Login Here
How'd you like to be Fred Fielding? You've lived through the two archetypal Republican scandals (Watergate '74, Iran-Contra '86) without getting tainted by either. Then you're brought into to the withering Shrub Administration to lend an air of respectability as the Bush thugs attempt to stay out of jail while still preserving Dick Cheney's quaint ideas about the Unitary Executive. And then, just hours after you're named White House Counsel, the scandals break loose in a way that is perhaps worse than you even imagined.
You see, I ask because Fred is sending mixed signals. Consider the letter he sent in response to Leahy's and Conyers' latest attempts to negotiate White House cooperation on the USA Purge investigation. There are the paragraphs that definitely scream, "Go Cheney Yourself!":
In response to your suggestion and invitation in the March 28 letter to attempt to "narrow the dispute," I should affirm that the President's proposal was intended to reflect just such an effort. The proposal reflects a series of balanced compromises designed to respect and accommodate your interests in obtaining information while also protecting the institution of the Presidency. Although it consists of individual components, the proposal reflects a unified offer that, if accepted, would result in your Committees receiving a significant amount of information. We, therefore, respectfully decline your suggestion to immediately produce the documents that we are prepared to release as part of a carefully and thoughtfully considered package of accommodations designed to avoid shifting the dispute on ground on which we need not tread.
Shorter Evil Fred: Take it or leave it. Either you get Karl and Harriet, in a dark closet, with no paper to take notes, or you get nothing.
But then there's Conciliatory Fred, who says:
We are aware that certain e-mail accounts supplied by the Republican National Committee may have been used by White House officials in sending or receiving e-mails that might fall within the production contemplated in our letter. Please be assured that it was and remains our intention to collect e-mails and documents from those accounts as well as the official White House e-mail and document retention system, for production under the terms we outlined.
Shorter Conciliatory Fred: Oh shit. Did Harriet really let them delete all the emails? And now that Arlen "Scottish Law" Specter has gotten into the act, we learn that Fred is getting downright collaborative in devising a way to find the missing emails.
White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said Saturday that Fielding called Leahy and Specter to say that allowing the committee input into picking an independent consultant is a good idea.
Apparently, as Ari Shapiro noted in yesterday's blockbuster story on USA Purge, Fred seems ready to compromise, but the boy he's babysitting (and, I'm guessing, the boy's brain) want to keep fighting.
Sources tell NPR that Fielding actually wants to negotiate with Congress about how the interviews will take place. But Fielding has not been able to persuade President Bush to go along.
You see, I think the email annoucement has dramatically changed the balance of power in any USA Purge standoff. While the White House and the Judiciary Committees continue to dicker about what emails Congress can and cannot have, Henry Waxman has written every single cabinet member asking for a log of all email discussions involving the RNC accounts.
For this reason, the Committee requests that you preserve all e-mails received from White House officials who used the "gwb43.com," "georgewbush.com," "rnchq.org" addresses or other nongovernmental e-mail accounts. The Committee also asks you to preserve any e-mails sent to White House officials at any of these accounts.
In addition, I request that you provide the Committee with an inventory of any e-mail communications in the agency's possession or control that meet the description in the preceding paragraph. This inventory should include the name and e-mail address of the sender, the name and e-mail address of the recipient, the date of the e-mail, and a brief description of the subject of the e-mail. The e-mail should be provided to the Committee by May 3, 2007. [my emphasis]
Think about this: because BushCo committed massive violations of the Presidential Records Act with its RNC e-mail system, it created a legitimate reason for Henry Waxman to ask for an inventory of 95% of the e-mail correspondance involving the most corrupt--and powerful--members of the Bush White House. I think this is what they mean when they say "too clever by half."
So, yes, Fielding can keep stringing Leahy and Conyers along, and it might postpone Gonzales' eventual demise even while the American public slowly reconstructs what happened anyway (say, do y'all remember me predicting we'd hear more about WI?). But in the meantime, the tenacious Waxman is going to piece together not just Rove's USA Purge emails, but all of it, no doubt covering a range of scandals that we don't even know yet!
I can see why Fred is beginning to see the wisdom of compromise.
Share This 
Spotlight
Zed? Now to read the post.
A Watergate story about AG removal (since current events seem so Watergate-ish) …
The background.
In 1973, Archibald Cox had been established as the special prosecutor for the Watergate case, with the assurances of then attorney general Elliot Richardson that he would not be removed if his investigation got too close to president Nixon. Cox subpoenaed the WH tapes whose existence had been disclosed in the Senate hearings in the Ervin committee that summer.
The break-in occurred in June 1972. John Dean’s “cancer on the presidency” talk with Nixon occurred in March 1973. The Senate hearings took place in summer 1973. And Nixon’s order to fire Cox occurred in October 1973, which resulted in Richardson’s decision to resign rather than to conduct the firing, followed by deputy AG Ruckelshaus’ decision to resign rather than to conduct the firing, followed by Solicitor General Robert Bork’s decision to fire Cox.
The “Saturday Night Massacre,” as the resignation of two principled public servants and the firing of a third was called, was the tipping point in the Watergate saga, but it took many more months before articles of impeachment were prepared and Nixon was ultimate persuaded to resign. The entire event took time to transpire.
The story.
Archibald Cox taught my First Amendment law seminar in law school. My classmates and I took him to lunch. We were not sure if he would be sick of talking about Watergate (this was 12 years later), but we were delighted to find that he was very much willing to tell stories from that time.
The key story he told was about Elliot Richardson. Richardson and Cox were both New England WASPs and Harvard grads, and Richardson had been Cox’s student. Before accepting the special prosecutor position, Cox went to Richardson and asked Richardson, upon his word of honor, for the assurance that he (Cox) would not be removed no matter where his investigation took him. Richardson gave Cox that assurance.
When Richardson was later instructed by President Nixon to remove Cox, Richardson went to Cox somewhat hesitantly and informed him that Nixon had demanded his removal. Cox reminded Richardson of the no-removal promise.
Richardson acknowledged that he had promised Cox no removal. He also told Cox that the president would, in the end, work his will and that Cox would, in the end, be removed. Implicitly, Cox said, it was clear that he was asking to have Cox release him from his promise, and resign.
Cox’s reply was, “Elliot, you are a man of honor. I trust that you will do what you must.”
Ultimately, and to his credit, Richardson decided to give up being AG rather than break his promise or continue to serve the ends of a faithless and manipulative executive. That Cox held Richardson’s feet to the fire in no means diminishes the valor or ultimate correctness of Richardson’s resignation.
Moreover, Richardson’s adherence to scruple contrasted brightly with Nixon’s low and dark ethical standard. It made it possible for everyone to perceive the Nixon impeachment as an ethical act, and not a simple matter of low politics.
In the end, the revelations of Nixon’s abuses led Republicans and Democrats, and the public at large, to see Nixon as no longer constituting a viable head of a democratic government.
In this time, the public has turned against Bush on the war. The public became convinced of Bush’s incompetence and indifference to average Americans following Katrina. He has a core support that is unwavering, and he has alienated everyone else.
To the public at large, the case is not yet made, either intellectually or emotionally, that Rove, Cheney and Bush have been acting to subvert the electoral system through abuse of power in the DOJ and the GSA.
I think the public is prepared to believe that case, over time. I wonder whether the currently constituted Republican party is ready (maybe some weak polling closer to 2008 will do it).
Hopefully, as with Watergate, the accretion of detail of the abuse of power, developed through the Congressional committees, and abetted by the White House’s ongoing desperate and obvious attempts to conduct a cover-up, will make Bush’s removal (or at least removal of his noxious minions) a political inevitability.
Marcy!
The missing emails remind me of what my mom always said, “If you have to sneak, you know you’re doing something wrong.”
Hello Emptywheel and everyone.
Fred is just a very good lawyer who always seem to have really creepy clients.
It’s the American Way
I was wondering too about the slush fund Lieberman couldn’t account for during the election. Would this be a Connecticut story of corruption that wasn’t investigated?
Great one, as usual, Marcy.
Seems to me that Fred sees an out. He can have all the outward appearances of being a fierce advocate for his client(s), while simultaneously washing his hands of secret communications he didn’t know about. At the end of the day he gets to walk and say “I did my best.”
Heh! I should have known that you’d have already seen that AP piece on Fred being all “conciliatory”. Hell, he knows as well as anyone that Waxman and Conyers can — in fact, should — tell him and the Bushistas to go pound salt.
Fielding, like so many of his brethren, got too used to having a nice widdle Republican Congress around to protect them from the consequences of their own actions.
Anyone who signs on the sinking ship will get the blame. I doubt that even Jose Padilla would accept the job of War Czar. I’m sure that Fred Fielding gets his paychecks in advance and quite possibly by certified check.
–MARCY WITH THE WONDERFUL MIND. YOU’RE AS CUTE AS A SPECKLED PUP IN A RED PICKUP. DO YOU RECOGNIZE TEXANEEZE WHEN YOU READ IT? THESE ROTTEN REPUBLICANS HAVE NO IDEA WHO’S ON TO THEM, STILL. YOUR TIME IN THIS UNIVERSE SEEMS ORDAINED FROM ON HIGH. THANKS FOR ALL YOU DO.
ew -
Ya got any predictions about how this bushco “We’ll let you sit down & have a nice, friendly chat.” (no transcript/no oath/etc) plan is gonna wring out in the final analysis?
*Surely*? the good guys won’t go for the no transcript part…….but that’s only in my more optimist moments.
cfeddy @ 7
You mean investigated by the guy who just got named COS to AGAG?
I’ve been thinking about that–I’m not sure whether or not it goes through DOJ before it goes to FEC. Anyone know?
After such knowledge, what forgiveness? Think now
History has many cunning passages, contrived corridors
And issues, deceives with whispering ambitions,
Guides us by vanities. Think now
She gives when our attention is distracted
And what she gives, gives with such supple confusions
That the giving famishes the craving. Gives too late
What’s not believed in, or if still believed,
In memory only, reconsidered passion. Gives too soon
Into weak hands, what’s thought can be dispensed with
Till the refusal propagates a fear. Think
Neither fear nor courage saves us. Unnatural vices
Are fathered by our heroism. Virtues
Are forced upon us by our impudent crimes.
These tears are shaken from the wrath-bearing tree.
T.S. Eliot Gerontion 1920 Lines 33-47
Albert Fall, I loved your comments. I was a Journalism student before and during the time Watergate was taking place, and was fascinated by the whole story. In the end, as now, it will all come down to ethics… Nixon, in some respects, was a brilliant man, despite his lack of ethics. With the current bunch in office, I have not seen any evidence of ethics, and what brilliance there is has been badly mis-used to subvert some decidedly American tenets.
And, EW, as usual, I loved your reporting… It is like a serial novel! Any way you can let me in on the ending? ;-)
Waccamaw @ 12
I don’t think they’ll budge on that any time soon. They’ve still got a few more things to get to before tehy need to get Rove’s testimony. My hope is that Sampson, realizing he just perjured himself, might consider trying to fix that in a way that would be useful to the Dems. But we shall see.
I remember thinking, when Fiedling was appointed, what on earth is he thinking of? Does he really want this?
But he does have a history of creepy clients, and well, if he sticks to lawyering and makes sure none of the mud sticks, he’ll walk away unscathed. And probably win some brownie points with someone, somewhere.
It takes a lot for a Watergate lawyer to come into a job, look at Harriet and Abu Gonzales as his predecessors, and think ‘oh, shit’.
I still think that Conyers and Leahy should draw the line on allowing Fred and company to ‘aggregate’ ( la Sampson) the RNC-mails. That’s an attempt to sprinkle some magic executive privilege pixie dust over them. The appropriate approach is to start invoking the Presidential Records Act and noting that it’s not up to the White House legal eagles to determine, after the fact, the status of records they should have bloody well preserved in the first place.
Wow, Albert Fall. That was a great recap of Watergate insider info.
To clarify some of the reporting we’ve seen about this destruction of public records by the administration (especially now that the attorney for Rove, Robert Luskin, is peddling his wares to the press):
1. Members of the media: the Democratic Party is not requesting this information from the Bush administration [”Democrats vs. The Bush Administration” is the storyline they’re using]. Members of Congress are requesting this information from the Bush Administration/the President. In short, the Legislative Branch is examining how the Executive Branch has been executing its duties with regard to the operations of the Department of Justice, compliance with the Presidential Records Act and the Hatch Act, etc. Democratic Members of Congress must stop quietly accepting this inherently politicized characterization of their role by reporters, that implies that partisan members of a political party are questioning an apolitical President and his staffers — they need to stand up for their own independent branch of government! [And never mind if most members of the Republican Party in Congress decline to fulfill the sworn duties of their powerful offices.]
2. It’s not simply “political business” that prompted Karl Rove and dozens of other White House staffers to use separate email accounts and equipment provided by the RNC political party (allegedly to comply with the Hatch Act). It’s non-governmental political business conducted on behalf of a political party. Rove’s job for the American people, as a member of our government’s Executive Branch has been almost entirely “political” from day one: but his political job in the White House is designed to serve the President of the United States, the head of our Executive Branch of government. While working in his “day job” on behalf of the President, Rove’s political communications should have been conducted on the official, taxpayer-provided equipment and software, and should’ve been automatically archived accordingly in compliance with the PRAct. A small minority of Rove’s time during the average workday should have been spent on any political party business and equipment because his taxpayer-provided salary was not intended to finance Rove’s labors for the RNC, or for the Bush re-election campaign.
3. Perhaps Congress (and the media) needs to query Robert Luskin, his client Rove, and the RNC, about exactly how and why Karl Rove was led to believe (as Luskin asserts to the media is the case) that a political party’s communications were being “archived” for the public record. [Quote from the NY Times article today by Sheryl Gay Stolberg : “Karl Rove has always understood that his R.N.C. e-mails were being archived” - Attorney Luskin.] By and for whom and how were a political party’s political communications being “archived” for or by a taxpayer-funded government entity, or otherwise??
Http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04.....176578695- AIaQRYclDrAaqBlHEB//A
The closing of Stolberg’s article:
And Stolberg clarified from the RNC counsel Kelner on Friday that the workaround of Rove’s personal email deletion activity was implemented in January, 2006 at the RNC: apparently just when Special Counsel Fitzgerald finally had received a clear picture of the primary (RNC) email system Rove used, as a result of revelations provided when Rove attempted to defuse his pending indictment (Rob Kelner refused to confirm the reason for the 1/06 change to Stolberg).
Fielding and Company know darn well that public employees in the White House have violated the Presidential Records Act, and the media needs to start clearly differentiating between the taxpayer-funded public political and the privately-funded party political activities of public servants like Karl Rove before the full extent of the violations will become clear to the public at large.
Hey EW, I have a question for you? Do you think that there is a possibility that we might see a Rove resignation anytime soon?
Or is the sullied prince too stubborn?
pseudonymous in nc @
18
This is the correct Hotmail account.
Poor, poor Freddy. I’m thinkin’ he prolly knows he’s got some idjits for clients and is trying to make the best of a bad situation. He’ll probably want (and need) a L-O-N-G vacation after this all plays itself out. Too bad the Chimpenfuhrer still doesn’t understand that thar’s some new shuriffs in town. My predicion is the SCOTUS will end up at least 5-4 in favor of Congress. And a win is a win.
EW @ 13
If it is like most things, it starts with the FEC and goes to the Justice Department for prosecution.
We can only hope that my hero Waxman doesn’t deal with Fielding until after he gets everything he wants.
Even after he gets all the White House emails sent to executive agencies from the alternative email addresses Waxman will still be missing the emails sent between the (approximately 50) White House employees who inappropriately used non-White House email addresses for their official work.
Marcy, you predicted more about the WI. What’s the WI?
I’m pretty sure Fred’s a weenie with no soul; he’ll do whatever it takes to save his own skin.
Marcy, Marcy, Marcy!
So great to see you. Hope the ‘Beer Faerie’s been” by a lot for you lately.
Great post! This man sounds evil. Don’t often hear his name though.
When millions of emails are “found” will they come out like the recent document dumps?
SusanD @
4
Funny how moms know that sort of thing.
WaPoCritic @ 25
Ah, but he already did!!!
The announcement of the other day–that they had lost a bunch of emails–came at least partly as a result of Waxman’s meetings with BushCo and the RNC (and supposedly–though he said nothing about it–Susan Ralston). So Fielding already let the first step take place–the admission that they couldn’t comply with reasonable document requests.
Eureka Springs @ 30
Oh I think they exist. Suspect someone is holding them ransom.
Loo Hoo @ 26
Oh, back on the day Sampson testified, I predicted we’d learn one of the almost-but-not-fired USAs would be from WI.
So I take it emptywheel = Marcy ?
Pleased to meet you. I enjoy your writing.
suspend all funding of the white house!
everyone in america is this admin’s boss.
we need to embarrass them with calls to congress
to cut THEIR funding.
sayin’…
Are there any recent polls on any of this? Just wondering if any of the Bushspeak is being listened to anymore.
Bush/Cheney seem to be trying to stay on the talking point of the Dems and the war budget, but it seems to be more and more distanced from reality. The thing is, I always thought that, and still Bush got re-elected, so I wonder if the email scandal is being listened to by the base. I’ve heard less Repug commentators standing up for him. The WaPo editorial is about as strong as it gets in favor of Bush, but if you look at the comments, I didn’t see one that agreed. They were all mad.
GeorgeSimian @ 37
This is the sort of scandal anyone can understand.
tommy yum @ 8
A-yep. He knows that if the Bushies are even going to pretend to stay within the rule of law, as opposed to just saying “screw it” and openly establishing a dictatorship, that they’re goners on this. They don’t have a legal leg to stand on, at all. Fielding’s just trying to put a pretty face on it.
But in the meantime, the tenacious Waxman is going to piece together not just Rove’s USA Purge emails, but all of it, no doubt covering a range of scandals that we don’t even know yet!
I’ve changed Marcy’s words of emphasis. It is amazing how many unintended consequences are coming out of these document dumps. So many references to other disinformation campaign felonies at the edge of our peripheral vision. Did you see Trex’s proposed title for your next book, Anatomy of Delete?
Hey Marcy!
And to think, it’s just been four months since the Dems took over.
I’m loving this. It’s so exciting, like when you first start dating someone new and you get all tingly inside everytime they call or in this case, start a new investigation.
Is it too early in this relationship to say… I love you Henry.
:-P
wow. albert fall @ 2 - thank you.
I think it has to do with the USA there, Steve Biskupic. Link is from today’s Milwaukee Journal, front page, above the fold: Steven Biskupic on Firing List
OT, wrt Executive Priveledge, at least wrt emails, imvho, that ship may have sailed. If you’re running emails over non secure lines outside the WH email’s archiving system, how can you then turn around and claim EP?
I used to work (thankfully no longer do) at FF’s law firm, a vile nest of repub vipers old and young. (hey, I needed a job!) Once had a conf call in the office of another partner who had no ornament in there of any kind…….EXCEPT for a little plastic plaque proclaiming his service in the “Bush 2000 Florida Recount.”
Oh my God, I thought…….I am in the PRESENCE of evil.
TexasBetsy @ 35
If you have not already done so, please buy her book: ANATOMY OF DECEIT.
Wow, those Waxman letters are REALLY going to ruffle some feathers. The entire cabinet is now getting dragged into this. I think a lot of people are going to spend the weekend fuming that they don’t see why they should take the fall for the dumbass Attorney General and Karl Rove, which is pretty much what’s happening. Gonzales has to go by 2PM Monday, because that’s the only way they’re going to be able to defy Congress’s document subpeona. (If he misses that deadline, there’s a potential impeachment charge for Contempt of Congress.)
Trouble is, tossing Gonzo this late in the game isn’t going to staunch the bleeding. The USA firing scandal has led to the e-mail scandal, and that goes well beyond Gonzo. The noose is rapidly closing around Rove. And there’s a very real chance that a broad Congressional investigation of e-mail “mishandling” will lead back to the betrayal of Valerie Plame and its subsequent cover-up, which already has an appointed special prosecutor.
Does anyone know who are the “FIFTY EXECUTIVE OFFICE STAFFERS” that received NRC email addresses? Does this include staffers from the Office of the Vice President?
Why doesn’t Mr. Libby use email? Didn’t Fitz ask him a question about this? Also didn’t Fitz ask him about a special phone that Libby had and made calls from? There were lots of calls made that had no official record of existing in the WH documents supplied.
I think Fitz has known all along that there was a “second” covert line of communication to avoid Federal Record Keeping rules and to obstruct justice. If it turns out that Libby, or anyone in his staff, was issued an NRC “Blackberry” then the investigation will suddenly be “ON” again!
In reading Texas Betty I’m reminded of how much I miss another Texas lady, who’s sad, untimely death recently deprives all of us of the wit and wisdom she brought to the party.
albert fall @ 2:
IIRC, Richardson and Ruckelshaus talked Bork out of also resigning in order to maintain some continuity at DoJ and keep the entire department from blowing up even more. God, summer of ‘73 was fun watching Ol’ Sam do his thing.
Off Topic…But this could be the origin of the name “Turd Blossom”
http://www.orange-papers.org/o.....lowers.jpg
De Turd Reich liked Prarie Flowers too!
I assume that Mr. Rove’s non-government e-mails would not be subject to redaction as they surely would not include any matters of a sensitive nature vis-a-vis national security. After all, those systems are not secure enough for transmitting such sensitive material nor is such material relevant to Mr. Rove’s non-governmental responsibilities, surely.
Umm, what a tasty stew this could be.
One thing the criminal dolts in the White House may not grasp is that every e-mail has both a sender and a receiver, and that the sender and receiver usually have a copy of the e-mails on their own systems, in addition to those stored on the mail server.
So deleting the files on the mail server only pisses investigators off and tips your hand. Investigators can go to the “Sent Mail” folders of every person who has a GWB43.com account and reconstruct most if not all of the files deleted from the GWB43.com system itself.
This is to say nothing of GWB43.com system backup records, deleted but not overwritten files, and the spectre of latent magnetic resonance on the hard drive itself.
If someone would patiently sit down and explain Modern Technology to Shooter, maybe he and the Boy Wonder can be convinced to resign rather than undergo a full impeachment. President Pelosi is likely to be merciful…
John Casper @ 43
Yup — and the thing that save Biskupic’s neck with the Bushies? Ruining an innocent woman’s life in order to try and defeat Wisconsin’s Democratic governor at the polls.
THAT is going to be big, folks.
You can’t. And Fielding knows this. He’s just trying to huff and puff for the peanut gallery, and hoping that nobody on the evening news or drive-time radio points out that his position is legally untenable.
Bill Durbin @ 48
OT, back pre-Libby indictment, the WH could spin everything via the Compost and NYT’s via “anonymous sources” such as Bob gold bars Luskin. Statements attacking whistleblowers or defending the WH always originated from outside the WH. Those days are gone. Now it’s NPR reporting that the Shrub doesn’t agree with his latest lawyer, Fielding.
Abu Gonzo Lizard Skin will be out next week, one day after the hearings. Although, he may decide the hearings aren’t worth the trouble and resign before.
The rest of them will then declare, “story over”. I don’t know if that will work or not. I hope not, but I’ve been surprised by a lot in the last six years.
There’s another part of this story that’s not getting out, which is, Congress is going to get blocked up with all this stuff. The President is going to get blocked up, if it isn’t already. Nothing is going to get done until Bush steps down.
John Casper 2 43
Not to mention government business on non-government accounts. I don’t think that people are going to be happy about that, especially if it can be framed in terms that are analogous to income taxes and home businesses, which many people do understand.
So I have had my emotional purge today.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nwDzATryei8
Roger Waters - Leaving Beirut
Wow, the world does not like GW or the Christofacists.
TexasBetsy @ 35
Emptywheel = M T Wheeler = Marcy = the smartest, funniest, cute-as-a-speckled-pup-in-a-red-pickup, DREAMIEST, rugby-playing super woman around.
Did I mention she kicks major ass?
Albatross @ 52
No. No mercy. Not this time.
There’s a very frank and enlightening interview by Tony Mauro of a just-retired career DOJ attorney (Daniel J. Metcalfe), here:
http://www.law.com/servlet/Con.....LawArticle
A couple of excerpts of Metcalfe’s answers from the transcript:
In the end, I hope only that Mr. Fielding gets what is his due for eagerly participating in three of the most dishonest, horrendous and dreadful regimes in American history.
How long can Condi ignore Waxman?
oddmommy @ 44
So here’s my FF Q. One of my favorite binaries for the human race is solid citizens vs. flakes. A softer version (i.e., one with fuzzier edges) is adult vs. child. So which is FF?
There’s a correlary Q that I can’t judge because IANAL. Lawyers must defend their clients, even if their clients are flakes. So how far would a solid citizen lawyer have to go in defense of a flake client?
TexasBetsy @ 35
Emptywheel = M T Wheeler = Marcy = the smartest, funniest, cute-as-a-speckled-pup-in-a-red-pickup, DREAMIEST, rugby-playing super woman around.
Did I mention she kicks major ass?
Oh, and like our beloved John Casper says, buy her book!
CTMET has a diary at dkos with interesting comments from slashdot techies with thoughts about email recovery:
Slashdot Techie opinions on White House e-mail scandal
among the comments, one idea i found especially intertesting was the suggestion to subpeona the IT people - to find out what was done and who gave the orders…
Oklahoma kiddo @
62
He’s already getting what he deserves - He’s Bush’s lawyer at the time when the house of cards comes crashing down.
Go! Marcy, Go!!!!
I love it here at the Lake!
Let’s think for a moment about who all them cabinet members might be? Would they include the Attorney General? Umm, yes.
But CIA? VP? Apparently not. Nor do they seem to be in the list of Waxman’s addressees. Do you suppose Waxman will find some correspondence that might be of interest to, say, Patrick Fitzgerald?
Suppose, for example, communications between the AG’s office and the OVP or Mr. Rove?
Bob in HI
From Fromkin (WaPo?) summarization article a couple of days ago - some issues. Mentions historians warned Gonzales about necessity of keeping e-mails when he was President’s attorney (2003 or so)- per Alexis Simondinger - sorry if I mispelled the name; violation of PRA. 2. Per someone named David Hotlzman lost files can be recovered. 3. Per Susan Wheeler - at least what I take from the comments - sloppy security to have Rove using Wifi. If they are not using encryption then that would be very bad management techinique. Corporate managers would be warned about that with trade secrets. Remember, BushCo is very concerned with national security according to them. Rove has security clearance - right?
Finocchio!
Loo Hoo @ 63
Right up until the contempt citation following the subpoena, I should imagine. I suspect Waxman is working toward that, but Gonzales has decided to be first in line.
Jacqrat @ 59
Excellent! Thank you for the explanation.
I keep thinking and hoping (beyond hope?) that there is someone, somewhere, who has tidbits that would bring this whole group of criminals down.
All it would take is one insider Republican with a conscience (and serious cajones). Surely there must be good Republicans out there that are as horrified by all this as we are.
Come out, come out, wherever you are!
Oklahoma kiddo @
62
I bet he winds up in hell, with “Christopher, his dad and Paulie Walnuts” in that Irish bar where the Irish guys keep winning all the poker hands. (a reference to a Sopranos’ episode where Christopher has a near-death experience and sees Hell as explained above.)
Ed*ard Teller @ 67
;0)
marcy - one question… is waxman requiring the inventory list of emails - or the actual emails, by may?
btw, excellent (as always) post. thank you.
OfT a little, per pow wow’s great link above at 1:52, this is an update on the Milwaukee Journal web site regarding Biskupic:
Bold is mine. I don’t really believe Biskupic’s statement in a general sense. I think he knew. I think it’s very relevant, however, that Fitz is becoming the new “rock/safe harbor” that all USA’a look to.
So where are we at with the key players right now? Here’s my take:
These people need to cut deals as quickly as possible before things get any worse for them:
1. Scooter Libby–Convicted felon with setencing scheduled for June. He simply cannot be pardoned right now. Waxman would have him subpoenaed even before the ink dried. His legal team has to realize that they aren’t going to be able to keep him out of jail until November 2008. So he has to do SOME jail time, and he can’t trust Bush to pardon him when he’s done. His lawyers should be telling him that he’ll get a MUCH better deal if he talks now than he will if he waits until after sentencing. Admitting guilt and expressing remorse at the sentencing will go a long way to cutting his jail time down.
2. Monica Goodling–Schumer looks like he already has the goods on her. I suspect that there are quite a few people who will come forward with “loyalty oath” stories. That’s going to look really awful, and if it ever goes to trial, she’s going to lose. She’ll be less despised than Linda Tripp, but not by much. She just seems totally unsympathetic so far, and her Fifth Amendment gambit just made her look worse. Her lawyers need to cut a deal where she pleads guilty to a bunch of minor crimes, gets off with probation and disbarment, and spills her guts. Asking for blanket immunity is VERY risky right now, because this scandal seems to be moving too quickly to keep up with. Too many shoes dropping.
3. Kyle Sampson–Couldn’t remember much, and he STILL managed to be inaccurate. No replacements in mind, huh? Try again. Your lawyer is no doubt telling you that you’ll never be convicted for perjury for that one “inaccurate” statement. I would agree, but you need to take the long view here. Was that the only lie you told under oath? Probably not. And we all know there are more documents to come. You hung the Attorney General out to dry, so you can’t count on a pardon. They’re going to do everything they can to discredit you. You’ve got to beat them to the punch.
Does this mean “mercy killing” is not an option, either?
These guys are learning that they can be the prey of overzealous information collection as well as the predator. Their crimes are bigger, more evil and less likely to remain hidden!
Wheelie!
another good one!
Thank you.
Here’s what I can’t figure: that Rove did not realize how stupid it was to think that switching to RNC-server emails would cover his sorry ass.
How dumb can you get?
This entire “lost the emails” trip: who did they think they were kidding?
Bill Durbin @ 54
Ah, yes. She would be just giddy (and vindicated) to see all this going down. In some way I believe her passing may have paved the way for the sunlight. Having said that…I miss her work and spirit immensely!
About those requests from Waxman to each of the Cabinet departments and comparable agencies . . .
Each department has its own legal counsel, comparable to Fielding’s position at the White House. I’m guessing that as soon as Waxman’s request went out, there was a big inter-agency legal counsel meeting, so as to present a unified response. If the meeting hasn’t happened yet, you can be damn sure it’s on Monday’s calendar.
I haven’t tried to check yet, but it would be very interesting to know who those legal beagles are, and what their views on Congress might be. Given that they are Bush political appointees, I’m not holding my breath.
pow wow, I hope Waxman et al are aware of the issues raised in the article you cited. Everyone should read that
Get Rove. And it’s a bye-bye, baby.
Slothrop @ 81
Not dumb, ARROGANT!
Slothrop @ 80
This all happened with the Rubber-Stamp Congress in power. It sounds like Rove really believed that oversight could never happen.
Welcome to New Math, KKKarl.
My dog Jake tells me he thinks Marcy is headed soon back to
Washington D.C. where she will telepathically guide Waxman,
Conyers and the Senate investigative crew. He also tells me he
wants to hire her to go gold digging in the Sierra Nevada Mtns.
With gold around $685 oz and going higher due to Bush crashing
our economy he could use her excellent nugget skills. In the meantime he wants to donate to her beer fund. Go Marcy!
The big question for me is are we getting closer to impeachment hearings?
What’s the ‘gold bars’ reference? Not the same as some SC Justice, I don’t suppose?
FWIW, there was some speculation on an enptywheel thread over at TNH, iirc, that the “discovery” of these emails allow Congress to circumvent Monica. Before giving her immunity, let’s read her emails. She may have blown her best chance at immunity with her defiance.
Frank Probst @ 77