Scandal! Intrigue! In the White House! And it's not a Clancy novel

With Friends like this, who needs enemies?

 

How much more evidence do we need of the willingness of this White House to usurp the people's power at every opportunity?

Ashcroft is the hero here? Does that tell us anything about how far gone people like Gonzales, Card, and most of all the President himself are?

Let's be clear, this is the President of the United States ordering his Chief of Staff and head stooge lawyer (Gonzalez) to go to Ashcroft, gravely ill, and try to get him to renew something that had been declared illegal. Or do you think these guys were acting of their own volition, that Bush didn't know what they were doing? I refuse to be a rube on this one.

And of course, fate intervened as the Madrid train bombings derailed any more discussion on the matter, even though the Justice Department never signed the law to attest to its legality.

These quotes from Schumer and Spector regarding Gonzales sum it up.

 

For all those who wanted slam dunk evidence of a high crime or misdemeanor, and for some reason were ahistorically looking at those terms in legalistic terms, you've got it now. There really is no defense for Bush on this one.

 

Glenn Greenwald's all over it as usual. Still unanswered - who was being spied on and for what purpose? Congress still hasn't pushed for an answer because Admin. says it's a "classified program."

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/index.html

 

I've read this five times, and each time I am positively floored by the complete and utter irony.

 

Every week a new scandal comes to light. What kind of drugs are the 30% who still support the president taking? They must have better weed than I do.

 

I'm thinking at this point, it's the 30% who are scared to death of the left, "the abortionists, the feminists and the pagans" as the late Jerry Falwell once put it. They support Bush because they could not bear the alternative.

I refuse to accept some people are that stupid to not be able to understand the corruption levels in the Bush Administration. I think they are just blinded by a mix of fear and loathing.

Cocaine is a hell of a drug, but fear can be just as powerful, and is in far more ample supply...

 

Liar, liar pants on fire!

(a letter from several senators)

Dear Mr. Attorney General:

In very dramatic testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee yesterday, former Deputy Attorney General James Comey testified that in March 2004, when you served as White House Counsel, you were involved in "an effort to take advantage of a very sick man," referring to then-Attorney General John Ashcroft.

Specifically, Mr. Comey testified that you and former White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card went to Mr. Ashcroft's bedside at George Washington Hospital, where he was in intensive care, in an effort to get him to agree to certify the legality of a classified program that he and Mr. Comey, who was serving as acting Attorney General at the time, had concluded should not be so certified. Mr. Comey stated that when the Administration decided to go forward with reauthorizing this classified program without that certification, he and several other Justice Department officials, including possibly Attorney General Ashcroft himself, were ready to tender their resignations.

You testified last year before both the Senate Judiciary Committee and the House Judiciary Committee about this incident. On February 6, 2006, at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, you were asked whether Mr. Comey and others at the Justice Department had raised concerns about the NSA wiretapping program. You stated in response that the disagreement that occurred was not related to the wiretapping program confirmed by the President in December 2005, which was the topic of the hearing. The following is a transcript excerpt from that hearing:

Senator Schumer. Let me ask you about some specific reports. It has been reported by multiple news outlets that the former number two man in the Justice Department, the premier terrorism prosecutor, Jim Comey, expressed grave reservations about the NSA program and at least once refused to give it his blessing. Is that true?

Attorney General Gonzales. Senator, here is a response that I feel that I can give with respect to recent speculation or stories about disagreements. There has not been any serious disagreement, including – and I think this is accurate – there has not been any serious disagreement about the program that the President has confirmed. There have been disagreements about other matters regarding operations, which I cannot get into. I will also say –

Senator Schumer. But there was some – I am sorry to cut you off, but there was some dissent within the administration, and Jim Comey did express at some point – that is all I asked you – some reservations.

Attorney General Gonzales. The point I want to make is that, to my knowledge, none of the reservations dealt with the program that we are talking about today. They dealt with operational capabilities that we are not talking about today....

Senator Schumer. But you are telling us that none of these people expressed any reservations about the ultimate program. Is that right?

Attorney General Gonzales. Senator, I want to be very careful here. Because of course I am here only testifying about what the President has confirmed. And with respect to what the President has confirmed, I believe – I do not believe that these DOJ officials that you are identifying had concerns about this program.

In addition, on April 6, 2006, in answer to a question from then House Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner about the hospital visit, which had been reported in the press, you responded: "Mr. Chairman, what I can say – and I'm sure this will not be acceptable, but let me say it anyway – is that I have testified before that the disagreement that existed does not relate to the program the President confirmed in December to the American people."

We ask for your prompt response to the following question: In light of Mr. Comey's testimony yesterday, do you stand by your 2006 Senate and House testimony, or do you wish to revise it?

 

Just judging by the anecdotal evidence I have, you're spot on. Talking to people around here (here as in Utah) and you'll learn that Bush isn't really doing the greatest job, but he's better than a liberal who apparently is going to sneak into their houses late at night and ram coat hangers up their wives' cooters, then head down the hall to slip some gay into their milk to fagginate their kids.

 

Alibi #1) It wasn't "serious" disagreement. Nobody except my best buddy Bush is important, therefore their disagreements weren't a serious issue.

Alibi #2) He just plain forgot that they disagreed. Why you picking on someone with Alzheimer's?

 

What it demonstrates is, that as much as one may disagree with Ashcroft's politics, he was, at least in this instance, even in his incapacitated state, able to recognize that his duty as AG carried responsibilities that transcended political loyalty.

 

If Hagel runs as an independent things could get very interesting indeed. I don't agree with him on too much but I sure respect him. He is what McCain pretends to be.