Scandal Update: Monica In the Crosshairs
Even Republicans have clearly had it with the serial obfuscations of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and White House stonewalling.
By an overwhelming 32-6 margin, the House Judiciary Committee voted today to grant immunity to Monica Goodling, a former top aide to Gonzales, to force her to testify on the politically motivated dismissals of eight U.S. attorneys.
The committee then authorized a subpoena against Goodling by voice vote should she be unwilling to appear voluntarily.
Goodling has refused to appear before the committee, let alone take the Fifth Amendment to protect herself against self incrimination, explaining that she could be incriminated by those nasty Democrats leading the investigation by telling the truth.
More here. Meanwhile, Paul Kiel explains why it may take weeks before Goodling appears — if then.
opinions powered by SendLove.to
20 Responses to “Scandal Update: Monica In the Crosshairs”
In 21 months, the Democrats are going to be in control of all facets of the federal government and probably the state governments of at least 35 states. When will the Democrats begin to act like they really want to be in charge instead of nitpicking the other guy? My guess is never.
The Democratic Party’s obsession on nitpicking the Republicans instead of making policy proposals is probably an effect of the Democrats being dominated by attorneys who make their living of second guessing the other guy while never directly answering any questions.
No matter what happens in the hearings. all of the U.S. Attorneys currently serving will be fired on January 21, 2009 and the new Democratic president will be appointing all of the new ones. Why obsess over a huge non-issue?
Superdestroyer:
Democrats have an obligation to investigate matters that rise above Oval Office blowjobs. That said, I have very little hope that they’ll clean the Augean Stables of Washington and probably will add new layers of excrement themselves.
SDS, don’t lament just yet. 18 months is one helluva long time period.
In the not-all-that distant future, Congress is going to run out of “get Bush” committee action items and will have to actually start trying to govern.
When I first saw this post I thought:
“Why is Shaun dredging up the Clinton business?” A headline from the Wayback machine for sure…hahahahahaha
Well, the committee wasted time. But after overreaching constitutionally in demanding that Goodling justify her constitutional rights to Conyers (the courts would have tossed out his sopoenas pretty damn quick on that score)…the committee clearly realized it was on shaky ground and has sensibly granted immunity.
It will be interesting what she says about Gonzales. I believe this whole business is perfectly legal and constitutional…and the committee is just partisan.
Kritter surprised me the other day with her observation that Gonzales public idiocies may be a clever mask to cover himself legally.
I had thought he had simply brought the administration into this whole scandal through sheer supernatural stupidity.
So the question is…Gonzales: Clever trickster or Bumbling Stooge?
This Monica is also very religious. Throw Conyers’ tendency to assert near-dictatorial authority into the mix…and we might have some very entertaining hearings indeed!
CasualObserver said: “In the not-all-that distant future, Congress is going to run out of “get Bushâ€? committee action items and will have to actually start trying to govern.”
CO…The Democrats love investigations. I would note Waxman’s hearings into Jessica Lynch and Tillman.
We can soon expect Congressional investigations of Gulf of Tonkin, Pearl Harbour, and the Spanish-American War.
It will be amusing to see Conyers fulminating that William Randolph Hearst’s physical condition (i.e., death) does not excuse him from testifying before Conyers’ committee on his role in bringing the US to war on false premises.
[...] H/t Shaun. [...]
I’m guessing the irony of this escapes you.
“CO…The Democrats love investigations. I would note Waxman’s hearings into Jessica Lynch and Tillman.”
OK – the reason for all of the committees is executive power run amok without any oversight 2001-2007.
And the GOP ran many more investigations during the Clinton years, even checking to see if the money used to pay for Socks the Cat’s fan club came out of the public coffers, and if Bill misused his Christmas card list. So, its just business as usual.
Investigate! Disclose! Yes, I think the media has failed to tell us the truth or ask the tough questions, and the Administration has clearly spun everything. So criticize the Dems all you want, but I WANT TO KNOW. Everything! Under oath. Let’s have it. The unvarnished truth. Are you on the right afraid of that? Why so protective of secrecy about the workings of OUR government? Open up. They work for us, and we want to know what they’ve been doing. It is our right and our responsibility to oversee our employees.
I’m damn tired of being told that it’s unpatriotic to supervise OUR employees. C’mon, doesn’t anyone here have any business sense?
As a matter of political pragmatics, it may, arguably, be better for the Republicans to simply acquiesce to all the “goverment by Congressional Committees looking for CSPAN time” to allow the power and curiosity itches to be scratched now….and play the odds that anything dredged up from fact, innuendo or smear now won’t have staying power with the average voter 18 months from now.
As a matter of principles of government, however, I am of a different mind. The American public ought to be constructively refreshed on the notion that names like Jefferson and Madison connote something other than merely names on currency. Refreshed on the term “republic” vs. “democracy” in their strict application. If the Executive Branch feels the Legislative is overreaching on Constitutional powers, they are absolutely correct to play hardball at every turn.
I am continually amazed that those “currency busts” always seem to ultimately have a better notion of good government than those who would elevate Pew Research polls above those well-crafted documents in the Smithsonian.
Oh, I don’t know, Superdestroyer. The drip-drip-drip of revelations coming out of this White House will make it clear that this was more than a “non-issue” and a matter of “nitpicking.” Even the Wall Street Journal has an article basically stating that the GOP interfered with ongoing investigations of GOP members of Congress. It’s gonna take awhile, but this story is taking shape. You’ll see.
It comes down to this: Were the firings an attempt to gain a slight advantage in states where the red/blue line is very thin? There is always partisianship, but the administration doesn’t help itself with it’s past obfuscations, extrodinary memory loss and an aid that believes she could incriminate herself. What the public wants to know is, incrininate herself of WHAT? Partisianship will play itself out and if nothing is discovered the democrats have more to lose. But this has gone beyond partisianship. REPUBLICANS
…REPUBLICANS ALSO want to get to the bottom of this.
Absolutely, Howard. Largely overshadowed by the anti-war referendum implication of the 11/06 elections was the issue of incumbent Republicans giving into complacency and unethical behaviors.
Not too many voters want a crook or a crock in office even if their political views align.
And since Gonzalez failed the “paper bag test”, i.e., could not talk his way out of one, we’re at least looking at a crock.
Clean the slate for ’08.
I’m with GreenDream on this one, this entire administration has been operating in the shadows for far too long. That combined with an incredible reluctance to reveal anything about what they’ve been up to lead me to believe they have been doing some illegal things. In fact, I’d say lots of them.
And I hardly think its nitpicking if the DOJ was ordered to fire prosectutors because they were doing their job to members of the president’s political party.
Its sort of surprising how these “nonissues” end up actually being important- if it was just a matter of presenting a believable explanation- don’t you think they would have been able to do that by now?
“REPUBLICANS ALSO want to get to the bottom of this”
Not the ones that work in the executive branch I’m afraid.
Then why do they keep calling it a witchhunt?
Goodling would never have won if she’d tried going to court and claiming that her refusal to appear before a congressional committee was simply her right under the Fifth Amendment. She has the right to go there and refuse to answer questions that would result in her incriminating herself. She does not have the right to pretend to some form of telepathy that allows her to know that there would be no questions asked that would not in fact incriminate her in anything but perhaps would not reflect well on her fellow loyal Bushies, possibly incriminating them. What will her excuse be now that she’s been granted immunity. Maybe she’ll just have memory as good as her former boss.
Can she commit perjury during the hearing under immunity – or does that just cover any illegal acts that she may have committed that she is now forced to testify about?