Login HereYouTube of Bill Moyers and Jon Stewart discussing AG Gonzales' and his casual, passing acquaintence with honesty back in April of 2007. So true then, and more true now...
Looks like the Paulie Walnuts of the Bush Administration may be in some doo doo for his omerta tap dance on Tuesday. AP via USAToday. (From C&L):
Documents show that eight congressional leaders were briefed about the Bush administration’s terrorist surveillance program on the eve of its expiration in 2004, contradicting sworn Senate testimony this week by Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.
The documents, obtained by The Associated Press, come as senators consider whether a perjury investigation should be opened into conflicting accounts about the program and a dramatic March 2004 confrontation leading up to its potentially illegal reauthorization.
A Gonzales spokesman maintained Wednesday that the attorney general stands by his testimony.
At a heated Senate Judiciary Committee hearing Tuesday, Gonzales repeatedly testified that the issue at hand was not about the terrorist surveillance program, which allowed the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on suspects in the United States without receiving court approval.
Instead, Gonzales said, the emergency meetings on March 10, 2004, focused on an intelligence program that he would not describe.[..]
Here's a tip for Bush Administration cronies: if you are going to lie under oath, on the record, with a video camera in your face, don't lie about something for which there is documentary evidence directly contradicting your statements. It makes you look unprepared, panicked and sloppy. Even petty thieves get their stories straighter than this in magistrate courts across the nation. Juries still find them guilty, and see right through their lying skeezeball stories, but at least they have enough pride in their thievery to put a little work into covering their own asses. It's especially pathetic when you are given a number of the questions in advance.
Which brings those Fred Fielding continuing demands of no transcript, off the record, no further subpoenas, no oath and not in public for Miers, Rove and Bolten and other Bush WH cronies into much sharper focus, now doesn't it? Note to Congress: just say no. The public deserves to know what they are working so hard to hide.
There is a reason the Bush Administration is issuing directives to prevent its own USAttys from enforcing the laws -- only for Bush Administration cronies, though. Via Alterman:
Is not the administration's position that they would not permit the U.S. Attorney to prosecute a Congressional Contempt referral an implicit admission that they allow politics to impact prosecutions? They are admitting that they would interfere with the independent judgment of a prosecutor on a specific case. I suggest that this is precisely what the firings of the U.S. Attorneys are ultimately about. Yes, they serve at the pleasure of the president, but they do not prosecute at the pleasure of the president.... (emphasis mine)
Is it time to impeach him, yet? Because Gonzales' disrespect for both the spirit and the letter of the law is on my last nerve. And it disqualifies him for his post as the Attorney General of the United States in my book. How about you guys? It is way past time for some accountability.
The contempt citations for Harriet Miers and Joshua Bolten had better just be the tip of a very well-thought-out, well-planned series of steps toward overall accountability and restoration of the rule of law and balance of powers. Or this is going to be one pissed off citizen.
Don't make me pull over this blog.
Is the Gonzales silence protecting Junior President Bush? Or Tony Vice President Cheney? Or both? And shouldn't we find that out...pronto? And isn't it time the folks in the media started taking a fresh look at all the public statements, op-eds, and ranty bits from all the hypocritical, bloviating Republicans who now say that obstructing justice by claiming a nonexistant, overly broad executive privilege is a-okay?
Why exactly is it that President Bush is being given a pass on the question of obstructing justice to cover his own ass...again? While I'm at it, why exactly is the American taxpayer still paying Karl Rove's salary, anyway? And do we even want to know how imbedded the politicization of the US government has become under his tutelage?
Let's get a move on folks. We have a Constitution to save!
Share This 
Spotlight
Good morning
Good morning Christy!
g’mornin cristy…guess what?
http://corner.nationalreview.c.....JiZGVjZDk=mccain is toast
his media team resigns enmasse…some by email even
Good morning, Christy.
Great post, as always.
In 1973-4, there were at least some honorable Republics.
Now, there seem to be none.
Thus the HJC vote.
It’s going to be a hard row.
Bush Crime Family–the Sopranos writ large.
Great post this a.m., Christy!
Knowledge is power. Long past time the knowledge were open to the people.
Wigwam brought a WaPo piece on BushCo and War Crimes to the late stage of the previous thread. Ties right in.
Good morning Christy! Legal question for you: will principled members of the Justice Dept stay if the crooks direct them not to enforce the law? Isn’t this, by definition, a great excuse for a mass resignation? (Now, I realize that the President and his minions are so desperate to cover their #sses they may not care, but…)
they’re hired at the pleasure of the president, the president is not entitled to obstruct justice
let’s remind the ag and the president every time they claim sonmething as juevenile as “they work at the pleasure of the president”;
the president works at the pleasure the people
the people are the boss of him, he is not the boss of the people
and by proxy the president works at the pleasure of of congress and the senate, they are the boss of him not the other way around
the ag works at the pleasure of congress and the senate by that exact same token
congress has to start acting like the boss of the president, and they have to assert their bossy ness [errr]…bossosity [errr] boss hood [errr]
whatever, they need to exert that bossivousity
Jon Stewart is a very bright man - not to be trifled with or written off as being merely a comedian, as shown by the above clip, or in several instances on TDS, where he occasionally forgoes the funny, and tears somebody a new one.
I didn’t say that terribly well…not that it’s a “great excuse” to resign. It should be their duty and honor to do so, given the expectation they would break their oath to the law and the constitution. (more coffee needed…)
Are there any republicans with a working knowledge of our constitution.
I know there are only a few select democrats that understand this document.
FWIW, the message about triggering a Constitution Crisis is more spin. The crisis is now and the only remedy is impeachment. Our leaders must be held accountable for their actions.
If Cindy Sheehan starts to poll at 30% or above, do you think Nancy “impeachment is off the table” Pelosi will change her tune?
Politics always gets in the way of Justice.
Christy,
2 questions:
What does it take to name a special prosecutor and doesn’t DOJ get to name him, now that the law has lapsed?
If so, given the resignations, conflicts of interest and recusals, who would be left at DOJ to name him/her? Or is it the USA DC who does?
Which suggests a 3rd, Marcy’s belief that USA Taylor is a white hat. Your view and how would that help (which is question 2, restated, I guess)
And a 4th:
If AGAG has perjured himself, what about the lowersdown who testified? Any reason to hope for a chain reaction of perjury charges?
Nuf already. thanks again and again for educating and explaining so well. You should come out of this a prof of law at GWU. There are precedents for legal analysts to do so, and we respect precedents even if the presshit does not.
jayt @ 8
I find him almost scary. How can anyone be that quick and say that much in so few words, or just a facial expression?
oddball @ 10
Only in the sense that the 9/11 conspirators had a working knowledge of our air transport system.
Prairie: Did you get big storms in your Fargo area? From looking at the radar, I suspect you did & we are on the verge of that front now. It is non-stop rumbling here & the dogs have run for basement cover.
I would question why Congress is solely focusing their contempt citations on those who assert it, as opposed to those who are directing that the privilege be (improperly) invoked.
Why not haul Fred Fielding in for a chat?
I guess my conclusion is:
Don’t bitch about the politicization of the Justice Dept if you can’t get your political aspirations (i.e. the emergence of a stronger majority if we don’t rock the boat)out of the way.
Nancy, you are just as guilty as ABU, Bush and Voldemort (Cheney).
here’s a vital question leahey needs to ask abu torture the very next time he’s on the stand;
“when you say “we don’t torture”, are you using your new definition of what YOU consider is and isn’t torture?”
a follow up with;
do you think we might get some differant answers from you if we used these “non torture” techniques you advocate?”
be fun to watch his face
Christy,
It is way past time for Abu to go. Like you I am sick and tired of the spinless congress allowing the destruction of the Constution, The Justice Dept and Excutive branch of our country.If the Senate cannot ask for the appointment of a special procescutor to investigate what will it take. I cannot believe that the Republicans after Abu’s shamless performance continue to support him to the detrement of thier party. I have voted for many Republicans and am embarassed that I supported those people who now gleefully revel in destroying the principals of democracy.Boggles the mind doesn’t it.
FWIW, Olbermann did an excellent job of covering the discovery of this document and its significance on last night’s Count Down.
darclay @ 19
I can’t believe they want to wait till after recess to site contempt charges
I want to see these crimnals jailed for their contempt and I don’t want them enjoying some august
I also can’t believe they’re contemplating some kind of recess…this is unacceptable, they KNOW there will be in your face appointments for the very purpose of pissing them off
Let’s get a move on folks. We have a Constitution to save!
Indeed!
Support our troops’ safety — No August Recess!
Support our country’s future — Stay in Session!
While we’re at it, maybe we ought to start counting the days from the delivery of the “What Needs to Be Done to Care for Our Wounded Soldiers” recommendation and when the president actually moves on the recommendations.
July 26: 1 day
/work, back later
Morning all — just got back from the preschool drop-off and am sitting dow with my first cuppa coffee. You’ll have to give me a minute or two on the questions… *g*
Also, now the Intelligence Committee has to get someone to tell them about this “other program.”
“Don’t make me pull over this blog.”
LOL.
wigwam @ 25
they also have to get comey back on the stand
Perris, you would almost think that Nancy is colluding with them to block action on the contempt charges. I wonder if Spector will vote for special proc.?
Woodhall Hollow @ 26
an insta-classic!
.
Good Morning!
Christy, thank you, I just love your meaty posts — and the video’s exceptional!
perris @ 21
i suspect that the dem leadership is trying to delay as much as possible. looks like most of them are thinking about elections and not the constitution. the last thing they seem to want is confrontation… although they seem willing to do just enough to keep the base from open rebellion.
if this is the case, then the question is how to convince our congress critters that waiting is not a good strategy?
According to the Prince of Darkness,
the Congessional investigations and subpoenas are all about political payback.
While outing a NOC is of course good government.
Christy, can we do anything to get congress to stay in session.
i think christy must be pissed - her post is spiked with so many links.
darclay @ 32
This is a GREAT question! Add to that, “Can we do anything to get Bill Moyers to advise Congressional Dems?”
Christie - Well this old lawyer’s now with you on the AG. Yup, the docs did it. There it is, right in black and white. And from this old memory, I can tell you that it was less than this that had the Congress AND the media yelling ’smoking gun’ back in 1974. We’ve got the cards, it’s time to go all in.
And yet…AND YET…Leahy’s now talking about possibly referring the matter to the IG to DETERMINE whether Abu perjured himself? Are you kidding me? Congress is STILL playing this, “let’s let him stick around cuz it’s gonna help us” game?
Clue, fellas. YOU’RE IN THE MAJORITY NOW!!!! This whole thing about the big bad GOP lying to you doesn’t cut it when you have the power to do something about it and choose not to. The AP gave you a gun and there’s smoke coming out of it. If you choose to ignore it, or to say “gee is that really smoke?” you have no business being in the majority.
selise at 33 — I’m beyond pissed. But I thought the links were better than dragging the post on forever. That way, the folks who want to read a lot more have all the supporting info at their fingertips.
at 9am the House Armed Services Committee is having a hearing on “Upholding the Principle of Habeas Corpus for Detainees”
at 1:30pm the House Judiciary Committee is having a hearing on NSLs - and FBI director Mueller is testifying.
The contempt citations for Harriet Miers and Joshua Bolten had better just be the tip of a very well-thought-out, well-planned series of steps toward overall accountability and restoration of the rule of law and balance of powers. Or this is going to be one pissed off citizen.
I don’t see the citations (going judicial route) as well-thought-out. On a slightly bright note, the recess which we all know *will* be taken, will find D’s getting their ears blistered by constituents, which *might*, possibly, it’s conceivable - convince the D’s to get serious. I’m not convinced that they really want to do much of anything, but the public, and its collective checkbook, could force it.
Harriet Miers should have been thrown into the inherent contempt process, as refusing to show up is contempt per se. I would liked to have seen that one safely in the bank pre-recess.
Then send Bolten through the judicial process, and take the administration up on its taunting - “so you wanna fight? - bring it on” stance.
selise @ 37
I was just going to ask you for recommendations!
selise at 37 — The FBI hearing will be on CSpan-3 this afternoon, according to the website. But I can’t find any link for the habeas hearing — still checking on that one. It’s House Armed Services, and they don’t have the best streaming set-up as I recall from the last hearing I tried to follow…
Christy, What happens if Gonzo resigns in August because the dems are mean to him?
sorry i didn’t include links to the hearings (you can get the weekly list by clicking on my name).
the house armed services has a stream, but i think it is only audio. i wasn’t planning on listening to the whole thing, but thought it might be of interest to firepups. will check it out.
Get real folks. Stewart is correct. They just don’t care what you and I think anymore. Brass. Pure brass. Lie, cheat, steal. Used to do it in the dark, now they do it in the light. The Negroponte memo shows Abu lied. Clearly and unequivocally. Open and shut case, I would think. Who has the cajones to bring the charge???
Bill Moyers and Jon Stewart discussing AG Gonzales?
Are you joking? That is a Comedy Central show, right?
JPL @ 41
Then Bush recess-appoints an old friend.
JPL at 41 — They cannot recess appoint an AG, from what I understand, because it is a Constitutional office which requires advice and consent in order to be filled.
jayt @ 38
I would do the reverse. Send Harriet through the courts as I would think she is in a far less defensible position as a private citizen ignoring the subpoenas and would be a far more sympathetic figure than Bolten going through the Inherent Contempt.
Let Bolten be the one frog marched by the Sgt at Arms. It would achieve the same results with better PR visuals. And we know this admin is all about the PR spin.
and this is interesting from (of all people Bill Frist):
“I recall being briefed with the others about the program and it was stated that Gonzales would visit with Ashcroft in the hospital and that our meeting was part of the administration’s responsibility to discuss with the leadership of Congress,’ Frist said in a statement. (AP)
This is the first time anyone else (besides Gonzo) has directly linked that meeting with the hospital visit. They knew he was being sent! Are we getting this yet?
Anyone who’s read my
rantingspostings here knows that I think the single most important thing before this nation is the impeachment of the crime family now running the country. Be that as it may, I am not convinced that postponing things until Sept is bad. Here are my reasons:1) The criminal, but good marketer, Andrew Card had it right that you don’t launch a new product in August. You loose the nations attention and we need people paying attention.
2) I suspect there are still lots of congress-critters who want to move forward but are scared shitless. The recess is a chance to here from their constituents. We need to make sure they do hear from us then. Go to their events and be vocal. Visit them, stand out side their offices with signs. Make August the month they realize it will be safe to do the right thing and dangerous to ignore us.
I might think differently if there was a chance that Congress would not take the recess. That would make the country pay attention but there just isn’t any way they will do that.
So we wait, but not quietly.
house armed services audiocast is down. i just called the committee to confirm it was them (and not me). they are working on the problem and hope to have it fixed soon - but not for this morning’s hearing.
sorry about that!
Why did the villains wait until the program was about to expire before they sought “approval”?
martha at 6 — You know, that is a really tough question to answer. The AUSAs and the career Justice folks are the backbone of the entire system. And, in general, they have a lot of discretion about what cases do and do not go forward because, traditionally anyway, the political folks stay fairly hands off. We know that hasn’t been true for the Bush Administration — but honestly, that is a HUGE anomoly in scope from prior years from what I know.
Because they have so much discretion, the key is to get people with a high level of integrity and a commitment to justice and the rule of law into those positions. What the Bushies have tried to do is game the system — and get politically committed folks in those slots by driving out the long-term ethical people either through pressured early retirements, promotions to get them out of the way in key departments (this has happened a LOT in the public corruption unit and civil rights, for example) or through other means. When this happens, they can put in a loyal politico into a position that should never, ever have politics as its first and foremost consideration.
You know, I ought to do a whole post on this, huh? *G*
Christy, this piece is exactly on target. Perhaps we can wake up in time to save ourselves from the impending nightmare of our values being snatched from us while we worried about how to buy more “stuff”. The Bush administration has been very clever in very many ways. Cheney’s secret administration, pulling the strings from behind the curtains comes to mind. The “volunteer” army, fueled by the newly swelled ranks of Americans impoverished by trickle down economics. The systematic replacement of competent middle managers at the DOJ, out of the sight of all of use until the dismissals came to light. When you put the pieces together, it is a compelling and chilling story.
I sense that an awakening is in progress. Maybe there is still time for impeachment to save us. I hope that people like Jon Stewart and Keith Olbermann and Christy can keep the pot boiling until we are ready to tackle the hard work ahead. Impeachment. Now. It’s the only thing that can save us.
I keep asking myself, “What if Bush and Co. isn’t incompetent and bumbling? What if this was all a planned event to distract us? What if they are really just PLAIN EVIL and deceptive?” We have made the assumption all along that deep down, they fundamentally believed in the same American values as the majority of Americans. What if we were wrong?
Sally @ 50
Had they not sought approval, or had they sought approval but were not given it?
Republicans failure to acknowledge the problems at the DOJ & with Gonzo in particular, reveals a party steeped in hypocrisy.
The fact that Congress intends to vacation in August shows they have no sense of urgency about any of this. I’m afraid if we are waiting for them to do something, we have a long wait. They are like the fraternity pledge who on being wacked by a paddle says, “Thank you sir, may I have another.” This administration will certainly accomodate them.
BlueStateRedHead @ 12
Pat Leahy said last night on Countdown that Congress could name a special counsel but it would take too long for some reason. The Solicitor General is the only one empowered to name a special counsel in this case. And since he is a diehard Republican (worked for Scalia, etc.), I’m not holding my breath on that one.
Christy, well, it’s an interesting, ethical question isn’t it? And it can be applied across all industries. What illegal behavior will you condone? Until it lands on your doorstep and affects you only personally?
What interests me about all this is that most Rethugs have completely forsaken the Constitution–they’ve sworn an oath to the Rethug party and the President. (Conservative? meh…) Not exactly what we were taught in good ol’ public school, right? ;)
darclay @ 32
I am also wondering how these people can just go home and let things lie. My note to elected officials: Please PLEASE I am sorry you might need to get home, but there is some very serious work to do that no American can ignore and YOU are the only ones that can do it!
Oh I wish the legislative branch had my third grade teacher Mrs. Wright. She may have been tiny and she may have been almost 80, but she would just have to look over her glasses and that was IT, the biggest, most stubborn bully MOVED!
Cat In Seattle
Christy Hardin Smith @ 45
Christy I read Article II sec. 2
as saying he can do this. Why would this not be true?
perris @ 21
this can’t wait! we need to get on Nancy and all of our reps to see that someone brings this up on the House floor ASAP!
Good Morning, Christy and Blazing Pups!
Two days away (for a job interview - finger crossing is welcome) and trying to keep up via dead wood newspapers, and here’s Christy’s call for action all laid out for Congress!
I’m going to email this post to my reps and senators, and I’ll call all of the offices again.
I also would like to propose everyone writing their comments on Pelosi’s Speaker’s blog, The Gavel. I think that would be a good central source to consolidate a campaign calling for impeachment and taking action based on the will of We, the people.
OK - much reading to do - will be in major lurk and learn mode.
The Dems have to act! They have to act now! As far as the Miers and Bolton contempt citations go, they are planning to bring it for a vote this fall.
Can we afford to wait that long? While everyone is upset about Bush’s lying, obfuscation, cronyism, Bush has achieved his goal — he has absolute control on DOJ . . . and is only half a vote short on the Supreme Court to do whatever the fuck he wants!!! I ask again: Can we afford to wait?
If we were waiting pre-WWII, at what point should the fascists have been stopped? In the fall, after Summer Recess? I am not so appalled by the Iraqi government taking August off, it is the US Congress’ August I am worried about.
I’m getting more pissed, like you are, about how the media is treating this. I’m so sick of them presenting “two sides” of an issue as left and right, when it’s really right and wrong, especially when the facts are right there.
If Tony Snow (or any other Repug/thinktanker) comes out and says that Oversight is a Democratic political ploy, why do they print it? The Republicans are desperate to make the case, as with Libby, that there is no underlying crime here, so the fact that the Attorney General would lie before Congress isn’t really a crime. That is disgusting and disingenuous.
When Gonzales lies before Congress, and can be immediately called out by documented facts, then the headline should be “Attorney General Lies to Congress”, because that’s a huge fucking deal.
Booman has an excellent analysis of the warrantless searches over at his Tribune this morning. Pulls together all the threads of the testimony. He conjectures that the part of the project that Comey and others objected to was probably an automated data-mining operation that had the capacity to pull in just about everyone in the US without a warrant. It’s a kind of seven degrees of separation process that gets all of us a list that any ambitious Joe McCarthy can run with.
Some other good comments on that thread — about Yoo being a Cheney mole in DOJ, setting up a legal frame for a true Presidential dictatorship under cover of War Powers. Scary stuff, but not so far off the wall as to be non-credible.
And yes. No vacations for Congress this year. It might be their last, like Paula Zahn’s and Aaron Brown’s.
Under Good Stuff at Josh’s:
Harry Reid Rips Washington Post Editors As “War Cheerleaders” Unconcerned About Facts
In an unusually confrontational move towards a major news organization, Harry Reid has come out swinging against The Washington Post, accusing the paper’s editorial writers of being “eager cheerleaders” for Bush’s Iraq War and slamming them for a “disregard for the facts.”
Oh….and good morning Christy & fellow pups!
Christy -
Here’s another link (ThinkProgress): AP Reveals New Document Demonstrating ‘Clear Case’ Of Gonzales Perjury On Spying Program
perris @ 27
and Mrs. Ashcroft (who called you that night, my dear?) and Bob Mueller (did you really order FBI agents not to allow Comey to be dragged from the room? did you really threaten to resign over this issue?)
martha at 57 — In this particular job, though, it isn’t just a question of what you will condone. It’s also a question of leaving your cases to be managed by someone who will look at them with an unjust, politically motivated, improper eye. It’s leaving the investigators with whom you work closely on really important criminal cases — knowing that your priorities will not be put forward most likely, but will be dropped in favor of politicized enforcement of the law.
It really is being stuck between a rock and a hard place. You don’t condone the illegal behavior, not by a long shot — but do you walk away and allow someone to step into your workload and your department knowing that they will then skew everything you have done to a politicized fashion and get a career job where they will then be able to do that for a lifetime? Or do you try and stick it out and protect justice and the Constitution where you can with every little decision you can control for the next year and a half until the political hacks are out of the DOJ?
Think about how hard that would be. Day in and day out. My instinct would be to stay and fight every damn battle I could fight from within — because I would be damned if they were going to stick some unqualified political hack on my case load and my investigative team to pervert the work that needs to be done. But that’s just me…and it’s me looking from the outside in, and having no idea what these folks are facing right now because I’m not there.
It’s a really tough call, in my book. Because of the career nature of a lot of these jobs. You walk away from your spot, it gets filled by a hack, rooting that hack out later may be impossible. Then what have you done to the DOJ for the rest of your life?
TiredFed @ 60
Isn’t it just as important to get in touch with Senator Reid’s office to determine what can be done to keep the Senate in session in August?
Christy Hardin Smith @ 45
Christie - I’m not so sure that that’s a correct reading. IIRC, Brennan was initially appointed to the Supreme Court by a recess appt. and his position certainly required advice and consent.
What LESS does Gonzales have to do before he is charged? Those of us on the left have seen this administration’s ineptness with regard to the war, both Afghanistan and Iraq, Katrina, Walter Reed and the Veterans Affairs Administration. Why would Congress think their legal acumen would be any better? I recall during the Nixon debacle winning legal battles over ‘Executive Privilege.” During the Clinton impeachment they also defeated it except Clinton permitted members of his staff to testify before the claim got to the Supreme Court. Were those Congresses more able? More legally knowlegeable? Bruce Fein (Is it a relation who works in the DOJ?) was a legal pundit during the Cliton whose prognistications were correct. I didn’t particularly appreciate his editorializing but he was smart enough to know what to do. He may be the man to advise both Conyers and Leahy/Specter. Especially Specter. He is a class ‘A’ WINO>
On postponing August recess. I was not sure this was even possible because canceling it would require a rules change but if I read this correctly, that may not be true since this is not an elections year. Any Senate rules mavens out there who really know?
selise @ 33
yeah, talk about multitasking. is there a word for multidimensional multitasking?
EDIT for 72…. before he is charged. NOT ‘because…’ I missed it on re reading. Sorry. [Mod: fixed]
Christy Hardin Smith @ 51
Good morning from L.A. A whole post on this? Yes, please.
BushCo’s politicization of DOJ has demoted its standing, to paraphrase David Iglesias @ the Seattle CLE conference, from the A Team to a C or D Ring status.
JPL @ 41
Fred Fielding becomes recess-appointed Acting AG. Worst nightmare?
I would not expect the career attorneys at the DOJ to quit over Gonzales. But, I have been expecting that they would come together and in some dramatic way bring this matter to a head.
For instance, requesting an open hearing with Senator Leahy’s committee where literally hundreds show up and register their collective outrage.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 45
well, someone once upon a time recess-appointed the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. I’m thinking it can be done, but I’m gonna run and check that real frick like.
TiredFed @ 47
Or is Frist lying his ass off?
N=1 @ 61
speaker pelosi’s blog does not permit comments.
Senator Rockerfeller has looked deeply concerned and worried for quite some time. When Republican Senator Pat Roberts was doing everything he could to dilute, divert and delay Phase II of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. When Roberts was doing everything he could to protect the Office of Special Plans, the White House Iraq Group and everyone else who was involved with the creation and dessimination of false pre-war intelligence, Senator Rockerfeller looked very worried.
We have yet to witness the completion of all of the parts of Phase II. We have yet to witness anyone held accountable for the false pre-war intelligence and its use that has resulted in hundreds of thousands of dead, injured and displaced.
Holding those responsible for creating and dessiminating this false intelligence ACCOUNTABLE is the very least, the very least that our Reps can do for those who have needlessly lost their lives in this war of choice!
We are waiting Senator Rockerfeller and other Reps. We are waiting and pushing hard for justice and accountability.
Think Progress has an amazing rundown of all of Sen. Pat Roberts mostly successful efforts to water down the Phase II investigation
…and it’s time to hit that PayPal button again to support the fine work by all here @ FDL…
Done :-)
They’ll probably cut a deal with the WH by the end of the year, when it looks like they’ve dragged it out as long as they can. And the deal will probably be something like, under oath, but no transcript, or something like that.
Remember, Bush and Cheney testified behind closed doors with no transcript for the 9/11 commission. I’m sure they were very helpful.
selise @ 30
A couple of days ago, Conservative Republican & former Reagan Deputy AG Bruce Fein discussed why Bush must be impeached with Olbermann. He points out that those in Congress who stayed loyal to Nixon were ousted big time. Contrary to the Democrats’ fears.
realworld @ 73
that was an interesting history of the recess. Plus a look inside the bureaucracy through some of the little cogs and wheels that clog or wield it.
TiredFed @ 79
not fast enough to edit. from CRS report on recess appointments:
“When the Senate is in recess, the President may make a temporary appointment, called a recess appointment, to any such position without Senate approval (Article II, Section 2, Clause 3).”
“There is no qualification to the President’s “Power to fill up all Vacancies…” in the
constitutional provision. Neither is there a statutory constraint on this power.”
realworld at 59 — See here:
Just above the section you quoted from article 2. The AG is an officer of the United States and, thus, subject to Senate approval, as I understand it. He is not an inferior officer, so that cannot be delegated. At least, that’s the argument that I have heard on it for cabinet officials.
Christy -
Another idea comes to mind: How worthwhile would it be to get in touch with Senator Byrd and other senators whose knowledge of Senate rules is comparable to Senator Byrd’s knowledge of those rules?
TiredFed @ 77
Or Lieberman (shudder)
selise @ 81
see Contact Us. she takes comments from everyone at Gavel, not just CA constituents.