Monica sings?

Justice!

Christy!

Actually I’d like to see Rove one day soon being offered immunity. For obvious reasons.

What happens if she doesn’t speak truth?

good work… give the grunts immunity in exchange for ratting out the big guys… I love it!

Goodling’s hot, too…

I’d rather have questioned her before the immunity grant and force her to either answer questions, or take the fifth. (How can there be NO wrongdoing if some feel that their truthful testimony would implicate them in a crime?)

Loo Hoo @ 5

What happens if she doesn’t speak truth?

yeah, what if we just get more Sampson and Gonzales?

Oklahoma kiddo @
4

Actually I’d like to see Rove one day soon being offered immunity. For obvious reasons.

NO! That’s what kept Ollie North from going to prison for his lies and other crimes during Iran/Contra. Rover needs to be held to account but in the courts. Let the underlings be given immunity and use their testimony to put Rover down.

christy, if you could, as information becomes available, describe what steps are being taken to insure this immunity WON’T conflict with any other investigations that might bring charges.

that is, i don’t want a replay of iran-contra.

much obliged, ma’am. thankee.

Elliott @ 8

Loo Hoo @ 5

What happens if she doesn’t speak truth?

yeah, what if we just get more Sampson and Gonzales?

If she commits perjury after immunity all bets are off and she goes to jail is my understanding. But IANAL and may be an idiot.

Loo Hoo @
5

What happens if she doesn’t speak truth?

Does her immunity cover the period before testimony? If she lies under oath is that included in the immunity? IANAL, so I have lots of questions.

ATTENTION…New GOPer speak:

“ENEMY of MODERATION”
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/25/bush-bombs/

Let’s see where it pops up next. Any bets?

Chris Shays, another Republican liar. And he’s considered moderate.

dakine01 @ 9

Oklahoma kiddo @
4

Actually I’d like to see Rove one day soon being offered immunity. For obvious reasons.

NO! That’s what kept Ollie North from going to prison for his lies and other crimes during Iran/Contra. Rover needs to be held to account but in the courts. Let the underlings be given immunity and use their testimony to put Rover down.

Rover’s problems will be pardoned away one day soon.

People of Connecticut, dump Shays!

Waxman building up to dismissing GOP claims that the Condi subpoena is frivolous.

Waxman says 911 event is too important to our history not to hear from Condi.

Shays (R) is addressing the ‘go to war’ vote, saying everyone was on-board, including our allies. Everyone was wrong, he’s saying. WE all made this decision…

(I hope Waxman shreds this blatant dodge from BushCo responsibility for lying us into War.)

Shay’s getting strident on the Condi subpoena!

W.T.F?????

dakine01 @ 11

If she commits perjury after immunity all bets are off and she goes to jail is my understanding. But IANAL and may be an idiot.

I think you’re right – about the perjury, not about being an idiot.

Badwater @
15

dakine01 @ 9

Oklahoma kiddo @
4

Actually I’d like to see Rove one day soon being offered immunity. For obvious reasons.

NO! That’s what kept Ollie North from going to prison for his lies and other crimes during Iran/Contra. Rover needs to be held to account but in the courts. Let the underlings be given immunity and use their testimony to put Rover down.

Rover’s problems will be pardoned away one day soon.

Then if Rover is pardoned, THEN give him immunity and put him under oath. He seems to be incapable of telling truth anyway and a perjury charge and conviciton works.

[nested quotes watch we must — mod]

Holy crap. Shays is un-be-liev-a-ble.

I don’t think this is going to be such a big deal. As with the village in “100 Years of Solitude”, there appears to be an epidemic of progressive amnesia at the Justice Department. We can expect to hear many, many “I don’t recalls” out of Ms. Goodling. She’ll have a very good memory about what she herself did (so that her acts are covered by immunity), but remember little, if anything, about what Rove said or did. Monica will smirk, take her immunity to the bank, and give them nothing.

Shays, The American people are indeed fed up but it’s with your party and your divine Leader. These Republicans are backed into a corner and they are scared and desperate.

dakine01 @ 9

Oklahoma kiddo @
4

Actually I’d like to see Rove one day soon being offered immunity. For obvious reasons.

NO! That’s what kept Ollie North from going to prison for his lies and other crimes during Iran/Contra. Rover needs to be held to account but in the courts. Let the underlings be given immunity and use their testimony to put Rover down.

Well… what you say is true and I understand and sympathize with what you’re telling me. And I dislike Rove with a powerful intensity. But I’m more interested in ensuring that the Bush political dynasty never rises from the ashes. ;0)

They will go to the mat for Condi. If she is under oath, she will have to perjur herself or be a huge cog in bringing the entire operation down. They cannot let this subpoena go through. IMO

Wax: This admin has a LOT of peole who don’t recall things. Heard from Lurita, Heard it from Condi and AGAG. Seems to be all purpose answer.

I want to know what they knew as they scared American people with mushroom clouds.

Tell it Henry.

Waxman: This administration has a lot of people that don’t recall things. I guess that’s the all purpose thing to say when you’re under oath!
They scared the American people into thinking they knew what they we’re talking about….I’m only asking for a hearing. Awesome!!!!!!!

On topic: I loved Dakine01’s phrase “put Rover down” in #9 above… :)

Here Rover… Heeeere good ol’ Rover… got a Special Nummy dog-yummy for ya…

OT, optional unofficial FDL map… Check out this earlier FDL post.

I’m LOVING Watson!

Oklahoma Kiddo says:

Well… what you say is true and I understand and sympathize with what you’re telling me. And I dislike Rove with a powerful intensity. But I’m more interested in ensuring that the Bush political dynasty never rises from the ashes. ;0)

Agreed. And the best way is to get as many of them into jail as possible. Ford’s pardon of Nixon stopped everything H2Ogate in its tracks which allowed many of these thugs to keep coming back and making mishief.

terstimony?

Shays (R) is making the ‘no witch hunts’ argument from the minority position – after unilaterally dictating to the Dems as the majority for six years.

Davis (R) justifying ‘asked and answered’ objection by the Repubs. (He’s using a prop – a large blow-up of Rice’s prior statement/testimony.)

Watson (D) says let’s get to the vote – “I want to hear from the Secretary on this.”

Waxman says we’ve heard too much ‘I don’t recall’ from the GOP – the same people who told us that there would be a ‘mushroom cloud smoking gun’ now can’t recall their actions in support of those statements.

Watson calls for vote. Waxman says there will be a roll call vote.

Repubs very desparately trying to stall.

repubs defy subpoenas; “too busy, too partisan to be bothered.” let’s have the dems keep hammering THAT meme for 2 years.

Well.. perhaps she will choose to honor her Regents University law degree by simply sitting in jail, Judy Miller-style

So because she has immunity, she can’t claim 5th Amend? Is that right?

vote for gods’ sake!

S.O.S. from MA @ 30

On topic: I loved Dakine01’s phrase “put Rover down” in #9 above… :)

Here Rover… Heeeere good ol’ Rover… got a Special Nummy dog-yummy for ya…

OT, optional unofficial FDL map… Check out this earlier FDL post.

Thanks! It was a purposeful choice of words.

No Mr Issa, the question is why she lied to the american public to engage us in an illegal war.

Waxman’s righteous outrage is long overdue and liberating. I so hope some of this gets coverage. (Is KO back?)

This may be the first time we’ve heard a full discussion about the 16 words and the argument that Rice & the administration had evidence rejecting the Niger claim before she went around making those claims of mushroom clouds.

This is a big deal.

Georgesimian @ 37

So because she has immunity, she can’t claim 5th Amend? Is that right?

I presume she could still refuse to testify and go to jail for it.. and think she’s doing her beluved president a great service

How do these freaking liars look themselves in the mirror? I guess it’s like prostituting yourself, the first itme is hard but it get’s easier, IMHO

including how limited this immunity grant sought will be and whether it will be use or otherwise.

Thank you Christy. You’ve made this old lawyer very happy.

Waxman can get the subpoenas without a vote…should he care to, right?

Some of the folks locked down in the jobs versus clean enviroment issue. Many of us tried like hell to get a national spotlight on Cheshire Ohio. Sometimes it works and sometimes it does not!

Check out what happenned in Cheshire Ohio just a few years ago!

http://www.forgottenoh.com/Cheshire/cheshire.html

Georgesimian @ 37

So because she has immunity, she can’t claim 5th Amend? Is that right?

Yeah, that’s the point.

Georgesimian @ 37

So because she has immunity, she can’t claim 5th Amend? Is that right?

IANAL but that is my understanding. She may still try to obfuscate and talk around but I’m thinking there are probably some ex-prosecutors on House Judiciary as well as on Senate.

Georgesimian @ 37

So because she has immunity, she can’t claim 5th Amend? Is that right?

But, can she still claim that she doesn’t recall???

dakine01 @ 21dakine01 @ 21

Then if Rover is pardoned, THEN give him immunity and put him under oath. He seems to be incapable of telling truth anyway and a perjury charge and conviciton works.

I hope things reach that point quickly.

kaleidescope@23–
I don’t think Goodling can do that — she was the liaison between DOJ and Rove’s shop. If she lies about what Rove said or told her to do, she commits perjury and loses her immunity. IANAL, but IMHO, that’s why she threatened to take the 5th in the first place, to obtain immunity so she wouldn’t have to lie to avoid being indicted.

I could never be a congressperson. I would never be able to supress my desire to get up and thunk these dips in the back of the head.

stupid q from a nonlawyer. if goodling does time, i know she loses her law license.

but she has taken the fifth, and has been granted immunity. what happens then to her law license?

mayan @ 45

Waxman can get the subpoenas without a vote…should he care to, right?

Let the Republics babble on and make fools of themselves.

Oh, JEEBUS! Now Souder brings Sandy Berger back up but gets slapped down.

Once Rove his gone, he will not arise. The Bush family has the power, the money, the ‘chits’, the influence and world wide connections to come back to haunt us.

Waxman is calling the votes.

The typo at the top of this post regarding Goodling’s possible JC questioning is probably apt: “terstimony.” Don’t spend too much time tuning the guitar for her song.

OT–

Bushism of the Day

By Jacob Weisberg

Posted Tuesday, April 24, 2007, at 4:46 PM ET

“My job is a job to make decisions. I’m a decision—if the job description were, what do you do—it’s decision maker.”—Tipp City, Ohio, April 19, 2007

You can also watch the video here. (The Bushism is at 6:03.)

Solai @ 49

Georgesimian @ 37

So because she has immunity, she can’t claim 5th Amend? Is that right?

But, can she still claim that she doesn’t recall???

Yeah, “I don’t recall” is always good. It’s hard to prove what someone can recall.

valletta @ 29

Waxman: This administration has a lot of people that don’t recall things. I guess that’s the all purpose thing to say when you’re under oath!
They scared the American people into thinking they knew what they we’re talking about….I’m only asking for a hearing. Awesome!!!!!!!

Waxman is our Sam Ervin …..

steve @ 33

terstimony?

Oh yeah. Prolly.

Oklahoma kiddo @ 55

Once Rove his gone, he will not arise.

tell that to lee atwater.

RNC vote pending: clerk calling the roll.

Loo Hoo @
5

What happens if she doesn’t speak truth?

Immunity doesn’t cover perjury…

Biodun @ 58

OT–

Bushism of the Day

By Jacob Weisberg

Posted Tuesday, April 24, 2007, at 4:46 PM ET

“My job is a job to make decisions. I’m a decision—if the job description were, what do you do—it’s decision maker.”—Tipp City, Ohio, April 19, 2007

You can also watch the video here. (The Bushism is at 6:03.)

Uhhhhhh…thanks, but no thanks. Heard it about 5 times Monday??? That was quite enough!

my dream~Goodling isn’t much of a lawyer-based on her creditentials only-maybe she didn’t really understand,until very recently, just how illegal what she was doing was…

maybe her consciene will kick in…

like I said- my dream

Both Republic amendments voted down by voice vote.

Roll call vote on first subpoena going now. All Dems are voting Aye

Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha!!!!!!!
Go get ‘em Henry-
Supoena’s for all my…?

I’d like to see someone trot out to Monica with a Bible and have her put her hand on it to swear in. Either it will freak her out enough to stay honest…or, if she lies anyway (I’m not so certain she won’t), then I’ll at least get one more confirmation of the hypocrisy of the fundies.

steve @
33

terstimony?

Isn’t that a concise sworn statement? :)

My dog Jake wants Henry Waxman nominated of next year
Time Magazine person of the year award. I told him that there is
a trio out there for the award Leahy, Conyers and Waxman.
Perhaps we can add Kerry to it when he starts oversight hearings
on the regulatory agencies. Jake tells me that Lieberman ought to
have a dead chicken wrapped around his neck for his refusal to
hold oversight hearings on Katrina disaster. Dogs have to wear a
dead chicken around their neck as negative conditioning for their act
of killing of chickens.

Repubs voting no
Motion will carry

LQ- I call them hypocristians!

Sam @ 71

My dog Jake wants Henry Waxman nominated of next year
Time Magazine person of the year award. I told him that there is
a trio out there for the award Leahy, Conyers and Waxman.
Perhaps we can add Kerry to it when he starts oversight hearings
on the regulatory agencies. Jake tells me that Lieberman ought to
have a dead chicken wrapped around his neck for his refusal to
hold oversight hearings on Katrina disaster. Dogs have to wear a
dead chicken around their neck as negative conditioning for their act
of killing of chickens.

Sam, I like your dog Jake.

Oklahoma kiddo @ 55

Once Rove his gone, he will not arise. The Bush family has the power, the money, the ‘chits’, the influence and world wide connections to come back to haunt us.

Rove will arise…on the Fox Noise Channel.

Bluetoe @ 14

Chris Shays, another Republican liar. And he’s considered moderate.

Yesterday Shays basically blamed Jessica Lynch for the level of spin about her injuries. What a slime bucket!

Waxman committee first RNC subpoena vote:

20 ayes
8 nays

motion is agreed to

Solai @ 49

Georgesimian @ 37

So because she has immunity, she can’t claim 5th Amend? Is that right?

But, can she still claim that she doesn’t recall???

She can try, but they’ve probably got the goods on her. It’s pretty damning to answer certain questions with an “I don’t recall”:

“Ms Goodling, did you rob First National Bank on January 24, 2007?”

See? It doesn’t really work. Especially if the follow-up question is something along the lines of, “Will this video surveillance tape help refresh your memory?” That’s how much trouble Monica is in.

20 ayes- 8 nos, 1st subpoena agreed to.

How many Repugs didn’t attend the committee meeting?

20 ayes
8 neys

Issa, blech.

ruffian @ 66

my dream~Goodling isn’t much of a lawyer-based on her creditentials only-maybe she didn’t really understand,until very recently, just how illegal what she was doing was…

maybe her consciene will kick in…

like I said- my dream

She’s a believer. I’m sure that she thinks she was doing ‘God’s work’. BushCo. has taken advantage of these people. They found weak-minded people and brain-washed them. Or, so it seems.

where can I link to the hearing?

Mica amendment on limiting RNC PowerPoint subpoena to only gsa.

Nos have it, amendment not accepted.

2nd subpoena voice vote- ayes have it

Issa loses again!!!!! hahahahahah!!!!

John Dean was stating in a recent Findlaw posting that even transactional immunity can make it hard to pursue charges, that in practice it may not be much different than full immunity. Here’s to hoping Monica Goodfling spills a few beans and can still be prosecuted for violations of other than the Hatch act- whose only penalty is firing.

Speaking of Dean, just started reading Conservatives Without Conscience- great book, explains the complete nuttiness of the Reich wing. Tempted to buy copies for all repubs I know, and many dems.

Waxman committee voting now on Rice

Roll call vote.

“Enemy of Moderation” is oxymoronic. Those three words lack the moderation supposedly so important.

Here, Kathleen: http://oversight.house.gov/story.asp?ID=1262

Here we go … Condi subpoena

dmg @ 62

Oklahoma kiddo @ 55

Once Rove his gone, he will not arise.

tell that to lee atwater.

Actually I’m talking about the Bush family political dynasty. There will always be Rove’s and Atwaters. At least Atwater finally saw the light. The impression is diluting the Bush family influence is the ‘greater good’.

Tap Duncan @ 81

20 ayes
8 neys

will they replay this hearing?

kathleen @ 84

where can I link to the hearing?

C-Span 3 on cspan.com

Repubs saying Condi needed for Syrian talks.

Bolden (R) – sweating profusely – dancing around and claiming that this subpoena is ‘over the top.’ Bolden now giving ‘hearsay’ – someone should call him on that – now yelling – saying nothing is ever 100% in intelligence.

Vote coming by Waxman!

Repubs crying like babies, Davis’ voice going up an octave. Back on wanting
Sandy Berger…Waxman slams it down.

Here’s the vote!

Mica amendment – first vote – appeal chairman’s decision to drop the Mica amendment. no’s have it – Mica gone.

Mica amendment – second vote – overturn germainess ruling – no’s have it – Mica #2 gone.

RNC Subpoena for documents coming up.

Vote Aye 20 Nay 8

First Subpoena approved

Second Proposed Subpoena – RNC E-mails

Issa amendment to limit scope – Nays have it.

Second Subpoena vote – voice vote – Ayes have it

Third Subpoena – Rice Subpoena by roll call

more…

While I’m not happy about granting any of them immunity from anything, I’ll take Goodling if it’s the only way to get up the ladder. But, blast-it, I want results!!

And OT, but I had a minor revelation last night. I don’t watch much on Fox network these days, just House and the occasional episode of Bones. I watched 24 the first two years, until their ‘the ends justify the means’ activity, the Bush regime’s over-reaching, and Fox’s increasing partisan-ship soured me on it.

Anyway, I’m sitting there watching House last night, and we’re talking politics during the ads and I’m b*tching about Rove’s ‘the ends justify the means’ and my daughter points to the tv and says, “Well, that’s the same thing, isn’t it?” I said, “Hunh?”, and she pointing to the returning-from-commercial-House and said, “Well, that’s what they do there, don’t they? The ends justify the means.” I was completely floored, because it *is* exactly what Rove does and 24 portrays. And I don’t think I’m ever going to look at House in exactly the same way ever again …

Zee @ 52

I could never be a congressperson. I would never be able to supress my desire to get up and thunk these dips in the back of the head.

you could do both. it’s the new Emily Post…..

kathleen @ 84

where can I link to the hearing?

http://oversight.house.gov/story.asp?ID=1262

Idiot Issa didn’t even realize his amendment had been ruled germaine – San Diego should be so proud!

Kathleen, you got me, probably not because it makes the repugs look bad

Rice Subpoena vote – it looks like party line – should be a good subpoena.

Final count coming…

Zee @ 98

kathleen @ 84

where can I link to the hearing?

http://oversight.house.gov/story.asp?ID=1262

Thanks folks

Waxman roll call vote on Rice subpoena

Ayes 21
Nays 10

The motion carries and they are adjourned.

Condi subpoena roll call – Dems all Aye again

Repubs voting no again

21 ayes- 10 nos

Adjourned

General note: no reference to violence against public officials or otherwise. Period. Everyone knows this, but I’m saying it again, because I don’t want to get a call from the Secret Service about veiled threatening language and a request for blog records. Hope that was clear enough for everyone.

21 ayes
10 neys
Adjuorned

Your too fast Egregious!
and absolutely right:)
Whoo HEEEEE!
This is good television

Rice Subpoena final vote tally:

21 Yays 10 Nays

Condi’s called on the carpet!

Oklahoma kiddo @ 92

dmg @ 62

Oklahoma kiddo @ 55

Once Rove his gone, he will not arise.

tell that to lee atwater.

Actually I’m talking about the Bush family political dynasty. There will always be Rove’s and Atwaters. At least Atwater finally saw the light. The impression is diluting the Bush family influence is the ‘greater good’.

Yeah, they call it a deathbed conversion.

[nested quotes watch we must-mod]

Given the choice between getting Rove and getting the Bush political fiefedom buried, I will prefer the later.

It’s been a good day. Now I can go get some work done.

(Oversight is SOOOOOO addictive!)

Kudos to radiofreewill for outstanding liveblogging this morning.

Biodun @ 58

OT–

Bushism of the Day

By Jacob Weisberg

Posted Tuesday, April 24, 2007, at 4:46 PM ET

“My job is a job to make decisions. I’m a decision—if the job description were, what do you do—it’s decision maker.”—Tipp City, Ohio, April 19, 2007

You can also watch the video here. (The Bushism is at 6:03.)

his faddah shoulda gotta phone call ……

From Wikipedia:

Use immunity

(snip)

Use immunity only prevents the prosecution from using the witness’ own testimony against them. However, should the prosecutor acquire evidence substantiating the supposed crime — independent of the witness’s testimony — the witness may then be prosecuted for same.
(my emphasis)

Christy Hardin Smith @ 105

General note: no reference to violence against public officials or otherwise. Period. Everyone knows this, but I’m saying it again, because I don’t want to get a call from the Secret Service about veiled threatening language and a request for blog records. Hope that was clear enough for everyone.

Oops if that was me, sorry!

Christy Hardin Smith @ 105

General note: no reference to violence against public officials or otherwise. Period. Everyone knows this, but I’m saying it again, because I don’t want to get a call from the Secret Service about veiled threatening language and a request for blog records. Hope that was clear enough for everyone.

VERY GOOD ADVICE CHRISTY, WELL TAKEN

Perhaps we shall just have to disagree. ;0)

kathleen @ 76

Bluetoe @ 14

Chris Shays, another Republican liar. And he’s considered moderate.

Yesterday Shays basically blamed Jessica Lynch for the level of spin about her injuries. What a slime bucket!

Christy is this acceptable?

My questions to Goodling… follow Schumers line

1. Were hiring of employees of the DOJ done using a political litmus test?
2. Were Judges reviewed using the same litmus test?
3. Were career DOJ employees forced out of their jobs because they DID NOT fit the political litmus test?

I want names of Judges so that the impeachment process can proceed to get those bozo’s off the bench.

When you have the BushCo Crime syndicate and they want to make sure they NEVER pay for their crimes, subvert the justice system. Federal Attorneys who will not peruse investigations and “Friendly” judges who will dismiss cases if they are.

Stephen Parrish, CPA @ 114

From Wikipedia:

Use immunity

(snip)

Use immunity only prevents the prosecution from using the witness’ own testimony against them. However, should the prosecutor acquire evidence substantiating the supposed crime — independent of the witness’s testimony — the witness may then be prosecuted for same.
(my emphasis)

That’s the theory but even with Use immunity granted to Ollie North and the Prosecutor making special pre-cautions to not be tainted, Ollie North’s conviction were still overturned by the courts because of the Possibility of it having been tainted.

OT -> but only by a hair…what’s going on in Waxman’s committee? Any votes/decisions? And isn’t Leahy’s committee voting on subpoening Sara Taylor today, as well? Any news? Thanks.

I’d NEVER advocate violence against anyone, even Congress Critters who STILL whine about stuff that happened during the Clinton administration.

I do, however, believe there should be a short stool in a time-out corner, where certain members should be forced to sit and watch while the other Congress Critters get to take recess and have milk and cookies.

Oklahoma kiddo @ 92

dmg @ 62

Oklahoma kiddo @ 55

Once Rove his gone, he will not arise.

tell that to lee atwater.

Actually I’m talking about the Bush family political dynasty. There will always be Rove’s and Atwaters. At least Atwater finally saw the light. The impression is diluting the Bush family influence is the ‘greater good’.

he saw the light, all right. on his death bed …..

[nesting quotes watch we are - mod]

Here are details of how immunity works in Senate committees (from 1997):

http://www.senate.gov/~rpc/rel…..o.797.html

Attorney General .. is entitled to ten days’ notice [6005(b)(3)] and may defer the issuance of any order for up to 20 days [6005(c)]. This procedure allows the Department of Justice time to insulate its evidence if Congress is going to grant immunity. Typically, of course, a congressional committee confers with the Department of Justice so as not to jeopardize a pending case.

christy — to be of some
help, and just to set the
record straight, here:

representative
john conyers called the vote
he took on the measure “to
include limited use immunity”. . .

and, that’s a quote.

i’ll have the video of it,
verbatim, on youtube shortly.

egregious @ 112

Kudos to radiofreewill for outstanding liveblogging this morning.

SECONDED! Thank YOU!

Mayan — Just updated on Sara Taylor above — the vote was to issue the subpoena. Will have something up on Waxman in a bit.

mayan @ 121

OT -> but only by a hair…what’s going on in Waxman’s committee? Any votes/decisions? And isn’t Leahy’s committee voting on subpoening Sara Taylor today, as well? Any news? Thanks.

See comments above, from 16 through about 116, for Waxman update.

nolo at 125 — Thanks — my phone rang just as that part was coming up, and I msised the exact wording. But I’d still like to see how they write it up because saying it and having what you’ve written conform to what I think that means are two completely different thing. Devil is in the details in something like this, as you well know.

MayDaze @ 59

Solai @ 49

But, can she still claim that she doesn’t recall???

Yeah, “I don’t recall” is always good. It’s hard to prove what someone can recall.

With Scooter there was a jury who decided that he was lying when he said he couldn’t recall. If Monica claims amnesia, do Henry and the rest of us have to take her word or can someone call her bluff and toss her in jail?

The Republican denials about these multiple scandals and the War in Iraq remind me of the lies, denials and obfuscation by Ken Lay before the demise of Enron.

Apology offered on the entry about Senator Lieberman.
no intention whatsoever to advocate any action of the sort.

dakine01 @
21

Then if Rover is pardoned, THEN give him immunity and put him under oath. He seems to be incapable of telling truth anyway and a perjury charge and conviciton works.

[nested quotes watch we must — mod]

Isn’t a pardon the ultimate grant of immunity? If Rove is pardoned, he can no longer refuse to testify about anything, it would be open season from a personal perspective. A pardon doesn’t relieve anyone from their duty to testify. This is one reason I think that Bush will spare any pardons to his guys. Next admin/congress could have a field day with free witnesses.

Issa is a north county idiot- not a san diego idiot. He’s apparently also a criminal.. Nice gooper!!

jim oconnor @ 131

The Republican denials about these multiple scandals and the War in Iraq remind me of the lies, denials and obfuscation by Ken Lay before the demise of Enron.

Several others have drawn that conclusion as well. Sadly i can’t remember exactly who mentioned it last night.

thanks, CHS and Peterr (I did read those posts…just didn’t see whether there were any outcomes.)

Today is shaping up to be the Congressional subpoena equivalent of the last five minutes of Godfather 1.

My understanding and correct me if I am wrong is that immunity from prosecution is only handed out for an exchange of information. In other words Goodlings legal team would have had to show the Judiciary here something juicy to get the offer in the first place.

If she recants on the deal then all deals are off the table and she is considered hostile and then it will get real ugly.

She agreed to say something to get the immunity, we are just going to have to wait to see what it is. For what it’s worth Iglesia thinks she holds all the keys to the kingdom.

mayan @
121

OT -> but only by a hair…what’s going on in Waxman’s committee? Any votes/decisions? And isn’t Leahy’s committee voting on subpoening Sara Taylor today, as well? Any news? Thanks.

Subpoenas to be issued for RNC in re: e-mails and equipment info, amendmendt by Repubs to include DNC for Sandy Berger info ruled not germaine and appeal voted down; RNC for info on PowerPoint presented to other agencies including but not limited to GSA, Repub (Mica) amendment to limit to ONLY GSA voted down; Subpoena to Condi to appear and answer questions pertaining to 16 words, how entered into SoU, why she defended after SoU even though had been discredited prior to SoU by CIA approved.

I believe I heard announcer state that Sara Taylor subpoena had been issued as well.

What happened with the Andrew Card and MXM related subpoenas?

http://oversight.house.gov/story.asp?ID=1262

rwcole @ 134

Issa is a north county idiot- not a san diego idiot. He’s apparently also a criminal.. Nice gooper!!

You’re not getting defensive there, rw, are you?

;)

To be clear, though — that’s north county, not northern CA. Not that I’m defensive about it either.

KestrelBrighteyes @ 139

What happened with the Andrew Card and MXM related subpoenas?

http://oversight.house.gov/story.asp?ID=1262

Not part of today’s votes. Waxman stated something at beginning of hearing but I missed it.

Woohoo…. its Subpoena Wednesday!

When Americans get the truth, that usually translates into votes.

OT–Waiting for the omnipotent, omniscient uber-President:

McCain announcing his candidacy this morning in Portsmouth, NH:

I’m not the youngest candidate. But I am the most experienced. I know how the military works, what it can do, what it can do better, and what it should not do. I know how Congress works, and how to make it work for the country and not just the re-election of its members. I know how the world works. I know the good and the evil in it. I know how to work with leaders who share our dreams of a freer, safer and more prosperous world, and how to stand up to those who don’t. I know how to fight and how to make peace. I know who I am and what I want to do.

anyone know what this announcement by john mccain is going to be about?

Story up at WaPo about a body in a sewer in Iraq named “Bob” by american troops. No one wanted to remove Bob from the sewer- and the sewer was in an old spaghetti factory that the troops were going to use as their headquarters. After much discussion- the generals still couldn’t figure out what to do with “Bob”- then the whole factory was blown to hell- apparently eliminating the need for a decision.

And so it goes.

When will we see the first heroic Iraq War movie?

rwcole @ 134

Issa is a north county idiot- not a san diego idiot. He’s apparently also a criminal.. Nice gooper!!

Sorry, just remembering that CSpan showed San Diego as part of his district is all. No idea on how Cali districts laid out/gerrymandered.

I don’t think Goodling would dare try to go the “I don’t recall” route after they called her 5th Amendment bluff.

How can she claim to not recall things that she was convinced would incriminate her?

Peterr,

Actually I live in North County- and I have my OWN gooper idiot- Bilbray. Issa is the idiot that serves some of my sister cities.
An idiot in every pot.

Ah – found it in Waxman’s opening statement on the oversight website:

We originally had four matters scheduled for today, but we will only consider two at this meeting.

Yesterday the White House substantially complied with our request relating to MZM, so there is no need to consider that issue today.

Also yesterday, Fred Fielding, the White House Counsel, made a constructive suggestion in a letter relating to the Committee’s interest in questioning former White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card. He suggested that the Committee interview the head of the White House Office of Administration before we consider whether we need Mr. Card’s testimony.

I have some concerns about how such an interview would be conducted. For example, it would need to be an on-the-record interview that is transcribed by a court reporter. But because Mr. Fielding’s offer may provide an opening to resolve this matter without a subpoena, I will postpone consideration of the Card subpoena until tomorrow so that I have a chance to talk further with Mr. Fielding.

http://oversight.house.gov/story.asp?ID=1268

Biodun @ 144

OT–Waiting for the omnipotent, omniscient uber-President:

McCain announcing his candidacy this morning in Portsmouth, NH:

I’m not the youngest candidate. But I am the most experienced. I know how the military works, what it can do, what it can do better, and what it should not do. I know how Congress works, and how to make it work for the country and not just the re-election of its members. I know how the world works. I know the good and the evil in it. I know how to work with leaders who share our dreams of a freer, safer and more prosperous world, and how to stand up to those who don’t. I know how to fight and how to make peace. I know who I am and what I want to do.

who’d a thunk it?

Peterr @ 140

rwcole @ 134

Issa is a north county idiot- not a san diego idiot. He’s apparently also a criminal.. Nice gooper!!

You’re not getting defensive there, rw, are you?

;)

To be clear, though — that’s north county, not northern CA. Not that I’m defensive about it either.

as a former resident of cardiff, i’d add that he comes from a long proud tradition of socal repug idiots.

debit @ 148

I don’t think Goodling would dare try to go the “I don’t recall” route after they called her 5th Amendment bluff.

How can she claim to not recall things that she was convinced would incriminate her?

Good point

Darrel Issa

debit @ 148

I don’t think Goodling would dare try to go the “I don’t recall” route after they called her 5th Amendment bluff.

How can she claim to not recall things that she was convinced would incriminate her?

Maybe she just had a bad feeling…

rwcole @ 149

Peterr,

Actually I live in North County- and I have my OWN gooper idiot- Bilbray. Issa is the idiot that serves some of my sister cities.
An idiot in every pot.

****

Bilbray? Bless your heart!

(Bradblog readers sympathize with you)

dmg @ 145

anyone know what this announcement by john mccain is going to be about?

He is going to announce his hopeless bid for the Presidency.

Biodun @ 144

OT–Waiting for the omnipotent, omniscient uber-President:

McCain announcing his candidacy this morning in Portsmouth, NH:

I’m not the youngest candidate. But I am the most experienced. I know how the military works, what it can do, what it can do better, and what it should not do. I know how Congress works, and how to make it work for the country and not just the re-election of its members. I know how the world works. I know the good and the evil in it. I know how to work with leaders who share our dreams of a freer, safer and more prosperous world, and how to stand up to those who don’t. I know how to fight and how to make peace. I know who I am and what I want to do.

ah. thanks.
guess the troop surge and that great deal on the rug gave him the confidence he needed.

rwcole @ 146

Story up at WaPo about a body in a sewer in Iraq named “Bob” by american troops. No one wanted to remove Bob from the sewer- and the sewer was in an old spaghetti factory that the troops were going to use as their headquarters. After much discussion- the generals still couldn’t figure out what to do with “Bob”- then the whole factory was blown to hell- apparently eliminating the need for a decision.

And so it goes.

When will we see the first heroic Iraq War movie?

we need Joseph Heller or Kurt Vonnegut around to write the novel first.

rwcole @
134

Issa is a north county idiot- not a san diego idiot. He’s apparently also a criminal.. Nice gooper!!

Beg pardon for the “slur”. C-Span 3 listed San Diego as in his district.

dakine01…Waxman, Conyers and Leahy…taking care of business. Good! They needed some swift, decisive responses to the usual, rethug smoke and fog that has been emenating from the RICO conspiracy we call the Bush regime.

The 49th Congressional District of California is a Congressional District that currently covers much of Northern San Diego County and southwestern Riverside County, California. George W. Bush received 63% of the vote in this district in 2004. The district has a Cook Partisan Voting Index score of R 10.

Re: subpeonas – 21 Ayes 10 Nays. Does that mean some rethugs voted Aye?

speaking of “and so it goes” (tag line from “Slaughterhouse Five”)

HotFlash @ 130

With Scooter there was a jury who decided that he was lying when he said he couldn’t recall. If Monica claims amnesia, do Henry and the rest of us have to take her word or can someone call her bluff and toss her in jail?

IIRC (sorry, couldn’t resist) Scooter was given the opportunity to “come clean” when confronted with evidence of his untruthful testimony and stood by what he said – and was then convicted. If there is evidence that she can recall, i.e., has recalled or has taken actions which can be construed as evidence of her knowledge, of course she could be charged. It’s just a high bar to reach.

rwcole @ 146

Story up at WaPo about a body in a sewer in Iraq named “Bob” by american troops. No one wanted to remove Bob from the sewer- and the sewer was in an old spaghetti factory that the troops were going to use as their headquarters. After much discussion- the generals still couldn’t figure out what to do with “Bob”- then the whole factory was blown to hell- apparently eliminating the need for a decision.

And so it goes.

When will we see the first heroic Iraq War movie?

Who would play the heroic Decider?

rwcole @ 149

Peterr,

Actually I live in North County- and I have my OWN gooper idiot- Bilbray. Issa is the idiot that serves some of my sister cities.
An idiot in every pot.

My apologies, on so many levels.

But Issa figures out so many ways to serve the whole state, including paying upwards of $2 million for the signature drive for that wonderful recall election back in 2003.

*sigh*

fahr-

Yeah he was one of my favorite writers- I use the tag in his memory.

OK, can we nip the “I don’t recall” crap in the bud with Monica? (and how ironic a name is “goodling”?) How can one not recall the stuff that one remembered might incriminate one? I think that maneuver is ipso facto (may I use that?) a lie. I would think that would be grounds for contempt of Congress even with immunity?

Kestral at 139 — They delayed a vote on Card’s subpoena because Fred Fielding at the WH Counsel’s office offered a deal on testimony that Waxman said was “worth exploring.” Interesting, eh?

rwcole @ 149

Peterr,

Actually I live in North County- and I have my OWN gooper idiot- Bilbray. Issa is the idiot that serves some of my sister cities.
An idiot in every pot.

Don’t think the Republicans have even one good conservative in the whole California Delegation.

Badwater @15
Then if Rover is pardoned, THEN give him immunity and put him under oath. He seems to be incapable of telling truth anyway and a perjury charge and conviciton works.

If you accept a pardon, you are admiting you are guilty. There is then no need for the committee to grant immunity, and if subpoena’d you must testify. The last thing yellow-bellied Rover wants is a pardon!

Are they going to vote on a Sara Taylor subpoena today?

Issa and his brother apparently has an insurance fraud ring going at one time. For example- the brother stole Issa’s car- and Issa filed an insurance claim for it.

Later, Issa created a product (the club) to prevent auto theft and made millions.

Now- a successful product of the free enterprise system, Issa is in congress.

Peterr @ 167
But Issa figures out so many ways to serve the whole state, including paying upwards of $2 million for the signature drive for that wonderful recall election back in 2003.

*sigh*

Here in CA-42, we have Gary Miller. He only does things for himself. http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/002436.php

Please remind me-

Who is Sara Taylor? There are so many crooks, I have a hard time remembering them all.

In addition to Bilbray and Issa, San Diegans have Duncan Hunter to be proud of.

San Diego County goopers- not a brain in a carload!!

EPUd for dmg:

TiredFed says

April 25th, 2007 at 10:02 am
dmg @ 93

Bluetoe @ 64

Burton is talking about the Clinton Administration. How pathetic are these a..holes? Traitors all.

[edited by mod]

you know what sucks? going to a family dinner earlier this month and hearing these words from my brother: “9/11 wasn’t Bush’s fault! 9/11 was CLINTON’S fault!”

and what’s worse, his son, now in his early 20’s chime in triumphantly, “and there hasn’t been a terrorist attack in the states SINCE 9/11!”

when i refused to get into a debate about these statements with them, my brother called me “arrogant.”

help me, spock.

do they read? if so, give them Richard Clarke’s book, Against All Enemies and Paul O’Neill’s book The Price of Loyalty. That ought to shut them up. Then again…

McCain:

When I’m President I’ll offer common sense, conservative and comprehensive solutions to these challenges. Congress will have other ideas, and I’ll listen to them. I’ll work with anyone who is serious and sincere about solving these problems. I expect us to argue over principle, but when a compromise consistent with our principles is within reach, I expect us to seize it.

My bold. More of the same re: Congress.

Christy Hardin Smith @ 170

Kestral at 139 — They delayed a vote on Card’s subpoena because Fred Fielding at the WH Counsel’s office offered a deal on testimony that Waxman said was “worth exploring.” Interesting, eh?

Lots to consider in those two little words, especially considering the source. Waxman is not one to be easily appeased, or distracted by shiny objects.

I wonder how Karl is sleeping these days.

lectric lady @ 176

Please remind me-

Who is Sara Taylor? There are so many crooks, I have a hard time remembering them all.

Assistant to Rove

It’s raining “soo-peen-ees”, Hallelujah!

pronunciation comes from Wilford Brimley’s character, (an Asst.US AG) in “Absence of Malice”

dmg @ 53

stupid q from a nonlawyer. if goodling does time, i know she loses her law license.

but she has taken the fifth, and has been granted immunity. what happens then to her law license?

I think she can STILL lose her license — it’s up to the Bar Association she’s a member of…

Goopers may have to lose several more elections before it’s diehards are willing to admit that GBushism is dead.

I have a good feeling about Monica, not
to underestimate the irony of her name…
She WILL implicate….
Downhill from then on…

The optimist

OT (well, probably not, since it’s about a Basic Food Group):

The public comment period for the FDA docket item (the one including the redefinition of chocolate, among other things you don’t want them doing) has been extended to May 25.
(appearing at http://www.dontmesswithourchocolate.com)

At some point the GOP is going to realize, that as painful as it is, they are going to have to have these hearings before the end of the Bush administration, while he still has the power of veto.

Compare and contrast the Iran-Contra investigation. If that investigation had been delayed (a hell of a while, granted) until there was a Democratic president, then those pardoned wouldn’t have been pardoned, and would have done some time in the federal pen.

Pardoning people before their trials is pretty much unheard of (except for Ford’s of Nixon.)
Barring catastrophe, the GOP will lose the presidency in 21 months. I suppose the other option would be to foment catastrophe.

So now we watch to see how Ms. Ferragamo tries to weasel out of her subpoena.

thanks for thisTiredFed @ 178

EPUd for dmg:

TiredFed says

April 25th, 2007 at 10:02 am
dmg @ 93

Bluetoe @ 64

Burton is talking about the Clinton Administration. How pathetic are these a..holes? Traitors all.

[edited by mod]

you know what sucks? going to a family dinner earlier this month and hearing these words from my brother: “9/11 wasn’t Bush’s fault! 9/11 was CLINTON’S fault!”

and what’s worse, his son, now in his early 20’s chime in triumphantly, “and there hasn’t been a terrorist attack in the states SINCE 9/11!”

when i refused to get into a debate about these statements with them, my brother called me “arrogant.”

help me, spock.

do they read? if so, give them Richard Clarke’s book, Against All Enemies and Paul O’Neill’s book The Price of Loyalty. That ought to shut them up. Then again…

thanks for this.
as it happens, before i decided not to engage (enabling behavior, you know), i cited the clarke book to them.
not. that. it. mattered.

lectric lady @ 176

Please remind me-

Who is Sara Taylor? There are so many crooks, I have a hard time remembering them all.

Here’s a good place to start looking when you need to sort them out, and here’s where a lot of their main offices are.

Note: this is the 2006 version. Today’s may be a bit different.

(h/t to Dan Froomkin)

carolyn urban @
163

Re: subpeonas – 21 Ayes 10 Nays. Does that mean some rethugs voted Aye?

No, party line all the way.

rwcole @
134

Issa is a north county idiot- not a san diego idiot. He’s apparently also a criminal.. Nice gooper!!

Yeah, he’s near my neck of the woods. I’m in very red Orange County. He’s just like many of our politicians around here. Ewwwww.

Clusterfuck has a full time job defending his cast of criminals- has the combsucker Wolfie resigned yet? Can we expect a good quote from Clusterfuck on that one?

And so it goes.

Bluetoe @
14

Chris Shays, another Republican liar. And he’s considered moderate.

When did dipshit Shays do now? He was pathetic yesterday during the Tillman hearings.

MayDaze @ 165

HotFlash @ 130

With Scooter there was a jury who decided that he was lying when he said he couldn’t recall. If Monica claims amnesia, do Henry and the rest of us have to take her word or can someone call her bluff and toss her in jail?

IIRC (sorry, couldn’t resist) Scooter was given the opportunity to “come clean” when confronted with evidence of his untruthful testimony and stood by what he said – and was then convicted. If there is evidence that she can recall, i.e., has recalled or has taken actions which can be construed as evidence of her knowledge, of course she could be charged. It’s just a high bar to reach.

Scooter’s testimony was evaluated by a jury of his peers who decided that he was lying, not just misremembering. Who will evaluate Monica’s testimony to decide if she is lying? Does Henry do that? The House as a whole? Or do they refer her to (gasp) the DoJ for criminal charges? Boing! That’s my mind becoming unhinged.

carolyn urban @
163

Re: subpeonas – 21 Ayes 10 Nays. Does that mean some rethugs voted Aye?

Many weren’t there.

I’m hoping someone can answer this question. What happens when this administration goes? I’m fairly certain that the Dems will maintain control of the House and Senate and take the Presidency, so what happens then? Can Bush Co. be investigated or is there something that indemnifies them from prosecution when they leave office?

Iglesias on Goodling on Hardball last night:

MATTHEWS:

(snip)

Mr. Iglesias, let me ask you about how you foresee this probe by the Office of Special Counsel into Karl Rove proceeding. You pointed out they have the power of subpoena. Who would you like to see questioned under oath? Would you like to see the attorney general, Mr. Gonzales, questioned under oath on the manner and the information he has about how you were fired?

IGLESIAS: No, I mean, that has been tried. I watched the five hours of testimony. That was fruitless. I think Monica Goodling holds the keys to the kingdom. I think if they get her to testify under oath, with a transcript, and have her describe the process between the information flow between the White House counsel, the White House and the Justice Department, I believe the picture becomes a lot clearer.

MATTHEWS: So if Karl Rove or one of his deputies wanted to influence something in your department, they would work through her, through Monica Goodling?

IGLESIAS: Yes, she wore two hats. She was counselor to the attorney general. She was also the White House liaison. So her job was to serve as a conduit for information between the Justice Department and the White House.

OT. for the later thread on the Iraq supp (I’m sure there will be one soon):

Here’s the binding language in the Conference Committee bill. Note the word “shall.”

Section 1904 (Page 77 of 251)

b) If the President fails to make any of the determinations specified in subsection (a), the Secretary of Defense shall commence the redeployment of the Armed
Forces from Iraq no later than July 1, 2007, with a goal of completing such redeployment within 180 days.

c) If the President makes the determinations specified in subsection (a), the Secretary of Defense shall commence the redeployment of the Armed Forces from Iraq not later than October 1, 2007, with a goal of completing such redeployment within 180 days.

OT New Froomkin. Lead with stepford Laura telling Ann Curry how she and The Chimpenfuhrer “suffer” when they sees Iraq vids.

lectric lady @
176

Please remind me-

Who is Sara Taylor? There are so many crooks, I have a hard time remembering them all.

She an Aide to Rove.

Perino! Botox!

ian @ 197

I’m hoping someone can answer this question. What happens when this administration goes? I’m fairly certain that the Dems will maintain control of the House and Senate and take the Presidency, so what happens then? Can Bush Co. be investigated or is there something that indemnifies them from prosecution when they leave office?

Well, I ass-u-me that a new DoJ could initiate some criminal proceedings where appropriate.

HotFlash @ 195

Scooter’s testimony was evaluated by a jury of his peers who decided that he was lying, not just misremembering. Who will evaluate Monica’s testimony to decide if she is lying? Does Henry do that? The House as a whole? Or do they refer her to (gasp) the DoJ for criminal charges? Boing! That’s my mind becoming unhinged.

Well, here’s what Wiki has to say about contempt of Congress.

Meanwhile- back at the Ranch- Supreme Court watchers are prayin that Clusterfuck doesn’t get one more pick. Here’s the current court and their ages:

Stevens 87

Ginsburg 73

Scalia 72

Kennedy 71

Bryer 68

Souter 67

Thomas 59

Alito 57

Roberts 52

Stevens is getting up there- Ginsberg is a cancer survivor- Scalia is a chain smoker..

Roberts avoids trucks.

badwater @166

Gilbert Gottfried (voice of parrot Iago in Disney’s Aladdin) will play the decider: “ya got a prawwblem, pinkie?”

ANyone catch McCain on TDS last night? He had my logic completely turned inside out. My logic: how do you “win” against a concept like “terror”? McCain (taking on Reid) “if the war is lost, who won?”

(banging head against wall) my point exactly. no one wins this one. Just make it stop.

Roberts could still be adding his personal brand of fascism to the court in fifty years!!

The effective legacy of a president are the sum of his supreme court appointees- and Clusterfuck’s given us a pair of beauts.. Sure as hell hope he doesn’t get another chance to fuck up america.

“The Administration cannot comment on an on-going investigation.” http://www.correntewire.com/bu….._ourselves

Update: It is likely to be weeks before the committee actually gets to interview Goodling. That’s because the law requires that the Justice Department be allowed an opportunity to provide its views on immunity — i.e. whether it might interfere with an existing or possible investigation. If the DoJ objects to giving Goodling immunity, then the committee would be forced to consider whether to defer or delay conferring immunity. And regardless of what the DoJ says, the local federal court has to approve giving Goodling immunity. All this is likely to take several weeks

This is from TPMMUCKRAKER. What does this mean? Does it mean that the Dems have to go to a (possibly corrupt) Repub Court for approval.

Let’s be clear. Goodling will be given use immunity. That means that what she says can’t be used against her and anything down the road that was in any way discovered in part because of what she said is also tainted and can’t be used.

So she will have an incentive to expound — just as Ollie North did — about what SHE did. That makes it all the more likely that anything anyone finds out independently about her crimes will be seen to be tainted and thus subject to the use immunity.

But Goodling will have no incentive to implicate Karl, except that she can’t commit perjury. The classic route to avoid committing perjury while still not providing the information sought is to say you don’t recall. What do you think Sampson and Gonzales already did? Absent some document written later where the person actually says they did remember, it is virtually impossible to convict someone of perjury for saying they don’t remember. Do you think they can prosecute Gonzales for saying he didn’t recall?

The best you can do is to force them to repeat their, “I don’t recalls” many, many times and thus damage their credibility as a witness. Monica Goodling could care less about how credible a witness she is. If she protects Karl she’ll benefit from wingnut welfare for the rest of her life.

Here’s a pretty good take in answer to those who argue that the oversight committee hearings are taking away from “real” issues:

“Anyone who doesn’t take truth seriously in small matters cannot be trusted in large ones either.” — Albert Einstein

– Hence, we find ourselves in a war without end and numerous other problems that typically find their roots in disdain for the truth.

Seems that Pere Clusterfuck can’t bring himself to utter the words “My eldest son is a complete idiot and screw up and should NEVER have been allowed inside the White House”.

From the WSJ:

Delays in Renzi Case Raise
More Gonzales Questions
By JOHN R. WILKE and EVAN PEREZ
April 25, 2007; Page A2

WASHINGTON — As midterm elections approached last November, federal investigators in Arizona faced unexpected obstacles in getting needed Justice Department approvals to advance a corruption investigation of Republican Rep. Rick Renzi, people close to the case said.

The delays, which postponed key approvals in the case until after the election, raise new questions about whether Attorney General Alberto Gonzales or other officials may have weighed political issues in some investigations. The Arizona U.S. attorney then overseeing the case, Paul Charlton, was told he was being fired in December, one of eight federal prosecutors dismissed in the past year. The dismissals have triggered a wave of criticism and calls from Congress for Mr. Gonzales to resign.

Investigators pursuing the Renzi case had been seeking clearance from senior Justice Department officials on search warrants, subpoenas and other legal tools for a year before the election, people close to the case said.

…

Wall Street Journal article on Renzi

TiredFed @ 199

OT. for the later thread on the Iraq supp (I’m sure there will be one soon):

Here’s the binding language in the Conference Committee bill. Note the word “shall.”

Section 1904 (Page 77 of 251)

b) If the President fails to make any of the determinations specified in subsection (a), the Secretary of Defense shall commence the redeployment of the Armed Forces from Iraq no later than July 1, 2007, with a goal of completing such redeployment within 180 days.

c) If the President makes the determinations specified in subsection (a), the Secretary of Defense shall commence the redeployment of the Armed Forces from Iraq not later than October 1, 2007, with a goal of completing such redeployment within 180 days.

thanks for bringing this up again… i’m starting to read now (here’s the link for anyone else who wants to read the conference report of the iraq war/occupation supplemental funding bill).

i think the presence of the word “goal” (which i’ve bolded in your quote above), makes the withdrawal nonbinding (as in the senate version and not as in the house version)

Solai @ 209

Update: It is likely to be weeks before the committee actually gets to interview Goodling. That’s because the law requires that the Justice Department be allowed an opportunity to provide its views on immunity — i.e. whether it might interfere with an existing or possible investigation. If the DoJ objects to giving Goodling immunity, then the committee would be forced to consider whether to defer or delay conferring immunity. And regardless of what the DoJ says, the local federal court has to approve giving Goodling immunity. All this is likely to take several weeks

This is from TPMMUCKRAKER. What does this mean? Does it mean that the Dems have to go to a (possibly corrupt) Repub Court for approval.

It means Monica should avoid flying in small planes. As to the overall investigation, I wouldn’t worry about it. This is all going to tie in to Abramoff, and things seem to be humming along on the parallel track there. The Renzi investigation is getting harder and harder for them to contain. Once that one blows up, even David Broder will be able to connect the dots.

dakine01 @ 200

OT New Froomkin. Lead with stepford Laura telling Ann Curry how she and The Chimpenfuhrer “suffer” when they sees Iraq vids.

You mean the same guy who gloated when he denied a stay of execution as Texass Guv, mimicking and mocking the petitioner saying “oh, please, I don’t want to die…” is “suffering” when he sees the death on the TV screen? Hmmmph.

Pete Bogs @ 6

good work… give the grunts immunity in exchange for ratting out the big guys… I love it!

Goodling’s hot, too…

I guess if you’ve got a thing for thin-lipped, repressed, fundamentalist types with outdated hairstyles.

Question…Can they use the Bloch/OSC dodge to circumvent the immunity…you know…granting immunity is going to interfere with our whitewash of events?

I see Goodling as our Joan of Arc. She’ll risk being burned at the stake rather than divulge “The Secrets.” Ain’t gonna talk.

Delightful. From Muck, Leahy & Specter are asking Abu to do a take-home test.

They sent over a lit note today, asking him to “promptly supplement your testimony of April 19 with answers to those questions for which you responded that you could not recall or did not know.”

He’s got a week to turn in his homework.

Tee hee hee heee…..

You know, I’m a big believer in irony and poetic justice, so when they swear Monica in, I think they should give her the option of swearing on a beautiful, heirloom quality Bible, and then offer to let her keep it as a token of the committee’s gratitude.

kaleidescope @
210

Let’s be clear. Goodling will be given use immunity. That means that what she says can’t be used against her and anything down the road that was in any way discovered in part because of what she said is also tainted and can’t be used.

So she will have an incentive to expound — just as Ollie North did — about what SHE did. That makes it all the more likely that anything anyone finds out independently about her crimes will be seen to be tainted and thus subject to the use immunity.

But Goodling will have no incentive to implicate Karl, except that she can’t commit perjury. The classic route to avoid committing perjury while still not providing the information sought is to say you don’t recall. What do you think Sampson and Gonzales already did? Absent some document written later where the person actually says they did remember, it is virtually impossible to convict someone of perjury for saying they don’t remember. Do you think they can prosecute Gonzales for saying he didn’t recall?

The best you can do is to force them to repeat their, “I don’t recalls” many, many times and thus damage their credibility as a witness. Monica Goodling could care less about how credible a witness she is. If she protects Karl she’ll benefit from wingnut welfare for the rest of her life.

IANAL, as stated before, but I believe her testimony under Use immunity CAN be used against others. It just makes it very difficult to use against her. That’s what the courts were saying with John Poindexter and Ollie North, the testimony they gave to Congress under Use, tainted the prosecutions against THEM. I’ll quite gladly sacrifice the prosecution of a Monica Goodling to bring down Rove, AGAG, Cheney, Bush et al.

Think Condi’s shoes will match the bags under her eyes?

Frank @ 221, let’s send her a Bible to help her memory.

I guess if you’ve got a thing for thin-lipped, repressed, fundamentalist types with outdated hairstyles.

Hmm… Do you also mean…Dana Perino?

mayan @ 218

Question…Can they use the Bloch/OSC dodge to circumvent the immunity…you know…granting immunity is going to interfere with our whitewash of events?

Do not believe so. Someone posted last night the info that at best Bloch can refer action but cannot bring criminal charges. Conressional oversight has to trump his investigation.

MayDaze @ 204

HotFlash @ 195

Scooter’s testimony was evaluated by a jury of his peers who decided that he was lying, not just misremembering. Who will evaluate Monica’s testimony to decide if she is lying? Does Henry do that? The House as a whole? Or do they refer her to (gasp) the DoJ for criminal charges? Boing! That’s my mind becoming unhinged.

Well, here’s what Wiki has to say about contempt of Congress.

Thanks MayDaze. Lessee, wiki says:

Following a contempt citation, the presiding officer of the chamber is instructed to refer the matter to the U.S. Attorney; according to the law it is the “duty” of the U.S. Attorney to refer the matter to a grand jury for action.

OK, I know a good guy for that job, but which USA will be handling that case? Oh-oh, it’s Jeffrey Taylor! Will he recuse himself? Also, wiki notes:

The statutory procedure has generally been used by Congress since 1935. But its use does leave some things unclear. The law pronounces the “duty” of U.S. Attorney is to empanel a grand jury and for its action on the matter. But dispute exists over whether or not the Congress can properly compel the U.S. Attorney to take this action, as the U.S. Attorney is a member of the Executive Branch and ultimately reports to the President. (The Courts have been reluctant to decide this question, claiming it is a “political question” for resolution by the elected branches of government.)

Fresh thread for everyone, up and ready for reading.

should be required to SIT on the Bible while swearing- betting her eternal ass against her eternal soul.

Sally @ 219

I see Goodling as our Joan of Arc. She’ll risk being burned at the stake rather than divulge “The Secrets.” Ain’t gonna talk.

I’m the internal optimist…
Monica WILL sing

I’m sorry, but every time I read “Fred Fielding,” I think “Fred Feral.” And everytime I read “Monica Goodling,” somehow that transforms to “Monica Goodbar.”

Hotflash @ 227 -

Not looking too damn good, is it?

rwcole @ 212

Seems that Pere Clusterfuck can’t bring himself to utter the words “My eldest son is a complete idiot and screw up and should NEVER have been allowed inside the White House”.

I will quite happily say it for him. And I said so 6 years ago.

I think the Congressional investigation trumps the one at OSC.

I suspect the reason the OSC is pursuing theirs is to be able to say to Congress, “Look we’re doing what we’re supposed to do!”

I don’t think it’s going to wash.

Georgesimian @ 37

So because she has immunity, she can’t claim 5th Amend? Is that right?

dakine01 @ 200

OT New Froomkin. Lead with stepford Laura telling Ann Curry how she and The Chimpenfuhrer “suffer” when they sees Iraq vids.

Brphh! Almost lost my lunch over that. Fred Barnes needs to crawl out of Bush’s skivs for some air once in a while.

selise @ 214

TiredFed @ 199

OT. for the later thread on the Iraq supp (I’m sure there will be one soon):

Here’s the binding language in the Conference Committee bill. Note the word “shall.”

Section 1904 (Page 77 of 251)

b) If the President fails to make any of the determinations specified in subsection (a), the Secretary of Defense shall commence the redeployment of the Armed Forces from Iraq no later than July 1, 2007, with a goal of completing such redeployment within 180 days.

c) If the President makes the determinations specified in subsection (a), the Secretary of Defense shall commence the redeployment of the Armed Forces from Iraq not later than October 1, 2007, with a goal of completing such redeployment within 180 days.

thanks for bringing this up again… i’m starting to read now (here’s the link for anyone else who wants to read the conference report of the iraq war/occupation supplemental funding bill).

i think the presence of the word “goal” (which i’ve bolded in your quote above), makes the withdrawal nonbinding (as in the senate version and not as in the house version)

that’s not the way I would interpret it, but I can see some DOD lawyers trying to drive a truck through it. the operative phrase is “shall.. no later than..”

Bay State, let her sing loud and clear.

re: Selise @214 (trying to cut down on the nests), my sense of the goal clause is that it better not take that long, but i guess it could. Bush could redeploy 1 soldier at a time.

[noted and appreciated-mod]

LJ/Aquaria @ 69

I’d like to see someone trot out to Monica with a Bible and have her put her hand on it to swear in. Either it will freak her out enough to stay honest…or, if she lies anyway (I’m not so certain she won’t), then I’ll at least get one more confirmation of the hypocrisy of the fundies.

I’m sure they covered this exact situation in Jesus Camp for Co-eds or whatever she went to. She’ll swear on a stack of Bibles and lie through her teet for the Lord. What part of ‘the end justifies the means’ don’t you understand?

dakine01 @ 222

kaleidescope @
210

Let’s be clear. Goodling will be given use immunity. That means that what she says can’t be used against her and anything down the road that was in any way discovered in part because of what she said is also tainted and can’t be used.

So she will have an incentive to expound — just as Ollie North did — about what SHE did. That makes it all the more likely that anything anyone finds out independently about her crimes will be seen to be tainted and thus subject to the use immunity.

But Goodling will have no incentive to implicate Karl, except that she can’t commit perjury. The classic route to avoid committing perjury while still not providing the information sought is to say you don’t recall. What do you think Sampson and Gonzales already did? Absent some document written later where the person actually says they did remember, it is virtually impossible to convict someone of perjury for saying they don’t remember. Do you think they can prosecute Gonzales for saying he didn’t recall?

The best you can do is to force them to repeat their, “I don’t recalls” many, many times and thus damage their credibility as a witness. Monica Goodling could care less about how credible a witness she is. If she protects Karl she’ll benefit from wingnut welfare for the rest of her life.

IANAL, as stated before, but I believe her testimony under Use immunity CAN be used against others. It just makes it very difficult to use against her. That’s what the courts were saying with John Poindexter and Ollie North, the testimony they gave to Congress under Use, tainted the prosecutions against THEM. I’ll quite gladly sacrifice the prosecution of a Monica Goodling to bring down Rove, AGAG, Cheney, Bush et al.

Ollie North was a Marine Colonel and an organizer of the conspiracy. He went on to become something of a national hero to the right wing and the mainstream media. It’s a scandal that he got off.

Monica Goodling is quite a different matter.

TiredFed @ 238

re: Selise @214 (trying to cut down on the nests), my sense of the goal clause is that it better not take that long, but i guess it could. Bush could redeploy 1 soldier at a time.

[noted and appreciated-mod]

could redeploy one soldier (to start the redeployment)… and that would be all that is required.

iirc, this is the language from the senate bill – not the house. the house bill gave more time for “redeployment”, but there was a real deadline.

will go look for that text now, so we can compare and contrast.

HotFlash @ 233

rwcole @ 212

Seems that Pere Clusterfuck can’t bring himself to utter the words “My eldest son is a complete idiot and screw up and should NEVER have been allowed inside the White House”.

I will quite happily say it for him. And I said so 6 years ago.

41 knows his son and this administration is a complete failure. Did you see 41 break down at that event with Jeb? 41 knows 41 knows, that our country may never recover from the effects of 43’s administration.

As Osama Bin Laden shared with the Journalist Peter Bergen many years ago that OBL would very much like to see the U.s. become “a shadow of it’s former self.” (heard Bergen say this on Talk of the Nation before the invasion)

43, Zbigniew Brezinski (heard him at Ohio U after the invasion,) Madeline Albright, Arthur Schlesenger (heard him at Ohio U before he passed) all fear that we are well on our way to becoming that shadow of our former selves!

Bay State Librul @ 230

Sally @ 219

I see Goodling as our Joan of Arc. She’ll risk being burned at the stake rather than divulge “The Secrets.” Ain’t gonna talk.

I’m the internal optimist…
Monica WILL sing

Will she hum or sing?

selise @ 241

TiredFed @ 238

re: Selise @214 (trying to cut down on the nests), my sense of the goal clause is that it better not take that long, but i guess it could. Bush could redeploy 1 soldier at a time.

[noted and appreciated-mod]

could redeploy one soldier (to start the redeployment)… and that would be all that is required.

iirc, this is the language from the senate bill – not the house. the house bill gave more time for “redeployment”, but there was a real deadline.

will go look for that text now, so we can compare and contrast.

House version says commence on such and such, out in 180 days. no goal. just get out. better language. and Bush is still gonna veto this????

we love our mods!

Frank Probst @ 221

You know, I’m a big believer in irony and poetic justice, so when they swear Monica in, I think they should give her the option of swearing on a beautiful, heirloom quality Bible, and then offer to let her keep it as a token of the committee’s gratitude.

GMTA, as I said basically the same thing upthread.

LJ/Aquaria @
69

I’d like to see someone trot out to Monica with a Bible and have her put her hand on it to swear in. Either it will freak her out enough to stay honest…or, if she lies anyway (I’m not so certain she won’t), then I’ll at least get one more confirmation of the hypocrisy of the fundies.

kaleidescope @ 210

Let’s be clear. Goodling will be given use immunity. That means that what she says can’t be used against her and anything down the road that was in any way discovered in part because of what she said is also tainted and can’t be used.

So she will have an incentive to expound — just as Ollie North did — about what SHE did. That makes it all the more likely that anything anyone finds out independently about her crimes will be seen to be tainted and thus subject to the use immunity.

But Goodling will have no incentive to implicate Karl, except that she can’t commit perjury. The classic route to avoid committing perjury while still not providing the information sought is to say you don’t recall. What do you think Sampson and Gonzales already did? Absent some document written later where the person actually says they did remember, it is virtually impossible to convict someone of perjury for saying they don’t remember. Do you think they can prosecute Gonzales for saying he didn’t recall?

The best you can do is to force them to repeat their, “I don’t recalls” many, many times and thus damage their credibility as a witness. Monica Goodling could care less about how credible a witness she is. If she protects Karl she’ll benefit from wingnut welfare for the rest of her life.

more than that, she’ll be able to take responsibility for actions that were beyond here pay grade, thus giving rove et al. cover, and being immune from prosecution on those actions herself.
i hate immunity deals.

from the house version section 1904:

(c) If in the transmissions to Congress required by subsection (a) the President determines that any of the conditions specified in such subsection have not been met, or if the President is unable to make the certification specified in subsection (b) by the required date, the Secretary of Defense shall commence the redeployment of the Armed Forces from Iraq and complete such redeployment within 180 days.
(d) If the President makes the certification specified in subsection (b), the Secretary of Defense shall commence the redeployment of the Armed Forces from Iraq not later than March 1, 2008, and complete such redeployment within 180 days.

i’m having trouble finding the text in the senate version… will keep looking…

TiredFed @ 244

House version says commence on such and such, out in 180 days. no goal. just get out. better language. and Bush is still gonna veto this????

no kidding!

at this point (i’m still trying to educate myself), i’m hoping bush will veto…. seems like he would be nuts not too… he could just take the money and then do basically what he wants. loop holes look big enough to drive a truck through.

hoping it will look better (more binding language on withdrawal) as i read more.

Tap Duncan @ 86

Issa loses again!!!!! hahahahahah!!!!

He’s slime.

selise @ 248

from the house version section 1904:

(c) If in the transmissions to Congress required by subsection (a) the President determines that any of the conditions specified in such subsection have not been met, or if the President is unable to make the certification specified in subsection (b) by the required date, the Secretary of Defense shall commence the redeployment of the Armed Forces from Iraq and complete such redeployment within 180 days.
(d) If the President makes the certification specified in subsection (b), the Secretary of Defense shall commence the redeployment of the Armed Forces from Iraq not later than March 1, 2008, and complete such redeployment within 180 days.

i’m having trouble finding the text in the senate version… will keep looking…

if the Conference version is any indication, I would start looking around page 30 of the Senate version.

selise @ 248

i’m having trouble finding the text in the senate version… will keep looking…

found it… from section 1315 (b):

(2) COMMENCEMENT OF PHASED REDEPLOYMENT FROM IRAQ- The President shall commence the phased redeployment of United States forces from Iraq not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, with the goal of redeploying, by March 31, 2008, all United States combat forces from Iraq except for a limited number that are essential for the following purposes:

(A) Protecting United States and coalition personnel and infrastructure.
(B) Training and equipping Iraqi forces.
(C) Conducting targeted counter-terrorism operations.

my bold.

TiredFed -

so this is how i read it (so far) with regard to withdrawal timeline – the conference version uses the senate non-binding language (goal), and not the house binding language.

probably because the senate wouldn’t pass binding language – maybe hagel & smith (the two republicans who supported the bill) or some of the dems wouldn’t support a binding withdrawal…. they could only afford to loose one vote to still get the 50 they need to pass (with johnson out) – here’s the senate role call vote.

if that’s the case, i’d like to know who in the senate (R or D) wouldn’t support and binding withdrawal. i want to know who to hold responsible.

guess we’ll have to wait and see. i just dont understand why he would veto when he has everything he wants now.

rwcole @ 149

Peterr,

Actually I live in North County- and I have my OWN gooper idiot- Bilbray. Issa is the idiot that serves some of my sister cities.
An idiot in every pot.

EVERY pot in town. Don’t forget Duncan Hunter.

lectric lady @ 176 –

Sara Taylor was Rove’s assistant, before she abruptly resigned recently.

She was apparently involved in getting Rove’s buddy Griffin installed as USA in Arkansas.

She definitely knows where a few bodies are buried.

i hate thomas!

here are permanent (i think) links to the bills -

conference version – link here.
house and senate versions – links here.

TiredFed @ 254

guess we’ll have to wait and see. i just dont understand why he would veto when he has everything he wants now.

kabuki ?

the bill is being portrayed as a limit to the power of the POTUS…. reid has been doing a good job of challenging bush rhetorically the last few days. wish there was more legislative challenge….

my big fear is that bush will not veto, and then find loop holes – it’s not like he has a good track record of following either the letter of the intent of the law.

i’d hate to see our nice new D congress pay for endless war/occupation.

thanks for your help in figuring out what’s going on…. debate on the house floor is supposed to start this afternoon.

selise

any time. it what I live for (no, really).

{{{{{TiredFed}}}}}
{{{{{selise}}}}}

Thank you for everything.

Christy Hardin Smith @ 129

nolo at 125 — Thanks — my phone rang just as that part was coming up, and I msised the exact wording. But I’d still like to see how they write it up because saying it and having what you’ve written conform to what I think that means are two completely different thing. Devil is in the details in something like this, as you well know.

well-put, indeed.

and devilish details have
ruled the day, here for far too long. . .

p e a c e

Georgesimian @
37

So because she has immunity, she can’t claim 5th Amend? Is that right?

dakine01 @
120

Stephen Parrish, CPA @ 114

From Wikipedia:

Use immunity

(snip)

Use immunity only prevents the prosecution from using the witness’ own testimony against them. However, should the prosecutor acquire evidence substantiating the supposed crime — independent of the witness’s testimony — the witness may then be prosecuted for same.
(my emphasis)

That’s the theory but even with Use immunity granted to Ollie North and the Prosecutor making special pre-cautions to not be tainted, Ollie North’s conviction were still overturned by the courts because of the Possibility of it having been tainted.

Ollie’s testimony was thrown out not only because Congress jumped the gun on immunity but because the appeal went to people like David Sentelle, Lawrence Silberman, and Stanley Sporkin, former counsel for the CIA. Sentelle is still around doing damage and now he’s aided and abetted by Janice Rogers Brown.

The court that will be enforcing subpoenas in this case and others is considered to be in Bush’s pocket so a word of caution about optimism should subpoenas be ignored.

I’m all for impeaching some of the people on the Federal bench including at least two sitting Supreme Court justices who told outright lies at their confirmation hearings.

I wanted to watch the video of Bush dancing but it has been spiked. I was so mad then lo and behold it appears on CNN. Thanks Wolfie.

kaleidescope @
23

. . . member little, if anything, about what Rove said or did. Monica will smirk, take her immunity to the bank, and give them nothing.

Pretty much. Waxman needs big dirt on her, badly, to get anything out of her. She’s as arrogant and blameless as the rest of them. They ALL have Stay Out Of Jail Lives in their own minds. Only thing that’s gonna work is to actually PROVE something and charge them, to make them sweat. Just testifying, at this point, is a walk in the park for them all.

Christy Hardin Smith @
105

General note: no reference to violence against public officials or otherwise. Period. Everyone knows this, but I’m saying it again, because I don’t want to get a call from the Secret Service about veiled threatening language and a request for blog records. Hope that was clear enough for everyone.

Can we say ‘rot in a hell of their own making’?

Get the DA’s lined up,
…because when Monica is forced to testify, which immunity should guarantee, she won’t be allowed the luxury of the memory defense, and for good reason.

Ms. Goodling hasdisplayed herattention to detail every day of her short and meteoric political life, so her testimony should be precise, accurate and exhaustive, if she lives up to her billing as one of those ultimate over-achievers who channel every resource and rocket to the top. Unfortunately for this “Monica,” her ascent occurred in a failing administration, and her ballistic trajectory was chopped off, as the political house of cards about her collapsed.

Ms. Goodling’s testimony could prove to be historic, if she answers with the depth of her perspective; she knows everything…and the right questions can leave her no room for obfuscation, especially with an immunity agreement already on the table. Which is why I say, line up the former DA’s like Hodes, who are on the committees and can effectively question her, and get the questions refined down to their least ambiguous framing.

I would bet a fair amount of money that she made no “proffer” of her testimony. She was under no threat of indictment. I suspect her lawyer just said, “If you want her, immunize her.” Congress is buying a pig in the poke. Period.

Now, the question is whether she has any incriminating evidence re Rove or Harriet Meiers, and whether she would give it up truthfully if she does. Her lawyer will advise her that her only danger is lying to the committee.

Her biggest danger, if she decides to provide cover to the White House by lying, is that the committee has some e-mails or other evidence she does not know they have. Then if she, for example, says something directly contradictory to something she wrote, she is jammed.

She is a good Christian woman. (No sarcasm intended.) I assume that she will come in and tell the truth, as she ought. Let’s see what happens next.

My prediction: this is the end of the Gonzales scandal. He may not survive, but it goes no further.

Anyone have a breakdown on who the six were? Thx.