahy basically inviting Abu G to dig himself deeper into the hole by answering DiFi’s last question. That he didn’t says it all.
Now the five minute Orrin Hatch tonguebath.
Shorter Hatch…. The Justice Dept is one well
managed machine
Hatch. How many times do you have to be flagellated over this?
G: this institution is designed to withstand change.
Hatch. Right, so no damage done, right? USA serve at pleasure of pres, right?
USA’s leave, career attorneys continue cases. Uh huh. Sure. Let me break out my wallet for that bridge.
Hatch, don’t start that pleasure thing again, you pervert.
Waht are gun prosecutions?
Hatch: If USA leaves all cases continue?
Abu: We have all indications that that is true.
Hatch: Pleasure of the pres. Blah Blah Blah
Fuck you Hatch
Orrin Hatch in his reprises his role as partisan hack!
Bulimics of the world, rejoice!
fahrender @ 178
Wow, oddly Abu G’s responses to Hatch are cogent. Coincidence?
I think not. Hatch is in this up to his neck He’s desperate to avoid an ethics investigation against him.
cspan 1 showing hearings now…
Proved there was political interference, misleading Congress. Resounding no? Uh, no Hatch. Not true.
ceci @ 171
They both used the service of jeff gukett (gannon) but i’d wonder who was on who’s knee’s
Hatch simply looks like a shill at a hearing where an awful lot of senators who are on the same page.
Only because he is from Utah, where this sells.
Sounds like Hatch is doing some damage control….
Now he’s showing his stripes….
Jerk…
kdh22 @ 138
Mckay in Wash (didn’t buckle to political pressure)?
The guy from Nevada — rehtug governor>
Hatch – no proof of improper interference. Or misleading congress. Some members want to cross lines and ask why some were NOT removed. This is wrong.
We need a Special Prosecutor
Hatch is making a fool of himself, must be pretty lonely for him, just him, Abu and Ol’ Karl.
Hatch auditioning for Abu’s job – and showing his fellow R’s how he would like to be “questioned”….
Hatch is a piece of shit.
-GSD
No disrespect to chunks of feces everywhere.
Hatch is lucky he’s in Utah. He’d be DOA in his next election otherwise.
OPR is an arm of the AG
Hatch for AG! … He seems to know more about the job than Gonzales…
I’m guessing he said “flagellated,” but it sounded like “flatulated.”
twolf1 @ 190
thx!
Hatch: In WaPo column you say the Office of Prof Resp will investigate. What will they do?
Hatch is so political. Talk about asking leading pro-Gonzales questions. It’s sickening.
Is there a report? It will be completed in
two years…
Orrin Hatch was seriously considered as a Supreme Court nominee during the administration of George Herbert Walker Bush.
Wouldn’t that have been something.
Question for Gonzo:
We’ve all heard, ad nauseam, that the US Attorneys serve at the pleasure of the President. Yet you tell us that the decisions were made by a ‘consensus’ of people under you, not by you or the President. What was the President’s input into this decision? If none, how can you justify the ‘pleasure of the President’ excuse?
hamsull @ 184
Possession, possession with intent to sell, comitting a crime by use of a gun. These are local prosecutions accept where there is some element of interstate commerce.
Tithonia @ 205
‘Berto is such a little fart.
Memo to Sen. Hatch:
The USA is supposed to be “professional staff”, too, not just the career prosecutors. They are supposed to know what their people do and how best to do it.
American citizens and taxpayers cannot afford USA’s who are inexperienced religious zealots who know little about the organizations they are meant to run. We’re already paying for one of those to sit in the Oval Office.
Hatch is salivating over Abu’s job. Carrying water for Rove to the bitter end.
The look on Leahy’s face when that came up in a prior hearing was priceless.
Abu finally said something honest: I’ve recused myself of oversight. Full stop. End it there.
Abu: I have recused myself from oversight.
WOW that’s the understatement of the decade!!
zennurse @ 201
That’s a threesome of the worst kind.
Lying is not improper?
Hatch should have recused himself from this committee and investigation because it is his protege who, while allegedly serving Specter, inserted the clause into the Patriot Act that would allow the appointment of USAs without Senate confirmation. It is that protege that is now USA in Utah. That stinks to high heaven.
LiBritto @ 203
Knowledge means nothing. Hatch is not enough of a crony.
Hatch…”Its not your fault, my Boy.”
ceci @ 169
I even prefer switching over to Dr. Phil to suffering through Hatch’s moronic mumblings.
Couldn’t these two guys talk to each other like this after work?
BerkeleyMom @ 157
The 8 (almost 10) fired US Attorneys were all Bush 43 appointees each and every one.
It is a tradition that when a new Administration is elected, the political appointees from the prior Administration resign (this includes the USAs), they aren’t ‘fired.’
If a President wins a second term, the USAs that were appointed during his first term are usually ‘held over.’ While some have resigned or been removed in other Administrations, this is usually VERY rare.
Hatch is full of crap. You might as well sit in Gonzales chair and answer the questions for him.
In the past 25 years…only 5 AJ were fired begining the second term of the President…
So when 8 are fired 2 YEARS INTO THE second term…IT IS A BIG ISSUE!
Hatch: Abu you are a very busy man. You get lots of phone calls.
mc @
89
Yes. I don’t think it’s any accident that there’s House business shoving these hearings from CSPAN over to CSPAN3. Frankly, I wouldn’t have been surprised if there had been some mysterious server problems at the cspan.org and senate.gov websites to keep people from streaming the hearing.
Gonzo is getting hoarse from all the not remembering. I hope they bring him back for another day. Who knows, the memory fairy might visit him. As it stands, I’m amazed he can dress himself.
nrglaw @ 212
A very small portion of caseload, considering what other issues there are.
zennurse @ 199
A triangle jerk?
He is a busy person who works hard and deserves
a raise…
There is no evidence because there is obstruction…
Woodhall Hollow @ 194
McKay was investigating voter fraud. Which I think is different than public corruption.
Nevada, yes, that’s distinctly possible. But that would mean the investigation started before Gibbons became governor–from his time as Congressman. Which would be particularly damning, since it would mean that even a non-indictment wasn’t enough for them.
Also, I think it likely Chiara had a public corruption case–I just don’t know what it is, nor does anyone in MI, AFAIK.
Which is why I’m asking all these questions.
Hatch: Aw its not your fault. You delegated this to other people and trusted them and they let you down. After all, you have a 100,000 people to supervise and yove taken responsibility. Its not as if you weren’t doing the job down there it was just poorly handled and sometimes somethings slip by.
Yuk.
Ed*ard Teller @ 224
I’m about to ask them to get a room.
H: your op ed and your written statement -you’ve asked office of professional responsibiltiy to investigate whether this has been handled improperly. Can you describe this office?
G: office ensure lawyers of dept are doing their job properly.
H: once you request they look into it, its in their hands, not yours, right?
I think we can all agree this was poorly handled. But you delegated this to be handled, yet you take responsibiltiy.
G: that’s right, I’ve done nothing improper. I don’t even understand why you’ve been called up here.
H: you have many many responsiblities.
Bay State Librul @ 203
Hatch’s suggestion is like the fox guarding the henhouse….
Damn….
No Hatch…
Toss that a** clown out…
zennurse @ 198
In the Republican Party? Not too lonely, I suspect.
Listening to Kyl and his Off Shore Gambling rambling was easier than borin’ Orrin.
Fingernails on a chalkboard!
I’m glad I’m not going to recall any of this…
Hatch – you’ve taken a lot of lumps – but you’ve done GREAT.
Barf bag, please. Orrin Hatch was disgusting.
Hatch is proposing to call this whole thing ‘badly handled’ and be done with it.
Pentimenti @ 220
Hatch’s a conflict sandwich, with more that “ties” to Kyle Sampson…
LJ/Aquaria @ 174
My memory may not be serving me well, but I seem to recall that one of his staffers wound up doing porn. Has to be more than 10 years ago. Maybe thats why he takes such an interest in it.
BOOYHA!!!
Leahy just busted Gonzales on the OPR being prevented from investigating NSA wiretaps–as political influence.
Brilliant work!
Leahy – you suggest the Office of Professional Responsiblity operates outside the DOJ? Are they ever subjected to political influence?
G: i don’t understand whatyou mean by political influence.
L: like when they were asked to look into Warrentless wiretapping and they were told to look no further.
Leahy: Warrentless wiretapping: OPR were told to not go any further.
Abu: Pres said no
Leahy: So they don’t operate without political influence, right?
Leahy established that OPR isn’t truly independent.
Cardin up.
This hearing is going to beat the hell out of Ed Gillespie’s reputation as Mr. Confirmation
JGabriel @
237
Nor Utah, or up here in Alaska, for that matter.
F-u Hatch,,, Get roves E-mails then lets talk f-ing ass****e
Cardin: What does Monica know?
Abu: I don’t know
Hatch is lying.
If I remember my DoJ organization chart, the USAs are three levels away from the AG (through the Deputy AG, the Director of the Executive Office of the US Attorneys, and then the USAs). It’s highly likely, given the visibility and importance of their roles, that performance reviews of the USAs would have to be approved by the AG.
There should be a paper trail on this part of the scandal a mile wide and deep. Where is it?
Cardin: Monica Goodling’s role. What was it?
sen. hatch:
“. . .with more than 100,000 employees,
some times things slip up, right?. . .”
right. eight top prosecutors
are dismissed WITHOUT using the
standard review procedure — and the
president and rove were consulted on it.
but gonzo is in the clear. . .
riiiiiiiiiight.
“…if you “hang” a USA once in a while to discourage the conduct of all the others, isn’t that improper? AG goes back to the technical issue on Presidential removal prerogative.” Huh? Then did the Prez, without input from the DoJ, and acting on his own, originate the plan to make removals and order you to perform the removals?
Gonzo: Monica who?
Aha…Monica…. What’s up with her?
Abu: Monica? SUTTERING. She was involved with dealing with WH. But she is not the person I primarily relied on.
Gonzo said he didn’t know what Goodling did earlier. Now he knows. Imagine that!
scory @ 253
Completely agree. UNlikely that he would not.
Gonzales will live to regret this testimony. Goodling was much more central in this process–I suspect that she’s going to end up saying that she was much more involved in this.
nrglaw @ 250
Explain please.
Gonzales should star in “Memento 2.”
L: didn’t want to leave the impression they operate outside of political influence.
Cardin: re Goodling. What do you think she might be able to contribute?
G: After the fact, I’m aware she was involved with prep of testimony, but WRT her role, she was involved in communicating with WH and certain indivs. She was not a person I was relying primarily on – I relied primarily on deputy AG.
Abu: All I know is what I’ve read about Monica
nrglaw @
249
Gillespies ad: Hire me for $500 an hour and your witness can be seen speaking gibberish, in tongues and in circles in 2 weeks or less.
-GSD
What is it that Goodling is hiding? I’ve been out of the loop on her role, except knowing that she was the lieison between the AG and the WH. Do we think that means Rove specifically?
Cardin trying to destroy the “voter fraud” canard.
Cardin establishing priorities voter fraud v. voter intimidation.
Cardin – re voter intimidation, votor fraud. In Maryland, voters came out to vote, and lines were so long they did not vote. I say that because there seems to be growing activities of voter intimidation affecting minorities around country.
You indicated lack of activity on voter fraud was a r eason for USA firings, but I didnt’ see anything about Voter intimidation.
Cardin – Seems to be growing activities os voter intimidation to affect minorities. Why hasn’t DOJ investigated?
Abu: I grew up in a poor neighborhood.
FYI, Prince George’s County population is heavily African-American.
And as I noted elsewhere, judging from your comments, C-Span online is obviously quite a bit (10 seconds?) behind the TV broadcast.
eCAHNomics @ 263
Gillespie is former RNC chairman. He has, of late, “shepherded” high profile confirmations, including Roberts and Alito. He was assigned to Gonzalez’s prep for this hearing.
EW – See if this helps any.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/3/22/5326/71374
He lived in Houston. Humble, to be exact. A small town…but right next to Houston. Try again, Gonzo.
Cardin: Voter fraud is small compared to those who are eligible to vote who are unable to.
Voter fraud miniscule compared to those eligible to vote who don’t get to. Why no investigation of that?
I have been withholding all my one liners for the sake of the servers all morning, but I find all this crap just totally unbelievable. This is from one of the big players in the government of the United States.
How in the heck did we get to this point where we have total morons, incompetents, and ideologues in the highest positions of power?
Christ in a bottle…..
Abu:
“Voter fraud means your stealing someone’s vote.”
Yet another example of talking point as perjury.
He’s setting a record that will never be equalled.
Oh dear: Cardin is going after some known Republican tactics, like flyers with the wrong date to vote.
LJ/Aquaria @ 234
At Guantanamo
Voting fraud? Think Florida, 2000. The AG says “It’s important to enforce the law”.
10 min break.
G: grew up poor neighborhood, so this is important to me. Be sensitive not to intimidate people.
Cardin – I hope you’ll look at Obama bill. Voter fraud is miniscule compared to eligible voters who are unable to cast votes: non working voter machines, blatently wrong literature intimidating voters, wrong election days, serious effect on minority participation in voting. So if you’re looking at USA’s work on voting, we look at this – so every vote counts in this country.
Durbin Durbin!
Abu seems aware that Cardin met with the Civil Rights Division. He knows something about his job. 10 minute break.
GO @
225
It’s as if Gonzo’s a rag doll. Hatch is under orders from Rove to save the rag doll if he can, or to destroy it in such a way as to deflect attention from BushCo.
Abu: I grew up in a poor neighborhood.
So the F**k what! You don’t live in a poor neighborhood anymore and you’ve obviously forgotten where you came from. Your not for the people your against them. So don’t give me that “I lived in a poor neighborhood” crap. He’s trying to pull the J.lo card, “Don’t be fool by the rocks that I got, I’m still, I’m still Al from the block!”
Recess time. Time to play pin the tail on the elephant?
FYI- Dolittle “resigned” from Appropriations Cmt.
little fireworks everywhere
Oklahoma kiddo @ 284
That is hilarious….
How can Gonzales say that with a straight face?….
Oklahoma kiddo @ 283
I think that election fraud
If Bush was capable of feeling embarrassed, being the patron of Gonzo should provide a lifetime’s worth.
kdh22 @ 274
Nope, still doesn’t answer it. Like I said, I fully expect Chiara is one of those 7, and there was a Green investigation that may be why she was fired.
But the Heffelfinger stuff is different–he’s not one of the 8. So we’ve still got:
Lam (Foggo)
Cummins (Blunt)
Iglesias (Dems)
Bogden (maybe Gibbons?)
Charlton (Renzia)
Chiara (something, could be Green)
We’re still missing one, most likely McKay.
From McClatchy:
Link
Goodling’s testimony is the only chance of breaking through this firewall, I think.
Feinstein’s questioning revealed that the “agreed upon” strategy is for everyone to go up there and testify that they don’t have a clue how any of the names got on the list.
When it is clear to anyone with half a brain that Rove was the person who put every single one there, via Goodling.
Someone please elaborate (after these proceeding adjourn for the day) on the significance of the OPR not following-up on an NSA issue?
Thanks. OMG. Gonzo sounds like he’s had no prep at all. Geez, if I’d been prepping him I’d have made up a 1-2 sentence summary for why each of the 7 were fired, as takeaways for the evening news & tomorrow’s MSM. Gonzo couldn’t explain it even when asked by a R. And that’s just for starters.
Gonzo does Pathos. ugh. He’s so pitiful. I could almost feel sorry for him. Almost.
carolyn urban @ 265
Oh. So that’s how he communicated with staff “during the investigaton.”
scory @ 254
I said this last month — I work for the Federal government and each department has performance evaluations 3 times a year, and the forms are filled out each time. Your boss and their boss have sign off on them, every time they’re reviewed.
Even if AGAG hasn’t seen those performance evaluations, copies will be on file with DOJ in Washington. He could have reviewed them at any time, all he had to do was send someone down to the DOJ Personnel office to get them (or have them brought to his office).
Gonzo’s hypocrisy on ‘voter fraud’ is breathtaking.
Asshole.
I want to ask this question again of those in the know. A professor from Mt. Holyoke was on Pacifica today discussing the hearing. He mentioned that one of the issues not brought up was the Republican Prosecutor who was let go of in Guam (that this guy was investigating or had investigated Abramoff’s connections there). He also indicated that Bush had initiated this process.
Would it be in line to bring this up in this hearing?
radiofreewill @ 301
just a ten min break
eCAHNomics @ 299
It’s not that he’s unprepared. Gonzo is spectacularly unqualified to be AG. His face should grace the Republic Rubber Stamps.
GO @ 290
Good one…
You make me laugh….
(((((((((((((zennurse)))))))))))))
kathleen @ 305
Was Ashcroft still AG when they fired the Guam USA?
Is this live again, Specter, or rerun of earlier stuff?
Break time FYI
The house has passed DC Voting and $ to pay for it. Deal includes an extra seat for…….Utah!
I wish c-span would turn the cameras around so we could see the public
radiofreewill @ 300
IIRC – the day after Abu found out that he would be a traget of the probe, Bush shut it down by denying the investigators the proper security clearances.
Rerun for the 10-min break
Helen @ 313
OPR was told to stay the hell out of it…
New thread
new thread
Re Gonzo’s preparation: He has been treading on thin ice perjury-wise all day. All they could do was drill the Libby defense into him. So they fired every possible question they could concieve of at him, over the last two weeks, and made him practice various permutations of “I don’t recall.”
I swear that he looked like he was going to break into tears due to the pressure several times today–esp when the rethugs were hammering away at him.
My guess is that the White House let him know several weeks ago that it would be all right by them if he resigned…but would “leave it up ot him.” Bush is loyal to his little bro in that way. Or sadistic.
Jacqrat @ 309
Hey, there, thanks, Jacqrat!
Badwater @ 307
Being unqualified to be AG & not being able to memorize 14 sentences to answer the obvious Q are 2 entirely different matters.
Just switched to cnn. Wolf Blitzer says ‘….senators are outraged by the way the USA firings were handled’ Do you notice how this talking point has stuck? I’m not outraged at how it was handled. I’m outraged that the US attys were being used to influence elections. I’m outraged that Dems were investigated 8 times more than repubs. I’m outraged that we turn down Harvard grads for pat robertson robots. There’s a lot here that causes outrage. The way it was handled is the least of it.
Trippi joins Edwards campaign…
Trippi joins Edwards campaign, links at HuffPo and TPM
hi, zennurse, what a welcome surprise!!
emptywheel @ 295
what about the attorney that left to make the big bucks?
eCAHNomics @ 299
One of the e-mails uncovered in the document dump explained that the DoJ’s strategy would be to distract from the *reasons* the prosecutors were fired by getting the Senate to focus on the *process* by which they were fired.
So that’s the reason Gonzo has no prepared statements as to why each of the USA’s was asked to resign: it would undercut the strategy. They really don’t want to answer that question, because any anwsers will lead to either more questions (along with the introduction of evidence contradicting those answers), or perjury charges.
So instead, Gonzo’s strategy is to respond to all questions regarding the *reasons* for the firings by changing the subject to *how* they were fired and admitting ‘mistakes were made’.
Woodhall Hollow @ 298
Concur. We need her testimony
kathleen @ 304
This all came out during the Indian Hearings and the reporting on Abramoff. Should be in the 750,000 pages about to be released. Its obvious that since Bush came into office, Justice has been perverting the law in every possible way they could find.
Sounds to me like Gonzo’s had a lot of prep, but is severely limited as to what he can actually say without incriminating someone. That’s why he keeps falling back on, “I take full responsibility” (yet he continually mentions consensus decisions and pushes the blame on underlings) and fails to recall any substantive details.
I was grabbing a late lunch in a fast food restaurant just as the hearing was scheduled to resume. I was listening to Pacifica on headphones while the restaurant audio system blared out some other local FM station. The music that happened to be playing just as they annouced Gonzo was coming back into the room? “You Had a Bad Day.” It’s really painful when you snort diet coke up your nose.
Gumby has more legal expertise and managerial ability than Alberto.
Schumer:
Step down!
Uh oh, Gonzo gets defensive.
Schumer corrects Mr. G. on the burdens of proof.
Shorter Gonzo: “If I make you all think I’m an incompetent rube at least I’m not confirming that I, Karl Rove and the Prez repeatedly committed obstruction of justice.”
Even shorter Gonzo: “Karl and Bush must be protected at all costs.”
And the Repub senators are complicit in deflecting everything off the WH and onto Gonzo.