Tweet
Update: Eureka Spring got this posted in Arkansas Blog, where it got this response:
Sen. Mark Pryor's office says that the Justice Department has represented consistently that Griffin was being appointed under provisions of the Patriot Act and thus is a full U.S. attorney and not an "interim" serving under a time limit. Gonzales did represent (dishonestly by all appearances) that it was his intention to seek Senate confirmation for Griffin. The matter has been settled in court, by Judge G. Thomas Eisele's rejection of a challenge of Griffin's appointment by defense lawyer John Wesley Hall. Eisele explicitly held that Griffin held the position under the Patriot Act provision that allow unlimited appointments.
Apparently, the Justice Department doesn't know that it has "represented consistently" that Griffin was appointed under the Patriot Act, because they won't say so on the record. Perhaps Pryor should tell them as much?
Update 2: Amanda Terkel at ThinkProgress got John Boozman to confirm that he sent the names of three candidates to replace Griffin to the White House on March 30. Surprise! He hasn't heard anything more about it. She also links to Gonzales' testimony where he assured Congress he wanted Senate-approved USAs. So what's the hold-up, Gonzales?
It's been almost five months since Kyle Sampson advocated "gumming to death" the Tim Griffin nomination as USA for Eastern Arkansas. Since that time, the Administration has repeatedly claimed that it never had any intention of appointing Tim Griffin using the PATRIOT Act provision giving the AG authority to appoint USAs directly. Most recently, designated firewall defense lawyer Brad Berenson stated that Griffin was not, in fact, appointed using the PATRIOT Act provision.
Berenson said that the letter was technically accurate because Sampson and Oprison never ultimately implemented the plan to install Griffin as U.S. attorney through the PATRIOT Act provision. "The principals never adopted it, and it was never done," Berenson said. "The statement in the letter is accurate."
But if I'm doing the math correctly and if Griffin really was appointed as a normal interim USA, his appointment would have expired on April 20.
I can only think of two possibilities. First, that Rove lackey Tim Griffin is serving as USA in Arkansas despite having no legal basis to do so. Or, that Griffin actually was appointed using the PATRIOT Act provision despite repeated Administration assurances to the contrary. And that we are now in the official "gumming it to death" stage of Griffin's illustrious career.
Now, I'm not a lawyer so perhaps I'm missing other possibilities. I've made five calls to DOJ's Public Affairs Office (if you're wondering, their phone numbers are (202) 616-2777 and (202) 514-2007), yet DOJ has been unable to provide any clarification regarding the legal status of Griffin's appointment as USA. I also twice called Senator Pryor's office (whose number is (202) 224-2353), figuring that, since Pryor met with Attorney General Gonzales on April 23–the first business day after Griffin's appointment should have expired–Senator Pryor might be able to explain Griffin's status. Perhaps Senator Pryor is embarrassed that his lax attitude toward advice and consent was abused so badly, because his staffers haven't returned my call either. If I were a suspicious person (oh, I am, I am) I would assume these people aren't returning my call because they're trying to avoid telling the truth about Tim Griffin's employment status.
Maybe you all can help me clarify this issue. Can anyone find a definitive answer as to whether there is any legal basis for Tim Griffin to continue to serve as the top law enforcement official in Eastern Arkansas?
294 Comments
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Zedcentricity
gumming it to death? they’ve flossed their minds!
Marcy, surely you aren’t insinuating that BushCo would do anything that was less than perfectly legal…?
Does this mean that anyone being prosecuted by that office could claim that the head of the office was acting without legal authority? Holy Zed.
Have you tried contacting Patrick Leahy or Sheldon Whitehouse?
Hugh @ 5
Nope. I wanted to see if we could get DOJ to go on the record on this. The point is, will DOJ ‘fess up to it. How can they not explain what status Griffin has???
But I will call both their offices.
punaise @ 2
You said a mouthful with that one. This thing with Cummins is really hard to swallow.
Bingo!!!!
He’s probably serving the same way Condi ignores subpoenas and Gonzo continues in his fake job. He’s there until someone literally does something about it. They ignore the law and continue to just show up at work, and nothing of substance ever happens. Nothing will change until there is action – not just words.
They don’t follow the stinkin’ laws.
punaise:
Felicitations…apropos le zero. Le premier peut-etre?
OT ~ The GOP Culture of Corruption is alive and well and playing golf.
Under Boehner, Corrupt Conservatives Play Musical Chairs With Committee Seats
punaise @ 2
Mental floss.
Thanks for turnning the rocks over (GOP) (DEMS) it stinks to the high heavens. Thanks E.W.
it is important to get the official doj word, so that once they change it, we have a record.
thanks for this post, marcy. i hadn’t realized that griffin’s status was still in play. he’s been id’d as the poster boy for patriot act appointments so often i thought that was settled.
ew -
NOBODY can stir the weeds like you do! And Hugh’s suggestion for contacts sounds like a couple of good starting points. H*ll, the Dems oughta be calling you and asking, “What is our assignment for the day, ma’am?” They might get somewhere a great deal faster than they’ve been draggin’ *ss to this point.
The telephonic equivalent of “I don’t recall” and “I am searching my memory but don’t remember”.
Reason one: Because King George the Turd wills it.
-GSD
Y’know, it would be a lot of fun to watch Leahy drop this in a hearing like a water balloon on Abu’s head.
EmptyWheel – Brilliant!
Hope we get some answers – and that this gets some serious attention.
Hi EW,
You and Phoenix Woman are hurtin’ my head this a.m. with all these facts and reality-based questions…
Did anyone catch Sydney Blumenthal’s article in Salon, All Hail the King. Great analysis of when and what happens when a loyal Bushie leaves the king’s circle of trust.
http://www.salon.com/opinion/b…..7/loyalty/
Not only Griffin. What about the “Interim USAs”. Doesn’t the 120-day rule apply to all Interim appointees resulting from the 12/7/06 firings – or are those slots USAless right now?
Biodun @ 8
merci, but I lost my zedginity a long time ago. truth be told, I’m just a casual zedder (right place right time, crime of opportunity kind of thing), rather than a true devotee of the hunt.
Hey – are you guys not covering the Plame motion today? Or is that letr on.
That’s all. Thanks for everything.
Waccamaw @ 13
perfect suggestion!
Marcy deserves the pew-litzer prize for weed stirring. Thank you for being you. I’ve got to run take care of business. Once again, please don’t drop any bombshells until I return, OK?
Well, I drop by and look who is in the house. I think Claude Rains would be shocked, SHOCKED, that such perfidy is going on at the Bush Casino. On a serious note, I recall seeing somwhere a theory where, if you couple both an acting and an interim status, you could obtain a potential period of a little over 300 days (330 comes to mind, but don’t know why). There may be precedent for something like this, but I am neither aware of it, nor can I find it. Barring some viability of this contrivance, I do believe Griffin is serving without authority.
Thom @ 22
So many scandals…so little time.
Did I read that Leahy/Specter gave Gonzo 48 hours to respond (tomorrow deadline) to their ‘angry’ letter?
If so, what are the consequences (surely anticipated) for further non-compliance?
LS @ 20
Not really.
First of all, most of them were hired over a month later (because the first resignations took place in late January-early February. Also, most of them fall under Vacancy Reform Act replacements, in which one of the top AUSAs takes over in case of resignation of the USA. The one exception is Scott Schoools, who is technically an EOUSA employee, who replaced Ryan in SF.
And in any case, most of THOSE folks (again, with the probable exception of Schools) we have an incentive to leave in place, precisely because they are career employees and in the case of AZ and SDCA, seem to be letting public corruption cases go forward.
quick flyby from paris. give ‘em hell, marcy!
bmaz @ 25
I actually think that’s what they’ll do, bmaz, yes.
But again, I’d like to make them say so. If only so we can push the gumming line some.
emptywheel @ 27
Thanks. That clears that up for me.
Thom @ 22
Wasn’t planning on doing anything here, though perhaps I should. I don’t expect it’ll be good news, was “keepign my powder dry” for the sentencing hearing in a few weeks.
Great post, great question for DoJ, EW.
While driving my neighbor to an eye clinic this a.m. we talked @ length about the USA firings. She’s quite the radical & was a CCC (card carrying Commie) during the Hollywood bad old days. A mind like the proverbial steel trap, @ age 89.
Her comment on the Cummins et al firings- “Marie, when our DoJ starts pulling shit like this & trying to hide it in plain sight, it’s time to bring Ed Murrow back from the grave to call them out on it. MSM is more in the pocket of big business than ever before & is worthless right now.”
As always, she is an inspiration…
Sam W @ 4
Maybe the person to ask is one of the Federal District judges for Eastern Arkansas.
A search of the online dockets only goes up to 5/15, with not that many “USA” plaintiff cases filed in the weeks before. So it’s just possible that the issue hasn’t come up in court yet.
If it does, it will be highly embarassing, particularly if Griffin tries the usual GOP ‘bluster through’ strategy, then gets brought up short by a demand that he produce documents that show his current status.
Judges really hate being bullshitted.
SOP=IOKIYAR
Pronounced Eye-okie-ar
radiofreewill @ 27
I think a guest TH on Hardball said in effect another round of sand-pounding then off to court. More resistance.
BTW, I’m very tired of TH talk about “running out the clock” and the “American people look askance at impeachment” etc. Finally someone last night said the FFs got it right, and Congress has the duty to impeach. I say impeach them all, Bush, Cheney, Rove, and Abu (am I missing anyone).
emptywheel @ 30
OK. Now I am feeling rather stupid. It was you that promulgated that thought wasn’t it?
From DoJ website:
My bold. How? emptywheel on the trail.
I don’t know the answer, but why aren’t our Reps doing something about it? How many USA’s are currently serving w/o Senate approval? Why are they allowing this? Frustration level rising.
bmaz @ 25
Dayum! Wish I could talk as pretty as you :-P
Also it kind of depends on which statute applies. Before the Patriot Act shenanigans, I think and please help me on this that at the end of the 120 days the choice of the interim USA reverted to the judge in the district, which was one of the ostensible reasons that the Bush DOJ changed the statute.
EvilDrPuma @ 3
Erm
Didn’t we have a budget which was different in the House and Senate last year?
Details details details
Leftist libruls insist on taking that pesky Constitution literally about stuff other than abortion.
emptywheel:
Does this clarify the situation?
bmaz @ 37
No, not at all (didn’t mention it in the post, either, bc I’m playing dumb). But I had read the same thing–that you can stretch out to 330 or something. And assumed that’s what the technical justification is at this point.
Lou Costello @ 10
Minority Leader Boehner’s motto: Smaller petri dish than Hastert’s; same familiar culture.
When there’s only corrupt Congressmen to choose from, what’s a Leader to do?
Well what does the Patriot Act say? Congress evidently didn’t read the bill before passing it, maybe we should take a look.
Satan luvvs Repugs @ 34
i would think a defense attorney handling a federal case in arkansas would raise the issue before the judge…
Biodun @ 42
[Professor Farnsworth]Oh, my, yes…[/Professor Farnsworth.]
Sam W @ 4
It’s certainly another potent arrow in the defense bar’s quiver.
Need list of defense attorneys in Arkansas who are arguing cases before federal court.
Ready, set, go.
Biodun @ 38
Ah yes–thanks for pointing that out, Biodun, I had noticed it too. In every discussion of this topic, particularly Griffin’s own announcement that he’s not going to seek Senate confirmation, the “how” remains unanswered.
On Feb. 15, Griffin suddenly announced that he had “made the decision not to let my name go forward to the Senate” for approval. Instead, he will serve indefinitely as an “interim” prosecutor. By avoiding Senate approval, Griffin will also avoid having to answer questions under oath about his role in a plan to supress Florida votes — primarily those of African-American servicemembers — in the 2004 election. From the LA Times, 10/28/04:
Did White House Pull Nomination To Avoid Questions Over 2004 Minority Voter Suppression?
punaise @ 21
moi aussi.
re: gumming
Bazooka-type gumming???
re: Gonzales
AP quoting Specter as saying “I think Gonzales will be resigning following our investigations”.
ccmask @ 52
I think that is the correct reading of his decision not to seek Senate approval. But with Berenson out there claiming Griffin was in fact normally appointed, I think it would cause DOJ some embarrassment to have to admit that Griffin is, in fact, a PATRIOT appoint. Of course, they seem unwilling to do so thus far. Minor issue, I know.
The more this develops it appears the Senate Judiciary at least is beginning to make a case against bush directly. I hope so. There is enough to go on here to possibly get him to resign in disgrace thus putting an end to the bush dynasty.
The executive branch is finding itself more and more between a rock & hard place the more they let Gonzo talk and or even stick around. But then if they let him go who can they find to do replace him that will pass a Senate confirmation hearing.
Prediction, Gonzo goes down and bush tries to get along with out a permanent AG until Jan 2009. Who is second in command right now?? There have been so many rats fleeing that I lost track.
schumer’s people seem to be listening and paying attention…
emptywheel @ 51
I was just trying to find that statement. Apparently, Griffin knew his appointment wouldn’t survive confirmation hearings.
Sounds to me like Griffin is grandfathered in.
Listen. While you are attacking Dear Karl Rove, his predictions are coming true!
“Hundreds of illegals” register in Texas.
Here we go.
-GSD
Hm. I called and got various voice mails, spoke to one actual live person, a young man, who rather frantically said his (Griffin’s) assistant knows all that stuff, not him, and she’d have to call me back.
The number was 501-340-2650.
The statute is the only source of authority for appointment of a USA. The PATRIOT Act amendment did not create an alternative menas for appointing USA’s. It amended the existing statute to delete the provisions for 120-day appointments. The statement that Griffin was not appointed using the PATRIOT Act procedure appears to me to be nonsense. At the time of his appointment there was no other way to appoint him.
Here is the wording of the amendment:
SEC. 502. INTERIM APPOINTMENT OF UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS.
Section 546 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by striking subsections (c) and (d) and inserting the following new subsection:
”(c) A person appointed as United States attorney under this section may serve until the qualification of a United States Attorney for such district appointed by the President under section 541 of this title.”.
The deleted subsections (c) and (d) provided for the 120-day limit on interim appointments and appointment by the Court if no Senate-confirmed replacement is made in that time. The new section (c) permits the “interim” appointee to serve until a new candidate is confirmed – that is, indefinitely.
Methinks the congresscritters investigating the DoJ are beginning to feel like Phillistines by being beaten by the jawbone of an ass.
ccmask @ 59
I think the grandfather you write about is Augusto Pinochet.
-GSD
Great Tony Auth cartoon on Cheney!
emptywheel:
Did you see my 43?
Griffin, asleep on the job
OT
The national average for regular gasoline hit another high today $3.114.
The wholesale price is $2.3902 which is near high.
What this means is that gasoline prices are very high, that they will remain high, and that there are pressures in the market to keep them going higher for a while.
In crude oil at the moment,
Nymex Crude Future $63.58
Dated Brent Spot $69.12
WTI Cushing Spot $63.74
The Brent (world) benchmark is very high. The Cushing (US) benchmark should not be so far off the Brent and indicates that a) it is rapidly ceasing to be a meaningful benchmark and b) a glut in crude supplies remains which is not being processed in a timely fashion by US refineries: another indication that US gasoline inventories will remain tight.
I expect that oil company executives are going around in private with peglegs and eye patches and saying “Arrgh” a lot these days.
Gunga Djinn @ 54
Wow! Is this the same Specter — Judiciary Committee? Is there a link?
Hugh @ 41
Claiming, as they did after getting caught, that their concern was that a USA appointed by a Federal judge but reporting to the AG was — wait for it — a violation of separation of powers!
As if that ever kept them up late at night, sleepless….
do-si-do@36
BTW, I’m very tired of TH talk about “running out the clock” and the “American people look askance at impeachment” etc. Finally someone last night said the FFs got it right, and Congress has the duty to impeach.
I agree. Non other than Sheldon Whitehouse, on Hardball last night was spewing the “impeachment, because of the Clinton years”, is not a viable option. I want to know where he got this info; that the American people are impeachment fatigued. It is a Republican talking point, one that Whitehouse should not be repeating.
It was Jonathan Turley on KO who said that impeachment is not only the correct option, it may very well be the only one.
punaise @ 67
And do not let sleeping griffins lie.
OT, but as to Plame and EW’s comment about not being optimistic. This is the Judge who they are appearing before. Some interesting connections:
Judge John D. Bates
Judge Bates was appointed United States District Judge in December 2001. He graduated from Wesleyan University in 1968 and received a J.D. from the University of Maryland School of Law in 1976. From 1968 to 1971, he served in the United States Army, including a tour in Vietnam. Judge Bates clerked for Judge Roszel C. Thomsen of the United States District Court for the District of Maryland from 1976 to 1977 and was an associate at Steptoe & Johnson from 1977 to 1980. He served as an Assistant United States Attorney for the District of Columbia from 1980 to 1997, and was Chief of the Civil Division of the U.S. Attorney’s Office from 1987 to 1997. Judge Bates was on detail as Deputy Independent Counsel for the Whitewater investigation from 1995 to mid-1997. In 1998, he joined the Washington law firm of Miller & Chevalier, where he was Chair of the Government Contracts/Litigation Department and a member of the Executive Committee. Judge Bates has served on the Advisory Committee for Procedures of the D.C. Circuit and on the Civil Justice Reform Committee for the District Court, and as Treasurer of the D.C. Bar, Chairman of the Publications Committee of the D.C. Bar, and Chairman of the Litigation Section of the Federal Bar Association. He was a member of the Board of Directors of the Washington Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs. In 2005, he was appointed by Chief Justice Rehnquist to serve on the U.S. Judicial Conference Committee on Court Administration and Case Management. In February 2006, he was appointed by Chief Justice Roberts to serve as a judge of the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.
And also:
Mike Luckovich’s take on Republican loyalties!
Biodun @ 66
Yes.
We know that on the 19th there was that discussion. But we also know that, several times afterwards in discussions with Congress, AGAG and Sampson said they decided against that.
The answer is, in fact, probably Bloix’s at 62–he was necessarily appointed by PATRIOT. But the point I’d like DOJ (and Pryor, for that matter), is not just taht he was statutorily appointed by PATRIOT, but that they are going to treat him as such, and gum up any attempts to replace him.
Thank you Bloix for the actual statutory language. See, that didn’t take me very long to read.
Yo Congress, read this stuff before you make it the law of the land, ok?
flatford39 @ 56
who, for that matter, is THIRD in command?
interesting element i did not know:
in the absence of an independent counsel’s office, and the spotty record of doj where special prosecutors are concerned, this oped piece in the times at the end of march addressed that person’s role in launching special investigations. (FDL may already have discussed this; if so, apologies.)
by neal katyal, now a law professor at georgetown.
IN 1999, when the Independent Counsel Act (the law that gave Kenneth Starr and Lawrence Walsh their mandates) was expiring, I was given the job of writing the new Justice Department rules for the appointment of a special prosecutor since the department would once again be responsible for overseeing such investigations.
There was one hypothetical to worry about once the Independent Counsel Act lapsed: a case in which the attorney general herself and her deputy were suspected of possible misconduct. The rules were therefore written to vest the decision about whether to appoint a special prosecutor in the top Justice Department official not embroiled in the controversy.
Today, the only way to get to the bottom of the United States attorney scandal — which involved the administration’s firing of nearly 10 percent of America’s top prosecutors — is to use these rules and appoint a special prosecutor.
so do we know who that person is?
Helen @ 71
I’m with you all the way…Impeachment and an Indepenent Counsel to ivestigate the USA firings as the very least should be our goals now!
I was very disappointed to hear Whitehouse repeat the Republican talking points also.
do-si-do @ 36, it’s as if somewhere it is written that Congress’s oversight does not include impeachment when dubious assertions are made that time is a consideration and that the American people MAY not be in the mood for impeachment. The American people are not in the mood for a lot of things; such as, the Iraq war, but Congress isn’t offering any apologies for not effectively stopping the war. The politicians seem to never act on what is right and what is wrong but rather almost always how it affects reelection.
I’m beginning to wonder why we need a two-party system. Why not have solely the Democrats for six years and solely the Republicans for six years and any other party that wants to join in the fun for six years? Or until the clock runs out on any of it.
Hugh — diamond-studded eyepatches and solid-gold peglegs, yes….
AZ Matt @ 65
would have been better if there was evidence that he’d shot him in the face.
OT-Bush was asked this a.m. if the had sent Card and Abu to Ashcroft’s bedside. He’s not going to talk about it.
Danziger’s Great Moments on the War on Terror!
I had an odd thought yesterday amid all the frustration.
Do the Bushies have a plan to take over our government?
I know Im being nutty but havent they put everything into undermining each part of our government and scoffing at the Constitution. Why would they just leave peacefully under the rule of law?
egregious @ 77
Exactly.
While we are allowed to talk about this provision being “slipped into the bill in the dead of night without being read,” it rings particularly hollow when actual Senators (thinking of DiFi particularly) sing the same tune.
OT:
The republcans can forget about September the end of the last FU.
No end in sight
Three months into the job, General David Petraeus says it is difficult to predict how well the surge of troops in Baghdad will succeed before the full number of troops arrive and that he would not have a definitive answer about prospects for stability by September, when he is to report back to Congress.
“I think generally is is still early days. We are literally still just setting the footprint if you will to do what we intend to achieve but until we get all those forces in and have really worked with them for a while I think it’s difficult to see what’s going to happen,” he told me in an interview Tuesday evening.
Hugh @ 41
there are 21 US Attorneys who were not nominated by the President, including Tim Griffin.
If I had my druthers, every word of every piece of legislation would be read into the record and available for review by the citizens who have to live under the laws.
Is it noon yet? I need a drink…
I find it wholly intolerable that these jokers enact federal laws that they haven’t even read!
Kafka is spinning in his crypt.
Isn’t Mr. Griffin a judge or a JAG? Does that count?
emptywheel @ 76:
You know BushCo will never admit that–gumming up attempts. *g*
Helen @ 71
I agree. Non other than Sheldon Whitehouse, on Hardball last night was spewing the “impeachment, because of the Clinton years”, is not a viable option. I want to know where he got this info; that the American people are impeachment fatigued. It is a Republican talking point, one that Whitehouse should not be repeating.
Impeachment fatigued?? So the take-home message for power-crazed wannabes is to plan ahead? Hold spurious investigations now so when a real team of crooks comes to bat, the general public will be “too tired” to hold you accountable? What a crock!
snowbird42 @ 85
That’s what makes me nervous about the phrase “read into the plan.”
WHAT PLAN.
They already set up a shadow government, permitted by laws passed [but perhaps not read] by our Congressional representatives. The idea was we needed some government if we lost too many top people in a terrorist attack.
I cannot imagine Congress would have gone along with simply having someone declare, Ok, it’s time for the parallel government now.
dmg @ 78
Solicitor General Paul Clement–which is technically what ahs happened. Gonzales has recused and Clement is in charge. It might comfort you (not!) to know that Clement clerked for Silberman AND Scalia and is a BIG fan of the Unitary Executive. Supposed to be smart as hell. Kind of like Addington.
dmg @ 78
There are no such individuals.
ccmask @ 90
No
Solai @ 83
Somebody’s clearly wishing for an “ongoing investigation.”
Not talking about it because you’re not going to talk about it doesn’t have the same sheen of respectability as an “ongoing investigation.”
emptywheel @ 44
I read the same thing as you, but can’t remember the details. I DO remember, though, that after interim period (120 days) runs out, he has to be renamed for position for an additional 180 days. IIRC, the second period is called acting USA.
Folks, sorry to run–I’ve got to go fetch a friend at the airport. But I will check back in later because you’re coming up with important points.
“Mr. Comey said the bizarre events in Mr. Ashcroft’s hospital room were precipitated by a White House request that the Justice Department sign off on a continuation of the eavesdropping, which started in October 2001″
http://rawstory.com/news/2007/….._0517.html
When did he say that?
I believe Mr. Griffin is a JAG-off.
-GSD
Forgot to ask..has he been renamed?
emptywheel @ 94
ugh, no comfort at all.
still, thanks very much, marcy. y’see? i don’t blame the messenger for bad news.
He never said this either:
“Later, he said, Mr. Bush agreed to change the wiretapping in ways that enabled Justice to provide a legal rationale”
Solai @ 83
They should hammer Bush with questions about this and ask him why he’s afraid to talk about it. Pointedly ask him if he’s ashamed of his actions, if he considers them criminal, etc. This episode carries a strong mental image that the general public is likely to grasp intuitively and it connects directly to Bush.
Shame the Wilsons drew this judge. It’s as if Karl, Dick Cheney, and Dickie Armitage said, “You can’t sue us, let’s go ask our friend, he’s a judge~!”
At the outset, Comey said he was not going to describe the matter or program or even acknowledge the existence of a program. Even if Feinstein alluded to it being the wiretap program and Comey didn’t deny it, he also did not acknowledge it.
jayackroyd @ 87
Boy, color me surprised. I didn’t see this coming except from many miles away. That dope Odierno got ahead of himself and said we wouldn’t “know” until next April. He had to quickly backtrack but Petraeus is working his way in that direction only slower. And all of this nonsensical talk of “setting the footprint” comes down to: it’s hard to see any progress when there isn’t any. Petraeus is already adopting the equivocations of his predecessors. There is a natural arc to them. First, there is the can do bravado. Second, comes the situation is complicated and difficult. Last, there’s no progress but the claim is made that at least they are keeping something worse from happening.
yellowdogD @ 102
Not that I have found and, to the best of my knowledge, that has to be done as an official matter of record.
LS @ 104
LS – you are correct at 100 and correct here. They are making assumptions. Also, I left you an answer last night re: the Madrid bombings. You were correct then also. Comey’s decision to stay had nothing to do with the bombings.
TeddySanFran @ 97
And the next ? should have been this morning- but aren’t the American People you refer to so frequently @ this moment needing/demanding the answer to this ?
Oh, wait, different journalistic era…
OfT: Dana Priest made a little news (I think) today in response to some smarty-pants EssEff questioner. Or did we already know that State had made a Baghdad billet critical to career advancement?
Here’s how the statute worked before the Patriot Act amendment. If a USA resigned or was fired, the president could appoint a new one to serve “with the advice and consent of the Senate,” pursuant to 28 USC Sec. 541. That creates a problem – the Senate can be slow in acting to confirm, or might not confirm, in which case the position would stand vacant. So Section 546 provided that the Atty Gen’l – NOT the president – could appoint an “interim” USA for 120 days. (Note that it’s the AG- a law enforcement officer who is supposed to be removed from politics – who made the interim appointment.) The 120 days was in order to give the Senate time to act. Usually the interim appointee was the same person that the president nominated but it didn’t have to be.
If nothing happened within 120 days, the district court appointed an interim USA. Again, this could be the same person who the president nominated and usually was- but the process was designed to keep political concerns out and to make sure the appointee had lots of institutional legitimacy.
The Patriot Act reauthorization changed the rules. It deleted the 120-day limit on AG appointments and the provision for district court appointment, and made the initial “interim” appointment indefinite in time and without review. This meant that all the Pres had to do was have his AG appoint someone as USA and then refuse to submit any names to Congress, and the person could serve until the Pres fired him.
Griffin could not have been appointed under the 120 day rule because the 120 day rule had been deleted and did not exist when he was appointed. He could have been nominated under Sec 541 but that nomination would not have allowed him to serve because he had not been confirmed by the Senate. The only way for him to serve was to be appointed by the AG under Sec 546. He certainly could also have been nominated under 541 at the same time, and it is apparently that nomination that he “withdrew,” but his Sec 546 “interim” appointment was not affected.
ccmask @ 90
He walked by a tennis court once. Does that count?
Tortoise @ 40
Great read: David Sedaris, “Me Talk Pretty One Day”
http://www.twbookmark.com/book…..10135.html
In a banana republic, no legal basis is required for anything.
Slothrop @ 116
and in dc, no one can hear you scream.
LS @ 107
Not the wiretapping program but a different one, the technology that made Rockefeller nervous enough to record a secret note and put it in his safe. Remember Gonzo kept saying in earlier testimony “not THIS program.”
All emails. All phone calls. All internet searches, and indeed keystroke memory. Business records thru National Security letters. Data mining. To know everything about everybody.
Of course they would never do that to political opponents, members of Congress or the diplomatic community, or journalists, would they?
AZ Matt -
Did you see the 5-16 Sherffius ‘toon wrt to vultures? Left the link on a downstairs thread but you can probably get there a lot faster than I.
Quzi @ 79
Amen.
Waccamaw @ 119
Thanks, will check it out!
Helen @ 110
Thanks Helen, I saw that later! I just get a bug about the reporting being accurate. I am convinced that the fear and anger expressed by Comey is related to something bigger, and all this reporting and assumption about the wiretap program seems to me like a red herring. I think they are barking up the wrong tree somehow. Just my humble gut opinion.
BusChen…turning the world into a RICO-republic… one USA at a time.
Bloix @113 – Precisely right. Except both Griffin and the US Government are on record as saying Griffin was NOT appointed under that provision. That is the Catch-22 these infants have placed themselves in.
This isn’t going to end well. As Sam W pointed out, there doesn’t seem to be any legal basis for Tim Griffin being the AUSA for that area. Eventually, a defense lawyer is going to point that out to a judge. I’m hoping that this stunt isn’t going to damage any court cases, but I have a nasty suspicion that a bad guy (or several bad guys) is going to get away with a fairly nasty crime because of this, and Bush is going to try to blame it all on an “activist judge”. Hope I’m wrong.
Bloix @ 113
that would be my take on it as well. I have read somewhere that such 546 appts would expire at the end of the current term of Congress, but I’m not sure now.
Good morning! Its 7 AM in Hawaii.
Last night, something happened at FDL and I lost the ability to get into the Comments on any thread, getting a weird error
What happened? It was frustrating.
If this was answered on a previous thread, please point me to it.
Bob in HI
ironically, the guy who slipped the language into the Patriot Act (at William Moschella’s suggestion), Brett Tolman, was appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate as USA for Utah.
spurious @ 120
What I fail to understand is what impeachment buys. At the very minimum it would take a year and at this point there is no chance to get 2/3 of the Senate. An Independent Counsel statute would be vetoed and require 2/3 in BOTH Houses which is not possible. Therefore, isn’t it just better to wait until the next election and let the people decide?
I wonder if someone out there is trying to connect some of the dots on the DOJ issues with Andy Card and the imprisonment of his cousin.
http://www.watchermagazine.com/?p=6763
It is interesting that his own cousin was a victim of these attacks on our Constitution, and he was the one who ratted her out.
egregious @ 118
I agree with everything you are saying. What I am saying is that at no point during Comey’s testimony did he indicate one way or the other that it was “that” program or that “type” of program that was at issue that particular night. All he said was that whatever it was had a deadline for reauthorization on 3/11 and that he and Ashcroft could not certify the legality of “it” as it was, whatever “it” was/is.
Hugh at 108–
Notice that the time is getting telescoped, though. I think we’re now down to 90 day Boehner Units, replacing the FUs.
I still have a very hard time wrapping my mind around the Congress just collapsing on us. I ran into Maloney’s local COS today, and she said that the solidity of the Republicans makes doing much of anything nearly impossible.
Don’t they realize that they’re gonna lose the Senate completely if they don’t find a way to get out? I mean a filibuster proof democratic majority. Bush is in the 20s. Everybody hates the occupation. It’s only gonna get worse.
Is there nobody with an R on their forehead with the political courage of a Bill Cohen or Howard Baker? Is it really this bad?
Echo answers mournfully, I guess.
Griffin could be an interim USA under the Vacancy Reform Act (Under the Vacancy Reform Act, First Assistant United States Attorneys can only serve for 210 days as Acting United States Attorneys). Combined with the former 120 day rule under section 546, that comes to 330 days (that’s not the current process though).
TeddySanFran @ 106
Shame the Wilsons drew this judge. It’s as if Karl, Dick Cheney, and Dickie Armitage said, “You can’t sue us, let’s go ask our friend, he’s a judge~!”
True, that. But in order for a claim of immunity or privilege to trump a complaint about a particular act, that act must have been performed while acting within the scope of the job. i.e. Cheney e.g., is claiming (now) that he is immune from suits for acts performed while he was acting as the Veep. However, he’s also on record as saying that the anti-Wilson campaign was nothing more than “political hardball” – which obviously is not within the scope of the official duties of the Vice-President of the Unites States.
I tend to read into his strategy that he’s also trying to say that he couldn’t have performed the complained-of act unless he was *in* the office of the V.P.(being ostensibly the only way he could have had the info with which to slime the Wilsons). fwiw, I don’t think either one flies legally – or at least shouldn’t.
From very early on, the defense was “political hardball” – so let ‘em live with that. The Motion to Dismiss should be denied.
Also to be considered is that those same claims of immunity and privilege are weaker for Libby, and very weak indeed for Rove.
Bob Schacht @ 127
I think someone was pinchin’ the toobZ shut
I’m embarrassed to even suggest this, but the writer does know that “gumming to death” has nothing to do with chewing gum, right?
It’s late here and I’m just thrown off a bit by the picture of the bubble gum, that’s all.
Did the Senate question Comey in private? If not are their any plans to do so?
sorry, that last note might have been a bit confusing. The only authority for Tim Griffin to continue to serve as Interim or Acting US Attorney is 28 USC 546 (per Patriot Act Reauthorization).
I called DOJ Pub Affairs office, got a guy and asked him about Griffin’ status. He asked my state, and when I said Calif, he sent me to DOJ comment line, where I left a message about Griffin.
Called Sen Pryor’s office, got a woman who said she was not familiar with who Tom Griffin was or the issue, but she would take a message for Sen Pryor with details.
The so-called “program” could have been about torture or extraordinary rendition just as well as being about wiretapping. Just a thought.
Griffin’s post was filled in recess. Does that make any kind of difference?
Teague noted that Griffin’s previous experience appears to be “primarily research and campaigns.
LS @ 122
I’m inclined to agree.
TiredFed @ 132
Except Griffin had never been a AUSA much less a FAUSA. Add to that the best reading is those provisions were repealed or obviated by the Patriot measure.
ccmask says
May 17th, 2007 at 10:15 am
Griffin’s post was filled in recess. Does that make any kind of difference?
he’s an opposition research expert, installed in Arkansas just in time for HRC’s campaign. A political hit-man.
tbsa @ 136
Interesting question. I got the impression that after the vote, they might go right into private questions. Originally the committee planned two rounds of public questions. Then Leahy showed up, got pissed and said that they would meet privately. Then it became clear that the public hearings would be much shorter than previously planned.
Which makes me wonder if they didn’t go right into a closed hearing (the existence of which would be classified???) right away….?
bmaz @ 142
there was a lot of discussion in the Goodling emails about detailing Griffin in under Cummins after he (Griffin) got back from JAG duty in Iraq. Will go look now. brb
TiredFed @ 128
Has there been any mention of an investigation into how Tolman was able to insert this language so clandestinely?
Woodhall Hollow @ 144
wondered the same thing. no telling until Senate calendar gets published.
and have y’all heard this: Former Rove Assistant to Seek Immunity
This is good wrt the cagist lists, from Palast:
Griffin himself ducked our cameras, but his RNC team tried to sell us the notion that the caging sheets were, in fact, not illegal voter hit lists, but a roster of donors to the Bush-Cheney reelection campaign. Republican donors at homeless shelters?
lol–imagine homeless people donating to Republicans?
Where is the big dog in all of this? Be nice of him to stop in for a chat.
TiredFed @ 148
Oh goody, another rat. Here’s hoping that she squeaks.
Tokyoite — you may need to head for bed. The pic may not have been the choice of the author of the post, and may have been a sight gag based on the word “gum” — as in, we FirePups should chew on this matter for a while, since Griffin is obviously following Rove’s orders, I mean, Sampson’s suggestion to gum his appointment to death.
Damn, Marcy, I can’t keep up with you!! Guardian-UK yesterday, multiple posts at TNH along with a post here; I hope you are refraining from caffeine — because if you had a sudden burst of coffee, I’d have to throw in the towel.
yellowDogD, Bloix — I am digging around now, believe I have seen something that documents your points about another 220 days, which may or may not be the Sec 546. That sounds like the tack they were taking with Griffin, based on both Sampson’s email to Oprison and Cummins’ testimony. However, they were also using the pregnancy of AR’s FUSA to skew the length of the appointment, too.
They were clearly skirting this issue as far back as Sampson’s email; if you look at page 2 of the email, at an earlier reply, you can see Sampson shaping the talkers responsive to questions about the appointment (conspiring?) to avoid the issue of the consultation with the congressional delegation and the subsequent nomination process, by supplying a flimsy “we had to fill the hole to get the job done” and “it’s hoped every USA is nominated-confirmed.”
They were shaping the response based on Blanche Lincoln’s annoyance with the appointment process; maybe we should make Blanche squeal some more, since it forced DOJ to respond?
Re: 3/11/04 – Madrid Bombings
Whatever happened to this case?
CNN) — A lawyer in Portland, Oregon, wrongly detained in connection with the investigation of March’s deadly train bombings in Madrid, Spain, filed suit Monday against the Justice Department and FBI.
In the suit filed in U.S. District Court in Oregon, Brandon Mayfield and his family charge that the government violated their civil rights.
During an FBI terrorism investigation, Mayfield’s fingerprints were mistakenly matched to a fingerprint on a bag containing detonators found in Madrid, leading to his detention by the FBI on a material witness warrant in May.
Mayfield, a convert to Islam, alleges his faith caused him to be “singled out by by the U.S. government to be accused of terrorism.”
The lawsuit, which names the Department of Justice, Attorney General John Ashcroft, the FBI and four FBI employees as defendants, also challenges the constitutionality of portions of the Patriot Act.
The suit alleges that in order to justify the arrest of Mayfield as a material witness, his constitutional rights were violated when FBI and Justice Department staff “concocted false and misleading affidavits.”
ccmask @ 149
At this point. this administration would have stretched Kurt Vonnegut’s imagination, let alone mine!
jayackroyd @ 131
I agree. I don’t accept this argument that the President and the Republicans are so weak and unpopular that Democrats can’t do anything. I think that Democrats need to ask themselves what the Republicans would do if their positions were reversed. I think it’s clear that they would be demanding at every opportunity why Democrats were refusing to obey the will of the American people. They would be saying every 15 seconds: 70% of Americans stand with us. That Democratic recalcitrance bordered on treason. That Democrats were showing yet again that they care nothing about the lives and families of American soldiers by cynically putting them in danger in a failed war of a failed President and his failed party.
Perhaps we should send a couple of pebbles to each of the Democrats in the House and Senate with a note saying: Since you seem to be lacking them, here are a couple of stones. Use them.
LS @ 153
US Government settled and apologized.
I refreshed and found a new thread
Did anyone see this 2 minute Greg Palast youtube wrt ChoicePoint? Choicepoint is marrying your phone records, your bills, your medical, your voting and driver’s license with your DNA.
Oy vey
Hugh said:
Perhaps we should send a couple of pebbles to each of the Democrats in the House and Senate with a note saying: Since you seem to be lacking them, here are a couple of stones. Use them.
Sir, I do luv the way your mind works. ;-)
OT – Ed Kennedy and others speaking live on CNN about new immigration bill…
Woodhall Hollow @ 144
I really, really, really, hope so.
LS @ 153
Schumer did make a point of mentioning the Madrid bombings–as being “the” day of the deadline. Which makes one wonder if the White House wasn’t using it as an excuse to launch something quite nefarious in terms of domestic spying, ie, that was the day the Pres authorized it w/out the sign-off of the DOJ. The Portland lawyer story is only the tip of the iceberg. Schumer knows something that hasn’t been “de-classified” yet.
I hope whoever wins the 2008 election will be willing to open the doors and windows and shed light on all of this…Hilary worries me in that regard. And Obama also, for that matter.
Thanks for the response Emptywheel (and the joke, do-si-do).
it seems to me that anything out of the mouths of Cheney’s and Rove’s lawyers should be news. People should be reminded constantly that these are people on the defense, who will remain that way for some time.
And bad news today? You don’t think they’re going to dismiss?
ccmask @ 158
Holy.Shit.
Brad Blog had Greg Palast yesterday with Monica Goodling goodness: AN ARMY OF ROVE-BOTS.
Woodhall Hollow, 162:
Brandon Mayfield is/was an attorney who had defended one of the “Portland 7″ who were indicted for terrorism under the Patriot Act (I think). Hmmmm.
Forgive me, but all the scandals may be converging…
http://waynemadsenreport.com/
dang. EPU’d again. will leave this here in case anyone is interested.
RE: Tim Griffin Appointment Emails from DOJ Docudump, March 13, 2007, Part II, pages 26-28
Parties involved:
Monica Goodling
Kyle Sampson
Scott Jennings
WH Deputy Political Director (Karl Rove Minion)
Using email address: sjennings@gwb43.com
August 18, 2006
Asking Monica Goodling and Kyle Sampson if they could conduct a conference call re: Tim Griffin.
Monica’s response to Sampson only, in part:
“We have a senator prob, so while wh is intent on nominating, scott thinks we may have a confirmation issue…. The possible solution I suggested to scott was that we (DOJ) pick him up as a political, examine the BI completed in May pursuant to his WH post, and then install him as an interim. That resolves both the WH personnel issue and gets him into the office he and the WH want him in. I asked Elston to feel out the DAG on bringing Tim into one of the vacant ADAG spots there….The DAG wanted to look at his resume .…”
Sampson’s response:
I agree, but don’t think it really should matter where we park him here, as AG will appoint him forthwith to be USA. (Is Cummins gone?)”
August 24, 2006:
Email from Scott Jennings:
Suggested going with Bud Cummins idea to appoint Griffin as Special USA while Cummins was still there.
Questioned Sampson whether Griffin had to be DOJ employee to become Special USA.
Sampson says “Yes, but we’ll bring him on and then detail him down to AR.”
OT drive-by :
Detroit City Council votes to impeach Bush and Cheney (Mrs. John Conyers is on the council)
http://www.clickondetroit.com/…..etail.html
spurious @ 146
well, the exchange between Moschella and Tolman took place at 11 pm. on 11/9/05. that tell you something?
TiredFed @ 170
Remember it took nearly 2 days for Webb’s victory to be clear, ie, control of the Senate.
bmaz @ 142
ah, but he was a “Special” USA. maybe even a Super Secret Special Acting First Assistant USA. Who knows? not trying to pull your chain here.
Lou Costello @ 165
Wow, Palast writes:
“But Iglesias wouldn’t help. He did the PR stunt — but he wouldn’t handcuff the innocent. Was he fired for that? His termination was ordered by Tim Griffin, Karl Rove’s right-hand hitman.”
TiredFed @ 132
Greg Palast on DN about Griffin: LINK
OK–here is a total crackpot theory. One of the immediate consequences of the Madrid train bombings was the throwing out of the Bush/Cheney Iraq War allies in Spain. That happened, I think, 2 days later. Was the US trying to help the Spanish spin the intel. (they tried at 1st to blame it on Basque Seperatists) so as to keep their coalition-of-the-willing allies in power?
?????
egregious @ 118
This is the Watergate third rate burglary, on steroids, with technology enhancements.
Bob in HI
From DOJ AR Press Release:
The Justice Department today announced the appointment of J. Timothy Griffin to serve as the interim U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Arkansas. Mr. Griffin will serve under an Attorney General appointment. He will succeed Bud Cummins, who will resign on December 20, 2006, to pursue opportunities in the private sector. Mr. Griffin currently serves as a Special Assistant U.S. Attorney in the Eastern District of Arkansas.
oops. date of press release: December 15, 2006. Griffin was sworn in on December 20, 2006.
OT ~ H/T ThinkProgress: “Actions scream louder than words…” Stephen Colbert
since Griffin wasn’t First Assistant US Attorney, he could not have been installed under the Vacany Reform Act. So all that is left is the Patriot Act Reauthorization language that amended 28 USC 546. The new language permitted indefinite appointments of US Attorneys without Senate confirmatinn (eliminating the 120 day limit and appointments by the judiciary).
LS @ 154
FBI settled, admitted errors, paid some money
TiredFed @ 168
Crap, TiredFed, I don’t have the holographic memory that Marcy has…completely missed that bit about “special”.
Jeebus, were they trying to make a hybridized role somewhere between USA and Special Counsel? Somebody who eventually had the same powers as the AG, like those Fitzgerald had in the Plame investigation?
edit: or was the designation “special assistant usa” a way to get around parsing of the previous regs and any potential limitations to the PatAct-based regs?
In such a climate, Rove last week telephoned Rep. Mark Kirk of Illinois to dress him down for allegedly giving the news media an account of a private meeting at the White House in which Kirk and other moderate Republicans complained to the president about his Iraq war policy. “That’s not the first time I got blamed for doing what Ray LaHood (a garrulous fellow Illinois Republican House member) did,” Kirk told a colleague.
No matter who was responsible for the leak, Rove’s scolding of Kirk was not well-received in the House Republican cloakroom. Kirk, a former State Department official and U.S. Naval Reserve aviator, is widely popular in the Republican conference. With Waxman hot on his trail and hounding his former assistant, Rove could use enthusiastic support from Republicans on Capitol Hill.
Beam me up, Kirk
Interesting to note again of the position Gonzales held in Texas after being Bush personal toady/ counsel. He was Texas Secretary of State or the states chief elections officer. Guess that was the training for how to steal elections. he learned the ins and outs.
These creeps are too much!
TiredFed @ 178
Yes, but that is a temporary non-scheduled posting that does not confer formal AUSA status, much less the FAUSA status required for the provisions you were discussing to be operative. The fact that Daniel Knauss in Arizona and karen Hewitt in San Diego were officially the FAUSA at the time they took over allows them to still be properly serving. This does not apply to Griffin.
From Bud Cummins Q&A before House Judiciary Committee:
“Sometime in early December (I think), Tim called me and said “They are going to use the Patriot Act to appoint me.” I have a fairly clear memory of that particular
conversation. He said that there was a provision in the Patriot Act that nobody
knew about that would enable them to appoint him in a way he could stay in
place throughout President Bush’s administration with or without Senate
confirmation.”
OT – schumer/feinstein re gonzo on CNN – calling for gonzales no confidence vote
Frank33 @ 168
Damn, wish we could believe waynemadsen from time to time… would have been delicious
Rayne and TiredFed – The Special AUSA is a limited appointment granted to give an individual basic experience. It is the provision that allowed Sampson and Goodling six month stints in a USA office to get experience, and is commonly used to allow law school students in prosecutorial clinic programs the ability to work with US Attorney offices.
Very Off Topic but it seems to be a very, very ODD Coincidence
Same platoon, three guys left strung out to die on an isolated stretch of road without support.
” Three U.S. soldiers slaughtered in a grisly kidnapping-murder plot south of Baghdad last June had been left alone for up to 36 hours in a poorly planned mission, a military investigation concluded. Two officers have been relieved of their commands.
Neither of the officers faced criminal charges as a result of the litany of mistakes that left the soldiers exposed, a military official familiar with the investigation told The Associated Press on Wednesday. A report on the investigation said the platoon leader and company commander — whose names were not released — failed to provide proper supervision to the unit or enforce military standards.
A seven-page summary of the investigation provided to the AP also said it appears insurgents may have rehearsed the attack two days earlier, and that Iraqi security forces near the soldiers’ outpost probably saw and heard the attack and “chose to not become an active participant in the attack on either side.”
“This was an event caused by numerous acts of complacency, and a lack of standards at the platoon level ,” said the investigating officer, Lt. Col. Timothy Daugherty, in the summary.
Complacency? Or was this intentional…an effort to eliminate possible witnesses to earlier crimes???
Daugherty said the soldiers were told to stand guard for up to 36 hours with just one Humvee, and there were no barriers on the road to slow access to them or provide early warning.
Daugherty concluded that the platoon did not get the supervision or direction it needed. And he said the unit was hurt by the loss of 10 troops, including several leaders, who were killed in action as well as by the need to shuffle the platoon’s leadership three times.
This seems extraordinary! How is it that a company isn’t adjusting for such losses and sending platoons out that cannot operate in the field without taking high casualties? Was this platoon/company targetted because of their involvement in the rape/murder charges? Were witnesses being killed to cover up superiors involvement or malfeasance?
Here’s the kicker…hidden away at the bottom of the story.
The platoon also had been dogged by an ongoing investigation into the rape and killing of an Iraqi girl and the killing of her family by several other members of the unit….Daugherty’s investigation found no evidence linking the three soldiers’ deaths to the rape-murder, which occurred three months earlier. An al-Qaida-linked group, the Mujahedeen Shura Council, claimed last July that the attack on Babineau, Menchaca and Tucker was revenge for the rape-killing.
Yeah sure! Just as the original investigation of that incident covered up the deaths and the involvement of officers in concealing the criminal activity there!
Release of the investigation’s results has been delayed for months. The probe was completed and the punishments delivered by last August. Families of the three soldiers were given unclassified briefings on the results of the investigation later in the fall. According to a military official, part of the delay was due to legal reviews and the movement of the units involved out of Iraq.
Yeah, more bulldada.
In the rape-killing case, five soldiers were charged in the March 12, 2006 incident. Three have entered guilty pleas, one soldier’s trial has been delayed and the fifth is being prosecuted in federal court because he had already left the military when he was charged.
Someone needs to ask if the members of the platoon knew anything about the incident, were either participants or whistleblowers, or had knowledge of their superiors involvement in covering up the rape-murders. Were the officers and others disciplined involved in the rape-murder? Shouldn’t such repeated actions mandate very harsh criminal sentences.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200….._ROCrMWM0F
This Company and Platoon brings disgrace upon the long history of the 101st Airborne…such “Black Companies” should be eliminated and treated with historical disdain.
When Bush ‘certified as legal’ or ‘over-ruled a legal finding’ to a [program] he had just been told was ‘not legal,’ he put himself above the rule of Law.
We need to know more. Bush’s actions were the very antithesis of ‘preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America.’
One cannot break the Constitution to save it.
bmaz @ 186
agreed. that law only applies to FAUSAs.
bmaz @ 189
Thanks, bmaz, that is reassuring. Have you run across anything that limits the term of a SAUSA?
BREAKING: Senators want Gonzales no-confidence vote.
radiofreewill @ 191
Bush made or remade law in his certification, which is reserved to Congress and not part of Article II outline of the Executive’s role. It was a violation of his oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution.
Impeachable offense?
Rayne @ 183
my sense is the “special” designation was simply a device to permit a Schedule C appointment or some such non-permanent posting. Griffin may or may not have qualified for a regular AUSA or junior position and it would have looked funny to have gone from janitor to US Attorney. ;)
I like Madsen, and he was totally correct about Cunningham-Wilkes-Foggo. It is true WMR has made much more extreme claims…It does seem impossible that any Republican would do such non-family value behavior. MOVE ALONG…NOTHING TO SEE HERE…
Rayne @ 196
The President has numerous mandates to certify various items. He is free to take whatever advice he wishes and agree/not agree and still certify. The certification is a ministerial not a lawmaking act.
Cspan 3 is House Veterans Affairs hearings on PTSD now.
Oh Tim Walz!
And some heavy hitters among the guest speakers.
Griffin was not a recess appointment. Only the President can make recess appointments of civil officers. He didn’t in this case. The DOJ press release says the appointment was made by the AG. This is supported by the designation on DOJ’s website for all USAs as to whether the incumbent USA was Presidentially appointed. Griffin was not. Now, to get back to the original question, who is saying Griffin was not appointed under the Patriot Act revision and does that person’s opinion really matter (e.g., did he say this under oath before a Congressional committee)?
snowbird42 @ 85
Hello Snowbird42,
I thought this as well…wait for bush/cheney to announce in 2008 that elections are for losers. Like our friend Ferninand Marcos.
Rayne @ 196
yes. that and about 100 other things!
TiredFed @ 149
You know, if this keeps going on I’m going to need a scorecard to keep track of who knows what about whom…this thing has as many heads as a Hydra and more tentacles than a Kraken!
breaking news : Senate seeks no confidence vote in AG AD. Muckraker will have video of the DiFi and others press conf. shortly
http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..id=topnews
Helen @ 71
Hi Helen (I’m still catching up on comments). Thanks for putting names to the soundbites I remembered. I’m not quite up to FDL standards yet, but firedogs are quite nice about it.
I’m not given to political outbursts at the dinner table, but I told my kids that they need to know that right now the most criminal, corrupt, dispicable administration of all US History is in the WH. One said quite simply, why don’t they get fired?
Rayne – A SAUSA appointment is for six months or less as far as I have ever known. I had such a designation when I was a 3rd year law student and it was designated for one case only as I recall (Been a long time). Anyway, look at this:
http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/dc/E…..cial_AUSA/
do-si-do @ 205
Impeachment = You’re fired!
The Founding Fathers put impeachment in the Constitution as a power of Congress for that very reason. To get rid of incompetent boobs like these folks.
bmaz @ 206
Thanks, bmaz.
I think TiredFed (200) is sidling up to something.
Will Bush make Griffin a recess appointment on Memorial Day?
TiredFed @ 200
I think both Gonzales and one of his underlings like McNulty or Mercer said this under oath before a committee. I have seen Griffen admit he was not a Patriot appointee in the press somewhere, but he has made conflicting statements.
Brisingamen @ 203
There is no way Susan & Monica testify before Congress with immunity and not nail Rove.
No way. Write it down.
It’s over.
Rayne @ 208
Of course he will pull that shit. It is no joke that Congress needs to run a skeleton crew so there is no formal recess.
LibertyLee @ 129
Impeachment buys the Constitution. It places individuals who are involved in Unonstitutional Acts on notice that their place in history will be tainted. That they cannot simply “wait out the clock” without consequences.
In my view they should continue the impeachment trial even AFTER the election and ino the first year of the new Presidency. While it’s true that the major act of “Removal from Office” would be a fait accomplis one could still remove the emoulements of office such as retirement benefits, Secret Service protection, franking priveleges, office space, travel money, usew of the title or “seals of office”, etc. In additiojn there might be the big IMPEACHMENT – CONVICTED associated with the term of office.
THAT would be a major restraint on any future President, VP or executive officer from attempting such activities in the future. It protects the Constitution.
twolf1 @ 188
Thanks twolf! Wow, DiFi spells it all out, not just the USA firings but Gitmo, torture memo, smackdown of Geneva Convention, I dunno defense, everything! thanks for the heads up.
Frank33 @ 198
El Wayno was very accurate on the Foley Scandal.
Frank33 @ 168
Hey, gang, if this is true — I *think* we may have finally found the blo*job.
STTP in Ohio – There has already been a statement that Ralson’s proffer does not hurt Rove. I don’t know how that could be, but that is what has been said.
STTP @211: There is no evidence that either Monica or the Novak source have any evidence that would harm Karl Rove, Gonzales, or the President.
cinnamonape @ 213
And given all that you think 2/3 of the Senate would convict? I don’t think you’d get 17 Republicans to go that way. Most of them are fully on-board with the President and they won’t be out of office until much later. That’s why the Framers designed the system to protect a President from an unruly House.
bmaz @ 216
It doesn’t sound like much of a proffer then.
TiredFed@207
You know, I’m banging the impeachment drum today out of frustration but also because our elected (cough) leaders need to make this right. There are no other consequences for this criminal in chief are there? Or are there?
STTP in Ohio @ 209
Are they insured?
Rayne @ 196
If it isn’t, it should be part of the fundamental definition of a high crime or misdemeanor for the Executive to act without regard for judicial process or legislative over-sight.
Imvho, going extra-Constitutional should be the highest of high crimes and misdemeanors if government for the people, by the people is to mean anything.
Rayne @ 208
there’s no need. Grffin stays for the duration even if Congress (with a veto-proof margin) changes the law back to the 120-day limit. the law can’t go backwards in time and void Griffin’s appointment. it was legal at the time so it stays legal.
do-si-do @ 218
no. not realistically. I dont think we should wait, either. there’s no way anyone is going to chase Bush/Cheney down after the ‘08 elections. wont happen.
IF Monica is truly a koolaid drinker, can someone break the spell? I mean, it seems like she might really have believed she was doing the right thing and then reality slapped her silly.
Is she isolated from the cult or still in the fortress?
radiofreewill @ 220
you mean acting like a KING? could the Founding Fathers have had any better reason than the tyrant George III for impeachment? what are we waiting for?
radiofreewill @ 220
Yes YES! G*ddammit YES!
TiredFed @ 225
public outcry
Uh, I guess I’ll continue gumming over on the other thread that’s 90 minutes old?? Doh! see you there?
a little history lesson (someone linked to this the other day). see how many sound familiar today:
He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
Yes, the movement has to come from the public — Congress has seen how folks react when the demand for impeachment comes from them (admittedly on spurious grounds, but still).
It would be hilarious if the White House Madam case turns out to be the final straw, and puts impeachment back on the table:
“Goldurn it, Martha! Them guys are spending our money on high crimes and misdemeanors with those fancy ladies!!!”
do-si-do @ 228
have they gone off track yet? didnt want to muddy the waters of a swell debate with all this.
bmaz @ 216
I saw that as well and think it’s balderdash.
If, as David Iglesias says, “Monica holds the keys to the kingdom”, then Susan R. holds the short hairs on lots of folks as well. What do they both have in common? They both worked very closely with Rove. No way they say anything meaningful that doesn’t lead to “The Blossom”.
No way.
Marcy has some interesting thoughts (as usual) on Novakula’s article that probably started that ridiculous train of thought.
Just had CNN on.. they’re treating this whole AG thing as a virtual whodunit… tracing Comey’s movements as he raced “the President’s men” to Ashcroft’s hospital bed (where they allegedly were trying to intimidate the hospitalized AG into approving the wiretapping program). This is getting positively Nixonian.
LibertyLee @ 217
Who says that there will be 17 Republican Senators in 2008.
Impeachment, conviction and removal of the emoulements of office can occur AFTER the individual has left the office (either by resignation or the end of term).
In addition, just as the war will be a gun to the head of Republicans coming into the 2008 election, so to, will their position on impeaching an Attorney General, VP, or even President who have shredded the Constitution. They can choose to avoid voting to convict…but only at their own peril.
There are more than members of the Executive branch that are trying to “run out the clock”. Senators and Representatives who rally to the support of the President also face the judgement of history and the electorate.
You are correct, the Founders made impeachment very hard. But they did NOT place it amongst the first and most detailed sections of the Constitutional Powers of Congress because they did not think it should NOT be used. And they did not offer any “protections” against “the mob” removing those from their positions as elected Representatives if they tied themselves to a President who was unpopular (for whatever reason). Senators may have to wait several years (as in the case of Lieberman), but others will have to confront their acts much more rapidly.
If an Executive has undertaken corrupt or UnConstitutional acts and they attempt to block conviction when the public in their Districts patently see that they are acting to shield that Executive Officer…THEY will face the heat. The Investigation associated with the Impeachment trials often brings things out far beyond what is tolerable to even a Republican politician.
I suggest that you look at the case of Richard Milhous Nixon…who had just won an overwhelming electoral victory in 1972 and had, at that time, a substantial group of Republican Senators that would “never” have voted to convict him of imepeachable offenses.These all were quickly abandoning him as the scandal drove on…all while Nixon was actually de-escalating the US involvement in VietNam.
Blub @ 233
all we needed was some drama. finally people are paying attention.
TiredFed @ 231
a little bit, but I think maybe someone farted because there’s been a very long pause, so I came back here.
TiredFed @221 – Please know I am arguing with you not against you on this and probably any other subject. OK, so here is my thought. I probably agree with your statement; but not definitively. Ex post facto prohibitions only apply to criminal or other potential liberty infringing statutes. My recollection is that the language our brilliant congress adopted only said those portions of the Patriot Act were repealed and to revert to their former status without addressing anything that could (did) happen in the meantime. Hell, I am not even sure that the repeal has been signed yet; in fact, I don’t think it has.
I am convinced that the only way Griffin can legitimately be serving is via the Patriot Act provision, but Gonzales is going to have to recant his tesimony and say so on the record for it to be valid. Short of that, I don’t think Griffin is duly authorized. Now, htat being said, I am not one that thinks this will permanently hurt regular criminal prosecutions in that districe in the long run. This is more of an esoteric argument that demonstrates what deceitful incompetents these pricks are; but that is important to show.
cinnamonape @ 234
cinn – thanks for that very cogent history lesson. maybe impeachment in an election year could be just the ticket to get the 16-17 Republicans needed for impeachment. gonna have to take a look at vulnerable Repub Senate seats now. hmmm. maybe there’s a use for trolls after all.
TiredFed @ 235
The wonder what Card and the other presidential operatives said to Ashcroft while they were squeezing his IV tubes…
Blub @ 239
Abu and Card making an offer Ashcroft “couldn’t refuse.”
Blub @ 239
Hey now! They were just “wishing him well”…
Seriously, I would like to know that too.
bmaz @ 237
I think I’m right there with you. The original post up top was about a letter Justice wrote claiming they had never once used the new provision in the Patriot Act. If this was in direct response to a Congressional inquiry, they have a very big problem. Griffin was appointed by the AG under the new law. No way around it. Letter was from Richard Hertling, DOJ, Feb 23, 2007. Some of the letter has since been disupted by DOJ, but according to Sampson’s attorney, Brad Berenson, not this part. He claims it is still technically accurate. His claims may have no meaning unless they were made in court or before Congress. He can say just about anything in the newspaper.
do-si-do. love the fart joke. lol
cinammonape @ 34: I was around during Nixon. The big difference then was that there some in both parties who could still talk to each other. I’m here because I keep seeing if I can talk without being referred to as a troll and I find I often am. But I’m not. But I also don’t agree you’re going to see 17 defections. You certainly have a right to be optimistic, but the polls don’t seem to be shaping that way at the National level. I guess we’ll see…but the difference between Nixon and President Bush is that the President WILL fight it out. He’s NOT going to cave like Nixon was ready to do. And there’s a lot a President who’s willing to fight can do to preserve his position. As to whether you think it will be wise to pursue an impeachment into the next term of a President whoever that might be, I think the next President may have something to say about that. A Republican may very well Pardon a President and a Democrat would be interested in adopting his/her own agenda. So…I doubt that strategy is viable. Maybe a compromise might be in order? Just to run the country?
TiredFed @ 200
Sampson and his lawyer have both said it most recently. And at least one of the letters to the Senate said they intended to get confirmation for Griffin.
One thing I need to do is check Griffin’s statement that he wouldn’t get confirmed vis a vis Sampson’s resignation.
emptywheel @ 244
if it’s there, I’m sure you will find it. where are you looking? maybe I can help. I have a bunch of windows open.
Well, I feel like saying “it wasn’t me!” when a thread discussion finally tapers off. Just call me ThreadKiller.
Seriously, perhaps people are working (!) or trying to get more info on the breaking news re abu…?
do-si-do @ 246
I just didnt have anything to add and wanted to keep this issue going. so I stay behind a lot. usually alone. and now marcy’s here. wow.
emptywheel @ 243
EW, you keep mental track of this far better than I do; but it is my recollection that Gonzales gave testimony to one of the committees that either specifically or generally indicated Griffin was not a Patriot Act appointee.
emptywheel @ 244
are you thinking of Sampson or Cummins here?
TiredFed @ 249
like:
“Sometime in early December (I think), Tim called me and said “They are going to use the Patriot Act to appoint me.”
Cummins Q&A with HJC
For all the frustration that is expressed in this blog daily, take comfort in the fact the tide is finally turning. Yeah, it’s faaaaar too slow for most of our tastes but, the genie is way out of the bottle on this one.
Waxman, Leahy & Conyers have their teeth firmly into their hindquarters and won’t let go. There will be nothing but bad news (for the Bush Crime Family) coming out of upcoming testimony from Monica and Susan no matter how their press flacks try to spin it now.
Also take comfort in the fact that when all is said and done this administration will go down as the most corrupt and inept in the history of the United States.
And when you think about it, that’s no small feat given the pool of candidates for that title.
I’m thinkin’ the Dems’ strategy on the Abu no-confidence vote is to gauge Republic brittleness on support for the AG. As such, I see this as a prelude to impeachment. If a vote results in a significant number of R defections (see TPM’s roster), then either Bush and Abu get the hint or articles of impeachment will be introduced.
Or am I jes’ whistlin’ Dixie?
bmaz @ 249
I remember something to that effect as well, but I think that may fall into the domain of Gonzo’s “fluid memory,” subject to correction.
Bob in HI
Marcy
btw, did you see my note over at your place (Exit Strategies… 1st comment)?
Dear STTP in Ohio
Thanks for that. And it’s truly amazing to me to see just how long Leahy and Waxman, (don’t know about Conyers myself), have been turning over the stones on all this.
mc @ 253
I hope you’re right! Its time to stoke up the engines of impeachment!
Bob in HI
mc @ 253
I’m right beside you — can anyone tell me how many Senators would have to ‘cross the aisle’ to have enough to convict if an impeachment does happen?
emptywheel — did you ever determine the status of S. 214 and H.R. 580? They both passed, but I don’t know what happened after that; did they get combined and signed under another bill number by POTUS? GovTrack only shows that each passed — no further action recorded.
Is that another tack to take with both Pryor and Lincoln, ask about status of S. 214 since they are both co-sponsors?
Eureka Springs, you out there? Wanna’ make a constituent phone call?
What will it take to bring Rove down, I wonder? I thought the Plame affair would do it, but if this doesn’t, then what will?
ok. here’s the list of Republican Senators up for reelection in 2008. see any good targets for rolling over to the Democratic side on impeachment?
Alexander, Lamar- (R – TN)
Allard, Wayne- (R – CO)
Chambliss, Saxby- (R – GA)
Cochran, Thad- (R – MS)
Coleman, Norm- (R – MN)
Collins, Susan M.- (R – ME)
Cornyn, John- (R – TX)
Craig, Larry E.- (R – ID)
Dole, Elizabeth- (R – NC)
Domenici, Pete V.- (R – NM)
Enzi, Michael B.- (R – WY)
Graham, Lindsey- (R – SC)
Hagel, Chuck- (R – NE)
Inhofe, James M.- (R – OK)
McConnell, Mitch- (R – KY)
Roberts, Pat- (R – KS)
Sessions, Jeff- (R – AL)
Smith, Gordon H.- (R – OR)
Stevens, Ted- (R – AK)
Sununu, John E.- (R – NH)
Warner, John- (R – VA)
Look at this…it’s Griffin on top of Rove: LINK.
Froomkin’s up!
TiredFed @ 261
My guesses would be Hagel, Collins, Smith & Warner.
Bob in HI
At the WMR website, there is a picture of Wolfie wetting his comb, with this below:
Wolfowitz shaking more comb money out of World Bank
lol
Here are 10 likely to roll over, retire or otherwise be vulnerable in 2008:
Coleman, Norm- (R – MN)
Collins, Susan M.- (R – ME)
Dole, Elizabeth- (R – NC)
Domenici, Pete V.- (R – NM)
Enzi, Michael B.- (R – WY)
Hagel, Chuck- (R – NE)
Smith, Gordon H.- (R – OR)
Stevens, Ted- (R – AK)
Sununu, John E.- (R – NH)
Warner, John- (R – VA)
And we would still need 6 or 7 more (vote is 2/3rds of those present).
STTP in Ohio @ 254
I think the Dems peaked in 11/06. The recent approval ratings of the Congress are BELOW the President’s ratings. That does not bode well for 2008.
LibertyLee @ 244
You’re neglecting to mention the most obvious thing: Democrats had a crushing majority in the House in 1974: 191-144.
You’re right.
But I think most people here agree that impeachment is a legal necessity at this point. Besides that, it will serve admirably to focus the public’s mind in a way that Katie Couric and Brian Williams are reluctant to. The media’s suppression of news about Bush administration lawlessness should not be underestimated. By summer hopefully Leahy and Waxman will have sown the ground for it.
TiredFed @ 261
I thought Roberts was one of those calling for Gonzales to resign? So maybe he would.
CNN is off the Ashcroft in the hospital story…we have a suspicious item in LAX terminal one…fear, fear, fear.
Rayne.. I am here….want to help me phrase the question?
btw, I managed to get the only “Blue” paper in AR (Arkansas Times) to link up this post on their blog. Max Brantley has been covering this in great detail.. So Pryor and Griffins office will most likely be reading this…)
Make that 291-144.
do-si-do @ 256
You are most welcome. I just thought I’d share with others what I keep telling myself every time a subpoena to appear or request for documents is blown off.
They are gonna get theirs and it won’t be pretty. Indeed, you can almost feel it (the collapse) gathering steam as we speak.
and Senator Pryor should be several shades of purple by now.
Removing their emoluments of office will be very important. Impeachment may be imperative in 2009 — impeachment of the previous occupants of the Pres and Veep, and all their civil officers. It can be swift, sweet, and take only days. Done and voted on by Valentines, I say.
Run them outta Dodge. Make them flee to the ranch in Paraguay.
Make that 242-192 in the House after the 1972 elections, 56-42 in the Senate.
Pryor thinks he is superman (or super-Lieberman) because he called out Tim the vote grifter for lying… When Gonzo failed to kiss Pryors ring after Schumer asked him to in a hearing.. we have heard *crickets*
Nothing heard from Blanche Lincoln or Pryor, no mention at all on either of their web sites, nada.
brendan @ 271
and Dems had a 7-seat majority (counting the one I), but votes against Nixon were virtually unanimous. we are getting there with Bush. the Senate voted unanimously (97-0) to overturn the Patriot Act provision on US Attorneys being named by the AG for indefinite terms.
LibertyLee @ 267
I saw that headline as well and was perplexed by it. It may well indicate dissatisfaction that Congress hasn’t done enough to get us out of this mess in Iraq.
As for the Dems peaking in 06, you can’t be serious. With all the scandals that have yet to play out this year, Republicans will do well to lose only 20-30 seats in the House and 5-7 seats in the Senate. And forget the White House; Thompson will be your candidate and lose to either Gore or Edwards.
FYI, Jane has a new new thread
Jane’s upstairs with a new thread!
The hospital scene/White House meeting links key players into Bush’s decision to ‘over-rule’ the OLC’s legal finding against his [program.]
Comey said that Cheney, Addington and Gonzo lined-up against the OLC in the days leading up to the hospital visit. Since we know Comey also met with Bush and had a ‘full exchange,’ we can assume Comey told Bush about the OLC’s findings, as well.
That’s potentially a core for impeachment articles – that Bush and Cheney conspired to go extra-Constitutional in order to ‘certify as lawful’ a [program] determined by the OLC to be ‘not legal.’
It splits the question of the Rule of Law right down the middle – whose Rule of Law: the People’s or the King’s?
this one is about wore out. see y’all later (late night if I can stay awake).
Liberty Lee — of course you would think that Dems peaked. Your worldview is incapable of seeing anything differently. You also cite Congress’ JAR, forgetting that nearly half of all Congress is still Republic Party members, or that the reason Dems may be tagged with Republic’s low scores is that they haven’t yet kicked their asses to the curb on Iraq like the public wants, up to and including impeachment.
BTW, let me guess you had no problems with impeachment of Clinton over prevarication regarding a blow job — but you can’t see the justification now for impeachment because of subverting the Constitution, spying without probable cause or warrants on Americans, using taxpayer resources and government agencies for political purposes, so on…
Eureka Springs (269) — what we need is a call to both Pryor and Lincoln’s offices, asking them the status of S. 214, on which both had been co-sponsors. (See link above in my earlier post to read full text of the bill.) If you can call DC offices, here’s the names of their Chiefs of Staff:
Bob Russell (Pryor) 202-224-2353
Elizabeth Hurley Burks (Lincoln) 202-224-4843
S. 214 passed, but that was nearly 2 months ago in March. The bill should have been consolidated with the corresponding house bill HR 580, then signed by the President. Have NO idea whether that ever happened — in which case, these may have become law by default, and/or Bush is still sitting on them.
Rayne @ 283
Both bills are sitting in the Senate awaiting action. Since there is a subtle but important difference between the House and Senate versions, a conference committee seems necessary but I see no indication of one yet. I would think a simple reminder to Senator Leahy and Cong. Conyers is in order.
for Brisingamen @ 69
(sorry this took so long, I stepped out. and sorry no link, but I’m not sure how to paste it into FLD’s java pop-up)
from NYT online, today, Washington page:
Specter, the senior Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said earlier Thursday that the Justice Department can’t properly protect the nation from terrorism or oversee Bush’s no-warrant eavesdropping program with Gonzales at the helm.
“I have a sense that when we finish our investigation, we may have the conclusion of the tenure of the attorney general,”Specter said during a committee hearing.”I think when our investigation is concluded, it’ll be clear even to the attorney general and the president that we’re looking at a dysfunctional department which is vital to the national welfare.”
OK. I will call in the morning. If you think of anything else I will be around all evening.
TiredFed @ 279
Don’t get me wrong. I’m for impeachment, and I think the process of impeachment itself will change the dynamic. My point about the press is that by summer something dramatic may be needed to hijack the debate from our stewards of civil dialogue in the media. Counting on Republicans is a fond hope. These are people who repealed habeas corpus.
dang. there was a document that had Karl’s default hard drive address on it in one of the DOJ docudumps. gotta look for that later.
Thanks for the update, Marcy — and excellent work, Eureka Springs!
Gunga Djinn, Thanks!
Yea!
AR the only blue southern state..) Just have to remind them what blue means from time to time.
So, who’s this Judge G. Thomas Gisele?
Another “loyal Bushie” federal bench appointee?
Every single Bush-appointed person in our federal government should be investigated, while in the meantime they are kept under surveillance, maybe even attaching an ankle monitor to them, so we can keep track of them.
G. Thomas Gisele? Is this anything like L. Lewis Libby or G. Gordon Liddy?
When I served in the U.S. Air Force years ago, and was given a job that required a top secret clearance, the FBI visited my family and friends to check up on what I’d been doing for my first 19 years of life.
I just bet that the Bush administration, being the most lawless and corrupt administration in American history, has been waiving the FBI’s background checks for “loyal Bushie” nominees.
Not that I’m suspicious of the Bush administration. No, no, not at all. Cough.
As far as Griffin, he won’t leave until his mission is accomplished, whatever that is. Bogus voter fraud cases “investigated” just before the elections next year, maybe? Whatever it is, it can’t be good for Arkansas or for our country.
But if he had any honor or integrity (HAHAHAHA), he’d resign and let the Senate approve his replacement. Nope, never going to happen. He’s Karl Rove’s protege and we all know how much honor and integrity Rove has (HAHAHAHA)…zilch.