Gonzales reaches out.
By on Mar 21st, 2007 at 6:17 pm
Gonzales reaches out.
“Embattled Attorney General Alberto Gonzales met this afternoon with several Republican Senators, including Orrin Hatch, Jon Kyl, John Cornyn and Jeff Sessions. … The lunch meeting held at the Department of Justice, sources said, was initiated by Gonzales. A source familiar with the meeting says it was an attempt by Gonzales to reach out to Republicans who have been decidedly unhappy with how he has handled the US Attorney mess.”
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Strategizing meeting? I know Kyl is on the Judiciary committee.
March 21st, 2007 at 6:21 pmif the idea is to reach out to Congressmen who have an issue with him, why did he make it partisan? Gonzy should have invited Dems, too…
March 21st, 2007 at 6:22 pmOnly thing he should be reaching out for is a life raft
March 21st, 2007 at 6:22 pmGo Speedy “Torture” Gonzales!!!!
March 21st, 2007 at 6:27 pmdropkick; he would do better to reach out for an anvil while he’s treading water.
March 21st, 2007 at 6:28 pmPLEEASE Lemme stay…
…I’ve betrayed my people…
…and shamed my ancestors…
…YOU broke me…
…now you own me…
-Abu Gonzo-
March 21st, 2007 at 6:29 pmWon’t reach out to the Dems? I guess he knows they won’t rollover for him. He can only get along with and talk to corrupt individuals.
March 21st, 2007 at 6:29 pmIt’s funny that he met with Jon Kyl of all people, considering he specifically bypassed Kyl’s nomination of Dianne Humetewa for the AZ attorney position in favor of Mr. Knauss. Wonder if that was tense at all?
March 21st, 2007 at 6:35 pmAnonymous:
How do you know Speedy “Torture” Gonzales has not reached out to Dems like, say, Joe Lieberman?
March 21st, 2007 at 6:36 pm” I ran out of gas. I had a flat tire. I didn’t have enough money for cab fare. My tux didn’t come back from the cleaners. An old friend came in from out of town. Someone stole my car. There was an earthquake. A terrible flood. Locusts. IT WASN’T MY FAULT, I SWEAR TO GOD.
Jake Blues
March 21st, 2007 at 6:36 pmIf the GOP fall for Gonzales’s lunch game they are saying that now the Attorney General has lied under oath it’s now legal. Ted Wells will use this to get Libby’s case dismissed. The jails will be cleared out as all convicted for lying are free. Our Justice System will be run by a AG who allows crimes to be committed. No need for Justice next the Supreme Court will be in question. The US will no longer have a Justice System and out right lawlessness will be allowed. Bush has to let his friend go home. Yes Gonzales fixed it so Bush wouldn’t have to admit to having a DUI so he could continue his career. But he got rewarded and now it’s time for him to move on. Bush should use his energy to save his friend Karl Rove who had the voting machines fixed and stopped minorities and seniors from voting there by getting in office. Karl has committed many crimes to make sure Bush got control and continues today.
March 21st, 2007 at 6:38 pmLieberman is an Independent, just like you, Jake.
You dum bass.
You didn’t know this?
March 21st, 2007 at 6:43 pmLieberman is not a Democrat, he’s an AIPAC Republiscum douchebag. Those idiots can have him.
March 21st, 2007 at 6:45 pmJackie:
Now you know (again) what we felt like after Clinton’s Senate acquittal. As I said before, let me know when you get Bush lying under oath.
March 21st, 2007 at 6:46 pmalp3:
According to the official Senate records, Lieberman is listed as an Independent-DEMOCRAT. He caucuses with the Dems so is a, de facto, Democrat. Keep pushing this and surrendering in Iraq, and you may some day be right.
March 21st, 2007 at 6:47 pmJaneESchneider:
Be careful what you wish for — Bush thought it was a good idea to snub Jeffords on some minor “Teacher of the Year” event and we all know how that turned out ; )
March 21st, 2007 at 6:49 pmNow you know (again) what we felt like after Clinton’s Senate acquittal.
Comment by Jake — March 21, 2007 @ 6:46 pm
“We”, Jake?!?!? Who is “we”? Doesn’t sound much like an “Independent” if you ask me.
Are you really 75, Jake? Or are you a 20-something Red State volunteer foot soldier working on Team-Rove?
March 21st, 2007 at 6:50 pmJake sez:
Lieberman is a registered Independent, Jake…just like you.
(He’s about as “independent” as you are, too.)
Honestly, Jake…presuming to lecture all of us about ‘executive privilege’ and ’separation of powers’, and you aren’t even aware that Lieberman is an Independent? Sheesh…
March 21st, 2007 at 6:50 pmGoodness. I hope these fellas aren’t becoming co-conspirators. Why, I’d begin to question the ethics of the Republic Party.
March 21st, 2007 at 6:50 pmHe caucuses with the Dems so is a, de facto, Democrat.
Another legal theory of Jake’s.
Just keeping making it up, Jake. Nobody here believes you.
March 21st, 2007 at 6:51 pmAn ant in a toilet bowl looking for a floater.
Go luck Sleazy Gonzales.
-GSD
March 21st, 2007 at 6:52 pmDid I write Jake? I’m sorry, I meant to write Joke.
March 21st, 2007 at 6:53 pmVerbalKint sez:
Jake has a mouse in his pocket. ^_^
March 21st, 2007 at 6:53 pmNot to worry Gonzales, they’ll all fall in line.
March 21st, 2007 at 6:53 pmVerbalkint, I’m with you, there’s no way in hell this immature troll is 75, OR Independent, and I told it so yesterday. I’ve had enough of Jake/Joke/Jerk derailing these threads with stupid strawmen. As I said yesterday, this current crop of trolls makes me miss Exley. :|
March 21st, 2007 at 6:55 pmDo you think so, Jake? Do you have a link to wikipedia for verification?
If I keep pushing this Gonzo debacle, the Democratic party is going to
lose their pillar of party loyalty Joe Lieberman?
Hmmm…
March 21st, 2007 at 6:55 pmLieberman is a mole on the inside.
March 21st, 2007 at 6:56 pmif anyone doubts this was a conspiracy meeting to hide the facts and further obstruct justice….
March 21st, 2007 at 6:56 pmplease contact me about some land I bought that is now for sale
My dad is in his 80s. He was a Goldwater Republican.
One of my earliest political memories is going to a Goldwater rally in western NY.
Then Watergate happened and my Dad left the party…or they left him.
I’m proud of my Dad. He thinks for himself.
He’s not a mindless drone like Jake.
March 21st, 2007 at 6:57 pmNow you know (again) what we felt like after Clinton’s Senate acquittal. As I said before, let me know when you get Bush lying under oath.
Comment by Jake
This isn’t about f*cking payback, you jackass.
This is about us, the Democrats, getting rid of corrupt politicians, who ALL happen to be Republicans.
Give it a f*cking rest.
March 21st, 2007 at 6:58 pmDana Rohrbacher says…
…â€Alberto Gonzales has mishandled this and a number of other situations and should resign…he should go. But let me say that Bill clinton fired all 93 Us Attorneys when he took office. And Wolf the President has the right to fire these attorneys, they just handled it badly and brought down a firestorm that they didn’t have to have.â€
Now lemme see if I get this right:
…the Preznit should fire Gonzales…
…who has done NOTHING wrong, just mishandled HOW he did NOTHING wrong…
…the Preznit has the RIGHT to fire these attorneys, but should FIRE Abu for doing what the Preznit has the RIGHT to do- because of the WAY he did it…
YEAH…
…these sombiches are hiding something…
…INVESTIGATE…
…til we can uncover the CRIMINALITY…
…it’s in there somewhere…
March 21st, 2007 at 6:58 pmMore drooling by Jake
Jake, focus now, pay attention. Since you failed to answer ina previous thread
The key part of the ruling against Nixon’s claim of executive privilige is â€
Absent a claim of need to protect military, diplomatic, or sensitive national security secrets,
Now tell me are the firings military? No
Diplomatic? Nothing diplomatic about the handling for sure.
Sensitive national security secret? No
Even if Bush lied and talked about it with Rove or Meyers, it still does not meet the criteria set forth by the Supreme Court for a claim of Executive Privilige.
And rebutting Exley’s claim, Since the Judicial and the Legislative branches are equal, the Legislative has asmuchpower to call for testimony
Please cite any court ruling in your rebuttal for verification. If you cannot cite a court ruling, you have no argument that is sound.
March 21st, 2007 at 6:58 pmCheney paid 140 K to Wade to remodel his office. Wake buys Cunningham a boat for 140 K 2 weeks later. Cunningham goes to jail.
bush fires Carol Lam, who prosecuted Cunningham.
Such simple math, even Jake can understand.
March 21st, 2007 at 6:58 pmWe could try to “win” the abomination in Iraq if such a thing was even possible. Never forget the undeniable fact that this thing was lost a long time ago, almost before “Mission Accomplished”.
March 21st, 2007 at 6:58 pm
Loserwhore is going to switch to the Repukes soon.
He got most of his support from the Repukes anyway.
Loserman stopped being a Democrat when he ran against the party nominee. That violates party rules.
“Independent Democrat” is a meaningless term and I am surprised the Senate is using it on their website. Loserman is an Independent. Actually, he’s a closet Repuke but he’s coming out of his closet.
March 21st, 2007 at 6:59 pmVerbalKint:
I am really 75, and “we” in that sentence includes everyone, regardless of party affiliation, who thought Clinton should have been removed from office — as I’ve said, once you’ve got Bush lying under oath, let me know. Also, “de facto” does not mean “legal theory” — look it up if you won’t believe me.
TripMaster Monkey:
Lieberman, Joseph I.- (ID – CT) http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm?OrderBy=party&Sort=ASC
March 21st, 2007 at 7:02 pmabby thank you for posting. i wish someone in congress would pick this up, not for political reasons but for the sheer fact that this is HORRIBLE!!!!!!!
March 21st, 2007 at 7:05 pmYeah, ya’ see, me an’ my Independent buddies were down at the VFW havin’ a few beers one night a few years back, an’ we’all just started hollerin’ “Let’s impeach that SOB Clinton!”.
(uh huh, Jake)
March 21st, 2007 at 7:07 pmsorry to do this to ya Jake, but since Bush is hiding behind ‘executive priviledge’, the same way that many in HIS administration said Bill Clinton couldn’t, why can Bush continue to hide behind this???
March 21st, 2007 at 7:07 pmRepublicans who have been decidedly unhappy with how he has handled the US Attorney mess.
Shouldn’t this say “how he created and then handled the US Attorney mess.”
March 21st, 2007 at 7:08 pmalp3:
I posted the Senate’s own web site link instead. Let me know if you still have questions.
Zooey:
That sounded a bit “nasty and bumbling” to me ; )
Wayne:
I’d cite it again, but what’s the use if TP keeps deleting it?
Tom3:
Lots of Senators and Representatives have been “Independent Democrats†— there have been “Independent Republicans” too — don’t look now, but there used to be a party called WHIGS!! Can you believe that?
March 21st, 2007 at 7:09 pmJake, you really are a 75-year-old idiot.
You still support a criminal regime that lied to us to start a war.
You support torture. You support treason.
And now you support dismantling our legal system.
I spit on you, Jake. You are a worthless, immoral scumbag.
You have nothing to say here, Jake. I suggest you leave.
March 21st, 2007 at 7:09 pmZooey:
That sounded a bit “nasty and bumbling†to me
It was definitely nasty, but in no way was it bumbling.
March 21st, 2007 at 7:09 pmI don’t get it. Is Lieberman a democrat or not? Surely “independent democrat” implies he no longer views himself as part of the democratic party?
March 21st, 2007 at 7:10 pmIncompetance meeting.
March 21st, 2007 at 7:10 pmSuch simple math, even Jake can understand.
Comment by helenahandbasket — March 21, 2007 @ 6:58 pm
Don’t bet on it, helena – hell, he doesn’t even know how old he is!
March 21st, 2007 at 7:11 pmAn Independent Democrat is NOT a Democrat.
They are two seperate things.
Lieberman is NOT in the Democratic party.
Jake is just lying and spinning like a typical Repuke moron.
March 21st, 2007 at 7:11 pmand the WHIGS aren’t here anymore….
March 21st, 2007 at 7:11 pmhow odd.
In case you needed any more justification for Gonzales’ departure, see:
March 21st, 2007 at 7:11 pm“Top 10 Reasons Why Gonzales Must Go.”
“Go fu*k yourself Gonzales”
March 21st, 2007 at 7:12 pmI am really 75, and “we†in that sentence includes everyone, regardless of party affiliation, who thought Clinton should have been removed from office — as I’ve said, once you’ve got Bush lying under oath, let me know. Also, “de facto†does not mean “legal theory†— look it up if you won’t believe me.
Then the “we” really doesn’t apply here, does it? I’d be willing to be few of the people posting on TP believed Clinton should have been removed from office for lying about whether or not he got some head. Me? I have yet to meet the married man that would admit, right up front, that he’d had sex with another woman. Lying is the most logical and normal response.
Was it wrong? Sure. Were the members of Congress in any position to cast the first stone? It is to laugh. Plenty of other illicit knob jobs going on in DC, but Clinton had the misfortune to get caught.
The real hypocrites, though, are the people whining about Bill that continue to defend the Bush Administration for an incredible series of lies that had nothing to do with blow jobs and everything to do with tricking the American public into agreeing to invade a sovereign country, spend trillions of dollars, lose thousands of lives, cripple the military, and accomplish nothing but to make the situation worse.
A lie is a lie, whether Bush and Cheney were “under oath” or not. They took a fking oath when they took office, and they’ve been violating that oath every day since January 2001.
March 21st, 2007 at 7:12 pmhya Zooey! i hope your day has gone well.
March 21st, 2007 at 7:13 pmwhiteyfresh:
No need to apologize. Clinton was forced to testify in a CIVIL case, and then before a GRAND JURY looking into his alleged perjury therefrom. Bush has never testified as President. Now who’s the genius?
March 21st, 2007 at 7:13 pmComment by Tom3 — March 21, 2007 @ 7:11 pm
Cheers for clearing that up. I had the feeling I was being stupid and missing something. It seems that this wasn’t the case – for once.
March 21st, 2007 at 7:13 pmAn Independent Democrat is NOT a Democrat.
They are two seperate things.
Lieberman is NOT in the Democratic party.
Jake is just lying and spinning like a typical Repuke moron.
Comment by Tom3
Lying and hoping no one will notice the hypocrisy: Jake claims to be an Independent, yet claims that Lieberman, who ran as an Independent is a Democrat. If Lieberman is a Democrat, than ipso facto, Jakie is a Republican because every word he types is right out of the Republican playbook.
March 21st, 2007 at 7:15 pmI think we can guess at what was said at this meeting:
“Um…HELP!!!!”
March 21st, 2007 at 7:15 pmwouldn’t you know it..
Tucker showed the clip w/Gore and in-HO, and cut the clip so it stopped before Boxer put him in his place.
Jake:what’s up?you here causin us ‘libs’ indigestion again? :0~
March 21st, 2007 at 7:15 pmJake says: once you’ve got Bush lying under oath, let me know.
Doesn’t the oath of office swear to uphold and defend the Constitution?
Habeas Corpus = QED.
March 21st, 2007 at 7:16 pmJake-the reduds had 4 years-Dems have been here what,3 months?
March 21st, 2007 at 7:17 pmgive em time…
Jake
March 21st, 2007 at 7:17 pmI was middle age when Nixon got impeached I know it’s hard to believe that a Republcan President resigned rather then have to be under oath for the crimes committed. We’ll see if the Nixon play book works out this time. With supporters like you Nixon would have been our first Dictator. Now Jake you get to see what all the Watergate corruption was about. Yes Dick Cheney was a good student of Nixon’s and followed in his footstep. Bush might just sworn under oath to his crimes and not skip out like Nixon did. Like other loyal Republicans such as Libby, Abramoff, Duke and Ney no crimes have ever been committed and all are innocent but in jail. Still they are loyal like the Nixon team and protect the President at all cost even if you look and sound stupid just keep lying someone might believe it.
Now you know (again) what we felt like after Clinton’s Senate acquittal. As I said before, let me know when you get Bush lying under oath.
Comment by Jake
How about at this two inaugurations when he took an oath to defend the Constitution and uphold the laws for the nation? Do they count, Jake?
March 21st, 2007 at 7:17 pmJake, he could be registered as a freakin’ tuna salad sandwich, and
you could post a link that confirms it, but the people know
which way the wind blows.
This is something you don’t seem to understand. Hell, you could
have a link that proves you’re a 75 year old, independent, american
male…
I’d still call b*llsh*t, based on your posts alone. We are not always
what we claim to be, Jake.
That, you already know..
March 21st, 2007 at 7:17 pmHitch, kyll, Cornholyn and shitshins. There’s a mensa meetin’ for ya.
March 21st, 2007 at 7:18 pmAh, Jake, here you are! Why did you run out on that spirited conversation we were having back in the “39%” thread?
Now, I know you didn’t mean to, but you left before answering my question. You responded once, but you only responded to a little sarcasm I made (childish on my part, I know) but you didn’t get to the substantive part abotu the separation of powers. So, just to remind you, here it is again:
How does “separation of powers†account for the differences between these two situations:
In public vs. In private
Transcript vs. No transcript
Oath vs. No oath
Thanks, Jake!
March 21st, 2007 at 7:18 pmYeah Gonzales, reach out and touch someone. What happened, did boy Bush tell you to get your arse back out there and try to make some friends? Pluck your magic twanger, froggy!
March 21st, 2007 at 7:20 pmStill here, jake? Wow you’re dedicated!
March 21st, 2007 at 7:21 pmJake typed:
“No need to apologize. Clinton was forced to testify in a CIVIL case, and then before a GRAND JURY looking into his alleged perjury therefrom. Bush has never testified as President. Now who’s the genius?”
Avoiding testimony under oath doesn’t make Bush a genius, it only establishes that that he is a careful criminal. But in your warped view, that’s really the same thing, isn’t it?
March 21st, 2007 at 7:21 pm#44 – I don’t get it. Is Lieberman a democrat or not? Surely “independent democrat†implies he no longer views himself as part of the democratic party?
Comment by UKBristolDave
Lieberman is neither a Democrat nor a Republican — he’s a Traitor.
Hope that helps. :)
March 21st, 2007 at 7:21 pmTom3:
I’m disinclined to acquiesce to your suggestion. Means no.
Also, I said Lieberman was a DE FACTO Democrat.
Zooey:
1 out of 2 ain’t bad ; )
UKBristolDave or gummitch:
Are you saying no other registered Independent OR Democrat wanted Clinton removed from office?
March 21st, 2007 at 7:22 pmhya Zooey! i hope your day has gone well.
Comment by whiteyfresh
Hi whitey, my dear, now that it’s over, it’s fantastic. How about your day?
March 21st, 2007 at 7:22 pmComment by Zooey #30
You tell ‘em Zooey…
…they got nothin’…
…just memories of a FAILED impeachment attempt…
…that blew up in their faces…
…EVERYTHING they touch turns to sh*t…
…because of their rotten, cursed Karma…
March 21st, 2007 at 7:23 pmJake – boy Bush wouldn’t take an oath in front of Congress JUST so he won’t get caught lying under oath. Remember, Bush the chickenhawk, the airman that went AWOL during the Vietnam War?
March 21st, 2007 at 7:23 pmzooey:dang skippy.
March 21st, 2007 at 7:23 pmHey Zooey… Lieberman could be an Isreali spy for all we know.
March 21st, 2007 at 7:25 pmIs Gonzales “reaching out” or “reaching around”?
March 21st, 2007 at 7:25 pmJake get down to the VFW and knit stump covers for yer troops, pal. Every minute you’re in here is another minute you don’t support you troops and Leader, gummy.
March 21st, 2007 at 7:25 pmIt is amazing how much the Repukes have been lying and spinning about this case. Anything to keep the voters from understanding what this really means.
The US Attorneys were fired in mid-term for political reasons, and some were fired in the middle of investigations of Republicans.
You can’t do that. It undermines public trust in our legal system. If the legal system can be manipulated at will by partisan politics, then there is no legal system and no justice in this country.
We cannot have a legal system that prosecutes Democrats and lets crooked Republicans go scot free. That’s the simple truth of it…the truth the Repukes do NOT want you to know.
March 21st, 2007 at 7:25 pmit’s funny, the way my computer is set up with my tv to the right, i am perpetually leaning to the ‘left’ when I post!!
:D
March 21st, 2007 at 7:26 pmKRank (and CoffinsDrapedWith Flags):
Congress cannot legally force the President or his advisors to testify — Bush did not even have to offer the interview w/ no transcript option, but he did to set up the Dems as the side wanting a Constitutional crisis.
jeff:
Still here. Thanks.
War4Sale:
No, that’s not the same thing.
March 21st, 2007 at 7:27 pmComment by Zooey — March 21, 2007 @ 7:21 pm
Hey, I am here to learn. And try and get a US citizenship. The House of Windsor is thoroughly unimpressed with me following the Prince William incident. Hehehehe
Comment by Jake — March 21, 2007 @ 7:22 pm
What’s this “UKBristolDave or gummitch” stuff all about? I’m UKBristolDave for crying out loud! Should I start calling you “Jake or Sweaty Pete”?
March 21st, 2007 at 7:28 pmI’m disinclined to acquiesce to your suggestion. Means no.
Also, I said Lieberman was a DE FACTO Democrat. Comment by Jake — March 21, 2007 @ 7:22 pm
Really? To us, it just means you’re a weasel, like Lieberman. He’s a *defacto* CON, and has been for several years – just like you are.
1 out of 2 ain’t bad ; ) Comment by Jake — March 21, 2007 @ 7:22 pm
You’re a ZERO dum bass.
Are you saying no other registered Independent OR Democrat wanted Clinton removed from office? Comment by Jake — March 21, 2007 @ 7:22 pm
Yeah, and both you and Lieberman *claim* to be an Independent. Yet both of you carry water like the most faithful loyalists around. What’s in a label, when a *weasel* like yourself simply wants to deceive.
Stop Jake’ing off old man, you’re just a t*rd in the punch bowl. You serve no function other than to demonstrate what a juvenile twit you are.
March 21st, 2007 at 7:28 pm…because of their rotten, cursed Karma…
Comment by big papa
Thanks, big papa. It’s stupid how they actually think they’re going to bluff their way through this, saying it’s all payback. F*ck that.
I gotta disagree about the karma, pops. I think karma is working just fine. :D
March 21st, 2007 at 7:28 pmzooey:dang skippy.
Comment by whiteyfresh
Cool.
March 21st, 2007 at 7:29 pmCongress cannot legally force the President or his advisors to testify — Bush did not even have to offer the interview w/ no transcript option, but he did to set up the Dems as the side wanting a Constitutional crisis. Comment by Jake — March 21, 2007 @ 7:27 pm
Sure they can. They can force them to testify either before Congress itself, or a grand jury.
Still here. Thanks. Comment by Jake — March 21, 2007 @ 7:27 pm
Useless fools like you never have anything better to do with their time than harass people. I can see why your children avoid you.
No, that’s not the same thing.
Comment by Jake — March 21, 2007 @ 7:27 pm
Yet, you’re the same twit that knows nothing…. Idiot
March 21st, 2007 at 7:30 pmHey Zooey… Lieberman could be an Isreali spy for all we know.
Comment by CoffinsDrapedWithFlags
He’s just not that smooth. I’m sure he has their interests at heart, though.
F*cking traitor.
March 21st, 2007 at 7:31 pmGonzales reaches out to the Republicans in a private luncheon
Guard your privates as he reaches out – he’s learned some techniques during his sojourn with Herr Bush, or perhaps he taught Bush. Or maybe they discovered a whole new universe of love together.
March 21st, 2007 at 7:31 pmLOL — I can’t wait for the day Bush is forced to testify before Congress then — you guys are funny!
March 21st, 2007 at 7:34 pmzooey: from accross the pond, are ye?
March 21st, 2007 at 7:37 pmit’s funny, the way my computer is set up with my tv to the right, i am perpetually leaning to the ‘left’ when I post!!
:D
Comment by whiteyfresh
It’s good for you, builds character. At least it’s to the left…. :)
March 21st, 2007 at 7:39 pmUKBristolDave or gummitch:
Are you saying no other registered Independent OR Democrat wanted Clinton removed from office?
Comment by Jake
You can’t read, can you? Did your reader leave the room?
And, per your standard SOP, you’ve built your straw man and completely avoided addressing any of the points I made, since that would require logical thinking and having to write something other than a canned response from the neocon playbook.
March 21st, 2007 at 7:43 pmAbu Gonzohomo is an a$$ clown that needs to be fitted for a pair of very tight fitting handcuffs!!!
Can we disbar this bastard!!!!!
Where is he licensed???
He needs to get a new career!!!!!!!! Like being a big ass, ugly, short, whore for Repugniscums and their little boy friends!!! Perfect fit!!!
March 21st, 2007 at 7:43 pm
zooey: from accross the pond, are ye?
Comment by whiteyfresh
Why would you say that, whitey?
March 21st, 2007 at 7:43 pmLOL — I can’t wait for the day Bush is forced to testify before Congress then — you guys are funny! Comment by Jake — March 21, 2007 @ 7:34 pm
Congress or a Grand Jury, either works for me. He won’t be president forever. He can testify now, or the GOP candidates can face the coming presidential election with the mark of being “drunk with power”. Considering EVERYONE knows he’s a drunk – that works for me…
March 21st, 2007 at 7:44 pmJake, I tried to understand for you a dozen times the other week that Clinton did NOT lie under oath. When he said he did not have sexual relations with Monica he was using the prosecutor’s definition of sexual relations which did NOT include anything that he and Monica did. Do you think I am wrong or do you not understand what I am saying? A federal judge later ruled that Clinton’s statement was immaterial to the Paula Jones case—so either way (if it were true or false) it could NOT be perjury.
I really don’t know how much clearer I can make it. Just because the media keeps repeating something–even the “liberal” CNN—does not make it true.
This is also ignoring the fact that the Paula Jones case and the Monica Lewinsky affair have nothing to do with the constitution or the powers of the presidency and therefore are not grounds for impeachment.
March 21st, 2007 at 7:45 pmKarma’s a bitch, but a sexy bitch!
March 21st, 2007 at 7:46 pmCoffinsDrapedWithFlags sez:
Lieberman’s not an Israeli spy.
Spies are covert.
March 21st, 2007 at 7:47 pmHey, I am here to learn. And try and get a US citizenship. The House of Windsor is thoroughly unimpressed with me following the Prince William incident. Hehehehe
Comment by UKBristolDave
I can’t imagine you trying to impress the Royals, UKDave. Just stop knocking them down! :D
March 21st, 2007 at 7:47 pmSo much for Separation of Powers then.
March 21st, 2007 at 7:47 pmI would like to think that my letters to Senator Cornyn might have had something to do with the luncheon regarding the inappropriate actions by the AG. One can only hope!! My opinion remains the same. Impeach Bush, Cheney, Gonzales and let the chips fall where they may. The terrible thought of that action is that Speaker Pelosi would step up to the plate. What a terrible thought!
March 21st, 2007 at 7:47 pmKarma’s a bitch,
Karma’s not a bitch, payback’s the bitch
March 21st, 2007 at 7:49 pmzooey:dang it, i know there was SOMETHING in the comments, but I can’t find it now….
oh well. I refinanced my house today. I feel like I’m still signing my name(and initial here,here,here,here…..)
I couldn’t be better if i were twins
March 21st, 2007 at 7:49 pmKarma’s a bitch, but a sexy bitch!
Comment by SKdeA
Karma is fabulous.
I say that even though she has bitten me in the ass on several occasions — I really deserved it. :D
March 21st, 2007 at 7:49 pmJake, how does any of that have anything to do with the difference between the two situations I described?
Let me simplify it even more for you:
How does “separation of powers” affect whether the President’s aides are put under oath or not when they testify?
March 21st, 2007 at 7:49 pmgummitch:
I can read just fine, but this is not even a sentence: “I’d be willing to be few of the people posting on TP believed Clinton should have been removed from office for lying about whether or not he got some head.”
keith:
You tried to “understand for me”? No need to strain yourself on my account.
March 21st, 2007 at 7:50 pmoh yeah! THAT was it…
March 21st, 2007 at 7:50 pmmy letters to Senator Cornyn might have had something to do with the luncheon
And what a luncheon it was. They agreed to grope each other without admitting to any of it, and since they weren’t under oath, they are free to lie about it with abandon.
March 21st, 2007 at 7:50 pm“Homer brain no function beer good without.”
March 21st, 2007 at 7:51 pmI couldn’t be better if i were twins
Comment by whiteyfresh
You bet, whitey.
I think you got confused by a comment by UKBristolDave.
Does it seem like I speak the Queen’s English? I’m in frickin’ Idaho!
March 21st, 2007 at 7:53 pmJake, tell me what part of my last comment you think is not true.
March 21st, 2007 at 7:58 pmComment by Zooey — March 21, 2007 @ 7:47 pm
But I was trying to get a rave!
I’m on a mission to get myself invited to one of his garden parties when William is a King. I’ll be able to do the “remember me?” thing. Genius.
March 21st, 2007 at 8:00 pmy’kow i think you’ve mentioned that before…now that i think about it…
i better get a beer..
March 21st, 2007 at 8:01 pmGonzo is toast and he knows it. Now he’s on his knees begging the hard-core Rethugs to save his sorry butt. How pathetic!
March 21st, 2007 at 8:03 pmComment by gummitch — March 21, 2007 @ 7:43 pm
ooops, sorry, just realised something I posted earlier could be seen as me insulting you and your name. I was just confused by why Jake was calling us together.
Sorry. I didn’t mean to call you Sweaty Pete. Please feel free to insult the living hell out of me back!!
March 21st, 2007 at 8:05 pmWith today’s horrendous news on the Hill, the assclown trolls are out in numbers. Makes sense that they want to hijack the discussions away from their obvious corruption. Each day/another scandal….today it’s the Veteran’s home conditions….tomorrow it will be “HookerGate”…that’s what’s brewing right now. Pop the popcorn…it’s going to be another truly fascinating couple of days!
March 21st, 2007 at 8:05 pmAnyone know which mail order law school Gonzo enrolled in to get his diploma? Or do we even know if he has one?
March 21st, 2007 at 8:06 pmAny republican congressman who tries to back a lying, incompetent, and complicit individual like Abu Gonzo will find themselves viewed by the american people as a pure, unadulterated maggot. Hear that Hatch-bag?
March 21st, 2007 at 8:07 pmSchumer’s on MSNBC!!
March 21st, 2007 at 8:07 pmmmmmmmmmmm sweeeaty………
March 21st, 2007 at 8:08 pmMadam Palfrey is spilling her guts as we write and it’s not going to be good news for the lying, hypocritical Rethugs….This one will replace the daytime soaps! Can’t wait!
March 21st, 2007 at 8:08 pmBut I was trying to get a rave!
I’m on a mission to get myself invited to one of his garden parties when William is a King. I’ll be able to do the “remember me?†thing. Genius.
Comment by UKBristolDave
Nobody get between UKDave and a rave! Especially if you’re the Future King. He’ll f*cking knock you on your ass.
I really hope you achieve that goal, Dave, because I must hear that story before I’m drooling. :D
March 21st, 2007 at 8:11 pmUKDave,
I heard Jake absolutely loves to be called Sweaty Pete. :D
March 21st, 2007 at 8:12 pmkeith:
I have no basis to either admit or deny whether “you tried to understand for me” is true. Next question?
March 21st, 2007 at 8:12 pmveritas:OH SNAP! the DC madam?
March 21st, 2007 at 8:13 pmPaul Begala said under President Clinton there were about 1,000 subpoenas issued to his people. His aides testified before congress 47 times. There was 140 hours of testimony on Clinton’s Christmas card list.
We got eight solid years of Whitewater in which the Clinton’s lost a few thousand dollars in a condo deal two and a half decades before he was president.
There was Travelgate, Filegate, and Nannygate (his appointee for AG did not pay social security taxes on her nanny two or three decades in the past).
We got three or four investigations into Vince Foster’s death—each one carried out by Clinton’s enemies and each one saying what the previous one said.
We did NOT get impeachment for the illegal selling of massive amounts of weapons to the terrorist state of IRAN under Ayatollah Khomeni and the illegal weapons to the terrorist-drug dealers outside Nicaragua. How much lying under oath occurred under Iran-Contra?
We did NOT get impeachment for the $billions in credits going to Hussein illegally under GHW Bush.
March 21st, 2007 at 8:15 pmChildrenofLir: actually, the marines say; “payback is a motherf*cker”. I did a tour with the marines as a navy corpsman-Vietnam.
March 21st, 2007 at 8:19 pmBush did not even have to offer the interview w/ no transcript option, but he did to set up the Dems as the side wanting a Constitutional crisis. — Comment by Joke
Hmmm, getting some new talking points? Sorry, chump, nobody gonna buy that one. We already know that it’s Cheney that is pushing for the crisis, we’re just playing out the rope.
We may not see your last breath, because it’s not worth the trouble, but we will see your last gasp, and the last gasp of those like you.
Of that, you can be certain.
See, Joke, what you don’t understand is that the Conservative Movement is over, done, kaput. Nobody is buying this self-serving, pearl-clutching, Lawrence Welk. white-ass-pseudo-patriotic crap any more. You got away with it for thirty years, but now it’s over, and you got nothing but stool to show for it. And, it’s not over because I say it’s over…it’s over because you ran out the clock. There is nowhere else to go with your Imperialistic jingoism, the real estate market is done, the US no longer has a manufacturing base, the supply lines are insecure and the currency is already dead and rotting away by the day.
So, Joke, why don’t you just get the hell out of our way now, while you still have a chance to get in a few rounds of shuffleboard. What good are you anyway — you don’t have the expertise to fix what is broken, and you don’t even have a decent religion to offer those who now must bear the tribulation you created.
Be gone, you nasty old fool.
March 21st, 2007 at 8:20 pmUncle Ho: The Marines may say that
But Wall Street says “payback’s a bitch’
March 21st, 2007 at 8:21 pmGonzales worked for Enron’s law firm in Houston. I have not been able to find out if he worked directly for Enron.
Within 24 hours of Carol Lam saying she was going to subpoena Dusty Foggo, an e-mail was sent saying she was to be fired.
March 21st, 2007 at 8:22 pmAnyone know which mail order law school Gonzo enrolled in to get his diploma? Or do we even know if he has one?
Yes. It was St. BigasDickas. A premier jesuit law school heavily funded by the Bush family.
March 21st, 2007 at 8:23 pmI have no basis to either admit or deny whether “you tried to understand for me†is true. Next question?
Comment by Jake — March 21, 2007 @ 8:12 pm
Then stop ^*&%$@# saying that Clinton lied under oath!
March 21st, 2007 at 8:23 pmAnyone know which mail order law school Gonzo enrolled in to get his diploma?
Comment by veritas #114
…the Sargeant Schultze Academy…
…their fight song starts with the disclaimer:
“I saww NOTHINK!” (German accent required)
March 21st, 2007 at 8:24 pmGonzales worked for Enron’s law firm in Houston. I have not been able to find out if he worked directly for Enron
If Gonzales worked for Enron, then he was probably involved in the early spring 2001 Cheney Energy conferences the minutes of which are now classified to prevent their release.
It was at that conference, attended by Ken Lay, the Saudis, the oil companies, and other neo-cons, that it is surmised the cabal decided to invade IRaq. Possibly they discussed creating a 9/11 attack as a smokescreen for their traitorous cabalist activities.
March 21st, 2007 at 8:26 pmBig Papa
I believe it was St. BigasDickas Jesuit School of Law, and not the SGT Schultze Academy as you so confidently yet erroneously assert.
March 21st, 2007 at 8:27 pmChildrenofLir; I guess I have to take your word for that.
March 21st, 2007 at 8:33 pmComment by Zooey — March 21, 2007 @ 8:11 pm
Oh, this will happen. If only because you know William will remember the time he was put on his arse and called a tool. When else will this have happened to him in his life?
Hell, I’m pushing for an invite to his wedding.
It’s my destiny to make this happen
March 21st, 2007 at 8:34 pmGonzales and Enron
“But before Gonzales became a permanent fixture of Team W, he was a partner at the powerful Houston law firm Vinson & Elkins, and that’s something congressional investigators are apparently taking a closer look at.
Sources tell me that investigators are following up on tips that Vinson & Elkins may have briefed former partners in advance on the findings of a top- secret probe into Enron’s shady business dealings.”
March 21st, 2007 at 8:36 pmhttp://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2002/02/15/BU132842.DTL
ChildrenofLir,
I believe the maps (revealed by Greg Palast) of Iraq divided among the major oil companies—come from those secret meetings.
Don’t know if Gonzales was involved.
March 21st, 2007 at 8:37 pmComment by ChildrenofLir #132
…I defer to your obviously more “informed” contention…
March 21st, 2007 at 8:38 pmReaching out? Or begging for their help.
March 21st, 2007 at 8:46 pmAnyone know which mail order law school Gonzo enrolled in to get his diploma?
Comment by veritas #114
Uh, the Close Cover Before Striking School of Law ?
Beside the point, but when Gonzales was aked if his grandparents came to the US legally, he said “that is unclear”. Don’t mean to be immigrant-bashing, but I don’t think he has much regard for the law or the truth.
March 21st, 2007 at 8:51 pmGonzales is the concilliari to the mafioso Bush family.
He does what he’s told, he keeps his mouth shut, he knows where the bodies are buried, and he’s well paid.
March 21st, 2007 at 8:56 pmFox’s “Business” Anchors Try to Scare Their Audience:
March 21st, 2007 at 8:57 pmThe Alberto Gonzales “Witch Hunt” Could Cause a Stock Market “Sell Off”
“Neil Cavuto, Fox’s “money guy” (his words) is at times, as regular readers of this site know, very adept at creating the illusion that his show is about “business news” while simultaneously beating the propaganda drums for the Bush administration. Today he was at the top of his game. With the help of cohort Brenda Buttner, he blew out some smoke and flashed some mirrors and he put the fear of losing money into his audience due to the “witch hunt” the Democrats are conducting over the Attorney General scandal”
What do you want to bet that Cavuto and other Faux news conspirators are on the phone to Merrill Lynch as soon as their shows end, making trades based on their own manipulations.
Time for a war crimes tribunal.
March 21st, 2007 at 9:12 pmOh, this will happen. If only because you know William will remember the time he was put on his arse and called a tool. When else will this have happened to him in his life?
Hell, I’m pushing for an invite to his wedding.
It’s my destiny to make this happen
Comment by UKBristolDave
Then I believe you will make it happen, Dave!
Maybe you can volunteer to get together the music for the FUN reception.
March 21st, 2007 at 9:12 pmzooey:you ever get frustrate dwaiting for tp to post?
March 21st, 2007 at 9:17 pmuh,frustrated
March 21st, 2007 at 9:20 pmzooey:you ever get frustrate dwaiting for tp to post?
Comment by whiteyfresh
It’s maddening, whitey! I usually have a couple other things going, like email and school reading, so it doesn’t make me as bonkers as it used to.
March 21st, 2007 at 9:31 pmHe reached out at a lunch meeting? What did they have for lunch- crow? I love the cries of a drowning man in the morning.
March 21st, 2007 at 9:37 pmKnow this. The President’s EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE means you can’t supeana him. That’s what Bill O’Reilly was saying in his “talking points” segment.
So suck on that libs.
March 21st, 2007 at 10:25 pmGONZO WAS VERY BUSY GIVING MULTIPLE BLOWJOBS TO THE repugnant-repub rightwingnut crank fudge-pachyderm “senators” AND I USE THE TERM LOOSELY, ESPECIALLY AROUND THEIR ANUSES, Hatch, Kyl, Cornyn, Sessions ET CETERA AD NAUSEUM WHO ALL ENJOYED GONZO’S MOUTH MOVEMENTS IMMENSELY!!!!! “REACH OUT, REACH OUT AND ‘TOUCH’ SOMEONE, EH, GONZO?” HAH HAH HAH HAH HAH!!!!!
March 21st, 2007 at 10:30 pm….and if there is one thing we know for sure, we know that Bill O’Dildo always knows what he is talking about.
Riiight.
March 21st, 2007 at 10:42 pmKnow this. The President’s EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE means you can’t supeana him. That’s what Bill O’Reilly was saying in his “talking points†segment. So suck on that libs. Comment by firehead — March 21, 2007 @ 10:25 pm
Talk to Congress, or talk to the grand jury. This was settled by you CONS during Clinton. St*pid idiot. By the way, it’s spelled “subpoena”, not “supeana”. Don’t use words you can’t spell, it just proves how st*pid you are.
March 21st, 2007 at 10:56 pmWeâ€, Jake?!?!? Who is “weâ€? Doesn’t sound much like an “Independent†if you ask me.
Jake has a mouse in his pocket. ^_^
Comment by TripMaster Monkey — March 21, 2007 @ 6:53 pm
Jake uses the Royal We, he thinks he’s the freakin Queen of England.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:39 pmSuch simple math, even Jake can understand.
Comment by helenahandbasket — March 21, 2007 @ 6:58 pm
Don’t bet on it, helena – hell, he doesn’t even know how old he is!
Comment by JaneESchneider — March 21, 2007 @ 7:11 pm
If he does know he’ll lie about it anyway.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:46 pmNow who’s the genius?
Comment by Jake — March 21, 2007 @ 7:13 pm
I know who the pompous putz is Jake.
March 21st, 2007 at 11:48 pmStill no answer, Jake? (Looks at watch) Dang. I thought you’d have pounced on my simple little question, seeing as you have all the answers and all, and we libs are ushing a “show trial”. I mean, you responded to others’ posts…
Okay, let’s try again:
How does “separation of powers†affect whether the President’s aides are put under oath or not when they testify?
Thanks.
March 22nd, 2007 at 12:16 am#36 I am really 75, and “we†in that sentence includes everyone, regardless of party affiliation, who thought Clinton should have been removed from office
Only the extreme right wanted Clinton removed. Note his 60+ approval rating at the height of his inquisition. Stop saying you are independent. You are a right wing whore.
March 22nd, 2007 at 12:18 am#53 Wow, you are stupid. Bush has never testified as President. Now who’s the genius?.
Lying to Congress is a HIGH CRIME!!! That would be an impeachable offense you delusional freak.
March 22nd, 2007 at 12:21 amSo much for Separation of Powers then.
This comment confuses me Jake. When have you righties (oh, sorry, bent over to the right independents) cared about seperation of powers?
March 22nd, 2007 at 12:28 amChimpy, Trannie Annie, Dildo Strap-oN Cheney, Gonzalez Jabba The Hut, you’re all coming down HARD!!!
March 22nd, 2007 at 2:49 am