Comments (122)

sherifffruitfly wrote on May 11, 2007 9:37 PM:

Maybe I have the wrong attitude to be a Senator, but that would simply result in an INSTANT subpoena from me, were I head of the committee.

Kevster wrote on May 11, 2007 9:38 PM:

He's kidding, right?

Leahy cannot abide by this.

Note to Brad-Cancel your fucking vacation. Contempt of Congress is your only other option.

-Sincerely, Pat Leahy.

sullynyc wrote on May 11, 2007 9:39 PM:

I tried this approach with jury duty in NYC and it didn't work. Calp his babyfaced fat fascist ass in irons and drag him in to testify.

Steve5117 wrote on May 11, 2007 9:40 PM:

Get his passport!

Rich wrote on May 11, 2007 9:42 PM:

Isn't he under subpoena? If not he should be. Hold his ass in contempt.

JRoyale wrote on May 11, 2007 9:43 PM:

Give him a choice of testifying with or without being handcuffed to the chair.

Albert Fall wrote on May 11, 2007 9:46 PM:

Must be getting close to the mark.

blackpropaganda wrote on May 11, 2007 9:48 PM:

When will karma catch up with spin? Or: can lies outrun the hand of God?

l wrote on May 11, 2007 9:49 PM:

I agree with comment number one.... immediate showing would be required, prepared or not.... like Monday , first thing, pre vacation

Firstthingwedo wrote on May 11, 2007 9:50 PM:

To sullynyc - Actually, you can do this for Jury Duty in California, at least in San Diego. They give you a window of time, and if you can't make it (usually because of a previously planned vacation), you can reschedule. Just thought that was worth mentioning.

jeffgee wrote on May 11, 2007 9:51 PM:

Schlozman is a Bushie. Vacation comes first.

daCascadian wrote on May 11, 2007 9:53 PM:

blackpropaganda >"...can lies outrun the hand of God?"

Only for so long

Then it is, *poof*, matter meets anti-matter

code = attack (the thing which needs to be stepped up a couple of notches)

"Eventually, the truth will emerge. And when it does, this house of cards, built of deceit, will fall." - Robert C. Byrd

jzap wrote on May 11, 2007 9:54 PM:

Heh. The letter must have been written by a political hack. Certainly any professional staffer would know the difference between the letter O and the number 0: 10:OO A.M.

Anonymous wrote on May 11, 2007 9:55 PM:

They need time to shred all the records in the Voting Section.

Oh yeah. I forgot. They didn't make any.

Anonymous wrote on May 11, 2007 9:56 PM:

Note the late Friday timing for this one-finger salute from the DOJ. I think they are trying to get Congress to overreact to small things, to look as petulant as the Prezelnit. But Schlozman's behavior is no small thing. It is potentially worth impeachment. So, I would suggest Schlozman rethink the timing of his annual leave. If not, I'd have a subpoena on his desk by Tuesday at 10.00 am.

The average employee would consider Congress dopey and not serious, if it lets Schlozman/Gonzales get away with this crap. Schlozman's a lawyer for gosh sakes, not a postal worker fitting in an annual leave between deliveries. He was formerly in an assignment that required Senate confirmation.

Rove and Bush regard as all these tiffs as spitting contests (in addition to intentional, serial delays). Time for Congress to hit the spitoon from the other side of the saloon.

SteveW wrote on May 11, 2007 9:57 PM:

Yes...and I'm sure Brad's "vacation" is with Mr. Rove discussing his "story."

unpoetaloco wrote on May 11, 2007 9:59 PM:

If they accept that, they are bigger patsies than I thought. I have said before, and I will say it again here: It's time to shit or get off the pot. There is more than enough evidence to impeach Gonzales and probably more than enough evidence to indict a handful of overs. The Democrats are starting to look like a bunch of effete politicians with nother better to do but bitch.

Anonymous wrote on May 11, 2007 9:59 PM:

This is actually good. Leahy needs to get all the former Voting Section staffers who are popping out of the woodwork in for interviews over the next two weeks so the SJC can give Schlozzie a really good grilling.

Put him on a panel with Joe Rich and Bob Kengle. That'll roast him good.

nogamez wrote on May 11, 2007 10:00 PM:

Unfortunately, this is a typical Bushco move, in Sampson's words, "gum it to death" until public outrage dies down and to read some reports from yesterday's testimony it may be working.

Anonymous wrote on May 11, 2007 10:00 PM:

Schlozman's behavior as a USA was potentially worth an impeachment, not his taking a vacation when Congress wants to talk with him. Schlozman's been protected from that exposure by his move to an indeterminate assignment at the EO of the USA's. All the more reason to remind him that he works for the American people and the US Govt, not just the current president.

Joe Mama wrote on May 11, 2007 10:03 PM:

apparently voter fraud isn't that important when it's Ann Coulter
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/localnews/content/local_news/epaper/2007/05/11/m2a_jose_col_0511.html

PissedOffAmerican wrote on May 11, 2007 10:11 PM:

These God damned cowards need to stop playing softball, issue subpoenas, and enforce them with Federal Marshalls. To "ask" someone like Schlozman to testify is asinine to the extreme, and it should come as no suprise that Sholzman would pull this kind of horseshit. Don't ask, just subpoena.

MadMax wrote on May 11, 2007 10:16 PM:

Bradley, Bradley, Bradley... Best spill your guts before Dick Cheney's Mafia spills them in a more vivid way.

cebm wrote on May 11, 2007 10:19 PM:

I thought Abu very clearly gave us a big fu*k you in his testimony. He clearly thinks he's not going anywhere. Withholding documents, bold faced lies, vacation etc... all this just makes us Dems look just like the repugs have characterized us for thirty years, whimps. I just hope a lot is going on behind the scenes. Where are the indictments for Grover Norquist and his little friend Mister Super Christian Ralph Reed? You know, the money launderer guys.

Anonymous wrote on May 11, 2007 10:23 PM:

Dear Senator Leahy,
What more will it take sir for you to understand the utter contempt these criminals have for you and your attempt at oversight. Trying to play nice with these scumbags will get you nowhere. If the public has not already lost all interest in this "scandal" they soon will. The Republican strategy has been nothing but delay, delay, delay. Subpoena his lying ass immediately.

Anonymous wrote on May 11, 2007 10:27 PM:

And one more thing, where are all those documents you told the "Department" to turn over?! Yet another big FUCK YOU from DOJ! This is really just unbelievable.

Anonymous wrote on May 11, 2007 10:31 PM:

Somebody needs to park themselves outside of Brad's Alexandria, VA townhouse and make sure he's on "vacation."

dean moriarity wrote on May 11, 2007 10:32 PM:

He can vacation this summer with the Iraqi Parliament.

Do Not Stand For This Slap In The Face Senator Leahy! wrote on May 11, 2007 10:33 PM:

I've never had to "prepare" to tell the truth. You only have to "prepare" if you want to try and pull off a lie. Haul his ass in on the double.
Security Code Word: again
As in here we go again.

KeepGitmo wrote on May 11, 2007 10:43 PM:

Let him vacation inside Gitmo.

code word Expert, as in, let him become an expert in waterboarding, from the boardee's point of view.

real wrote on May 11, 2007 10:47 PM:

Bushies are placed in the Federal Appellate Courts . . . regardless of what happens they will reverse all convictions of Bush Crime Family members on technicalities like they did for North etc. This is their ace in the hole . . . look at the history of how they destroyed the IranContra investigation and reversed the convictions obtained by Prosecutor Walsh . . . the entire system is rotten by the people they have placed in these "positions for life" on the Federal Bench . . . .

MSlater wrote on May 11, 2007 10:49 PM:

Sounds like DoJ just gave Leahy a first-rate Bitch slap.

ITK wrote on May 11, 2007 10:57 PM:

FYI to all - Gonzales called Chris Cannon this morning to say thank you and solocit advice!

ITK wrote on May 11, 2007 10:57 PM:

FYI to all - Gonzales called Chris Cannon this morning to say thank you and solicit advice! Contact Cannon and see if they deny it. Or the AG's office.

ClayAllison wrote on May 11, 2007 11:01 PM:

Regarding technicalities in Iran/Contra, I was fried that North, Poindexter and Abrams got off, but the reason was use immunity provided by Congress. Similarly, if Monica Goodling testifies, it is doubtful that her conviction can be obtained or sustained through appeal since it is virtually impossible to prove that some of the evidence used in prosecution did not come from her own testimony. Ultimately, Congress must decide whether they want to grill 'em in front of the cameras or convict them in court. Of course, when it is the Justice Dept. itself which is rotten, where are we to go?

Charles Bowman wrote on May 11, 2007 11:03 PM:

From the beginning, I have heard this refrain from this tumid administration: "Hell yes, I did it. What are you going to do about it?" It suffers my patience greatly that this petulant mob could ever have raised it head in this nation, and it cooks me that the wheels of justice do not turn faster, but upon reflection, think how far and against what great odds you have brought this inspiring historic revelation. The want to have it over perhaps betrays a weakness in us that only makes the way for future conspiracies. Thank God for those who cherish the everyday work of really keeping our nation secure!

stephen wrote on May 11, 2007 11:04 PM:

Unbelivable!!!!!! Gee Sorry Internal Revenue I am on vacation that week and I won't be able to file my tax returns until I get back you don't mind do you??????

Ron Byers wrote on May 11, 2007 11:05 PM:

Wonder if Brad is coming back from his vacation? Any idea where he is heading? Do we have extradition?

On the Clock wrote on May 11, 2007 11:10 PM:

Grab his passport, indeed.

In all seriousness, grab his passport. This attitude indicates such a lack of respect for Leahy that he may actually know who sent anthrax to the guy.

Michael Stevens wrote on May 11, 2007 11:18 PM:

Even if he didn't have a vacation planned, he'll certainly take one now. Perhaps he'll only leave town for a few days, but he has to make this look good.

I'm actually surprised he's agreed to appear. Of course, if Congress agree to this delay, Schlozman would still have plenty of time to change his mind.

I've another thought about Schlozman's response. Consider that Goodling first announced plans to plead the fifth, then she stayed home and burned all her vacation time, then she resigned.

Perhaps Schlozman is doing the same thing, only in reverse. He's burning all his vacation time first, after which he will announce his resignation and plans to plead the fifth.

That plan would actually make a lot more sense than Goodling's actions. Since (I believe) he's a political appointee, he could potentially be fired for refusing to testify. A strategy of burning his vacation first, then announcing plans to plead the fifth would guarantee him that final paycheck.

G4AM wrote on May 11, 2007 11:49 PM:

Security code = door, as in, Bradley, don't let the door hit you in the ass as you go out. Once Leahy climbs back down off the ceiling, I expect a squadron of capital police helping Mr. Scholzman get his priorities right.

Orwell's Intuition wrote on May 12, 2007 12:13 AM:

I don't know, I guess I'm in the minority here with my perception of the letter, but to me it has a glaze of groveling to it. Let the bastard go on vacation and rehearse his lies, while the Senate Judiciary Committee talks to others and prepares the Schlozman snare.

Code word - memory. Oh, that's rich.

Peter Principle wrote on May 12, 2007 12:28 AM:

It will be interesting to hear Schlozman's lawyer try that same excuse in 2009 -- when the Dems control the Justice Department and the "invitation" is to testify before a grand jury.

ahem wrote on May 12, 2007 12:37 AM:

Dear Brad,

Get your f*cking ass over here or you'll be taking your vacation in jail.

Love,

The Senate Judiciary Committee

steambomb wrote on May 12, 2007 12:38 AM:

Gee is this equal justice under the law? Would you or I get to tell government officials that we dont want to answer any questions right now because we are going on vacation? I think NOT.

smeesq wrote on May 12, 2007 12:46 AM:

When the Republicans were all trying to save their sorry behinds in the last election, all they could talk about was voter fraud-you would have sworn that at least half of the Democratic votes in their districts were being cast by dead people and union bosses. But now that the DOJ gets a REAL chance to tell the Senate about this awful plague on our political system, and Schlozman needs two weeks of vacation. I hope Leahy cuts him a new one, it would be a hoot to see one of these low lifes hauled before the Senate in handcuffs to testify.

Security code word : where. As in "Where are all those falsified ballots we heard about?"

Mooser wrote on May 12, 2007 12:46 AM:

Schlozman is a foool! Take it from an experienced prevaricator, best, if you lie often, to lie early.

wrb wrote on May 12, 2007 12:56 AM:

What obvious creeps and criminals. I'd jail them & lead them up from their cells as they are needed.

2strange wrote on May 12, 2007 1:14 AM:

federal employees get paid for their annual leave, in a lump sum, when they are terminated. If you are a CSRS employee (pre-reagan) your sick leave counts toward your retirement. If you are a FERS employee (post reagan) your sick leave doesn't matter. But you never loose your annual leave. Most employees wait to retire the last pay period of the year, so that they can receive payment for the largest amount of annual leave allowed to them for that year.

Cowboy wrote on May 12, 2007 1:15 AM:

Welcome to Watergate.

He's saying:

1. I need a month to prepare my defense.
or, perhaps
2. I am doing everything I can to gum this up and kill the clock (unfortunately, the clock may continue to tick after 2008)

thepeoplechoose wrote on May 12, 2007 1:38 AM:

I think Senator Leahy is going to let this alone. He knows they are trying to tweak him. The tactic can only be successful if Leahy rises to the bait. Leahy has time on his side and will get his chance at Schlozman. The delay probably serves Leahy better than Schlozman because more information trickles in daily about this whole affair. It may be that Schlozman will take the fifth and then there will be more ammo with which to figure out how to hand this whole thing over to a special prosecutor. I don't know how that might ever work under this particular circumstance but that is where this is headed just the same. In the last six plus years the WH has seriously stacked the deck to prevent ever being held accountable for its actions and this dilemma reveals how pervasive that effort has been.

Anon wrote on May 12, 2007 1:38 AM:

Re Iran-Contra: I thought the Iran-Contra criminals got off because of blanket immunity and that's why we wanted (and got) limited immunity for Goodling.

Code word - poison. Great, now I have an Alice Cooper song stuck in my brain.

Johnsnottoodistracted wrote on May 12, 2007 1:38 AM:

We want to see the check list for acceptable reasons you need not appear.Vacation can not be realistic.
Seems if he is on vacation he is even MORE available and should have extra time to spend on this if they need him longer.
After all, we are sure he wants to get the truth out and move on.
Why would he want to delay that.
mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Cowboy wrote on May 12, 2007 1:46 AM:

When was Schlozman put on "annual leave"?

Federal D.C. closes down during the summer, not in May.

EH wrote on May 12, 2007 2:06 AM:

It's just a gambit to see how serious the Dems are.

Mooser wrote on May 12, 2007 2:27 AM:

I wouldn't rush things.
1) Failure, of any kind, is not accounted for in Rove's plans. The Republicans cannot change who they answer to, who gets screwed and who benefits.There was never a plan B "if people get too mad we'll make these concessions and accept partial success" Nope, as long as B and C and R are running things, the whole show goes on.
2) People are turning against the Repubs not because the Democrats have suddenly developed some new framing or rhetoric which inspires people (not that they haven't) but because people are dying, suffering and going broke. Only real suffering could induce Americans to abandon the party which promised them all those ponies, and to save all the little babies, and kill all the terrorists.
3) I wouldn't be in a hurry to solve all the Repubs problems for them. Look, let's say the Dems can send every corrupt Repub to jail, is that good? No it's terrible! Then the Repubs say "all the bad ones are in jail, so let us, the true Reagan Republicans give you all the ponies and save all the babies.
4) Look at the rhetoric and framing which brought the Repubs to the top. Anyone who accepts their worldview will only vote Dem if they feel there is a direct threat to their life and livelyhood.
5) All this could have been avoided if the Dems had simply concentrated on organising and voter registration among their natural constituency- minorities, the poor, and workers. But that would bring Dem politicians into contact with yuuchhy people, so instead they went for the "swing voters" which turned out to be the most uninformed, easily swayed by BS, petty and vindictive voters. Oh, they might vote Dem, if they thought death was the alternative, so that's what it better be.
I'm seeing Democrats trying to save the Repubs from themselves. That's real noble, but in my experience, it won't translate into votes, and if the Dems accomplish it before the next election, why should anybody vote for them?
You want proof? Go take a look at the farm couple the Guliani campaign just screwed over cause they weren't rich enough to claim they were poor. Oh, they don't like Guli any more, no. Now they like McCain! Cause, you see,Democrats are intrinsically immoral and traitorous. Again, maybe if the Repubs were killing them or their kids, they might vote Dem, but not otherwise.

If the Dems solve the Repubs problems for them, Americans will say "thank you", and then go on voting Repub! After all,"all the bad ones are gone now".

Jason wrote on May 12, 2007 2:55 AM:

"In Cold Blood" Truman Capote weaves a complicated psychological story of two parolees who together commit a mass murder, an act they never would have been capable of individually. That's Bush and Cheney to a tee.

ewastud wrote on May 12, 2007 3:05 AM:

Gonzo first tried to give a middle finger to theSenate and House Judiciary Committees, too, saying he had better things to do with his time as AG. Then the bad stuff starting coming out about what his department was up to, and Gonzo couldn't get the committees to schedule him to appear at their hearings soon enough, presumably to answer Sampson's damaging testimony. Perhaps Schlozman will come to have similar misgivings about displaying petulance instead of a measure of respect.

big brother wrote on May 12, 2007 3:08 AM:

The order of interrogation appearance is important, if our justice department officials are prepared to purjure themselves. He can always be called back. His testimony is based on known historical data when he was implementing the WH policy in MO. Seems the victims of the fraud accusations may have great light to shed as well as the local papers. It is time for all stakeholders to tell their stories. Perjury may carry worse penalties than manipulating the DOJ on behalf of the WH ala the Republican Carbal and the Oligarchy.
Can the Grand Conspiracy be revealed by a time line on one chart. Connect the dots. Electioneering by DOJ by order of WH can be state, local and federal election law crimes. Was RNC with the e-mail chain to the WH connected? Big Brother, like Gollum, wants to be THE permanent Lord of The Ring. It has to be made clear to world that this Cabal is a cancer on American democracy. Faith based government and justice was overturned when the American Colony dumped the the King and the Church of England. The cover of religious righteousness covers a multitude of crimes. Of course we know that the Religious Right is particularly righteous.
The Carlyle Group, after all, is the epitome of the Military Industrial Complex.

"As a Bush Cabal-connected company, it prides itself on having government/business insiders and their minions in a network that literally covers the globe. This is the hard core of the Bush Cabal

The Chairman Emeritus of Carlyle Group is Frank C. Carlucci, whose claim to fame was Deputy Secretary of Defense (1981-1982) and National Security Adviser (1987-1989). After his government stint, he headed the Sears/ Coldwell Banker scam.

law is what the Cabal claims to be fighting."
http://www.conspiracydigest.com/carlyle_group.html

Follow the appointments and understand the goal is to have the power through DOJ corruption to put Cabal serving people in strategic military places for "The New World Order" to maintain global control. The World Bank replaces the UN as the monetary wedge that will support a globilization of the FederaL Reserve. That bank set the world monetary standard based on the silver standard and can manufacture/create currency. That reduces the value of other national currencies. This policy can only be enforced by a military industrial complex.
Carlyle, in cooperation with the Saudi Royal family, manufacture heavy arms on down and distribute them, by sales, to promote global conflicts. Secret organizations, like the CIA, conveniently start the wars using their contract operatives ( Iran Contra etc.)
The Wolf wears sheeps clothing. You may not know until after you have been had.
The real job of Congress is to expose the Carbal and force them back under ground I believe.
The never ending struggle for The Rights of Man, Justice freedom and the Pursuit of Happiness as inalienable Rights must be Liberty 101 taught as continuuing education. A never ending learning process as new minds are born the education process repeats. Some people are willing to endure tyranny I am not one. Let's hope we can reinfect American with freedom. Seems like mob rule by the Godfathers.

Ed wrote on May 12, 2007 3:29 AM:

I see the sent the letter on friday, he starts his vacation monday, guess which week he planned to be out of town.

Gypsy wrote on May 12, 2007 5:09 AM:

Seems like you wouldn't need so much prep time if you were just telling the truth instead of practicing to say things like "I take full responsibility but I don't know how the names got on the list". I can't wait to hear what kinds of crap they teach him to say to avoid more trouble.

I agree that Sen. Leahy should send a letter telling him to cancel vacation and show up or he will be in jail in the foreseeable future.

E. Smith wrote on May 12, 2007 6:43 AM:

This, along with Rice's refusal to comply with a subpoena, Gonzales smirkingly delivering hours of repetitive "I don't recall" "testimony", Paul Wolfowitz hanging on by his fingernails, the refusal to turn over RNC emails is a very calculated, deliberate, flagrant nose-thumbing at Congress. And if the Democrats roll over, the precedent's been set, and they'll be permanently defanged.

They have the power to have the Sergeant-at-arms show up with cuffs to haul this gang of assholes in; why do they keep acting like wimps on this?

nofltwlt wrote on May 12, 2007 7:44 AM:

The "instant subpoena" suggested in a previous comment is an excellent idea. Schlozman would not be missed for a few hours any more than you or I would be missed. The committee should clear their calendar and have him picked up on the street (rendition style).

Schlozman should not be provided the opportunity to prepare for his testimony. It is likely that he will be coached as well.

AMERICAN'S WANT THE TRUTH! This administration is dirty and people such as Schlozman, Griffin, Gonzales, Goodling, Sampson, Battles, Spellings, Tenet, Rumsfeld, Brown, Cunningham, Lewis, Dolittle, Foggo, Lewis, Domenici, Palouse, Blackwell, Cheney, Fieth, Wolfowitz, Abramoff, Delay, Ney, BUSH41, Doane, Rove, Stevens - do you get the idea - are selling out our nation.

Nobody wrote on May 12, 2007 7:53 AM:

This is the problem with "inviting" witnesses to appear and the democrats should realize that this will become a constant refrain from Bushies called to testify. They can't issue a subpoena now because there are likely some type of timing requirements. They should just take this tactic to heed and subpoena every single Bush administration witness called to testify. If the Bushies want to play game, the dems should use their power to ram the investigations down their fucking throats.

Betty wrote on May 12, 2007 9:11 AM:

Time for Congress to hit the spittoon from the other side of the saloon.

What a vivid sentence, I can almost see the astonishment on the faces of the pedestrian republican spitters.

Dabb wrote on May 12, 2007 9:19 AM:

Leahy has played nice. Time to change the rules. Don't invite; subpoena.

jfrankesq wrote on May 12, 2007 9:33 AM:

From everything I have read about Mr. Schlozman, he sounds like an abject piece of shit. However, I am not bothered by this delaying tactic on his part. He may really be taking his kids to Disneyland or to Yellowstone - and as someone who wants to see Schlozman's head on a platter, I mean that. I am a lawyer, and I accommodate vacations in scheduling all the time; I am suing someone now, had his deposition scheduled for May 4, and I agreed to postpone, because the guy is getting married. What am I going to do, say no?

The Schlozman thing does not bother me. All the more time to get the sizzle sauce ready to fry this motherfucker.

mikey wrote on May 12, 2007 9:55 AM:

Dear Brad,

This IS BUSINESS of the United Sates of America. Your vacation is CANCELLED. Appear or be JAILED INDEFINITEY.

Sincerely Hugs,

Your Favorate Senator and
"WE, the PEOPLE"

Anonymous wrote on May 12, 2007 12:40 PM:

Scholzman should be cited for contempt of Congress -- FAST!

Questions:

1. Can the DOJ and RNC be prosecuted under the RICO act for various activities, including bribery, conspiracy to violate Federal civil rights and voting laws, obstruction of justice? Could the investigation  extend to members of Congress who collaborated in these activities? e.g. Members of Congress who were involved in the firings of the US Attorneys, such as Domenici. Could Arlen Specter and Sensenbrenner be prosecuted for inserting legislation into the Patriot Act which allowed the White House to appoint new US Attorneys without Congressional Approval?

2. Has the FBI also been corrupted to the point that it cannot carry out independent investigations?

3. How much power does the Congress have in this investigation? Won't the matter ultimately have to be turned over to a Special Prosecutor? Would Patrick Fitzgerald be a good choice?

4. Did Gonzales testify under oath before the House Judiciary Committee? If not, why not?

Oracle wrote on May 12, 2007 12:46 PM:

The objections are silly. He is obviously not gonna be able to testify. What lawyer would let him? So he's taking his vacation, will take 5, and then resign.

Not so sure Brad's gonna be offered use immunity.

Just as an aside, what do all these folks think is gonna happen when a Dem administration takes over and all those angry career folk at Justice are unleashed to subpoena emails from server backups? The price of a cure for hubris: 20 months. The photos of these folks when the verdicts come down: priceless.

3centsworth wrote on May 12, 2007 1:00 PM:

Oh, wow! his vacation is more important than the committee. Sen. Leahy should put his foot down, enough already. Plus, didn't he just move back to the Washington Office and now he's scheduled for vacation.

Cowboy wrote on May 12, 2007 1:31 PM:

Anon 12:40 PM, "contempt of congress" citation isn't going to happen. A subpoena would have have to have been served first, and all that the Senate sent was a letter, which Schlozman OKed, before he changed his mind.

We actually might see one of those "contempt of congress" citations dumped on Alberto Gonzales on May 15th if he refuses to comply with the Congresses document production. Oh, that's right, he no longer has any involvement in what documents can be produced because he's a fact witness. (Actually this one could get very strange--if Gonzales doesn't comply and claims that the problem is that the Senate served the subpoena on the wrong person, but that he can't tell them who should have been served with the subpoena, things are gonna get REAL UGLY.)

1. I don't see how a government agency could be charged under RICO. However, it's conceivable that a political party could be. The question is how much high level coordination was there at the RNC? I don't see this one coming into play, even though the actions in this instance resemble a pretty classic mafia protection racket.

2. In terms of the corruption of the intelligence services, I don't think we're looking at something ala Watergate. Time will tell of course; however, my hope here is that the safeguards put in place in the aftermath of Watergate will hold firm when this is all said and done. I have no doubt that they will be tested (if they haven't already).

3. Congress can cut funding, or attach conditions to the funding (e.g. that the funding is contingent upon the hiring of a special prosecutor subject to Senate approval); it has impeachment powers. Quite a few options here.

4. No. Good question, but I would guess because the Republican members of the Judiciary committee pushed back on a sworn oath. For the Republican party that hearing will go down as one of the low points of its history, and certainly among the lowest for any political party in the history of the U.S. Not a single one of those guys stood up under the courage of his conscience or principle. Not too surprising actually, but an embarrassment for the Congressmen.

Buck wrote on May 12, 2007 1:44 PM:

If the Republican members actually insisted that he not testify under oath, that's quite a story in itself. I suggest getting the scoop and headlining it.

What possible reason could they have for not wanting him to testify under oath?

You know the answer to that one already.

..as an aside, I'd note that Bill Clinton did it-testified under oath I mean.

macdust wrote on May 12, 2007 2:05 PM:

The three most important words in this letter: "Memorial Day recess."

Anonymous wrote on May 12, 2007 2:09 PM:

Yo B-Rad,
Get your ass to our hearing toot sweet. Got it? Good.

Leahy

Pompano Pete Jr wrote on May 12, 2007 3:40 PM:

Leahy to staff - They think they're making us look like wimps, and that works to our advantage. We know who are witnesses are and while these clowns play their games, we will keep drawing the noose tighter and tighter.

And when we finally come down on them like a ton of shit, none of the GOP Senators, or the media can object or call us partisan because we have been so accomadating all along.

Now then, focus on Monica Goodling and how she can show that Gonzo lied to the Senate Judiciary Committee, and the House Judiciary Committee. Then we start issuing subpeanas to the WH staff, and calling for a Special Prosecutor to handle the DOJ. We've got at least eight qualified candidates for the job.

drmoore wrote on May 12, 2007 3:47 PM:

What did I miss. Did he just find out last that he had planned a vacation previously and could not come to the hearing next week. Duh! Excuse me officer, I know I was speeding, but I can't go to jail right now. I have to take my vacation.

drmoore wrote on May 12, 2007 3:47 PM:

What did I miss. Did he just find out last night that he had planned a vacation previously and could not come to the hearing next week. Duh! Excuse me officer, I know I was speeding, but I can't go to jail right now. I have to take my vacation.

bjobotts wrote on May 12, 2007 4:35 PM:

Pelosi gave Bush & co permission to do whatever they want by saying impeachment is off the table meaning they would not be held accountable. They are getting away with everything they set out to do because they know there is no one to stop them. Gonzo is smiling and smirking because he knows outside of contempt he's untouchable. Except for incompetence there would be one party rule from now on. Republicans care not for the rule of law but only for a bigger share of the pie. Every department from Interior, State, and Defense to DoJ has been politicized and corrupted throughout. So what if it runs the GOP underground for the next 50 yrs, hell it will take that long for the Dems to undo what has already been done. Schlozman is just one of a hundred thrown out there to impede, stall, and "gum to death" any oversight. 10 such committees like Waxman's would barely make a dint in the corruption before Bush's term expires. He's had 6yrs., 4 with a rubber-stamp congress to pollute the entire government. But for the greed and incompetence he might have had something to show for it besides ineptitude. I truly hope this leads to a Republican free congress. That's the main difference between R's D's, D's will even go after their own when corrupt but R's only do what their party tells them. D's believe government should be by for and of the people, R's believe government should be for hire. The only good Republican I ever heard of was Abraham Lincoln but he wouldn't get far as a repub today because they are only concerned with special interest not the republic. So once more, thanks Pelosi for allowing Schlozman, Goodling, Gonzales, Rice and others to just "gum us to death" till Bush is out of office since he knows there will be no accountability because Impeachment is(inspite of overwhelming evidence and support) off the table.

bjobotts wrote on May 12, 2007 5:00 PM:

Just saying there is a lot of demanding of the Dems to act right away and that they are cowards for not jumping on everyone etc. but hell I would rather they act with tact, patience and especially deliberation, to consider all the angles (many of which I'm sure the public is unaware of) before they just jump right in. My impatience is due to the frustration of having to tolerate the obvious corruption until it can be "proved". I've had to live with a government I do not trust and now I'm supposed to trust in the judgment of the Democrats and I find it hard to do. I need some collateral to chew on while I wait for justice. So here's hoping they nail one of these bastards while they continue going after the rest. If the shoe were on the other foot I would want considerable deliberation before action was taken because the corruption is simply overwhelming and I would want to bring it all down.

Anonymous wrote on May 12, 2007 5:42 PM:

bjobotts, I agree with you largely. I also don't think it really matters if Team Bush is "making the Democratic congress look like wimps". I mean that seems to be the entire crux of the Bush foreign policy: "If we look weak, they win".

Well, sometimes a smart strategy is to look weak to encourage an adversary to overplay his or her hand--let them get cocky. Let them think that we've returned to business as usual. There is also such a thing as a strategic retreat where you sacrifice a battle to gain better positioning down the road. The worst case is to become predictable--especially if your position is weak.

In this case the best approach for the congress is to proceed deliberately. Maybe it makes sense to hit Schlozman with a subpoena on Monday. If people have a problem with working near the Memorial Day weekend well, maybe they should get over it. This is an important issue. Then again, there may be advantages to delay, or other ways to expedite this--I have don't know what other manuevers are going on behind the scenes.

Based on my understanding though, I would think it's subpoena time for Schlozman. Maybe Schlozman needs to reschedule his vacation for another time. Sometimes that happens. Tough luck.

Anonymous wrote on May 12, 2007 5:53 PM:

"I don't see how a government agency could be charged under RICO. However, it's conceivable that a political party could be. The question is how much high level coordination was there at the RNC? I don't see this one coming into play, even though the actions in this instance resemble a pretty classic mafia protection racket." - - - Cowboy

The use of RNC servers for some of the email in these activities, it would seem to implicate the RNC rather deeply.

The only thing preventing the prosecution of the RNC under the RICO statute is the political firestorm it would raise; so the Dems have to tread pretty carefully here and lay their case. But if that came to be, wouldn't all those in the DOJ who collaborated with them (e.g. Rove, Gonzales, Goodling, Schnozman) be swept up in the same investigation and subject to the same penalties?

Anonymous wrote on May 12, 2007 6:10 PM:

"A grand jury in Salt Lake City, Utah, has charged seven people and four companies with multiple felonies related to processing credit cards for gambling Web sites.
The 34-count indictment, issued Wednesday and released Thursday, accuses the defendants of operating a business that helped Internet gambling sites disguise credit-card charges and deceiving credit-card issuers who would have not authorized the charges. Most online gambling is illegal in the U.S."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/pcworld/20070512/tc_pcworld/131766
This is currently a frontpage story on Yahoo about a crackdown on some folks in Utah by Kyle Sampson nemesis Brett Tolman. Anyway, wasn't Chris Cannon from Utah the guy who told Gonzo how upset he was about online gambling at the hearing? If you check out Chris Cannon's Wikipedia page you'll see "Cannon's former chief of staff, David Safavian, lobbied for online gambling interests before joining Cannon's staff. Cannon has also hired three other staffers who were previously registered lobbyists for the gambling industry" as well as the fact Cannon has taken money from gaming interests. He seems like a shady character to say the least- maybe he was the pushing for Kyle Sampson to be the USA in Utah? Someone posted above that Gonzo called Cannon after the hearing and thanked him and asked for advice:
(FYI to all - Gonzales called Chris Cannon this morning to say thank you and solicit advice! Contact Cannon and see if they deny it. Or the AG's office.
Posted by: ITK
Date: May 11, 2007 10:57 PM)
Just think it's interesting that this all goes down around the time Cannon gave Gonzo a free pass.

Anonymous wrote on May 12, 2007 6:25 PM:

http://www.glumbert.com/media/irack

watch an get a good laugh!

Tom Farrell wrote on May 12, 2007 6:30 PM:

Note 2 things about the letter: (1) He does not identify any unchangeable travel plans for the 15th - no nonrefundable plane tickets to Kazakstan, beach house in Dubai - only that "one of those weeks" (the week of the 21st?) he will be out of town (the Jersey Shore?); and (2) Why the need for so much time to prepare? To get his story straight? To figure out and memorize the current party line?
No self-respecting judge would grant a continuance on such and letter and neither should the Senate.

perfidius wrote on May 12, 2007 6:57 PM:

Subpoena his "travel plan" documents, demand he not leave the country, and reiterate that the order to show still stands and that he will be ordered to be arrested and brought before the committee if he fails to appear on the appointed date.

Simple.

ducky wrote on May 12, 2007 7:45 PM:

The lack of respect this corrupt administration demonstrates for the American people is disheartening. To display the blatent disregard for congress that Schozy showed gives a signal to the "young republicans" sprouting that they have to answer to no one for anythng.

Steve5117 wrote on May 12, 2007 8:01 PM:

I watched the Bill Moyers segment with the interviews with the graduates of Regent Law School.

It scared me.

The graduates were talking about seeking the truth, but what I saw them saying was The TRUTH.

I do not think that the govern... no, not the government, OUR government, should be run by these hacks.

Come on Congress, get the lead out of your asses and weed out these bastards who have sold their souls to Satan's henchmen. Bush is not pope, king nor emperor, why are our forces fighting his Crusade?

solai wrote on May 12, 2007 9:30 PM:

If he doesn't go on vacation (and we all know he isn't), does that constitute obstruction or misleading Congress or anything else?

Cowboy wrote on May 12, 2007 9:42 PM:

Solai, no. The statement that he won't be able to make it to a voluntary hearing wouldn't constitution obstruction of justice or misleading congress.

If he says that he's on vacation and decides to show up for work, or stays in the area that still wouldn't be an issue. Misleading Congress occurs during testimony.

Obstruction of Justice would be lying during testimony, destruction of evidence, etc, but not simply going back on a date with the Senate Judiciary committee based on a mutual agreed upon, voluntary meeting.

My thought here though would be to subpoena the guy and have him bypass his "vacation". A "vacation" would be doubtful grounds for failing to adhering to a subpoena. Part of the issue here is that the Senate sent him a letter last Monday, he said OK. And then Friday he remembered that he was supposed to go on vacation. Well, tough nuts. If they subpoena him Monday and require that he show by Thursday, he will have effectively had almost two weeks since the first notification to prepare himself. In fact, given the circumstances surrounding these attorney firings, there is no reason why he shouldn't have prepared himself earlier.

Clearly the objective on the part of the White House/DOJ/Schlozman is to drag this out until after Memorial Day at a point when fewer people will be paying attention. It will also give him time to conform his statements to fit with those of Monica Goodling's and in light of any documents dumped this upcoming Tuesday (assuming that the DOJ complies with the Senate subpoena).

This incident took place on Dec. 7th and it has now been almost 5 months since this issue took place.

And yes, the White House is simply playing games here--not acting in good faith. The time for games has long passed.

Richard L. Adlof wrote on May 12, 2007 9:51 PM:

The (fictional) Reich Right Daily reports that Schlozman is scheduled for the full treatment at an unnamed resort for week of daily hydrocolonics, mouth-target beard trimming and voice lessons. While the name of the resort has been left blank, the article does mention that it is only a small plane trip away over open water . . .

I so hope that the Senate yanked this jackhole's passport.

Ducky wrote on May 12, 2007 10:32 PM:

Schlozman's planned vacation looks more like an esacape. When he is available again the first week in June, some other committment will take him away.

Monica's testimony will leave the Congress holding an empty bag. It will be worse than Ollie's. Everything I have read about Ms. Monica leads me to believe she is cold, calculating and ruthless. Why would this little leoplard change her spots now? She will make sure she come out on the top, no matter how many bodies are under her.

This entire scandal has the feel of "the criminals running the prison."

Anonymous wrote on May 12, 2007 10:58 PM:

Come on Leahy, give this young punk who thinks the rules don't apply to him a swift kick in the ass. Issue that subpoena.

abuG wrote on May 13, 2007 3:22 AM:

http://ihatealbertogonzalez.blogspot.com/

Hardheaded Liberal wrote on May 13, 2007 3:45 AM:

Shall we start a pool on how much of Brad's "additional leave" week will be spent trying desperately to review documents so that he won't testify to too many statements that are flatly contradicted by e-mails or other documents? I'll take 65%.

Oh, but that would be using internet facilities to gamble. Is that a crime? Or at least a sin? We know that AGAG and Brad would never commit a crime or a sin, so we better stay on the up and up....

Security code: small, as in the amount of professional and personal integrity possessed by certain DOJ officials of the recent past and present!

nofltwlt wrote on May 13, 2007 10:12 AM:

And if it is determined that Scholzman did not actually go on vacation, then what?

What if he vacations in Washington with his DOJ handlers?

Then what?

These people must perpetuate a cover-up or go down in flames. The committee should get him on record yesterday by taking a deposition. Then when he returns from "vacation", he can testify in person.

free bird wrote on May 13, 2007 1:18 PM:

http://www.kansascity.com/115/story/105164.html
Which of these theories do you believe?

A. Sen. Kit Bond does not have control of his office. Unknown to him, a senior staffer put U.S. Attorney Todd Graves on the down escalator.

.....................................

After he arrived here, Schlozman told some that he was only keeping the seat warm for a few months.

For whom?

Well, enter Bond relative John Wood, 37, the new U.S. attorney. When Wood was a boy, Bond would drop by his family’s St. Louis home to talk politics, Wood told The Star. Wood said all that was a catalyst for his interest in public service.

PeeJ wrote on May 13, 2007 2:02 PM:

I'm sorry, I murdered someone last week, but I will not be able to attend my arraignment due to a previously scheduled vacation. I'm sure you will understand that the stress we serial killers are under, we must take time off to unwind.

Let's see, how silly is our world? Iraqi's take vacation, corruption suspects take vacation. Isn't it ok for serial killers to take vacation. After all, I did have previous plans, and justice and my country should not come between my ability to f-off!

Geesh... Peace!

regular lurker wrote on May 13, 2007 2:16 PM:

I'm ok with drawing this out to, oh say, right before the 2008 elections.

Com-n-sense wrote on May 13, 2007 4:42 PM:

It's becoming more apparent that the Democrats are in on the game. There is no way you can delay like this without consequence without complicity.

This administration has been blatantly pissing all over everything, the Constitution, treaties, laws, the people all of it and all the Dems do is huff and puff, act like they're going to do something and then nothing. NOTHING!!!

Gonszo testifies, lies to their faces, gets called back and tells them the same lies and walks!? If this isn't collaberation - what is? We don't need an election or an an impeachment - we NEED A GOD-DAMN REVOLUTION!

Cowboy wrote on May 13, 2007 5:09 PM:

Is this a collaboration?

How about . . . No.

Four months on the job.

I saw two completely different hearings--one in the Senate where there was at least the pretense, and I suspect more than that--of disgust on the part of Republican members with Gonzales; and then the House where the GOP members, many of whom have friends who have been convicted in recent years, praised Gonzales for his incompetence and inattentiveness; they might have some harsher words for some of the prosecutors involved with those cases.

So those are the conditions that we're working with. A bare majority in the Senate, and a few seat majority on the Congress where many GOPers seem to be pleased with Gonzales's work on behalf of corrupt members of their party.

The process works if voters pay their dues, and invest their time in the democracy. The problems come when the people don't exercise their due diligence during elections and vote in candidates who have a long succession of disasters on their resume (e.g. George W. Bush). If you elect corrupt, incompetent leaders, then you get a corrupt, incompetent government. It's simple.

A revolution won't resolve the underlying problem. The answer is higher quality candidates, and an investment by voters in their democracy. No one forced 47% of Americans to vote for George W. Bush in 2000, or 49% or so in 2004. A lot of people got played for fools, simply because they didn't do their homework. Well, if they do their homework next time around, that would be one way to raise the bar.

Steve Elliott wrote on May 13, 2007 7:37 PM:

Just for fun, can`t these questions be put forward at the outset of Schlozman`s hearing ? Did you prepare for this hearing during your vacation ? Who helped you prepare ? Did you discuss any elements of your hearing and your testimony to be given here today with any Whitehouse official and if so what are their names.

Richard L. Adlof wrote on May 13, 2007 7:41 PM:

Cowboy @ May 12, 2007 01:31 PM,

Good breakdown of the situation. Thanks.

Richterscale wrote on May 13, 2007 8:20 PM:

The answer is higher quality candidates, and an investment by voters in their democracy.
Posted by: Cowboy

Sorry, but I really don't think that's the answer.
The answer is public financing of elections, and repealing the SCOTUS decision tying money to free speech.
Oh, and we could also do America a favor by not letting Presidential campaigning start two stinking years before the elections.

JP2 wrote on May 13, 2007 9:26 PM:

Richterscale, your answer, which I agree with on some level, also denies a prior reality:

How will public financing of public elections or creating a Constitutional amendment defining speech as distinct from money come about absent higher quality candidates, and higher quality representatives?

In a Democracy the answer always comes back to the People. Time for boots to hit the pavement and/or for individuals to ante up. I think 2006 was a fine demonstration of what happens when a number of ordinary folks act in concert.

I think there are quite a few high quality principled representatives who are in a position of responsibility now. However, it's been demonstrated time and again that representatives seem to lose a sense of obligation to their constituents the longer that they've been in Washington--especially in cases where one party has a near monopoly on power for an extended time (there are exceptions, but they usually seem to defy the rule). Those are ground facts that I can work with, but they are still ground facts.

Anonymous wrote on May 13, 2007 9:34 PM:

incredible amount of smart posts on this board. i have 2 cents:

i think the house repubs are just daring the dems to impeach gonzo. they figure that's the way to get their poll numbs up -- have an impeachment spectacle to complain about. "how can our AG fight the war on terror at home while the dems impeach him, etc. blah blah." but wait! there's no reservoir of good will for gonzo and the white house. an impeachment over at judicary over a certifiable A.G.? not gonna overshadow the bush war. so the dems need to nut up and call the bluff. impeaching Gonzo can only lead to more white house crap floating up. probably pelosi knows this but needs to put some steel in the leadership's back. the "impeachment is off the table" line can be said to mean imp. of bush or cheney. not a crooked A.G. i'd play this hand in a heartbeat. it's pocket aces. rahm? can you hear me?

Mooser wrote on May 13, 2007 9:41 PM:

Don't solve the Republicans problems for them. If Americans are not actively and presently suffering under Repub rule, They'll just take another big drink of Kool-Aid and chase the Repug pony. With the DOJ paralyzed, all kinds of criminals must be having a field day. Just let that fester till election day.

Anonymous wrote on May 13, 2007 11:50 PM:

Bah. What's a couple more weeks? Screws are most effective when turned slowly.

Ducky wrote on May 13, 2007 11:58 PM:

The Dems need to keep tossing the republican's own lies and muck right toward the White House. The law of averages will kick in a some point. The more you throw, the more is bound to stick. But you can't get anything to stick until you throw it. I think the Dems need to come after them every day. Relentless. In their face. Gonzo, Goodling, Cheney, Bush, Rove. Keep hounding and throwing eventually you're going to trip one of the clowns over their own lies.

code word: spade = dig their own graves

Anonymous wrote on May 14, 2007 12:26 AM:

Anybody remember when they just had to depose Clinton, when they set the perjury trap for him?

Sure, he had nothing else going on, right? Al-Qaeda had just bombed the embassies, there was intel indicating that other targets were being prepared.

Yeah, let's force him to testify IN A CIVIL CASE instead of ensuring that the Chief Executive of the government isn't bothered by the GOP witchhunt de jour. And his lawyer didn't really help him much, did he?

Bob Bennett instead of arguing to the court that the priorities of running the country outweigh the immediate deposition of his client, hell, he just goes in there and argues the wrong fucking point leaving the justices no choice but to find for Jones.

And who is he representing now? That good old neo-con, Paul Wolfowitz. Let's hope he's as inept at this defense as he was with Clinton's.

PJ White wrote on May 14, 2007 5:27 AM:

Get him before the committee NOW. Vacation? Horse shit!

SC: doubt. Yeah. I have my doubts about this patently bogus excuse.

dhs wrote on May 14, 2007 8:47 AM:

I just watched Amy Goodman's telecast Democracy Now (Monday, May 14). Greg Palast was on the show. He has done extensive in-depth reporting on the firing of the US Attorneys. Iglesias was the Navy attorney played by Tom Cruise in "A few Good Men". He contacted Greg Palast about his firing some time ago.

Palast has 500 of the missing RNC emails; and these show that Karl Rove was directly involved in a massive campaign to deny minorities the right to vote. About 3 million voters were denied the right to vote in 2004, including many African-Americans serving in Iraq. Iglesias has filed a suit against the Commander in Chief (W) for having him fired because he was on duty with the Navy (he is still in the naval reserve).

I raised the possibility earlier that the RNC should be prosecuted under the RICO statutes. If all this is true, there would be no other choice.

Peter Duffy wrote on May 14, 2007 8:54 AM:

Will the vacation prove to be career decision?

TheraP wrote on May 14, 2007 9:10 AM:

Just read your post dhs.

Makes me think of the DC Madam. What if different people start giving away emails they've saved, just as she has done with her lists of clients?

Sounds like the leaking is taking on some interesting dimensions.

That's the problem with email. When the ship starts sinking, how can you really be certain they've all been destroyed?

Anonymous wrote on May 14, 2007 9:15 AM:

Seriously, will anyone be surprised if after he takes his paid vacation he steps down and pleads the fifth? He's just gonna use this time to kick it like only B-Rad Schlozman can and then lawyer up.
Code Word: 40
As in I hope Schlozie shows up at the hearing with a 40 cause ain't no party like a Schlozman party cause a Schlozman party don't stop!

The Political Junkie wrote on May 14, 2007 9:19 AM:

Since when can you blow off Congressional testimony because you're on Annual Leave?

I've worked for the Feds for over twenty years, and even if you're summoned by anything remotely resembling subpeona for testimony, even before the Merit Systems Protection Board, you were expected, if not ordered by your superiors, to cancel your leave, or else lose your damned job.

That's one of the "Acts Of Congress" it could take to get a career government employee fired...

Anonymous wrote on May 14, 2007 9:20 AM:

That's the problem with email. When the ship starts sinking, how can you really be certain they've all been destroyed?
Posted by: TheraP
Well, we know someone in the executive branch has been leaking the emails- Murray Waas had been given some and reported on them last week. Whoever is doing it is at great risk though- if Rove and his minions find out who is doing it and get ahold of them watch out! But that's the great thing- Sampson is now royally fucked cause he never thought these emails would see the light of day. Folks are now going to have to think twice before they lie.
Code word: snake
Rove? Snake? Nuff said.

Anonymous wrote on May 14, 2007 11:13 AM:

I'm sure the vacation is timed to the minute of where the statute of limitations of whatever crimes Schlozman has committed has just passed...

Edward Rockstein wrote on May 14, 2007 3:45 PM:

Bring Hertling in to testify first!

noshrub wrote on May 14, 2007 4:54 PM:

His "annual leave?"

Austin Cooper wrote on May 14, 2007 5:30 PM:

This is the Rethug strategy, straight through until the moment on January 20th, 2009, when the Sucker-Puncher-In-Chief will have to leave:

Spin. Obfuscate. Delay. Run Out The Clock.

Samuel Lipari wrote on May 22, 2007 9:05 AM:

The message we should all be sending is; Vote anti-incumbent until the end of time. Many of the Republicans who lost the last election actually spent more money than Democrats. Until we take the Corporate supports out of office nothing will ever change. That goes for our Judges as well. Start petitions for removal in your local, state and federal agencies in addition to your legislature. This is the only way to fix the real problem. Corrupt Leadership!!! Expose those who support corrupt leadership as well.