(Shot of spilled beans via Dougalug.)
The House Judiciary Committee will be taking testimony from Monica Goodling this morning, beginning at 10:15 am ET in 2141 Rayburn. C-Span3 and C-Span radio will be broadcasting the testimony live. And it looks as though the committee will have some sort of webcast going as well. I'll be liveblogging below, too. Hang on kids, we are about to learn what, if any, beans Monica decides to spill.
Please keep comments to a minimum as much as possible to facilitate smooth liveblogging and keep the load off the servers as much as possible. Wouldn't want to crash in the middle of testimony, now would we? Would hate it if your comment was the one too many, so think before you hit send. Thanks!
REP. KELLER QUESTIONS: Started as WH liaison in April 2006. Had worked at DoJ in other positions for about 4 years. Says that Lam was a topic of frequent conversation — there were a lot of conversations regarding gun issues (project safe neighborhoods project — people saying she was underperforming — knew this from the 2003/2004 timeframe when Goodling worked for the public affairs office). First heard about immigration issues — maybe when in executive office, via letters from Congress in 2005. Did anyone at DoJ ever indicate that she should be fired for investigating GOp officials? Not that Goodling knows. Doesn't remember anything like that from the WH either. Now talking about the Feinstein complaint about "coyote" cases not being fully hammered, and wondering when he'll see a smoking gun piece of information.
REP. WATERS QUESTIONS: Why did you resign? Goodling says she didn't think that she could be effective any longer. Waters asks about RNC issues — understand that you worked with Barbara Comstock doing oppo research, and then moved over to the RNC PR. Did you use any of your oppo skills once you went over to the DoJ? Goodling says that she certainly used Westlaw and Lexis. In what way did you use them? Goodling says that she researched people that they were considering hiring. Did you use them to make decisions on who should be retired? Goodling says no. Do you have an HR division which does this sort of background research? Goodling says no — just her and her deputy who were responsible for looking at this information. Did you ever discuss any of the research you had discovered with Rove or anyone in his office? Not with Rove. Discussed it with Scott Jennings and Jane Cherry (sp?). So, you used this information for hiring with political appointees? Did talk to WH office of political affairs about who should be hired after she checked out people at the DoJ. Did you document your research — is it on file anywhere? Goodling hedges — didn't really keep that sort of information. Do you have files where you kept this information? Goodling says there would be some files and they would be at the DoJ.
REP. ISSA QUESTIONS: And we're back to the Feinstein letter. And back to Issa and Sensenbrenner's griping about her as well. Now talking about the FBI doing background checks on potential hires as well, and downplaying personal oppo research done by Goodling. Goodling says that someone told her that Lam was an independent but that she never checked her voter registration personally — Issa says that's public record. Looked not only to politcal appointees but also to qualified career professionals. Then we bring up the "Clinton did it, too" talking point. (CHS notes: I'd say that every single time Issa asks questions, that this is the thing he ends with every single time.)
REP. DELAHUNT QUESTIONS: Talking about the delegation order from the AG, which he finds to be extraordinary given Goodling's limited experience, legal and otherwise. Can you explain why the AG bypassed McNulty (the DAG). Putting this at the feet of the Justice Management Division (late fall 2005) — personnel actions needed to be delegated. Said Margolis had made some decisions. Why not notify the existence of that order to McNulty, then — why the statement specifically that McNulty was not to be notified, that then caused considerable controversy in National Journal article. Goodling says she read it and found it not to be very accurate. Goodling says that the decision was to have Sampson notify him personally. Given the disparity of experience like yourself who were involved and the true professionals who were bypassed — Delahunt says it raises questions for him. Goodling says sometimes people had different experiences, and that people assessed people differently.
REP. PENCE QUESTIONS: Starts with a Lincoln quote about the need for the people getting the facts. Talking about Goodling's bio a bit. Now discussing "illegal behavior" — talking about the criminalization of politics. Says politics are vital to our consitutional system of government. Says this troubles him.
REP. COHEN QUESTIONS: Talking about why she attended Regent – says that she enjoyed studying with people who had the same belief system. Says she didn't ask applicants about their religion — and doesn't recall any discussion of religion coming up. Says that she was looking for people who wanted to do good int he world, and that people she knew from Regent who were like that. Lots of people who applied to work for this President who shared his same faith system. Who told you about the violation of the departmental policy on unauthorized discussions with members of Congress? Heard about it several times — there were specific requirements about contacts between USAs and elected officials. Talking about Ashton's discussions about a management consultant talking to AUSAs in the office, and career staff in the office didn't appreciate being asked to be analyzed in Vine's (sp?) office. Historically, prior to this Administration.
Committee in recess for three votes and lunch. Will return at 2:00 pm ET.
Related posts:





Spotlight







Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search

MAXINE!
whoo-hoooo
Justice!
This hearing is beyond disheartnening.
Christy!
Issa’s killing it. Damn.
Issa: Clinton appointed Democrats!
Worse than worse…
Getting nowhere… let the Senate have at her
EPU’d:
Issa is definitely an a*shole.
Clinton did it!
SMARMY. My god these cons are SMARMY.
LJ/Aquaria @ 3
Are you kidding, this is great!
This isn’t going to play well with the public, methinks.
Issa what a jerk
TeddySanFran @ 6
I’m shocked!
Monica,
Pray harder. Maybe your gods will forgive you — especially if you give them more money — but mine will not.
Issa should be working for Rove
Coming to the secret delegation?
Yeah, he appointed them legally, Issa, you asswipe. He didn’t replace them halfway through his tenure just because they wouldn’t help him win elections.
This may have been pointed out before but it’s my understanding that her immunity is only from testimony she is giving? She is not immune from evidence of crimes gathered outside of her testimony.
I ask because if that’s the case, I can understand why she’s obfuscating. I don’t respect it but I understand.
Delahunt: I’m surprised that you were delegated authority that bypassed McNulty.
Delahunt holds up hand: “You’ve answered my question.”
Asking about the secret order and its addendum, where McNulty not to be made aware of the order.
go billy go, he slowly gathers steam and then….
anne @ 10
Well, he did replace MORE than 8 U.S. Attorneys in his second term.
Bay State Librul @ 15
Issa paid for the California recall that gave us Arnold, hoping to win the governorship himself.
Secret order at the plate! Woo hoo!
“Executive Ardor”?
Is that a Lifetime Movie of the Week or what?
Repeat: Do not feed the troll.
LJ/Aquaria @ 19
How do you know that? Clinton replaced the U.S. Attorney going after Rostenkowski (and then later pardoned Rostenkowski).
Monica: Personnel actions were signd off on that shouldn’t have been.
Delahunt: Why was it specified that McNulty was not be consulted?
Responding to a comment from the last thread.
LibertyLee @ 11
The implied criticism was of the non-sequitorial nature of the response. Party affiliation is somewhat independent from a lawyer’s actual talent and skill for the position. And it isn’t to be taken into consideration for line-attorneys or other non-Civil Service employees.
Jake, are you another fine graduate of the pathetic, 4th tier, Regent Law and Small Engine Repair?
bmaz @ 32
SPEW!!!!!!
A stuffy joke from the chair.
Describing different peoples’ experience with USAs as entirely subjective…
Small engine repair is a noble profession compared to Monica’s.
LJ/Aquaria @ 27
It is sad to hear Rove’s discredited talking points raised again and again. Clearly, the only purpose of that is to influence those who aren’t paying attention. AKA, non FDLers.
This is LiveBlog. Please starve trolls.
Pence. Yikes!
bmaz @ 32
No.
Facts… tell that to Bush/Cheney
Mike “Indiana Market” Pence is grateful for her service, which he admits was compelled.
Why do they refer to articles from yesterday? Don’t they realize how unprepared that makes them seem?
Buffing up her Regent credentials….
44 happy Gabblers now … it’s been up to 58 this AM, IIRC:)
Monica: I have a masters in public policy.
JGabriel @ 30
She was speaking about political appointees.
This is a fucking love in.
Biodun @ 42
I just spit a taco all over my monitor
Bustednuckles @ 33
Thank you, but the line was stolen from one of Marcy’s fine commenters a couple of weeks ago.
Pence: I still haven’t seen any facts about the illegality of the AUSA firings.
JGabriel @ 29
Political affiliation is not supposed to be a factor in the appointment of any Civil Service employees.
She must have skipped the ethics in law course (or aced it!)
kdh22 @ 45
I just threw my monitor out the window onto a taco stand.
aw, damn it, i missed putting up a pool on use of the term ” “criminalization of politics”
who is this narhead?
More misdirection. More talking points. Criminalization of politics? Nope, it’s about simple criminality.
Oh, he’s another graduate of God’s Golden Ghetto University, too?
All these degrees from “Christian” universities need to be de-certified for public work. Immediately.
Boy, do I HATE republicans
bonkers @ 49
trumped
Pence: “The attorney general was very forthcoming about mismanagement at the DoJ.”
I suppose, if looked at a certain way, that “I remember nothing!” *is* a rather open admission of poor management skills.
Pence asking her a list of talking points ‘talkers’ Where is Henry? We need a strong dem up there.
Bingo!
“I’m not afraid of facts,” says Mr. Pence. He’s already quoted Lincoln, expect he’ll soon quote Horatio Alger. Where are the Democrats????? Circle jerk about he and Goodling being graduates of conservative Christian schools. Isn’t that special?
No wrongdoing, just could have done it better. No illegal behavior. No crimes, btu the attempted criminalization of politics. Good storyline, especially from someone who claims Goodling got better law school grades than he did. When will he kiss the sleeping princess and awaken her, freeing her from her thorny tomb?
Where are the DEMOCRATS???
and asking the witness — who has the experience of a doorknob — for her studied consideration of what is and is not illegal in her behavior.
now THAT’S good eating.
if he were my congressman, and i was a rightwinger, i’d still be embarrassed.
Cohen D-TN up.
Steve Cohen (D-TN) up. Good one.
Bay State Librul @ 53
they make me feel smart
Enough. This is beyond laughable. There’s housework to be done. Much more productive than listening to these fairy tales.
Later.
FDL in da House! Go Steve!
Brisingamen @ 47
WHY, is this just coming out now? Where are the interviewees? They can’t be all ‘Loyal Bushies’
So if it is just about politics, why did Goodling need immunity?
Why does he thank those dodos
“Criminalization of Politics”.
Dude, didn’t anyone tell you that you’ve got to change your talking points every three months or 3,000 miles whichever comes first?
That’s sooooo 2005 Tom DeLay.
“I had a Faith System”?
Why did you choose Christian universities?
Monica: I enjoy being surrounded by people with the same faith as I have.
She has a “faith system”.
(End of days? Blame the gays? Fuck the Jews?)
Hugh @ 66
DING!
Ha! I just asked this in the last thread. Goddamn, glad I gave $$ to Cohen!
Cohen – Christian U? why?
MG: I liked to hang out the same types of people as me. Debate was rigorous at Regent
Cohen: Regent says mission “Will of ALmighty God” What does that mean?
MG: Don’t know
Cohen: When interviewing people did you ask about religion?
MG: Not that I recall
TRex @ 53
Under what criteria may you decide that Christian universities cannot produce even more outstanding people than Harvard or Yale? Are you stating that you cannot have faith and serve the law?
LibertyLee @ 44
I think you’re making a distinction Goodling herself failed to make. In any event, Goodling had hiring authority over non-Civil Service, i.e. non-political, employees.
At best, even if your contention is correct, Goodling’s response was misleading.
Jake is a serial troll. He posts the same, discredited talking points day after day on all the liberal blogs. Again and again, he’s told the difference between Clinton and Bush, but he still trots out the same crap. Sorry to “feed the troll”, but I’ve seen his name today one too many times.
OMG! 50-60% of Regency students failed bar the first go. Thankfully more Harvard and Yale law students populate the DOJ!
“That’s refreshing”
Ooooooh, SNAP!
Monica: I’m always looking for people who will make a difference in the world. We have a lot of people from Harvard and Yale.
Cohen: That’s refreshing.
Biodun @ 70
Not to mention the same narrow, close minded world view.
TRex @ 52
OMG please don’t forget that line. Brilliant as always TRex!
I loved that bit.
It’s refreshing there are more people from Harvard and Yale.
Cohen up now. 50% of Regent Lawschool grads failed the bar examon their first attempt.
i was on gabbly and it worked well for a while, then it stopped working… the only comments I gotwere the ones I posted. I left becuase the conversation was dull. he he.
TRex, I am scoring this (so far) as a win by the Republicans. Here’s why:
1. Unlike Gonzales, Goodling is giving a good show of being forthcoming. The rare exception was her evading mentioning e-mails when talking about discussions with Rove.
2. This is a complicated issue because there are three separate categories: normal political appointments, political appointments made for wrongful or unlawful reasons, and career appointments. As long as the Republicans are able to blur normal political appointments with career appointments, they make it seem like Democratic bickering.
3. No single deed has been identified as wrongful. The more attorney firings that are involved, the worse, because it deprives the hearings of a focus.
Now, I don’t think they’re going to win in the long term. The facts on the ground are that good career people won’t sign up for DoJ and ordinary people may effectively decline to serve on federal juries because they think the process is hopelessly corrupted. But before we get to a situation where there is breakdown and backlash could be long and hard.
Jason @ 78
But they can change the spark plug in a lawn mower in 5 seconds flat apparently.
JGabriel @ 74
I think she stated early on this a.m. that she was responsible for hiring both political and career staff. Were the interview questions for both the same?
She won’t remember and has absolutely no written documentation of such. Surprise!
let’s not forget the immortal roman hruska criterion: mediocre people need representation too.
Monica: There were multiple age-discrimination lawsuits.
Many age discriminatioin suits?
Is Margaret Chiara one?
thank goodness for the break. her voice was giving me a headache.
Another recess. One hour.
But they have to pray before and after.
recess till two ,,,clear the room…
Out till 2pm.
Late to this, but it appears I haven’t missed much. At least Monica the Happy Oppo Robot can find future work recording messages for voicemail systems.
Her testimony and the performance of the Dems was giving me a stomach ache and I think I’m grinding my teeth.
I can’t believe I woke up so early for this.
Iglesias still chatzing at WaPoO.
pseudonymous in nc @ 93
And she’s, like, an expert Googler
LibertyLee @ 75
“No man can serve two masters…” Matthew 6:24
Charles @ 83
In a way we have lost ground because she has been effective in blurring and clouding some of the strong points we already had. A total waste so far as to actually advancing the ball down the field to a desired goal.
TRex @ 93
… and not fondle the spark plug … at least not in public
Conyers: Room will be cleared except for unauthorized staff, er…authorized staff.
(Laughter.) As I said in a thread weeks ago: Conyer’s gettin’ old.
Can’t someone get to the Dem staff with Q’s so that they can get their act together? I can’t get thru.
Gotta love the way Pence opened his questions to Goodling. Basically, “Hey, I went to a Christian college, too. Let’s network!”
Dover Bitch @ 94
I can’t believe I’ve stayed awake for this. I think I’ll catch the rest of this in the funny papers. I have to work tonight.
OT — If anyone wants to make postcards of flag draped coffins to send to the legislators when military are killed in Iraq, here are some links for you:
coffins
postcards
Quick somebody send Conyers Emptywheels questions and Tiredfed too. There is still time to save this hearing. MARCY!!!!! Tiredfed!!!!! CONYERS!!!!! Please.
Lonely are the eyes of a nation that turn to the wit and wisdom of Sen. Roman Hruska.
Brisingamen @ 100
This Nation was created by men who gave faith to their Creator.
i really hate the stucture of 5 min of questions from one committee member at a time.
seems designed to be unproductive when confronted by a hostile witness.
i don’t recall clearly, were the watergate hearings run like this?
A final reminder before I head out: Don’t feed the trolls, and it’s obvious who they are.
prostratedragon @ 107
i’m not proud of it, dammit.
the point is, what was once a national punchline is now national policy.
LibertyLee @ 75
Notre Dame YES. Regent U. Bha ha ha ha ha.
Do you think half of the Harvard and Yale Law school grads fail to pass the bar exam on their first attempt because that’s the success rate of Regent U Law grads. You’re dead to me.
pseudonymous in nc @ 95
To the great joy of sellers of phone sets.
lolo @ 106
yes, am hoping the dems understand they have to SAVE THIS HEARING.
cause right now, it’s one big suckfest.
Hugh @ 79
And not to mention the same mission, to infiltrate the government, abolish separation of church and state, and make the US back into a ‘Christian’ nation.
Well wasn’t she teh cutest little Goddamn Faith-Based Thing you ever saw?
Ten bucks says she tries to book a flight and flee to the Holy Land during lunch.
pseudonymous in nc @ 95
I will wager you she will get a slot on a talk show, then her own talk show, and possibly later a Seat in Congress.
dmg @ 112
Oh I know. I’d assumed you were looking up from our debased times.
I am depressed. No effective oversight (these questions are pitiful)and now no time lines on Iraq. If the Democrats can’t save the republic who can?
Dems need to be more persistent in their questioning. A few got answers, but she is getting better at wasting time. Give some time to Sanchez and others who want to dig for the truth.
spurious @ 114
i wouldn’t say BACK into a Christian nation.
selise @ 108
If I recall correctly both members and counsel asked questions.
Unfortunately the Dems on HCJ have lived up to my expectations. Was hoping they would be embarrassed from the last hearing & bone up for this one, but they are just boners.
TRex @ 117
There is a great weed whacker joke in there somewhere……
JGabriel @ 103
What’s HE doing here? It’s such a lovely day for a stroll in Baghdad.
I’m willing to believe the Dems set the stage for an afternoon’s worth of really tough questions. I hope MG is sitting at lunch with Dowd and saying, “Golly, that wasn’t so bad!”
g’day all – just getting to the hearing in time for recess – will watch after recess…. has monica “defended” her repug actions or is she digging a hole to fall into? after yesyerday’setback i need some encouraging news…..
From yesterday and it continues today if the comments are gauge:
The Trail of Truth is in full burn
TRex @ 53
Aren’t they certified for so-called “God’s” work? Who said anything about public work?
@ 119
We can. It’s up to us and always has been.
I love the direct yes/no answers to all the fluff Republican questions(?) to allow them plenty of time to pontificate and the attempt to blab continuous nonsense for each Dem question. A simple “who is in the room” begins a diatribe about everything but who is in the damn room. And if there were only four people there, how the hell do you not remember who that last person is? I will answer myself. There is no possible way she does not remember who that person was. She is lying for Jesus ’cause Jesus talks to our “leader”.
spurious @ 116
I’m sorry, but when was America ever a Christian nation?
Hugh @ 122
i was just a kid, but my memory of the watergate hearings was of (in addition to sam ervin’s amazing eyebrows) of a much more useful questioning process.
Neil @ 114
Actually I suspect the question would better be phrased by state bar. Certain states are much harder than other states. Having passed the bar myself after going to night school believe me, it depends a LOT more on how much time you have on the cram class given. Harvard, Yale, Northwestern or Regent don’t teach you to pass the bar in school…that is done in the state by state cram courses.
Also, Froomkin chatz now.
money from Yglesias
..oh gawd i didn’t turn off the cspan audio feed and now i have dubya’s voice in my head…it hurts make it stop it burns it burns…
*clicks stop button*
Whew. I know that it’s only a the Coast Guard Academy commencement speech, but…and gee, Dubya managed to work 9/11 into the speech.
What a suprise.
50-60% failed in 1999 — Charlie Savage of the Boston Globe was on Fresh Air (listen to the podcast for 5/16) talking anout this — Regent is working very hard to upgrade the legal education and has recently won two law school competions previously won by Harvard and Yale. Monica may be making them look bad but they will never give up.
cspan live now has bush at the coast guard academy. eeeeeeew.
click.
TeddySanFran @ 127
I do think she needs a fresh pair of panties after Maxine asked her about documents. priceless.
sometimes we just have to keep panning for a little gold.
FYI- Passing rates for state bar exams vary by state. 50-60% failure is not out of line with the national average. Some states set a lower standard, others set a higher standard. It’s a way of regulating the number of lawyers that can prctice in a state…
TeddySanFran @ 127
I hope you’re right, TSF … so far this hearing has followed the same pattern of the last two, which I felt were wasted (Abu & Comey).
Why was McNutly purposly not told of AGAG’s authorization for MG and KS to hire/fire? Monica never answered Delahunt’s question. Isn’t this like Gonzales/Card attempted end-run around Comey?
Petrocelli @ 133
I was a little amazed that MG couldn’t repeat even one line of indoctrination for Cohen.
Shorter Cohen: what’s the point of finding a christian law school.
mg: uhhh…
selise @ 108
I agree. A hostile witness can just talk out the clock and prevent any followup or logical progression of questioning.
Diane @ 121
There is a decided lack of focus and use of specifics. Few mentions have been made of the March 2006 order of Gonzales delegating hiring and firing authority to a self-professed nobody. None that I know of concerning the interim USA language inserted in the Patriot Act extension. I still am waiting for specifics about what was the nature of her job as WH liaison. I would still like to know in what universe such a sloppy, undocumented hiring and firing process would be considered acceptable.
I recall lots more staff questioning during the Watergate Committee — but it was a Select committee, in the Senate, and operated under different rules, as agreed to by Howard Baker (ranking minority GOP member) and Chair Sam Ervin. Recall, please, that it was Fred Thompson, the minority counsel (staffer), who asked Alexander Butterfield the question about the taping system in open session, even though the staff had uncovered that gem in private depositions several days previously.
TexBetsy @ 106
My work computer won’t let me link to the coffin page — can you send me one? Thanks
Wow! Those fundies are steppin’ up their statistical prowess. I’m jus’ shakin’ here!
There appears to be some displeasure with MG here.
Bay State Librul @ 16
Duh, he is working for Rove.
Personally I had a hard time understanding Monika’s ’spanations, especially the one in answer to the question about EO (or AG authority) bypassing McNulty.
do-si-do @ 137
that’s a good point. Even under the best of circumstances, taking testimony is a slow and tedious process…….and if you tried, I don’t think you could come up with a worse format for getting information than this bullshit 5 minute questioning from a zillion different people. Who came UP with this procedure?
Waters made progress, actually. Files of Goodling’s “oppo research” exist in Department of Justice files. I think that’s new and important.
someone needs to ask her..if Tenet medical/hospitals was ever brought up in regards to firing Carol Lam and the Missouri USA firings..
Carol Lam was working on the case of Tenet/Alvarado suit herself!!
Tenet Healthcare Fraud $$billions$$ of medicare /medicaid…the same Tenet that was closed up at Redding Medical Center in Redding Calif for heart surgery fraud..was Lam fired because of the
Cunningham ‘the cover-up question’ to avoid the Medicare fraud prosecutions possibly???????
and it just so happens that jebbie just was paid $$450,000.00 to be on Tenet’s board of directors!!
fly
“Did you break the law? Is it against the law to take those considerations into account?” Scott said.
“I believe I crossed the line, but I didn’t mean to,” she responded.
So is this like “Well, gee, I didn’t mean to pull the trigger” to get a charge reduced from murder to manslaughter? Either way, it’s a crime. She’s trying to cover her own a** by playing like she’s some little dumb hack, but it’s already been clearly established that she had plenty of power here. Sheesh!
Ten bucks says she gets a book deal and a fellowship at AEI/Regent/Liberty, and her Akin Gump legal fees paid by the same public spirited citizens who’ve been paying Libby’s.
Hugh @ 125
If I recall correctly both members and counsel asked questions.
Yes, a staff counsellor named Sam Dash became a particularly effective questioner. I think a lot of time was given him somehow. But I think that only happened after it became clear that the matter really might go as far as impeachment, and the tone had to be more like a preliminary hearing.
It also seemed to me that each Senator had more than 5 minutes, but maybe that was just my youthful impatience.
LibertyLee @ 116
I fear you are right. Or wind up as a legal consultant on Fox.
ok, the brain is at critical mass – will Senate JC get a crack at her ?
kaye @ 143
Sure seems like it–and it seemed to have been put into place to prevent DAGs from making hiring and firing decisions.Delahunt quickly figured out that Monica had no idea what the statute changed. And further, had no problem being delegated authority that DAGs–Senate confirmed people–used to do.
TeddySanFran @ 127
That is what happened in the last hearing with Gonzales. It seems that the freshman come last, but some of them have more energy (or are less distracted by other committees?) to really hone in on the witness. Like that guy from Mississippi (forget his name, but he was great) who has a law degree from Harvard.
selise @ 110
Absolutely not! IIRC each party hired council to conduct questioning of witnesses with additional by committee members to clear up points in answers. Made for continuity and focus in questioning. All the best….
She sure can babble away and say a lot of nothing, can’t she? Wish the reps were better questioners.
I look upon the HJC as being Triple AAA baseball. It counts…sorta, kinda. But it ain’t the bigs.
I think they are getting her on the record…tenderizing her for a meeting with Leahy and cohorts.
So, I’m just getting in. Can anyone wrap-up Ms. Goodlings testilying for me? Or should it be called testi-phony?
-GSD
IowaDem @ 159
The point is that her immunity agreement prevents her from being prosecuted for the alleged crossing of the line. Without her words I doubt enough independent proof would exist and most of that would be sustained by the earlier Poindexter line of cases.
(CHS notes: I’d say that every single time Issa asks questions, that this is the thing he ends with every single time.)
Issa’s debate repertoire is always very limited, he always relies on the simplest talking points and presents every issue in a very transparent and reliable rehearsed spin.
Stating the most obvious, stupid viewpoint has always been one of his trademarks. He’s likely backing Lungren for the next AG, along with the rest of the West. If folks all across America only knew about Issa’s and Lungren’s real history, they would be even more disgusted with them.
selise @ 131
Of course, it helps if both Democrats and Republicans are asking pertinent questions. Here the Republicans are engaged in talking completely off topic, spoon feeding the witness, or opining that there is nothing here to see, move along. It gives an erratic quality to the proceedings and it takes even more focused questioning by Democrats to bring things back into line, and this often doesn’t happen.
Her answer to Cohen regarding (?) District about forced analysis in a log cabin seemed completely wacko.
emptywheel @ 84
I wish she would have said, “My best friends are from Harvard/Yale.”
kaye @ 144
Yes. She tried to pass it off as, “Well, he didn’t get the memo because it was decided that Sampson would tell him in person.” Bright green bullshit. If this delegation of authority was truly something that has gone on in the past and they’re merely making it official on paper, there’s no need to be so hush-hush about it. The normal office procedure would be to tell McNulty verbally before the paperwork happened or as it’s happening, but also do the paperwork for the record, IMO.
I was most amused by her answers to this line of questioning because she was claiming it gave McNulty more power. An authorization he didn’t know about that gave her power helped McNulty — did I hear that right?
As for the actual delegation, I’m skeptical that it’s truly happened before. More likely, the underlings have done data collection and made recommendations but have not had any actual hire/fire authority. Hell, a contractor could do that, and there’s no need for any double-super secret memos to authorize it.
mui @ 171
You’d be wacko too if you had been brainwashed for 33 years.
soooo i gather from reading monica aced these questions? god it gets worse…. please someone ask pertinent questions to draw her out… damn!
emptywheel @ 160
Did anyone understand MG’s point about that order giving McNulty (DAG) more power?
On CSPAN 3, Bush’s Commencement address at The US Coast Guard Academy is on counter-terrorism efforts.
I can hear the grads and their parents mumbling, my child spends four years in college and on his/her graduation day must sit through a speech about national security/US domestic and foriegn policy to advance the President’s agenda rather than a speech about the significance of the accoplishment and the road ahead.
GSD @ 166
Here’s your wrap-up: The Republicans will have to extend the Iraq supplemental celebration party for another 2 hours to make room for celebrating this hearing.
This is not how you question a hostile witness – they should be prying the facts out of her along pre-determined lines of legal surmise.
Our gang is fishing today instead of hunting.
Not only is the Dem coordination of effort missing, but the individual level of preparation, with occasional exception, has been weak.
It’s obvious she’s only going to speak as a fact witness to the DoJ side of her job – not the ‘privileged’ side of her job.
Someone should just whip out the light sabre and ask her a question she has to answer but can’t – something like:
“Do you believe the President has the authority to order you to withhold information from the Congress that may be germaine to a criminal investigation?”
What can she say to that?
What is it with the dog ate my homework republicans? A few days ago, we learn that the WH attorney’s office lost the fax that Ashcroft sent over confering Acting AG status on Comey (good thing they had a reciipt over at the DOJ) and now this! From Iglesias’ chat over at Wapo:
GSD @ 166
I just read Think Progress. they have several things I didnt hear or understand
http://thinkprogress.org/
Ms. Goodling,
Is lying to Congress a sin?
Is obstruction of justice?
Was religious affiliation a consideration in your research for potential hires?
Did you not hire anyone because they were not a christian?
Neil @ 179
There is bad news for Bush that must be camoflauged. That’s why he is talking about this now–there is much bad news to be drowned out.
Striking difference between House and Senate representatives on both sides of the aisle being demonstrated here today.
The Dems are scoring no points with this witness. I’ve found myself yearning for Leahy’s barely controlled indignation, Schumer’s snarky disbelief, and Whitehouse’s crisp assertions of how things work in the real world of USAs and DoJ. They’re quite effective means of communication, when witnesses are dancing.
And I never thought I’d be thinking highly of Jeff Sessions, but these House Republicans are making him, and some other Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee, look like staunch defenders of nonpartisan justice.
Jane S. @ 176
Yeah…it was blatent bu**sh*t!
A thought has occurred to me, Rove and Bushco seem to have set up DOJ with several “sleeper” cells, just like the terraists, or organized crime, everybody is insulated from the blowback if one of the cells is smashed or if somebody turns. My tinfoil is really crackling now, but would it be possible to ask if there were any “code words” used in the emails or discussions? “Olive oil business” perhaps, to continue the Godfather hospital visit meme? I read once that Nixon always used the phrase “Bay of Pigs” as code for JFK’s assassination when he was talking with Haldeman on tape. It would appear so far that Monica G. will not be John Dean, we’ll have to keep looking.
So then… is my party, the Democratic Party, doing a good job on Monica?
dmg @ 120
Nor I, but she might.
The MSM demands a “Butterfield” moment during these hearings. A “Butterfield” moment is something they are comfortable with because it’s easy and they don’t have to do any real work like teasing out the threads of a very tangle web of deciet and lies to find the truth. It doesn’t look like there is going to be such a moment in these hearings for a variety of reasons. Having said that I fear the MSM is going to follow the Republican meme that this is nothing more than a fishing expidition, nothing to see here, move on.
Fresh thread for everyone.
Just stumbled upon my second zed in 24 hrs. :) Come join me.
empy1000 @ 184
YES! phrase things exactly that way.
Summary so far:
Who fired these attorneys and why were they fired?
Answer- I don’t know.
Dear firepups,
Work out who hasn’t yet used their five minutes, and call those critters’ offices, wouldya? Or just get Conyers to pass La Goodling across to the SJC. I’d like them coming out of lunch knowing that we’re not impressed so far.
Meanwhile, another 9 US soldiers reported dead, with indications that one body of a US soldier has been found in a river.
The US is pushing more and more naval armor into the Gulf as France announces they want to get tough on Iran and as Iran continues with their enrichment program.
Also, this from right blogistan:
“If I had to rape and vivisect a 3-year old child to save my country, then by Jimmy, I’d do it. See. I’m not a pussy. I’m keeping it real. Your turn.
Posted by: Seixon at May 22, 2007 11:47 PM | Permalink to this comment”
What more can one say.
-GSD
Ahhhh! The Didndoit Party…where every member’s last name is Didndoit.
There’s Monica Didndoit, Scooter Didndoit, George, Karl and Dicky Didndoit…and on and on and on…
I’m so sick of this. The party that claims that everyone should take personal resonsibility. HAH!
Another good question might be… is lying to the American people a sin? And how about is lying by the Congress a sin?
Petrocelli @ 131
I was just interpreting (though I’ve always been a bit confused by the ‘In God We Trust’ on the coins, etc.).
Jwoods @ 174
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
i wish a dem would say this!!
60% of Regent U’s Brilliant Class Flunks The Bar? woooohooo now lets go hire 150 of those grads for the bush administration!!!!!
screw Harvard, Princeton, Yale, Stanford..lets hire Regent U flunkies!!
fly
Religion in politics makes me nauseous.
spurious says
May 23rd, 2007 at 10:36 am
Petrocelli @ 131
spurious @ 116
And not to mention the same mission, to infiltrate the government, abolish separation of church and state, and make the US back into a ‘Christian’ nation.
I’m sorry, but when was America ever a Christian nation?
I was just interpreting (though I’ve always been a bit confused by the ‘In God We Trust’ on the coins, etc.).
“God” in this case is not specific. Your God may be a pet turtle. The country was founded on the basis of your right to worship that Turtle without being persecuted for it.
spurious @ 199
My question was not a rebuttal of yours, I am a Canuck and thought I missed something in history class … it was always a great place to catch up on sleep …
IIRC, The Bill of Rights allows for freedom of religion, not freedom of a particular religion.
Re Regent Law School’s bar pass rate, who’s a member of the VA bar who can tell us the average for everyone who sat the Commonwealth’s bar exam. The number wouldn’t be out of line in CA or NY, possibly FL, but may be pretty low for VA and a lot of other states. No idea, but “it’s a capital mistake to theorize before one has data”.
An interesting aspect of the 3rd Reich that has implications for today’s Republican Party. During the rise of the Nazi’s and their subsequent rule, because the followers were “true believers” having incorporated the ideology of the Party, it often wasn’t necessary for functionaries to recieve orders on the best course of action in a given situation. The functionaries KNEW what was expected of them and therefore would carry out their duties accordingly without having to be told. Those who took initiative, without being tole, in promoting certain goals and policies inherent in the ideology were rewarded with more power and priviledge. Hitler was the Leader but he did not have to dictate because he knew that his followers knew what was expected of them. In this regard we are seeing similarities with the Republican Party. Each cog in the wheel knows and has incorporated an ideology that at it’s roots is anti-democratic. They know what is expected of them without having to be told.
TexBetsy @ 194
In her mind she could answer the question about lying to Congress being a sin but be lying about her answer.
According to Juan Cole, the “surge(s)” aren’t working; we can’t even truck enough food up from Kuwait to assure our troops they’ll get three squares a day, much less fresh fruit or greens. And Shrub is extending tours for how long?
http://www.juancole.com
Dude, what a joke this hearing has been, and as others have pointed out, the five minute rule is NOT helpful in the slightest.
And Cannon going off about Murtha for five minutes? WTF was that?
As I watch her testify i can’t help thinking of Thomas Jefferson’s quote about whether his neighbor has one god or ten, ‘it neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.’
And I’d like to ask her if she sees this Democratically-controlled Congress as being in the employ of Satan. (I’ve heard that from some Pentecostals I know.) I don’t think she has any qualms about lying to people she think are aiding “The Enemy.”
flyarm @ 201
I doubt ANYONE who hasn’t passed the bar was hired.
Since y’all are talkin’ about Regent University, here’s a link to Comedy Central…a coupla weeks ago, Jon Stewart did a Real Funny Bit… (if it doesn’t go directly to the video, look for Safety School and click…
but, btw, spew alert.
jon stewart = Safety School
sorry, guys…go the search box at the top to search for Safety School…I’m tellin’ ya, it’s funny.
GSD @ 197
He’s clearly working out his alibi.
from below…I’m always a day late and a $ short on my comments, so I’m putting it up here.
D. Moore @ 212
TeddySanFran @ 99
I’m loving Iglesias’ righteous anger, and his very public stance on his firing (defense of his personal reputation, really)…And I’ll be damned if Mr. “Few Good Men” Iglesias won’t be a very effective poster-boy of formerly loyal Republican backlash, calling for Rove’s head!
“a lot of class”
yeah, she didn’t flash a beaver