Go here or here for a stream of Goodling's testimony.
Please keep extraneous comments to a minimum to lighten the load on the servers.
The AG order just got introduced.
Tom Feeny (FL): To clarify the last point–people at DOJ who would serve in either career or political positions.In order to cover the whole realm, if people were applying for political positions as well as career,
MG I would interview them as if they were political. People would tell me flat out that the person was a Republican. Some people would just self-disclose they were Republicans. There were times I crossed the line in reference calls by asking. I'm not going to sit here and tell the Committee that it didn't play a factor. Sometimes it helped them.
Feeny: You've been a huge disappointment to those hoping to find a grand conspiracy. You've said only a few people knew you personally. You described yourself as a quiet girl. Millions of Americans are proud to have someone like you serving in government. I hope Congress can stop with this circus.
Brad Sherman (CA): I'd like to talk to you about work in hiring non-political folks. Sometimes you crossed the line when checking their references. Were your superiors at Justice aware?
MG Detailees to leadership offices, I was looking for people who would be working side by side with policy makers. Originally I was told IJ we could consider political questions.
Sherman: Who told you you could consider political factors.
MG Kyle Sampson.
Sherman: Did you ever look at FEC.com?
MG Occasionally. It wasn't that common to find that among law enforcement. I did check them for detailees. I was looking for people that would be working in political positions. I did a lot of research, I don't want to rule out that I did that.
Sherman: Detailees, Immigration judges, BIA judges, subject to an analysis that you're going to see their political giving.
MG Sometimes I would ask staff to look.
Sherman: There's been a discussion of Lam's supposed failings. DOJ responds, and says, she's doing a great job. We're on target to be 40% higher on alien smugglings. Why would DOJ tell DiFi that these criticisms were inaccurate, then fire her.
MG Department was trying to say what it could. But maybe not as much good work as Department would like to have done.
Sherman: Was there some reason you found the [response to DiFi] unpersuasive.
MG Dept would have been happier to have an even more positive response.
Lurie Gohmert (TX): Why is okay to inquire about immigration but not voter fraud. I hate to be the bearer of news but politics has always been a part of appointment process. I appreciate your testimony today. You seem to believe you did something wrong by saying a person was a liberal Democrat. Blah blah blah blah politics politics politics. There was no investigation when Clinton hired a bunch of USAs when he came in. When I was a judge and someone presented something 30 minutes before the hearing, I think it's unfair, [because I read right slow and darnit, none of my political staffers read either] And when we bring up God and Christianity Harvard itself has a quote from Psalm 8 on one of its buildings, and its official motto 400 year ago was religious. It is part of the foundation. And I would submit to my colleagues, if someone here indicate there's something wrong with being a Christian, the person on this committee could be charged under the hate crime bill, so watch you comments and votes.
Baldwin (WI): AG Gonzales' previous acknowledgement Bikupic. Do you have knowledge about who put him on the list.
MG I don't–he wasn't on the lists I saw.
Baldwin. Any knowledge about why?
MG No. I would read the press clippings, and I'd occasionally read stories that involved his office.
Baldwin: Did you ever participate in a discussion of whether he was loyal to BushCo. That he was acitve in prosecuting vote fraud?
MG I don't recall any.
Baldwin: Sampson testified that he likely would have spoken to you about Biskupic.
MG I can rule it out. Sometimes Sampson and I would talk about USAs when other jobs opened up, like ATF job, AAG, VAWA. I just don't remember any conversations about him at all.
Baldwin: DAG McNulty's testimony. You told Sampson you had concerns.
MG I raised info about caging. Elston said Dpty didn't have enough time to be comfortable with it. Most of my comments had to do with opening door to saying bad things about people who worked for us. I didn't think it was the right thing to do to say bad things. We were trying to get them to leave quietly.
Baldwin: Did you tell McNulty you had concerns, AG?
MG No.
Baldwin: Did you tell Moschella about inaccuracies.
MG Conversation right outside hearing room. I thought it would be bad for the USAs. My focus was on that. I was so much more focued on the other things. I think I went on to getting Dpty ready for private briefing.
Franks (AZ): Ah have been so impressed with yar testimony today. I think we're all fortunate to have your presence in the justice department. I was struck by your motivation, to make things better. Should be motivation for govt in general. I cahnt help hear again and again, were these based on political considerations. That is certainly within the purview of the President to do that. It's okay to hire people of their own persuasion. The critical question is this abotu justice. Did you ever try to affect justice?
MG I certainly did not.
Franks: Do you know of anyone who did?
MG I can't testify to what other people were thinking. We didn't talk about what the reasons were except for Bogden, I never heard anyone say anything like that.
Schiff (NY): I'd like to ask about criteria. Let me assume for a moment that delegation of authority is a reason to be fired.
MG He could be. [she sees where this is going--perhaps to Mercer?] You'd look at the totality of circumstances in every case.
Schiff: If he removed someone from a corruption case, that would be a good reason to be fired.
MG I don't know.
Schiff: Bad morale might be a legitimate reason.
MG It'll be the totality of the circumstances.
Schiff: If Iglesias testified incompletely, that might be a reason to fire him. Certainly if someone gave incomplete testimony that would be reason to be fired.
[Pause, Monica knows where this is going.]
MG: It's not easy to give you complete answers.
Schiff: Lack of confidence might be a reason to be fired. And if a USA or other key justice official demonstrated an excess of loyalty, that might be reason to put them on a list.
MG I don't understand.
Schiff; You have a USA who improperly delegates authority, actions cause morale to plummet, testimony inconsistent or incomplete, and creates impression that loyalty overrides constitution.
MG Not my call to make.
Schiff; By that standard, shouldn't some have put AG on list to be fired. Morale has plummeted.
MG I've left department. I do think there was some inconsistencies with AG's testimony.
Schiff Senators have lost confidence in AG.
MG I've seen newspaper accounts.
Schiff, AG has created impression that loyalty is more important than constitution.
MG I don't know what I think about the topic.
Davis (AL): no confidence resolution. Gonzlaes testified he never saw a list. Is that accurate.
MG I believe he saw a list.
Davis: If GOnzales testified he had never been briefed, inaccurate?
MG Inaccurate.
Davis: Any other inaccuracies?
MG I don't know if I saw all of it.
Davis: AG said no discussions of USA firings.
MG He was at November 27 meeting.
Davis: When did you first become aware that Gonzales made inaccuracies in testimony.
MG Not testimony.
SmithLundgren: Witness has been asked questions about testimony.
Davis: I ask ruling on point of order.
SmithLundgren: She believed that comments she referred to went to press accounts. As matter of fairness, witness has a right to
Waters Lee: Davis' is appropriate line of questioning. Dowd: you're to counsel witness, you're not a participant.
Somone appeals ruling.
Question is on the move to table.
Hearing is in recess. Parliamentary inquiry. We cannot recess uniliaterally. We've asked for a recorded vote.
Schiff: Since there's no one to record the vote.
Waters Lee: Clerk is now here. Question is now on the motion to table. Clerk will call roll.
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

EPU’d
My question:
What, exactly, did you think might be ’self incriminating’ in your testimony today?
http://www.ImpeachGonzales.org
Gohmert: Politics has a place in this, and it should.
Comey AG!
So… it’s illegal to consider politics, but it’s unavoidable, so it’s okay?
Man, Gohmert is just hitting all the GOP talking points….
Harvard again.
Baby jesus weeps everytime a repug speaks
You guys are picking on God! And hate crimes bill might cover you evil anti-christians.
Has Congress always been so bloody theocratic> This guy is just scary
Hate crimes? Wow. This guy was a freaking judge.
Jesus Christ, I hate Republicans.
Gohmert: Christians being persecuted. Thereis nothing wrong withbeing a Christian. People on this committee can be charged with hate crimes.
Whaaaaa?
Gohmert: There’s nothing wrong with being a Christian.
Lesbian Tammy asking questions now. MG does not look happy as she looks to Tammy.
Biskupik!!
Wow. The Republican Congressmen are disgusting.
The Christian pandering is *way* over the line.
What happened to Conyers? Is he taking a nap?
oh she is good! watch what she does and asks
Suddenly, MG does not remember!
james @ 11
If Jesus Christ showed up, Republicans would hate him; he’d treat them like the pharises.
james @ 5
How can it be illegal when the repubs say it is all correct politics??? Me be confuzled.
I’m sorry – I totally missed how the Repugs segued this questioning into a Christian versus non-Christian problem. Can anyone point it out to me? Thanks! This is another one of those days when I feel like I’m living in the pages of the National Enquirer.
Gohmert is actually quite disturbed. Suggests that comments and votes in Congress might subject members to charges under Hate Crimes legislation.
Baldwin: Who put Biskupic on list?
MG: Don’t know. I don’t remember hearing anything about it.
Baldwin: Any concerns about Biskupic?
MG: I feel like I read the press clippings.
Feel Like?
JGabriel @ 15
I too, can’t stand their hypocrisy’s of politics and religion…
Biodun @ 16
He’s not napping – he’s waiting to strike.
Biskupic – I don’t know, etc, etc
because you know what a problem violence against Christians is.
Monica: I don’t recall. I don’t remember.
The Dems need some props. Hold up the Bible while you’re asking a question ; )
MG: “I feel like I read the press clippings every day.”
I know how that feels. It feels like a feeling but not a known fact. Feelings are funny things. You can say them and believe them but they can be entirely based on a lack of factual basis.
“I don’t remember!” I’m luvin’ it!
newtonusr @ 22
Most Republican Representatives are either marionettes or dumber than dirt, or both.
Much as I love and respet FDL, I think it’s a huge wast of your time to liveblog this. I think a quick note now and then pointing out something salient would be much more useful than a play-by-play (borrrrrrrrring)
Cozumel @ 28
maybe the constitution of the United States
I really hope Schumer and Specter eventually get a hold of this woman. Clearly these people don’t know how to properly cross-examine a witness.
I’m almost glad I’m not watching it, the R’s saying “we’re wasting our time” is making me angry.
Clearly, MG and Sampson gossipped all the time about USAs, but she doesn’t remember anything.
“I was concerned we were opening a door to saying bad things about people who had worked for us.”
Somebody should ask what she had for breakfast, just as an experimental control. Perhaps she has no memory at all…
Baldwin: You said that after DAG testimonythat you told Kyle that some of the testimony was inaccurate.
MG: Told Elston about caging issue.
I thought she didn’t know what caging is
…why does the process she describes sound like a mean-girls sorrority rush?
You can’t say bad things about the USAs; but you can just fire them without cause. And then threaten them if they talk about it.
Wasn’t the OLC supposed to be looking into whether Monica had politicized the hiring process? She’s pretty much admitted that she has, under oath. How do her answers here affect an internal investigation. Anyone know?
MG: I didn’t want to offer reasons for firings because it wouldn’t be very nice
Sarik @ 26
These theothugs probably think that these hearings ARE violence against Christians. Heck, the way Gohmert was going on you might think that being a Democratic is a hate crime.
when she uses actiniums, Rep’s sitting should ask her to clarify who she is referring to!
Dee @ 21
Steve Cohen made some snark about Regent U. He didn’t quite get his point out properly, and the Repukes pounced on it. I think he was trying to make the case that our nation’s laws should supercede the Bible’s “laws.”
“We would have been happier to see an even better response” than 40% higher? That’s really getting perilously close to flat out lying. The charge that Lam disappointed on immigration prosecutions is bull honky and for her to resist admitting that is very close to the line where her immunity should drop.
TeddySanFran @ 34
Again this goes back to why isn’t there a documentary trail to all this. As it is this doesn’t qualify for discussions around the water cooler.
CharlieW @ 32
Speaking from the office, I am very happy for FDL’s liveblogging.
Mr. Franks of Arizona will now be proposing marriage…
Now MG’s talking about what she thought was “good” or “bad” for the department. Dig in on this. I think. I think I think. I think. I just I just I jsut
“We thought we were on the way to resolving it.”
And if it hadn’t been for you pesky kids…
What documents was the last GOP questioner asking about that arrived a half hour before the hearing, and that he didn’t get until an hour into the hearing – wouldn’t any delays in receiving documents be the fault of the DoJ or the WH?
her speech is very fast…she needs to slow down, because her recall memory is suffering and she will state I don’t recall.
grayslady @ 40
I think these comments can’t be used because of the immunity. But she is being investigated, yes.
If she is so sincere why did she plead the 5th?
I have to mute the repuke questioning. I am trying hard to hold my lunch down.
Is there some way to disallow starting every answer with “I think…”, “I believe…”, and “I feel…”?
“make a better world…” Franks
“Yes, I crossed the legal line.” MoniKKKa
Thanks, anne.
…and ally her Christian self with those who torture.
ifthethunderdontgetya @ 47
Well meaning concern troll?
I hope the Daily Show is busily assembling all of these enconia into one big compilation showing the Martyrdom of Saint Monica.
My Congressman Trent Franks(hangs my head in shame). Can’t get more conservative than him.
She might as well take a 5 minute potty break.
Isn’t there some way to shut Trent Franks up?
No fish in the pond?
How about a whale or an elephant
Shorter Franks: It’s “best for humanity” to ask non-political appointees for their political affiliations, and to hire only Republicans.
Well for anyone who wanted to know if you could fellate and talk at the same time, the Republican Representatives are showing it can be done and that it must be fairly easy considering how many of them can do it.
Historically, whenever Christian’s get involved things go downhill from there. PBS Last night.
Dover Bitch @ 10
We didn’t show up at Falwell’s funeral with a Napalm bomb. A “Christian” did. One of Falwell’s kids…
Did you ever torture living infants? No? Well, then! I guess the Dems are just playing politics here.
You are free to visit another site.
Thinking about LHP’s post this am, and the fact that so many Republican lawyers are dismayed at the politicization of the DOJ, it is quite amazing to see these Republican congressmen getting up there and shameless repeating the idea that there is nothing wrong with politicizing the justice system.
“Could you tell the committee who’s awesomer: God or Jesus?”
Are the Republicans on this committee good for anything but fellating the White House?
“No fish in the pond”…”B-b-but Clinton fired 93″…Christ.
Thank you for coming. Thank you pleading the 5th. Thank you for breaking the law.
Oh, Matt, I am so sorry!
She doesn’t recall.
Republicans and the rule of law:
Yes, dear, you committed a crime and pleaded the Fifth.
But you are really wonderful, just wonderful, thank you so much….
This gonna be fun…Dems are gonna play Trent’s comments over and over again when he next runs for office…and thereby loses!!!!! His political staff have to be cringing.
Woodhall Hollow @ 71
As always ….. the people lead and the congress stumbles along trying to catch up.
What an absolute joke that was. By the way, whose kid is that they’re questioning?
Another fawning Repuke – the earlier comment the RePukes acting as if she was 9 mos pregnant and they were making her stand is great. The Repukes don’t really ask questions, they give speeches about whatever darts into their memory challenged minds, say Clinton did it and tell MoniKKKa how wonderful she is and how there are no fish in the pond.
How come no one mentions that Lam was most likely unpopular because she had put the Dukester in Stir and was getting ready to go after his buddies?
“I have seen no evidence that shows that any of these attorneys were fired for blah blah blah……….” Repukes not only have no memories but are blind and dumb to boot.
All these right wing Christian Republicans started out as stealth school board members. They are now infiltrating our US Federal Government. There are many more in the hopper and in 2008 thier take over will be complete.
…he “hopes the very best in life” for Monica.
(um, like having an oil tanker named after her? Or getting AG’s job maybe)
Adam Schiff up.
Did Monica “pretty” herself up – new hair style and make-up – just for her appearance before Congress?
How sweet. Now if she would just tell the truth…
JGabriel @ 65
There are some who would agree. It makes the Democrats mad, but a Republican would agree with that assertion.
Schiff is trying to do leading questions. Not too good at it.
Why isn’t anyone talking about the REAL reason these ATTORNEYS were fired? Especially Lam. She was looking into the money laundering/corruption of Tenet Health Care. You know, the place that pays Jeb 37K per day.
How about asking about the Defense Dept. laundering of money funneled back through the RNC? C’mon people. Get with the program.
The repubs are treating her like a sweet wonderful little GIRL who MAYBE once made a wee little mistake. What was her position again?
At about 4:30 in the hearing:
Goodling thought McNulty had committed perjury/obstruction in his public testimony, was then involved in prepping McNulty for subsequent closed testimony, but never mentioned to him, after the hearing, or in the process of prepping him, the points on which she believed his open testimony was perjurioius/obstructive?
Isn’t that, at best, legal malpractice?
4th tier law school
Monica not sure if incomplete congressional testimony was a reason to be fired…
Schiff: If an USA delegated a lot of decisions that’s a good reason to fire?
MG: May be a good reason.
Schiff: Low morale to be put on list?
MG Don’t know, totallity of circumstances
Schiff: if USA lied to congress; that would be a reason?
MG: Says nothing – she knows where this is going
Miss P. @ 67
Only those who are incapable or unwilling to honor the separation of church and state.
“it’s not easy to sit here and give you complete answers, but i don’t know.”
now THAT’S scripting.
CharlieW @ 32
Live blogging is a new communication tool. Some days or hearings go better than others. Conyers’s hearings have been among the most slow-paced in the US House.
Blink, goes MG. Blink. Blink. Look up at the questioner so you appear innocent, open faced, honest. Blink. Blink. MG, the blink is the tell. It’s a lie.
If Iglesias delgated too much – that would be a reason to fire, right?
as opposed to Carol Lam’s prosecuting too many cases personally, which is also a reason to be fired? (from earlier this morning)
SChiff trying to get Monica to say that someone who’s acted in (the same way as AGAG) should be fired.
“Totality” is her version of “consensus”. Crack the damn thing open.
Democracy is done. Welcome to rightwing christian theocracy. They’ve been working towards that goal for over twenty years and have succeeded. Mission accomplished. That the Republican members of the committe are so blatant about it (one member even threateneing the others to watch what they say!) is frightening.
Schiff is asking through the back door is Abu should be fired for all the shit he pulled. She knows it and she’s hesitating.
Dee @ 96
Looking down too.
Good snark. Talking about Abu!
THIS GREAT!! Someone has finally shoved the issues into her face!!
Schiff is right on track – listing all kinds of reasons why a USA might end up on the list, including lying to Congress – Why not Abu?
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
wtf is Schiff doing here?
Yes, so much for Americans to be proud of here. Such a good, quiet Christian girl. How about putting her in charge of Iraq?
Great questioning…
What a Monica hedge..
Schiff: Should Abu be fired
MG: I’m gone; can’t tell you what’s going on there.
Schiff: Inconsistency in Abu’s testimony?
MG; Yes, some
Abu G was a good man who tried hard, but I don’t know what I think about whether he’s a complete fuck-up.
Woah, did she just say there were inconsistencies in AG’s testimony?
Helen @ 101
She must pray to the Decider to know how to answer.
MG: Abu tried hard. I don’t know what I think about the topic of him being fired.
Abu “Good Man” Tortureboy
“I don’t know what I think about the topic” MG…?????????????????????????????????
Artur Davis. He should be good. And it’s a pity that seniority gets enforced so strictly here.
“He [AGAG] was a good man and he tried.”
“I don’t frankly know what I think.”
AG’s testimony that he didn’t see or get briefed on the list was INACCURATE
she doesn’t know what to think of the “topic.”
OH WOW!
Oh – hey – time to wake up. Monica’s just called Abu G a liar twice!
Now it is getting interesting. Any other inaccuracies?
Davis: Abu said that he neve saw list. Is that accurate.
MG: He did see a list
Wow, Goodling can’t say whether or not Gonzales was more loyal to the President than he was to the duties of his office.
anne @ 112
She CERTAINLY did!
THIS is serious stuff!!!!
JEEZUS. Finally some substance. Thank you!
Mon: Gonz saw the list – inaccurate testimony
Mr. Davis was on CSpan this morning. UhOh he’s gonna make her cry. I bet he doesn’t like the caging bs. OMFG a racecard.
Badwater @ 112
What about the Commander Guy?
YEEEE HAAAW!!!!!! Abu LIED
Let’s hope the house of cards starts to come down.
We really need another round.
Oh no she didn’t!
this is PAINFUL.
there is virtually no traction on any of the dems questions, the repubs sweep anything away by invoking christianity, terror or the great legali instituition of regent univerity, and little miss kitty either feigns memory loss or lack of experience to dodge virtually every question she doesn’t want to answer.
finally some tough Questioning
gonzo DID SEE the list Gotcha, gonzo time to QUIT!
FINALLY!!! We are seeing some fish in the pond!!!
Badwater @ 112
That is a great lawyer technique, the back door way, in order to get to the front door were the real stuff is
Her lawyer should sit down and shut up! He has no right to speak.
Dan Lungren is a putz…
testimony “allegedly” made by AG!!!
I’d like to see all the Dems on this committee surrender their time to Davis. He is thorough and efficient.
Davis “Let me help you” His Nov 27 meeting testimony was inaccurate?
MG: Yes.
Davis: When did you become aware that there were inaccuracies in Abus’ public account?
Dowd: ?????
Davis: You are not part of this
Torpedos heading to the battleship Gonzales fired by the USS A. Davis. The water is real deep under the Gonzales.
Purportedly allegedly supposedly
What are the odds on Dowd briefing the GOPpers on tag-team tactics beforehand?
Wait, ‘alleged’ testimony? Is it alleged or real testimony?
Lundgren ruled outta order
“Mr Dowd you are not a participant in these proceedings,” but he won’t shut the fuck up!!!!
This whole affair is a fucking joke
Just following along while at work, but didn’t AGAG already apologize for “inconsitencies”? Maybe not, maybe we just all knew that to be the case. “I can’t recall.”
Davis clearly got to the nut
Lungren and Down are both putzes.
I LOVE DAVIS!!! (Earlier today I misrepresented him as being from Miss). He is as tough as nails….scaring the shit out of Dowd and the rethugs.
theExile @ 148
can they kick him out?
Jackson Lee: Lundgren shut up. Dowd – you too
Monica revealing that her memory isn’t so bad…
uh ohhhhh its getting interesting for real now
this is getting really really cool. The theocon sock puppet was lured through fairly skilled questioning into calling her ex boss a liar and her lawyer (who is really Gonzo’s lawyer) is mad.. Dowd put into his place.
Can someone call a roll-call vote on having Dowd chucked out?
Is she beginning to sweat?
Recess
how long a recess?
Does DooDoo Head Dowd’s bullshit come out of Davis’ time?
damn – just as it gets real – RECESS!!
Wonderful this is great with Abu inconsistencies…
WTF did she do that for?
Clerk not there, so can’t have the called-for rollcall vote.
Lee– the chair has ruled we are recessed until the clerk can be found.
You can tell that damage has been done. The Republicans and the attorney are running around like cockroaches when the light is turned on.
Sometimes this parliamentary procedure bullshit makes me sick.
Doesn’t matter. It can’t be unsaid, and the film of Gonzo’s prior remarks probably exists and will be on the news tonight. Zap!
Even if the remarks were made in a press conference and not before Congress, the public lie will be deadly for PR reasons even if no legal jeopardy attaches.
Goodling has just hung Abu out to dry, stating repeatedly that she knows of numerous mis-statements by AG in testimony and the presser, as per questions by Davis!
Since it came up, Harvard’s motto today is simply Veritas, which is after all the entire point of this committee meeting.
TIME OUT
All right–any parliamentarians out there who “get” what just happened?
is she conferring while they vote?
Clerk here now, let’s vote on the chair’s motion to table the ruling of the chair that Lundgren is outta order. (I think)
This is soooo fucked up. I hate lindgrund! he is stonewalling this committee
Motion to table? Someone help me.
Stalling . Gonzo a goner
Where is Conyers? It’s his committee and he’s absent. Typical
There is an objection to the recess. I object to the whole joke of getting testimony from someone who got paid 133,000 per year yet knows nothing, remembers nothing and can’t answer questions.
Clerks! WTF? Do they just let them wander off?
Haha, blaming the photographers now – they are getting so desperate.
Somebody shut this ahole from CA up.
i’m woke now!!
1oldlady @ 174
Actually this is beautiful. Monica needs her blankey (Dowd), and not for nothing. She is in deep trouble.
They’re scrambling to ensure that La Goodling has enough time to learn the script from Dowd.
OT: Got my postcards ordered — Here are more coffin images:
http://www.thememoryhole.org/w…..tos/dover/
Should have my postcards by D-Day, and then to mail them to my Congress-critters!
Thanks TexBetsy for the postcard company link.
The Republicans are so much more experienced at getting nothing done and derailing than the Democrats are at getting things done and ramrodding a committee’s business through!
Gotta love Davis.
Summary: The GOP is stalling on Monica’s knowledge, and the timing of her knowledge, of Abu’s mis-statements. This gives her time to consult with Dowd. Also stalls the film at 5:30 for the nightlies.
I wish Conyers would rule this with an iron hand.
Where is he?
Wow, the Republicans are being total assholes and doing everything they can to muck up the hearing.
This vote call just takes up time and reduces the number of questions that can be asked before the day ends.
And Davis knows that he’s got her on the ropes. Now, if he doesn’t get the time to continue — and the GOPpers are going to run interference from now on — it’s up to the Dems who follow him to keep on that line of questioning.
I’m not sure I follow the reason behind the lawyer’s objections to the questioning. Can someone shorten it for me?
Why the f*ck did Jackson-Lee stop Davis?!?! He was so ready!! Now MoniKKKa gets to get her compsure back and get coached more. DAMMIT!
Hugh @ 169
Right on.
Hugh @ 32
Obviously this asshole isn’t aware that speech in the well of Congress is completely protected….representatives and senators cannot be prosecuted for what they say even if they, for instance. tell someone to “Go Cheney” themselves.
wake up AMERICA the republickes are obstructing justice
ahh – I got back just in time. Gonzo about to be fried – R’s come scurrying back to vote (on whatever the hell this is about).
newtonusr @ 188
your right…but its lindgrund, I hate the sob
Please don’t tell me Conyer’s and his delegatee can’t keep enough Dems in their chairs to control this hearing.
F_____in Democrats wander off like a bunch of stray cats.
The oobjection is that Davis alleged that AG stated things “in testimony to the House and Senate” and MG agreed his testimony was inaccurate. Then she tried to say that perhaps his statements were not testimony, but at his presser. That was the signal — that Monica had misrecollected — to clusterfuck.
Did ANYBODY notice that she said that the repukes were involved in CAGING in the 2004 election? There is a court order against the Republicans using that specific illegal practice going back to the 80’s.
MG is getting advice on how to not answer questions about her knowledge of the discrepencies between Gonzalez’ testimony and what she knows to be true.
Is Maxine doing a good job?
Isn’t Gonzalez a fall guy of sorts? Bush would love to keep him in place until Jan 2009 but if he must go that means Rove has more cove, no?
So if I understand the excitement…
Goodling will give the goods, that will get Gonzo. But if you get Gonzo too soon, then you lose Rove. But if you can keep Gonzo on the hook long enough, then Rove will surely be destroyed. And if Rove is destroyed, then this will get Bush.
Wouldn’t even make a good sundance movie.
Davis now up again.
What is a motion to table? I am unclear?
Looks like the Repubs got the word to try and shut things down if things were looking too scary for Gonzo or Rove…
Motion to table passes…
17 aye; 9 no. Motion to table passes.
Are Leahey and the rest of the Dem. first team going to get a crack at Monica?
Press conference, it struck me that something wasn’t right but I couldn’t put my finger on what.
Davis: When did you first become aware that Abu lied?
MG: Press conference
Davis: did you tell him he lied?
MG; No
ahhhhhh – ole arthur making her sweat a bit…….
MG: I am soooo confused.
Davis is zeroing in and her memory is getting faultier and faultier.
I got distracted by work, what just happened? vote?
As Monica has immunity, this is about pinning perjury on Abu G.
Davis — did your last conversation with AG make you uncomfortable.
Yes.
Am I reading this correctly aren’t we? That Goodling is now in the proces of plunging a knife repeatedly into her boss?
“I couldn’t continue working on his staff”.. wow
pseudonymous in nc @ 194
Looking at Debbie Wasserman Schultz glaring toward Goodling’s attorney, I’m thinking you may get just what you want.
Davis: Did you tell anyone that you thought Abu lied?
MG: No
When was the last time you spoke to Abu?
Thurs or Fri before I left
Did anything about that conversationmake you uncomfortable?
MG Yes
Tears are coming
MG “I read so many things trying to prepare for today that I am confused”
Why read anything? Just tell the truth, tell the committee what happened – easy. Oh yeah you’re a Repuke Theocon so the truth is outa the question.
Holy cow – is she nailing Abu G on Obstruction of Justice????
Don’t Christians understand? It’s not the religion we mind, it’s the hypocrisy and the overstepping of its bounds. They do NOT have a right to force the entire country to live by what THEY consider to be morality and it is wrong to try and make it so just because they are the majority. Majority rule is immoral, as is the “the end justifies the means” approach we see so many of them take. Being Christian doesn’t automatically put you outside of legal or ethical bounds.
In her testimony today before the House Judiciary Committee, former DOJ White House liaison Monica Goodling joined Alberto Gonzales, Kyle Sampson and Paul McNulty in disclaiming any role in the creation of the infamous list of U.S. attorneys to be fired. It should comes as no surprise that the graduate of Regent University law school would have us believe the list so central to the prosecutors purge appeared magically, untouched by the hands of man. Call it Immaculate Conception.
For the details, see:
“Monica Goodling’s Immaculate Conception.”
Shes saying that ABU tried to coach her testimony????? OH NO
Obstruction of justice? Gonzo telling her his recollections? I know NOTHING about the law, but this sounds suspicious.
yielding to Davis…
AG laid out his recollection of the firing process, did I have a reaction to his recollection? Was it appropriate for us to talk about that — so I didn’t say anything.
Yielding back to Davis — yeah!
“I would like to yield my time to Mr. Davis.”
FINALLY !
4:54 – So Gonzo takes some time in his last face-to-face to coordinate their testimony? Well, well, well.
WAKE UP BOYS AND GIRLS Gueterriz yeilding back to Davis
She just busted ABU for conspiracy to obstruct.
Ok…the ol christian right can now say ‘hey we did our best’ and get up and leave with what they will consider a clear mind and blame the dems for the world being round….grin.
christy —- you were right on with the graphics —- just a few hours too early
oh my…
she wanted to transfer, AG needed to think about this,
process…what? Ag..reaction to his reaction,
what is THAT?? now thats good he yeld him time back to the other guy…this is good!@
TexBetsy @ 231
Thats what I said,.
Gonzales is toast!
Nice hand-off, Mr. Gutierrez! Now let’s see the other Dems do that, and tighten the screw.
(Damn, the low-seniority Dems are the best ones again.)
DAVIS!
DAVIS!!!!
DAVIS!!!!!!!!!!
Davis: What made you uncomfortable about the conversation
MG: We should not be discussing our “recollections”
Davis: Why inappropriate?
MG: Cuz we’d have to talk about them. Not necessarily inappropriate. She’s trying to get out of it. “He’s a kind man”
oh my!
nowwwwwwwww i am soooo loving this!! ;o)
MG: AG and I were getting our story straight!
paul @ 205
MG: Gonzo wanted to tell Goodling what he remembered about the process of the terminations…
I was asking for a transfer.
He was being kind, he was a kind man.
She is ready to run out screaming. Davis is very, very good. The Repubs are all getting full blatters right now.
Mr Davis should go far. Hes amazing!
Shorter MG: Gonzo coached me, which was weird, but it was because he’s such a nice guy.
Oh, that was a deep breath.
This is highlight reel material.
Abu was telling her what to say.
Valley girl: Naow I didden.
Hey, this was SO worth the wait.
So Gonzales lied. Goodling knew it, and did nothing. That’s professionalism, Bush-style.
Finally Rep Artur Davis is asking some appropriate questions. The Democrats should have all been on this line of questioning.
Davis: Do you think AG should be concerned about making inaccurate statements?
MG: He has apologized for his misstatements.
Davis: Did AG talk abot terminations?
MG: He said that everybody was on list for performance related reasons. He thought the Deputy was at fault
gutierrez is a team player!!! his office is getting a call of thanks from me today (as soon as the hearing is over).
Toast
Well, I’ll say this: the Regent grad had a better feel for Obstruction of Justice than the Harvard-educated AG…
Davis — was he trying to shape your recollection.
No! But I didn’t know if it was a conversation we should be having. Clarifying — it wasn’t testimony, it was presser.
Clintons secretary Betty Currie all over again
Gonzo has to know better they impeached Clinton for his part in remember what happen with betty
Gonzo now caught doing the same thing
Davis: Was Abu trying to shape your recolection?
MG: No
Davis: But it made you unconfortable.
Bang. “I didn’t know if this was a conversation we should have been having.”
Is CharlieW @ #33, who thought live blogging this hearing to be a waste of our precious minds still here?
Interesting.
Goodling says that Gonzales attempted to talk with her about her recollections regarding the US Attorneys’ dismissals.
This would be the same Gonzales who testified to the Senate that he had no such conversations because he had recused himself from investigations regarding this matter, and didn’t want to taint his testimony as a fact witness.
Goodling may have just offered up an indictable or impeachable perjury charge or obstruction charge on Gonzales.
Hope the press catches this.
but it made you uncomfortable, smack.
HJC subpoena for Abu now. Now.
Debbie yields 1 minute to Davis — yay!
That look on her face just now was priceless.
…and I am in love with Debbie Wasserman-Schultz
And Debbie yields.
wasserman!!!!!!!1
OOOHHH!!!
I wanna kiss Davis right now.
Screw these Republicans.
Yielding again to Davis 1 minute
Davis: you said if there was something incomplete with our testimony would you come back
MG I wanna talk to my laywer.
Debbie rocks, too.
She needs to consult with counsel regarding giving truthful testimony to congress!
boy oh boy…he is good..and the others are wanting him to speak and get
will this make it on the forkin’ news tonight!?!?
Lundgren is there to disrupt the flow. Luckily, the networks have editing machines.
we do have to consider the possibility that Goodling intended to hang her lying liar of an ex-boss out to dry. The Ashcroft connection to Regent U and whatever loyalty that engenders needs to be considered. I really don’t know.. just thinking out loud.
So Gonzales talks about possible future testimony. Goodling feels uncomfortable about it but lets it happen. Boy, it’s a shame these guys weren’t lawyers because then they would know how inappropriate and illegal it was.
Jackson: Do you want to consult?
MG: No; I want to consult when I am done. Not now.
Davis: Re McNulty – did he try to correct the record of his testimony to senate or in closed briefings?
MG: Don’t know. But they were thinking of addressing it, but don’t know if it happened
Debbie Yeilding to Davis again
sanitas @ 275
Hmmm – meeting with AG made her uncomfortable – I say it leads.
Ed*ard Teller @ 260
I so hope he is. ;~)
they all are yeilding there time to him! his line of questioning is great@!
See, people?
It takes time to make a good can o’ beans.
“I wouldn’t claim to be an expert?”
selise – are you recording? I got your back if you have gaps, etc.
…and now, Domenici is on the spit…
Nailing Domenici now.
Go Go Go Go Go!
Sigh @ 225
Amen!
Just checking in from England. Is it now a crime in the States to hate?
Davis: Did you prosecute?
MG: Some, but they all pleaded out?
Davis: In your opinion would it be appropriate for a US Senator to contact a prosecutor about a specific case?
MG: We got those questions al teh time.
Davis: Answer the question.
MG; MAybe if they were calling about something in the public record?
Gonzo is absolutely sure the firings were for “performance related reasons”, but admits not having read their reviews, or personally dealt with any of the fired USA’s, but was mad his staff went off message and suggested the Cummins’ firing was just so Tim Griffin could get a little resume padding.
TeddySanFran @ 287
And Heather Wilson :-)
Going after Senator Pajamas now.
Every f—ing Dem on the committee should be yielding to Davis.
i honestly don’t see what this line of questioning does, unless it’s to score cheap points on gonzales, domenici, etc…
unless he’s going to tie it to monica’s own behavior…
May they both rot in hell, I’m from NM
Rep Arthur Davis ‘08
new thread
Davis: Any instance for appropriate for a politician to ask USA to prosecute a person.
MG: Prolly not
New thread…
New Thread upstairs
Wow! She certainly is showing the superb legal education she received from Regent!
Dee Loralei @ 292
oh please oh please…
What is Davis’ background? He is on fire!!! Other HJC members [some, at least] should watch & take notes.
Rep. Artur Davis [D-AL] is GOOOOD. He is so calm is paced and engages her answers with quick and incisive questions that keep the questioning moving. He is also respectful.
damn, she admitted the AGAG has admitted 3 inaccuracies in the attorney firings. 1. He didn’t know of a list, sampson didn’t know of a list and Monica talks about a list.2. He was part of a discussion she said he was. On the 4th quest. she has to ask her lawyer. She’s being more forthcoming in the afternoon session.
Wow. We now get admission from the higher up in the admin. that AGAG was lying. Well we knew that. OH man this is something. Obstruction of justice on AGAG? Lying to Congress….
For a former senior Justice Dept official, Ms. Goodling has a hard time saying that a witness should correct omissions or inaccurate or incomplete statements. Hmmm.
Fresh Thread!!
I think Ellis is after Debbie–I hope he turns his time over as well.
Wait, didn’t Wasserman-Schultz still have 2 minutes left?
This Party loyalist got immunity for this testimony? I hope that they can find something in her testimony where she can change from her little black dress to an orange jump suit.
ohhhhhhhh B got amnesia now LOL
sound effects?? whats going on……….
was born in Montgomery, Alabama, and was raised by his mother and grandmother. He graduated magna cum laude from Harvard University in 1990 and cum laude from Harvard Law School before returning to Alabama.
After working as an intern at the Southern Poverty Law Center and then as a civil rights lawyer, he served as an assistant United States Attorney.
In 2000, he ran for the House in the Democratic primary against 10-year incumbent Earl F. Hilliard. He criticized Hilliard for taking a trip to Libya in 1997 despite U.S. sanctions, but despite vigorous campaigning, Davis lost the 2000 election 58%-34%. In 2002 he ran again and was helped by the fact that Hilliard’s district had been greatly altered in 2002 redistricting, adding many white voters in Birmingham. Hilliard also had voted against a 2001 resolution expressing solidarity with Israel in its fight against terrorism. Davis received many contributions from pro-Israel groups. During the campaign Hilliard notably questioned whether Davis was “black enough” to represent the district. Despite these attempts to divide the African-American vote, Davis defeated Hilliard narrowly in the primary which required a runoff in June. However, he had no trouble winning the election in November.
Artur Davis: Did Dominici’s phone calls come up in your briefing meeting with McNulty to help prepare his testimony?
I… don’t…. recall…..
The Dems are now showing they are thugs and bullies and will have completely lost the faith in the American people…If anyone here thinks they are showing good faith and impartiality it, you are sadly mistaken. I can’t wait until we see this on the news tonight.
Davis apparently was an intern at the SPLC, then some years as a civil rights lawyer and an assistant USA. So this is definitely something he’s invested in.
Wikipedia link for Artur Davis
Hopefully the link, my HTML’s pretty awful.
Qualifications including being a 33 year old psycho with no experience and no management qualifications.
newtonusr @ 286
i am! excellent to have both of us… i’m dependent on webcast streaming…. and therefore susceptible to drop outs..
and this time at least we have c-span (and their archives) for folks to access.
this is getting interesting…
Doh! rwcole beat me. But my link actually worked, so I’m still happy.
Wow! The testimony that Davis elicited re Gonzo is fabulous. I would love to know the back-story to this. How did Davis know about this? Did Monica “cry” to someone about this, and if so, who? Or was it the carrot which was held out by Dowd re the immunity deal?
Woodhall Hollow @ 322
whoever she cried to that she was “undomfortable” with the meeting
c-span is replaying the Davis questions!
yeah, Davis was great and hit a sensitive spot on the R side.
It looks like Dowd signalled the rethugs to disrupt the questions. I missed that the 1st time.
LibertyLee @ 320
Neither can we, you might want to check out what they are already saying. What a tool!
LibertyLee @ 318
Thugs and bullies, ay? Hmmm, considering you all have been so profoundly, supremely bipartisan over the last few years, you certainly have a point. We should treat you with the same respect and downright deference you all lavished upon us as a minority, by all means!
Heh, heh. Apparently, you’ve never watched any hearings when the Publicans were running the show. You dear darlings, the way you laid down like doormats for us was so endearing and touching. Naturally we should handle you with the same kid gloves.
I’m sorry you guys lost, but you really need to suck it up and take it like a man. I thought y’all were all macho and stuff.
LibertyLee @ 319
Who’s talking points might these be?
What’s happening? When are the hearings to resume??
Why is CSPAN playing Bush propaganda?
Mary McCurnin @ 330
Sean Hannity’s?
rep artur davis phone number for kudos – I just called and they were very gracious :)
202/225-2665. Although I now live in MD, I was raised in AL – it’s nice to see good things from the home state and I told them so :)
I dreamed I swayed the Congressional Hearing in my Regent approved maiden form bra!