Durbin Calls Out White House On Executive Privilege Sham
Durbin Calls Out White House On Executive Privilege Sham
When former White House aide Sara Taylor testified in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee last month, Chairman Pat Leahy (D-VT) asked whether President Bush had a role in the firings. Despite being under executive privilege, Taylor stated she did not attend meetings with Bush nor did she believe he was involved in the scandal.
In today’s hearing, Leahy asked the same question to White House aide J. Scott Jennings. In contrast to Taylor, Jennings refused to answer, repeatedly citing executive privilege. In fact, Taylor answered “a number of questions that Jennings has refused to answer,” despite both being under similar assertions of executive privilege.
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) noted the discrepancy between Taylor and Jennings’ responses and called out Jennings for abusing executive privilege. Jennings responded: “I respect [Taylor's] decision…but I simply do not intend to disobey a directive from the President.”
Watch it:
Jennings’ stonewalling is an attempt to further muddle the administration’s role in the attorney scandal. As Leahy asked Taylor last month, “what is the White House so intent on hiding?“:
I do note your answer that you did not discuss these matters with the president and to the best of your knowledge he was not involved is going to make some nervous at the White House because it seriously undercuts his claim of executive privilege if he was not involved. … Your testimony today under oath bolsters that impression. And that really shows, again, that the White House counsel’s broad instruction is not only unprecedented, but it’s unsound. … This broad invocation of the notion of executive privilege to obstruct Congress from learning the truth leads one to believe it’s part of a cover-up.
Paul Kiel adds that today, Jennings wouldn’t even answer what his job description is.
Transcript:
DURBIN: Let me ask you a couple things. First, did you read Sara Taylor’s testimony before this committee?
JENNINGS: I watched it and then read a follow-up, yes, sir.
DURBIN: Do you know that Senator Leahy asked her the same questions that he asked of you?
Specifically, Senator Leahy asked her if she’d spoken to the president about removing U.S. attorneys, and she answered, I did not speak to the president about removing U.S. attorneys. Chairman Leahy then asked her if she attended any meeting with the president since the 2004 election in which the removal and replacement of U.S. attorneys was discussed. Ms. Taylor answered, I did not attend any meetings with the president where that matter was discussed.
I’m struggling to understand how she could read the same Fielding memo that you and your attorneys have read and respond to those questions and you would refuse to respond.
Can you explain to me what the difference is in the questions asked by Chairman Leahy?
JENNINGS: I know that Ms. Taylor answered the questions. I read the transcript. And I respect her decision.
And I also know that several members of the committee criticized her for, in their view, cherry-picking or selectively answering questions during the hearing.
DURBIN: In fact, I noted that when Ms. Taylor initially refused to answer a question, Senator Specter stated, I think your declining to answer the last series of questions from the chairman was correct under the direction from the White House counsel. I do believe when you were asked whether you had a conversation with the president, that even though it does not go to the issue of content of the conversation, that it comes under the interdiction of White House counsel, which I agree that you are compelled to follow at this stage, having been an employee.
TAYLOR: Sara is a former employee. I am a current employee. And I simply do not intend to disobey a directive from the president.
DURBIN: Well, Sara Taylor was much more forthcoming. And I thought, frankly, that at the end of the day people respected her for it. She went as far as she could go without going into the substance of conversation, to at least acknowledge whether or not a conversation had taken place or a meeting had taken place. And I think that was the nature of Chairman Leahy’s question.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Wow. Another partisan witch-hunt! Who could’ve guessed?
August 2nd, 2007 at 6:39 pmWow. Another moronic comment from troll Mr. Pee. Who could’ve guessed?
August 2nd, 2007 at 6:44 pmHis job description: Do whatever the president or vice president says. And don’t tell anyone anything no matter what.
Yes’em bossman, gotcha.
August 2nd, 2007 at 6:45 pmIf it looks like a witch and talks like a witch it’s probably a witch.
Your next cliche should be “fishing expedition” in 3, 2, 1…
August 2nd, 2007 at 6:46 pmJennings wouldn’t even answer what his job description is.
He’s got the common decency to not give the lurid details in mixed company.
August 2nd, 2007 at 6:46 pmIt’s highly classified, and subject to executive prickelige.
If there is nothing to hide, why not be forthcoming? Why does the Bush administration hate telling the truth?
August 2nd, 2007 at 6:47 pmWhy does the Bush administration hate telling the truth?
Comment by Morganna
Because that behavior is not in their DNA. AND it makes them no money.
August 2nd, 2007 at 6:49 pmWhat does the White House have to hide?
Why is the Bu**sh** administration so against open government?
Gawd, I hope Leahy grows himself some balls and takes some serious action about this stonewalling.
August 2nd, 2007 at 6:50 pmThey’re gonna need to remodel & expand the DC Jail to hold all these assclowns, male and female when Inherent Contempt is enforced.
August 2nd, 2007 at 6:52 pmReal witches always tell the truth…
August 2nd, 2007 at 6:52 pmHeadline 31 October, 2007
The White House today ordered Jessica Lynch to storm the DC Jail and rescue the 412 white house aides that are imprisoned there.
August 2nd, 2007 at 6:54 pmNo details on Jessica’s wherabouts, as she was last seen hitching up her mobile home to her 4X4 truck.
I watched that hearing. What a farce that was.
August 2nd, 2007 at 6:54 pmRepublicans and the White House need not worry Senator Specter is on the job. Specter used the famous magic bullet during the Kennedy assassination and it worked. Americans believe that one bullet killed the President and then injured several others but never explaining how several bullets were found in the car and one in President Kennedy’s head. Great job Specter he was better then Harry Potter. Then their was the famous knowledge of the JFK assassination that Specter as a Republican insider knew about. Well now he’s here to save the White House again. This time with words like wily for a lie but not a lie. An Attorney General can lie but it’s a wily lie and that’ s not really a lie. Look for future lawyers to defend the criminal clients with that defense. Specter should have represented convicted felon Libby with those win words. Judge Walton might not get it. So Durbin can fight for Justice in America and for Americans but Specter will spin/lie/blame and even do magic to keep the criminals in the White House. The voter of Pennsylvania didn’t know what a liar Specter was as they elected to represent them.
August 2nd, 2007 at 6:55 pmJeez… more time and money wasted on a partisan fish hunt.
August 2nd, 2007 at 6:55 pmDurbin is calling them out. Executive Privilege will be on trial soon.
August 2nd, 2007 at 6:56 pmJackie, it’ll probably become known as the
August 2nd, 2007 at 6:56 pmWily Coyote defense.
#14 ~ more like shooting fish in a barrel hunt…
August 2nd, 2007 at 6:58 pmWhen Dubya and his Weasel-sucking AssKlown Flying Circus gets flushed down the crappper in 09, it will be incredible to see the streaks left behind and to unwrap the putrid contents of this Cabal’s fun and games in the WH.
It will make Dricky Dicky’s tape erasures look like so much kindergarten hijinks. If any of them were born of human flesh, their mothers’ would NOT be proud!
August 2nd, 2007 at 6:58 pm#
Jeez… more time and money wasted on a partisan fish hunt.
Comment by Gorgias — August 2, 2007 @ 6:55 pm
When it becomes a partisan bird hunt, Cheney’ll be there w/ Ole’ Betsy, blasting away at anything that moves! You watch!
August 2nd, 2007 at 6:59 pm#14 ~ more like shooting fish in a barrel hunt…
Target rich environment and all…
August 2nd, 2007 at 7:01 pmMr. Pee — er, “Gorgias”… do you think it’s possible for Republicans to do wrong?
Just wondering. Because a whole raft of administration officials either losing their memory or else pleading “exectuive privilege” seems kinda suspicious to me. Not the sort of circumstance that would characterize a “partisan witch/fish/bird hunt”.
Seems to me that if there were nothing to hide, the President would order his people to testify openly, under oath and with a transcript, so that we would all know that the administration is honest. But that’s not happening.
August 2nd, 2007 at 7:09 pmGorgias is an inbred idiotic redneck racist Repuke troll.
Oops, forgot fascist.
August 2nd, 2007 at 7:09 pmLink for Wayne:
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/08/02/three-former-bush-aides-to-testify-in-tillman-inquiry/#comment-3983099
August 2nd, 2007 at 7:10 pmAs the reichwing is so fond of pointing out, if they have nothing to hide(criminal activity), then they should more than willing to testify under oath and tell all. But with all this stonewalling, one can not help but conclude they are hiding a huge rat’s nest of illegal shit in the White House.
August 2nd, 2007 at 7:10 pmThis whole issue of EP must be resolved. It has been distorted to mean “anyone and anything” the president so deems. This is not democratic, if you accept the democracy can only function well when there is the most transparency. Not only can he decide that anyone who ever talks to him is an “advisor,” but any issue, as we see with the Tillman case. The Executive is not that special – it is merely a co-equal branch – and cannot be insulated from the rest of government.
August 2nd, 2007 at 7:11 pmGorgias is correct. This is a waste f time and money. Anyone who claims executive privilege in this matter should immediately be arrested and held in inherent contempt of Congress.
August 2nd, 2007 at 7:12 pmGorgias is an inbred idiotic redneck racist Repuke troll.
Oops, forgot fascist.
Comment by Tom3
He’s high on catchup bottle smegma.
August 2nd, 2007 at 7:13 pmThe Executive is not that special – it is merely a co-equal branch – and cannot be insulated from the rest of government.
Comment by Candyce — August 2, 2007 @ 7:11 pm
Don’t forget Dick Cheney. Apparently he’s become some sort of unique creature, a unicorn or perhaps a narwhale.
August 2nd, 2007 at 7:16 pmDon’t forget Dick Cheney. Apparently he’s become some sort of unique creature, a unicorn or perhaps a narwhale.
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity — August 2, 2007 @ 7:16 pm
Or those Saudis, which aren’t really muslims even though they are. Right, Mr P?
August 2nd, 2007 at 7:21 pmBush will go the way of the dodo bird. We just need to learn from our mistake of being scared of terrorists and voting for hardliners. And keep our eye on FISA.
August 2nd, 2007 at 7:23 pmJENNINGS:
[...]
And I also know that several members of the committee criticized her for, in their view, cherry-picking or selectively answering questions during the hearing.
snippy snippy snippy…
August 2nd, 2007 at 7:25 pmNo job descriptions? No funding!
August 2nd, 2007 at 7:27 pm“Gorgiasâ€â€¦ do you think it’s possible for Republicans to do wrong?
Of course. Look at Mary Cheney.
August 2nd, 2007 at 7:28 pmThis just in: Hugo Chavez, Sean Penn and ThinkProgress all hate America.
Here is the link
August 2nd, 2007 at 7:32 pm“Gorgiasâ€â€¦ do you think it’s possible for Republicans to do wrong?
Of course. Look at Mary Cheney.
Comment by Gorgias — August 2, 2007 @ 7:28 pm
Hardy har har.
Unless, of course, you’re also homophobic…
But I noticed you sidestepped the question with a joke worthy of Glann Beck.
Let me ask another way: why are you so sure that there is no wrongdoing in the executive branch? Is it the “I can’t recall” chorus that so inspires your confidence? Or is it the administration officials who can’t even describe what they do because it’s so secret?
August 2nd, 2007 at 7:34 pmWhat’s Congress going to do about it? Oh, that’s right. They same thing they have been doing. Talk big, make vailed threats, and then do nothing.
Seven years of law breaking, unethical conduct, gross incompetence, and when the Dems finally get control of Congress, they turn out to be the pussy’s Republicans said they were.
Congress is full of lawyers. You would think by this time they would have been able to put their collective heads together long enough to use their education and experience to figure out if any laws have been broken, and if so start impeaching people. Are the President’s spy programs legal or not. This question has been floating around for years. Yet the best any member of Congress can do is say they aren’t sure. It shouldn’t take anymore than a couple of days for Congress to figure out the legality of they things Bush has been doing and let the country know if things are on the up and up or there have been crimes commited.
August 2nd, 2007 at 7:34 pmJennings is another in a long line of young, incompetent, regent lawschool, right wing mafia. They will not talk, cause the godfather, president george karl cheney will protect them.
August 2nd, 2007 at 7:38 pmLet me ask another way: why are you so sure that there is no wrongdoing in the executive branch? Is it the “I can’t recall†chorus that so inspires your confidence? Or is it the administration officials who can’t even describe what they do because it’s so secret?
Comment by mikey r — August 2, 2007 @ 7:34 pm
August 2nd, 2007 at 7:39 pm—————————-
I never said that I was sure that there is no wrong-doing. I said that this is a partisan witching expedition that is wasting time and money on matters that are trivial.
No GorgiASS, you said PARTISAN FISH HUNT. What a moron.
August 2nd, 2007 at 7:41 pm#38. I never said that I was sure that there is no wrong-doing. I said that this is a partisan witching expedition that is wasting time and money on matters that are trivial.
Comment by Gorgias — August 2, 2007 @ 7:39 pm
So the wrong-doing is trivial, then?
August 2nd, 2007 at 7:45 pmMary Cheney has done wrong. Mary should not have campaigned for the Republicans.
August 2nd, 2007 at 7:46 pmSo the wrong-doing is trivial, then?
Comment by Luis M — August 2, 2007 @ 7:45 pm
————
What wrong-doing?
August 2nd, 2007 at 7:47 pmOr those Saudis, which aren’t really muslims even though they are. Right, Mr P?
Comment by Luis M — August 2, 2007 @ 7:21 pm
You don’t stonewall Congress w/ the lies you wish you could tell, you stonewall them with the lies you know you can tell.
There are known knowns, unknown unknowns, known unknowns, and unknown knowns. The are things we think we know but dont, things we don’t know that we think do, things we know we don’t know and don’t, and things we know we don’t know but do.
Shoobie doobie do…
Yabba dabba do…
Pass me the doobie and don’t bogart, it my friend…
There… that’ll confuse the F*ck outta ‘em for another 18 months.
August 2nd, 2007 at 7:47 pmMy good god almighty.
Capitol Police have bolstered security around the U.S. Capitol after a recent al-Qaeda communique threatened an attack on Washington.
When asked if people should leave Washington, D.C., during the month of August, Lott replied that “I think it would be good to leave town in August, and it would probably be good to stay out until September the 12th.”
Cut and run, Lott!! Run for your life!
August 2nd, 2007 at 7:48 pm#
This just in: Hugo Chavez, Sean Penn and ThinkProgress all hate America.
Here is the link
Comment by Eric — August 2, 2007 @ 7:32 pm
They actually all love America, just like Michael Moore and George Soros. It’s THE BUSH ADMIN they hate, just like 70% PLUS of the public hates ‘em.
August 2nd, 2007 at 7:49 pmCut and run, Lott!! Run for your life!
Comment by Candyce — August 2, 2007 @ 7:48 pm
And for God’s sake, take that hideous toupee w/ ya!
Why do toupees hate America so?
August 2nd, 2007 at 7:51 pmIf Mr. Jennings can’t remember what job he has – or refuses to disclose it because that’s somehow privileged too (an assertion impossible to verify without his answer) – then Congress should forget to allocate funds to pay him, indeed, to pay anyone in Rove’s Shoppe. If their communications were virtually all through the RNC, then theirs would seem to be party work that the RNC should pay for.
Executive privilege is a creature of judicial activism, which the GOP normally shuns like a tax hike. It is a judge-made concept and has two levels – direct communications with the president, which are heavily protected, and advisory discussions that don’t include him, which are much less protected.
It is a “privilege”, not a right, and it is not absolute. It is strong when the topic relates to military, diplomatic or national security issues, and highly qualified when it comes to others. It is NOT absolute – despite Mr. Fielding’s aspirational letter – and fails when the issue relates to investigating a crime. Just as Congress’ right to information in areas in which it has legislative power – and the power of the purse – is strong – and low in other matters. Mr. Cheney is just telling the whole world that he is untouchable and daring Congress to knock him off his perch.
Oh, and Mr. Cheney is wrong about having so many jobs. That’s resume padding, typical of someone who flunked out of Yale twice. He has one job, Vice President, and is an elected member of the executive branch. He is the president’s understudy – but he’s not entitled to a copy of the play before he goes on stage unless the president gives him one. He gets to break tie votes in the Senate, but he’s not a senator. Anything else he does is only by way of a “by your leave” from the president. How Mr. Cheney got so deep inside Junior’s shorts is an interesting Freudian question, but he hasn’t any power that Junior hasn’t allowed him to steal.
He’s also wrong about not being liable for its abuse. Yes, Mr. Bush is ultimately liable, a convenient arrangement that Mr. C likes to hide behind. But since Mr. C is also the main actor – as in sending Fredo to Ashcroft’s bedside for his “Enzo the Baker moment” – he’s directly liable for what he does. Something else the next administration’s Attorney General will spend much of his or her time wrestling with.
August 2nd, 2007 at 7:51 pm@ 44
they must justify a month long vacation durning the trobled times some how.
.
August 2nd, 2007 at 7:52 pmIt really is amazing how many times I here “I don’t know” I don’t recall, or I can’t answer that.”
Republicans; The party of personal responsibility, some one else’s personal reasonability that is.
August 2nd, 2007 at 7:56 pmThe executive privilege claim may have credibility with some of Bush’s top aides.
http://OsiSpeaks.com or http://OsiSpeaks.org
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:05 pmHow about an amendment to the Constitution OUTLAWING EXECUTIVE PRIVELEGE?
Oh, right. The Bushies don’t give a tinker’s fart about the Constitution, that “worthless scrap of paper.”
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:07 pmSo what????? Are the democrats going to do anything about it??? I don’t think so. They just whine. How long is this dog and pony show going to go on? These clowns evade, lie, “confuse”, claim executive priviledge where none exists, and still the democrats do nothing.
We’ve gone through this exercise how many times now with people lying to congress, with people evading questions, with people showing blatant contempt of congress, and what are the democrats doing???? Anyone????? NOTHING!!!!
And so, I reiterate, SO F*CKING WHAT!!!! Who cares???? Not the democrats.
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:09 pmI never said that I was sure that there is no wrong-doing. I said that this is a partisan witching expedition that is wasting time and money on matters that are trivial.
Comment by Gorgias — August 2, 2007 @ 7:39 pm
I inferrred from your response that you believed there was no wrongdoing, at least in these cases that Congress is investigating. Is that not the case?
Surely, if you believed there was the possibility of wrongdoing, then you wopuld support an investigation to prove it one way or the other, right?
IF you characterize an investigation as a “partisan witching expedition” (and I don’t even know what that is) then you must be implying that there is no cause for such an investigation. Am I wrong?
Or are you just using nonsense phrases because you dislike being taken seriously?
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:14 pmInteresting reading on background and origin of “privilege.”
Congress was granted the privilege, not the executive branch.
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:15 pmOkay, i gotta commute home for about a half-hour. Try not to get into any trouble while I’m gone. TRoS, you’re in charge.
And Mr. Pee, stay out of the liquor cabinet.
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:16 pm“Another witch-hunt!” – WitchTurd the Troll
witch – a practitioner of black arts; to work or cast a spell; to bewitch; one who has dealings with the devil
Sounds about right. I’d say burn ‘em at the stake, but feces doesn’t burn.
p.s. No offense to wiccans. It’s not your fault your good name has been ruined by Deadeye of Newt and the Shrubbery.
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:21 pmSigh… how much more of this do we have to take?
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:22 pmHow proud J. Scott Jennings family must be of him. Probably entered public service with great idealism, and wound up being a puppet. Just like most of the young idealist recruited by this White House to shape and mold. Just as the president was shaped and molded by the elititist corporate world that surrounds him.
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:27 pmInterim dictators suck.
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:36 pmIF you characterize an investigation as a “partisan witching expedition†(and I don’t even know what that is) then you must be implying that there is no cause for such an investigation. Am I wrong?
———————————
You know… it is possible to go witch-fishing, catch a witch, and still waste time and money.
I see the Dems doing all they can to maintain the partisan divide… from day one, when Leahy accosted Cheney, it was all party over country for the Dems……………………….
Pathetic.
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:39 pm“Jeez… more time and money wasted on a partisan fish hunt.”
Was that such a great post you had to do it twice? I give you credit for changing one word, though. Nice job.
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:41 pmWhy isn’t this portly, lying chickenhawk manning a checkpoint or hunting down “Al Qaeda” in Iraq?
Because he is too busy pissing on the Constitution and licking Karl Rove’s ass.
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:44 pmJPark,
Nah, I read this post:
And decided to update my terminology.
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:44 pm“I never said that I was sure that there is no wrong-doing. I said that this is a partisan witching expedition that is wasting time and money on matters that are trivial.”
That is stupid. A “partisan witch-hunt” would necessarily mean the absence of wrongdoing since there is no such thing as witches or spells (no matter what Wiccans think).
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:44 pmGawd, I hope Leahy grows himself some balls and takes some serious action about this stonewalling.
Probably not going to happen. I heard on Randi Rhodes today that the chickenshit Democrats have agreed to interview KKKarl Rove at the Whitehouse, with no transcript and not under oath. Please tell me why they are bothering. All that will happen is that Rove will sit there smirking at them and say “I can’t recall”.
Why don’t they just bring them all before the house for Inherent Contempt. They have the power to find out the truth, they are just too chicken to use that power. If they keep on going at this rate, there will be no Democratic Party in 2008 and the Republicans will win by default.
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:45 pmIt really is amazing how many times I here “I don’t know†I don’t recall, or I can’t answer that.â€
It worked for the Reagan crooks.
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:46 pm“And decided to update my terminology”
Ok, got it. It is still inaccurate and intended to give cover to illegal activities.
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:48 pmHow about that $50,000,000 partisan witch-hunt that the Republicans and Ken Starr went on? And that was for a land deal that happened before Clinton was even in office.
Our partisan witch hunt is about crimes that the Bush Administration has committed while in office. You know, crimes like wiretapping Americans, black site prisons where they have people tortured, kidnapping to get the people to the black site prisons, obstructing justice, on and on and on.
Since you think this is a partisan witch hunt and that Bush has done nothing wrong, then why are you not encouraging Bush to allow the Democrats the documents and the witnesses they need to find out that Bush is entirely innocent of any wrong doing? Why does Bush have to hide behind executive privilege, even using it to stop Congress from obtaining copies of Pat Tillman’s files.
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:50 pm“I see the Dems doing all they can to maintain the partisan divide” – WitchTurd
Yes, and I recall the sweetness with which the Repulsives greeted Clinton for 8 years.
F-off.
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:50 pmbilbo, I don’t get it. What do they have to lose by taking a hard line? Cite him for contempt. The Dems have been listening to the Washington insiders way too long. It is about time they make the Carvilles and the Brazilles walk the plank. They have been losers way too long.
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:50 pmComment by JPark — August 2, 2007 @ 8:44 pm
“Partisan fishing expedition,” then.
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:51 pmwasting time and money on matters that are trivial
You find lying us into an illegal war trivial. You find spying on Americans without a warrant trivial. You find obstructing justice when Congress is trying to find out why Pat Tillman was killed trivial.
AND YOU DID NOT FIND INVESTIGATING A LAND DEAL CONDUCTED BEFORE SOMEONE WAS EVEN PRESIDENT TRIVIAL?
ARE YOU NUTS! By the way, that is a rhetorical question.
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:53 pmComment by bilbobaggins — August 2, 2007 @ 8:50 pm
2 words:
National Security.
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:53 pmNo, Gorgias, it is an investigation…something that is direly needed with the abuses of power over the past 6 1/2 years. Whether it is partisan or not is not an issue. The Republicans STILL lick Bush balls after all the damage he has dont to the party. Who else would investigate those criminals?
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:54 pm“National Security.”
Hahaha. Put the bong down and pay attention to what the administration ACTUALLY does about “national security”. We LOVE the Saudis and the UAE. A little suspicious? You bet your a$$.
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:56 pmPathetic.
Comment by Gorgias
Yes, you are Mr.Pee
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:59 pm“2 words:
National Security.
Comment by Gorgias”
What? What are you referring to? If you are referring to Executive Privilege, what does Pat Tillman’s death have to do with National Security. What does the investigation into why the justice department firings have to do with National Security?
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:00 pm“AND YOU DID NOT FIND INVESTIGATING A LAND DEAL CONDUCTED BEFORE SOMEONE WAS EVEN PRESIDENT TRIVIAL?” - bilbobaggins
And let us not forget the millions spent investigating (and impeachment over) a lie about an extramarital blowjob. Yes, clearly that rates right up there alongside treason, fraud, pillaging of the treasury, dismantling of the Constitution, and destruction of institutional structures of democracy.
Why were the Repulsives frothing over that blowjob? Apparently they only get all worked up about consensual heterosexual scandal. For pedophilia, on the other hand, they… uh… turn the other cheek.
Isn’t that right enGorgias?
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:00 pm“2 words: National Security.” – enGorgias
Two words: Smoke Screen
Two more words: F-Off A-Hole
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:02 pm“I see the Dems doing all they can to maintain the partisan divide… from day one, when Leahy accosted Cheney, it was all party over country for the Dems……………………….
Pathetic.
Comment by Gorgias “
You are right, you are pathetic. Leahy “accosted” Chaney by walking across the isle and offering Chaney his hand to shake while asking him to come over to the other side to talk. It’s a ritual that happens when a new Congress starts. It’s a courtesy.
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:03 pmYes, Gorgias…the partisan divide has nothing to do with the Republicans crapping all over the Dems when they were the majority and it has nothing to do with Bush thinking he is above the Constitution by claiming the right to be dictator. You are really…not very thoughtful.
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:05 pmTwo words, Gorgias. James Sensenbrenner. I would have two more words for you but gorn already used them.
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:06 pmYou know… it is possible to go witch-fishing, catch a witch, and still waste time and money.
I see the Dems doing all they can to maintain the partisan divide… from day one, when Leahy accosted Cheney, it was all party over country for the Dems……………………….
Pathetic.
Comment by Gorgias — August 2, 2007 @ 8:39 pm
So, since you didn’t bother to answer the questions I asked directly…
I infer that you don’t want to be taken seriously.
I mean, that much was demnstrated beyond a doubt when you were Mr. Pee, but I thought maybe “Gorgias” would want to turn over a new leaf and actually discuss stuff for a change. I guess not.
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:10 pmAdvice to all white house “advisers”.
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:15 pmBe sure to parse your answers as much as you can.
Don’t send a memo if an email will do.
Don’t send an email if a call will do.
Don’t make a call if a word in person will do.
Don’t say a word if a nod will do.
Don’t nod if a wink will do.
Don’t wink if a look will do.
Comment by mikey r — August 2, 2007 @ 9:10 pm
Fine, I’ll answer “directly”
Yup.
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:45 pmSome of my progressive friends and I are going out to LaPush late September and go on a partisan fishing expedition.
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:51 pmSalmon, Ling and Rock Cod.
Now THAT will be a partisan fishing expedition.
These hearings are just trying to uncover the truth about the mismanagment and misdeeds and just plain mis-alltheshit these hacks have been up to.
And what about the ***General who’s the fall guy in the Tillman case refusing to appear before Congress? He ducked the Federal Marshall trying to serve him notice.
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:53 pmYou can’t fu(king hide ***General, we have your address…
Oh, and by the way, Sharon’s gonna be pissed about your misuse of the term Witch.
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:54 pmAnd you don’t want Sharon pissed at you Mr. Pee.
‘Fine, I’ll answer “directlyâ€
IF you characterize an investigation as a “partisan witching expedition†(and I don’t even know what that is) then you must be implying that there is no cause for such an investigation. Am I wrong?
Yup.’
But you already said you don’t know if there was wrongdoing. Is Karl’s pen!s in your mouth?
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:22 pmFine, I’ll answer “directlyâ€
IF you characterize an investigation as a “partisan witching expedition†(and I don’t even know what that is) then you must be implying that there is no cause for such an investigation. Am I wrong?
Yup.
Comment by Gorgias — August 2, 2007 @ 9:45 pm
Thanks, but it might have helped a bit if you could have explained WHY I’m wrong in my assumption?
For instance, if you are not implying that there is no cause for such an investigation, then why is it, in your opinion, a “partisan fish hunt” or whatever euphemism you wish to use?
Just tryin’ to get a straight answer.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:45 pmEngaging republican traitors is a waste of time. Beating the sh*t out of them is more productive. That should be next on the agenda.
August 2nd, 2007 at 11:32 pmbilbobaggins,
you said “Democrats have agreed to interview KKKarl Rove at the Whitehouse, with no transcript and not under oath.” Do you have a source for that other than hearing Randy Rhoades say it? I can’t find it anywhere.
August 2nd, 2007 at 11:34 pmJeez, even T would tell the committee he’s in “waste management.”
August 2nd, 2007 at 11:36 pmMoments ago, I heard on the news that Bushitler and his 1st slut are going to the collapsed bridge in Minneapolis. Is there NO tragedy the Bushies won’t stoop to in order to exploit for a photo op?
August 3rd, 2007 at 7:43 amWhat hasn’t this Bunch of Thugs posing as an an American Presidency HAVEN’T covered up?
Starting with the sunny Tuesday September morning back in 2001.
August 3rd, 2007 at 9:26 amWhat HASN’T this Bunch of Thugs posing as an an American Presidency covered up?
Starting with the sunny Tuesday September morning back in 2001.
August 3rd, 2007 at 9:27 am“Engaging republican traitors is a waste of time. Beating the sh*t out of them is more productive. That should be next on the agenda.
Comment by ronjazz — August 2, 2007 @ 11:32 pm”
Spoken like a true liberal!
August 3rd, 2007 at 9:35 amRemember when executive privilege meant a parking spot and a key to the washroom?
August 3rd, 2007 at 9:58 amWe’ve gone a long way, baby.
This is probably the greatest “non-story” of the Dubya administration.
The President can fire U.S. Attorneys at will, for whatever reason he/she wants.
Don’t like the hair color? Fired. Don’t like the fact that he/she’s of the opposing party? Fired. Don’t like someone who wears wing-tips when you wear brogans? Fired!
Bush’s greatest mistake was not to fire the whole lot of them. So much for the success of attempting to be the great bi-partisan reconciliator.
I guess Bush CAN be blamed for not being the political tactition the “great mis-communicator” Clinton was. After all, wasn’t it Bill Clinton who fired 93 U.S. attorneys all at once, just to cover up the firing of the one U.S. attorney in Arkansas who was investigating the Clinton’s themselves? And thus, “Whitewater” became “Whitewash”?
“It’s good to be King!”
Perhaps Bush did learn one political reality from this: In politics, you must take one of two tacks, either crush your enemies, or simply ignore them. In this case, he is ignoring them.
Bottom line is this: While the Bush-hating liberal blogs and the Democrat controlled congress are still bogged down in this U.S. attorney-firing “non-issue”, the rest of America has moved on. They don’t take it seriously anymore, and thus, they are no longer paying attention.
Some say: “Where there’s smoke, there’s fire!” as the excuse for all of this nonsense.
I say: “You can’t yell fire in a crowded theatre.” Or for that matter, continually cry “Wolf!” with nothing to back it up, without eventually pissing everyone else off, or causing them to ignore you as the charletan you are.
It’s time for the Democrats to quit crying “Wolf!” and get on with governing.
August 3rd, 2007 at 10:11 am“Engaging republican traitors is a waste of time. Beating the sh*t out of them is more productive. That should be next on the agenda.
Comment by ronjazz — August 2, 2007 @ 11:32 pmâ€
Spoken like a true liberal!
Comment by O. Bigfoot — August 3, 2007 @ 9:35 am
I think TP truncated your comment, O.Bigfoot-in-bigmouth.
It cut off the part where you said “Spoken like a true liberal frustrated with trying to get a straight answer out of a Republicant!”
You’re welcome.
August 3rd, 2007 at 10:12 amI see O.Bigfoot-in-bigmouth is back to the “Pleasure of the President” talking point. Oy.
He doesn’t realize that the President CANNOT fire a US Attorney if that firing is intended to obstruct justice (as in halting investigations into corrupt Republican officials). That’s illegal. And firing a US Attorney who won’t politicize prosecutions (as appears to have happened in a number of cases) is improper in the extreme.
But that second objection carries some nuance with it, so I don’t expect O.bigmouth to get it. And come to think of it, the first one is about the rule of law, so I don’t expect him to get that one, either.
August 3rd, 2007 at 10:19 amThis is SUCH a joke. This is less scandalous than Hillary’s travelgate cover-up.
AND Durbin is such an awful man. To compare our troops to Nazis and then cry on the senate floor – what a horrible person. I am glad his efforts to smear Sam Alito failed.
Dick Turbin – man of so little character. He would make Hitler blush.
August 3rd, 2007 at 10:44 amI see some comments here about, this being a non-issue.
That America has moved on.
That no one is paying attention.
That it is time to stop crying wolf and start governing.
Yet those same people can’t go without mentioning how Clinton did it too.
That this is nothing compared to what Clinton did.
That this is less scandalous than Hillary’s travelgate cover-up.
Who, I wonder, has more trouble letting go.
August 3rd, 2007 at 10:56 am#103 – at the moment, YOU. This story is a big YAWN. Durbin is a vicious partisan and you know it. AND he’s a coward. Liberals don’t care about these firings – they want impeachment. But the Democrats are too chickensh*t to give you what you want … Bawk, bawk, bawk!!!!
lol!!! At least the GOP has courage.
August 3rd, 2007 at 10:58 amCiting Executive Privilege to obstruct justice is just that . . obstructing justice.
It should not be honored.
They should be arrested for obstructing justice and made to defend themselves in court.
August 3rd, 2007 at 11:11 am#105 – just like Clinton. Hey, if you idiots want to rally the right-wing base, be my guest.
August 3rd, 2007 at 11:16 am“I guess Bush CAN be blamed for not being the political tactition the “great mis-communicator†Clinton was. After all, wasn’t it Bill Clinton who fired 93 U.S. attorneys all at once, just to cover up the firing of the one U.S. attorney in Arkansas who was investigating the Clinton’s themselves? And thus, “Whitewater†became “Whitewashâ€?”
Comment by O. Bigfoot — August 3, 2007 @ 10:11 am
——————————————
Ok, this is a new one. We have heard the “Clinton did it too” drumbeat over and over and over again, including “Clinton fired all 93 of his USAs”. That argument has been discredited every time it comes up, because it’s common for an incoming president (especially one from a different party) to remove all the existing USAs and appoint his own. Clinton did it, Dubya did it when he first came in (yes, the whole lot of them), Reagan did it, etc. etc. But now you are accusing Clinton of firing all 93 to cover up Whitewater??? Then, why didn’t he fire Ken Starr? And if there was so much to be covered up with Whitewater, why did Ken Starr conclude there was nothing there after four years of digging? Your argument is baseless.
Nowhere in your diatribe do you explain to anybody’s satisfaction why, if the Bushies have done nothing wrong, they are going to such great lengths to cover up and be uncooperative. Bush isn’t under fire for firing all his attorneys when he first came to office — that practice is standard. He is under fire for canning his OWN appointees, and while he has the right to do so as long as it’s not for illegal reasons (to obstruct justice, for example), there is evidence that suggests he may have done this for illegal reasons.
You only imply that this is of such little consequence that Bush is correct to ignore it. Sorry, that only makes him look guiltier. Just as when Clinton lied, stalled, and obfuscated to the point that we all KNEW he was getting serviced by Monica, Bush’s actions are convincing us there is a huge sh!tpile they are trying to hide.
August 3rd, 2007 at 11:19 ammissmolly, in terms of the law, Clinton broke it, it’s at best, debatable if Bush did. When you are ready to grow up and stop being hypocrite, you might actually make a difference. Until then, aniticipate a tsunami of hate headed right for your candidates come next fall. You deserve it – your lies and propoganda against Bush have consequences.
August 3rd, 2007 at 11:23 amThese people are TRAITORS, plain and simple. Who’d have ever thought that people who work for the White House would REFUSE to uphold and defend the Constitution, the cornerstone of our republic, and refuse to appear before our governing body to truthfully answer questions. Doesn’t anyone in this administration have any INTEGRITY?
I pray every day that a true patriot, who understands that their utmost loyalty lies with the United States of America, will have the internal fortitude to do the right thing and tell the TRUTH for once.
August 3rd, 2007 at 11:46 amWhen you can’t argue facts, you can always resort to name calling.
August 3rd, 2007 at 12:11 pmComment by Jackie — August 2, 2007 @ 6:55 pm
Arlen Specter invented the Magic Bullet, but it didn’t injure “several others.” It hit the President in the upper back, emerged from his throat (through the knot of his tie), hit Governor Connally in the back (breaking one or two ribs), emerged from his chest, hit him again in the right wrist (breaking his radius) and is thought to have hit him a third time (causing a superficial wound in his left thigh). No bullets were recovered from the car (if any had been, they would have been immensely helpful to the investigation). The Magic Bullet was found in Parkland Hospital, where it is thought to have fallen from the Governor’s thigh during transportation. No bullets were recovered from the President (again, they would have been very helpful).
It is called the “Magic” bullet because it suffered very little damage despite passing through each man’s torso (what’s the plural of torso?), and because of the apparently circuitous path (left, then right, then left, then right, etc.) it traveled to cause all those wounds.
Arlen Specter invented the argument that one bullet caused the wounds to both the Governor and the President because only three shots were fired by Oswald (three empty shell casings, too little time to aim and fire a 4th time). The first shot was heard by witnesses, but didn’t hit anyone (it is thought to have struck a Dealey Plaza curbstone, but was never recovered). The second bullet is the Magic Bullet. The third bullet struck the President in the head, dramatically killing him on the Zapruder film.
If two separate bullets hit Connally and Kennedy, that would mean a fourth bullet not fired by Oswald. A fourth bullet means two shooters. The police arrested Oswald and he was dead. The establishment did not want to hear that a second shooter was still at large. So: Arlen Specter and the Magic Bullet.
Specter played ball in 1964, as he has done his entire life. He will keep giving cover to the his masters. He (like John McCain) just likes to pretend he still owns his soul.
August 3rd, 2007 at 12:43 pmmissmolly, in terms of the law, Clinton broke it, it’s at best, debatable if Bush did. When you are ready to grow up and stop being hypocrite, you might actually make a difference. Until then, aniticipate a tsunami of hate headed right for your candidates come next fall. You deserve it – your lies and propoganda against Bush have consequences.
Comment by I Heart Alito — August 3, 2007 @ 11:23 am
Um…you didn’t answer my question. Instead you are behaving like a troll by calling me a hypocrite (without explaining why), accusing me of lies and propaganda (without any specifics), and making some vague predictions about a “tsunami of hate” (also without any specifics).
My question is this: If the Bushies have nothing to hide, why are they spending so much time and energy stonewalling?
But with your latest post, I now have more questions for you:
1) What about my post makes me a hypocrite? Please be specific about any double-standard you see. Or is “hypocrite” just the label du jour to be tossed out in a vain effort to discredit a poster you disagree with — like “stalinist”?
2) What lies and propaganda am I spreading against Bush? All I said about Bush is that he fired 10% of his U.S. Attorneys in the middle of his term, and that is unprecedented. That’s not a lie. I also said there is evidence that suggests he MAY have done this for illegal or improper reasons — enough to warrant further digging. That’s not a lie, either. And I said that Bush and his minions are acting guilty by ignoring subpoenas, stonewalling, improperly invoking “executive privilege” and doing everything they can to avoid cooperating. This is common knowledge, and not a lie I am trying to spread.
As far as the “tsunami of hate” directed at Democratic candidates — yes, I’m sure there will be some. There is vitriol in every campaign, which is unfortunate. I would much rather see a campaign where each party tells the public why their candidate is the best, instead of spending their energy telling the public why the other candidate is the spawn of Satan. And it will be the trolls who are full hate-spewing mode.
August 3rd, 2007 at 12:49 pmBushieGate cover up.
August 3rd, 2007 at 12:56 pm#108 Until then, aniticipate a tsunami of hate headed right for your candidates come next fall. You deserve it – your lies and propoganda against Bush have consequences.
Comment by I Heart Alito
UHHHH, maybe you should go outside teh US (as well as read the polls here) And see how the MAJORITY of the US AND the world feel about your “Codpiece COmmander Guy”. He is a laughingstock and most people feel he is a danger to the world.
Your posts here seem like a bit of “whistling by the graveyard”. But we shall see how things shake out in the ‘08 elections when a lot of additional seats will change hands in both Houses as well as the WH. But it will be OK, you will enjoy some adult supervision for s change.
August 3rd, 2007 at 12:56 pm“Specter played ball in 1964, as he has done his entire life. He will keep giving cover to the his masters. He (like John McCain) just likes to pretend he still owns his soul.”
Pete – you should know about selling your soul you hatemonger.
August 3rd, 2007 at 1:08 pmlol!!! At least the GOP has courage.
You have confused courage with arrogance.
August 3rd, 2007 at 4:05 pm“You have confused courage with arrogance.”
A-Bloody-men! These are, after all, the same nimrods who conflate yelling with the ability to argue cogently, offer soundbytes instead of actual content, confuse mindless jingoism with real patriotism, and mistake money for Jesus Christ (or whoever you’d like to put there).
August 3rd, 2007 at 6:28 pmQuestion for all of you extraordinarily bright, ivy league political hacks:
Bush et al advocate a strict Constitutional interpretation – forget the Fairness Doctrine, etc.
Where is “executive privilege” mentioned in the Constitution? Where is the Constiutional foundation for “Executive Privilege”? What Federal laws define it? What is it? What are its parameters?
Frankly, as long as the Roberts’ court is dismanteling stare desisis, shouldn’t the concept of “Executive Privilege” be fair game?
Admittedly, the Pres should be able to be able to speak frankly with advisors regarding the advisability of say, invading Iran. However, when the question comes down to e-mails sent over the RNC website that any half-decent techie can hack, hasn’t the concept been stretched to laughable lengths?
I may be a voice in the wilderness . . . but this vague concept is a moving target that apparently, only the executives who benefit from it can define, and the definition changes with political expediency. Perhaps dems are afraid that if they challenge it, they will lose the opportunity to use it when they finally obtain the presidency. That is truly not the issue . . .
The issue is: THE ILLUSORY CONCEPT OF EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE IS NOT CONSTITUTIONAL – IT HAS NO BOUNDARIES, NO DEFINITIONS – AND DEFEATS DEMOCRACY. IT HARMS THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.
Congress, with extraordinarily low ratings, fails to grasp the fact that Americans want a democratic form of transparent government in which we know what’s going on. Who exactly are we voting for? Hopefully not the “hushed,” lobbied hacks that we see today . . . hopefully not the partisan politicians who have no concept of the founding fathers’ vision of “NO KING” representation “by the people, for the people” . . . let’s get back to it. Either get rid of executive privilege altogether or pass a Constitutional Amendment making it a part of our “democratic” form of government. Step up to the plate. You seem to be pacing around it, by failure to act, negligently allowing an abhorent doctrine to take root.
August 3rd, 2007 at 6:37 pmNewsflash: GOP Lawyers Aren’t Military Commanders, But Alleged War Crimes Defendants
Let’s call this what it is: A bunch of punk lawyers are getting paid to shill for the GOP and President. There’s been illegal activity. These punk lawyers have their hands on this non-sense. Why is this legal community not outraged by this baloney by peers in their profession?
“Zealously defending their client” my A$$: They’re assenting to illegal activity, evidence destruction, and thwarting oversight of admitted FISA violations.
Of course the President’s involved — hello!! — This is “the decider” — nobody in the GOP or Executive Branch can move without this President being happy.
How can the Public reasonably expect this President not to be involved with these decisions? He’s involved with everything else: From excuses not to respond to the media, to fast questions about how in the DOJ is leaking information, and then onto gagging his own staff to be quiet about his open admissions.
I’m not sure what’s worse: Comparisons between this President’s mind control and Hitler’s non-sense; or the fact that the US, despite having checks and balances, refuses to use the public’s imagination to challenge this psychosis. Congress is doubly wrong when it cannot simply call this what it is: FISA illegalities. Nothing is more complicated; the rest of the story is how the President and others induce the world to do nothing about it; then blame others for their illegal activity. It’s nothing new. Same games, same lawyers who have bungled warfare in Afghanistan and Iraq. They’re not military experts: They’re alleged war criminals. Stop listening to them. Start adjudicating legal matters: They are not to be revered, but prosecuted.
August 3rd, 2007 at 7:14 pmAnon:
Good points all . . . .however, you blame lawyers . . . lawyers are not the key decision-makers in this administration. Neither Bush, Cheney nor Rove is an attorney. They appear to have hijacked a few lawyers to justify their policies . . . but lawyers are not the source of the problems. Lawyers who should probably be disbarred shill for wrong policies, but lawyers are not the problem.
By pointing your accusatory stick at the lawyers that defend the policies, you deflect attention from the true culprits.
Who are the culprits? Well, a good starting point is the Office of the President, the Vice President, etc. down to Mr. Griles, Mr. Abranhoff, etc. Get off of the anti-lawyer boat and look at those who are actually prolumgating the policies. Look at the Exec, Legislative and Judiciary branches. Forget about the hired hands . . . yes, they prostitute themselves, but they do it for any cause . . . get over it. As a democracy, we are all entitled to a good defense. Don’t think that the lawyers won’t change sides with the changing shifts of the winds.
August 3rd, 2007 at 7:26 pmThrow the obfiscators in jail for a while. They might not feel like such “privileged” executives then. Contempt of Congress sounds like a start. Put ‘em in prison until they find their tongues. If Bush then wants to silence his privileged executives, let him take it to the Supreme Court. Let’s see some action! How long do we have to watch this cabal flout the law?
August 3rd, 2007 at 11:17 pmThe U.S. Congress and Iraqi Parliament are on vacation, Why aren’t you? It’s the weekend. Time for a video recap of the weekly news…Why read…it’s the weekend. Relax, kickback, and enjoy. A little political humor never hurts.
U.S. soldiers ask “Should We Stay or Should we Go.
August 4th, 2007 at 3:49 pm