March 29, 2024 / by 

 

McClatchy Kicked Off the Plane AND Redacted Beyond Recognition


How to Spike the Lewis Investigation


Or Should I Have Said: Nice Try Tom Davis?


Shorter Henry: Nice Try, Brad Berenson

There has been a lot of discussion already about the Ralston news from today–that she asked for immunity so she could testify about Abramoff contacts with the White House. What seems to be missing from those stories is the takeaway: Henry Waxman’s not giving Ralston immunity anytime soon.

Waxman provides a helpful map of what happened. Ralston gave a deposition on May 10–over a month after Waxman first invited her to visit. While there, she "testified on a number of subjects unrelated to the Abramoff matter." [Note to Novak and Rove–that bit’s just there to make you sweat.] But as for the rest, Waxman describes what sounds like an unsuccessful attempt on the part of designated firewall defense lawyer Brad Berenson to convince Waxman to give Ralston immunity for stuff she’s still under investigation for with the DOJ probe. Henry helpfully shows us the roadmap Berenson laid out for us:

Susan is here this morning voluntarily. She wants to assist the committee in its investigation to the extent she is able to. She is not under subpoena. We understand that the purpose of this morning’s deposition is really twofold: first, for her to provide the information that she can provide on a couple of subjects where she can testify without precondition … and, secondly, to make a record for the committee of the subjects on which she does not feel she can testify without a grant of immunity based on concerns that the testimony may reasonably form some link in a chain of evidence that someone could regard as inculpatory of her.

The subjects this morning that she will be unable to testify to on those grounds are the subjects of the relationship between Jack Abramoff and his associates and White House officials, including Ms. Ralston, and the subject of the use by White House officials of political e-mail accounts at the RNC.

She has material, useful information about both of those subjects. She is more than willing to provide it to the committee. However, she will, as we have previously discussed, require a grant of immunity before she is comfortable going forward.

And if you can’t read that road map, Henry gives you an even more specific one:


Did Orrin Hatch and Byron York Get Their Oppo Research from Monica?

Remember back in April when Orrin Hatch started talking out of his pasty white arse about Carol Lam’s background? He claimed it was alright for her to have gotten fired because she had been Clinton’s campaign manger. As it turned out, Hatch had completely botched his talking points and confused Carol Lam with Alan Berson, her predecessor in SDCA appointed by Clinton. One of Josh Marshall’s readers noted that the talking point–botched as it was–appeared to come from an NRO article that Byron York wrote.

But yesterday’s document dump includes a document (pages 5 to 15) that might be the source for both of their comments. The quality of this document is really crappy, but if you look closely you’ll see that it’s a matrix of all the Clinton USAs, similar to the matrix that the clique at DOJ came up with for their own USAs. Only there’s no column for Federalist Society membership, if you can believe it. It’s basically their oppo research on Clinton’s USAs.

It’s worth squinting at, if only to see how rarely a Clinton appointee had any more than County-level political experience with the Dems, certainly nothing like the folks that the clique recycled form Orrin Hatch’s Senate staff. One of the very very few USAs with political experience but without the expected legal experience was indeed Alan Berson. And Monica (if she’s the one who compiled this document) noted the same thing that Byron and Orrin noticed: that Berson was Clinton’s campaign manager for San Diego County.

070521_oag15171531_clinton_oppo_p_2

Now I know it would be shocking, SHOCKING! if Byron York, after regurgitating Barbara Comstock’s press releases for two years in his Libby coverage started regurgitating the press releases of Comstock’s protege, Monica Goodling. But it is just within the realm of possibility that Byron’s story on Berson came right from Monica.

Wouldn’t that be a surprise?


What's Here Is Correct

Remember way back before we knew about the partisan tests for hiring, when the biggest reason for Monica Goodling to plead the Fifth was the accusation that she had prepared Paul McNulty to state falsehoods in his testimony before the Senate?

Well, why do you suppose we only got this document on the eve of her testimony, after she had already been granted immunity?

Whats_here_is_correct


What’s Here Is Correct

Remember way back before we knew about the partisan tests for hiring, when the biggest reason for Monica Goodling to plead the Fifth was the accusation that she had prepared Paul McNulty to state falsehoods in his testimony before the Senate?

Well, why do you suppose we only got this document on the eve of her testimony, after she had already been granted immunity?

Whats_here_is_correct


Speaking of Back-Dating Signatures


Questions for Monica


Making the No Confidence Votes Count: Support Impeachment

Copyright © 2024 emptywheel. All rights reserved.
Originally Posted @ https://www.emptywheel.net/law/page/87/