Thursday, March 15, 2007

Rovian Obstruction of Justice

Howling Latina just received an e-mail from the Democratic Party asking that Americans sign a petition demanding the White House turn over all papers regarding the "Justice Department firings."

Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-NY, a member of Senate Judiciary Committee also held a press conference early this evening stressing the need of White House political operative Karl Rove to testify before their committee. Today, the panel decided to allow a week to pass before voting whether or not to subpoena the snake.

Only a couple of days ago, White House Press Secretary Tony Snow had assured the public that the proposal to fire all U.S. attorneys at the start of the second Bush administration originated with former White House Counsel Harriet Miers.

Well, as it turns out, the latest administration e-mail shows that it wasn't Harriet's idea (who after all is more known for her fawning tail-wagging obeisance than any strategic thinking). but cagey, double-dealing Karl Rove.

As Howling Latina watched "Hardball" with NBC White House Correspondent David Gregory pondering what this latest news could mean and Schumer noting the e-mail proved Rove was directly linked to Attorney-gate and insisted that he must come clean and tell all, she couldn't help but hearken back to her earlier posts about the idea of replacing every prosecutor, which of course, would have serendipitously included Patrick Fitzgerald.

ABC News broke the story:
The e-mails directly contradict White House assertions that the notion originated with recently departed White House counsel Harriet Miers and was her idea alone.

Two independent sources in a position to know have described the contents of the e-mail exchange, which could be released as early as Friday. They put Rove at the epicenter of the imbroglio and raise questions about Gonzales' explanations of the matter.
Yes, of course Rove wanted to get rid of every U.S. attorney around the same time Fitzgerald was putting the legal squeeze on Matthew Cooper of Time. After all, Rove was Cooper's source in the Plame affair.

President's do this all the time... Clinton fired 93 of them... It is the President's Constitutional Right. How about Schumer and the rest of his compatriots release copies of all the requests to the IRS to do retributive Audits on their opponents. Get on to the next stupid thing you all will do to destroy Bush; you bore us, you bunch of whiners or weiners (you choose).
Nice talking point, only one small problem.

Clinton did his firing at the start of his term to get rid of prior GOP prosecutors installed by a PRIOR president. Once they'd been replaced, he certainly didn't fire them during the middle of an ongoing investigation.

Karl was pissed that these treacherous RINOs had gone after the folks who were breaking the law (yep, that would be GOPers) instead of the trumped-up cases against Democrats.

Something else: HE swore after '06 that '08 would be different. That is, no more run-away prosecutors breathing down the neck of GOP lawbreakers. No doubt that's why the ratio of cases was 7:1, Democrats vs. Republicans--only problem they usually fizzled since there was nothing 'there' THERE in the case of newly minted Sen. Robert Menendez.

Oh yea, and that's why all the frenzy to anoint Karl's protege as U.S. attorney in Arkansas; you know, just in case Hillary is nominated the Democratic candidate for president in '08 so they can dig up all the ol' baseless crapola and 'swiftboat' her before she can even thank Democrats for nominating her.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Oh, and about losing, hmmm, exactly WHO were the losers in '06?!?

And just who will lose in '08?!?

The only whiners are folks like you who troll the internet and post proven false talking points without the courage of putting your name on your posts.

Howling Latina rules!! You are definitely on to something alright. There is something much bigger going on here that this adminstration doesn't want anyone to know about. And the only thing Republicans can spew at it are, "Clinton did it, Clinton did it". No, he didn't. He did not do the same thing at all.
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?