« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Democrats Waiting For More Than A Whiff Of Wrongdoing
Congressional Democrats have been wary of dropping the “s” word so far in the simmering Justice Department probe.
Despite indications of possible criminal wrongdoing, Democrats have not called for a special prosecutor (necessary, given the inherent conflict of interest at the Justice Department). It looks like the majority party is holding out for the smoking gun.
That gun will probably lead to peripheral charges, Roll Call reports today:
“Obstruction, perjury, false statements —that’s always how these things get started,” said ethics attorney and former House counsel Stan Brand.Brand pointed to the Watergate defendants, many of whom were charged with similar crimes.
“There were not many substantial offenses charged in most cases. That was a cover-up,” he said.
The strongest aroma has wafted off the Monica Goodling and Paul McNulty standoff. McNulty has reportedly told Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) that, in preparation briefings for his appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Goodling withheld information about the White House's roles in the firings from him. And Goodling claimed last week in her testimony before the House Judiciary Committee that McNulty knew more about the U.S. Attorneys firings than he claimed during his testimony. McNulty flatly denies Goodlings accusation.
Three of the fired U.S. attorneys have also testified that they received calls from Michael Elston, chief of staff to the deputy attorney general, with the implicit threat to stay quiet about the firings or risk the reasons for their dismissals being made public.
Prosecutor-turned-politician Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) described the possible criminal violations that have surfaced so far saying:
“It is surprising how often a whiff of obstruction of justice has reared its head in the course of this investigation.”
Let’s see how long just a “whiff” lasts.
Comments (89)
C.Hathaway wrote on May 29, 2007 11:58 AM:They can kick all the sand they want, but it still won't hide the stench.
bobh wrote on May 29, 2007 12:06 PM:What the hell does that mean?
oldtree wrote on May 29, 2007 12:11 PM:am going to guess on what it means that the democrap are reneging on their promise to find the crimes and prosecute.
they have done neither so far. and what do we have a government for again?
Noam Sane wrote on May 29, 2007 12:13 PM:This White House stinks like a dead skunk on a summer day. A whiff? Please.
Tom wrote on May 29, 2007 12:15 PM:What's the "s" word? Surrender?
foxklub wrote on May 29, 2007 12:17 PM:To paraphrase WC Fields
"I could carve a better political party out of a banana"
Rich wrote on May 29, 2007 12:18 PM:Let's see:
1) Vote to fund the fiasco in Iraq.
2) Delay vote on no confidence on Gonzalez.
3) Delay call for special prosecutor.
Replace Harry Reid today.
G4AM wrote on May 29, 2007 12:21 PM:With these guyz the "s" word is stupid.
Dennis wrote on May 29, 2007 12:29 PM:The outcome of ths is becoming pretty obvious. When all is said and done, a scam to go around Congress for confirmation of AGs and replace them with nothing but Republicans who are more loyal to that political party than they are to any semblance of ethics and separation of powers is all that's going to come up.
The innocence of Goodling and others is a bunch of crap.
No laws will have been broken, no one will suffer, those who have participated will be rewarded and taken care of by the Republican party and they will move on to another political job.
The Republican party for being caught has a little egg on its face which will soon be forgotton by both the voters and by the mainstream media.
The real crimes over these past six/seven years have been the political payoffs leading right on into the Oval Office, and the biggest crime of all, the lies and lie of the Iraq war - which will never be pushed to its end, because if it was, George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Powell, Tenet, and many others in this administration would be tried for war crimes, and that's not going to happen in this country by the willingly complicit U.S. Congress.
You don't have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.
Crust wrote on May 29, 2007 12:29 PM:I can't believe Democrats are floating the meme that so far there has only been a "whiff of wrongdoing". This is crazy, both substantively and politically. There is already more than enough evidence to justify a special prosecutor.
For example, Goodling already pretty much confessed to illegally using partisan considerations in hiring for staff positions. Under questioning, she said she believed it was probably fewer that 50 times but she wasn't certain of that. In other words, this was not a one-off offense.
Or consider McNulty's false testimony to Congress. Someone committed a crime there. At this point, it's not entirely clear whether it was Goodling (for inducing McNulty to unknowingly make false testimony) or McNulty (for knowingly make false testimony) or both. But any which way, a crime was committed.
Or again consider the fact that AG Ashcroft, DAG Comey, FBI Director Mueller and roughly thirty other senior officials were on the verge of resigning based on what they believed was illegal behavior. It's hard to overstate how troubling they must have found the behavior in question that all these Republicans were willing to risk the re-election prospects of a Republican president, not to mention their own careers. Not to mention the whole bit about trying to induce a heavily sedated man to sign an important legal document he was legally in a position to sign anyway.
I could go on. And on.
mayan wrote on May 29, 2007 12:36 PM:While I've been surprised that the Dems have not yet called for a special prosecutor, I'm not willing to say that -yet- that there isn't intelligence behind the decision.
I implicitly trust Waxman, Conyers and Leahy. Call me crazy. Perhaps they are concerned that the the "wrong" special prosecutor will be appointed and end up compromising the case. Perhaps, they want to make sure they have a prima facie case first. Perhaps there are political considerations (the public not being entirely engaged and/or outraged by the scandals at this point.)
I don't know the answers. It's something I've been gnawing on. Personally, I can see the necessity but I'm not sure that the investigations have really gone as far as they are going to. My thinking is that Schlozman and whatever other tricks the SJC and HJC have up their sleeves will be playing out in the next two or three weeks.
molly wrote on May 29, 2007 12:38 PM:Dennis....the underlying offense is election fraud. Without that, these two bit criminals wouldn't even be in office. The saddest aspect of this problem is now that the d's are in office...a bill is being offered by a d that will allow it to continue. Read bradblog and what Greg Palast has to say about it. RRhodes interview on buzzflash as well.Even progressive blogs refuse to even look at this pervasive assault on democracy. All the attn. goes to the criminal and insane antics of bushco while the real political operatives are becoming more entrenched every day in a fascist way of life for US.
Anonymous wrote on May 29, 2007 12:40 PM:Many of these Democrats seem as determined as Shrub to ignore the smell of the dead cat in the front parlor. Wonder what it is that has to waft through their nostrils before they find it offensive enough to call for a Special Prosecutor?
To what, no doubt, election-based timetable are they working from? If they ignore too much, too long, they'll find their election gambit a complete failure.
Anonymous wrote on May 29, 2007 12:45 PM:Whether Congress votes or doesn't vote to impeach or appoint a special prosecutor says little of what the States may legally do: Prosecute US government officials for violating State laws and gurantees to an enforcement mechanism.
Indeed, Congress may choose to not impeach and not investigate, but this does not mean that nobody else can do anything: State Attorney Generals may lawfully prosecute this Attorney General, President and Vice President.
Anonymous wrote on May 29, 2007 12:49 PM:DoJ is willing to threaten its own to be quiet about illegal activity. No suprise when law firms are used to dissuade the public from discussing illegal activity, and grave breaches of Geneva.
How many lawfirms are on the WH-GOP payroll to stifle pubilc discussion of this President's illegal actiivty; and how much money is going through the GOP money laundering to engage in witness retalation?
Dennis wrote on May 29, 2007 12:49 PM:Thanks, Molly. I'll check the sites. I agree with Mayan that Waxman, Conyers and Leahy know what they're doing. But when all's said and done, I think nothing is going to come of it. The Democrats don't have the killer instinct nor the political will that it takes to haul these people into court for any wrong doing.
And with political races getting ready to heat up, this affair will drop to the side somewhere.
(And if the Republican party has proven anything within these past years of ruling, it's just how low they will go to be elected).
You don't have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.
Val A Lindsay II wrote on May 29, 2007 12:54 PM:One word for the current Democratic leadership; Spineless
Val A Lindsay II wrote on May 29, 2007 12:54 PM:One word for the current Democratic leadership; Spineless
Official A wrote on May 29, 2007 12:54 PM:The Democrats we elected are being paid to watch the clock, like fidgety workers waiting for this shift to end? Do they think that when the whistle blows it will automatically be their turn to govern?
What they're not bargaining on is the disgust of an angry citizenry which began to manifest itself last week when they slavishly re-funded this illegal war (Cindy Sheehan has denounced the Democratic establishment).
A third party could stake a claim on many long-time Democrats, a lot of Independents, and even some of the remaining Republicans. Finding common ground won't be that difficult:
It's the Constitution, stupid.
raoul wrote on May 29, 2007 12:58 PM:You know what? Nothing is going to come out of this. The dems have shown themselves to be total cowards - something Karl Rove has banked on for the past 6 years or longer.
theWalrus wrote on May 29, 2007 12:59 PM:And I have dropped out - I'm through with the political system. I have done things to insulate my family from anything this government does. Even if the stock market crashed tomorrow it wouldn't affect me since I'm invested entirely in foreign stocks and mutual funds. Yesterday was Memorial day. I don't celebrate it because I don't give a crap about phony military holidays. We went to Walmarts and found it packed with people shopping like a herd of pigs. That's what those poor slobs are dying for over in Iraq - so people here can shop until they drop.
So Amerika (with an intentional k) - F you!
If this continues into 2008 who am I going to be able to vote for? I've always voted, but at this rate if the Dems don't bring these bastards to some form of justice I'll just stay home.
Pathetic. The whole system is just too corrupted.
mo2 wrote on May 29, 2007 12:59 PM:If Gonzales resigns, then the Republicans will say that Democrats got the guilty man and are just on a witch-hunt to get Bush or Rove. Sen. Reid is working the system correctly.
POed Lib wrote on May 29, 2007 1:02 PM:There's a good reason NOT to have a special prosecutor. A special prosecutor is not under the control of the Congress. You cannot tell him/her when to hold hearings and when to go after certain people. In other words, you lose control. In addition, the SP would probably bring Congressional investigations of the same issues to an end. This would be bad.
Right now, the Dems are using these hearings to great effectiveness. Why stop now? Investigate, hold hearings, remind everyone of the tremendous amounts of scummy stuff the Repukeliscum are hiding.
POed Lib wrote on May 29, 2007 1:03 PM:There's a good reason NOT to have a special prosecutor. A special prosecutor is not under the control of the Congress. You cannot tell him/her when to hold hearings and when to go after certain people. In other words, you lose control. In addition, the SP would probably bring Congressional investigations of the same issues to an end. This would be bad.
Right now, the Dems are using these hearings to great effectiveness. Why stop now? Investigate, hold hearings, remind everyone of the tremendous amounts of scummy stuff the Repukeliscum are hiding.
raoul wrote on May 29, 2007 1:09 PM:Pathetic. The whole system is just too corrupted.
Posted by: theWalrus
Amen brother. So I can count on YOU to join my 3rd party movement? Good, that's 2 of us. Now, all we need is another 30 million or so.. ha ha
Official A wrote on May 29, 2007 1:14 PM:So I can count on YOU to join my 3rd party movement? Good, that's 2 of us. Posted by: raoul
Make that three. 29,999,997 to go.
pol wrote on May 29, 2007 1:17 PM:I watched the Al Gore/Charlie Rose interview yesterday. It's quite lengthy (almost an hour), but one thing I came away with was this: Gore says we've got to start demanding we get our democracy back. He wants to know: Where's the outcry from John Q. Public?
The link is here: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-836879575340595191&q=charlie+rose+al+gore
Jane wrote on May 29, 2007 1:20 PM:The political imperative is to restore constitutional democracy in this country so that every vote is counted. I believe that this requires optical scanners coupled with random physical audits.
If Bushco and company are re-elected, this prospect is completely lost.
I believe that many of the (re)Publican hierarchy deserve to be impeached and that this would provide a possible deterrent for future misbehavior. I continue to wonder whether President Ford's pardon on Nixon emboldened participants in the current debacle.
To impeach you need a majority vote in the House and a two thirds vote in the Senate. The Senate tries the impeachment as though it were a court and you need to have on hand sufficient evidence not only to convince a number of Republican Senators but also the country. If you cannot convince the country, those who voted for the impeachment in the swing districts lose their seats and we are back to Bushco running the country.
So Congress has to proceed very carefully in order not to be counter productive. Laying out the reasons impeachment is called for in MSM frequently and forcefully is a beggining step to reaching the results we need.
Official A wrote on May 29, 2007 1:20 PM:Wonder what it is that has to waft through their nostrils before they find it offensive enough to call for a Special Prosecutor? Posted by:
I fear these creatures have adapted to their environment and have two anuses where their nostrils used to be.
carol wrote on May 29, 2007 1:28 PM:mark schields said on the news hour recently that there would be no movement on the prosecutors until after the immigration bill was signed. because the coalition needed to pass that bill was too fragile to survive the partisan benefit of the USA scandal.
Official A wrote on May 29, 2007 1:30 PM:politicians believe this is the only chance for comprehensive immigration reform and both parties want that behind them, before they go on to more divisive issues. i think the old guy is right on this one.
Where's the outcry from John Q. Public? Posted by: pol
That's a fair question. I think about it alot and chide myself endlessly for my own inaction. But I am not sure this can be led by those of us who led it in the 60s. We have vested interests (jobs and house payments and looming old age) now just like our parents did then. In the 60s, it came from the youth, and it really did change the world (albeit briefly). Seems to me we need a catalyst -- a leader, a series of events (remember the turbulent events of 1968?), something -- to energize the masses and wake us from our lethargy.
Sure hope we like what ensues, but in truth it couldn't get that much worse than it is right now.
goldberry wrote on May 29, 2007 1:37 PM:uhhh, if the Congress votes for a Special Prosecutor, doesn't that prosecutor have to be appointed by the DC US Attorney? And wouldn't that kinda be a conflict of interest, seeing as the DC US Attorney may well have gotten his job via political loyalty test?
zk0sm0 wrote on May 29, 2007 1:48 PM:ummm... don't the congressional investigations still have their sights set on the white house? isn't the white house the end game here? we've still got white house subpoenas to be complied with and white house testimony to get on the record. let congress do its work FIRST. or we risk letting doj take the fall for doing what the white house told doj to do.
being thorough and deliberate is the right way to be careful to make sure the 'political witch hunt' accusation won't stick.
Official A wrote on May 29, 2007 1:56 PM:we've still got white house subpoenas to be complied with and white house testimony to get on the record Posted by: zk0sm0
Well, that's a nice thought, but how does Congress compel testimony while walking on eggshells?
Wake me up when Sec. Rice takes the stand.
You can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar, but these aren't flies, they're dung-loving Republicans, and sometimes you just have to start swatting.
Henk wrote on May 29, 2007 2:23 PM:After the "no Time tables" funding fiasco, I am convinced that Democrats are gutless non-leaders. Their political handlers/consutants have convinced them that, if they don't rock the boat, they have a lock on '08. We will see nothing from them that isn't safely poll tested. If 99.9% of the voters supported a special prosecutor, then, with much trepidation from the Steny Hoyer's of the party, they MIGHT, act. Until then don't hold your breath.
JW wrote on May 29, 2007 2:23 PM:Tony Blair may be Bush's poodle, but the democratic party is his chihuahua- and a neutered chihuahua, at that. Remember, impeachment is off the table. Period. So it's scold, scold, scold, nag, nag, nag, whine, whine, whine. I've had my fill. As far as I'm concerned, the democrats guilt is all the greater because they damn well know better, yet invariably turn a collective blind eye to the crimes of the domestic enemies of our constitutional Republic. Or what's left of it, anyway. They have been weighed in the balance by the great events of their times, and found wanting.
mo2 wrote on May 29, 2007 2:28 PM:Fine, vote Republican if you want to. Or do you already? Troll much?
SocraticGadfly wrote on May 29, 2007 2:33 PM:Nothing's going to happen.
Vote Green in 2008 or something.
Official A wrote on May 29, 2007 2:39 PM:Fine, vote Republican if you want to. Or do you already? Troll much? Posted by: mo2
Fine. Now those not towing the DLC line are trolls? I suppose Cindy Sheehan is a troll? I have never voted for a Republican for national office and won't start now, but I can tell you that the Dems better get their act together and stand for something or I'll be looking for (and helping fund) an alternative. The discontent is real and glossing it over -- or calling those of us who feel it trolls -- won't help.
Jillian wrote on May 29, 2007 2:44 PM:The only point of sending a Special Prosecutor into DoJ at this point would be to force Gonzalez to resign.
The place to apply one, avoiding the quagmire within DoJ, would be at the DoJ-White House connection. In public Leahy and Conyers seem to be focussing on getting compelling evidence of it out of Rove. Behind closed doors I suspect they're trying to wring all they can out of Kyle Sampson.
714Day wrote on May 29, 2007 2:45 PM:Official A
I'm a gray panther m' damned self. I can hardly believe you said you can't imagine things getting much worse. You know better.
Official A wrote on May 29, 2007 2:53 PM:One thing time has helped me with is the acknowledgment of reality. I will recognize that nearly every politician we elect (if they ARE elected by the people and not situated because of dirty tricks at the polls) wants the limelight for something less than altruistic purpose. They want power and influence just like anybody else...it's a matter of the degree of such want that bears the difference for a politician. They want it something fierce. They care about holding their positions and that's the simple truth. That includes Pelosi and (very much so) Reid. The Waxman, Conyers, Leahy crew is puny.
STILL, we all know (some of us remember) that it drifts back to the people over the waves of blood.
If there are enough voices raised out in the streets and by every other avenue of dissent afforded to us, the politicians make the changes in the end. They need someplace to show off their new outfits when the legislature reconvenes.
However, we have not yet had a government this hell bent on running a hidden agenda. All of you wondering about "endgames" can stop bothering. You've seen the endgame; it's to hold control...period. This is a fire brigade. There's a sqaud to start one, a squad to put it out. It keeps everybody busy and they don't have to concern themselves with a deeper purpose or the meaning of life or any of that silly shit. And they do not give one crap about who or what is obliterated in the meanwhile. They have time. They will do more damage and it's ONLY the people who will stop them.
I can hardly believe you said you can't imagine things getting much worse. You know better. Posted by: 714Day
Right you are. What I was thinking and didn't say is that I cannot imagine much worse than Bushco taken to its logical extreme. The *trajectory* is downright scary and has its historical precedents, none of them pretty.
EdNSted wrote on May 29, 2007 3:00 PM:I've already posted my own feelings about this so I won't repeat myself, but I am curious. How many people here still think the decision to grant Goodling immunity was a smart one?
Anne wrote on May 29, 2007 3:09 PM:I know we've waited what seems like an eternity for the ability to effect some change and hold people to account, but for crying out loud, it hasn't even been 6 months yet. You don't even have a real majority in the Senate, with Tim Johnson still recuperating and Joe Lieberman consistently voting with the GOP, not to mention that Lieberman's chairmanship of the Senate Homeland Security and Government Oversight committee has rendered it useless.
Conyers, Waxman and Leahy have been working from the get-go to get the information they need, and have been stonewalled whenever it gets too close to the WH. I know we want justice, but there's no way to prove a case, or convict, on the evidence we have because there are too many holes in it.
And it's bigger than just the firing of prosecutors. Every layer that gets peeled back reveals something worse, and I think it's going to take a long time to figure it all out, unless someone starts singing.
Throwing out the "gutless" and "spineless" labels just shows me that you seem to be ready to give up way too easily. I know a lot of people want instant subpoenas and showdowns with the White House, but it doesn't work that way. What's been happening is slow and steady pressure that increases as each person is interviewed or testifies before Congress. Each person who goes under oath and reveals a little more of the puzzle turns the screws just a little more. At some point, they may not need those subpoenas, because they will have enough, and they can go tell the WH and Karl Rove and Harriet Miers to pound sand.
There is an inherent conflict in the need for a special prosecutor to investigate the Justice Department. What is needed is an independent counsel - but that means passing legislation, because the old IC statute was allowed to lapse afer Bush took office (imagine that).
I'd have to go and check, but I think this Congress has had more days in session in less than 6 months than the previous Congress had in its entirety, so you really can't say they aren't working on these things.
Frederick wrote on May 29, 2007 3:20 PM:Pleaseee, how much evidence do you need. If the Dems are waiting to get hit up side the head with a baseball bat for a SP to step in, 09' will have come and gone. No guts no glory.
Frederick wrote on May 29, 2007 3:20 PM:Pleaseee, how much evidence do you need. If the Dems are waiting to get hit up side the head with a baseball bat for a SP to step in, 09' will have come and gone. No guts no glory.
Rocky37 wrote on May 29, 2007 3:26 PM:The lack of grey matter being used in many of these comments is amazing.
Both house's committees are actively looking into abuse Sen. Waxman is most interested in the goings on in the WH and it appears that they are making progress.
Don't even think for a minute that we the people, know all that is 'in the works'. Keeping the cards close to the chest is most helpful. Jumping into this mess without having a really good thought process is insane. When Congress makes it's jump on the WH and DOJ they nee3d to be able to drive the Spike into the heart with one thrust -- a deadly thrust.
In the end I think this will lead to the fact that the 2004 elections were fixed and was pulled off by bush and bushies. That is something I am more than happy to wait for. This WH is a outhouse full of shit and Congress is on the hunt!!
My security Codee is "blood" How is that for coincidence????
Rocky37 wrote on May 29, 2007 3:27 PM:The lack of grey matter being used in many of these comments is amazing.
Both house's committees are actively looking into abuse Sen. Waxman is most interested in the goings on in the WH and it appears that they are making progress.
Don't even think for a minute that we the people, know all that is 'in the works'. Keeping the cards close to the chest is most helpful. Jumping into this mess without having a really good thought process is insane. When Congress makes it's jump on the WH and DOJ they nee3d to be able to drive the Spike into the heart with one thrust -- a deadly thrust.
In the end I think this will lead to the fact that the 2004 elections were fixed and was pulled off by bush and bushies. That is something I am more than happy to wait for. This WH is a outhouse full of shit and Congress is on the hunt!!
My security Codee is "blood" How is that for coincidence????
Scoppertop wrote on May 29, 2007 3:33 PM:The Dems are being blackmailed and their families threatened... DUH!
Read "Confessions of an Economic Hit-Man" by John Perkins.
Security Code: regret!
Jason wrote on May 29, 2007 3:33 PM:Thank you, Anne, 03:09 PM for putting events in proper context. 6 months! I know we've become a nation dependant on instant-gratification, but reality doesn't always comply with that lifestyle. Good things are worth waiting for, and worth doing right the first time (in some cases, you ONLY get one shot).
Anonymous wrote on May 29, 2007 3:46 PM:Oh, thank Goodness, all hope is not lost. The Democrats have a double super-secret plan to send another strongly worded letter to the WH. YIKES! Maybe they will even debate a nonbinding resolution, that will scare them.
You heard it here first!
JW wrote on May 29, 2007 3:51 PM:I understand the snail pace realities inherent in the legislative branch. But tell me, why was impeachment declared "off the table" two months before the transfer of congressional power was effected? Wouldn't it have been more common-sensical to say "we have absolutely no clue where our investigations will lead"? Think about it in those terms, and Pelosi's statement smacks of unutterable arrogance. I have been in correspondence with my House rep (Thompson D-Ca.) numerous times about just that issue, and have concluded the democratic party has chosen to abrogate the sworn duty to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution.
I also understand the power of political rhetoric, of simple truth telling. Again, the democrats assembled- with notable exceptions- have time and again proved unworthy, craven. None were stampeded into war, to hear them tell it. Instead, they grasp the thin reed of pleading having been "misinformed". The same thin reed, of course, that those who Big Lied this nation into unleashing war invoke when rationalizing their initial justifications for it.
I'm sick of them ALL.
theWalrus wrote on May 29, 2007 4:13 PM:OK. I'm willing to give the Dems some benchmarks. Let's say, by September (or sooner): McNulty, Moschella - perjury & obstruction of justice charges, Gonzo, gone and facing jailtime, Goodling - perjury, multiple violations of the Hatch Act (prosecuted by means other than her immunized testimony), Laurita Doan, ditto. Sara Taylor, obstruction of justice charges.
That's just a start. Those are the little fish (exception, Gonzo). If the Dems can't reel THEM in, then we might as well pack up democracy, put in on a spaceship and send it outta here.
theWalrus wrote on May 29, 2007 4:15 PM:OK. I'm willing to give the Dems some benchmarks. Let's say, by September (or sooner): McNulty, Moschella - perjury & obstruction of justice charges, Gonzo, gone and facing jailtime, Goodling - perjury, multiple violations of the Hatch Act (prosecuted by means other than her immunized testimony), Laurita Doan, ditto. Sara Taylor, obstruction of justice charges.
That's just a start. Those are the little fish (exception, Gonzo). If the Dems can't reel THEM in, then we might as well pack up democracy, put in on a spaceship and send it outta here.
theWalrus wrote on May 29, 2007 4:15 PM:OK. I'm willing to give the Dems some benchmarks. Let's say, by September (or sooner): McNulty, Moschella - perjury & obstruction of justice charges, Gonzo, gone and facing jailtime, Goodling - perjury, multiple violations of the Hatch Act (prosecuted by means other than her immunized testimony), Laurita Doan, ditto. Sara Taylor, obstruction of justice charges.
That's just a start. Those are the little fish (exception, Gonzo). If the Dems can't reel THEM in, then we might as well pack up democracy, put in on a spaceship and send it outta here.
Steve5117 wrote on May 29, 2007 4:16 PM:JW
Saying that impeachment is off the table does not mean it will not be put back on the table in the future.
jdw wrote on May 29, 2007 4:20 PM:You guys probably should do a long piece on:
(a) where we are on the USA story after the Goodling testimony
(b) what new avenues opened up from Comey, Goodling and other news articles that move this well beyond just the USA story
(c) what items remain outstanding to push (i.e. the documents), both in general and in specific key areas
(d) what questions need to be most asked
The last two probably should be ranked in order of importance.
One of the problems with the Goodling testimony is that it was built up for more than a month as the critical point in the investigation. After the flash-bang of Comey's testimony, anticipation peaked and people were waiting for Goodling to explode a bomb. It didn't happen, and the focus has faded from the story.
You guys have done great coverage of this from the start. But we're at a lull right now, and the MSM and possibly even Democrats are likely to lose focus on it. They story really needs a focusing right now. Similar to what Greenwald does on some of the Domestic Spying issues from time to time.
Security Code: screw, as in "keep tightening the..."
Anne wrote on May 29, 2007 4:48 PM:Just because there are no headlines does not mean that the investigation is at a standstill. You have to remember that these committees are also staffed with a full complement of attorneys, and they are the ones who are doing the real grunt work on this.
YOu should also not discount the value of the psychological aspects of this - where those who are being "interviewed" by the legal staff have no idea what the others are disclosing, and no one wants to get nailed for perjury or obstruction.
At some point, the "I can't recall" defense is going to expire, and the pressure is going to get to someone, and then it's going to get very interesting/
Michael Stevens wrote on May 29, 2007 4:50 PM:Posted by: POed Lib
Date: May 29, 2007 01:02 PM
"There's a good reason NOT to have a special prosecutor. A special prosecutor is not under the control of the Congress. You cannot tell him/her when to hold hearings and when to go after certain people. In other words, you lose control. In addition, the SP would probably bring Congressional investigations of the same issues to an end. This would be bad.
Right now, the Dems are using these hearings to great effectiveness. Why stop now? Investigate, hold hearings, remind everyone of the tremendous amounts of scummy stuff the Repukeliscum are hiding."
=============
POed Lib is exactly right. Those are all very good reasons to hold off in asking for a Special Prosecutor. Here are some other good reasons the Congress shouldn't rush towards a Special Prosecutor.
A Special Prosecutor is typically appointed by the Attorney General himself. Gonzo could simply refuse the request. Worse still, Gonzo may already have some political partisan lined up for the job.
A Gonzo appointed Special Prosecutor could easily bury the case. He could work very slowly, he could simply agree with the White House's claims of executive privilege. He could even keep Congressional hearings from continuing by claiming they hampered his investigation.
Any of those tactics would be fully legal, any of those tactics could completely bury AttorneyGate.
As I've posted previously, I believe the Congressional Dems are playing this game 10 moves ahead. They are not trying to win small battles only to lose the larger the war.
Right now, I think they're building a rock-solid foundation of real, (easy to understand) criminal charges against Alberto Gonzales himself. Real criminal charges will keep Gonzo from having any influence in the appointment of a Special Prosecutor. Real criminal charges will also gut the Republican claim that this is all just a political witch hunt.
Once clear charges of criminal wrongdoing have been made, it will be very difficult for a majority of the Republican Senators to stand beside Gonzo. They may have no choice but to agree with an impeachment conviction.
That said, don't expect to have a giddy week of Gonzo impeachment hearings with his own Republicans voting to confict. This is becuase the very minute 67 Senators are lined up against him, Gonzo will resign. It will be an anti-climatic ending, but that's how these things often work out.
Personally, I think the smoking gun criminal charge will relate to Comey's testimony of the Ashcroft hospital visit. The Congress will probably call for Solicitor General Paul Clement to bring contempt charges against the AG. Suprising to many, I think they won't ask Clement to appoint a Special Prosecutor. Instead, the Congress will initiate ipmeachment proceedings, forcing Gonzo out.
Once Gonzo has resigned, the Senate (in a repeat of WaterGate) will compell the new AG to appoint a politically neutral Special Prosecutor.
Mark Richards wrote on May 29, 2007 4:59 PM:"S" is for "Slide right through", meaning the Teflon mal-administrator and all his various minions will remain untouched. In the end the Democrats will have plenty to chatter about but little power to act on their findings.
If that law were in the hands of the American people, instead of within the slimy and corrupt grip of the current Gonzo and a still-crushed congress, the whole lot of them would be scurrying like cockroaches in the light.
JW wrote on May 29, 2007 6:08 PM:I fully expect Gonzalez to fall. However, I do not expect the democrats to pursue the matter further. Once again, a criminal conspiracy that emanates from the Oval Office will go unpunished. Congressional democrats as a body lack integrity- by my lights, anyway. Their inaction is tantamount to collaboration with a domestic enemy.
Ducky wrote on May 29, 2007 6:16 PM:Raoul,
I read your post and found it interesting. Even though you make some excellent points about our country and its political faults, I feel I must disagree with your F-Off Amerika. Our country and constitution was set up to embrace things like this. We are meant to debate and discuss and root out the wrong doers.
Our president, and I use that term loosely, has allegedly broken some laws, if he has, than he will pay. . . eventually. In a country of our size and diversity the wheels of justice turn painfully slowly. They do turn. The corrupt politicians eventually get caught.
The United States is so diverse, that even something as terrible and corrupt as Vietnam did not stop immediately. Look back at the amount of public outcry at Vietnam and compare it to Iraq. The Democrats do not have enough of the this wonderful, diverse, Wal-Mart loving country behind them carrying signs yet. They will. Stay strong and keep yelling. The more we yell the more attention we will garner. When we stop shouting then we have lost.
Oh, by the way, if you really hate the United States that much, try France.
JW wrote on May 29, 2007 7:51 PM:"Saying that impeachment is off the table does not mean it will not be put back on the table in the future".
I do not believe congressional democrats possess (what I deem) the patriotism to uphold their Constitutional duty.
Rocky37 wrote on May 29, 2007 7:57 PM:Spot on Michael Stevens -- Nice to see grey matter still working!!
Rocky37 wrote on May 29, 2007 8:27 PM:JW --" I fully expect Gonzalez to fall. However, I do not expect the democrats to pursue the matter further. Once again, a criminal conspiracy that emanates from the Oval Office will go unpunished. Congressional democrats as a body lack integrity- by my lights, anyway. Their inaction is tantamount to collaboration with a domestic enemy."
I truly believe your comment to be dead wrong --- I see the Democrats to be into this for the long haul.
Sen. Waxman is a terrier at heart. He has seen the enemy and is focused on it. The Republican party is in serious Rove invented trouble and he (Sen. Waxman) WILL take them down. I have no doubt in this.
2008 will be a Democratic win hands down. But, this will only happen if the Democratic Congress put the Republican heads to the guillotine: showing them to be the evil beings that they are. They have so much to work with. Don't you think that Sen. Waxman knows this? Why wouldn't the Democrats use this to their advantage???
Security Code = glass, as if through the looking glass
Me thinks the repubs are in serious trouble!!
JW wrote on May 29, 2007 8:29 PM:"Once Gonzo has resigned, the Senate (in a repeat of WaterGate) will compell the new AG to appoint a politically neutral Special Prosecutor".
There's no such animal as a "politically neutral Special Prosecutor" in today's world.
In today's world, Fitzgerald is a politically charged fiend. That is, if you swear allegiance to the GOP.
If democrats are unwilling to pursue impeachable transgressions without a third party- if they lack the guts to fight, win or lose- they have no business being in congress.
Rocky37 wrote on May 29, 2007 8:43 PM:JW -- Why would you think they wouldn't fight??? From what I have seen, they are on a witch hunt. A very succulent witch hunt I might add.
Sharon A wrote on May 29, 2007 10:11 PM:A book I just finished reading depicted the German left that assumed power post-WWI too weak to survive the assaults from the far right (Hitler/Nazis) because they had essentially been "crowned from above" rather than developing the leadership required to maintain a stable government and economy.
Perhaps the Democrats are thinking they too will inherit power from our country's discontent as well. Or perhaps they remember this history and wish to avoid this pitfall altogether.
If they were to become our accidental statesmen/women, how long until we saw an even more virile strain of fascism return as did the Germans in the opening of the 20th century?
Lots more work to do here before we get to have our prom. Lots more. The field is too scattered in the Democratic party, blurry, unfocused. No heir apparent obvious yet.
Perhaps we should not rush this part of the process. Wish for immediate transfer of power from the cooked duck, otherwise known as George W. Bush, via impeachment.
Maybe we do need to patiently follow the processes of identifying those who sought to overturn our democratic republic, bringing their plans to a complete END.
Otherwise, I fear we will just be revisiting these same sights again in successive generations.
A lot of time and money has been spent dividing our countrymen/women from one another for political gain. It's a nasty spell that has turned people into ogres and meanies.
I hope the spell is soon lifted from the kingdom so people can be themselves again.
Irina wrote on May 29, 2007 10:50 PM:The arrogant, lying, superficial way they carry themselves and relate to the American people.
The total politicizing and privatizing of the U.S. Government and all its agencies and ensuing colonization of the working classes and environment.
The appointment to the Supreme Court of two suburban, corporate, yuppies who put the rights of private institutions and their acquisitive agendas ahead of the people's need to adapt and take new directions for their survival and progress.
Their criminal neglect or purposeful omission of an impending terrorist attack before 9/11 and the subsequent cover-up of the actual sequence of events that led to 9/11.
Their immediate focus on Iraq which deflected us from pursuing a far more immediate and audacious enemy that worked to create a far more expansive,
international threat against us and our allies.
A foreign policy which brought Russia and China into military alignment against the United States.
Pulling a drawer open and taking out the entire Patriot Act almost over night.
Massive war profiteering by their personal friends and business associates.
The arbitrary rounding up of civilians in a nation that they invaded and whose civilian population and infrasture they were totally responsible under international law.
The trashing of the Geneva Convention and systematic, institutionalized torture against an entire civilian population immediately after an illegal
invasion.
The move towards a unitary President-Dictator and destruction of Habeus Corpus and admissable evidence promulgated by torture.
The President stating that our Constitution, the protocols by which we live, is "just a piece of paper."
And the Democrats are compromising with them?.
JNagarya wrote on May 30, 2007 12:00 AM:"am going to guess on what it means that the democrap are reneging on their promise to find the crimes and prosecute.
"they have done neither so far. and what do we have a government for again?
"Posted by: oldtree
Date: May 29, 2007 12:11 PM"
Where do you Republican-defending trolls come from?
The Democrats don't yet have sufficient votes to do as you demand _BECAUSE THE REPUBLICANS, ESPECIALLY IN THE hOUSE, ARE FOOT-DRAGGING_.
So who do you bash? The Democrats.
Does that make sense? No. In fact, it's stupid, and pro-Rebublican.
There's a website on which there's a slew of Democrat-bashers. How about taking your BS to that website: Free Republic.
JNagarya wrote on May 30, 2007 12:03 AM:"What's the "s" word? Surrender?
"Posted by: Tom
Date: May 29, 2007 12:15 PM"
The letter is "t" for "timing".
The Democrats don't yet have sufficient votes to do as you demand because the Republicans are foot-dragging. That means it is STUPID to bash the Democrats, when the obstacle is the Republicans.
JNagarya wrote on May 30, 2007 12:12 AM:"Let's see:
"1) Vote to fund the fiasco in Iraq."
That isn't even as much as a half-truth. For one, the Democrats forced Bushit to compromise -- the first time in six years. That's no small accomplishment.
As result that bill includes domestic spending, to which Bushit was opposed -- including monies for veterans affairs, and an increase in the minimum wage.
That's onoly step one in the increasing tightening of screws on Bushit and gang.
Why are you bashing the Democrats when it is the Republicans who are the obstacle?
Oh, right: you believe all the horseshit conspirabunk, because that's easier than learning how politics function, how "Politics is the art of the possible" -- and how to change the impossible to the possible.
"2) Delay vote on no confidence on Gonzalez."
Let him sweat, ass.
"3) Delay call for special prosecutor."
Do you want Gonzales impeached and removed, even though he's only a symptom, and thus see an and to the entire issue?
Either smarten up, or shut up.
"Replace Harry Reid today.
"Posted by: Rich
Date: May 29, 2007 12:18 PM"
I have a hunch Harry Reid is a great deal more sophisticated than you -- especially in view of the fact that you are bashing the Democrats when instead the problem is the Republicans.
This isn't "American Idle" or "Law & Order" or a football game, or some other TeeVee show in which the issue is wrapped up within the amount of time it takes to drink a couple six-packs.
JNagarya wrote on May 30, 2007 12:20 AM:"I can't believe Democrats are floating the meme that so far there has only been a "whiff of wrongdoing". This is crazy, both substantively and politically. There is already more than enough evidence to justify a special prosecutor."
"Posted by: Crust
Date: May 29, 2007 12:29 PM"
I think it's wise that the Democrats keep their cards close to their vest. Perhaps someday you'll understand what that means. But you won't get there by believing conspirabunk, and having that "cause" you to overstate and distort the facts as current known.
We don't, as example, know that McNulty lied to Congress. Goodling says so -- but has she provided hard evidence to the Congress which substantiates that assertion?
Every "i" must be dotted, every "t" crossed, if the investigation, and any potential prosecutions, are to be aboveboard and successful.
Last but not least: the obstacle in Congress is the Republicans. So why do you bash the Democrats, instead of the Republicans? Basically because you don't know what you're talking about.
And don't have your head on straight.
JNagarya wrote on May 30, 2007 12:25 AM:"Indeed, Congress may choose to not impeach and not investigate, but this does not mean that nobody else can do anything: State Attorney Generals may lawfully prosecute this Attorney General, President and Vice President.
"Posted by:
Date: May 29, 2007 12:45 PM"
The reality: Democrats don't yet have sufficient votes to do as you demand because the Republicans are foot-dragging.
But why pay attnetion to reality? You already know it all. So you bash the Democrats instead of bashing the foot-dragging Republicans.
Think? Not you and your fellow political-illiterates and huffily "superior" fashinonably cynical neophytes.
SC = face. As in, Face reality, or continue to bash the wrong political party.
JNagarya wrote on May 30, 2007 12:28 AM:"DoJ is willing to threaten its own to be quiet about illegal activity. No suprise when law firms are used to dissuade the public from discussing illegal activity, and grave breaches of Geneva.
"How many lawfirms are on the WH-GOP payroll to stifle pubilc discussion of this President's illegal actiivty; and how much money is going through the GOP money laundering to engage in witness retalation?
"Posted by:"
How much _EVIDENCE_ have you for any of that?
_ZERO_.
JNagarya wrote on May 30, 2007 12:33 AM:"One word for the current Democratic leadership; Spineless
"Posted by: Val A Lindsay II
Date: May 29, 2007 12:54 PM"
You know more than they about the stage of the investigations, and the undisclosed testimonies and evidence?
I thought not.
You don't get your way, even though your demands aren't supported by reality or facts, and it's someone else's fault.
What you obviously don't get is the fact that the obstacle is the Republicans. Because of that, the Democrats don't have sufficient votes to do as you demand.
But, go ahead: Continue to be an ass by bashing those who aren't the obstacle.
SC = sleep. As in, Continue to sleep, and shut up, or wake up and smarten up.
JNagarya wrote on May 30, 2007 1:00 AM:"If Gonzales resigns, then the Republicans will say that Democrats got the guilty man and are just on a witch-hunt to get Bush or Rove. Sen. Reid is working the system correctly.
"Posted by: mo2
Date: May 29, 2007 12:59 PM"
Exactly. I'm fed up with the trolls -- it's as they act -- who bash Democrats when the obstacle is the Republicans.
"There's a good reason NOT to have a special prosecutor. A special prosecutor is not under the control of the Congress."
False. The Congress can appoint a special prosecutor/counsel and direct the focus of her/his investigation.
"You cannot tell him/her when to hold hearings and when to go after certain people. In other words, you lose control."
False. The special prosecutor/counsel appointed by Congress who be working for and answerable to Congress.
Congress has subpoena power. That means it also has the authority to enforce the subpoenas. And Congress has more than one means to do that.
"In addition, the SP would probably bring Congressional investigations of the same issues to an end. This would be bad."
You have no grounds for making such a bogus statement. The sepcial prosecutor/counsel APPOINTED BY CONGRESS would work for Congress, and at Congress' direction.
"Right now, the Dems are using these hearings to great effectiveness. Why stop now? Investigate, hold hearings, remind everyone of the tremendous amounts of scummy stuff the Repukeliscum are hiding."
Exactly. But Congress need not rely on the DOJ for investigations -- especially of itself. Congress has oversight authority; that includes the investigative.
It was Congress which intiated investigations and prosecution of Watergate.
"Posted by: POed Lib
Date: May 29, 2007 01:02 PM"
SC = doubt. As in, I doubt many of those who bash the Democrats, instead of bashing the obstacle that is the Republicans, have a clue to anything except not getting their way instantly, and throwing tantrums when that doesn't happen, instead of accepting the fact that the Democrats won't have sufficient votes to do as it demands until the Republicans stop foot-dragging.
Wanna bash someone? Bash the obstructive Republicans.
Squirm wrote on May 30, 2007 1:09 AM:Re jdw and Mayan, questions are right on. Monica Goodling admitted to at least one conversation with Bradley J. Schlozman. Questions in the public interest: He could be asked under oath how many times he used the word "boondoggle" to describe his lengthy international trips using funds dedicated to human trafficking within the Civil Rights Division, and as a follow up, be asked to explain specifically how long the trip was and what he accomplished on each trip. He could be asked how many Division hires were personal friends of his, and as a follow up, be asked to explain each of their qualifications. He could be asked precisely what process and promises to prosecute preceded his installation as a United States Attorney. So many questions, so little time.
JNagarya wrote on May 30, 2007 1:12 AM:"Just because there are no headlines does not mean that the investigation is at a standstill. You have to remember that these committees are also staffed with a full complement of attorneys, and they are the ones who are doing the real grunt work on this.
"YOu should also not discount the value of the psychological aspects of this - where those who are being "interviewed" by the legal staff have no idea what the others are disclosing, and no one wants to get nailed for perjury or obstruction.
"At some point, the "I can't recall" defense is going to expire, and the pressure is going to get to someone, and then it's going to get very interesting/
"Posted by: Anne
Date: May 29, 2007 04:48 PM"
The jerks -- calling them trolls is accurate, based upon their own stupidities -- who haven't a clue about anything, so bash the Democrats instead of the foot-dragging Republicans, prefer throwing tantrums to even knowing the realities, let alone accepting them.
They would learn something about the realities of Congressional investigations if they'd read a few books by principles in the Watergate investigation/s. Sam Dash, Peter Rodino, Archibald Cox, and others. Some provide direct insight into the large investigate team (each Congressman has more than one staffer -- sometimes quite a few more than one) behind the Committee which are unseen and usually unsung.
Even back then, with no computer systems, the Committee members were provided virtually instance on point facts to back their questions by that staff, and a system of classifying the myriad facts which made that possible.
The kind of work being done right now is gathering information and evidence, and getting that cross-referenced, and evaluated for links, etc., and in which directions can be proceeded, and the relative fruitfulness of each, and the order in which to pursue them. And more than that.
This isn't a two-six-pack sports event, the utter stupidites posted by the trolls notwithstanding.
SC = snake. As in, The Republican Party is a snake farm.
JNagarya wrote on May 30, 2007 1:17 AM:Those who want blood for such as perjury:
When a defendant is charged with perjury, he will in effect obstruct all the more in pure self defense: he will deny it. Is that all you want? A long-shot possible conviction for perjury? Or do you want more than that: prosecution of the underlying crimes?
stephen miller wrote on May 30, 2007 1:49 AM:In the case of Lam and others, looks like obstruction of justice. What's the problem? Why delay? Impeach these obediant collaborators. Get something on John Yoo Too.
Jimmy Johnson wrote on May 30, 2007 2:59 AM:Whiff? I can smell it all the way on the Pacific Coast. And the wind is blowing the other way!
TomT wrote on May 30, 2007 7:28 AM:This has been the cleanest administration in recent history. These faux scandals prove the point. Do I really need to go down the list? The only reason Reid doesn't do anything is because he doesn't have anything. He knows it and does not want to set a precedent for the next Democratic president. Of course most of you will not hold him/her to the same standard. They can come into office and fire all of the US Attorneys and you will not even raise an eyebrow. Any fair minded person would conclude that these are nothing but trumped up charges for political reasons.
Me_again wrote on May 30, 2007 7:49 AM:Doesn't matter how much evidence you show Sen. Leahy, he'll never do anything.
Leahy cowers at the word "do something". Sen. Leahy doesn't care not even if Dick Cheney says "fuck you" to him.
Leahy is the biggest do nothing in the entire senate. Leahy already has all the incentive but no inclination.
This is the biggest problem with Dem party. Josh goes out on a limb and Dem senate doesn't Appreciate it, not one bit. The only people who care that Bush was turning the DOJ into a political sideshow of favortism is just "we the people". Dems could have cared less.
Anne wrote on May 30, 2007 8:57 AM:"Do nothings" generally do...nothing. When questions were initially raised about the firings, a "do nothing" Judiciary Committee chair would have "done nothing." It would have been easy enough to just sweep it under the rug, and let it die.
But that didn't happen, did it? And as the investigation proceeded, there have been numerous places along the way where the various Committees could have just let the matter die, but that didn't happen either.
I have no doubt that public pressure has helped keep this alive - it's supposed to. Government is supposed to be responsive to the people - we're the oil that helps keep the gears turning.
But there's a big picture here, and a lot of you are not looking at it. You're like little kids screaming for Mommy to give you the chocolate chips you can see on the kitchen counter, and so furious that she's only given you a handful, that you fail to see that the chocolate chips are for the cookies she's making.
[Sorry for the Martha Stewart metaphor!]
Official A wrote on May 30, 2007 9:22 AM:The jerks -- calling them trolls is accurate, based upon their own stupidities -- who haven't a clue about anything, so bash the Democrats instead of the foot-dragging Republicans, prefer throwing tantrums to even knowing the realities, let alone accepting them. Posted by: JNagarya
Here's a reality for you. You have called everyone who disagreed with you stupid, ignorant, lacking gray matter. That is the behavior of a troll. Gray matter and patriotism are not mutually exclusive, you know. Practical politics and compromise are fine when two reasonable positions are at odds, but there comes a time when critical leaders have to emerge and rally the citizenry. I can think of no more appropriate time for that than when a wildly unpopular administration, having lost its Congressional blank check, persists in systematically dismantling the constitution.
polkadotpoodle wrote on May 30, 2007 10:16 AM:when folks wake up and realize this country is owned and operated by a corporate plutacracy, all will be clear. there are a few hard working souls in congress, fewer in the senate....how many there do not represent the special interest's money that put them in office? whatever happened to election reform? we don't and haven't had a democracy for about 40 years now....neither party represents the people....Folks like Conyers, Waxman, Murta can only do so much....
did Karl Rove's assistant also attend Regent. How many incompetents are there in positions of power because of there professed personal belief systems?
did anyone think for a moment that a man who has destroyed everything he has touched would do differently for his ultimate job as leader of the most revered nation? this would be Bush II....
This country needs to do some REAL soul searching if it is to survive as it was intended.....we need more than a special prosecutor! We need to be in the streets....
doug r wrote on May 30, 2007 10:30 AM:Don't miss the real story, now Arkansas US Attorney Tim Griffin organizing the ILLEGAL caging lists. See Greg Palast
epenisa wrote on January 11, 2008 12:42 AM:Hi all!
Nice work from your side... have a nice time with yoru blog :)
G'night