Goodling on asking political questions of potential hires: “I was trying to hire good lawyers.”

There is nothing illegal about hiring good lawyers of the political party you happen to belong to…all you’ll hire.

I can’t help but wonder why the Dems are being so polite?

Don’t feed the troll, folks.

sorry. dang. boredom leads to carelessness & a tendency to tease the moles.

“Ms. Goodling, if the White House deliberately targeted and fired DA’s who were aggressively pursuing legitimate criminal investigations against the President’s political allies, in order to replace them with other DAs who agreed to quietly drop the case, would that be illegal?”

“Ms. Goodling, if the White House deliberately replaced DA’s who would not pursue sham voter fraud investigations designed to disenfranchise large blocks of citizens who are prone to voting for the political opposition, would THAT be illegal?”

“Ms Goodling, ARE YOU AWARE OF ANY SUCH EFFORTS OR DISCUSSIONS OF ANY SUCH EFFORTS involving DA’s that this White House has fired or considered firing?”

THAT, I might have been impressed with. The Dems I saw today acted like they have lost interest in the whole thing.

Well, they’d better not, or their stay in Washington will be very short!

clichy @ 206

The only LSAT score necessary for entry into Regent is John 3:16.

Wrong. Regent Law School seeks to admit students who are serious about the critical roles they will assume as future counselors, conciliators, defenders of the faith, effective client advocates and followers of Christ.
Strong academic credentials are crucial, but Regent Law also places significant importance on the personal statement and letters of recommendation. The personal statement gives the Admissions Committee insight into the student’s motivation for studying law and reveals his or her desire to receive a legal education integrated with Christian principles. Regent Law seeks men and women who are dedicated to becoming Christian leaders who will change the world for Christ.

Why choose Regent? If you are academically qualified and you desire to integrate your faith with your pursuit of a legal education and ultimately the practice of law, we invite you to apply to Regent University School of Law.

Profile of the 2006 Entering Class

Number of Applications: 689
Class Size: 161
Avg. LSAT: 154; Median LSAT: 153

I wonder if Jane S. will answer my questions now?

so-o-o, how come so many flunked the bar, according to what was said at today’s hearing?

kathleen @ 40

What’s the story with the secret provision?

Here’s a bit from my scandals list:

2. Firing of US attorneys. Most of the country’s 93 US attorneys are usually replaced within the first 2 years of a new administration and this is what happened when Bush came into office in 2001. US attorneys are political appointees and are chosen to reflect the policy priorities of a President. Still their primary job is to uphold the law, and the law is not supposed to be partisan. Karl Rove, of course, had other ideas. He believes that government should be politicized and populated with compliant partisan hacks loyal to him and his.
The plan was to create a list of political hires and fires of US attorneys under the direction of the White House (i.e. Rove and Harriet Miers) which Gonzales (and Bush) would then dutifully sign off on. There were two components. First, on February 7, 2006, regulations were published giving Attorney General Alberto Gonzales the power to hire and fire all non-civil service employees of the Justice Department (DOJ). On March 1, 2006, Gonzales signed an order delegating this power (subject to his nominal final approval) to two fairly junior and inexperienced staffers: Monica “Loyalty oaths” Goodling his senior counselor and liaison with the White House and his Chief of Staff Kyle Sampson. Second, sometime late in 2005 (shortly before the conference report for the Patriot Act Extension was filed on December 8, 2005), language originating at the DOJ was surreptitiously inserted into the act by Brett Tolman which allowed Gonzales to make indefinite interim US attorney appointments without Senate approval. The conference report was passed and became law on March 9, 2006. So again, the two parts were first to set up a system where Rove could control the hiring and firing of US attorneys and second to bypass the Senate confirmation process which might interfere with the first part.

This is good. Where is your scandals list?
Bob in HI

Crap,I have missed the whole thing so far, busy as hell.
Will have much reading to do later.
*s*

stock up on the caffeine 1st…