
To say I do not understand WTF is going on between the Justice Department, the OVP, the White House and Congressional Republicans in the William Jefferson affair would be an understatement. I doubt right now if many can claim to know what this weird dance is all about.
Abu Gonzales has never found a position so base he could not justify at Dubya's request -- from torture to illegal wiretapping to threatening journalists and rubber stamping all manner of unlimited executive overreach -- but he's finally drawing a line in the sand over returning documents seized in a bribery scandal?
Dennis Hastert has gleefully played marionette to perhaps the biggest crook in the House, Tom DeLay, and has happily facilitated the White House's efforts to hack off limbs of Congressional authority, but now he's ready to force a constitutional crisis defending a member of the Black Congressional Caucus?
Dick Cheney, chief pimp for the theory of the Unitary Executive, is telling the White House to back off? That's like Simon Cowell walking on to the set of American Idol and ordering everyone to stop being so mean.
The only one who's acting in an understandable fashion in all of this is Bush himself, who knows that without Abu to harass journalists and whistleblowers even more of his dirty laundry threatens to bust out into the pubic eye, and should the GOP crooks in Congress decide to play defense and turn up the heat on the White House by providing some oversight he might very likely find himself on the business end of some ugly subpoenas.
As Christy has noted, where the law comes down in all of this is open to debate. Is Hastert just fighting a proxy battle over Jefferson (as the NYT suggests), knowing that his own time is coming? Probably; he certainly engaged in a bit of "bully the press" this week when he threatened ABC news for alleging he was involved in the Abramoff mess. Do the FBI and the DoJ have clean hands in all of this? Unlikely -- as Digby says, the FBI has a long history of abusing their power for political ends, and smart money says every Democratic strategy memo seized from Jefferson's office is presently sitting in Karl Rove's in basket.
Writing at The Left Coaster, Steve Soto has one of the more perceptive analyses I've read:
I doubt that Cheney, for his part, really raised an objection to the raid on constitutional grounds and any newfound concern for a separation of powers, two things that have been an alien concept to him and his staff for five years now. Cheney may have felt the way he did because 1) he correctly calculated that the raid would cost Bush whatever remaining support he had inside his own caucus for his agenda in an election year; 2) he doesn't want Republicans investigated at all and wants Justice to Deep Six the Abramoff and Cunningham inquiries because of where they will lead; and 3) he saw a chance to stick it to Rove and Abu in the ongoing internal White House pissing contest. Gonzales, for his part, wanted to signal back to Cheney that Bush would have to choose between them and saw a chance to stick it back in Shooter’s face that in this battle, Bush will side with Abu and against Cheney. Sure, there will be some face-saving “compromise” between Frist, Hastert, and Gonzales here, but Bush will continue on with the Jefferson prosecution as he should. It will strain the relationship a little more between the GOP caucuses on Capitol Hill, who are now for the first time really afraid of this administration’s excessive power grab, and a White House that has internal divisions and a degree of dysfunction hidden to all of us. And it will mean that scores of GOP representatives and senators on the hill are now seeing that they reap what they sow, and that Justice will be coming after them now also.
However the tightest summation of this whole games-within-games political drama I've read came last night from knuckledragger in the comments:
This is all pig kabuki. There’s no Elliot Richardson or William Ruckelshaus in this bunch. Plenty of Borks, though.
It does indeed seem to be a game being played by a world full of crooks who have operated under a code of omerta, and everyone is suddenly looking around and wondering who's going to turn into Sammy the Bull. Should be some damn good theatrics in store for the political junkies in the weeks to come, since I don't think that 45 day wet blanket is going to hold for very long.
Login Here
Share This
Spotlight
FITZ
Oh…Crap. FITZ.
Perhaps Roves perplex your enemy strategy is unveiling….
The centre cannot hold.
I dunno, maybe I’m just too simple-minded a lawyer for my own good, but it seems pretty simple to me.
Raid on only Dem. Congressman’s office with any hint of scandal. Raid complete. Gop leaders raise Cain. Smoke and mirrors of “constitutional crisis” and “separation of powers” spread all over. Docs held for 45 days until “compromise” that makes any raid harder to acheive is worked out.
Now only GOP Congressmen left to investigate, but investigation impeded due to new “compromise”. Oops, have to call off investigation.
Something I’m missing?
They have no center…..no core…only whores
why is this only website where pics below thread title dont appear…only little box with red x…anyone else have this problem ? i click hit ” show picture” and still nothing.java up to date thx
Wow! Sounds like Abu is looking for an excuse to distance himself from the Bush administration. Get you tinfoil hats out - my guess is that Cheney is in real trouble and the wheels are comin’ off real soon.
OT: EPU’d from Christy’s “Sincerity” thread…
I found this posted in the comments section of the Jamison Foser article in Media Matters:
Sounds like a good use of five minutes of my Saturday blog-o-rama time.
Read an analysis that compares the thoughts and actions of George Bush with those of Richard Nixon…here:
www.thoughttheater.com
Jane - what you really need is a pig-pole.
hope Kobe feels better…..
Seems like a good way to make a big story out of a small story. exploit the ‘they’re all crooks, what’s the dif?’ mentality- echo bi-partisan corruption and let the voters make up thier own mind. Or stay home, either way.
The main stream waters are fixin to get mighty muddy as November approaches.
Large paddles recommended.
OH! MERTA!!
KOBE!!
I’m with you - this Jefferson-Bush-Hastert-Abu thing makes Plame seem transparently logical.
I mean:
1) Jefferson is a democrat - and he’s as dirty as Abramoff - a dream come true for the Republicans
2) And now Hastert & Abu are bending over backwards to pull his crooked ass out of the fire?
WTF WTF WTF - something is rotten in Denmark
Jefferson is dirty, but not as dirty as Abramoff.
Jefferson enriched himself, but Abramoff built a criminal syndicate.
Since the Republicans *never* do anything that’s no to their benefit my guess(es) is/are. There was a Republican involved with Jefferson, or they’re sweating that Republican offices may be raided. I’m positive that they’re not doing it out of respect for the law.
Jacqrat -
That might work for Howie, but Matthews’ show is taped on Friday.
Of the many nicknames that gave graced this blog, “Abu” Gonzales is the most apt and the most deserved.
May he rot in Dante’s lowest Hell, which probably looks like one of Abu’s prisons.
I agree with Dratty in number 5
“We need a bankshot. Something to get the attention off our own scandals. This Jefferson guy? How can we turn his petty theft into something that will stick in the public’s mind for a longer time? He-he. You know, Democrats are just as baaad!”
I’m with dratty in #5.
oops. . .shoulda read to bottom cuz los diable, i’m with you too.
To make sense of this, you have to ask yourself, “How does this help the Republicans during an election year?” The president has pretty much decided that this year isn’t about is agenda: it’s about making sure they control the congress for the rest of his presidency and beyond.
Maybe I don’t know enough.
For a long-time we’ve been saying that the Republican Congress is a Rubber Stamp for Dubya. By being very vocal about this, it seems as though the Republicans can make a claim that “We’re not rubber stamps. Didn’t you hear us take on the President? And not only did we take him on, but we did it when it was a Democrat who was in trouble. We’re principled, don’t you see?”
While we all know that this is complete and utter nonsense, by being very vocal with little downside to being that way, the Repubs are attempting to take away a talking point for election time.
This makes it even more imperative that Jefferson resign now and that Democrats are loud about not standing for corruption from anyone, especially one of their own.
The raid on Jefferson’s office is so clearly a party putsch, the kind of self-interested targeting of political enemies that characterized the Reichstag or Stalin’s punitive campaigns against his enemies.
I agree with Stevie. This is a way for Repugnantcans to keep the “democrats are corrupt too” story alive and kicking.
If I understand this correctly, the money was found in the freezer last year(July maybe)after it was given to the Congressman by the FBI in a sting. Why are the FBI involved in a sting of a democrat? Wasn’t there a Supreme Court case relative to entrapment?
The other issue for me is why now? It just gets curiouser and curiouser. There is certainly something strange up. More than usual is rotten in Denmark so to speak.
I don’t mean to sound too contrarian on this, but maybe Hastert is livid because he actually takes protocol seriously. After all, without the pomp and circumstance, who would these guys be? The fact that it was Jefferson means that Denny can get all huffy without being accused of a coverup (which is, I would bet, why Pelosi is happy to let him take front and center on this.) I do think that it’s deliciously ironic that Cheney’s office is taking Hastert’s side, but perhaps that’s because Deadeye Dick was a Congressman once, and Addington was a Hill staffer before he became Cheney’s right testicle. Just sayin’.
I would agree with both #5 and #16. The most likely reason the republicans are up in arms is because it keeps the eyes away from their own misdoings. Also I think we are seeing infighting of factions within the various agencies and branches with some trying to do the right thing and others trying to maintain the status quo. The only problem is trying to identify who are the undercover good guys and who are the undercover bad guys.
Hi all!
Back from Cozumel (paradise!) ; )
My first blush on this is to go with Mueller and by default *cough* Abu. This is an ongoing criminal investigation where a signed search warrant was executed. A search warrant has very specific items listed on it that can be seized if found and NOTHING ELSE outside of the “four corners” of the warrant. Why are the Republicans in a feigned uproar? Can you say Abramoff? How about Cunningham?
As for…
“%u2014 as Digby says, the FBI has a long history of abusing their power for political ends”
J. Edgar Hoover died years ago so that “long history” is in fact, ancient history. Further, Mueller IS NOT a “Bush administration official”, contrary to what the media is saying.
What could possibly be so all fired important in his stinking office? Cripes, they have all they need on this guy several times over. Besides, all the offices are bugged and all their communiations are too. For selective Dems I suspect they know the exact time of every dump they have taken the last 5 years. Of course that can’t be used in court but they have all they need anyway. He has the stash of money, he’s black. What more do you need, well besides a confession given under torture administered by Dick that is.
Hassert is the loose cannon in this. Without Delay he obviously is a ship without a rudder. I mean really Denny, is it so hard? The White House does it, you applaud.
He’s gone. Maybe he just figured out who was spreading the story of his own investigation and it was in the direction of the White House. In which case don’t fight back Denny. You’ll just humiliate yourself. Be a man. Take one for the team. You didnt actually think you were important or something did you? Oh my God!!! What an idiot.
Continuing the thread on sincerity…
I’m a nurse, and Lowell Weicker is the only R I ever voted for. I was national co-chair of Nurses for Dean.
In order to be powerful (Oprah, Rush, BillO, Suze Ormond, etc) you have to be totally committed to telling other people what they should do, rather than teaching them how to empower themselves. It’s the “I will deliver you from your poor miserable life, you idiot, if you’ll just promise with your very soul to do everything I tell you to do — without question.”
Two years ago, a book I wrote was published, and got tons of great press. I was on national TV shows, books signings, and ended up with my own PBS special. (And if you get annoyed about having to sit through the #$@& pledge breaks, I can tell you all about faking sincerity doing those things live)
I was feeling damn good, and I got to the table to sit down and talk about where we go from here. My lifelong dream. I had a chance at a series of books and a TV show about health. The problem? I could not figure out a way to justify making pronouncements about what people should do with their lives while telling them they were idiots who could only survive with MY guidance.
Does Suze Ormond make you want to scream every time you hear her voice? Oh, absolutely, but she has no problem telling callers they are idiots and are to blame for all their financial problems, but if they sign up for her “save your sorry financial ass PROGRAM” (cut to only 5 easy payments of $99.95) she will save you while laughing all the way to the bank. (Green rooms reveal a lot about a person) I couldn’t sell out for money,
so instead of sitting in my expensive beach house this weekend, I am here with the true patriots.
IMHO, that’s what kills the progressive movement. It’s the brain cells, ethical part of our being that takes us only so far because we lack that egomaniacal gene.
We believe in empowering people. We do not lie, we realize life is lived in a shade of gray and that we believe what we believe in to our roots, not because it is an expedient belief for the moment. We believe that people are essentially good and that we don’t give them a fish to keep them under our thumbs waiting, begging for the next fish morsel. We teach them how to fish and help them with resources so they can catch more fish, and to fish in different places so everybody has a chance, rather than giving all the fish to the nasty rich guy who bullies the fishermen. We believe in helping those who want to set up a little fish restaurant on Main Street, and those who want to send their fish to other people who don’t have fish in their town.
We believe in America and don’t ever question someone’s patriotism because, in our bones, we are the true patriots. We believe America can be an incredible force for good in the world, and we know that you don’t taks over countries and shove our freedom down their throats. We want to set the example so that people would fight for their own freedom and drink its nectar.
We are incredibly complex people who probably overthink things, but that is because we care about how people less fortunate than us will be affected by policy decisions. We are here to serve, not to use community/public service as a key to the lottery bank.
And, sadly, that is our Achilles heel. We have a collective conscience and ethical grounding. We have a good handle on basic right and wrong. And that’s why we will have trouble. We don’t stomp on the little people to climb higher. We can’t boil our positions down to 4-word bumper stickers. Our commitment to our fellow American won’t let us. Our patriotism won’t let us.
Sorry for the length, but on this Memorial Day weekend, I thought it needed to be said after reading Media Matters.
Be safe, everybody.
Have to admit that this thing is puzzling. If you’ve got video tape of a guy taking a bribe- and the money recovered from the freezer- why hasn’t he been indicted? Worried about an “entraptment” defense? Saving it for the election year? Beats me. And is Hastert REALLY concerned about the FBI over reaching? Don’t know. Guess he wouldn’t like to see such raids become commonplace. No telling what they’d find.
My head is spinning on this one, and is it any wonder? The threads of corruption that run through the administration are many, and they’ve been there since those awful days in Florida in 2000. On top of the corrupt and illegal acts initiated and carried out by the administration, you have GOP Senators and Representatives so thoroughly convinced they are invincible that they engage in illegal activity of their own, and re-shape the rules to make it easier.
You know why we can’t figure this out? Because there are so few people in this administration who have any commitment to the truth. Lying has become something they do with pathological ease, believing in the lies they tell. When you lie like this, when so many people are doing it, at some point it becomes impossible to keep track of who was told what, and why. The interests of the liars so converge and conflict that the decisions they make for one set of interests threatens the ability of their other interests to hold together.
Anyone else feel like this is “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest?”
I sense an implosion coming.
The whole thing would be easy to understand if it turns out that the FBI is actually investigating a RING of CORRUPTION and sought documents that pertain to goopers as well as Jefferson.
The bribers don’t usually limit themselves to bribing only one congresscritter.
This is all indeed very puzzling. We have little but speculation. Here’s some more.
If Bush were running for reelection, Rove would likely be advising him to run against Congress. It’s happened before, when a President feels stymied by an intransigent Congress, even from his own party. Truman? While we view Congress as “rubber stamps,” it’s quite possible that over the last six months, the WH has come to view the Congress in a very different light. Everyone, including the Repub leadership, seems willing to state that Bush has lost direction, is “clueless,” “out of touch,” etc. For Bush to regain some authority and positive image, he needs to convince more Americans that “I’m the guy who’s trying to do the right thing, and those corrupt congresscritters are standing in the way.” He needs to rebuild an image of truthfulness. So would it make sense for Bush to run against an unpopular Congress even though it’s his own party, and even though he’s not running for reelection?
Some possible arguments:
1. Bush has been quoted lately as concerned about his own legacy. He’s running to improve that. To do that, he has to be seen as a statesman rising above partisan bickering and political self protection.
2. The only thing lower than Bush’s approval is Congress’ approval. He can improve his own image by seeming to stand on principle against a Congress that appears not to have any principles.
3. Though there’s a current Republican majority, a President concerned about his legacy, including the long-run viabilitiy of a neo-conservative ruling class, as well as his ability to govern in 2007-08 could be faced with a majority of revenge-minded Dems in one or both houses. He would be wise to run against them, starting now. Note that when he tries to be the responsible center in the immigration debate, he always adds, “there may be some in the Dems who want pure amnesty.”
4. A Black Demo member’s corruption investigation is the perfect opportunity to put this scheme in place. It threatens none of Bush’s core or his major policies.
5. It would not surprise me to find that Gonzalez and others at the DoJ, as well as the FBI, are eager to demonstrate they have some remaining integrity, as long it is doesn’t require them to oppose Bush’s policies. This is hypocritical to us, but a normal human reaction — most people think of themselves as decent, even when they’re not. Investigations of Congressional corruption are a safe place to make that demonstration, and Jefferson is a perfect target.
6. If the Dems win big in November, Bush will need all the public support he can muster to survive the investigations and paint them as against the public interest. He will accuse the Dems of trying to persecute him for keeping the country safe.
Bottom line: the image Bush needs to portray is radically different from the one he used to get reelected. He is fighting for survival and his place in history. This week’s phony mea culpa press conference is a calculated part of the new image, the first of many instances of the “new Bush.” If this strategy works, the Repubs regain Congress in 2008, and Bush’s neocon majority and legacy are [arguably more] secure.
To paraphrase Kurt Russell in “Tombstone”….Fitz is coming, and Hell’s comin’ with him! Hell’s comin’ with him!
“Fitz is coming”
Well- maybe- after the longest streak of foreplay in human history.
The nature and timing of the events surrounding the William Jefferson affair gives me a sense that there is a desired outcome that remains several moves ahead and is not specifically related to Jefferson. I don’t know what play there could be, but hearing about Abu and McNulty threatening to quit over aspects of this matter make me wonder ultimately how Fitzgerald could be affected.
Bush administration and Republican congressional strategy with regard to Jefferson:
1. Using Bush’s bully pulpit to create a constitutional furor over the FBI’s raid puts media attention squarely on Jefferson, above and beyond Delay, Abramoff, Goss, etc.
2. Making Bush look like he actually cares about the Constitution and separation of powers by the fact that he is getting involved and putting in place the 45 day period for resolution.
3. Creating a standoff that will allow republican congressmen to appear to take a principled stance on something - thus appearing not entirely in Bush’s pocket.
4. Creating a public spectacle that will distract generally from all the other bad news about Iraq, the economy, gas, etc.
5. Allowing Bush to look like a judicious peacemaker, who came up with the 45 day resolution period to make sure everything is resolved correctly and in the appropriate fashion.
6. Related to 5 above, Bush has a well deserved reputation as someone who does not wait for all the facts to come in before he makes a decision, and often seems to make decisions in spite of the facts, by taking action to impose a cooling off period, Bush makes himself look less rash and more diplomatic (helps to deflect the criticism that he is not negotiating with Iran and did not allow the inspections process to run its course in Iraq).
7. Generally muddy the waters in the public’s mind with regard to separation of powers issue. This is actually a case where the law is a bit murky, as opposed to the other unconstituational actions Bush has taken without Congressional authorization. Once the public has been innoculated against caring about separation of powers by witnessing this tempest in a teapot, they equate other conflicts with it (with the help of the media and Republican efforts to conflate and equate) and will come to care even less about the other intrusions of the executive branch into the legislative branch’s historical powers.
8. And many more reasons that I’m sure FDL’ers can help fill in. Make no mistake, none of the reasons here have to do with separation of powers or moral principles.
Bush administration and Republican congressional strategy with regard to Jefferson:
1. Using Bush’s bully pulpit to create a constitutional furor over the FBI’s raid puts media attention squarely on Jefferson, above and beyond Delay, Abramoff, Goss, etc.
2. Making Bush look like he actually cares about the Constitution and separation of powers by the fact that he is getting involved and putting in place the 45 day period for resolution.
3. Creating a standoff that will allow republican congressmen to appear to take a principled stance on something - thus appearing not entirely in Bush’s pocket.
4. Creating a public spectacle that will distract generally from all the other bad news about Iraq, the economy, gas, etc.
5. Allowing Bush to look like a judicious peacemaker, who came up with the 45 day resolution period to make sure everything is resolved correctly and in the appropriate fashion.
6. Related to 5 above, Bush has a well deserved reputation as someone who does not wait for all the facts to come in before he makes a decision, and often seems to make decisions in spite of the facts, by taking action to impose a cooling off period, Bush makes himself look less rash and more diplomatic (helps to deflect the criticism that he is not negotiating with Iran and did not allow the inspections process to run its course in Iraq).
7. Generally muddy the waters in the public’s mind with regard to separation of powers issue. This is actually a case where the law is a bit murky, as opposed to the other unconstituational actions Bush has taken without Congressional authorization. Once the public has been innoculated against caring about separation of powers by witnessing this tempest in a teapot, they equate other conflicts with it (with the help of the media and Republican efforts to conflate and equate) and will come to care even less about the other intrusions of the executive branch into the legislative branch’s historical powers.
8. And many more reasons that I’m sure FDL’ers can help fill in. Make no mistake, none of the reasons here have to do with separation of powers or moral principles.
dratty’s simple minded lawyer take sounds about right but I was also really struck by how this story sounded when CNN headlined with it this morning - the whole tale was convoluted and hard to follow until they got to the line about how W took a firm stand and imposed a 45day delay. Like W was such a righteous deciderer …whatever is going on here (fbi off the reservation, Hastert off the reservation, Jefferson set up to give corruption a bipartisan face (and the McKinney and Conyer’s slams haven’t showed much staying power) someone in the WH sure moved fast to spin this for W’s benefit.
What really makes me want to weep in anger and frustration is that none of the goings-on have a single thing to do with actually governing, leading, running the country. I am sick to death of this being one campaign after another to “improve image,” and the desperate nature of the current campaign has me worried on many levels.
Nuff said
scarecrow #35
excellent analysis..you may haveve something there..
Talking about spin
The NYT Magazine article by Matt Bai on YearlyKos Convention is live at
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05....._lede.html
Woohoo!
xyz #40
“Allowing Bush to look like a judicious peacemaker, who came up with the 45 day resolution period”
who do you suppose gave bush this idea? Tis surely beyond his ability to come up with.
“Congressional Black Caucus,” not “Black Congressional Caucus.”
Carry on…
keith of orlando: ummmm, could it be. . . karl rove?
Oscar Wilde’s Grandson attacked at Gay Demo in Moscow
xyz,
“8. And many more reasons that I’m sure FDL’ers can help fill in. Make no mistake, none of the reasons here have to do with separation of powers or moral principles.”
Bingo! Take Abu out of the equation for a minute. Who’s left? Mr. Unitary Executive Addington himself, Hasstert, Cheney etc. on one side vs. Mueller. This is a preemptive (Abramoff, Cunningham) partisan political stunt.
The reason for the raid was spelled out in Wednesday’s WaPo
I don’t know if it is true, but it is a reasonalbe explanation.
One the other hand, today’s Washington Post story about the raid had me scratching my head. Gonzales threatening to resign on principle; the OVP standing up for the separation of power; and Bush not pushing back at a “white-hot” Hastert, while remaining agnostic on the issue. When I first read the Post story I had to look around the room to see if Rod Serling was leaning against the wall.
It took me awhile to come up with a plausible explanation for this man bites dog story. I think the White House is using the Post to set-up a good-cop/bad-cop negotiating stance with Bush playing the role of honest broker. If I were Hastert, I wouldn’t fall in to this trap. Let the judiciary sort things out.
Creativo #35
“Why Karl, you look like somebody just walked over your grave.”
Keith of Orlando,
I have no idea who came up with the 45 day idea. If I had to guess, it would be Rove.
But, as I’m sure you agree, the main point of my post is that for Bush and the republicans this whole thing is about perception and positioning - so Bush’s actual ideas about the Jefferson matter and the constitution generally (if he has any except “I, as president, can do whatever I want”) are completely irrelevant to the analysis.
Gonzalez’s so-called (and of course phony) threat to resign was designed to be a cover for bush with anger congressmen. Congress demands that bush return documents, bush wishes he could, he really does. but with gonzalez threatening to resign and all that, he just can’t.
kirby at 31 — exactly, well-said, and thanks.
Somehow, the notion that the same people who brought us that wonderfully thought-out Iraq war, are now bringing those same talents to bear on the inner workings of the government, leaves me very, very cold. When my blood is not boiling, that is.
OT
http://www.latimes.com/news/na.....crosspromo
Strong Signs of Rift Among Democrats
[]”This is a fight for the soul of the Democratic Party,” said Marshall Wittmann, a senior fellow at the centrist Democratic Leadership Council. “It will have repercussions for the 2008 presidential campaign and whether centrists will feel comfortable within the Democratic Party.
Lieberman, the 2000 Democratic vice presidential candidate, long had been considered politically invulnerable in his home state.
[]Lamont’s credibility as a candidate also should benefit from MoveOn’s stamp of approval, said Scott McLean, chairman of the political science department at Quinnipiac University in Hamden, Conn.
“Getting 33% at the convention is really impressive, but [Friday’s endorsement] is even bigger because it shows the grass-roots and money [donors] %u2026 that there is something behind Ned Lamont,” McLean said. “It’s big. It’s huge.”
Wittmann said that if Lamont and his allies succeed in ousting Lieberman, “it would be devastating to the Democratic Party” by suggesting that centrists are no longer welcome.
“This shows that [MoveOn] is trying to precipitate a civil war within the party,” (Wittman) said.
xyz 52
Yep, I do agree with you 100% and mainly beccause bush is unable to do anything other than be in the campaign mode. I’ll bet Miers was in on it too for the so called legality of it.
kirby, 31
Spoken like a true patriot. On Monday, fly your flag with pride.
I agree it’s highly unlikely (1 in 1000) Bush “thought” of the 45-day cooling off period. It was only necessary that he get credit for it. It would be first time in his career Bush would be cited for doing something “thoughtful” that seemed to balance competing interests in an impartial manner.
Seems likely this idea would have come from some career attorney in the DoJ, someone who understood that there is a balance that has to be struck between: (1) the DoJ’s ability to investigate evidence of possible felonies by Congresscritters and (2) the possibility of misuse of FBI, even with court-warrant searches and prosecutorial discretion for partisan reasons.
Also, does anyone know about the federal judge who issued the warrant? Is he someone who would be amenable to stronger executive prosecutorial/investigative powers vs Congressional perogatives?
To figure it out: think like a criminal.
One small point: voters who would consider voting Republican are not going to impressed by the Republican congress’ “principled stand” in defense of the seperation of powers, especially when that stand benefits an obviously corrupt black Democrat.
Scarecrow, you said “It would be first time in his career Bush would be cited for doing something “thoughtful” that seemed to balance competing interests in an impartial manner.”
Actually, this 45 day period idea reminds me a lot of Bush’s stem cell research (bullshit) “compromise” wherein he allowed for continued research on only certain lines of stem cells (which was an asinine and reprehensible decision for both moral and logical reasons - but we’ll leave that aside for now).
At the time of the stem-cell decision, the press played right along with the idea of Bush as a solomnic and thoughtful decision-maker. That was pre-Iraq and pre-so-much-else.
One might imagine that Bush and his team are wistfully trying to remanufacture the same sort of press coverage that he received then, back when the some of the country could swallow the idea that Bush was capable even of reasoning his way out of a paper bag.
There’s a troubling pattern going on here. For the first time, we’re hearing the term “executive overreach” in the MSM, and it’s always connected with the Jefferson office search, and rarely if ever connected with any of the more troubling issues.
I think framing is the key to understanding this. Framing the issue, as in “Don’t Think of an Elephant”.
Remember Rathergate? Once the Rather report came out, the matter of Bush’s ROTC service records was primarily framed in terms of the Rather documents. Once those were discredited, the whole ROTC issue was discredited because of the framing.
I’d bet that we’re going to see the same pattern here.
1) Frame “executive overreach” as the Jefferson office search. (Done)
2) Generate a scandal based on the framing. (Pretty much handled, what with the histrionics of Hastert, Gonzales, et al.)
3) Discredit the scandal, either by showing that the search is clearly constitutional, or preferably reaching a compromise that seems to reduce the executive overreach in this one situation.
4) FINIS: Since this scandal has been handled to show that there is no executive overreach, then there is no executive overreach, and anyone who claims otherwise is a nutty conspiracy theorist. QED
At first blush after hearing about the raid and then the outrage it occurred to me that perhaps the republicans are afraid their offices might be raided as well. After all the FBI did acquire warrants.
On the other hand if this is simply a political ploy it would not surprise me. Notwithstanding where are the democrats on this particular issue? Why haven’t they said anything in regards to the raid on Jefferson’s office?
However, to their credit, Pelosi and others asked Jefferson to step down from his commiittee post and even went so far as to ask him to resign from the House. Jefferson refused.
Of course not much has been said to highlight that!
Great analogy.
“The Justice Department signaled to the White House this week that the nation’s top three law enforcement officials would resign or face firing rather than return documents seized from a Democratic congressman’s office in a bribery investigation, according to administration sources familiar with the discussions.
The possibility of resignations by Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales; his deputy, Paul J. McNulty; and FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III was communicated to the White House by several Justice officials in tense negotiations over the fate of the materials taken from Rep. William J. Jefferson’s office, according to the sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue…”
_____
Pardon my skepticism that ANY of this is true. More likely a staged “crisis,” one with utterly obvious benefits to the BushCo/Gooper criminal enterprise.
Notice the story is all leaked info. It is supposed to mean that the people involved have principles that they will quit for.
It is the biggest game I have ever witnessed.
-GSD
Jonathan Turley appeared before Congress yesterday (it was on C-SPAN? last night) arguing that the DoJ and FBI had overreached and violated implied Constitutional princiles relating to separation of powers. He argued that although the FBI/DoJ must be able to investigate crimes by Congresscritters, it needs to be done carefully so as not to raise the specter that the investigation is for partisan/intimidation reasons. When the Congress is stongly at odds with a President, and when the opposition party is particularly enraged, the suspicions re motives are stronger. So how should FBI investigate Jefferson and not raise these concerns? Not clear, but he suggested more precise subpoenas, followed up with court contempt orders for non-compliance, rather than full scale raids of the offices of a Congressman from the opposition party. The fact that the FBI took a copy of the the office computer hard drives with all messages, not just those related to alleged bribery, was particularly troublesome.
Other con-law experts on same panel were less sympathetic with this argument. But we should recall that on more than one occasion, the WH and DoJ have leaked information about possible criminal investigations about someone very soon after they opposed this President (and there’s a history of this with other Presidents, too, so the principle is important.)
Bush and the Republican congress want the same thing–for congress to remain Republican. Making Bush look good (solemn, thoughtful executive) and congress look bad (protecting their own asses) doesn’t achieve their shared end.
Noel -
Agree 100% - please see my comment above in post # 40 (in my seventh bullet) for my take on Bush’s efforts to use this situation as a chance to tie the Jefferson scandal anchor around the entire concept of executive overreach and throw it to the bottom of the ocean.
The old saying “hard cases make bad law” is applicable here. This is indeed a situation where the law is somewhat murky. If Bush can create a feeling in the public’s mind that the very idea of separation of powers is a wholly grey area in which reasonable people can disagree on virtually everything, then he has succeeeded. He wants to smear the murk and the grey of this case over 200 years of constitutional jurisprudence and the many clear delineations and separations that have been established and which were acknowledged by virtually all until this administration.
As a corrollary - it seems clear to me that Watergate couldn’t happen now. Bush would say that his tapes were protected by executive privilege and he would marshall the political and legal forces necessary to turn back Archibald Cox and whoever else sought to investigate the matter.
xyz — good example; it’s even more ludicrous that Bush could fashion a plausible scientific middle groud.
laura bush should be suspect of elizabeth (the paris hilton of the nyt)’s blowjobs. at least georgie is getting it up for a woman in addition to jeffy and rove.
Are the goopers becoming desperate? Well they probably SHOULD be.
We are now approaching the five month mark until the midterm elections.
In January, there were 28 competitive house seats according to the the Cook Political Report- 10 of them democratic seats. Cook now reports 46 competitive seats- still only ten of them democratic. The number of competitive gooper seats has grown from 18 to 36 since the first of the year- and could easily grow even further.
In the senate- there are good signs and not so good signs.
The good signs include Montana and Pennsylvania- where dems have leads in races against incumbent goopers.
There is also some bad news- DeWine now leads in the Ohio race- although the polling is not from reliable sources.
Dems have challenges in New Jersey, Minnesota, and Maryland- New Jersey is a virtual tie- but it’s a dem state- so there is good reason to think that the dems will pull it out.
Dems have to be disappointed about Tennessee to this point- where Ford is sinking rather than rising in the polls.
Missouri is still very competitive as is Rhode Island.
I’d give the dems a very slim chance of taking over the senate- but a pretty good chance in the house.
Losing the house would be the end of the Clusterfuck presidency. He would ride out the final two years of his term in shame and fear as dems begin the long process of proctology for every mistep, lie, and error of his six year term of office.
Goopers have every reason to bring their A game to the fight- they’re fighting for their lives.
J. Donne — there’s a way to reconcile what appears to be contradictory. If Bush can raise his credibility significantly over the next three months, he can use the last two months to campaign openly for his Congressional friends in key districts.
What’s clear at the moment is that Bush is dragging most of his party down. If he can save himself, he may be able to save them in the long run.
Again, this is all just WAGGING.
Hastert’s being groomed for the public eye. In the unlikely event everything goes south while he’s still Speaker, the American public need an image of him as a “straight shooter” to take us away from our long national nightmare. In my lifetime, he’s certainly the lowest-profile Speaker ever. Essentially, this may be the first most Americans hear of hm: “he stuck up for the separation of powers and for that Democratic Black Congressman.”
These may be important concepts for the American public to believe about Denny Hastert as he becomes more integral to the survival of The Republic.
Why Cheney is popping off on this, I have no idea. Seems way below his pay grade.
Usually when the pieces of the puzzle don’t add up AT ALL- it’s because key pieces are still hidden. I’d hold my fire on this one until we know more about what’s going on. The response appears to be WAY out of proportion to the incident- which may mean that there’s a lot more to the incident than what we see so far. Patience.
Maybe this is why the Dems have been so quiet. Are they that smart/knowing? Sigh. I doubt it.
scarecrow-Wagging beats working.
Bush wants: a Republican congress.
Republican Congress wants: a Republican congress.
Abu wants: what Bush wants.
In the context of this story, these interests cannot be reconciled. I just repeated Jane’s original post.
Suppose for a minute that Jefferson has been negotiating a deal with Justice for the past several months- and Justice decided to raid his office to make sure that what he’s been selling squares with the facts. If his dealing involves goopers- there’d be plenty of reason for Denny to hit the ceiling. Patience.
Digby says, the FBI has a long history of abusing their power for political ends
They also have a long history of doing their job in a professional manner, including busting crooked politicians. The warrant for the search is still online, and I suggest that folks who are concerned about this read it before making a judgement. The warrant lays out a pretty convincing case against Jefferson. He might not be guilty, but I’d say that if the FBI find whatever they’re looking for in his office, Jefferson is as screwed as Scooter Libby. A warrant, BTW, according to our own looseheadprop, a sworn affadavit. Lying on a warrant is like lying in court.
Anyhow, while I’m always suspicious of anything that might come out of Abu’s office, this appears to be largely unrelated to politics. Until some actual evidence of wrongdoing on the part of the FBI surfaces, I’ll keep my tinfoil hat in the hall closet for now.
Fitzy is obviously sniffing around at Cheney … Addington (Cheney’s rotweiler) jumping in on the side of separation of powers may be a way of smacking down DOJ investigators…
If they have video tape and the cold cash, why did they need his entire hard drive with all his job and party related info on it? yes it is an election year and who else did he do business with? Sounds like a terrorist prosecution where the administration makes such a mess of it they will have to drop the charges to something less and it will fizzle. But is Shooter trying to calm the water since he is going to be a witness for the prosecution soon?
According to Pete Williams (Yeah, I know) on NBC Nightly News a bit ago. The search warrant raid on Jefferson’s office was the result of eight months of back and fourth with the judge that eventually signed it (the warrant) and was carefully crafted with respect to the separation of powers issue.
*ilson — I agree. The thought that DoJ and FBI could get a warrant and then swoop down on your office and carry away boxes of files and copies of harddrives would be enough to send even Cheney and his rubber stamp allies to look for their long lost and never read copies of the Constitution.
I don’t believe Congressional GOPers are genuinely concerned about executive overreach. It’s all theater for propaganda purposes and protecting them in the end.
.
btw, C-Span2 right now is replaying Chomsky’s speech at West Point …
Thanks, *ilson!
cujo and *ilson, I’m pretty much with you. While there’s been a fair amount of press regarding Gonzales and Mueller vs Cheney and Addington, I’d love to hear what the FBI’s agent in charge of the case was telling his/her higher-ups. Likewise what the DOJ lawyer who went to the judge for the warrant said to his/her superiors.
I could easily see the career folks in the trenches passing thoughts up the chain of command like “If you let this stuff get sent back to the Hill, you’ve just stiffed every working grunt in the department, and you’ll have absolutely no respect from anyone around here. And maybe a few resignations . . . or more than a few.”
Faced with rebellion from the ranks, I could see Gonzales getting a bit of a spine in standing up to Cheney, Addington, and Hastert.
Of course, this is all speculation. The press, enamoured with it’s unnamed “senior administration officials,” might want to cultivate a few lower-level sources. I’ll bet they could shed a whole lot more light on this mess.
The other aspect that seems to be missing from this discussion is the whole “law and order” mindset. Not the TV show, but the attitude toward the administration of justice. The WaPo article says that Frances Townsend was Gonzales’ chief ally within the White House, and she’s a former prosecutor. G’s Deputy Paul McNulty is as well. It’s not too much of a strech to think that these former prosecutors were impressed with the work of the current prosecutors, and didn’t want to see them undercut for pursuing a difficult case.
Sending the stuff back also sends a signal to the judiciary that I’m not sure Gonzales, McNulty, and Mueller wanted to send. It says “Judge, you goofed in signing that warrant.” How’d you like to be the next federal prosecutor going into that judge’s courtroom?
“To say I do not understand WTF is going on between the Justice Department, the OVP, the White House and Congressional Republicans in the William Jefferson affair would be an understatement.”
Spot on, as always Jane. No secret, unnamed sources, just a fair, laser sharp analysis of the available data.
IMO we can infer that Rove is losing control of the GOP. Six months ago, he would never have let this mess “leak” out into the press. Republicans read the Libby filings too. They don’t need “anonymous sources” to know that Rove will be indicted. They have excellent reason to believe Rove has flipped and that he will use anything on anyone to keep his sorry ass out of a Federal Penitentiary.
Hope Kobe continues to improve.
“I’m with you - this Jefferson-Bush-Hastert-Abu thing makes Plame seem transparently logical.”
Thanks obsessed, LMAO.
Cozumel — Pete Williams? Well, if he says “carefully crafted,” we just take that as gospel. Carefully crafted means, “take every file and piece of paper in the office.” Must have taken a long time to craft that. ;-)
Even if this raid was a cover to get the Democrats’ secret election plans, Karl Rove will be sorely disappointed.
Secret Democratic Election Plans –
1. Together, we can do better.
2. Culture of Corruption.
3. Dubai Ports.
4. GOTV, and Win!!!
Peterr @ 4:08 pm (#89) - Actually, this is one of those rare times when a Bush Cabinet secretary is backing up his department the way you’d expect him to. At least, when that secretary isn’t Don Rumsfeld. Part of government at that level is give-and-take between various departments and political interests. There should be a disagreement, as their should be on most important matters.
I’m glad for once that there is, even while I can’t help being suspicious.
I think dratty @ 5 and billy pilgrim @ 23 may be onto something. Now suppose DOJ purposely planted the Hastert under investigation story just so they can do a “rare” denial of it, and you can add in the liberal media are against the repugs talking point.
elizabeth bulmiller: the paris hilton of the nyt.
There’s one crime these guys haven’t exploited yet: blackmail. Given Hastert’s recent unraveling, and his anger over Goss getting put in the ejector seat, I’m guessing he went to the WH with a big ‘or else’. I’m sure he has the necessary dirt to get the dogs called off.
[/cynicism mode off]
perhaps Gonzales was simply “playing along” this whole time if only to find himself in the position he’s in where every bit of corruption could be investigated and hopefully prosecuted?
Cheney knows all roads lead to his office, so he’s of course concerned/shitting his pants.
[cynicism mode on]