PDA

View Full Version : Gonzales' Lies Exposed


ECW
03-24-2007, 03:33 AM
Another liar in the Bush Administration is exposed. Once Sampson testifes under oath next week, the final nails will be pounded into the coffin of one Alberto Gonzales.

WASHINGTON - Attorney General Alberto Gonzales approved plans to fire several U.S. attorneys in a November meeting, according to documents released Friday that contradict earlier claims that he was not closely involved in the dismissals.

The Nov. 27 meeting, in which the attorney general and at least five top Justice Department officials participated, focused on a five-step plan for carrying out the firings of the prosecutors, Justice Department officials said late Friday.

There, Gonzales signed off on the plan, which was crafted by his chief of staff, Kyle Sampson. Sampson resigned last week amid a political firestorm surrounding the firings.

The documents indicated that the hour-long morning discussion, held in the attorney general's conference room, was the only time Gonzales met with top aides who decided which prosecutors to fire and how to do it.

Justice spokeswoman Tasia Scolinos said it was not immediately clear whether Gonzales gave his final approval to begin the firings at that meeting. Scolinos also said Gonzales was not involved in the process of selecting which prosecutors would be asked to resign.

On March 13, in explaining the firings, Gonzales told reporters he was aware that some of the dismissals were being discussed but was not involved in them.

‘I knew my chief of staff was involved’

"I knew my chief of staff was involved in the process of determining who were the weak performers — where were the districts around the country where we could do better for the people in that district, and that's what I knew," Gonzales said last week. "But that is in essence what I knew about the process; was not involved in seeing any memos, was not involved in any discussions about what was going on. That's basically what I knew as the attorney general."

Later, he added: "I accept responsibility for everything that happens here within this department. But when you have 110,000 people working in the department, obviously there are going to be decisions that I'm not aware of in real time. Many decisions are delegated."

The documents were released Friday night, a few hours after Sampson agreed to testify at a Senate inquiry next week into the firings of eight U.S. attorneys last year.

Earlier Friday, a staunch White House ally, Sen. John Cornyn, summoned White House counsel Fred Fielding to Capitol Hill and told him he wanted "no surprises."

"I told him, 'Everything you can release, please release. We need to know what the facts are,"' Cornyn said.

Sampson to testify

Sampson will appear Thursday at a hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee, his attorney said. His appearance will mark the first congressional testimony by a Justice Department aide since the release of thousands of documents that show the firings were orchestrated, in part, by the White House.

Sampson "looks forward to answering the committee's questions," wrote his attorney, Brad Berenson, in a two-paragraph letter to Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and the panel's top Republican, Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania.

"We trust that his decision to do so will satisfy the need of the Congress to obtain information from him concerning the requested resignations of the United States attorneys," Berenson wrote.

WP: E-mails show moves to replace prosecutor

E-mails between the White House and the Justice Department, dating back to the weeks immediately after the 2004 presidential election, show Sampson was heavily engaged in deciding how many prosecutors would be replaced, and which ones. The Bush administration maintains the dismissals of the eight political appointees were proper.

Democrats, however, question whether the eight were selected because they were not seen as, in Sampson's words, "loyal Bushies."

"He was right at the center of things," Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., who is leading the inquiry into the firings, said of Sampson. "He has said publicly that what others have said is not how it happened. ... He contradicts DOJ."

Schumer said he hoped Sampson would provide more detail about who initiated the firings and whether they were politically motivated.

Gonzales orders investigation

The Justice Department says Gonzales has ordered an internal investigation of the firings.

A department spokesman said "although there is no evidence to suggest improper conduct," Gonzales asked the department's Office of Professional Responsibility to look into the firings. It will be joined by the department's inspector general.

The spokesman said the main questions are how the attorneys were fired, how they were selected for firing and why Congress was misled about the firings.
~link~ (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17763780/)

Angel Of Mercy
03-24-2007, 03:22 PM
ECW: Gonzo is definitely a dead man walking...

TheStripey1
03-26-2007, 06:21 PM
Some of the emails released Friday show that the AG was involved IN the discussions deciding which attorneys to fire, thus contradicting what he had claimed earlier...

seems to me that AG AG should be disbarred... because lawyers aren't supposed to give even the semblance of impropriety and IMO, lying is improper, especially when doing it in front of Congress...

Question for the lurkers... If the bush administration wants to get to the truth, why are they fighting against their aides testifying under oath? If they want to bring light to bear upon this, why do they want to hide while doing it?

It makes NO sense...

BIrdzeye
03-26-2007, 06:30 PM
Oh, what's the point? If Gonzalez goes, Bush will just nominate another scumbag. There's no way he'll ever nominate someone with integrity.

potter
03-26-2007, 06:51 PM
Oh, what's the point? If Gonzalez goes, Bush will just nominate another scumbag. There's no way he'll ever nominate someone with integrity.



This particular scumbag however is the one who approved the concept of torture and warrentless wiretaps to this administration. A rather large ugly stain on what America stands for. The guy should be removed from office and deported to a country more suited to his ethics.

http://cbs13.com/national/topstories_story_074190905.html

As the president's chief lawyer, Gonzales sanctioned the widespread use of "warrantless wiretaps," allowing the government to snoop on Americans without court orders.

Citing an urgent need to prevent terror attacks, he also approved the so-called "torture memo," clearing the way for the CIA to use harsh methods in questioning al Qaeda captives,

BIrdzeye
03-26-2007, 06:55 PM
Oh, what's the point? If Gonzalez goes, Bush will just nominate another scumbag. There's no way he'll ever nominate someone with integrity.



This particular scumbag however is the one who approved the concept of torture and warrentless wiretaps to this administration. A rather large ugly stain on what America stands for. The guy should be removed from office and deported to a country more suited to his ethics.

http://cbs13.com/national/topstories_story_074190905.html

As the president's chief lawyer, Gonzales sanctioned the widespread use of "warrantless wiretaps," allowing the government to snoop on Americans without court orders.

Citing an urgent need to prevent terror attacks, he also approved the so-called "torture memo," clearing the way for the CIA to use harsh methods in questioning al Qaeda captives,


Oh, I don't doubt that for a minute, but the cynic in me says that any replacement of Gonzalez will be as much of a scumbag as he is.

potter
03-26-2007, 06:59 PM
Oh, what's the point? If Gonzalez goes, Bush will just nominate another scumbag. There's no way he'll ever nominate someone with integrity.



This particular scumbag however is the one who approved the concept of torture and warrentless wiretaps to this administration. A rather large ugly stain on what America stands for. The guy should be removed from office and deported to a country more suited to his ethics.

http://cbs13.com/national/topstories_story_074190905.html

As the president's chief lawyer, Gonzales sanctioned the widespread use of "warrantless wiretaps," allowing the government to snoop on Americans without court orders.

Citing an urgent need to prevent terror attacks, he also approved the so-called "torture memo," clearing the way for the CIA to use harsh methods in questioning al Qaeda captives,


Oh, I don't doubt that for a minute, but the cynic in me says that any replacement of Gonzalez will be as much of a scumbag as he is.


On that I agree, anyone Bush appoints will be a scumbag. In the unlikely event he or she is not a scumbag, he or she will most certainly resign after getting a whiff of the unholy stench in the white house.

manyfeathers
03-26-2007, 10:52 PM
I thought it was particularly funny that Gone-or-reah has ordered an internal investigation. Ha ha ha - LMBO. Smoke and mirrors my friends, but all this slight of hand can't go on forever - nothing lasts forever. Pst - maybe someone should whisper that to Mr. Bush.

speedracer
03-26-2007, 10:54 PM
Oh, what's the point? If Gonzalez goes, Bush will just nominate another scumbag. There's no way he'll ever nominate someone with integrity.


The next scumbag-in-question would need to make it through Senate confirmation. The administration is weighing the bummer of having to deal with Gonzalez against the bummer of having to deal with Democrats confirming his next choice.

This should actually turn out to be an interesting lesson in realpolitik, Bush administration style. At what point is dealing with incompetence worse than dealing with Democrats? We'll know when Bush cuts him loose.

manyfeathers
03-27-2007, 02:42 AM
Oh, what's the point? If Gonzalez goes, Bush will just nominate another scumbag. There's no way he'll ever nominate someone with integrity.


The next scumbag-in-question would need to make it through Senate confirmation. The administration is weighing the bummer of having to deal with Gonzalez against the bummer of having to deal with Democrats confirming his next choice.

This should actually turn out to be an interesting lesson in realpolitik, Bush administration style. At what point is dealing with incompetence worse than dealing with Democrats? We'll know when Bush cuts him loose.


Bush - kind of weak in the liver, isn't he? :rolleyes:

Pookie
03-27-2007, 06:38 AM
I think Gonzales will give up and resign.
Purrs,

piratemonkey
03-30-2007, 02:01 PM
New info from yesterday's testimony of former Justice Department official Kyle Sampson.

Sampson talking about Gonzales' public statements and statements to Congress:
Specter asked about Attorney General Gonzales' "candor" in saying earlier this month that he was not a part of any discussions on the firings. He asked about the November 27, 2006 meeting "where there were discussions" and Gonzales allegedly attended. Was Gonzales' statement about taking part in no discussions accurate?

"I don't think it's accurate," Sampson said. "He recently clarified it. But he was present at the November 27 meeting."

"So he was involved in discussions in contrast to his statement" this month? Specter asked.

"Yes." Sampson replied.

Sen. Charles Schumer then asked about Gonzales also claiming that he saw no documents on this matter.

Sampson replied: "I don't think it's entirely accurate."

Schumer: "There was repeated discussions?"

Sampson : "Yes."

Schumer: "As many as, say, five."

Sampson: "Yes."

Schumer then asked if Gonzales was truthful in saying Sampson's information on the firings was not shared within the department.

Sampson: "I shared information with whoever asked....I was very open and collaborative in the process."

Schumer: "So the Attorney General's statement is false?"

Sampson: "I don't think it is accurate. "

How many liars, criminals and incompetents do we have to find in the Bush administration before the apologists stop defending him?

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003564888

ECW
03-30-2007, 04:10 PM
Is that a rhetorical question, piratemonkey?