Quotes of the Morning: I Know Nothing.. Nothing!
“The Bush administration has been caught telling yet another falsehood (domestic-politics category, as opposed to the Iraq-war category).
Thanks to the latest Friday night document dump, let's just simply compare what Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said on March 13, and what he did last Nov. 27.
On March 13, he felt compelled to address the burgeoning evidence that eight U.S. attorneys (all Republicans) had been fired in an unprecedented fashion for failing to politicize their offices sufficiently and aid the GOP at election time. Gonzales denied he had played any role in the firings. Here was the money quote: ‘We never had a discussion about where things stood.’
Now it turns out, courtesy of an item on the Justice Department calendar that Gonzales met with his top aides Nov. 27, to have a discussion about where things stood. They met in a Justice conference room at 9 a.m., and the title of the meeting was ‘U.S. Attorney Appointments.’ The firings were engineered on Dec. 7.
Naturally, a Justice spokeswoman said Friday night that there was absolutely no conflict between what Gonzales said on March 13 and what he did last Nov. 27, but if you're prepared to believe that, I have some Saddam Hussein WMD to sell you.”
-Philadelphia Inquirer, March 27, 2007
“Attorney General Alberto Gonzales' liaison with the White House will refuse to answer questions at upcoming Senate hearings about the firings of eight U.S. attorneys, citing her Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination, her lawyer said Monday.
[…]
In an interview with NBC News, Gonzales said Monday he was ‘really pained’ by Republicans and Democrats alike who widely say the attorney general has lost his credibility.
[…]
Goodling's statement contradicted her boss' promise to allow his top aides to testify before Congress, voluntarily and under oath.
John Dowd, Goodling's lawyer, suggested in a letter to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., that the Democrat-led panel has laid what amounts to a perjury trap for his client.
Goodling, one of several aides involved in the firings of federal prosecutors, will refuse to answer senators' questions.
‘The potential for legal jeopardy for Ms. Goodling from even her most truthful and accurate testimony under these circumstances is very real,’ Dowd said. Goodling was key to the Justice Department's political response to the growing controversy. She took a leave of absence last week.”
-Associated Press, March 25, 2007
“How many times do I need to tell you?.. There is nothing unusual about the attorney firings! People plead the Fifth Amendment all the time, so there is nothing unusual there, and yes, it is true that if she answered honestly she would be in legal jeopardy for perjuring herself before Congress, but so what?
You’d think that someone in the Administration finally remembering what the Constitution says would make you people happy, but nooooo..
Let’s just ask Alberto one more time and let him clear all of this up.”
-Skippy
“ATTORNEY GENERAL GONZALES: I asked for their resignation not for improper reasons. I would never have asked for their resignations to interfere with a public corruption case or in any way to interfere with an ongoing investigation. I just wouldn't do that. And if you look carefully at the documentation we've provided to Congress, there's no evidence of that....
I directed the Department officials participate in interviews and hearings before the Congress. As I've indicated, I've asked OPR to be involved, to work with the Office of Inspector General so we can reassure the American public that nothing improper happened here. I've got nothing to hide in terms of what I've done. And we now want to reassure the American public that nothing improper happened here.
If I find out that, in fact, any of these decisions were motivated, the recommendations to me were motivated for improper reasons to interfere with the public corruption case, there will be swift and -- there will be swift and decisive action. I can assure you that.
PETE WILLIAMS: Meaning people would be fired?
ATTORNEY GENERAL GONZALES: Absolutely. Because there is no place for that. Our prosecutors have to-- there has to be no question about the integrity, the professionalism, undue influence of prosecutions in connection with public corruption kinds of cases. And if I find out that any of that occurred here involving the Department of Justice officials, yes, they will be removed.”
-NBC News Interview with Alberto Gonzales, March 26, 2007
“See? Alberto had nothing to do with it. He wasn’t involved in the decisions going on in his office, and if he finds out that something political went on he will immediately fire those involved, just like Fearless Leader did in the Valerie Plame case.”
-Skippy
“President Bush said Tuesday he welcomes a Justice Department investigation into who revealed the classified identity of a CIA operative.
‘If there's a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is,’ Bush told reporters at an impromptu news conference during a fund-raising stop in Chicago, Illinois. ‘If the person has violated law, that person will be taken care of. ‘”
-CNN, February 11, 2004
“President Bush appeared to backtrack Monday from his 2004 pledge to fire anyone involved in leaking the name of CIA operative Valerie Plame.”
-CNN, July 19, 2005
“What? No one was fired? Rove still works there? Hmm…
Well, regardless, at least you know that Alberto Gonzales was not involved in a cover-up about the political firings. He was just completely unaware of what was going on in the Justice Department that he was heading, and you can’t be upset with a guy for not being aware of crimes that his underlings were performing. Heck, if you had to take responsibility for what those working for you did Fearless Leader would have been kicked out of office years ago. Obviously ignorance is a really, really good excuse.”
-Skippy
Thanks to the latest Friday night document dump, let's just simply compare what Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said on March 13, and what he did last Nov. 27.
On March 13, he felt compelled to address the burgeoning evidence that eight U.S. attorneys (all Republicans) had been fired in an unprecedented fashion for failing to politicize their offices sufficiently and aid the GOP at election time. Gonzales denied he had played any role in the firings. Here was the money quote: ‘We never had a discussion about where things stood.’
Now it turns out, courtesy of an item on the Justice Department calendar that Gonzales met with his top aides Nov. 27, to have a discussion about where things stood. They met in a Justice conference room at 9 a.m., and the title of the meeting was ‘U.S. Attorney Appointments.’ The firings were engineered on Dec. 7.
Naturally, a Justice spokeswoman said Friday night that there was absolutely no conflict between what Gonzales said on March 13 and what he did last Nov. 27, but if you're prepared to believe that, I have some Saddam Hussein WMD to sell you.”
-Philadelphia Inquirer, March 27, 2007
“Attorney General Alberto Gonzales' liaison with the White House will refuse to answer questions at upcoming Senate hearings about the firings of eight U.S. attorneys, citing her Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination, her lawyer said Monday.
[…]
In an interview with NBC News, Gonzales said Monday he was ‘really pained’ by Republicans and Democrats alike who widely say the attorney general has lost his credibility.
[…]
Goodling's statement contradicted her boss' promise to allow his top aides to testify before Congress, voluntarily and under oath.
John Dowd, Goodling's lawyer, suggested in a letter to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., that the Democrat-led panel has laid what amounts to a perjury trap for his client.
Goodling, one of several aides involved in the firings of federal prosecutors, will refuse to answer senators' questions.
‘The potential for legal jeopardy for Ms. Goodling from even her most truthful and accurate testimony under these circumstances is very real,’ Dowd said. Goodling was key to the Justice Department's political response to the growing controversy. She took a leave of absence last week.”
-Associated Press, March 25, 2007
“How many times do I need to tell you?.. There is nothing unusual about the attorney firings! People plead the Fifth Amendment all the time, so there is nothing unusual there, and yes, it is true that if she answered honestly she would be in legal jeopardy for perjuring herself before Congress, but so what?
You’d think that someone in the Administration finally remembering what the Constitution says would make you people happy, but nooooo..
Let’s just ask Alberto one more time and let him clear all of this up.”
-Skippy
“ATTORNEY GENERAL GONZALES: I asked for their resignation not for improper reasons. I would never have asked for their resignations to interfere with a public corruption case or in any way to interfere with an ongoing investigation. I just wouldn't do that. And if you look carefully at the documentation we've provided to Congress, there's no evidence of that....
I directed the Department officials participate in interviews and hearings before the Congress. As I've indicated, I've asked OPR to be involved, to work with the Office of Inspector General so we can reassure the American public that nothing improper happened here. I've got nothing to hide in terms of what I've done. And we now want to reassure the American public that nothing improper happened here.
If I find out that, in fact, any of these decisions were motivated, the recommendations to me were motivated for improper reasons to interfere with the public corruption case, there will be swift and -- there will be swift and decisive action. I can assure you that.
PETE WILLIAMS: Meaning people would be fired?
ATTORNEY GENERAL GONZALES: Absolutely. Because there is no place for that. Our prosecutors have to-- there has to be no question about the integrity, the professionalism, undue influence of prosecutions in connection with public corruption kinds of cases. And if I find out that any of that occurred here involving the Department of Justice officials, yes, they will be removed.”
-NBC News Interview with Alberto Gonzales, March 26, 2007
“See? Alberto had nothing to do with it. He wasn’t involved in the decisions going on in his office, and if he finds out that something political went on he will immediately fire those involved, just like Fearless Leader did in the Valerie Plame case.”
-Skippy
“President Bush said Tuesday he welcomes a Justice Department investigation into who revealed the classified identity of a CIA operative.
‘If there's a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is,’ Bush told reporters at an impromptu news conference during a fund-raising stop in Chicago, Illinois. ‘If the person has violated law, that person will be taken care of. ‘”
-CNN, February 11, 2004
“President Bush appeared to backtrack Monday from his 2004 pledge to fire anyone involved in leaking the name of CIA operative Valerie Plame.”
-CNN, July 19, 2005
“What? No one was fired? Rove still works there? Hmm…
Well, regardless, at least you know that Alberto Gonzales was not involved in a cover-up about the political firings. He was just completely unaware of what was going on in the Justice Department that he was heading, and you can’t be upset with a guy for not being aware of crimes that his underlings were performing. Heck, if you had to take responsibility for what those working for you did Fearless Leader would have been kicked out of office years ago. Obviously ignorance is a really, really good excuse.”
-Skippy
posted by Pope Impious XXIII | 4:19 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home