https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Logo-Web.png00emptywheelhttps://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Logo-Web.pngemptywheel2007-06-04 08:48:002007-06-04 08:48:00Why Pick Gillespie to Replace Bartlett?
John B. says:
Bizarre. Brazen. Criminal. Traitors.
Maeme says:
WAS IT THIS US ATTORNEY?
The head US Attorney for the District of NH is Thomas P. Colantuono, appointed to his post by George W. Bush in 2001. *
In the 2004 Presidential campaign, Colantuono’s wife made election-law news (Concord Monitor, October, 2004):
It’s illegal for clergy to campaign for a candidate on church property, but that didn’t stop a staffer for the Republican National Committee from soliciting help re-electing President Bush last week.
In an e-mail to â€pastors, church leaders and ministries,â€Pam Colantuono, wife of Tom Colantuono (a Bush-appointed U.S. attorney for New Hampshire), asked clergy for help getting a pro-Bush flier to parishioners. Colantuono was clear about how priests could do this without breaking the law.
â€Please place these in your parking lot, or when you have a church activity have someone hand them out outside the church. This is very important,†the e-mail read. It continued in bold letters: â€Pastors, do not display within the church and make sure you are not handing these out personally within your church. Assign someone to do this for you. We want to protect you.â€
(Monica was doing the interviewing then — maybe Ed had something to do with this appointment – another stellar lawman.)
TomJ says:
I have been unable to keep mental track of Bartlett. He seems to me to be the guy who is never in the room when anything happens. I don’t know if this impression is valid, but it would jive with the choice with Gonzo. Finally the Decider’s role in continuing this death spiral may have tipped off Bartlett that maybe something was up.
Reminds me of my own naive self finally discovering, at the old age of 20, that other people (besides myself) lie.
Adie says:
Hi EW.
apologies for OT question, but does anyone know if/why FDL AND Huffington are both â€down†right now? Or is it my local connection. arrrrggghhhh!?!
emptywheel says:
May well be your local, I’m on FDL fine right now.
Adie says:
thanks much!
DANG! we’re being switched from defunct adelphia to hyper warner in these parts. right now not funny. not fun. not at all a’tall!!!
i’ll get my smart hubby to reboot & yank those hamsters awake again. ;->
Lurcher says:
EW – its ’scot-free’ not ’scott-free’
emptywheel says:
Damnit. I had scot and changed it. Will change it back when I get to DC.
Neil says:
What a great question! â€Did Bush have to choose between Bartlett and Fredo?â€
You might think Gillespie’s work as Swiftboat Group counsel would conflict him out as President’s counsel but no, it qualifies him.
John Lopresti says:
Somewhat Off Topic, but right in the Same City of WA-DC and on the Same Day, which will be tomorrow: Schlozman hearing tomorrow; LAT’s meandering new journalism describes the anticipated hearing as about the USA in MO, but I think the first link, to Legal Times, is equally accurate in depicting the coverage as going to examine the politicization of career bureaucracy in DoJ civil rights section. I follow these topics in a desultory way; here is more about the purge at the civil-voting rights section from epluribusmedia, who also published a helpful compendium of the specifics of what happened in 2003-2005 in the voter rights section of DoJ there.
Mimikatz says:
I still think Bartlett sees that Bush is going off his rocker and doesn’t want to be around when it all falls apart completely.
It is hard to believe that someone around Bush for that long could actually have a line he wouldn’t cross, but who knows.
Gillespie is a great choice for them. Right in his element, as you point out, with such transferable skills.
Sailmaker says:
I see putting Gillespie in the Executive Branch as either a serious misstep or a serious Cheney yourself to the rest of the world.
Misstep) Replacing Bush’s reported ’son he never had’ with a political operative.
Cheney yourself) Hey we don’t need to worry about election fraud and all those petty details – Hey they couldn’t even get the charges right (aside: I just wonder why).
Not nice either way.
Urban Pirate says:
There are only so many â€made†men. We all know that they are barely staying one step ahead of impeachment/incarceration, so it was imperative to bring back a â€Bushieâ€.
No one who wasn’t neck deep in unlawful activities would could within a stone’s throw of this crowd right now, it’s the career kiss of death.
Bizarre. Brazen. Criminal. Traitors.
WAS IT THIS US ATTORNEY?
The head US Attorney for the District of NH is Thomas P. Colantuono, appointed to his post by George W. Bush in 2001. *
In the 2004 Presidential campaign, Colantuono’s wife made election-law news (Concord Monitor, October, 2004):
It’s illegal for clergy to campaign for a candidate on church property, but that didn’t stop a staffer for the Republican National Committee from soliciting help re-electing President Bush last week.
In an e-mail to â€pastors, church leaders and ministries,â€Pam Colantuono, wife of Tom Colantuono (a Bush-appointed U.S. attorney for New Hampshire), asked clergy for help getting a pro-Bush flier to parishioners. Colantuono was clear about how priests could do this without breaking the law.
â€Please place these in your parking lot, or when you have a church activity have someone hand them out outside the church. This is very important,†the e-mail read. It continued in bold letters: â€Pastors, do not display within the church and make sure you are not handing these out personally within your church. Assign someone to do this for you. We want to protect you.â€
(Monica was doing the interviewing then — maybe Ed had something to do with this appointment – another stellar lawman.)
I have been unable to keep mental track of Bartlett. He seems to me to be the guy who is never in the room when anything happens. I don’t know if this impression is valid, but it would jive with the choice with Gonzo. Finally the Decider’s role in continuing this death spiral may have tipped off Bartlett that maybe something was up.
Reminds me of my own naive self finally discovering, at the old age of 20, that other people (besides myself) lie.
Hi EW.
apologies for OT question, but does anyone know if/why FDL AND Huffington are both â€down†right now? Or is it my local connection. arrrrggghhhh!?!
May well be your local, I’m on FDL fine right now.
thanks much!
DANG! we’re being switched from defunct adelphia to hyper warner in these parts. right now not funny. not fun. not at all a’tall!!!
i’ll get my smart hubby to reboot & yank those hamsters awake again. ;->
EW – its ’scot-free’ not ’scott-free’
Damnit. I had scot and changed it. Will change it back when I get to DC.
What a great question! â€Did Bush have to choose between Bartlett and Fredo?â€
You might think Gillespie’s work as Swiftboat Group counsel would conflict him out as President’s counsel but no, it qualifies him.
Somewhat Off Topic, but right in the Same City of WA-DC and on the Same Day, which will be tomorrow:
Schlozman hearing tomorrow; LAT’s meandering new journalism describes the anticipated hearing as about the USA in MO, but I think the first link, to Legal Times, is equally accurate in depicting the coverage as going to examine the politicization of career bureaucracy in DoJ civil rights section. I follow these topics in a desultory way; here is more about the purge at the civil-voting rights section from epluribusmedia, who also published a helpful compendium of the specifics of what happened in 2003-2005 in the voter rights section of DoJ there.
I still think Bartlett sees that Bush is going off his rocker and doesn’t want to be around when it all falls apart completely.
It is hard to believe that someone around Bush for that long could actually have a line he wouldn’t cross, but who knows.
Gillespie is a great choice for them. Right in his element, as you point out, with such transferable skills.
I see putting Gillespie in the Executive Branch as either a serious misstep or a serious Cheney yourself to the rest of the world.
Misstep) Replacing Bush’s reported ’son he never had’ with a political operative.
Cheney yourself) Hey we don’t need to worry about election fraud and all those petty details – Hey they couldn’t even get the charges right (aside: I just wonder why).
Not nice either way.
There are only so many â€made†men. We all know that they are barely staying one step ahead of impeachment/incarceration, so it was imperative to bring back a â€Bushieâ€.
No one who wasn’t neck deep in unlawful activities would could within a stone’s throw of this crowd right now, it’s the career kiss of death.