If this admin can’t figure out that they should have tried to plant WMD in Iraq, then there’s really no hope they’ll figure it out now.

And this. For a brief moment, let’s pretend that performance issues were truly the reasons for firing the 8 attorneys.

What this part of the e-mail is saying is this:

“Yeah, there are performance issues from the 8 attorneys and they are hurting the government’s attempts at prosecuting cases, but we may have to let them stay in if we get any heat from other attorneys or the Congress.”

Yep. Makes perfect sense to me (not).

Oh, and I’m still waiting for the administration to reveal the REAL reasons they were fired, as they threatened a few weeks ago.

Come on, Bush. You can do it. I’m sure the reasons will be unquestionable. Just think…this whole issue could be ancient history by next Wednesday.

Comment by Zooey — March 25, 2007 @ 2:15 pm

Bingo.

Frankly, I don’t see the Mexicans going for that arrangement. They are much more likely to form a union with Central and South American countries. At least they all speak the same language.

The Mexican people are also well aware of the many manipulations that the USA has perpetrated on them over the years – and they are not bad at revolution and guerilla warfare.

What Did Mr. Bush’s 2nd Inaugural Address Really Mean?

Comment by west virginia hillbilly #48

Hey wvh,

…I didn’t think there were any “thinking” Progressive people in WVA…

Where’s Timothy? Hint: Caging.

WC,

In my opinion, that part of the email shows that they were completely aware that what they were doing was illegal.

Comment by RUCerious — March 25, 2007 @ 12:55 pm

Did you catch Briseadh’s post on this thread yesterday at 7:29 pm?

The part I found interesting is this excerpt from Sampson’s e-mail re: the attorney firings:

…if we start caving to complaining U.S. Attorneys or Senators then we shouldn’t do it — it’ll be more trouble than it is worth.

In other words, and as we have been saying, they had no good reason(s) to fire the attorneys. If it was truly about performance, and they could prove this to anyone who “complained,” then there should be no problem. But that’s not the position we are in, now is it???

And, as was pointed out on crooksandliars.com, if Bush was not involved in the firings, as Tony Snow says, why is he whining about executive priviledge? Per the Constitution, only the president can fire the attorneys. If Bush was not involved in the decision to fire the attorneys, why not?

If he was not involved and none of his advisors consulted him on it, why is he hiding behind the excuse that having the advisors testify in front of Congress, in the open, under oath, with a transcript, that all this will harm his (and future presidents’) ability to discuss important matters in the future?

“We need to find ways to win the war” Karl Rove, President Bush’s political director told a gathering of the Family Research Council in March, 2002. The Family Research Council is one of the most powerful lobbying organizations of the Religious Right today. Rove wasn’t talking about the war on terrorism. He was talking about the war on secular society. The Reverend Tim LaHaye co-authored Mind Siege: The Battle for Truth in the New Millennium, published in 2000. The best-selling book issues a call to arms for evangelical Christians to battle against secular humanism. Mind Siege declares that secular humanism is a “religion,” and issues marching orders to evangelical Christians to gear up for an all-out battle to root secular humanists out of public life; their bottom line is that “No humanist is fit to hold office.” Continued here…

(09-14-04) Conquering by Stealth and Deception: How the Dominionists Are Succeeding in Their Quest for National Control and World Power: Americans and the main-stream media have been very slow in catching on to the fact that we are in a war—a war that is cultural, religious and political–a war that uses stealth and deception and the rules of engagement written by the enemies to representative democracy. Unless Americans wake up–we could lose that war. Continued here…

(2006) ‘American Theocracy’ – Clear and Present Dangers

I wonder who made the call to withhold emails from the most relevent period of time? Would that in and of itself be obstruction of justice? Certainly it is flipping off Congress…just as was the “unprecedented” offer of testimony by Rove and Meiers – behind closed doors; no oath; no transcript; and they get two lawyers present during their “testimony.”

Bush and the Republicans can’t limit the scope of this inquiry as they did the nyne-juan-juan “investigation.”

Comment by Michel de Nostredame

Maybe now is the time to take the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution seriously and do what many on the left would previously have not considered a neccessary thing. Just get a safetly lockbox so no accidents occur…

http://www.gunbroker.com/

http://news.yahoo.com/comics/doonesbury;_ylt=AihVmqa4S5WiHKV8CZXz1SjdcLQF

There’s been infighting in Iraq for the past 1,400 years. Saddam “stabilized” Iraq by killing off entire villages. Bush removed Saddam and destroyed whatever infrastructure existed that helped maintain security. Bush did not commit enough troops to be able to secure munitions depots, thereby arming the populace. Bush did not, and still does not commit enough troops to secure the entire country, thereby allowing insurgents to leave one “secured” area and wreck havoc elsewhere.

There’s been infighting in Iraq for the past 1,400 years.

But Iraq will be deemed “stabilized” when its oil runs out.

– I wrote such a story, which got traction at Daily Kos, but no where else. It links Collins to Citizens for the Common Defense, a “shadowy” group co-founded by Bradford Berenson, Kyle Sampson’s current attorney and former senior associate White House Counsel to Bush, Jr., which group describes itself as promoting a “robust” view of presidential power.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/3/19/12148/2763, titled “Neocons Braintrust US Atty Firings: Link to Bush”.

….My feeling that there’s more going on at DOJ that meets the eye, as I expressed by pointing out the “Feeney Amendment” and reaction to the “Booker” and “Blakely” cases, is gaining more weight. Please review the documents with an eye for the bigger picture, the politization of justice in general.