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.

LizDexic @ 249

“find the courage to do the right thing.”

that’s usually “marry the girl” or kill oneself.

but not both

Altho, sometimes in a way…….

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.

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

brendan @ 99

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?

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.

I thought he said he’d stay until a replacement has been confirmed. That’s important.

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

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

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?

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

Has anyone asked Monica who is paying for her defense?

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

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.

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.

Personally, I’d still like to see this simple question asked:

Did the President of the United States fire the USAs?

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?