There are other videos at the bottom – but they are outdated at this point.
http://snuffmonkey.com/gonzales/

-Matchoo

GeorgeSimian @ 64

Anyone want to start listing the impeachable offenses of Gonzo, in regards to the NYT editorial? It seems to me, he missed a few.

Lying to Congress
Witholding evidence
Destroying documents
Influencing politcial prosecutions

Was it Ashcroft who went around FISA?

Feel free to chime in here.

I didn’t like that editorial at all. It had unsourced quotes. Stated as fact a lot of silly interpreations that have become twisted from their original meaning. For example:

“I serve at the plesure of the president” was a line from a resignation latter (I can’t remember who’s right now–Was it Cyrus Vance? Arrrgh- I have a brain like a sieve!)

It orginally was a courtly remark made by a person who felt that if he could not in good conscience carry out a presidential policy, then he had no choice but to resign, publicly and overtly breaking with that president and that policy.

Not unlike the “noisy withdrawal” provisons in Sarbanes-Oxley—BTW any DOJ types out their who want to do a post departure noisy withdrawl, now might be a good time–

Anyway, back to my point. Somehow I serve at the pleasure” has gotten twisted to mean that the Presiedet can fire for ANY reason or no reason.

I’m sorry, but you find me a stute or case where the President is allowed to fire in bad faith. I don’t know of one, and if it existed, you’d think ambitous law school [professors who want to get onto the hNYTimes Op Ed pages would cite to that cse in their article

I hate that article. It is calcifying a myth.

Excellent discussions wrt removal powers of president are found in Louis Fisher’s book “Constitutional Conflicts between Congress and the President.”

You know, we here at the lake have our own national holidays” Fitzmas, Comey Day. Soon we will have to publish our own calendar!

Great idea

I went looking for “pleasure of the president,” but it didn’t come from Cyrus Vance’s resignation letter. After reading your comment, my memory started twitching, too, but it’s not from him.

“Calcifying a myth” — at the NY Times? I’m shocked, shocked I tell you . . .

Kathleen -

thanks for those links – I may not have time to get to them before tonight

whatever happened to the subpoena for Condi ???

Not sure what happenned checked all of the links before I sent that ‘is this a way to take McNulty out”. Once it was sent the links were not working. Have never had that happen before. I posted those links again down the line.

Paul K. Charlton of Phoenix and John McKay of Seattle said that Michael J. Elston called them on Jan. 17 and offered an implicit agreement of Gonzales’s silence in exchange for their continuing not to publicly discuss their removals.

I must be missing something here. Gonzales offers his silence if Charlton & McKay agree to not go public? That’s about as intimidating as a threat to be flogged with a wet noodle.

Where’s the leverage here? Was Gonzales et al that bankrupt from a negotiating standpoint, or just that inept?

Christy and TiredFed @ 6:26 -

Who was the House Majority Leader at the time this plan was originally concocted? What, if at all, was his involvement in devising or implementing the plan described in your 6:26 comment?

will look into later. TF

Here are the links

A*P*C on trial
http://www.counterpunch.org/petras01072006.html

Is the Media satotaging the A*P*C trial?
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/gs…..leid=10853

Abe Foxman and the trial
http://www.richardsilverstein……i-bishara/

Checked them again

Bench Conference-WAPO