Meet your new thread, same as the old thread.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
When is he being impeached?

eta: Ty, you really should stop relying on gossip columns or other mean spirited nonsense for news.

you mean bush? what did he do in that whole story? or do you mean this comey guy? he quit ahead of being fired. for a man charged with protecting this country to act so weasly THE DAY of the Madrid bombings- well, I tell you it is shocking.

and the testimony is inconsistant wrt at least 1 thing. he says they renewed the program w/o the AG signature- then later he implies he was able to effect changes that made him happy.

and i thought Schumer's introduction was certainly very senatorial- what a fucking hack. how can you look at that pile of shit as someone you respect?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
This is wild stuff. Skip to page 9, and read to about page 22.

Come now. You think this is unusual. Why do you think Ashcroft is no longer with us?

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
you mean bush?

For now, I'd be happy with just Gonzales. I wouldn't want to impeach Bush without getting rid of Cheney first.

and i thought Schumer's introduction was certainly very senatorial- what a fucking hack. how can you look at that pile of shit as someone you respect?

You seem to have a lot of respect for Bush. You tell me?

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
you mean bush? what did he do in that whole story? or do you mean this comey guy? he quit ahead of being fired. for a man charged with protecting this country to act so weasly THE DAY of the Madrid bombings- well, I tell you it is shocking.

and the testimony is inconsistant wrt at least 1 thing. he says they renewed the program w/o the AG signature- then later he implies he was able to effect changes that made him happy.

and i thought Schumer's introduction was certainly very senatorial- what a fucking hack. how can you look at that pile of shit as someone you respect?

I'm just sort of dumbfounded that someone appointed by the Bush administration has integrity.

ETA: I think that he goes into Hank's concerns under the Specter cross.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
so what?
and I just went and searched "McNulty" and none of you have ever mentioned him before. Did some blog tell you this was important or are you taking a shot in the dark that maybe it meant something?

More gossip:

• Is the Noose Tightening on Gonzales?
  
  Tuesday, May. 15, 2007 By KAREN TUMULTY/WASHINGTON U.S.
  
  Now that the number-two official at the Justice Department has resigned, the question many in Washington are asking is: Will soon-to-be-former Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty be DOJ's fall guy — or its worst nightmare?
  
  As is so often the case when someone gets the ax in Washington, the official explanation for McNulty's departure was personal. In his one-page letter to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, the deputy AG wrote that he will be leaving in late summer because of the "financial realities" of trying to provide for college-age children on a government salary. McNulty, 49, has worked nearly half his life either on Capitol Hill or in the executive branch.
  
  But no one is taking that to be the real reason. Since McNulty's congressional testimony in February that the White House was involved in the firing of at least one of the nine U.S. attorneys who were forced to resign last year, the tension between his office and Gonzales's has divided and crippled the department. "There's a war going on between the DAG's office and the AG's office," says one senior Justice official."The thing that's 100% clear is that there's really no leadership. Both the DAG and the AG are so compromised, there's no one running the department. There's a lot of antagonism between those two groups. The DAG is throwing [Gonzales and his team] under the bus."

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
More gossip:

• Is the Noose Tightening on Gonzales?
  
  Tuesday, May. 15, 2007 By KAREN TUMULTY/WASHINGTON U.S.
  
  Now that the number-two official at the Justice Department has resigned, the question many in Washington are asking is: Will soon-to-be-former Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty be DOJ's fall guy — or its worst nightmare?
  
  As is so often the case when someone gets the ax in Washington, the official explanation for McNulty's departure was personal. In his one-page letter to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, the deputy AG wrote that he will be leaving in late summer because of the "financial realities" of trying to provide for college-age children on a government salary. McNulty, 49, has worked nearly half his life either on Capitol Hill or in the executive branch.
  
  But no one is taking that to be the real reason. Since McNulty's congressional testimony in February that the White House was involved in the firing of at least one of the nine U.S. attorneys who were forced to resign last year, the tension between his office and Gonzales's has divided and crippled the department. "There's a war going on between the DAG's office and the AG's office," says one senior Justice official."The thing that's 100% clear is that there's really no leadership. Both the DAG and the AG are so compromised, there's no one running the department. There's a lot of antagonism between those two groups. The DAG is throwing [Gonzales and his team] under the bus."

I dunno:

I think [McNulty] found it difficult -- really, impossible -- to continue to serve in the Department of Justice as a professional, which Paul McNulty is, because it's embarrassing for a professional to work for the Department of Justice today.

page 6, Ty's link, above

And just for a chuckle:

SPECTER: Can you give us an illustration of an exercise in good judgment by Kyle Sampson?

I withdraw that question.

Can you give us an example of an exercise of good judgment by Alberto Gonzales?

Let the record show a very long pause.

COMEY: It's hard -- I mean, I'm sure there are examples. I'll think of some.

I mean, it's hard when you look back. We worked together for eight months.

page 38-39, Ty's link, above.

[Shape Shifter]

Cheney on the Pelosi Plan:

• "Democrats have to be responsible for the consequences of the policy recommendations they make."

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/20...ter-video.html

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
you mean bush? what did he do in that whole story? or do you mean this comey guy? he quit ahead of being fired. for a man charged with protecting this country to act so weasly THE DAY of the Madrid bombings- well, I tell you it is shocking.

and the testimony is inconsistant wrt at least 1 thing. he says they renewed the program w/o the AG signature- then later he implies he was able to effect changes that made him happy.

and i thought Schumer's introduction was certainly very senatorial- what a fucking hack. how can you look at that pile of shit as someone you respect?

La la

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
I'm just sort of dumbfounded that someone appointed by the Bush administration has integrity.

ETA: I think that he goes into Hank's concerns under the Specter cross.

I like that all these Dems are so worried about Ashcroft now.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
For now, I'd be happy with just Gonzales. I wouldn't want to impeach Bush without getting rid of Cheney first.

you think you can impeach for actions at a prior job? can you imagine the shit Clinton pulled on his paper route?

[Oliver_Wendell_Ramone]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
[list] Is the Noose Tightening on Gonzales?

Tuesday, May. 15, 2007 By KAREN TUMULTY/WASHINGTON U.S.

the number-two official at the Justice Department

I had no idea that position even existed. I guess we know where Atticus went, now.

[sgtclub]

• New York Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg is prepared to spend an unprecedented $1 billion of his own $5.5 billion personal fortune for a third-party presidential campaign, personal friends of the mayor tell The Washington Times.
  
  "He has set aside $1 billion to go for it," confided a long-time business adviser to the Republican mayor. "The thinking about where it will come from and do we have it is over, and the answer is yes, we can do it."
  
  Another personal friend and fellow Republican said in recent days that Mr. Bloomberg, who is a social liberal and fiscal conservative, has "lowered the bar" and upped the ante for a final decision on making a run.
  
  The mayor has told close associates he will make a third-party run if he thinks he can influence the national debate and has said he will spend up to $1 billion. Earlier, he told friends he would make a run only if he thought he could win a plurality in a three-way race and would spend $500 million -- or less than 10 percent of his personal fortune.

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
and i thought Schumer's introduction was certainly very senatorial- what a fucking hack. how can you look at that pile of shit as someone you respect?

He wins. Don't hate the playa . . .

S_A_M

[Not Bob]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
I like that all these Dems are so worried about Ashcroft now.

I think that it's more shock that someone could be less concerned about the propriety of the unnamed program at issue than Ashcroft was.

[Not Bob]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
you think you can impeach for actions at a prior job? can you imagine the shit Clinton pulled on his paper route?

So, the appointment of a special prosecutor for Whitewater was improper from the gecko*?

*A little** Not Bob humor.

**Fenwick would like to add that "very little" would be more accurate. I'm humoring the youngster because we're in trial tomorrow. Should be a blast -- my star witnesses are a recovering alcoholic store manager (a nice guy, actually) and a slacker bag boy who acts like he wouldn't know how to use a mop if his life depended on it. On the upside, the plaintiff slipped on Cool Whip, which just sounds silly, and the manager has been dry since he found Jesus, so I have some hope.