Margaret Chiara seeks a recommendation from McNulty, describing his willingness to get her a job elsewhere as “the witness protection program”, saying she’s willing to elude reporters if he’ll get her the job she wants. Beautiful.

She also says, by way of establishing her threat, that if she can’t get the job, then maybe the administration should tell the truth, because “”Politics may not be a pleasant reason, but the truth is compelling.”

Please take a look.

You know they are in trouble when they wish you would just go back and investigate Iraq.

This will be choice….can you spell….g-r-a-n-d j-u-r-y, and i-n-d-i-c-t-m-e-n-t?

How many days left until these bastards are out of office?

November 2008 will be a Repug Electorial Bloodbath.

Now put this in context with Rove and Gonzales (and some Republicans in Congress) pressuring the U.S. Attorneys to bring or announce indictments against Democrats during the same time frame before the election.

And also remember that just weeks before the elections, Karl Rove confidently stated that the Republicans would retain control of both chambers of Congress. He said he’s seen “the numbers” and Republicans might lose a few seats, but would still maintain control.

Anyway, the Mark Foley scandal placed all Republicans in a bad light, especially the enablers of Foley’s behavior in the House of Representatives, so Rove and Gonzales hit upon trying to fabricate a scandal against the Democrats by having compliant U.S. Attorney bring suits against Democrats, including using the claim of voter fraud.

Oh, and remember the stories before the elections last year (BradBlog) in which Republican “voter registration” hacks were collecting voter registration forms from members of both parties and turning in the Republican’s forms while trashing the Democrat’s forms.

In other words, to put the December 2006 U.S. Attorney firings in context, we have to look at what pressure was being applied on all of them before the November 2006 elections. The Mark Foley scandal, I believe, is the critical issue that Republican strategists like Rove were trying to force off the front page of newspapers…and replacing these Foley stories with manufactured scandals against Democrats.

Just a thought.

I hope so, too. Because that will mean that sworn testimony b efore Congress is purjured. We already know that, but having ironclad hard copy corroboration is always nice.

Republicans sought in 1993 to depict the routine and standard replacement of U.S. attorneys by the Clinton administration as some sort of grave scandal which threatened prosecutorial independence and was deeply corrupt.

And more from 14 years ago…

Senate and House Republicans yesterday blasted the White House and the Justice Department for giving pink slips to virtually all 93 U.S. attorneys, a move Senate Minority Leader Bob Dole called the “March massacre.”

He said, “The American people deserve a Justice Department that takes a back seat to politics and one that functions efficiently.”

THe new political appointee can certainly pick up where the old attorney left off. There is no reason these investigation cannot continue. Of course, Bush is perfectly free to purge them again. Maybe congress should focus on changing the law instead of looking for poltical points while ignoring how to fix this?

Comment by Roger_Roger — March 19, 2007 @ 2:21 pm

But did the new appointees pick up any investigations in progress? If they did, the WH certainly isn’t taking advantage of that news and putting to rest the accusations of obstruction of justice.

One of the fired attorneys has already called out Bush for lying about performance issues with the 8 attorneys. It’s under the Cummins thread from a few days ago if you dare to go read it.

Apparently you think it’s just fine for all attorneys appointed by a Democratic president to go easy on Democratic politicians and anyone, corrupt or not, with ties to the Democrats, including the President. And you can substitute “Republican” for the other side. Is that the rule of law you want to have in the U.S.???

Maybe you can tell us why the administration lied about the 8 attorneys’ performance.

Oh, and Roger (and all the other idiot trolls here)…

Bush personally blocked an investigation by the Office of Professional Responsibility in the Justice Department — the office responsible for investigating allegations of misconduct involving Department attorneys — which repeatedly attempted to investigate whether DOJ lawyers acted improperly concerning their role in the President’s warrantless eavesdropping program, but finally stopped their investigation because the President refused to give them the security clearances they needed to conduct the investigation.

Bush had no problem, however, granting security clearances, some to civilians, when he wanted to check into the leak of the NSA warrantless wiretapping program.

But see, you idiots don’t see a problem with this. That, or you are so far up Bush and the Republicans as*es that you don’t WANT to see a problem. Archie Bunkers…each and every one of you.

If Bush will personally block something like this, it’s not too much of a stretch of the imagination to conclude he’ll take any action to prevent investigation of any wrongdoing by his administration or any of his cronies.

But then again, you don’t have any imagination. You don’t question the “what if.” On another thread, it seems that Carol Lam was considered a “problem” by Gonzo’s assistant Mr. Sampson shortly before she was fired, and it looks like she was going after more Republicans based on info that came out in the Duke Cunningham investigation. I doubt that “problem” had anything to do with poor performance as Bush as suggested.

Hello, veritas! This thing is unravelling, and we have a front row seat. Impeachment needs to be front and center — right along side getting us the f*ck out of Iraq.

was supposed to be done last thursday or friday.

but they couldn’t make that deadline.

conclusion:

justice dept and white house lawyers

spent all weekend combing thru their paper garbage for really damaging docs to hide

before they turned the remainder over to congress -

on monday evening.

maybe.

BTW, I love your moniker. There are so many Valiants flying around these threads that I can’t keep up with them all.