OT and Scary!
My roomate just got a call from his pharmacy that they believe one of his meds (gabapentin) is contaminated. They didnt say with what or if it is related to any of the current recalls.

Replying to my own comment- Just to not cause a scare or anything, the contaminated gabapentin turns out to be a local pharmacy issue and isnt related to any national (or global) medication/food safety issue.

You guys cannot seriously believe that the Administration is murdering AUSAs?

Try this on for size, a depleted DOJ is not spending the money it should to do threat assesments on threats to AUSAs.

AUSAs got killed by bad guys.

So, main DOJ/ WH resist calls for more resources b/c they just want these stories to die quietly.

I wouldn’t claim any administration is killing someone they could simply fire. Of course, Ray Lemme might argue differently, but he wasn’t so easily deterred. No, more likely, as you say, they didn’t want to spend resources on anything but their own priority. It’s like sending soldiers to war without the proper body armor — what was in it for Bushies to give them armor they couldn’t profit from. But, back to the AUSAs, don’t you wonder what happened to their cases and who might’ve gotten away with something horrendous? And, don’t you have to wonder why it’s happened in so many places in the same general way and nobody at DOJ seems to care at all?

It’s disgusting.

I think your final comment about them wanting the story to ‘die quietly’ reflects how the Bushies feel about anyone which doesn’t benefit them directly — even other Republicans.

I can imagine someone holding Uncle Sam under water in a bathtub and saying, “C’mon, die quietly.”

i guess getting the budget $$ (appropriations committee) has priority – oversight, not so much. would love to see the senate appropriations committee grill her about her unwillingness to appear before the house oversight committee.

Would love to see Committee say “Thank you for the information on your 2008 budget request. We plan to act on it following your testimony in the House. Have a Nice Day.”

Hi Christy and everyone. I haven’t read today’s posts yet, so this will probably be OT.

If a proesucutor has the goods on someone – say 5 serious charges – and there’s a chance the defendant could be pardoned, could the prosecutor hold back one or two charges for a later trial, after any pardon might be granted? Just wondering and would surely like to know.

If the charges all arose out of the same facts and circumstances, it is unlikely that he would. Such a prosecution would be precluded by double jeopardy.

nolo @ 61

wow — on so many fronts, this
stuff just gets mind-numbing. . .

thanks for the comprehensive
run-down here, christy — two
additional thoughts:

one — as noted elsewhere, rep.
conyers is very likely going to ask
mr. gonzales to explain the woeful
e.e.o. record inside the DoJ civil-rights
division, since 2003 — no african american
attorneys have been hired. and, that’s
in four long years, here folks. [i have
some reaction from a former DoJ attorney
in the bottom of my post on this.]. . .

two — mr. gonzales’ “i don’t recall“
mantra will cut no ice in front of
rep. conyers, under oath, on thursday,
at 9:30 a.m. e.d.t., on the above.

these are cold, hard facts — facts, from
which he can no longer blithely shuffle
and soft-shoe, away. . .

so, where is his department on enforcing
the civil rights act of 1964?

where?!

well, the image in my post,
linked, above — and taken directly
from a white-house/DoJ brochure — tells
it all. . . in tragic, ironic, terms. . .

so — a busy week, ahead, here!

Wasn’t Alberto Gonzales supposed to provide to the Senate Judiciary Committee, which requested a response from him by May 4, written clarification of all his “I don’t know” and “I don’t recall” answers in his earlier testimony before that committee?

yes — good catch! — indeed, he was.

last friday, may 4, 2007 was that
date — as this letter indicates.

i’d look for more from sen. leahy
on this — tonight or tommorrow, at
the outside. ..

Yes, I think the kids can wear those tee-shirts just like the kids who held the banner “Bong Hits for Jesus”…it challenges us to think.

Wear teeshirts that say “judge not, let ye be judged” “let those without sin cast the first stone” etc etc. Like Colbert says, “don’t chapter and verse ME, man!”

now, THOSE are some RIGHTEOUS t-shirt messages!

If a proesucutor has the goods on someone – say 5 serious charges – and there’s a chance the defendant could be pardoned, could the prosecutor hold back one or two charges for a later trial, after any pardon might be granted? Just wondering and would surely like to know.

do you think wearing jewlery with a religious symbol should be banned in school? or uncut hair? or covered hair? – if done for religious purposes?

there are lots of religious elements to people’s lives… and i don’t like to interfer…

in my simplistic way of thinking, the separation of church and state meant that the state should NOT get involved (in either encouraging or repressing religious expression). so, i’m strongly against the mention of god in a pledge to the flag (don’t even like the pledge w/o the god mention). but personal t-shirts? i think they should be allowed… even if i hate the message.