Comments on: Patrick Fitzgerald Chosen As U.S. Attorney Over Rove Pressure

By: Big Johnny Holmes

Big Johnny Holmes — Sun, 18 Mar 2007 15:48:20 +0000

Argue as you might, you all are missing the BIG PICTURE here. The Federal Government has no standing as such, it rules by color of law not LAW itself. The United States Government is a corporation and as such, should have a fiduciary responsibility to its stockholders. Since there are no stockholders as such, their fiduciary responsibility is not to us, because the Federal Government was not created to benefit us, it was created to rob all of the wealth from the citizens (little C) of the united states of America (spelling correct for territory) and place it in the pockets of the owners of the Federal Reserve Banks (read Rockefellers, JP Morgan et. al.). Oh wait, did you not know that the Federal Reserve Bank was not wholly owned and operated by the united states of America? Watch the production “Creature From Jekyll Island” on YouTube and Google video for clarification. Read up a little on James Traficant, a former congressman from Ohio who is incarcerated because the noble man dared stand up at the podium in front of the Congress and say the truth. The united states of America offices ceased to exist in 1933 and the legal fiction United States of America began its reign under bankruptcy of biblical proportions. Don’t fear all, the worst has yet to come, but the worst will be short in duration because our divine creator promised us.

By: cheryl

cheryl — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 13:00:47 +0000

All right, this is big news-let’s get on the subpeona bandwagon and have Rove commit perjury-which he would most likely do-so we can jail this member of the Bush crime family!!!!!

By: FOIA Gras

FOIA Gras — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 05:42:54 +0000

#4
Roger_Roger, I believe you are correct that generally the attorney should be someone with ties to the community to which one is being appointed to serve. However, it was the person charged with making the appointment, who was himself tied to the community, who made the judgement that because of widespread corruption there was a need to bring in somebody from outside, somebody unencumbered by personal ties in going after said corruption. Don’t you agree that an argument could be made for an exception in such a case?

Further, isn’t it fair to question, given Rove’s Machiavellian record as a political operative, whether he advocated a local appointee as a matter of principle or did he use that principle as cover for more nefarious motives?

By: alaskana

alaskana — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 01:50:06 +0000

Just remember, there are a lot rungs in a ladder. we are only getting started. so far so good.
perhaps Rove, will hang himself, with the 8 atty. fireings…
We can only hope

By: knowhelpnow

knowhelpnow — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:48:15 +0000

It’s not how many judges were replace. It’s the why? If it is to stop the procecuting of coruption in government, that is WRONG

By: Terri

Terri — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:26:45 +0000

Well Rove has been called the ‘architect’… and when you build on slime, well… the whole thing eventually falls down.

It never ceases to amaze me the lengths some people will go to defend slime. It’s like party has replaced any and all sense of decency..any inkling of what is right.

Makes you kinda nostalgic for the days of blue dresses. The hypocrisy even there with major repubs (Gingrich, Guiliani, Foley…etc) making that look like a Mary Poppins event.

By: Margo

Margo — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:13:54 +0000

Abu Gonzales must resign. He holds the highest office in the land representing justice. Someone is his position must avoid even the appearance of impropriety. He has failed miserably on that count (along with the rest of Bush Co). The people can not trust the Dept of Justice to be imparital or fairly assert of the laws of the land when this kind of monkey (i.e. chimp) business is going on.

By: Brighid

Brighid — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 15:27:39 +0000

“Those fired were not completely “loyal,” as Sampson’s e-mails emphasized. But to what policies should a prosecutor be “loyal”? Two academics, Donald C. Shields of the University of Missouri and John F. Cragan of Illinois State University, studied the pattern of U.S. attorneys’ prosecutions under the Bush administration. Their conclusions in their study, “The Political Profiling of Elected Democratic Officials,” are that “across the nation from 2001 through 2006 the Bush Justice Department investigated Democratic office holders and candidates at a rate more than four times greater (nearly 80 percent to 18 percent) than they investigated Republican office holders and seekers.” They also report, “Data indicate that the offices of the U.S. Attorneys across the nation investigate seven times as many Democratic officials as they investigate Republican officials, a number that exceeds even the racial profiling of African Americans in traffic stops.” Thus what the 85 U.S. attorneys who were not dismissed are doing is starkly detailed.

If the Democrats hadn’t won the midterm elections last year there is no reason to believe that the plan to use the U.S. attorneys for political prosecutions — as they have been used systematically under Bush — wouldn’t have gone forward completely unimpeded. Without the new Congress issuing subpoenas, there would be no exposure, no hearings, no press conferences — no questions at all.

The replacement of the eight fired U.S. attorneys through a loophole in the Patriot Act that enables the administration to evade consultation with and confirmation by Congress is a convenient element in the well-laid scheme. But it was not ad hoc, erratic or aberrant. Rather, it was the logical outcome of a long effort to distort the constitutional framework for partisan consolidation of power into a de facto one-party state.”

All roads lead to Rove

The White House political director was clearly at the center of the partisan plot to fire U.S. attorneys, despite the administration’s clumsy attempts to pretend otherwise.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/blumenthal/2007/03/15/rove_attorneys/

By: Brighid

Brighid — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 14:05:39 +0000

Republican â€œLogicâ€

Good illustration of the obtuse Jake, who thinks he can explain the Constitution to anyone despite the fact that he can’t figure out that Bush has violated the Constitution too many times to count.

Perhaps US attorneys are appointed and serve at the pleasure of the President; however, they do not prosecute at the pleasure of the president. That would be obstruction of justice.

By: Batdog

Batdog — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 13:36:51 +0000

oops Isnâ€™t â€œthe baseâ€ in Arabic, â€œAl-Qaedaâ€?

By: Batdog

Batdog — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 13:33:47 +0000

Isn’t “the base” in Arabic, “the base”? “Al-Qaeda or al-Qaida or al-Qa’ida (Arabic: Ø§Ù„Ù‚Ø§Ø¹Ø¯Ø© al-qÄÊ•ida, trans. ‘the base’)”~ Wikipedia

So Rove wants to help al-Qaeda!

By: Marty

Marty — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 12:53:54 +0000

The obnoxious trolls are probably paid shills for the RNC. The constant talking point about the so-called “voter fraud” concerns is complete B.S. We know about Katherine Harris’s fraud in 00…military votes uninvestigated, felon lists expanded to excise Democratic voters, butterfly ballots etc…..where was the US attorney investigation??In Ohio….rampant interference by the black Sec. of State( also Bush election campaign head) with innumerable cases of fraud…where was the US attorney investigation??? Christine Gregoire in Washington State….investigated by US attorney McKay, and the FBI…..no evidence of voter fraud…but only allegations by the RNC….not happy with that ????OK…let us investigate that and ALL instances of voter fraud…and throw those found guilty in jail.

By: CitizenJane

CitizenJane — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 12:35:35 +0000

The verbage of the headline leaves the impression that Senator Fitzgerald was pressured by Rove to appoint Patrick Fitzgerald. Very misleading.

By: All Spin Zone » Rove Meddled In US Attorney Nominations All Along

All Spin Zone » Rove Meddled In US Attorney Nominations All Along — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 10:02:49 +0000

[...] make that clear, Rove has been meddling in these nominations all along, no matter the denials his office puts out. But the odd thing here is that there is nothing wrong with him meddling. Sure, I’ll agree [...]

By: barfly

barfly — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 06:45:22 +0000

After that, I will explain to you how the Constitution is not a suicide pact and that we were de facto at war with terrorists ever since they attacked the Marines in Lebonon.

Comment by Jake â€” March 14, 2007 @ 3:27 pm

Always late to the party.

But if we were de-facto at war with terrorists, why did Reagan sell them weapons? He began selling weapons to the Iranians shortly after coming into office, and both before and after the Marines were killed in Beihrut. So, what’s this suicide pact stuff? You either believe in the Constitution or you don’t. My quess is you don’t.

By: The Oracle

The Oracle — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 06:09:36 +0000

The U.S. Attorneys serve at the pleasure of the President.

The President serves at the pleasure of the citizens of the United States.

70 percent of U.S. citizens are highly displeased with the President and all the corrupt policies and practices of all the President’s Republican crony pals.

Ergo, because the President serves at the pleasure of the American people and a large majority of American citizens are pissed at Bush’s performance as President, Bush MUST be impeached…by our representatives and senators in Congress who also serve at the pleasure of the citizens of the United States.

By: teak

teak — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 02:58:41 +0000

Gotta love this. The Great State of Illinois will lead the way to Rove’s demise.

By: R

Thu, 15 Mar 2007 01:59:48 +0000

Republican “Logic”:
“But Judge, going sixty miles an hour, ISN’T ILLEGAL”
Librul Judge:
Going sixty in a TWENTY is.

Republican “Logic”:
But, Judge, it’s not ILLEGAL to fire someone I hired!
Librul Judge: Firing them for ‘retaliation’ is.

Republican “Logic”:
But Judge, firing the attorneys we don’t like anymore, isn’t ILLEGAL!
Librul Judge: Firing them to obstruct justice is.

Just like the republican trolls to cherry pick their ‘logic’ for legal defense, the same way they cherry picked their ‘intelligence’ for going to war.

By: mohammed khader

mohammed khader — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 01:55:53 +0000

We need 49 more Fitzs

By: Hand Banana

Hand Banana — Thu, 15 Mar 2007 01:00:25 +0000

Why isn’t there an entire army of special prosecutors descending on this administration? WTF? Every other day there’s a new law broken and a new scandal. Why aren’t there multiple investigations going on simultaneously on all fronts?