TPMmuckraker | Talking Points Memo | Bush on the Purge: "I'm Frankly Not Happy"

Bush on the Purge: "I'm Frankly Not Happy"

By Paul Kiel - March 14, 2007, 1:42PM

Bush commented this afternoon on his administration's mass firing of federal prosecutors:

Update: This clip only comprises one half of Bush's remarks today -- we'll have the rest up shortly.

Update: Here it is:

Update: Transcript below.

Q Mr. President, the Attorney General acknowledges in a statement --
PRESIDENT BUSH: Hold on, Roger. The world wants to hear your voice.

Q Thank you. The Attorney General acknowledged yesterday that there were mistakes in the firing of prosecutors. What is his future in your cabinet? Do you have confidence in him? And more importantly -- or just as important -- how effective can he be in Congress going forward when he's lost a lot of confidence among Democrats and doesn't have any defenders among Republicans?

PRESIDENT BUSH: I do have confidence in Attorney General Al Gonzales. I talked to him this morning, and we talked about his need to go up to Capitol Hill and make it very clear to members in both political parties why the Justice Department made the decisions it made, making very clear about the facts. And he's right, mistakes were made. And I'm, frankly, not happy about it, because there is a lot of confusion over what really has been a customary practice by the Presidents. U.S. attorneys and others serve at the pleasure of the President. Past administrations have removed U.S. attorneys; they're right to do so.

The Justice Department recommended a list of U.S. attorneys. I believe the reasons why were entirely appropriate. And yet this issue was mishandled to the point now where you're asking me questions about it in Mexico, which is fine. If I were you, I'd ask the same question. This is an issue that -- let me just say, Al was right, mistakes were made, and he's going to go up to Capitol Hill to correct them.

I appreciate the fact that he's taken some action, because anytime anybody goes up to Capitol Hill, they've got to make sure they fully understand the facts, and how they characterize the issue to members of Congress. And the fact that both Republicans and Democrats feel like that there was not straightforward communication troubles me, and it troubles the Attorney General, so he took action. And he needs to continue to take action....

Q Thank you, Mr. President, President Calder n. On the dismissal of U.S. attorneys, there have been allegations that political motivations were involved. Is political loyalty to your administration an appropriate factor? And when you talked to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales last year, what did you say, and what did you direct him to do?

PRESIDENT BUSH: Thanks, Kelly. I've heard those allegations about political decision-making; it's just not true. Secondly, just so you know, I get asked -- I get complaints all the time from members of Congress on a variety of subjects -- this senator, this congressperson so-and-so -- there's occasionally frustration with the executive branch. And they will pull me aside and say, are you aware of this, are you aware of that? And I did receive complaints about U.S. attorneys.

I specifically remember one time I went up to the Senate and senators were talking about the U.S. attorneys. I don't remember specific names being mentioned, but I did say to Al last year -- you're right, last fall -- I said, have you heard complaints about AGs, I have -- I mean, U.S. attorneys, excuse me -- and he said, I have. But I never brought up a specific case nor gave him specific instructions.

Q Sir, might he have inferred that you discussed it with him was a need for him to take action?

PRESIDENT BUSH: You're going to have to ask Al that question, but as I say, I discuss with my Cabinet officials complaints I hear. When members of the Senate come up and say to me, I've got a complaint, I think it's entirely appropriate and necessary for me to pass those complaints on. I don't every single time, but people view their moment with the President sometimes as an opportunity to unload their frustrations about how things may be working in their state -- or congresspersons how things may be working in their district. And whether it be the Attorney General or the Secretary of State or other members of my Cabinet, I pass those complaints on at times.

What Al did was -- and what the Justice Department did was appropriate. U.S. attorneys serve at the pleasure of the President. In other words, they're appointed by the President. They can be removed by the President. What was mishandled was the explanation of the cases to the Congress. And Al has got work to do up there. And the thing I appreciate about the Attorney General was, he said publicly he could have handled it better, mistakes were made, and took action. And, obviously, more action needs to be taken. That's what I discussed with him on the phone today.

Comments (100)

joel wrote on March 14, 2007 1:53 PM:

Re: Sampson staying on the job while job hunting

I smell shades of Michael Brown. If Sampson feels he is being set up as the fall guy, he might develop 'conscience pangs' and open up a bit more in future Congressional testimony. But hey, keep him set up with a paycheck and an office, and his loyalty might just stay intact until all this just blows over.

And a follow-up question: will Lam, Iglesias, et. al. be kept on payroll until they find other gainful employment? I mean, the USAs along with Sampson are all being ostensibly fired for poor job performance, so shouldn't they all receive equal treatment?

EH wrote on March 14, 2007 1:56 PM:

New administration talking point: This was the result of just one decision.

obsessed wrote on March 14, 2007 1:56 PM:

my god - he's so pathetic

Anonymous wrote on March 14, 2007 2:03 PM:

Of course he is not happy. He is about to be caught with his hand in the cookie jar. It's going to be interesting to see how he can weasel his way out of this one!

magster wrote on March 14, 2007 2:05 PM:

Tangential question:

Was there additional akwardness from the AG scandal at any time on Bush's trip to Latin America because his attorney general is Hispanic?

Bearpaw wrote on March 14, 2007 2:15 PM:

Re: Awkwardness in Latin America over Gonzales?

Given how awkward that trip is anyway, I suspect the Gonzales matter doesn't make much difference.

former FSO wrote on March 14, 2007 2:25 PM:

Any moral high ground we used to have is gone. How do we dare try and tell countries in this, or any other hemisphere, that the rule of law is important (arguably the foundation of democracy) when we don't follow it ourselves?

What this scandal needs is a good nickname. Watergate had the saturday night massacre.

I propose "Bush's USA Misfirings" it's covers such a multitude level of failures on his part, but is so perfect for this one.

busted! wrote on March 14, 2007 2:28 PM:

wow.

He seemed especially incoherent and sputtering, even by Bush standards.

His twitches, self corrections, hedges, second thoughts and addendum to his incoherent non-denial denial, the joking confidence approach, the "just so you know" confidence ... every classic liar tell was on full display.

"I never brought up a specific case nor gave him specific instructions" (coached statement alert!)

"you'd have to ask him" (Gonzalez on whether he interpreted Bush's discussions as a call for action.

"I discuss with my cabinet officials complaints I hear"

"I pass those complaints on at times"

He's so busted, and can't even lie about it half-decently.

On the Clock wrote on March 14, 2007 2:36 PM:

"I never brought up a specific case, nor gave him specific instructions."

Watch the body language.... the right hand covers the solar plexus. He's hanging his hat on this.

btree wrote on March 14, 2007 2:38 PM:

I trust you've seen this?

from a commenter at Dan Froomkin's online chat today:

"It sure does seem like we need to know more about Brett Tolman, the guy who beat out Kyle Sampson for the job of U.S. Attorney in Utah. What a bizarre coincidence that before he got the job, he was the staffer for Arlen Spector who is responsible for inserting the now infamous U.S. Attorney rule in the Patriot Act..."

http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_5431030

Anonymous wrote on March 14, 2007 2:41 PM:

Former FSO >>> What this scandal needs is a good nickname. Watergate had the saturday night massacre.

How about "The Pearl Harbor Day Massacre," following Nixon's DOJ purge and referencing the date of the biggest chunk of the USA firings.

I'm even fine with the histrionics.

DK wrote on March 14, 2007 2:55 PM:

Don't know about the others, but Lam has landed on her feet. She is now a Senior VP at Qualcomm. See excerpt from press release below.

QUALCOMM Appoints Carol C. Lam Senior Vice President and Legal Counsel for Company’s Legal Team

Former United States Attorney Brings More than 20 Years of Proven Legal Expertise, Litigation Success and Leadership to the Position

SAN DIEGO — February 15, 2007 — QUALCOMM Incorporated (Nasdaq: QCOM), a leading developer and innovator of Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA) and other advanced wireless technologies, today announced the appointment of former United States Attorney Carol C. Lam to the position of senior vice president and legal counsel. Working with QUALCOMM's existing legal team, she will help manage and direct the Company's litigation worldwide.

“Carol's groundbreaking work in complex cases has earned her a national reputation as one of the top prosecutors in the country,” said Louis Lupin, executive vice president and general counsel for QUALCOMM. “After more than two decades of outstanding public service, she is widely respected for her wisdom, judgment, integrity and courage. Carol's success and experience in managing complex litigation and large legal teams will be instrumental in shaping and managing QUALCOMM's considerable worldwide litigation.

***

Anonymous wrote on March 14, 2007 2:57 PM:

So Bush would have us believe that when he passes along "complaints" from Senators and Congressmen to his cabinet members he doesn't really expect them to act on them. He's just chit-chatting with them; complaining about USAs like you and I complain about the weather, high taxes or our bosses. We have to ask Alberto whether he thought Bush was asking him to do something. Pathetic.

And he praises Gonzalex for taking action. Sheesh. His first and repeated remarks on the USA firings was that they were "disgruntled former USAs grandstanding in front of Congress" Only after the media took up the story and Congress got serious about oversight of this Administration run wild did Gonzalez do anything. For that he deserves praise?

Robin Boerner wrote on March 14, 2007 2:57 PM:

Bush on the Purge: "I'm Frankly Not Happy"

Quite frankly, neither are the people who have to live in a state under one of your sub-standard Patriot Act Appointee US Attorney's like we do here in Alaska.

It has been 3 1/2 weeks since my fiance John Mitchell was assaulted by the US Army in an attempt to disrupt a federal lawsuit against them for Civil Rights violations. Even though Nelson Cohen was notified THAT DAY he has still not opened an investigation into the US Army's actions.

Civil Rights must not be one of the Bush Administrations high priorities that they judge US Attorney's on...right GW?

AS wrote on March 14, 2007 3:04 PM:

One take on this clip is that Bush seems to spend an awful lot of time on his own defense before he finally gets around to his weak talking points. Lots of "this is part of my job, I pass on complaints" and then some more, before he runs through "Al" admitting mistakes were made (is "stand-up guy" the next "heckuva job"?) and the rest of it. In the first part, he's working at it, defining his own role and deniability very carefully; when he gets to "Al" he's going through the motions.

name wrote on March 14, 2007 3:08 PM:

nice freudian slip there at minus 23 seconds: "the explanation of the case. the cases."

must be very wrong to call it one case, eh?

islandliberal wrote on March 14, 2007 3:21 PM:

George here displays virtuoso ineptitude in mendacity. He could be a professor giving his opening lecture in "How Not To Lie, 101".

Amazing. This performance is going to come back to haunt him.

Mrs Panstreppon wrote on March 14, 2007 3:51 PM:

DK: To add further intrigue to the Lam story, Qualcomm could be involved in an ongoing investigation of lobbyists, Copeland & Lowery.

Qualcomm executive vice-president, Daniel Sullivan, was on the board of the Foundation For the Improvement Of Mathematics and Science Education (FIMSE.

Copeland & Lowery failed to report more than $225k in lobbying fees paid by FIMSE between 2001 and 2006. Even worse, FIMSE not only failed to report paying the lobbying fees in its 990 IRS filings, it failed to report millions of dollars in grant revenue.

FIMSE is somehow connected to the Professional Development Collaborative (PDC) which offers educational progarms to science and math teachers in San Diego. PDC is, in part, underwritten by Qualcomm.

Some big names in San Diego education are involved in FIMSE including Harry Albers and Jane Gawronski. One of the FIMSE directors, Alan D. Bersin, was superintendent of San Diego schools. Bersin's contract was terminated 18 months early for unspecified reasons in 2005.

Mrs Panstreppon wrote on March 14, 2007 3:59 PM:

Oops! I forgot to mention that Copeland & Lowery was in bed with Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-CA), former Chairman of the Appropriations Committee.

Also keep in mind that Rep. Lewis did a real estate deal in 2002 with Marvin "Buzz" Oates, a wealthy real estate developer who is a member of the extreme right wing Council For National Policy.

The terms of Lewis's deal with Oates are about as clear as mud. To me, it looks like it was a paper transaction set up to manufacture income for Lewis.

BTW, Oates has already had to shell out a few million to settle a civil suit in which he was accused of defrauding fellow investors.

cevrero wrote on March 14, 2007 3:59 PM:

Can anyone explain why these attorneys serve at the pleasure of the president? Ok, he can hire them at the beginning of his term(s). But he uses it like that if they don't do what their subliminally told to do by the Justice department, then they can be replaced at the president's discretion. So who decides, the President or the Attorney General? It sounds like George is calling the shots. In any case, he admittedly is saying he was involved in passing complaints by senators to the Attorney General. Now that sounds red hot politically motivated as it gets to me. It looks like the administration is saying we can do what we want because there is no specific law that says we can't.

cevrero wrote on March 14, 2007 4:05 PM:

Ok George, certain senators complained about what? And you told Gonzo what? Oh you can't recall? Does anyone have a subpoena to pry open this crazy nut?

melior wrote on March 14, 2007 5:38 PM:

I've heard those allegations about political decision-making; it's just not true.

Remember, when we talk about wiretapping, it requires a warrant.

This is kinda important wrote on March 14, 2007 7:36 PM:

Yesterday, Bush made a pledge to the government of Mexico to work for a massive amnesty. While the U.S. Atty issue is important, Bush selling us out to a foreign country is light years more important.

Chabuka wrote on March 15, 2007 2:40 AM:

My guess is that Bush "is not happy" because they got caught....see "Article Two" of the Nixon impeachment....

Jaimie wrote on March 15, 2007 8:39 AM:

I get a really creepy feeling every time I hear one of them say 'at the pleasure of the president'.
It sounds so, I don't know, so whorish.

tothepoint wrote on March 15, 2007 12:43 PM:

just to recap the facts, with dispassion: the president hears complaints about u.s. attorneys. according to the president, he says something to gonzales like, have you heard complaints about u.s. attorneys. gonzales says, yes, he has. according to the president, he never discussed a 'specific case,' nor gave them 'specific instructions.'

watch the wiggle words: here's a biggie, "case." he never discussed a specific case. taking that literally, as you have to do with these guys, that leaves open the 'true' possibilty that bush never mentioned the specific cases involved in the decision to purge, such as the duke case. but it also leaves open the 'true' possibility that he mentioned NAMES of the congressmen and/or usa's.

another wiggle? "specific." as in the president said he never gave 'specific instructions.' a strict reading could mean he didn't say HOW to get rid of them but just to DO IT.

a reporter needs to ask the wh if the president mentioned any NAMES to gonzales. and, whether the prez told gonzales then he'd prefer they were gone.

fpyit esradci wrote on April 16, 2007 11:56 PM:

qnpea zlhwudxco lqticvmxy qjrpnmhcd pisuzblvg ohkzmta opcyest

zmdkluyh gbesvu wrote on April 16, 2007 11:57 PM:

tnpfkiuox kwyxu ilgedhpbt sfdwtr udsfiwc fqvaljn kcun http://www.byvsat.axithdvg.com

rjoenfdsg xthpcl wrote on April 16, 2007 11:58 PM:

csrpfbwel vgbwu hpwzs kxdep znqrfps dcvg yiudwnfjc [URL=http://www.cfjh.sbfu.com]lfmn oxjvnal[/URL]

vercqop fvuwq wrote on April 16, 2007 11:59 PM:

mzdnw pvfswhe utgrp kiom aioflgwj xgbukpc pletzgxf [URL]http://www.sgrdjunz.pamb.com[/URL] ygphj jcbfzkm

Britney wrote on May 23, 2007 7:26 PM:

Britney

Nbkvqfp wrote on May 23, 2007 9:55 PM:

http://16.xxxsexygirl24h.info x

Nbkvqfp wrote on May 23, 2007 9:55 PM:

http://16.xxxsexygirl24h.info x

Nbkvqfp wrote on May 23, 2007 9:55 PM:

http://16.xxxsexygirl24h.info x

Cheyenne Silver wrote on May 24, 2007 3:13 PM:

cheyenne silver 207.0 /day
cheyenne silver movie 3.6 /day
cheyenne silver anal 2.4 /day
cheyenne silver pic 2.2 /day
cheyenne silver gallery 2.0 /day
cheyenne silver porn star 1.7 /day
cheyenne silver free 1.5 /day
cheyenne silver nude 1.5 /day
cheyenne silver interracial 1.3 /day
cheyenne silver torrent 1.2 /day
cheyenne silver video clip 1.1 /day
free cheyenne silver video 1.1 /day
cheyenne silver baby sitter 1.0 /day
free cheyenne silver movie 1.0 /day
cheyenne silver photo 1.0 /day
cheyenne silver clip

twisty wrote on May 24, 2007 4:27 PM:

twistys 10,724.0 /day
twistys login password 2005 feb 3,404.0 /day
twisty 962.0 /day
twistys password 948.0 /day
inside twistys 782.0 /day
twisty girls 507.0 /day
twisty babes 502.0 /day
twistys daily video 242.0 /day
girls twisty 201.0 /day
twistys login password 197.0 /day
free twisty girls 188.0 /day
twistys cafe 181.0 /day
twisty ladies 177.0 /day
teen twisty 164.0 /day
twistys preview 152.0 /day

Nbkvqxj wrote on May 27, 2007 1:04 AM:

http://16.zpornstars.info x

Nbkvqrg wrote on May 27, 2007 5:32 PM:

http://1.sexybiqini.info x

Nbkvqrg wrote on May 27, 2007 5:33 PM:

http://1.sexybiqini.info x

Nbkvqhf wrote on May 28, 2007 11:23 AM:

http://12.sexxywomen.info x

Nbkvqhf wrote on May 28, 2007 11:23 AM:

http://12.sexxywomen.info x

Nbkvqpn wrote on May 29, 2007 5:56 AM:

http://1.xxxsextonlive.info x

Nbkvqkz wrote on May 31, 2007 2:58 AM:

http://3.epornreview.info x

Nbkvqkz wrote on May 31, 2007 2:58 AM:

http://3.epornreview.info x

Nbkvqkz wrote on May 31, 2007 2:58 AM:

http://3.epornreview.info x

Nbkvqzu wrote on May 31, 2007 10:55 AM:

http://19.filmsexs.info x

Nbkvqzu wrote on May 31, 2007 10:55 AM:

http://19.filmsexs.info x

Nbkvqzu wrote on May 31, 2007 10:55 AM:

http://19.filmsexs.info x

Nbkvqyx wrote on June 1, 2007 7:34 AM:

http://15.freesexxnet.info x

Nbkvqyx wrote on June 1, 2007 7:35 AM:

http://15.freesexxnet.info x

Nbkvqyx wrote on June 1, 2007 7:35 AM:

http://15.freesexxnet.info x

Nbkvqpu wrote on June 2, 2007 3:40 AM:

http://11.pornfielity.info x

Nbkvqpu wrote on June 2, 2007 3:40 AM:

http://11.pornfielity.info x

Nbkvqpu wrote on June 2, 2007 3:40 AM:

http://11.pornfielity.info x

Zmajrpm wrote on June 2, 2007 11:10 AM:

http://homesexual.info x

Zmajrpm wrote on June 2, 2007 11:10 AM:

http://homesexual.info x

Zmajrpm wrote on June 2, 2007 11:10 AM:

http://homesexual.info x

Nbkvqnu wrote on June 2, 2007 9:33 PM:

Nbkvqrp wrote on June 2, 2007 9:34 PM:

http://sexocolor.info x

Zmajrkh wrote on June 2, 2007 9:52 PM:

http://supergirlsex.info x

Zmajrkh wrote on June 2, 2007 9:52 PM:

http://supergirlsex.info x

Zmajrkh wrote on June 2, 2007 9:53 PM:

http://supergirlsex.info x

Zmajruy wrote on June 3, 2007 8:15 AM:

http://pornxdance.info x

Zmajruy wrote on June 3, 2007 8:16 AM:

http://pornxdance.info x

Zmajruy wrote on June 3, 2007 8:16 AM:

http://pornxdance.info x

Zmajrxt wrote on June 11, 2007 9:44 AM:

http://18.forsedsex.info x

Zmajrxt wrote on June 11, 2007 9:44 AM:

http://18.forsedsex.info x

Zmajrxt wrote on June 11, 2007 9:45 AM:

http://18.forsedsex.info x

Zmajrzq wrote on June 12, 2007 4:16 PM:

http://4.jjjxpornno.info x

Zmajrve wrote on June 14, 2007 4:28 AM:

http://18.sexxywomen24h.info x

Zmajrve wrote on June 14, 2007 4:28 AM:

http://18.sexxywomen24h.info x

Zmajrve wrote on June 14, 2007 4:28 AM:

http://18.sexxywomen24h.info x

Anderson wrote on June 14, 2007 8:41 AM: