Former White House liaison Monica Goodling finally testified today about the firing of U.S. attorneys — after she was granted immunity. But she didn’t deliver the smoking gun that many Democrats had hoped for. She said she had little role in the firings and mostly pointed the finger at Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty. She said that she didn’t talk about the firings to former White House counsel Harriet Miers or with political adviser Karl Rove.
Goodling did admit that she improperly considered the political loyalties of job applicants for career prosecutors. But she claimed that the violation of federal law was not intended. Huh? Shouldn’t the person helping hire federal prosecutors know what is allowable?
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Jed on Let immigrants run
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/23
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/23
77 Comments
OH HELL, I thought she was going to tell us were Hoffa was buried..
If our next President is a Democrat, I will urge Phil Kline to apply for a job.
When he is denied, Republicans can claim it was all “politics”!
Why in hell did she take the 5th in the first place?Doesn’t she know what it’s for, given that she worked in the freakin’ JUSTICE DEPARTMENT???
NONE of this thing has made any sense–no one is responsible for any of it. Oh, exdept the guy who resigned without testifying–HE did it.
Gonzales didn’t know either–why should he? He only runs the place–until McNulty resigned.
Oh, that guy who just quit? He did it. I didn’t know who did it before, but now I know he did it!!!
In afternoon testimony after Phillip wrote the above intro, Goodling has not only stabbed McNulty in the back, she is testifying to the inaccurate testimony and presumedly perjury of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales before congress.
At the base of this whole scandal is that AG AG did not seem to understand that he was making a job change when he went from the president’s counsel to the office of Attorney General.
Stephen Davis,
You are a charitable, charitable man.
By contrast, at the base of the scandal, CF2K sees that Attorney General Gonzales is a sleazy liar who willing accepted the task of taking a partisan hatchet to the Justice Department, in order to manufacture false voter fraud prosectuions and suppress Democratic voting turnout.
Gooding also appears to have directly implicated the White House in the decisions about who was and wasn’t on the list.
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/05/23/goodling-points-to-white-house/
And, as usual, the rule-of-law-hating-Republiwhores are all snivelling about the ‘fishing expedition.’ CF2K thinks it’s long past time for them to get some new talking points.
Paul – as you are well aware when Bush took office he fired all the prosecuters including a friend of mine here. Nobody complained; nobody yelled “it was all “politics”!” You are fully aware of that fact. You are also aware that what has happened SUBSEQUENT to that normal process is quite different. THAT is when BushCo sought to purge those who would not follow the party line sufficiently slavishly.
The ain’t got nothing…
I keep repeating this, no one believes me. :D
Republican,
Well, of course no one believes you: you’re a liar and an opportunist.
This scandal will keep on going and going and going all the way to Rove’s desk, where it was hatched. Gonna be a long summer.
They ain’t got nothing.
This scandal will keep on going and going and going all the way to Rove’s desk, where it was hatched. Gonna be a long summer.
were have I heard that before……Oh yeah the whole Scooter Libby trial
Pubican is right, they don’t have anything. What they have is obstruction, obfuscation, finger-pointing, buck-passing, denials, accusations, an unwillingness to testify under oath, and on top of all that, it seems like they really, really don’t want anyone to know what really, really happened.
Well, Republican, this is YOUR government.The White House is saying it is not accountable: it will not testify under oath.
How you like me now?
“SOME ONE IS BEHIND THIS! I don’t know who… In fact no one seem to know who! BUT SOME ONE IS BEHIND THIS!”. if it was not so serious, this whole thing would be laughable.
Oh, and wait a minute…Goodling did admit to breaking federal law.But then, McNulty was the one who lied under oath and really did it.And Gonzales was off popping Shrub’s pimples, or something, because he’s too busy delegating everything to know what’s up.
Like Ronnie Readgan and Iran Contra.Or like Ken Lay and Enron.Or like Condy Rice, George Tenet, Dick Cheney, and Donnie Rumsfeld over 9/11.
You all are SHITTY liars, but GREAT deniers.
Hey delsol, your buddies from the ACLU got Oliver North free from being prosecuted. You know that Fox News Contributor, Lt. Colonel Oliver North, USMC Retired. :D
Oh and delsol, George Tenet was a Clinton appointee.
How’s that working out for ya?
You know writerdog, that’s the thing: these are federal judges, not QT clerks, that were relieved of their duties for obvious political reasons– their willingess or unwillingness to try certain cases.
One of those who was suggested, but not fired, was Patrick Fitzgerald. Remember him?
Somebody was, in fact, trying to pull a Watergate with the Justice Department. Yes. Let’s call it what it is: Political hacks attempting to manipulate other areas of the government to serve their own agenda.
But hey, it’s just politics. Why should we care? They got nothing.
Your usual best trick, Pubican: Change the subject.
Despite the assertions of the usual deniers, this scandal is something and there is more to be be known.
An interesting thing is that though Bush may really want to let AG AG go, he can’t. The AG is between Bush and the revelations of how deep he himself was in on all this. [My speculation].
Arthur Davis was grilling the high school council president, er, I mean Former White House liaison so efficiently, I almost felt sorry for her.
ooooo Steven Davis, a conspiracy in there somewhere…
Do tell!
:D
hey clueless delsol, you’re the one that brought up Tenant and Iran Contra, not me.
If you can’t handle the truth, then don’t seek it. :)
“She also faces an internal Justice Department investigation into whether she brought political questions into the hiring process for career positions, such as assistant U.S. attorneys. That would violate federal law.”Like I said some time ago, it is a violation of the law to punish or favor people for their political views, believe it is covered under the Hatch ammendment.Looks like she doesn’t have immunity from the Justice Dept., but then if Rove and Bush are running the Justice Dept., why would she need it?
If they uncover that she’s withholding, or not fully cooperating, she’ll lose her immunity with congress also.
Much ado about nothing – or as Shirley Jackson Lee said “Rove needs to be sitting in that chair post haste”
They went after Rove and got poor Scooter because of a bad memory. And by the way that is why Goodlin wouldn’t testify without immunity. She didn’t want to snared for a bad memory the way Scooter was.
From the libs own post, Goodlin said “I have never attended a meeting of the White House Judicial Selection Committee”. No smoking gun there unless the White House isn’t allowed to attend the White House Judiial Selection Committee meetings.
I actually watched the entire testimony. The dems have nothing and they must be using the wrong bait because the big ones keep getting away.
Posted by: delsol | May 23, 2007 at 04:59 PM
“these are federal judges, not QT clerks, that were relieved of their duties for obvious political reasons– their willingess or unwillingness to try certain cases.”
Well desol if you can prove this you should go to Washington and help the libs out because they aren’t having any luck in this regard.
At the end of the day it will come down to “they serve at the prez’s pleasure” and if the libs have any sense which I am beginning to doubt at this point, they will leave well enough alone. The republicans will be back in power again and will probably have long memories.
And by the way I will challenge anyone on this blog who has actually hired employees to state under oath that they have never considered, number of children and what daycare they have available, sex of the applicant or any other of those taboo questions when making a hiring decision. You don’t ask, but the conversations you have usually bring these items out. Is this what she is guilty of?
Even Oliver North has the right to a fair trial, Republican. North got off because the ACLU is a watchdog that insists upon the goevrnment and private insustries follow the law, unlike the idiots running this government.
At least Reagan let his twits testify under oath!
I won’t try to defend Tenet. But I will resubmit the original question: How do you defend this government’s repeated resistance to accountability, such as the present situation?Can’t you have the intellectual honesty to admit that AG, Bush, Cheney, and Rove are sleazy, incompetent, or both? Or at least that AG is, if nothing else?
Those my dear delsol are loaded question prefaced with a false premise and shall not be answered because of their poisoned content.
If things are going so well for Gonzales, why did his former number three aide have to take the Fifth or get immunity before she would testify?
Politicizing the Justice Department is AGAINST the law, per the Hatch Act, so how can all of you Republicans defend Fredo?
Flip the equation – if Reno and Clinton had done what Gonzo and Bush have done, the Republicans would be screaming for the collective hanging of the Democratic Party.
Hey, Republican–with answers like that, you fit right in! Are you really the Attorney General?
“these are federal judges, not QT clerks, that were relieved of their duties for obvious political reasons– their willingess or unwillingness to try certain cases.”
Well desol if you can prove this you should go to Washington and help the libs out because they aren’t having any luck in this regard.
Ksgrm, if you listened to or saw the any of the Senate testimony of AG or Kyle lackey-guy, it’s abudantly apparent that that is what happened. Circumstantial though it remains, that’s clearly what happened, and if you listened to Kyle lackey-guy’s testimony, he as much as admitted it. Why else would so many Republicans in Congress be calling for AG’s head?Christ, Monica Goodling ADMITTED TODAY that she considered political positions when hiring new federal attorneys…hello, THAT’S ILLEGAL.She also said the AG wasn’t truthful to Congress!!!!!
What the Democrats, AND MANY FRUSTRATED REPUBLICANS SUCH AS ARLEN SPECTER AND JEFF SESSIONS, have been unable to establish is who actually ORDERED the political firings, because some of them are lying under oath…or because the White House did it.
Crimes were committed. They can’t figure out by whom because of the partisan protectionism of the people in power.
They ain’t got nothing.
Gee that was a short movie….
Desol you say ‘partisan protectionism’ of the people in power as if it is something new. Can you say Webb Hubbell. He took the fall and the money to save the necks of some ‘prominent and powerful’ democrats. Where were you then. He afterall was the second in command i the AG office. Where were the witch hunts then?
JPAU I always say. Do I like it? I sure don’t but I won’t be hypocritical enough to say it hasn’t happened in both parties and is still happening in both parties.
As Rebub says “They ain’t got nothing”. Stop fishing and get on with running the government. Their 100 days are over and I am still waiting for some meaningful legislation.
Yeah, cartoon movie for nieces and nephews… I was the second alternate child watcher. :)
We all live in a yellow submarine, yellow submarine, yellow submarine!!!!
no wait it was a porn flick, fast and intense
Oops, never mind it was S&M movie.
I must say…
As scandals go, this one has about as much excitement as the NBA playoffs.
ZZZZzzzzz….
What they have is obstruction, obfuscation, finger-pointing, buck-passing, denials, accusations, an unwillingness to testify under oath, and on top of all that, it seems like they really, really don’t want anyone to know what really, really happened.Posted by: delsol | May 23, 2007 at 04:43 PM
All that plus really, really bad memories for such smart people.
Believe me: that’s a LOT. Augustus Stupidus is permanently shedding Independent voters over this. All that’s left are the 25%-ers, those people who believe that to express any doubt at all in Augustus Stupidus is to open a crack in the dyke that is the Bush administration, a crack that’ll let in the boogeyman.
Any American with 2 oz. of gray matter between his or her ears can see these guys for what they are, it ain’t rocket science.
And it’s enough. Really, it is. Believe me, these guys are killing honest, integrity-soaked convervatism dead.
ReplagiarCon claims that this is “nothing” just like the Valerie Plame affair.
Except Scooter Libby is going to prison.
It’s like the mafia–if the underlings don’t rat out the capo, it’s hard to get to him.
But eventually, they always get to him . . .
I have a feeling some of the previous testifiers are about to be recalled.While goodling didn’t participate in the wh meetings, that’s not the same as no one participating in the wh meetings. More to come.
“Steven Davis, a conspiracy in there somewhere.”
Hardly, it is the typical mix of Bush arrogance and incompetence. He has drug it in the dirt the last time if we are all lucky.
We also have Bush offering defenses for charges not yet lodged – I am referring her to the release of secret bin Ladin information ahead of the accusations that he illegally authorized the NSA spying without AG Ashcroft’s (or his assistant when the AG was in the hospial) approval. I submit an impeachable offense.
There is so much to investigate when it comes to this criminal administration, it is hard to know where to start. I predict here and now, Bush will gone in some fashion, before the end of his term. It can’t come too soon if you ask me.
Off to watch _Lost_.
They ain’t got nothing.
Where did you steal that line from, ReplagiarCon?
After seeing some of of Goodling’s testimony, I disagree with the headline. She says the AG perjured himself.
Looks like there’s a smoking gun after all, and they do now “have something.”
Steven Davis you might be on to something??? But it is all about what Sheila Jackson Lee said today “We need Karl Rove is that chair post haste”
Desol what was the line where she said this?
How are those links coming, Grm? How about a little copy and paste?
After all, you said that I claimed to be a “green eyed black man.”
Where is your copy and paste, or did you just make stuff up again?
Hmmmm…..? And what does your husband think about your new boyfriend, Republican?
Clarkie go back and play with your toys – the adults are talking now.
How is that copy and paste coming, Grannie? Was that whole thing another “KSGrm makes up stuff” routine?
Come on now, you made accusations, now back them up, lady.
Or would you rather just admit you are a liar and get it over with?
It’s all over the news, Ksgrm. What, were you watching the testimony with the sound off? –Or maybe you were watching Fox News.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/05/23/politics/main2840617.shtml
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=amyej4wSTr2I&refer=home
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/05/23/goodling.testimony/index.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18816284/
The wife beater WSClark does not know how to treat women with respect.
There you go again, Republican. (Thanks, Ronnie.)
“The wife beater WSClark does not know how to treat women with respect.”
What woman, Republican? And, to be honest, I treat ALL ladies with respect, but SOME women do not deserve said.
So, what is your point?
Desol below is what I remember as being said. I took it from one of your links.
“In a written statement Wednesday evening, Justice spokesman Brian Roehrkasse said Goodling requested the meeting to seek a transfer, and it took place before the department launched an internal probe of the firings.
“The attorney general has never attempted to influence or shape the testimony or public statements of any witness in this matter, including Ms. Goodling,” Roehrkasse said. “The statements made by the attorney general during this meeting were intended only to comfort her in a very difficult period of her life, as Monica described today when she said, ‘He was being kind.’ ”
I still don’t know where she said the AG perjured himself. She said many times that the meeting was at her instigation. The AG in no way tried to shape her testimony. She did say that she felt uneasy discussing something about which she was going to testify.
Repub we see people like Clarkie all our lives. They start out as obnoxious bullies in gradeschool and turn into adult obnoxious boors who think intimindation gives them some kind of validity. They’re wrong.
I wonder how he thinks I know he has green eyes because I have certainly never met him in person nor do I ever intend to meet him. Could it have been from a post??
“Could it have been from a post??”
Hey, Grm, you said that I had posted that I was green eyed black man. Now, since I know that I did ever post that, I asked you for proof.
Just like your other lies, I am asking you to admit your lies or provide proof of your statements.
Easy enough, right?
Now, I have already kicked your ass all over the ‘Net with your lies about the Cole attack, so now I am asking you to put up or shut up, once again.
I will give you a pas, Grm, if you admit that you are a escapee from a Home for the Mentally Deranged.
Fair enough?
It doesn’t matter who wanted a meeting, The AG said he knew nothing about it and didn’t meet with anyone:
“Goodling’s dramatic story about her final conversation with Gonzales brought questions from panel members about whether he had tried to align her story with his and whether he was truthful in his own congressional testimony.
Gonzales told the Senate Judiciary Committee last month that he didn’t know the answers to some questions about the firings because he was steering clear of aides — such as Goodling — who were likely to be questioned.
“I haven’t talked to witnesses because of the fact that I haven’t wanted to interfere with this investigation and department investigations,” Gonzales told the panel.
Goodling said for the first time Wednesday that Gonzales did review the story of the firings with her at an impromptu meeting she requested in his office a few days before she took a leave of absence.
“I was somewhat paralyzed. I was distraught, and I felt like I wanted to make a transfer,” Goodling recalled during a packed hearing of the House Judiciary Committee.
Gonzales, she said, indicated he would think about Goodling’s request.
“He then proceeded to say, ‘Let me tell you what I can remember,’ and he laid out for me his general recollection … of some of the process” of the firings, Goodling added. When Gonzales finished, she said, “he asked me if I had any reaction to his iteration.” ”
remember–Republicans impeached a president over this sort of thing. And I am not arguing that that was not correct–If it was right then, it’s right now.
By the way, KSGrm, I have proved that you lied about Foley, Clinton and the Cole, and about your son’s service in the Navy. Now you say that you never claimed that I referred to myself as a green eyed black man?
How bad to you want to get your ass kicked?
It would only take a minute – do you want to be shown up again or will you just admit that you lied?
Desol I think the AG has handled this very unprofessionally. Honesty is always the best policy and he made a clumsy attempt to do damage control instead of just airing the firings and saying as a personnel issue that couldn’t be discussed in a public forum.
That said I think the demos are riding this horse to long. What is the end result they want? From listening to Shirley Jackson Lee and seeing the look on her face, it is to take Karl Rove down. I just don’t think this is going to happen. No where today did Goodling say that Rove was implicated in any way shape or form. In fact she denied that he was.
We could say the same about Watergate, or Ken Starr’s multi-year investigation that ended with “only” a blow job.
Who gave Kyle Sampson orders to fire those people? He said he DID meet with Rove and Miers, and Sampson suggested Patrick Fitzgerald be fired as well because he was an “UNDISTINGUISHED” prosecutor.
See, there’s either politically-motivated firings and hirings, which is illegal, or rampant incompetence. What were underlings with no experience like Sampson and Goodling doing in positions of hiring and firing people like David Iglesias and Patrick Fitzgerald? Why wasn;t the AG involved, as he claims he wasn’t? That’s like putting Barney Fife in a position of reviewing Alan Dershowitz for job performance.
So, to answer the question of what do the Democrats want:Either for Gonazales to resign because he is a liar, incompetent, or both;
or for Gonzales to spill the beans on who in the White House consulted with AG and Sampson about the firings–which leads wherever it leads.
What is the end result they want?Posted by: ksgrm | May 23, 2007 at 09:39 PM
They want Gonzalez to resign, for the very reasons you mention.
Gonzalez’ resignation would be the best outcome here.
Or, worse, for Bush to fire him. It’s worse than his resignation because it would imply Gonzalez disagrees that his lying/incompetence rises to a firing offense and that he therefore thinks Bush is firing him for political reasons. Namely, to protect Bush’s backside.
And if worse comes to worst, to impeach him for lying to Congress and the American people OR for being grossly incompetent. This is the worst outcome because it would be more division when the country needs uniting.
Bottom line: they want him gone. Not for politics only (that’s a part of it, granted), but because he’s proven himself unfit.
Pretty simple really. Just do the right thing.
I ain’t holdin’ my breath.
And Bush isn’t going to let AG go, because he doesn’t want another contentious hire & confirmation on his hands that has to be vetted by an empowered and angry Congress.
delsol,
Indeed. They’ll try to tough it out.
But all the Republican attempts at obfuscation aside, Gooding cooked Gonzales’ goose today–big time. Here’s a sample from Rep. Artur Davis’s line of questioning:
Rep. Davis: “General Gonzales testified that he never saw the US Attorneys list, the list of terminated US Attorneys, is that accurate to your knowledge Ms. Goodling?”
Goodling: “Um, I believe he did see a list.”
Rep. Davis: “So if General Gonzales testified that he didn’t see the list, you believe that would be inaccurate testimony on his part don’t you?”
Goodling: “I believe he saw a list.”
Rep. Davis: “So therefore you believe it would be inaccurate testimony?”
Goodling: “Yes.”
http://www.speaker.gov/blog/?p=415
Davis did this with respect to THREE different contradictions with Gonzales’ testimony. Moreover, McNulty directly denies Gooding’s factual claims, so the smart money is that folks are going to get called BACK before the committee to sort out who’s telling the truth and who’s lying.
So all in all, CF2K (and CF2K does love referring to himself in the third person) thinks all you Repubes better get whistlin’ past that graveyard, because there most assuredly is ample reason for further investigation.
Oh, and could Monica Gooding have looked any more guilty or incompetent on the stand?
Oh, and one more thing. Republican said:
“The wife beater WSClark does not know how to treat women with respect.”
Got any evidence for that factual claim? If not, Republican, then thanks, in advance, for validating my decision to call you a liar.
And it’s even more interesting that Goodling hung Gonzales out to dry when she herself had immunity from prosecution. Guess she didn’t want someone else contradicting her later on, thereby leading to charges for perjury.
Good for her–she looked scared as hell.
delsol,
Perjury, yes; incompetence, no. They’re guilty of ratf*cking–ratf*cking every nonpartisan Federal system they can get their hands on, to redirect toward their own ends.
It’s who they are and what they do. It’s all they know how to do. They surely don’t how to govern, or to act for the good of anyone but themselves.
I worked a low level fed. job, and in the 13 months I was there we all were required to watch the Hatch Act video, and pass a test on it to get a certification, twice. It is required for all new hires, and yearly.
As we all know, this is a very complicated story.
Sorry, but it does look like Goodling (what a name, BTW) spilled the beans on AG AG.
This is but one part of the info needed to impeach the WPE (you know to whom I refer).
To Philip Brownlee:WHAT THE HELL TESTIMONY HEARINGS WERE YOU WATCHING TODAY?
I urge EVERYONE who has posted on this blog to follow the link CF2K originally posted. Scroll down to the last video posted with Rep. Davis of Alabama:
http://www.speaker.gov/blog/?p=415
She called him out!!! AG is gone, and good riddance!
delsol,
To be fair, I’m pretty sure Philip posted before the bombshells were launched. Democrats did a good job going easy on Goodling before Representative Davis hit her with the chair.
But of course, this won’t be enough for the Wingnuts on this blog; nothing ever is. However, honest people who are sane know better.
When asked about her qualifications for making hiring and firing decisions about career govt. officials, Ms. Goodling is said to have replied “I’m not really an H.R. professional, but I worked for the college paper, and I did sleep in a Holiday Inn last night!”
If Brownlee posted the blog before the hearing was over, I say that’s crappy journalism, CF2K. Certainly colored the first half of this blog.
Sorta like calling the winner of a game before it’s over.
Or accepting a presidency before all the votes have been counted.
“Goodling did admit that she improperly considered the political loyalties of job applicants for career prosecutors. But she claimed that the violation of federal law was not intended”So are we to assume this law school graduate doesn’t think it was illegal because of her ignorance?
delsol and steve,
Touche’. Bad dog, Philip.
steve,
Indeed. They teach ‘em well at Regent U. You know, “ratf*cking,” er, I mean, “Christian ethics” for professionals, Pat Robertson-style.
They got somethin.’
What a farce to put someone so unqualified into a superior position to someone like fitz., etc.The reamaining AG’s should all resign enforce out of protest to such incompetence and cronyism!