Not the ones that work in the executive branch I’m afraid.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

We can soon expect Congressional investigations of Gulf of Tonkin

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.

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.

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!

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.

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.

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?