Breaking: Turdblossom and Harriet to Testify
And, just as importantly, the notion of Absolute Immunity dies a well-deserved death (via email).
In an agreement reached today between the former Bush Administration and Congressman John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.), Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Karl Rove and former White House Counsel Harriet Miers will testify before the House Judiciary Committee in transcribed depositions under penalty of perjury. The Committee has also reserved the right to have public testimony from Rove and Miers. It was agreed that invocations of official privileges would be significantly limited.
In addition, if the Committee uncovers information necessitating his testimony, the Committee will also have the right to depose William Kelley, a former White House lawyer who played a role in the U.S. Attorney firings.
The Committee will also receive Bush White House documents relevant to this inquiry. Under the agreement, the landmark ruling by Judge John Bates rejecting key Bush White House claims of executive immunity and privilege will be preserved. If the agreement is breached, the Committee can resume the litigation.
Chairman Conyers issued the following statement:
"I have long said that I would see this matter through to the end and am encouraged that we have finally broken through the Bush Administration’s claims of absolute immunity. This is a victory for the separation of powers and congressional oversight. It is also a vindication of the search for truth. I am determined to have it known whether U.S. Attorneys in the Department of Justice were fired for political reasons, and if so, by whom."
You think maybe Rove’s lost his 5 time’s a
charge charm with perjury?
Update on timing: The Committee is going to get the documents it had requested and read them before they do the interviews with Harriet and Karl. And the interviews will be done by staffers, with the option of doing a public hearing with questions from Congresspersons if that seems useful. So the timing for the moment seems to be driven by how quickly they get documents.
Update: Pelosi does a victory dance for the authority of Article I (via email):
The agreement for Karl Rove and Harriet Miers to testify upholds a fundamental principle: no one is above the law and Congressional subpoenas must be complied with.
As public officials, we take an oath of office to uphold the Constitution. It is the institutional duty of Congress — as an independent branch — to ensure against abuse of power through meaningful oversight over the Executive Branch. When there are credible allegations about the politicization of law enforcement, the need for Congressional oversight is at its greatest.
In upholding our oaths of office, the House of Representatives was determined to preserve checks and balances — the separation of powers that protects the rule of law. It brought action in court to enforce the Judiciary Committee’s subpoenas, and won a major ruling by U.S. District Judge John Bates dismissing the extreme position of absolute immunity from Congressional oversight advocated by the Bush Administration for former Administration officials. Under this agreement, the precedent established by Judge Bates’ historic ruling rejecting this extreme Bush Administration doctrine will be preserved.
Today’s agreement is a great victory for the Constitution, the rule of law, and the separation of powers. I appreciate the strong leadership of Chairman John Conyers and the assistance of the Obama Administration.
Congress now has the opportunity to uncover the truth and determine whether improper criteria were used by the Bush Administration to dismiss and retain U.S. Attorneys. [my emphasis]
I think Pelosi just got flagged by the ref for excessive celebration in the end zone.
Not like she didn’t deserve it, though.
Update: One more detail on logistics. The documents and the transcripts will eventually be made public.
hi EW, sorry o/t
but rivkin on hardball now with joan walsh….
I like that!
Thanks for keeping up with all of this news!
This will make me sleep a little better tonight.
Oops. I meant “5 times a charm” and have fixed it. The unconscious is a remarkable thing, huh?
Awwwh…I liked it “charge”!
I am still shuddering from your Foley comment IRT Bolton. The “yuck” factor has been overwhelming…not enough showers…
Glad to be of service.
You HAD to use the word “service”!
OK on topic, who represented the “former Bush administration” in the “agreement” with Conyers? I don’t get it.
This is the question I dialed in to ask, and I haven’t seen it addressed here in comments.
Perhaps it should say “the entity formerly known as ‘the Bush Administration’ ” (apologies, Prince). Who is that? The attorneys in this case is my best guess.
Weirder still: some of the coverage today has talked in terms of negotiations in recent days between committee staff and “the Bush White House”… which there isn’t any, any more.
No exclamation point, yet – I want to see the transcript devoid of dodges, dunnos, don-remembers and all the other bullcrap.
The mug shots of Alberto Gonzales and George Bush in the ad at the top right are a very nice touch.
Would I be alone in taking an “I’ll believe it when I see it” attitude on this? By “see it” I mean the witnesses have actually shown up and been sworn in…
So, who is going to depose turdblossom and blossom-ette? Grandstanding legislators or actual, competent lawyers?
Thanks for all your hard work, EW. I really do appreciate it.
Will the transcripts be made public right away?
I wonder what the terms of the deal were. Did w just cave, or did w or his handlers extract some kind of concession? If so what was it?
I remember the Liman commission in the 1980’s which “investigated” iran contra – i.e. provided immunity for crappy testimony that later voided Ollie North’s criminal conviction. I suspect that it was all worked out under the table – the Dems would softball the investigation, and god knows what dirty laundry on their own crooked team would stay in the hamper.
I don’t think Obama is a coward, and I don’t know if his appearance of lacksidaisical interest in this matter is real or just a ruse, so he can stay above it all, and reluctantly let Eric Holder off the leash.
I wonder what the terms of the deal are as well. I’m trying not to be too cynical, but there have been so many disappointments.
I sure hope they interview Miers first.
Pardon my scepticism but…….those two will testify when pigs fly.
I think there’s a good chance Harriet will actually show up. What’s a girl to do when her sweetheart is hiding out in a Texas McMansion. She may not think she has much choice… which is exactly the case.
Rove will skip. Paraguay-time. Or perhaps TX won’t extradite.
IANAL. But this is a federal subpoena. So unless he flees the country he has to appear or get arrested for contempt (assuming DOJ will back up the House).
fine.. he’ll stage Waco II then, with the TX Dept of Public Safety defending his mcmansion.
Have you seen Rick Perry’s “acceptance” letter of the stimulus funds?
TX isn’t really a loyal part of the US at this point ;-P
“As you know, I have been vocal in my opposition to this
legislation because I believe there are better ways to reinvigorate our economy and believe H.R. 1 will burden future generations with unprecedented levels of debt… On behalf of the people of Texas, please allow this letter to certify that we will accept the funds
in H.R. 1″
I mean, really.
Texas has never been a loyal part of the US. Every school kid takes and oath to the Republic of Texas and says a separate pledge to the flag of Texas. The history of Texas is required of all schoolchildren. There are most likely more students in Texas who can tell you who manned which position at the Alamo than can tell you how a bill becomes a law.
My SO was born and raised in Texas*, and she has no idea what you’re talking about. Care to share more?
*Of course, that was in Austin, which may not apply.
The pledge is to state flag, not the ‘Republic of Texas’, but my kids do in fact say the pledge of allegiance to the Texas flag every morning at school along with that other pledge. The Texas pledge is:
The ‘one state under God’ was added a couple of years ago.
The current law is this:
Idunno about that. I think people in TX stop doing that as soon as they get out of school, except maybe for state government.
(The group I belonged to did the Pledge of Allegiance and a prayer at emetings. Nothing to the state flag.)
Wow, thanks WO.
MsDiego recalls none of this from her childhood, or the in-state uni she went to. And she’s not nearly as old as me, so we can’t blame her memory. Also.
So is this something new? I notice all the cites in the subchapters you just quoted are very new…
Pardon my scepticism but…….those two will testify when pigs fly.
Karl’s booked on United flight 666.
Do we know when in 2010 this deposition will take place? And in which century will the transcripts be released? Sorry. I agree with Yelllow Snapdragon at 13 – so tired of being disappointed. But, thanks for your vigilance and insights EW. You are invaluable.
I’ve just updated the post with this–which addresses some questions you’ve asked:
Booyah! Another turn of the screw.
Many other screws are yet to be turned.
Here’s to the screwdrivers! Skol!
Bob in HI
Any sense why Josh Bolton as one of the original under the Congressional subpoena was not included?
His job was just to turn over documents. He was never involved (that we know of) in teh USA purge, and was just subpoenaed in his role as Chief of Staff.
Obama strikes me so far as being methodical and strategic.
Release Yoo memos–after giving yourself time to review them, think about the impacts, etc.–and then you drive the truth commission hearings AND take a shot across the bow for Miers and Rove, showing them that you already HAVE a boatload of information in the files and they can make their lives worst by not cooperating…..
I’m keeping my popcorn kernels on alert just in case.
I’ll get the Margaritas & Guacamole ready …
You can bring them down to New Paltz for the FDL BBQ over on Memorial weekend Sunday. *g*
Memorial weekend, huh ? Lesse if teh Boss(wifey) gives me time off …
Yikes, that’s 7 hours away from Toronto !
True enough. It’s not your 3 day weekend either. Just a thought.
Let’s see if I have any … um … important meetings in NYC that weekend ! *g*
you work for Boss Limbaugh?
Did that email contain a date by which these depositions would be taken, and say when/how they would be made public?
They will be made public, won’t they?
Working on that detail.
THere’s no date certain for testimony though–as I explained, first they get the docs, then they read them, then they haul T-Blossom in for some fun.
Possibly less grandstanding, certainly more pointed questions from staffers who are informed, who are lawyers, and who have read the file and EW.
Well, I am glad the staffers get the first shot.
Please tell us why … and thanks !
Updated the post with Pelosi’s victory dance for Article ! Authority:
Cheez louise, Pelosi has discovered her oath of office from the bottom of her desk drawer, where it has evidently languished for more than 2 years. Where was all this concern for oaths of office during the 110th Congress??
Pelosi’s disdain for her oath of office during the 110th Congress is a stench that still fills my air. I’m glad that she has rediscovered her oath, however. Maybe now that the Big Bad Wolf is out of town, she will rediscover her backbone.
Bob in HI
I wonder if we’d have won as many seats (and perhaps the presidency) if impeachment were the issue. Maybe she was right…
(ducking behind the couch)
I always get smacked for defending Pelosi, but I think she was playing a deeper game. (At least, I hope she was!).
And WO gets it right again.
The man’s powers of deduction continue to astound me.
Nancy said a little while after the 2006 elections that we don’t know the half of it.
Scott Horton’s post, titled George W. Bush’s Disposable Constitution alludes to that – “We may not have realized it at the time, but in the period from late 2001-January 19, 2009, this country was a dictatorship. The constitutional rights we learned about in high school civics were suspended. That was thanks to secret memos crafted deep inside the Justice Department that effectively trashed the Constitution. What we know now is likely the least of it.”
Senator Whitehouse added to that on KO tonight.
Wow, when KO is good, he is excellent.
What a fact-filled intro by KO, and Whitehouse is such a clear communicator on these complex legal topics that his contrast with Specter really is breathtaking.
But at 1:28 in KO’s intro, he mentions that Rivkin is with the ‘Council on Foreign Relations’, which prompted me to wonder if I hadn’t recently read some snarky comment to the effect that the hideous Eliot Abrams is now also at the CFR. Sure enough, Abrams is:
Head right on over and you can read Abrams’ “analsyis” on why there can’t be peace in the MidEast, and no two-state solution are possible in the near term, blahblahblah…
(Hillary doesn’t seem to be listening ;-))
All the more reason to be sure that people are held accountable, rather than allowed to go off to Think Tanks and continue their cushy lives while they wait to grasp power yet again.
wow – preserving the ruling, reading docs before questioning, questioning by staffers – sounds like someone’s really serious.
I haven’t got a hint as to what happened yet, but I’m guessing you only have a skunking like this with the clear message that Holder was ready to enforce contempt–which is why (as I’ve long theorized) tehy wanted to subpoena Turdblossom again, so tehy’d have a ripe issue of contempt.
glad to hear you think so
Transcribed depositions may qualify as testimony in a civil case, but it hardly does in this one. They need to testify in public, under oath, so the public can gauge the truth or lack thereof of their testimony.
no one will testify and no one will be jailed. this is just a waste of tax payers money down a dead end street.
I refuse to answer because it may incriminate me. Do we need to listen to this and I don’t recall or I can’t remember all day long. If anyone thinks they will get these people to say anything their nuts. Even if they do say anything it would probably be lies. So it is an exercise in futility. If they could use thumb screws waterboarding or some other of Bushes practices maybe they could get some mumblings. Turd blossom is supposed to be Bushes brain and we never got anything out of Bush so his brain is mute to.
I was looking for the earliest date of on-the-record testimony from Rove, or even of his correspondence being produced in evidentiary hearings in any forum, eminence grise, Siegelman, Klamath, US attorney purge, Libby (GJ testimony several times, not public, +deposition?), missing emails?
Updated the post again:
Good to hear.
I hope Congress now has time to get AG Holder to release the Pat Fitzgeral/FBI interview of Deadeye on his Valerie Plame Wilson Betrayal that former AG Mikey Mukasey erroneously convinced Junya to hide via Executive Privilege.
Yeah, I was thinking about taht last night. A new project for me to work on while I wait for Turdblossom.
Ooh … can we help by making phone calls ?
Oh, yes please — especially what with your lurker Glennzilla outed as spokesperson for Teh Left & all.
BTW I’m having trouble getting rid of the mental image from your headline: BREAKING TURDBLOSSOM.
Yeah, that reeks!
As a headline…
Oh, wow. Who the hell was negotiating on the Bush side? This is the worst possible format for Rove to testify in. He probably would’ve done fine in front of a Congressional panel. All he would’ve had to do is bloviate and run out the clock, and we know he’s good at both. What we know he’s NOT good at is telling the truth under oath when the questioner is both intelligent and patient, and that looks like what he’s going to get here.
As for Harriet Miers, I’m not sure she’d do well in any format. And I agree with those who say that she should be deposed first.
You know W loyalty runs in only one direction. This smacks of W selling TB & HM out, at first blush.
That was my first thought, too, but I don’t think that’s it. SOMEONE had to be negotiating on Bush’s behalf. I just can’t see Bush himself being bothered with this. And they could easily have dragged this all the way up to the Supreme Court, and if they lost then Karl could have invoked his Fifth Amendment rights with some sort of bullshit story about how he was really doing it out of respect for the President’s privilege, not to protect himself.
Instead, the negotiator not only caved, but did so in a way that puts Karl in the worst possible legal position. I’m dying to know who the negotiator was. I wonder if Poppy put some of his own people on this (Jim? Is that you?) after Junior left office to try to clean up his “legacy”.
Agree on both counts.
Though I’m sure ROve is also cognizant of the way that getting smacked down by–say–Robert Wexler, even if it was just hot air, would ruin his brand.
Though they get to get the second dip if they want to, and HJC is so full of blowhards that I suspect they’ll find a reason to call them back publicly.
I wonder what’s in Fitz’s datebook for that time period?
I don’t want Fitz asking the questions.
Because I want someone to ask Rove–under oath–about why Bob Kjellander in Chicago was telling everyone that Rove was taking care of Pat Fitz by getting him fired.
That’s not exactly an appropriate question for Fitz to be asking.
bmaz drives a BMW. More Clooney-like, maybe.
And [email protected], thx. Helpful.
It is a shame that Peter Boyle is no longer with us……
Clooney? Heh, in my wife’s dreams.
Nancy Pelosi saying that it’s the responsibility of Congress to ensure against abuse of power by the Executive -makes me want to vomit.
Took the words out of my mouth. She’s had years to uphold the law but waited until there’s so much evidence piling up that she can no longer ignore it.
Yes, I do like the idea of staffers questioning. Perhaps less speachafyn’ and more substance and hammer in the questions. I would think, with the years of spent documenting the ways the Bush-ship sailed off the edge. After that:
All we have to do now is get Marcy and bmaz hired by Conyers.
Man, bmaz would throttle Rove.
In the movie version of that Rove throttle who would play bmaz? Al Pacino?
Yes, it would be a breath of fresh air. I think a one-two punch would work well with the Rover. Who would be the good cop?
Gotta find a masochist for that role.
No one. Bad cop, worse cop.
I’m thinking of bringing LHP too, to be the unpredictable cop.
I do the bad cop.
I’m pretty good at good cop. And we have a Prius.
I’d love to see EW’s and bmaz’s top ten questions.
“Yes, I do like the idea of staffers questioning. “
Me, too. Especially because in that format, there are not the artificial time limits that stultify public testimony. With staffers questioning, Rove knows that bloviating will only prolong the process.
Or am I wrong that there are no time limits for the staffer questioning?
Bob in HI
In the Susan Ralston deposition before HJC, they agreed to general time limits (an hour for both side or something like that) but the questioning was done by one person primarily.
OT: TPM had a copy of a subpoena to Gonzales January 2008 for Rove correspondence in re USA purge; link not currently available locally.
I’m off to do the the Snoopy Happy Dance!
And totally OT – From Scotusblog:
From The Hill:
Is that part in bold in addition to an oral, back-and-forth, transcribed-by-the-stenographer quizzing by staff attorneys, or is the committee simply giving Karl and Harriet take-home exams to be returned within a week?
That doesn’t sound so good — so which is it, interviews by staff (and some committee members?) or the take-home exam, or both? Or is that just bad reporting by The Hill?
My guess is it’s The Hill, but I thought I’d check with Marcy to be sure.
All the baling wires have snapped.
Thanks for the good news.
Karl’s bad behavior comes to light…
Off to dinner. FYI, I just started Kill Khalid for Saturday’s book salon. It’s a real life spy/political thriller that promises to be a great read.
This is great!! So just the attorney purge? Back later for Siegleman?
Hehehehe … maybe a few questions about Siegelman will be tossed in …
No, both will be included.It was the attorney purge Rove was afraid of. I think he’s got a bit of a firewall on Siegelman (in taht he had someone else walk the allegations to PIN or in taht someone in PIN is willing to lie for him).
You know Karl will lie on the deposition. Fucker’s incapable of telling the whole truth. He’s gotta be thinking that if Fitz couldn’t nail him, Conyers can’t.
Will Harriet and Karl share lawyers to make sure the stories are on the same page? Will the staffers be able to call in other people from the department? Gonzales???
So if “someone” does ask him about Kjellander in Chicago, how can he respond?
Can/Will he lie?If he says no he didn’t, is that something that is just a he said-she said deal? What happens?
Certainly good news …
55 – including the ante of agreeing to vacateur makes this a tough one. The ‘good case’ to have had sent up, with Scalia on the court, was Padilla. He’s the US citizen. Al-Marri was here legally, but not a citizen and despite court tendencies to treat the classes similarly, I’m not sure that Scalia would. Still, when Gov is making the transfer and yet saying that it can undo that transfer at any time, including if he is found not guilty or at any stage during the trial – I’m not sure why the court shouldn’t be giving an advisory opinion to prevent future detentions.
After all, both Padill and now al-Marri show that the Executive is ONLY moving these people into the court system when their cases reach the Sup Ct, by then they’ve had years and years of torture detentions.
when Gov is making the transfer and yet saying that it can undo that transfer at any time, including if he is found not guilty or at any stage during the trial
They really are saying that? I guess so, since the SCOTUSblog post says “The government’s reply brief, like its initial motion to dismiss, did not give such assurances.” But did they explicitly mention returning him to the brig if he’s found not guilty?
That’s just bizarre. How does the Obama administration expect to be given credit for restoring the rule of law (because of moving the case into civilian criminal court) if they aren’t willing to risk al-Marri being freed? How could a trial be anything but a sham if the only, and predetermined, outcome is the defendant’s imprisonment?
I hope Harriet wears the lovely blue suit if there’s a public hearing. And uses the same make-up artist.
Did the agreement inlcude any reference to the types of interrogation procedures that the staffers are authorized to use?
Yeah…will scalpels be used at all?
That made me sick to my stomach. I also know how the really bad guys will use this to recruit …
“We’re just going to go by the DOJ book, Karl . . . Yes, we know the CIA now has to go by the Army Field Manual, but that doesn’t apply to Congress.”
LOL … we could start by showing him twolf’s graphic, though that might backfire.
You are a treasure!
“Interrogation techniques”. Remember Sam Dash?
Mary Would the answer be “enhanced”?
#67/Maddog/EW Really like thinking about that
#82 Bmaz…so funny
#132 Reader of Tea Leaves. “Abrams “analysis” on why there can’t be Peace in the Middle East”
Andrea Mitchell sure did her best to undermine the importance of resolving the I/P conflict the other day during one of her reports about Hillary’s trip to Israel. Andrea was on the Rachel Maddow show and Rachel pointed out that resolving this conflict seemed to be critical in the middle east. Andrea completely ran around Rachel’s question and went to the Afghanistan/Pakistan issue. Unable to link that Rachel/ Andrea interview from this computer but I believe it is a You tube. Mitchell was acting like a Rep for Israel instead of a reporter (what else is new?)
Leen, you’re a gem ;-))
Actually, I caught most of that Mitchell interp with Maddow, and — no slam at Mitchell’s work ethic through the years, yadda, yadda — it stuck me that they really need to highlight Richard Engel more often, and if I were at MSNBC, I’d be looking for some ‘local’ reporters who could give a contrasting perspective.
Kind of drawing from Ed Psych research, but Mitchell — like all of us — is a creature of her background and experience. To her credit, she worked hard and broke down some social and employment barriers, and hat’s off to her for that. She does have a long history, and that also has a tremendous value IMHO.
The problem is that it’s not THE best framework for what appears to be a shifting paradigm.
If you follow BBC, or even CNN, they have a much better mix of their own reporters + locals.
BBC probably has reporters who speak almost every language on the planet (well, except Basque and some kinds of Eskimo and some other lower-population languages).
But in a ‘global environment’, I don’t know WTF a company like MSNBC is thinking if they don’t have reporters who are fluent in Pashtun, fluent in Bengali, fluent in Arabic, etc, etc. It’s simple common sense; as an Austrian friend once observed, he felt that he’d finally started to crack English when he ‘got’ his first American joke. We get bad information when we don’t have people who understand the CULTURE.
Smart companies understand this.
Yes, we’re an American audience, but in a world where Al Gore can produce a 7/7/07 concert on 5 continents, don’t you think it would make sense for MSNBC to start rattling around to find an Egyptian reporter to give that perspective, a Lebanese ’stringer’, etc?
I tell you — sometimes I think Lobe at IPS is about the best guy around.
And Ben Lando at Iraq Oil Report.
No slam at Mitchell, but I just think the quality of information coming from a reporter ‘on the plane’ with the Sec of State has extremely limited value when the economic, political, cultural stakes are so high.
Well, lucky for MSNBC that I’m not a producer and have no pull their, eh?
But the Christian Science Monitor has out-reported just about everyone else, and on a shoestring, for as long as I’ve been following news. Although Nicholas Kristoff has that kind of vibe… ‘under the skin’, so to speak. Humble. Curious. Focused on the practical problems of daily life.
Andrea, no matter how hard she works, or how good she is, can’t provide that angle.
Engel, OTOH, showed how bogged down the heavy US military vehicles are — good reporting.
(I have this odd belief that good reporters are like really good researchers; they kind of look ’sideways’ at things. Maddow certainly has that gift.)
Oh yeah, love this. The dominoes are falling and the clever (not so much) rove is getting ready to topple. Kudos to Conyers.
rove has been clever enough, he has avoided testifying while bush in power, now it will not be as big a deal, bush is already out of office
of course will be very nice to bring these criminals to the bar of justice but I have had my hopes dashed before so now all I can do is hold my breath and pray
so why wouldn’t the roberts court overturn this decision?
is it because obama would now inherit the power if scotus gave that presidential power?
Rove will have a memory problem like Reagan had. Like Alberto Gonz had. Myers won’t know nuthin’. If it comes down to it, Dubya will claim to have been out of the loop like his dad claimed to be out of the loop (as he masterminded l’affaire Iran Contra).
reagan really did have a memory problem though
Yes, he did. But Reagan remembered to follow the script. As much as he hated liberals, welfare queens, and Sandinista commies, he could not remember for the life of him, chuckling with GHWBush over their sidestepping of Congress to fund the Contras, nor the weapons smuggling, nor the cocaine business. Glory Days.
Whitehouse on Keith tonight!
Although I was worried by that last move by the Appeals Court, I believe I called this one back on Feb 15:
Okay, so Isikoff just completely distorted the truth about Rove’s involvement in the DOJ firings, on Rachel.
That sort of sounds like the start of what we’re going to hear from Rove. This was all business as usual.
It even sounded like a laundered message, he slowed his speaking tempo down and enunciated certain words in different way than his normal speaking style… I wouldn’t trust what that guy says as far as I could throw him
Wooo-hoo! Yoo might move to OC.
Ya know,with all these scholastic opinions out there(Balkin,Dellinger,Lederman etc)about how badly they are shocked or I told you so stuff,I wonder why they didn’t put all there sholastic abilities into shutting that doc/opinion farm down.I Wonder if their perpsectives will ease he pain of all the people that were tortured or all the Iracis that have been killed or maimed
Opinions are like assholes,everybodys got one
Well this is kind of surprising. I notice that expectations have really been damped way down. I guess experience is at play.
I do expect that Rove at least will be required to appear publicly. Our legislators will want their brief 5 minutes in the lights and on camera.
And like John Dean has said, nothing criminal will stick to Rove, and I also doubt that Rove will lose any standing with those who still respect him, and everyone else who cares will continue to rant and rave and hate him to their graves.
I predict a ”draw.”
Interrog.325. What was the reason to sit on the tarmac in front of the jet nose.
All right. Why is everybody suddenly getting brave? You have Bradbury saying that the past 6 or so years were running on BS. You have Pelosi showing some semblance of life. Add other examples. My thought is: Just what did people think would have happened to them or their loved ones if they had spoken out under the previous maladministration? Just how much terror was there in the higher reaches of D.C.? Or is this all just late-night fog on my part?
Based on a comment that I made yesterday, I think you are dead on… Bushco had everyone (media and others) under a case of lockdown. “Step out of line and you are toast” was how it worked. I truly believe that… And I truly believe that there is enough anger in those who had to play along that the whole story is going to come out.
It seems that there must have been a certain level of fear, doesn’t there? But fear of what and wielded by whom?
Start with the word ‘anthrax‘.
Mailed to: Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews, IIRC.
Also mailed to Leahy (Dem head of SJC).
Also mailed to Daschle.
Not mailed to any Republicans, nor to any of the wingnut media as far as I am aware.
Keith Olbermann was still at ESPN when the anthrax letters were mailed, I believe. I don’t think Chris Matthews was a recipient, either, though at least one letter went to NBC.
The NBC letter was addressed to Brokaw.
ABC and Dan Rather at CBS got them too.
But you can’t argue it was totally liberal–the NYPOst got one too.
And then, of course, there’s Judy’s fake anthrax.
I knew that I ought to have double-checked that info before typing it.
I’m really sorry.
Will check facts on such serious things before commenting next time.
Meanwhile, thanks very much for cleaning up my mess!
I know we should all be celebrating that Meiers and Rove will be testifying BUT what is the story with the behind closed doors and not under oath privilige? Did Clinton, Haldeman and the rest of the Watergate crew get this privilige when they had to testify? Sounds like SPECIAL privileges to me. Now that they have finally decided to SORT OF obey the law you would think the Red Sea had parted and the push for Justice and Accountability had been resolved. .
What the hell is with Pelosi’s false statement that this proves that NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW hogwash. This is a start but many of us are waiting for Pelosi, Leahy, Feingold, Conyers, etc to hold those responsible for the “PACK OF LIES” (alleged WMD’s in Iraq) to be held accountable. But hell maybe Pelosi, Leahy, Whitehouse etc have forgotten that 4500 Americans and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi’s are DEAD DEAD DEAD due to this false intelligence. Maybe they have forgotten…sure seems to be so.
As long as Feith, Wurmser, Cheney, and all the rest who created. cherry picked and then crammed the false intelligence down the throats of Americans have not been held accountable that line ‘NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW” rings hollow
Rachel Maddow’s interview with Andrea Mitchell about Hillary’s middle east trip.
Rachel Maddow states and ask Andrea Mitchell ” For so long we have thought about the center of the potential resolution between the west and the middle east the the whole relationship between the west and the Muslim world we have thought at the center of gravity there being the Israeli Palestinian conflict. I wonder if you sense that the Obama administration still views the center of the gravity in the Muslim world as Israel Palestine? Or ist it possibly the crisis in south Asia the crisis in Pakistan that is starting to really rise in terms of importance in terms of what the Muslim World is paying attention to and what our relationship is with Muslims around the world?
Andrea Mitchell “Oh I think it’s definitely Af/Pak is what they would call it”
SO RACHEL MADDOW IS ASKING ANDREA MITCHELL WHAT “MUSLIMS AROUND THE WORLD” CONSIDER TO BE THE CENTER OF GRAVITY IN THE MIDDLE EAST. ANDREA MITCHELL?
JESUS MARY AND JOSEPH RACHEL MADDOW YOU MIGHT CONSIDER ASKING SOME MUSLIMS THAT QUESTION….NOT ANDREA MITCHELL.
GEEZ I THOUGHT RACHEL WAS MORE ON TOP OF IT. Pathetic person to ask that question
Andrea goes on to take this opportunity to share her extremely lopsided views on the I/P conflict. Rachel does not call her out on it just goes along with the lopsided perspective that Andrea spews. I expected more out of Rachel