Apr 16 2007

Politics Is Not Illegal – Yet

Published by at 11:32 am under All General Discussions

The WaPo is desperately carrying water for the Liberal witch-hunters in Congress trying to pin Gonzales with doing something improper in allowing Bush to exercise his staffing decisions on who will be the US AG’s around the country. The WaPo points to a poll that politics was involved in the prosecutor changes. Politics was involved in electing Bush and Congress. BFD – Gonzales did nothing wrong and the Libs are distracted on useless and marginal issues while ignoring the needs of our troops and national security. Politics is only illegal in dictatorships.

12 responses so far

12 Responses to “Politics Is Not Illegal – Yet”

  1. BarbaraS says:

    The dims keep making fools of themselves with this turkey. They hope that we don’t understand that the USAs are politically appointed by the President and can be fired by the President for political reasons. Just another example of the dims thinking the electorate is stupid. However, this keeps them too busy to make a muck of other things as they would otherwise do. Distract the sub mental and/or disengenious. It would be wise for the administration to ignore them as much as possible and delay giving them things until the dims run out of steam or until January 20, 2009.

    The dims showed what they are made of when they passed the military appropriations bill.

  2. Soothsayer says:

    As the Strataspheristas continue to demonstrate an appalling ignorance of the law, let me ask you to keep in mind that:

    1. The president may replace any US attorney at any time for any reason – AS LONG AS THE REASON IS NOT IMPERMISSIBLE.

    2. Impermissible? How so?

    Well, the president may not fire a US attorney because of race, creed, color, gender, age, etc. And – he may not fire a US attorney in order to affect the outcome of a case, nor may fire one for partisan political purpose.

    3. Partisan political purpose? How so?

    Well, let’s hypothesize that there was a concerted effort under way to promote or retain certain US attorneys because they prosecuted 85% Democrats and 15% Republicans. Cause that’s exactly what they’ve been doing.

    Or a rating spreadsheet which rates US attorneys on how many partisan prosecutions they’ve got under their belt. Cause one such spreadsheet was released recently.

    Or – let’s hypothesize that there was a Rovian plot to create the misimpression that poor and minority voters have engaged in widespread voter fraud. Which is exactly what Rove has been doing – compelte with PowerPoint demonstrations on how to accomplish this – and replacement of US attorneys who after investigating ralized there was no crime to prosecute – and refused to do so.

    This results in what is known as “selective prosecution” – and it can result in criminal convictions being overturned, as it is an impermissible abuse of legal process for partisan political purpose.

    All of these abuses are unlawful – as is most certainly lying under oath to Congress. Which is why Gonzales is going to wind up discredited, humiliated and out of work.

    Tomorrow should be a real humdinger. And next up — Monica Goodling. Mmmmmmmm- boy.

  3. ivehadit says:

    Then how did Clinton fire 93 because he wanted to really only get rid of one?

    Oh puhleeze. The six years olds are at it again. And I am going to tell you, that you are not going to succeed in tearing this country to shreds with your pathetic power grabs.

  4. Terrye says:

    soothie:

    Keep digging.

  5. Terrye says:

    Well of course politics were involved. They are political positions. Politics were involved when Clinton fired 93 Attorneys. Politics were involved in Travelgate. Politics were involved when Hubbel got his job. Politics were involved in the pardons. Politics were involved in the Chinese cash for campaigns in return for technology game. and so on and so forth. And politics were involved when Schumer’s people stole the credit report of a political adversary. And politics were involved when Feinstein’s hubby made millions off his wife’s job. And politics were involved when Murtha got nabbed in the Abscam scandal. And politics were involved when Leahy leaked the name of a CIA agent and got to remain in office.

    And the list goes on. Most people are not as deluded as soothie.

  6. Terrye says:

    And you know what elese soothie? For all their threats and bs the people after Gonzales have not come up with one single fact to back up what they say. Nothing, it is just bs.

  7. Soothsayer says:

    Wait until tomorrow, Terrye. Gonzales is going to get his butt handed to him and it won’t be pretty.

    As for facts – it’s a fact that Gonzales said – to Congress – that he “had nothing to do with the firings.”

    He’s admitted that was false – but says it’s jsut a misunderstanding. We’ll see. When a jury gets the facts – Speedy is going to follow in Scooter’s footsteps.

  8. ivehadit says:

    Typical liberal to use racial slurs in the posts.

    And let’s see, wasn’t it last month that soothie told us Alberto Gonzales would be gone by month’s end?

    I can’t wait to show my hispanic friends what the liberals REALLY think of them…

    The pathological liberals wouldn’t know a decent man if he fell on their collective pointed heads. Their definitions of the highest and best of mankind are certainly none to whicht I want to aspire.

  9. momdear1 says:

    Soothsayer. You can’t use the “ista” addendum to describe Strata enthusiasts. I coined the moniker, Clintonista, back in the 90’s to describe the Clintons and their left wing, antiAmerican, Sandanista like, sell anything to anybody, including national security and our industrial base, anything goes as long as it’s our guys doing it , followers. There is no way that any of Strata’s supporters have earned that designation.

    Marilyn Ayers

  10. For Enforcement says:

    Soothie’s having a premature orgasm. Look, let’s cut to the chase. The President can replace a US attorneysolely because he wants to. It doesn’t matter what the reason is. All he has to do is say,” I am exercising my discretion to replace this attorney.” Now it may be because he had bad breath, or didn’t smell good, or didn’t smile and say good morning. The president does not have to give a reason.

    The Dims are gonna accomplish exactly nothing except grandstanding for the press tomorrow. They will accomplish no more than they have in their first 100 days. Zip, nada.

  11. Soothsayer says:

    Zip, nada.

    Oh, really, learned one?

    Today’s early news:

    When Gonzales appears before the committee [now scheduled for Thursday due to Va Tech], a central focus will be the extent of his involvement in the firings.

    Gonzales has insisted he left those decisions to his staff, but ABC News has learned he was so concerned about U.S. attorney Carol Lam’s lackluster record on immigration enforcement in San Diego that he supported firing her months before she was dismissed, according to a newly released e-mail from his former chief of staff.

    The e-mail, which came from Gonzales aide Kyle Sampson, appeared to contradict the prepared written testimony Gonzales submitted to Congress over the weekend in advance of his Senate Judiciary Committee hearing Tuesday. In his prepared testimony, Gonzales said that during the months that his senior staff was evaluating U.S. attorneys, including Lam, “I did not make the decisions about who should or should not be asked to resign.”

    He’s still lying – and he’s dumb enough to do it in writing.

  12. Soothsayer says:

    More VERY BAD NEWS for Gonzales – Kyle Sampson is rolling like a log:

    The former top aide to Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales has told Congressional investigators that Mr. Gonzales was “inaccurate,” or “at least not complete” in asserting that he had no role in the deliberations about individual United States attorneys who were later dismissed.

    The statements by D. Kyle Sampson, the former chief of staff to Mr. Gonzales, during an interview with investigators on Sunday, were made public as the Senate Judiciary Committee postponed a hearing that had been scheduled for Tuesday in which Mr. Gonzales was to appear to defend his actions in the dismissals.

    In his interview, Mr. Sampson said under oath that Mr. Gonzales took part in discussions last fall about David C. Iglesias, who was removed as the United States attorney in New Mexico, as well as in a June 2006 meeting that addressed concerns about Carol C. Lam, the United States attorney ousted from her job in San Diego.

    Anybody else want to climb out on that limb and voice their support for the embattled AG??