I guess *they* seem to think a crime was committed...

[ribonucleic]

Gonzales aide to invoke Fifth Amendment

Monica Goodling, a Justice Department official involved in the firings of federal prosecutors, will refuse to answer questions at upcoming Senate hearings, citing Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination, her lawyer said Monday.

"The potential for legal jeopardy for Ms. Goodling from even her most truthful and accurate testimony under these circumstances is very real," said the lawyer, John Dowd.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070326/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/fired_prosecutors

[240 is Back]

People who defend gonzalez this point are either

1) too stupid to understand he outright lied repeatedly
2) too morally corrput to care


I have a question for Beach Bum though-

The 3 repubs who are saying gonzalez lied.  ARE THEY WRONG?  You have to admit, one group of repubs are wrong at this point.  Which is it?

[ribonucleic]

The sad thing is that, if we had a fully functioning judiciary branch, the administration would have to take the Fifth at every single press conference.

[Dos Equis]

People who defend gonzalez this point are either

1) too stupid to understand he outright lied repeatedly
2) too morally corrput to care


I have a question for Beach Bum though-

The 3 repubs who are saying gonzalez lied.  ARE THEY WRONG?  You have to admit, one group of repubs are wrong at this point.  Which is it?

LOL.  So it must be 1 or 2?  LOL.  Glad you got this figured out already.     The government shouldn't spend my money doing investigations and whatnot, they should just call you. 

[ToxicAvenger]

LOL.  So it must be 1 or 2?  LOL.  Glad you got this figured out already.     The government shouldn't spend my money doing investigations and whatnot, they should just call you. 

truthfull people have notrhing to hide..

good people have nothing to hide

jesus woulda had nothbing to hide

hope this dosen't help

[Dos Equis]

truthfull people have notrhing to hide..

good people have nothing to hide

jesus woulda had nothbing to hide

hope this dosen't help

Not true at all.  Some "truthful" and "good" people don't want to reveal embarrassing information.

What does Jesus have to do with this?    

[youandme]

Not true at all.  Some "truthful" and "good" people don't want to reveal embarrassing information.

That makes no sense. So your saying they embarrased our country?

[ToxicAvenger]

  Some "truthful" and "good" people don't want to reveal embarrassing information.

 

enbarassing info more often than not is illegal info.. 

if its the right thing..exacly why would anyone be embrassed?
embrassment is ALWAYS caused by wrong doing..

gimme an example where you were embrassed for doing the right thing?   common..go on..

[Dos Equis]

That makes no sense. So your saying they embarrased our country?

Who is "they"?  He made a general comment and I responded with a general comment.   

[Dos Equis]

enbarassing info more often than not is illegal info.. 

if its the right thing..exacly why would anyone be embrassed?
embrassment is ALWAYS caused by wrong doing..

gimme an example where you were embrassed for doing the right thing?   common..go on..

LOL.  So you want me to reveal information I was too embarrassed to talk about?  LOL.  Okay . . . . Be right back . . . .

I can think of others though:  Bill Clinton, Gavin Nesome, Newt, etc. 

[youandme]

LOL.  So you want me to reveal information I was too embarrassed to talk about? 

If that is what your country asks of you then yes

[Dos Equis]

If that is what your country asks of you then yes

My country hasn't asked me to reveal anything.  It was a guy named "Protein Farts" on a bodybuilding web site.  I think I'll sit this one out. . . .

[Straw Man]

Not true at all.  Some "truthful" and "good" people don't want to reveal embarrassing information.

What does Jesus have to do with this?    

Lying makes the baby jesus cry

[Dos Equis]

Lying makes the baby jesus cry

 

[youandme]

Lying makes the baby jesus cry

lmao

[240 is Back]

LOL.  So it must be 1 or 2?  LOL.  Glad you got this figured out already.     The government shouldn't spend my money doing investigations and whatnot, they should just call you. 

I agree, there shouldn't be an investigation.

Bush should look at the transcript of what Gonzalez said, then look at the evidence from the emails.

Then he should tell Alberto to turn in his resignation and have a nice day.

If I ran the nation, when a subordinate lied, he would be fired for the ethics breach.  Simple.  Why?  Because I have high standards.

beachy, if your employees were lying and embarassing your company, would you fire them?  Or would you let them continue to make your company look like shit so the competition (in this case the dems) would take your market share?

[Dos Equis]

I agree, there shouldn't be an investigation.

Bush should look at the transcript of what Gonzalez said, then look at the evidence from the emails.

Then he should tell Alberto to turn in his resignation and have a nice day.

If I ran the nation, when a subordinate lied, he would be fired for the ethics breach.  Simple.  Why?  Because I have high standards.

beachy, if your employees were lying and embarassing your company, would you fire them?  Or would you let them continue to make your company look like shit so the competition (in this case the dems) would take your market share?

Of course I wouldn't condone employees lying and embarrassing my company. 

What I wouldn't do is fire them, until I did my own investigation, when allegations of their misconduct are made by a competitor. 

[240 is Back]

Of course I wouldn't condone employees lying and embarrassing my company. 

What I wouldn't do is fire them, until I did my own investigation, when allegations of their misconduct are made by a competitor. 

If you had a videotape of your employee saying one thing to your shareholders...

and you had emails (and they've been released!) proving he was lying directly to their faces...

Would you fire him then?

[Dos Equis]

If you had a videotape of your employee saying one thing to your shareholders...

and you had emails (and they've been released!) proving he was lying directly to their faces...

Would you fire him then?

Yes, of course.  Assuming everything you say to be true.  Your point? 

[240 is Back]

Yes, of course.  Assuming everything you say to be true.  Your point? 

You should watch the news, man.  The WH released emails on friday night which showed AG lied. 

[Dos Equis]

You should watch the news, man.  The WH released emails on friday night which showed AG lied. 

Right.   

I'll wait, along with Specter, till Gonzales testifies.  As Specter said, it is make or break testimony.   

[240 is Back]

Right.  

I'll wait, along with Specter, till Gonzales testifies.  As Specter said, it is make or break testimony.   

What if Gonzalez takes the fifth?

[Dos Equis]

What if Gonzalez takes the fifth?

Then he won't testify.  That's how the Fifth Amendment works.    

If he takes the Fifth he has to resign IMO, unless Bush and others (e.g., Republicans in Congress) vouch for him.

After what happened to Scooter Libby, I wouldn’t be completely shocked if he takes the Fifth.  No underlying crime in the Libby matter.  No underlying crime here (yet). 

[ribonucleic]

No underlying crime here (yet). 

<<  Whatever one thinks of how convincing the available evidence is thus far, nobody who has an even basic understanding of how our government functions could dispute that the accusations in this scandal are extremely serious. Presumably, even those incapable of ingesting the danger of having U.S. attorneys fired due to their refusal to launch partisan-motivated prosecutions (or stifle prosecutions for partisan reasons) at least understand that it is highly disturbing and simply intolerable for the Attorney General of the U.S. -- the head of our Justice Department -- to lie repeatedly about what happened, including to Congress, and to have done so with the obvious assent and (at the very least) implicit cooperation of the White House. Even the most vapid media stars should be able to understand that. And yet so many of them do not. >>

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/03/26/matthews/index.html

[Dos Equis]

<<  Whatever one thinks of how convincing the available evidence is thus far, nobody who has an even basic understanding of how our government functions could dispute that the accusations in this scandal are extremely serious. Presumably, even those incapable of ingesting the danger of having U.S. attorneys fired due to their refusal to launch partisan-motivated prosecutions (or stifle prosecutions for partisan reasons) at least understand that it is highly disturbing and simply intolerable for the Attorney General of the U.S. -- the head of our Justice Department -- to lie repeatedly about what happened, including to Congress, and to have done so with the obvious assent and (at the very least) implicit cooperation of the White House. Even the most vapid media stars should be able to understand that. And yet so many of them do not. >>

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/03/26/matthews/index.html

I agree these are serious accusations.  Since this story broke I have maintained that the legitimate issue is whether or not these U.S. Attorneys were fired to impede legitimate criminal investigations/prosecutions.