That CRAAAAAAAAZY conspiracy theory: the mass firings of US Attorneys

[Squink]

@EddyTeddyFreddy

Nobody likes to be held in contempt, not even rubber stamps.

It’s not contempt if you’re a willing partner in the power transfer.

It looks like we may soon get a reading on exactly where Republican senators stand:
Senate Democrats Look to Hold ‘No Confidence’ Vote on Gonzales

[BrainGlutton]

@EddyTeddyFreddy

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

Here’s an idea.

[BrainGlutton]

@Squink

It looks like we may soon get a reading on exactly where Republican senators stand:
Senate Democrats Look to Hold ‘No Confidence’ Vote on Gonzales

Sounds like a good time for a lot of Pub senators to be away on fact-finding missions . . .

[waterj2]

@BrainGlutton

This is interesting . . . The Office of Special Counsel is investigating the attorney firings, the missing e-mails, and Karl Rove’s activities in general. However, Special Counsel Scott Bloch, head of the OSC and a Bush appointee, is himself being investigated:

I recall reading about Scott Block a couple years ago. Seems par for the course:

Three million employees of the federal government rely on one fairly obscure office for protection against job discrimination, retaliation for whistle-blowing, political hackery, secrecy, and partisanship. Tragically, the man who runs that agency, the Office of Special Counsel (OSC), is a gay-hating, secretive, partisan, political hack.
…
Their allegations run the gamut. They claim Bloch has denied help to gay workers who assert sexual-orientation discrimination; dismissed hundreds of whistleblower and discrimination complaints without any investigation; issued illegal gag orders and reassigned or fired employees he suspects of leaking information about him; and left critical staff vacancies open, while hiring numerous unqualified friends at high salaries for unnecessary administrative positions. Worse, they allege that he has politicized what should be a nonpartisan office by squashing investigation into whether Condoleezza Rice had broken campaign law, but speedily pursuing allegations against John Kerry; and vigorously pursuing petty complaints against Democrats and Green Party candidates, while burying complaints against Republicans.

[The_Hamster_King]

The House Judiciary Committee has supoenaed Monica Goodling and offered her immunity. Bye-bye to taking the Fifth! Things are about to get really interesting … .

[Merijeek]

@Pochacco

The House Judiciary Committee has supoenaed Monica Goodling and offered her immunity. Bye-bye to taking the Fifth! Things are about to get really interesting … .

Wanna bet?

“I don’t recall” repeated ad infinitum isn’t my definition of “interesting”.

-Joe

[RTFirefly]

@EddyTeddyFreddy

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

*There’s a big white panel truck standing in the road all week
and the sign on the side says ‘telephone company,’
but I know that can’t be right, ‘cause they took out my phone last month,
I wonder if someone’s listenin’ in on me.

And I wonder who’s watching the man who’s watching me?
And I wonder who’s watching the man who’s watching the man who’s watching me?
Who’s watching the man who’s watching the man who’s watching the man who’s watching the man who’s watching the man who’s watching the man who’s watching me? *
–Si Kahn, “Who’s Watching the Man”

[E-Sabbath]

http://www.cnn.com/POLITICS/blogs/politicalticker/
Confirmed. Immunity granted.
Now things get interesting.

[Cervaise]

@E-Sabbath

Now things get interesting.

Oh God, oh God, we’re all going to die.

[BobLibDem]

@E-Sabbath

Now things get interesting.

I’ll believe it when I see it. Saying “I don’t recall” might just be as much as we get out of her.

[E-Sabbath]

Gen’rals gathered in their masses… just like witches at black masses. Evil minds that plot destruction, sorcerers of death’s construction.

In short, yes.

[LilShieste]

@BobLibDem

I’ll believe it when I see it. Saying “I don’t recall” might just be as much as we get out of her.

I know what you mean - I’m expecting something like that, too.

Would this fly, though? I mean, why would she plead the fifth if she couldn’t remember anything, let alone anything that might incriminate her? (I’ve just started a GQ thread about this type of scenario.)
LilShieste

[Merijeek]

Can’t she claim she wanted to take the Fifth because she didn’t want to accidentally incriminate herself through erroneous recollection?

-Joe

[BrainGlutton]

Oooh! Now they’ve decided to subpoena Condi Rice! Mainly about the Niger yellowcake thing, but also about possible attempts to circumvent the Presidential Records Act.

[LilShieste]

@Merijeek

Can’t she claim she wanted to take the Fifth because she didn’t want to accidentally incriminate herself through erroneous recollection?

-Joe

I’ve wondered about that, too. But if that’s the case, then anyone could invoke the 5th for solely that reason, right? (Kind of lessens the significance of a subpoena then, doesn’t it?
LilShieste

[Merijeek]

@LilShieste

I’ve wondered about that, too. But if that’s the case, then anyone could invoke the 5th for solely that reason, right? (Kind of lessens the significance of a subpoena then, doesn’t it?

Of course it does. The problem is, unless they have proof that she ‘recalled’ one of the things in question right before testifying…

How you going to prove she’s lying?

-Joe

[BrainGlutton]

@Merijeek

Of course it does. The problem is, unless they have proof that she ‘recalled’ one of the things in question right before testifying…

How you going to prove she’s lying?

-Joe

I believe AG Gonzalez has approved some methods of persuasion.

[Merijeek]

@BrainGlutton

I believe AG Gonzalez has approved some methods of persuasion.

Only if the King declares her one of “them”.

-Joe

[elucidator]

Not sure because TG,IANAL but it ends up coming down to jury judgement, ala “Scooter” Libby. If the jury believes that your memory has certain very precise holes in it, you walk. Otherwise, not.

And this just in: Hellzapoppin’ out in Arizona!

http://www.ajc.com/blogs/content/shared-blogs/washington/washington/entries/2007/04/25/missing_documen.html?cxntfid=blogs_window_on_washington

Paul Charlton, the ousted U.S. attorney from Arizona, followed the rules. He reported an inappropriate contact last fall about an investigation into Arizona Republican Rep. Rick Renzi from the lawmaker’s own chief of staff as is required by Justice Department rules.

But that document is nowhere to be found among the thousands of pages of records turned over by the Justice Department to the House and Senate Judiciary committees investigating whether Charlton and seven other prosecutors were fired to silence public corruption investigations like the one into Renzi.

A House Judiciary Committee aide said that the document is “missing” and they plan to ask the Justice Department to find it and find it fast…

Poof! Gone!

[LilShieste]

@elucidator

And this just in: Hellzapoppin’ out in Arizona!

http://www.ajc.com/blogs/content/shared-blogs/washington/washington/entries/2007/04/25/missing_documen.html?cxntfid=blogs_window_on_washington
Poof! Gone!

But that’s just one document missing, out of thousands of pages supplied by the Justice Dept. What do you expect, that documents like this are actually saved?
LilShieste