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.
Just as a recap for those just checking in. As per usual, the later stages of questioning were much more interesting than the earlier ones. Congressmen Schiff and Davis (who introduced the no confidence resolution against Alberto Gonzales) basically got Goodling to cede that all of the things Gonzales has done of late–put loyalty over the Constitution, lie to Congress, and preside over a collapse in morale in his department–are things they would fire a USA for. Davis also got Goodling to tell about the conversation she had with Gonzales just before she left, in which he basically tried to compare notes with her as to the events surrounding the USA firings. Then Keith Ellison was up, showing that Paulose was hired over someone with much more experience–but who was branded a liberal (but not a Democrat!).
Right now we're waiting for the Committee to return from a recess to vote.
Conyers: Rather than have a second round of questioning, move to a questioning for the last 30 minutes to be divided between majority and minority.
Lamar Smith: Our time will be Chris Cannon.
Conyers: We will designate Adam Schiff to designate time. Cannon, begin.
Cannon (UT): On the record, appreciate the way you handled lobby reform bill. Yield to Keller.
Keller: You didn't have a major role in list, you asked some political questions, and you disagree with AGAGs testimony.
MG: AFAIK decisions were made for appropriate reasons, the handling was not great.
Keller: Turn to #5. Email, OAG 22, May 11, 2006, from Sampson to William Kelley, you were in fact senior counsel or senior liaison. Were you aware of this?
MG: I don't remember it.
Keller: Here is a list from May 11, so that's how I get the point that you weren't a major player, you were liaison and you weren't aware a letter was compiled.
MG: I saw a list that predated this email.
Keller: This email says "the real problem we have with Carol Lam" we should have someone to replace her as soon as her term expired. The day before Lam sent notice to DOJ she was seeking search warrants. This is their smoking gun. I'd like you to look at bottom, isn't it true, that April 14, 2006, a month before, one of the people DOJ recommends terminating was Lam. One final point, just in case anyone is not clear on where Gonzales stood on this issue, and AG said to me, he was aware of the problem in SD and that they were taking steps to do something about it. Gist of his testimony is that he knew then there was a problem in April 2006. You had heard conversations in 2004, 2005 about problems. I will yield my time.
Conyers 9:59.
Lundgren: You mentioned that you were concerned about statements that might come out that might hurt USAs to be released. As I understand it, you felt these people were otherwise honorable folks, who had done good jobs, there was no reason to hurt their reputation.
MG They had served more than their 4 year terms. I didn't think we had to do anything to damage their reputation. I thought it was within in POTUS' authority to make those changes if he wanted to do so.
Lundgren: were you aware of any complaints from local law enforcement.
MG: I don't remember hearing anything like that.
Lundgren: Are you aware of Federalist Society.
MG: Open debate, largely comprised of conservative.
Lundgren: Like-minded individuals who have fidelity to Constitution, might be AUSAs and USAs. Do you find it any problem when learning that someone is in FS when hiring. Following up on FS, I notice you're an ABA member. Has that impeded your career.
MG I don't believe so.
[Is this Lundgren or Cannon?] It goes too far to say that Members cannot raise issues for prosecution. Are you aware of Iglesias' failure to report contact with DOJ. I think the reasons for his firing are manifest. I'd like to read into record. Margolis: "If Sen Kerry were elected after 2004, these people would be out on the street anyway." There's been some question to your role in these, I refer back to Iglesias, Goodling holds keys to Kingdom, if they have her describe process bt WH, WHCO, and DOJ, the picture becomes a lot clearer.
[I think this is Chabot]: It is the power of POTUS to make such changes. That's what most AGs have done until this one. It seems to be more of a political witchhunt, they said it relates to job performance. Which gave fuel for political debate.
Cannon: One of the 93 USAs fired by Clinton was investigatng him.
Schiff: when did the meeting with AG take place?
MG In March, in his office, just him and I, it wasn't scheduled.
Schiff: During the course of the meeting, he raised his thoughts on firing of USAs with you, You felt uncomfortable. You thought it would be subject of dispute later and you felt uncomfortable being put in situation where your testimony might be compromised.
MG I rememebr wondering if we should be having this discussion.
Schiff: Top law enforcement didnt' raise issue that this might be inappropriate. Did it matter that you considered AG's testimony was inaccurate. Did AG tell you that he thought Cummins was fired for good reason.
MG He thought they were all in the same category.
Schiff: You understood that Cummins was fired to make room for Griffin. Didn't that make you uncomfortable?
MG the fact that we wanted Griffin to serve in Ar, wasn't exclusive of the fact that Cummins was rated one way or another.
Schiff You understood it wasn't true that Cummins was fired for performance.
MG I think he thought Kyle put him on a list bc he thought there were performance reason. What he was trying to say is that he thought Cummins was put on for a reason.
Schiff He was angry at McNulty.
MG He was upset, yes.
Schiff There was a meeting about how Iglesias was put on the list.
MG Group of people working on this issue had a meeting, after Sampson left, as close as I can get. The room was full.
Schiff and someone asked how Iglesias got on list. And someone said "that's been addressed."
MG I asked how he had gotten on the list. I don't remember who replied that it had been addressed.
Schiff McNulty struck info that Iglesias "didn't move cases."
MG [Explains] Wanted to give Domenici way to explain that himself.
Schiff McNulty made it clear that he wasn't going to discuss the Domenici calls, moving cases.
MG SOmeone else in the room, there was a conversation between DAG and someone else, maybe someone should call his CoS and see if Domenici wants to address that to his colleagues. It's the Senator's place to address it privately.
Schiff: Meeting where Rove said "you need to explain why people fired."
MG I can't remember what he said, that's my memory but my memory was that it was a follow-on comment to someone else.
Schiff Somone emphasized that there needs to be a clear reason why fired. AG was trying to supply reason why Cummins got fired. How did Griffin get hired. McNulty said he didn't know how Griffin got hired. He said he didn't know. That was a false statement, wasn't it.
MG I believe he had some information on it. I can't speak to what he remembered or knew.
Davis: Thank you for candor and courtesy.
Conyers: please let witness finish questions.
Davis: Transcript of AG testimony, May 10, will you look at page 18. Look at portion marked AG Gonzales, I'm going to read it for the record. "I have not gone back and discussed this investigation with Sampson and others to protect the integrity of this investigation. I have not asked these specific questoins." Based on your knowledge, is that testimony totally accurate.
MG [pause] I don't know what period he is referencing. I assume AG stopped talking to people but it must have been after I left.
Davis Do you agree that it says that. Did AG have conversation with you re: terimination of USAs. Did you know you might be fact witness about that. Had there been substantial news coverage that you'd be a fact witness.
MG He had told me they were having conversations to see if needed to be a fact witness.
Davis: Page 17, Chairman Conyers. You are the one that we talk to regularly. Just tell me, how the USA termination list came to be. Who suggested putting these on the list and why. What Mr Sampson engaged in, toward the end, was presented to me as a recommendation. Was that sworn testimony fully complete.
MG I don't know that I see anything inaccurate in it.
Davis: Did you understand he was briefed. Was the AG's presence referenced?
MG he doesn't provide a date. That could be a reference to that meeting.
Conyers: questioning comes to an end. Thank you and your counsel. Your testimony has been of help in getting us closer, both what you've been able to tell us about, the matters you know, and the matters you don't know. 5 days to submit questions. Requested that you promptly return your answers. There remain basic questions about how the termination list was formed. We thank you.
Dowd: Do I understand that questions from committee will still be under compulsion.
Conyers: yes.
Beer thirty!!
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

Zed?
Waste naught, zed not
hey!
madness!
ZedII? w/red face ;~)
Patiently awaiting return of HJC…
zed?
Davis!
wow.
Spilled beans!
I’m trying to remember . . . do we know who’s up next?
Does anyone know what’s taking so long? Is a republican out there stonewalling something else to interrupt this hearing?
Can they call her back tomorrow?
Hey Marcy – you and Christy keep us going!
Ceviche on me next Chicago trip!
FDL!
FDL!
FDL!
FDL!
FDL!
FDL!
FDL!
FDL!
oh, and Davis and Jackson-Lee today!
we’re back
Back on!
Personally, I kinda like the new Goodyear tread pattern.
It looks great on Abu.
congrats NPB
They’re back!
Any bet on which republican intrupts the hearing nexted
Their back
its on like donkey kong!
Siun @ 12
Hiya Siun.
Conyers in place, members assembling.
Peterr @ 10
Starting over at the top, if Ellison is the most junior Dem. Actually, Tammy is listed after Ellison Yeah- we’re starting from the top, when it starts.
SnarKassandra @ 16
(Cassie!)
Blush – who knew getting the zed was so much fun?
Should have been more patient, oh me of little faith…
sorry for the missed spelled words ..got cat hair on me keyboard
Yeah, we’ll probably start with Conyers, if he has questions still.
I’m afraid the MSM is going to miss the Davis revelations. Blitzer just finished a story, and only reported her throwing McNulty under the bus.
McNulty: I’m No Liar
“I testified truthfully at the Feb. 6, 2007, hearing based on what I knew at that time. Ms. Goodling’s characterization of my testimony is wrong and not supported by the extensive record of documents and testimony already provided to Congress.”
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/003288.php
Query: what is this about 15 minutes?
egregious @ 21
Bless you egre!
Rather than 2nd round of questioning, J2B rule 11, last 30 minutes divided majority minority 15 min each
Hi. I just got here and have not had time to read the threads or posts. Can anyone tell me their prediction as to what will be the headline on Countdown tonight regarding Monica’s testimony?
Lamar Smith to designate member on his side
Chris Cannon UT designates time first to Ric Keller—Florida
For the dems, Schiff of CA
j2b clause eleven whats that?
Only Cannon and Schiff
15 minutes of light questioning and 15 of the MG fan club noise… grr..
get ready for 15 mins of fluffing.
So did Monica get a “makeover”? Sure looks less dowdy than the usual pic I see here.
i’ll bet that was a HOT recess
Oh Gawd: Cannnon’s gonna talk for 15 minutes?
CANNON V. SCHIFF
controlling the time
should be fun
Chris Cannon to get 15 minutes. Get ready for a quarter hour of wankery and fuckery.
neurophius @ 33
“Uncomfortable” about AGAG’s “inappropriate conversation” with her when she went to him to ask for a transfer, although “I did not feel he was trying to shape my recollection.”
Keller…
Hi all. Just getting home and up to speed. Love her voice.
Going to be a long fifteen minutes
anne @ 30
They’s supposed to be a subcommittee meeting at 5:30. That may be having some effect on things.
Has anyone asked Monica who is paying for her defense?
egregious @ 32
Why?
30 minutes to go. 15 Dems 15 Repubs. Pubs yeilded their time to Chris Cannon, a rising star in fascist circles.
Finally a little bit of movement. Still nothing earthshattering. And that fat bastard of an attorney of hers, will someone shut him up.
get to take 15 minute break while the Republicans bloviate.
OfT -CNN Al-Qaeda torture instructions found.
Jesus, they’re bringing out all the big guns today to keep the spotlight off Monica.
Keller: You had no major role, you wish you didn’t ask nasty questions, and you believe that the firings were not illegal.
MG: I would not say I was not a major player.
GOP side looks almost empty….they gave up…just as they have done in other hearings….the blowhards are gone and the GOP that are left are engaged in damage control. expected.
Mary @ 49
Not relevant
Mary @ 49
yes. she is. may establish a legal defense fund later.
what? no dan lundgren time – hehehehehe
Mary @ 49
Yes herself Is what she told congress
Mary @ 48
Legal defense to come…
Mary @ 49
I believe so. And I believe she said in her nonresponse that she was going to set up a legal defense fund but hasn’t yet. So it remains: who’s paying?
I got this gist from earlier comments.
Fuckery has been called by jgabriel@43
Want to take this “quiet time” to comment on Goodling’s comment about “caging” being a direct mail term. Someone on another thread stated that they’d worked in direct mail for a year and had never heard this term. This 25-year ad/marketing veteran wants to confirm that in spades.
I’ve managed many hundreds of direct mail campaigns over the years. “Caging” is neither a direct mail term, nor a tactic used by commercial, professional, practitioners. That Republicans have used the mail to implement “caging” does not make Ms. Goodling’s assertion that it’s a “direct mail term” accurate. It’s a political term, describing an odious, and I believe, illegal practice.
The other story I’ll be amazed if MSM gets, per Josh:
It’s interesting to note how the House Republicans continue to praise Monica Goodling for her testimony even as she admits to repeated criminal acts (namely, using partisan affiliation as a criteria for hiring career employees).
Paging Keith Olbermann! Paging Tweety! Call these Rep creeps out on their support for a confessed crook!
WaPo no longer featuring a live feed, unless someone has a link?
Probably got a call from Rover to shut ‘er down.
Recess Pieces.
I wonder if any of the Congressional staffers are looking at the questions being posed in this space.
As an observation, It’s interesting to note when you tell a Christian Yahoo not to judge a sinner, the Yahoo will then say “I’m not judging the sinner, the Bible is.”
I’ve seen this sort of reality shifting throughout the Bush pResidency. Everyone but them is to blame, and to think otherwise is denying the will of their ‘god’.
Mary @ 49
Yes. She said she was . . . .whatever that means
Republicans not in the Committee room are likely talking to the MSM to begin their spin. That’s all Republicans have had and all they will ever have.
Ha ha ha!
Keller tries to characterize Goodling as ‘not having a major role’ in the US Attorney firings, nothing to see here, yadda, yadda, yadda.
Goodling responds, “I wouldn’t want to say I didn’t have a major role.”
And Keller still goes on trying to prove Goodling didn’t have a major role.
Bwahahaha.
Jackass.
Mary @ 49
Yes, Johnson asked that and she replied, “I am, but I am starting a legal defense fund.”
i’ll take a 15min break while repug gives talking points – back soon
Keller just told her again that she’s really not a major player. That’s the talking point tomorrow.
OfT -CNN Al-Qaeda torture instructions found.
Jesus, they’re bringing out all the big guns today to keep the spotlight off Monica.
Absolutely. Can you get more fucking transparent than these assholes.
The only time we get to find out any progress on terrorism is when someone has to testify.
Amazing they aren’t using the color coding. What happened to that by the way?
Mary @ 50
Yes, and she replied that she personally was paying for her defense. This was sometime mid to late morning.
jayt @ 55
What’re they worried about? No mention of Monica on Fox’s website at all.
question – did he just say that the email from May 2006 shows that she was not involved while she contradicts him to say she knew in January 2006?
these people make my head hurt
Mary @ 49
Yeah. She says she is. When some doubt was expessed on that, she ‘clarified’ by saying that she was going to set up a legal defense fund, but just hadn’t got around to it yet …
Celtic Music @ 64
caging wiki, including overlap between direct mail and voter suppression.
Mary @ 49
I believe Wexler of FL asked that one. She said she was but would be establishing a fund
kdh22 @ 63
Huh? Does that mean I get exclusive use the word ‘fuckery’ for the rest of the thread/
If so, I yield my monopoly to the public commons.
Keller pressing forward on Carol Lam – “See, we told you…”
Interesting that Goodling actually admitted she had made a note while interviewing Paulose that she might eventually make a “good Presidential nominee!”
I don’t know why but I get the feeling that this whole attorney purge was driven by supply rather than demand.
In other words, USAs made the firing list as much for who was in the wings to put in position to be “groomed” for the future than anything related to the USAs own performance!
I’m sure it was a combination of both, but I’d bet most of the “collaboration” was about the supply of “loyal Bushies” rather than the demand for replacements for poor performing USAs!
Now Lungren–CA Republican
srgtick @ 74
stolen by the rainbow coalition
Someone from the House was just checking in … hhmm .. I wonder who it was.
JGabriel @ 71
actually, that would be a good thing to establish. Kyle aggegated, she played secretary, Gonzo was out to lunch, McNulty was consulteed on 12/6, etc. so what does that leave?
TeddySF – Cspan3 has it live online.
She’s going to pay for her legal expenses by starting a defense fund. Her first donor will likely be Richard Mellon Scaife.
It’s ironic that after she testifies to Gonzo trying to ‘get the story straight’, the GOPpers are trying to shape her testimony in the same way.
If nothing else, the young Ms. Goodling has secured herself a high-paying job in a future Republican administration.
Helen @ 73
Yeah…I think Gonzo is toast…wait for it…Texas Toast.
RevDeb @ 69
Has she hit up Pat Robertson for money yet?
Why is Tweety talking about Rudy and immigration instead of Monica’s testimony?
Did Keller just use a list from May 2006 that she hadn’t seen to show she wasn’t deeply involved. Only to have MG reference the Jan list before that one that she knew about?
JGabriel @ 81
very well then. so ordered.
juslin @ 59
beware your wishes, lest they be granted….
he is revolting.
McNulty answers Goodling’s (written) testimony:
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/003288.php
Question: is there any chance of McNulty being wheeled back in? Why this seeming assuredness that he will not respond to accusations of lying?
Dem-agog @ 91
future Republic Admin? Bite your tongue!
Joe Klein’s conscience @ 93
Maybe they will try to appoint her to the World Bank
I hear there’s a vacancy.
Lundgren is a piece of work. At least he’s a piece of something.
TeddySanFran @ 71
Translation: Yes, there are other people paying my legal fees, but there’s no evidence of who they are yet.
Oh, and of course, this won’t have *any* influence on my testimony today — I have no concern that people won’t pony up if I testify in a way that incriminates other Republicans.
Nope, nosiree, no concern at all.
A line of questioning for Goodling:
According to your testimony today, you either knew the political affiliation of everyone you hired, or asked them their political affiliation, or looked for evidence of their affiliation on the internet, or delegated that task to one of your assistants. This ran the gamut of non-political, non-Civil Service positions, from internships to line attorneys. Is that correct?
(Pause for response)
Did you ever hire anyone whose political affiliation or ideology you did not know?
Did you ever hire a known liberal?
Did you ever hire a known conservative?
brendan @ 97
No shit! He’s probably steaming back to the Hill as we speak.
Federalist Society brings a smile to Monica’s face.
empy1000 @ 96
From here, reading y’all’s comments, it sounds like Keller is trying to get the Rove-approved or -developed narrative out there, and that she is fighting back. Clearly, he’s been given the talking points, and is ready to toss her busward.
Dem-agog @ 92
For the good of the country let’s hope that future Republican Administration is far, far, far off into the future.
Did Conyers have a nice lil nap?
Cannon of Utah, ending for the Repubs.
Celtic Music @ 64
See: Daily Kos–Greg Palast: Caging is a disenfranchisement tool employed to prevent the homeless, people in the armed forces, etc. from voting. She totally knows what it is! Why they aren’t pressing her on this is beyond the limits of my imagination. This is very important.
No mention of Regent grad. Goodling today on 700 club. Robertson did suggest that Iran would sink the fleet in the channel over there though. I think he got the memo.
Lundgren just distinguished himself as an unorganized incompetent fool. Well done.
srgtick @ 74
They raised the terror threat level four times prior to the elections, then decided that they were confusuing and not effective and retired them. I’m sure the results of the last election had no influence on the decision that they were no longer effective. /snark
Shorter R’s: Aren’t you just the cutest thing, li’l lady? We truly love your adorable smile.
Hey everybody. While I was here for the boring part this morning, it sounds like I missed the afternoon fireworks. Thanks for the summary, EW.
Wolf Blitzer just asked, “will Monica Goodling implicate the Attorney General”?
DIdn’t she do that already today?
Okay ,Just When do the repug’s realize the gigs up*** and bail out before no one would ever vote for a repug again !
seenos @ 84
Yeah, like Griffin. Gee I’d like to move back home…got any “openings”?empy1000 @ 96
Keller: please let me testify for you, Ms. G.
JGabriel @ 82
During the second round of “fuckery” explications at fdl, we get 15 minutes for all the pups together. I yield my fuckery time back to jgabriel…
jayt @ 106
Other than allowing the member in question to say that he’s a member of the Federalists, what was the point of that partiular line of questioning? Even Monica didn’t seem to see the point of taking the bait (or the candy in this case)
Comparing the American Bar Assc to the Federalist Society. WTF?
Goodling: Federalist a society of open debate, studies the Constitution, made up of “mostly conservatives”.
I think they also have a book club and sewing circle. How cute, how benign, how untrue.
Darth’s a grampa!
84 – yep. USA is a great resume kicker for a run at public office and for a judicial appointment. They were seeding the field for candidates and judges.
Personally, I’d still like to see this simple question asked:
Did the President of the United States fire the USAs?
with all the appropriate follow up, including her reaction when she heard that the President was saying he knew nothing about the firings.
Also, just to play GOPer, someone should consider asking her:
Between Cunningham and Wilkes and Foggo -Carol Lam was involved in some of the highest profile, most important public corruption cases of the century. What conversations took place about providing resources to assist USA Lam? What enouragement or support was she given by the Department? Was the Department proud of her work?
you get the drift
Cannon: And now I’ll read an excerpt from “My Pet Goat”
Shoepuker43 @ 112
Was she really on the 700 Club today? That sounds too absurd to be real. OTOH…
TeddySanFran @ 121
somewhere a baby seal just died from the release of negative energy released by another spawn of Cheney propagating.
Maybe the Repubs can spend their remaining time having a tea party!
Iglesias pointed out today on the Wapo chat that Charlton DID report an inappropriate contact from a member of congress and was fired anyway.
[fixed typo]
Hugh @ 122
Don’t forget the quilting circle.
Cannon: Iglesias said “Monica holds the key to the kingdom” I agree with Iglesias and you don’t have much to show.
Is he drunk? Seriously.
Is she a big player or a little player?
holy toledo, wtf are they babbling about??
TeddySanFran @ 122
I’m sure he’s proud.
Gohmert-TX takes the last 2.20 for the Repubs.
Says Clinton did it first.
Cannon sounds like he forgot his meds today.
Mary @ 49
She said she will get a legal defense fund going.
What a lovefest
Maybe this is why only 30 minutes???
“BBC Reporter Has Rove Office Emails -
Goodling/Sampson Obstruction of Justice evidence?”
http://www.gregpalast.com
empy1000 @ 119
I think Cannon was trying to say that the ABA is a “left leaning” organization so it cancels out membership in the Federalist Society. First time I’ve heard the ABA described that way.
RevDeb @ 131
I’m sure Blitzer is sending flowers.
Dem-agog @ 92
Actually, I think Monica’s only option after tonight will be to teach law at some bible college. When it comes to protecting their chosen elect, the rethugs don’t reward “effort” or a pretty face, and she might very well have hurt Gonzo as badly as Comey did the other day. They’ll compliment her to her face but then promptly consign her to the rethug leper colony the moment she leaves the public eye.
Gomer: Praise Jesus! Talking point…talking point….talking point.
God I hate THESE Republicans.
If we don’t get a Republican President, House & Senate in 2008 we’re DOOMED!
Seriously.
My god. This guy graduated from high school?
Blub @ 139
She is far more suited for that!
Dem-agog @ 91
I hope that’s an oxymoron.
Oh.My.God.What.Did.I.Just.Say????
I’m so angry at these guys. Of course I meant Democratic….sheeesh……
Clinton did it…odor of corruption…Janet Reno was Chelsea’s father…
Rambling, rambling ,Clinton did it, someone finally told R-Texass to STFU.
$250,000 is a “talker.” Sensenbrenner said this earlier. Yea, Repukes are all about fiscal responsibility….riiiiigghhht…
Clinton did it too when he came into office is soooooooo fucking lame.
Adam Schiff will take 10 of the 15 Dem minutes. Wants to talk about the conversation with Gonzo that made her feel ‘uncomfortable’
bonkers @ 149
you actually listen to Senselessbrenner?
Strange. Haven’t heard Vince Foster’s name at all. The Repukes are cracking.
Monica took leave? Of absence?
Ed*ard Teller @ 118
Ah, well, I’ll end with noting that the Republicans have now ended with more Bill Clinton fuckery. They just can’t get over Bill.
Sure they slam him in public, but in the House cloakroom they all ask, “Do you think Bill will *ever* call me again?”
Schiff gives himself 10 minutes: “Uncomfortable” meeting. When?
MG: The Thurs before the Monday when I left. In his office.
Schiff: He raised the firing issue?
MG: Yes
Why is there such stark obvious pandering on the part of EVERY repub? Do these bastards know the difference between right and wrong?
“It was just him and I”…
Apparently, Regent don’t care about gud English.
empy1000 @ 121
They’re interested in replacing any kind of professional or popular organization with a party one. Get it?
she can’t even remember the date she took leave?
gargantuan intellect obviously required in Abu’s DOJ.
/s
uncomfortable feelings, creepy icky unChristian-like?
why did you feel that way?
Abu /Goodling one on one meeting, nailing down some obstruction.
Republicans can do nothing but try and cover their asses by shaping the story as a witch hunt by the committee or that it was just bad management at the DOJ. Hope the MSM doesn’t let them get away with it.
ccmask @ 156
no…her senses.
tgrdug @ 158
No.
This has been another episode of Short Answers to Easy Questions.
clinton did it clinton did it
I guess thet forgot congress impeached him
Davis walks over and sits to Schiff’s right. Is he closing?
Schiff: Did Abu say that Cummins was fired for performance?
MG: Yes. But I thought it was because of Griffin
lol… awesome university
ya stutterin’ prick ya
Schiff should immediately yield to Arthur Davis. He is the only one that has been effective.
jayt @ 162
Stall tactic.
TeddySanFran @ 122
Now that’s tonight’s lead story.
brendan @ 99
McNulty has a fair amount of clout in DC. If he is point blank caling her a liar, there are going to be some big popcorn eating opportunities coming our way.
He may not be my hero or anything (I am so ambivelant about this guy, I can never decide what I think about him), but I have no doubt that HE IS NOT AN IDIOT.
There is no way a smart, experienced guy like McNulty flat out calls her liar unless there is more to come.
Much more. McNulty resigned last week, but his last day is not until the end of the summer.
That means if AGAG goes before the end of the summer, for a time under the succesion laws, McNulty will be acting AG. I think McNulty’s resignation was well choreograhped to maximize his flexibity.
I think, just maybe, I see some elegant manuvering
tgrdug @ 159
It’s not illegal to not know the difference between right and wrong. Just sick.
Blub @ 224
It’s perjury. Probably tampering and obstruction too, but that would be more difficult to prove, given that Gonzo would no doubt testify that was not his intent when talking to Goodling.
MG: Well, let me restate: getting Griffin in was just gravy, but I still didn’t correct Gonzo about why Cummins got the boot.
Throwing Sampson under the bus
She just said Kyle put Cummins on the list. And quoted Abu as saying that Kyle put him on it also
Dem-agog @ 144
We might be doomed before that if Chimp has his way with Iran.
Thom Hartmann’s exhorting folks to attend carefully to any play accorded by the networks to MG’s admission to GOP (enjoined from) ‘caging’ behaviors.
he sez mebbe MG really flipped the frijoles with that one, which explicitly linked the Bushevik campaign with the banned tactic–sending a registered letter to a voter’s listed address which, if returned, is used to expunge the voting roles of ‘undesireable’ citizens’ irksome opinions.
She squints, as if uh oh, now what. Wanna see the tape to find out when she squints.
(Abu) he thought “Kyle put him on the list because…”
oops – another perjury catch there.
Has anyone asked MG if she knew which people in DOJ had sufficient authority to add people to Kyle’s Little List?
MG was in a position way over her head. Her only qualifications were her loyalty to the Republican Party and their ideology and Karl Roves grand plan to create a one party country.
Woodhall Hollow @ 129
Iglesias also said another inappropriate contact to an Atty was reported and disappeared. Iglesias truly is an American hero. Comey, too, for the ICU stance. As LHP launched us this morning, there are heroes. If America and the MSM will only listen to the real, rather than the faux cowboys at 1600 Penna.
Froomkin’s got a terrific excerpt from Iglesias’ LA Times op-ed today:
“What happens is that terrible decisions are made, repeated and then justified by this shibboleth. That’s just one of the lessons that has emerged from the U.S. attorney scandal. . . .
“What has become clear already is that the ‘loyalty uber alles’ mentality has infected a wide swath of the Bush administration. Simple notions like right and wrong are, in their eyes, matters of allegiance, not conscience.”
And as for Gonzales: He’s “just another morally rudderless political operative,” who should “‘cowboy up,’ as we say in New Mexico — that is, find the courage to do the right thing.”
‘loyalty uber alles’ — no idle turn of phrase that from Iglesias.
brendan @
I thought Sampson testified he was just the “aggregator” and that he didn’t put anybody on the list on his own.
He is going to hand it off to Davis. Davis is getting ready.
New docs up at the house judiciary committee.
OAG1646-1705 pg 4-5
wgg: tokin liberal @ 182
Just remember that it’ll be Greg Palast who pushes this story on for the BBC, and that the US networks have declared Palast persona non grata.
egregious @ 168
Probably. I was hoping to hear some questions from Wasserman Schultz. She looked SO PISSED when the GOP tried to derail the hearing earlier this afternoon.
He is going to hand it off to Davis. Davis is getting ready.
The phone calls helped I bet.
clichy @ 58
Yes. She said she is paying for it. LMAO! Sure thing, Monica. Look at the army of lawyers behind her.
fooj @ 193
So who is her sugar daddy?
pseudonymous in nc @ 191
Palast does, however, have a tendency to overinflate what he’s actually got every now and then.
‘Special Comment’ on KO tonight ; )
Cozumel @ 196
how do you know?
Cozumel @ 196
OH GOODY!
looseheadprop at 174–Yes–what do you make of it?
Put up a post not just a comment, and thanks for all you add.
She’s saying McNulty lied about Cummins
Yielding to Davis for last 5 minutes.
TexBetsy @ 198
promo on MSNBC, a minute ago
LIBERAL TexBetsy @ 174
Poor little innocent tyke, held in the arms of Mr. and Mrs. Evil Incarnate.
Sort of a reverse Rosemary’s Baby for grand-babies.
Your guess is as good as mine. Maybe the Libby Defense Fund shared their e-mail lists! LMAO!!!
RevDeb @ 195
fooj @ 193
I notice nobody followed up with a question as to whether she was moonlighting to pay the bills for the $1500/hour she was racking up behind her…
How long would that take at $200/hour?
jayt @ 161
Probably because she still gets a paycheck.
Pressure time. Keep doing what you’ve been doing Davis.
She can’t find page 18.
Stallllllllllllllll
C-SPAN IN SUBURBAN VA HAS JUST SWITCHED TO PAID COMMERCIAL.
Got AG on another lie under oath.
This administration is going to have to burn down the WH to get rid of all of the evidence before they leave.
egregious @ 209
WOW !!!
artur just kicked abu’s ass!
egregious @ 209
W H A T !!!
Babble, babble, babble
what the fuk, she’s stalling
Davis: Did AGAG lie?
MG: (sound of crickets chirping….)
looseheadprop @ 173
The March 2006 Gonzales delegation of authority left McNulty out of the loop so it is a little strange that both Goodling and Abu have been trying to dump on him. Goodling’s constant reference to McNulty as the DAG is an indication that relations between them were less than warm.
egregious @ 210
say it isn’t so.
Oh, wow.
Gonzo’s toast.
RevDeb @ 195
nice
Davis: Here’s Abu’s May 10 testimony; look at page 18. It says “I have not gone back and spoken to Kyle or others who were involved in this process inorder to protectthe integrity of this process….”
Is that testimony true?
MG: I don’t know what period he’s referencing. At some point he stopped talking. I assume it was after I left the dept.
Did he have a conversation with you?
MG:March
Davis: Did you know you would be a fcat witness? MG: Yes. Davis: Did Abu know? MG: Yes
is this tampering and obstruction?
What is Congress going to do about McNulty and Gonzo lying to them?
i’m sorry, today has given me a massive headache. i was hoping for a lot more, and aside from a few glimmers when the dems started pressing lil miss twit, she — and the folks who run her — got off fairly clean.
please explain why i’m wrong.
Thank goodness she is not being represented by lawyers from Regents….she would be in jail by now…grin
Gotcha ,,,,gonzo lied!~
Rayne @ 206
Given her fame, she could probably earn much more.
Just imagine the fantasy scenarios.
Baby Jesus Loves Davis.
8ilbo @ 218
YES. I cannot f*****g believe this.
175 “There is no way a smart, experienced guy like McNulty flat out calls her liar unless there is more to come.”
If he has perjured himself, he doesn’t have a lot of options other than to dig in for a he said/she said – does he? If he did misrepresent, but doesn’t call her a liar now and she’s the one with the immunity deal …
and that’s it? wtf? when’s act II?
Wow, she stalled that whole 5 minutes.
More Testimony: Abu: “Sampson engaged in a process with Sr officials and it was a consensus recomendation” Is this true?
MG: humina hummina
Davis: Did AG know? Was he at the Nov meeting?
MG: yes.
Rayne @ 206
The only picture of Goodling being used on the web before today was the cropped shot of her from a Regent U reunion picnic. It wasn’t particularly attractive. People were speculating here and elsewhere last week and the week before about Goodling’s connections to women connected to the DC Madam list. I found it hard to believe she would be on it, but she comes across in this hearing as a “possible” rather than as an “improbable.”
The problem is that everyone is pointing to either someone else, most of the time they are not sure who, just who not. There is no way to say A is telling the truth so B is lying. Is there any way to just get them all for conspiracy?
Time has expired.
Democracy has expired. RIP.
davis aint done. bring her back!
Tux @ 233
No. Didn’t you see? She was r e a d i n g.
they’re letting her split ??
WTF ??
Tweety’s headline on Monica (finally) is that Monica said McNulty misled Congress.
David Schuster on now.
Tux @ 234
She prepped by studying Condi’s 9/11 testimony.
final remarks now
Rayne @ 207
$200 is way low these days, i believe.
more stalling on gonzo , Some church people,,
But why did conyer stop davis, he was just getting to the heart of it
Sure makes one wonder?
David Shuster has a Goodling report, on Hardball
Schuster: Goodling undercut Gonzoles
Dowd up: Can she change her answers?
Is that what he’s asking?
“find the courage to do the right thing.”
that’s usually “marry the girl” or kill oneself.
TexBetsy @ 240
Davis was reading. She was the 10 second pregnant pause and Davis would prompt her and she would do the pregnant pause again.
Democrats should not of agreed to that 15 minutes of happy talk and 15 minutes of slow talk.
LizDexic @ 249
but not both
Blub @ 224
It’s perjury. Probably tampering and obstruction too, but that would be more difficult to prove, given that Gonzo would no doubt testify that was not his intent when talking to Goodling.
neurophius @ 95
Oh! I know this one!
Because he’s a tool?
Mary @ 230
It’s unclear what McNulty knew and when he knew it. Both Goodling and Abu have tried to implicate him even though the process was designed to minimize his input.
Ed*ward @ 236 Was gonna say great minds think _____, nah. I yield !
Helen — no, he’s asking if she can amend answers if she needs to add to them, or change them if she realizes that the transcript does not reflect what she intended in terms of testimony. Standard practice with a deposition or congressional testimony to allow for this. I’d also expect that they will leave the record open for additional written questions and written answers from her.
Schuster says McNulty says Monica is wrong
so what didn’t they ask?
TexBetsy @ 252
It would be both if I had to marry Goodling.
That’s All Folks! Democracy goes quietly into that good night.
ok – now what? mcnulty just released a statement – the B lied……….
Coulda been better, but the immunity deal was worth it I’d say, no?
Well isn’t that just f..king great. FINALLY after 7 1/2 hours of testimony someone gets on point as to why Goodling was here (her knowledge of the process) and is about to nail Abu, and that person is allotted 5 f..king minutes because Adam Schiff had to speechify and fearless leader Conyers (who people this morning were lauding as having some sort of ’secret plan’) CUTS HIM OFF IN MID QUESTIONING lest he gets thought of as unfair to the Goopers.
I hope that now, finally, all of the Conyers defenders will now realize that he has no business, none at all, being chairman of this committee, despite what he has done in the past. His running of this hearing today was nothing shory of abysmal and to cut of the questioning of goodling just now, rather than to extend it and allow the Goopers equal time borders on sheer incompetence. I for one, will be sending a letter to the Speaker setting out my absolute disgust in his performance.
Davis should have had more than 5 minutes for his line of questioning. All she had to do was run out the clock.
bonkers @ 263
NO
davis talking now
Does anyone really think they are NOT building this:
From Wikipedia:
The role of the Gestapo was to investigate and combat “all tendencies dangerous to the state.” It had the authority to investigate treason, espionage and sabotage cases, and cases of criminal attacks on the Republican Party and the USA. With this authority came wide-ranging powers of arrest and detention on the smallest of pretexts.
Ok I changed out some words but the meaning is the same I think–just updated.
bonkers @ 265
How would her testimony be different if they didn’t give immunity? What did she say now that she couldn’t say then?
Tweety says Gonzo can’t be impeached. There was nothing illegal here…
Right, no crime in lying to Congress under oath.
SnarKassandra @ 261
They didn;t ask WHO CAME UP WITH THE LIST AND THE “PROCESS”!!
IMO, all in all, a poor carriage of inquiry and justice. I’m so disappointed in the actions of our congressional leaders. They must have really sucked as lawyers before they become equally incompetent as representatives. With a few exceptions (I can count them on one hand with a couple of fingers lobbed off!), this has been a testimonial to the egregious dysfunction of our government. Our forefathers would be so disgusted.
Can not wait for the press release:
Bush: Even more confident in Gonzo’s leadership
I threw up a new thread so we can move this discussion over there until the waitress gets here with our pitcher of beer.
dmg @ 245
That’s what Palfrey referred to as the non-social rate in one of her emails to her crew.
Social was 90/hour.
edit: oh wait, were you referring to the lawyers? that’s why I figured $1500/hour — 3 suits at $500, plus or minus plus cost of admin and paralegals.
She was NOT a happy camper having to answer Davis’s questions. He was the one (with assistance from Schiff) who got her off her game.
I’m reminded of those brain-teasers where you meet someone who either tells the truth all the time or lies all the time, and you’re allowed one question to find out which (and if you’re wrong you fall into a flaming pit or something). Only ALL these guys may be liars.
let’s hope the Senate does a better job with her!
Tux @ 273
I wonder if he’ll give Monica a “heckuva job”…
“She went before Congress, she answered all their questions, maybe they didn’t like the answers to their questions…”
empy1000 @ 267
Davis got her nailed in the first round when the others gave their time to him prior to the recess. Thsi last bit, he was just rehashing things.
Conyers was indeed pathetic. Arthur Davis was on to something and Conyers shut it down because he wanted to be fair to the Republicans. I guess he forgot that when he tried to hold hearings 2 years ago they relegated him to a broom closet in the basement of the Capital. When are Democrats going to learn that Republicans are not “esteemed” or “honorable” but mortal enemies of the Republic.
Remind me, please, exactly what she was immunized for?
Davis’s mike still on – says that Monica’s lawyer never made a proffer – Conyers’ best days are indeed behind him.
empy1000 @ 266
And Conyers could have given it to him…but he didn’t. Time for a new Chairman.
And so the most we can expect is a vote of no-confidence? A vote with no teeth. Which Bush will laugh off. What’s next? A vote of no confidence on Rove, Cheney and Bush?
Rayne @ 275
Hah, tea or me.
My take on the day was MG threw McNulty, Sampson and Gonzo under the bus. They also got Gonzo for lying under oath and obstruction. The McNulty lied thing is prolly gonna turn into a he said/ she said thing. She also drove the train into the White House with several comments, most notably when she said no one at DOJ really put folks on the actual list. IANAL, but that is my take.
Hurray EW. It’s beer thirty again.
TeddySanFran @ 282
Rabies?
HA! Monica’s little talk with the AG was a carrot held out by Dowd! And they did sit on it until the end of the day when she was good and tired.
Britisher @ 269
They did ask about the who. They just didn’t get an answer. I’m inclined to the view that the idea for the list came from a poltergeist haunting the DOJ since all human agents have denied any responsibility. As for the process, I called it earlier today a half *ssed mishmash with no documentation. I think I was being generous.
Rahm up on Hardball
mcgeek @ 270
It’s not that far off. The success of the Nazi was that true believer KNEW what was expected of them and they acted accordingly. They didn’t need marching orders because their orders where inherent in the ideology.
FYI, New thread
I love the point that Davis is hammering away on in that the letter of the law is to low a standard to hold the AG to.
Why would Conyers have to call out Davis about letting MG finish her answers? If she is blustering and wasting time, he get to move the questioning along.
Rahm giving credit to the 14 GOpers who went up and told the Prez what for.
jeebus, man.
TeddySanFran @ 294
Let us know what he, Rahm, says. I’ve sworn off Matthews. ;0)
IMO, there’s no way McNulty didn’t know what was what with respect to RNC emails being used in violation of the Presidential Records Act; Monica using inappropriate political considerations in career hires; and that none of the firings, in particular Lam – Iglesias – Cummins w/Griffin backing in and Griffin’s caging background, passed the smell test.
He is too bright for that. The order cut him out of the process, but even he admits he was in multiple meetings and never nailed anyone down on what was going on – that was bc he didn’t want to have it spelled out IMO.
He’s smart enough to know he screwed up. He’s smart enough to know his fibs are going to be caught up. He’s smart enough to know that Monica made her deal first. He’s smart enough to know that he now has the AG (a confirmed fibber but one who will get REpub support) and Monica (who with her immunity has much less reason to lie and more reason not to be caught in a lie than others) lined up against him.
That means he either discredits her & AGAG as much as possible without hard proof and hopes that it all remains too fuzzy for other action – or he goes and cuts his own deal and offers up info – or he has some kind of evidence that will make something she said an outright lie and both tar the rest of what she said bc of it, as well as crater her immunity deal. Those are the 3 routes I see, fwiw.
Monica’s statement that she would be paying her own legal defense – and would in future set up a legal defense fund – was in part marketing, and in part to imply that she had not yet accepted gifts that would be put toward that end. Had she accepted gifts while an employee of the DOJ, she would have violated the law.
Mary @ 124
I’ve been wondering about this for the last couple of days myself. With all the “USAs serve at the pleasure of the president” talk, has this question been posed to anyone? Let along, the President himself?
My understanding was that only the President can actually fire a USA. So did all these USA turn in letters of resignation? Semi-forced resignation and firing is a very thin line of course. But a line none the less. A line, in this case, that helps seperate the President some what from this.
I plead some ignorance to all of this, if I’m wrong, or missed some key statements, please do correct me and point me along.
If they serve at the President’s pleasure… at what point and why did he become dis-pleasured by them?
Lundgren was just peachy on the NewsHour. NO illegality. Mishandling. Inartful. Within the President’s authority to fire except specifically to obstruct justice. Standard GOP talking points.
On the latter, I think corrupting the USA team by preventing investigations from being launched, and by launching seven times more investigations against Dems than GOP’ers does seem a tad inappropriate.
On MG’s “exit interview” with ‘Fredo, MG was just nervous about talking with her boss because she was leaving, and that she thought the conversation was inappropriate. Umm, one would have thought that the AG should be a litttle more experienced about what was “appropriate”.
Oh, and the Committee has spent over, over, $250,000 investigating this. Hell, Cunningham spent that on booze for his boat. Arturo Davis, on the other hand, has facts and conveys a smooth, informed intelligence. Glad he made it to the Hill.
Lundgren on MG’s asking “political philosophy” of career DOJ appointees, “no intention to do anything illegal”. No broad effort to do anything illegal.
Davis excellent – reorients the peanut gallery that the standard of conduct for the Attorney General is NOT whether he violated the criminal law. S/He is expected to uphold a much higher ethical, professional and managerial behavior.
Lundgren repeats the TP that this is all about farcically “criminalizing” impliedly legitimate political behavior. (I’m sure Karl loves that TP.) He’s claiming to be conscious of the people’s time and money. I suppose he voted against the Iraq war funding bill then and to re-fund the Iraqi Inspector General. Hmmm?
Mary @ 50
Yes. She said she was. Hasn’t even got a legal defense fund set up (yet). No promises of re-imbursement from anyone.
Holycow! 300 comments already! Someone else must’ve answered this by now. sorry.
Bob in HI
brendan @ 99
Ah! the circular firing squad of McNulty, Sampson, Goodling, and Gonzales starts another round. Let’s take a poll: How many of them are going to be found guilty of perjury and other crimes?
Bob in HI
looseheadprop @ 176
I thought he said he’d stay until a replacement has been confirmed. That’s important.
Oh, yes. Initially, I saw McNulty’s resignation as his declaration of independence from Karl– “HA! You can’t fire me! I already resigned!” Plus, by placing his ending date in tandem with his replacement being confirmed, he blocks any shiteous fuckery by the WH naming some compliant “interim” DAG that would then serve out Bush’s term while everyone wrangles over a replacement.
On the other hand, by resigning, he has no more aces up his sleeve as leverage (”If you do that, I’m gonna resign!”) So it will be interesting to see how he plays out his endgame.
Bob in HI
mcgeek @ 270
There’s a new book out on the emerging American Fascist state, and I just got a CD about it. That was the Rove-Cheney plan, I think. And they were half-way there. . . .
Bob in HI
TexBetsy @ 253
Altho, sometimes in a way…….
Gaaawwwdd, just saw parts of Monica Goodling testimony on Countdown with Keith Olbermann, and I realized that Monica Goodling looks an awful lot like Ann Coulter.
Hmmm, maybe they have the same hair stylist? And makeup artist? Besides having the same spin coaches, that is.
Goodling broke the law, and she’ll skate. Her testimony is a blatant attempt to obstruct justice, to protect Rove and Gonzales, and Bush and Cheney, and Miers, but Goodling will skate.
The stench of corruption in the White House is pervasive, and Monica Goodling is part of the corruption. She lost her last chance to save her soul during her testimony today.
Of course, looking like Ann Coulter doesn’t help either.