Comments (56)

ajg wrote on March 22, 2007 12:50 PM:

Gonna be one big Idontrecallfest, I'm afraid.

cb wrote on March 22, 2007 12:52 PM:

I agree, why the automatic assumption that a voluntary witness is going to spill the beans?

Carl Nyberg wrote on March 22, 2007 12:53 PM:

"Mr. Sampson, would granting immunity help you remember?"

looj wrote on March 22, 2007 12:54 PM:

he hasn't agreed to anything yet, so a subpoena still might be necessary. my prediction, if he's gonna go up there and fall on his sword, he'll agree voluntarily. if it's going to be denials and i don't recalls, then it'll have to be a subpoena

POed Lib wrote on March 22, 2007 12:56 PM:

He sure looks a WHOLE BUNCH like KKKarl.

Pinson wrote on March 22, 2007 12:56 PM:

Anyone want to start a pool on how many minutes into his testimony it will be before he takes the fifth? Put me down for 12 minutes.

Carl Nyberg II wrote on March 22, 2007 12:57 PM:

"Mr. Sampson, would forgiving the tax lien the US Treasury has on your head help?"

POed Lib wrote on March 22, 2007 12:58 PM:

Before we start a pool, remember that the Chair determines the minutes that each senator has. I might be interested in such a pool, but would like to count only Democratic minutes.

Sagrilarus wrote on March 22, 2007 12:59 PM:

If they immunize him he's compelled to testify.

bleh wrote on March 22, 2007 1:00 PM:

"Mr. Sampson, would not forwarding a complaint of Obstruction of Justice and Lying to Congress to the US Attorney for the District of Columbia help?"

Dan D wrote on March 22, 2007 1:06 PM:

Don't worry about the voluntary aspect.

If he's there, under oath, is he really willing to lie to protect Rove and Miers? Or whomever at DoJ redacted and held back so much of the documents?

Once they're in the chairs, the circumstances of how they got there don't matter. You can't lie to congress or commit perjury just because you showed up voluntarily.

parrot wrote on March 22, 2007 1:07 PM:

My guess is that the Dems are still skittish for some reason. Perhaps they are waiting to see if DOJ has anything on any of them? Not sure why they would delay any further. Also, why are we negotiating with someone's lawyer? Is Sampson afraid of the big bad Dems? I mean, isn't he his own lawyer or something? Or is he just a political operative that is now whining to the Republican Machine about how they need to protect him?

Richard L. Adlof wrote on March 22, 2007 1:08 PM:

Sampson is still relatively young man . . . AND Bush 43 is better know for dropping tablets in acid and flipping switches than for pulling out the pardon pen . . .

He maybe considering a Party switch . . . He may never work in America again otherwise.

PMS wrote on March 22, 2007 1:08 PM:

I'll have my popcorn ready.

An omen: The Security Code-word is "blood".

anon wrote on March 22, 2007 1:10 PM:

That picture of Sampson is priceless. As my grandma would say, "Look at the punim on him!"

obsessed wrote on March 22, 2007 1:14 PM:

incredible MSM smackdown of Tony Snow:

http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?id=2595472n

paulr wrote on March 22, 2007 1:17 PM:

parrot: "Not sure why they would delay any further. Also, why are we negotiating with someone's lawyer? Is Sampson afraid of the big bad Dems? I mean, isn't he his own lawyer or something?"

Oldest adage in the legal profession: "A lawyer who represents himself has a fool for a client and an ass for an attorney."

Steve Garrett wrote on March 22, 2007 1:18 PM:

Even getting him to plead the 5th would go a long way toward the case that a criminal offense has been committed. I don't think you can plead the fifth just because the answer is politically damaging.

Remember that no matter how unethical it is the President has the right to fire a US attorney for any reason unless he does it to obstruct an on going investigation.

DoubleD wrote on March 22, 2007 1:20 PM:

Yeah, that's one shayna punim, all right... in a George Costanza-ish kinda way. He should kish mir in tochas.

Ian wrote on March 22, 2007 1:23 PM:

It will be interesting to compare Specter's questions of Sampson to his of Iglesias. Specter didn't take it easy with Iglesias, and I wonder if he'll take the same hard-line tack here?

I'm not sure why nobody is really talking about what enabled all of this to happen--the nugget inserted into the Patriot Act. Without that none of this could have happened, and it seems to indicate some collusion between the DOJ, WH and Senate...

Ron Byers wrote on March 22, 2007 1:24 PM:

Sampson fancied himself the next Karl Rove. I would guess he still does. That means he views himself as a pretty shrewed operator.

You have to wonder just how dense a guy has to be not to realize that Bush is only loyal to other members of his close personal circle (Karl,Harriet,and Alberto) and not to the hired help like Sampson. For them loyalty is expected to go one way -- to Bush.

For Sampson, who is obviously being set up by the President and his circle to take the fall, not to see that turning is in his personal long term best interests. After all, in just a few months even if they stay out of jail, George will be cutting brush in Waco and Alberto will be practicing law in Austin.

ReggaeBass wrote on March 22, 2007 1:28 PM:

He is gonna turn faster than a speeding bullet. Ladies and Gentelmen here is your John Dean. Why do you think Alberto wanted to keep him in the building after he resigned? To put the screws to him. I am telling you Sampson is gonna turn.

jinny wrote on March 22, 2007 1:29 PM:

Sampson looks as if he is a clone of Rove.

anon wrote on March 22, 2007 1:31 PM:

I don't think he's going to take the fifth. His role, assuming he doesn't leave the reservation, is to set out a narrative that the underlings can generally confirm, even if, of course, no one can quite remember anything. He'll stick to the released e-mails and admit that they were, you know, talking among themselves about the various AGs, and that there was some inappropriate behavior, but I suspect he'll keep the AG and the WH out of it.

I'd bet that Spector will be briefed at lenghth about what direction to take and he'll come on strong but end up helping Sampson establish an unpleasant but not quite illegal narrative. Something along the lines of, hey, the DOJ can be like Peyton Place, gosh, you know how offices can get. So, the bet would be how many questions until Spector asks "How would you describe the morale in your office?"

I haven't seen real signs that Sampson is not a committed Bushie. Sure, he's stumbled a bit but he'll be back on his feet by next Thursday. He's still at his desk, right? And the president has made it clear that he's going to fight to the end. If Sampson tells the truth, his career is over. He's been comfortable with what's he's been doing up to now, I don't think lying is going to be a problem for him.

Another omen? Code: right

gcs wrote on March 22, 2007 1:34 PM:

I agree with you Ron. Sampson is the hired help and anyone who works for Bush and doesn't get that is deluding himself.

I wonder if anyone remembers a famous exchange I guess it would be. I must've read it in a book. When George Sr. was Vice President the one thing that drove him crazy was the feeling that the Reagans treated him and Barbara like "the help." The Bushes are not "team players." Privilege and arrogance runs in their veins. Bush Jr. is not a man who cares a whit for anyone but himself and his family. Sampson is already being thrown under the bus and I have to believe if things got really tough Rove and Miers and Gonzales would be next. Bush has no loyalty to anyone but another Bush. Period.

Sholom wrote on March 22, 2007 1:35 PM:

parrot: "Not sure why they would delay any further. Also, why are we negotiating with someone's lawyer?"

The Dems don't have a lot of direct leverage. Even if they subpoena Rove et al, and even if Rove blows it off, and even if Congress authorizes a contempt of Congress citation -- who's going to enforce it? Constitutionally, only one man can enfore it, and that's the US Attorney for DC. And if he chooses not to (NPR quoted somebody as saying that this is exactly what happened in 1983 -- anyone know what that case is?) . . . there's not much Congress can do other than hope that the "court of public opinion" comes down hard on the Administration's position here.

(I think)

Barbara wrote on March 22, 2007 1:35 PM:

I agree. I think there is a good chance, he'll tell the truth (depending upon what he has been offered for lying) I thinks he must get the picture. No need to protect those who won't protect you.

Martin wrote on March 22, 2007 1:38 PM:

The administration can deepen its lies on record before congress and escalate it risks; or it can cut its losses and admit that it took legal [probably not] but, in retrospect, ill-advised political actions.

Aw, cutting out a few AGs was nothing but a third-rate surgery.

The third option is that they face down the dems who lose heart and interest. Under any circumstances, add this to the list of mistakes that Bush can't think of because no mistakes were made.
Martin

Barbara wrote on March 22, 2007 1:39 PM:

Well, anon makes a good point which is the opposite of what I just posted.

bohdi wrote on March 22, 2007 1:44 PM:

The missing emails in the Rosemary Woods gap are to be found at 5321 Riggs Road, Olney, Maryland and a search warrant will be necessary according to WayneMadsenReport. These key documents have gone underground, the same place where the 250 'missing' emails in the Plame affair were stashed prior to discovery in 03'. This according to a legitimate inside leaker. Somebody should get on this pronto. best,Bohdi

Anon wrote on March 22, 2007 1:47 PM:

What a joy to watch these little turds squirm and twist in the wind. Yeah, mixed metaphor, I know, but a turd by any other name would smell as bad.

Dave Chappelle wrote on March 22, 2007 1:48 PM:

I wanna talk to Sampson!

Ian wrote on March 22, 2007 1:51 PM:

I wonder who this scandal's Deep Throat will be? The parralells to Watergate are just too creepy.

Mark F. wrote on March 22, 2007 1:54 PM:

"the committee requested Sampson's 'assurance' that he 'will appear voluntarily at that time and that a subpoena will not be necessary.'"

That is one of the most elegant veiled threats I have ever heard. I'm starting to really like these guys.

Legalize wrote on March 22, 2007 2:05 PM:

"Mr. Sampson, would granting immunity help you remember?"

*ding*

Biggus Diggus wrote on March 22, 2007 2:30 PM:

Kyle should check the brakes on his car frequently and make sure he doesn't eat anything specially prepared for him in the White House cafeteria. He should also make a few public statements saying he has no intention of committing suicide just in case he should mysteriously appear to do so.

I'm worried the Bush might order a Putin on Kyle, puttin' him down for good.

MikeF wrote on March 22, 2007 2:32 PM:

gcs: Bush has no loyalty to anyone but another Bush.

I would disagree with this. Dubya has no loyalty to anyone but Dubya. Witness that he has gone out of his way to do exactly the opposite, and he has gone out of his way to screw any chance for J.E.B. getting into the White House so he can never be surpassed by someone else in the family.

nerdoff wrote on March 22, 2007 2:33 PM:

Sampson's lawyer, Brad Berenson, used to work in the Bush White House. I'm sure everyone is operating from the same playbook.

MikeF wrote on March 22, 2007 2:34 PM:

Doh! I hit enter too fast.

"exactly the opposite of what his father did" is what I meant that sentence to include.

tomg802 wrote on March 22, 2007 2:36 PM:

I know Pat Leahy, my man from the great state of Vermont.

He will not ask a question that he does not know the answer too.

I wonder if this Admin is feeling the drip, drip drip.

I have a funny feeling that they have no idea what Pat has in his pocket.

I bet VP regrets his remarks on the floor, nah the would require some hart.

You guys keep up the good work. I just love how you put things together.

rumpole wrote on March 22, 2007 2:44 PM:

If he's smart (and he did anything wrong), he'll take 5. He's out of the justice department. If he doesn't lie, he won't go to jail (compare, e.g., scooter). It'll be an interesting toss-up between his loyalty to his party and his loyalty to himself. They'll throw him under the bus.

bohdi wrote on March 22, 2007 2:48 PM:

Just as they did when bugging the U.N. Security Council reps on the runup to Iraq in 04' I am sure that they are using NSA to monitor very closely all calls and emails by all members of Leahey's committe including all assistants. WE are talking about very committed revolutionary operatives in the tradition of Stalin,Himmler and their earlier mentors.

Whats necessary now to break this thing wide open is another whistleblower on the inside of NSA intelligence to come forward with specifics and name names on some of those national security letters. Once it is known under testimony that Leahey,Kennedy,Fitz,Wilson,and members of the other side as well like troll Novak are being monitored the game will be up. Michael Hayden could be the man. Novak took a shot at him in op ed today which indicates he could be made the fall guy for the NSA scandal.

Legalize wrote on March 22, 2007 2:52 PM:

"He will not ask a question that he does not know the answer too."

Naturally - Examining a Witness 101. The Administration is betting on this thing being tied up in federal court for months and that the Dems will just go away. Problem is, precedent is not on the side of the Administration, in GREAT part to what they did to Clinton in the late '90s, and of coures, Nixon losing his battle with the Supreme Court.

Should be fun in any event.

Alana wrote on March 22, 2007 3:06 PM:

I'd love to hear this question:

Mr. Sampson I know you can't speculate about what Karl Rove's thinking is on the firings of the 8 attorneys, but can you tell us the culture at the DOJ? Can you tell us why you would say in this email, "we have a problem with Carol Lam." Can you give us your opinion what criteria made a particular attorney a "company man, a bush loyalist or a problem". What structure was used to gauge performance?

melior wrote on March 22, 2007 3:27 PM:

Here's a compromise: Bush preemptively pardons Rove for any perjury he may commit, then allows his sworn testimony.

tomg802 wrote on March 22, 2007 3:28 PM:

"The Administration is betting on this thing being tied up in federal court for months"

I know this is where the pop corn comes in. I remember the the fight over some tapes, was in the news over and over and over. Just adding anouther cloud to all the rest of the news, but who know with todays talking heads they might forget it.
lets hope not.

Michael wrote on March 22, 2007 3:43 PM:

The reason the Dems are skittish is beacuse of the results of the illegal wiretapping.

They (the Bush admin) have been trying to find dirt on all of their foes large and small, who knows what kind of junk they have. Remeber all of us have something private we'd rather not be confronted with public. We're all vunerable to this.

The Bushoids may not have the military but they do have the Hessians (Blackwater, etc).

IMHO they want to destroy this country and push it to civil war.

Read American Fascists by Chris Hedges, take a deep breath , close your eyes and think.

These folks are crazy like a fox and are 2 moves ahead of us.

US8 wrote on March 22, 2007 3:49 PM:

Someone will need to ask him about conversations/notes that took place outside of the email correspondence. Call logs, notes, and conversations are going to be on the table very soon.

tomg802 wrote on March 22, 2007 4:08 PM:

"IMHO they want to destroy this country and push it to civil war."

And this would be a bad thing, the way things have been going. Here in Vermont there is a movement to peacefully separate. From my perspective that would not be so bad, although it would be sad.

I think it more that they want to dominate the world and establish a corporate world government, under the appearance of democracy.

I'm not so sure that it has not already happened.

David Derbes wrote on March 22, 2007 4:18 PM:

Sampson will not testify absent a subpoena, and he may not testify even if the subpoena is served. This gang of criminals will not go willingly into the penitentiaries.

All these subpoenas are going to be resolved one way or another by the Supremes. I'm betting that Kennedy sides with the liberals, and US v. Bush goes against Bush 5 to 4.

(Great to hear Josh on NPR this afternoon. Between Jane et al.'s unmatched coverage of Libby/Plame, and Josh on Attorneygate, maybe some in the Fourth Estate are relearning how to be investigative reporters!)

Pompano Pete wrote on March 22, 2007 5:52 PM:

Pat Leahy is old enough to remember JFK's First Commandment of Politics - Don't get mad, get even. And RFK's addendum - And then get a little more.

To have been cursed on the floor of the Senate by someone has disgusting as Dick Cheney and then have it made public, is not something you would ever forgive or forget.

When the Bushies have been utterly disgraced, and many jailed, Pat will encounter Dick at some social function, walk up to him, smile and say, "And fuck you too, Dick".

Brade Lunner wrote on March 22, 2007 9:49 PM:

Yikes!

Sampson and Karl Rove come from the same vat of Nexus Series Replicants, Political Model!

The Nexus series — genetically designed by the Tyrell-Monsanto Corporation — are virtually identical to an adult human, but have superior strength, agility, and variable intelligence depending on the model. Because of their physical similarity to humans a replicant must be detected by its lack of emotional responses and empathy to questions posed in a Voight-Kampff test.

Note:

Political models sacrifice superior strength and agility, gaining expanded pudginess to insulate the super-chilled "Machiavelli - Heart of Cold" logic chip.

Political models are programmed to evade the Voight-Kampff test by avoiding questioning altogether.

tomg802 wrote on March 22, 2007 10:18 PM:

When the Bushies have been utterly disgraced, and many jailed, Pat will encounter Dick at some social function, walk up to him, smile and say, "And fuck you too, Dick".

That made me laugh, But I suspect Pat will would never utter those words, but seeing Justous done will be glorios

tomg802 wrote on March 22, 2007 10:23 PM:

oh my, I hit send too soon my typing is showing. oh goodness I did not enter a code, how is this posted??????

tomg802 wrote on March 22, 2007 10:51 PM:

I’m so sorry that I posted the last two messages. I am badly dyslexic and now I am so embarrassed and want to jump off a cliff. Some how it posted in the spell check process.You do have a problem with your code not checking, just so you know.

On A lighter note, I’m not retarded. The repubs will not steal an election and put me in power.

anon wrote on March 22, 2007 11:03 PM:

...These folks are crazy like a fox and are 2 moves ahead of us...

Yes, I'm afraid that's true.

I keep thinking their general level of corruption/ambition is roughly that of Berlusconi. His reputation in the US is strangely benign but it's worth reading about him for a sense of what the Bushies are up to. (There was a nice survey of his career in the NYRB toward the end of last year.) Berlusconi has mastered the art of falling forward. He was facing indictment so he ran for office to shield himself from prosecution. He immediately turned off the on-going corruption investigations throughout Italy and instantly gained a huge number of rather unsavory allies. He rewrote the law so that his media empire was not only fully legal but expandable. He expanded it, in part, with help from his new friends. In extreme short, he turned around goals of the Italian gov. to support, duh, Berlusconi. It's not exactly like Bush but it's close, perhaps even part of the same project.