Thank you C-SPAN 3.
Here was the afternoon MSM cable line-up:
CNN: scary weather
MSNBC: American Idol
FOX Noise: child sex predators
Only C-SPAN 3 thought the hearings important enough to cover.
Posted by Christopher at March 29, 2007 11:37 AMChristopher, you're forgetting the breaking news that someone hiccuped in Tazmania.
Posted by mainsailset at March 29, 2007 12:00 PMFOX Noise: child sex predators
One out of three covering Republican depravity is probably the most we could hope for. No?
Posted by snark at March 29, 2007 12:08 PMThey're back!
SEN. SCHUMER:Who did you tell you suggested firing Patrick Fitzgerald?
KYLE SAMPSON:Harriet Miers.
You can't make this stuff up!
Posted by Christopher at March 29, 2007 12:24 PMThe headline tomorrow morning:
IT'S IMPORTANT TO KARL.
Yep, confirming what most of us suspected.
Firing Patrick Fitzgerald while he was prosecuting the Scooter Libby case was "important to Karl."
I want to hear from Miers, Rove and Gonzo UNDER oath and on the record.
Posted by Christopher at March 29, 2007 12:30 PMSampson is really, really resisting being cast in the role of scapegoat. He's totally sold Abu down the river.
Posted by dj moonbat at March 29, 2007 01:33 PMdj, it really looks like it, doesn't it? What do you think the next step is after testimony?
Posted by iamcoyote at March 29, 2007 01:38 PMGood ol' Schumer and Feinstein; they're grilling lil' no hair Sampson until he's fried up like Bush shit! In my area, Metro fuckin' Washington DC, we're getting it ONLY on the radio!
Mal is slowly lowering the do-nothin' Congress from the Cross, they're doing a great job with the Kyle deflowering hearings; as I always suspected, who knows what Dems have been threatened with from Nazi Repubs? This like, sooo reminds me of the Watergate hearings...maybe everything is coming to the fore now, considering what Dems are up against.
Does anybody really think Bush will veto the funding the war/bring home the troops bill?
Posted by Mal Feasance at March 29, 2007 01:55 PMI'm trying to come up with some sort of mixture of Kyle Sampson and Easter for the next liberal holiday.
'cause Fitzmas isn't quite right for this one.
Posted by idiosynchronic at March 29, 2007 02:00 PMIt's just a veto away... The end of the war, it's just a veto away... Come on Bushie, do it, do it do it..
It's been six years of treason with the Bush/Cheney/GOP gangsters... Sieg Heils all around...
Posted by james k. sayre at March 29, 2007 02:03 PMMal Feasance - But the good news is Feinstein got Sampson to admit, twice, under oath, that Attorney General Gozales approved the firings list.
There's no way Gonzo will be able to squirm out of this when he testified before the Senate next month -- if he's still around.
Posted by Christopher at March 29, 2007 02:04 PMiamcoyote: What do you think the next step is after testimony?
Well, as Christopher notes, Gonzo may not still be the Attorney General by the time his turn to testify rolls around. But they might still want to have him come in for a chat, even after he tenders his resignation.
The only thing I can think of right now that's keeping Gonzales on board -- amid revelations that he's been lying his ass off and that his deputies have been feeding Congress lies through McNulty -- is that the Senate will make it a living hell for whoever Bush nominates to replace him.
I also think the House committee should vote on subpoenas for the relevant emails that went through GOP, rather than White House, accounts. There would certainly be a rollicking good fight over those. That should provide a good, slow burning controversy to keep the scandal interesting while America waits on Gonzo's testimony.
Posted by dj moonbat at March 29, 2007 02:24 PMdj - thanks! It hadn't occurred to me that they might keep Gonzo on to avoid another confirmation; good call. And yes, I'm wondering about getting the emails from the RNC servers. The commenters at TPM seem to think that's no problem since they're supposedly official emails - but as you said before, it's a private server, they'll fight like crazy to keep 'em that way.
Posted by iamcoyote at March 29, 2007 02:44 PMAbu Gonzales has been the cowering lickspittle legal enabler of the entire Bushco War against the Constitution, from torture memos to CIA black sites to Geneva Convention gutting to Gitmo to NSA warrantless spying to Rovian partisanization of our justice system.
He can never resign, and Bush will never fire his enabler. Abu will either be impeached (a warm-up?) or he will be "attorney general" until the day the plane finally takes Nero back to the Crawford pig ranch.
Bushco simply cannot exist with a "real" attorney general, which is what they would have to have if Abu ever resigned. Hence, he won't.
Posted by euzoius at March 29, 2007 03:24 PMHe can never resign, and Bush will never fire his enabler.
Maybe you're right. But this is Yet Another Bush Scandal, and really, they don't have any sort of decent pushback (I mean, it seems even less effective than the whole Plame thing), except the occasional hand-wringing over possible "overreaching." All of the different poll questions are starting to converge in the low 30s, as all but the wingnuttiest members of the public are starting to decide they'd prefer sane, non-corrupt leadership. The temptation to locate a sacrificial lamb has to be growing intense.
Posted by dj moonbat at March 29, 2007 03:34 PMDo you think Bush will go ahead and sign the bill and then just place a "veto" signing statement next to the war deadline portion...
Isn't that how he usually handles things he doesn't agree with from congress?
Posted by LB at March 29, 2007 03:52 PMDo you think Bush will go ahead and sign the bill and then just place a "veto" signing statement next to the war deadline portion...
If he hadn't already promised a veto, that would have been my guess. Now, though, it would just look like chickening out. And we know how he hates that...
Posted by dj moonbat at March 29, 2007 06:33 PMAnd we know how he hates that...
Which is why this series of pictures, and Pelosi's comment that Bush should "...calm down and take a deep breath" is a direct hit on him, infantalizing the puffed-up little cowboy. That's going to piss him off more than any pesky timetable will. Everyone should prepare for him getting wacky, 'cos if history is any guide, he's ripe for a meltdown of the grabbing a baby to sheild himself from the threat variety.
Let him surprise everyone and not veto; attach that signing statement, instead. Wouldn't that be a good time to bring up the status of signing statements in general and their legality? At some point in the future, maybe at their criminal trials, it might become an issue.
Posted by iamcoyote at March 29, 2007 07:05 PMThe daunting ailment that has plagued those in the service of the White House continued to take its toll on the President's minions. Today, members of a congressional investigative committee continued their efforts to find the source of the ailment as it seems to be highly contagious. The most recent strains seem to be far more pervasive yet determining its origin continues to remain elusive. Senator Chuck Schumer closed his questioning by offering the hypothesis that the ailment was a virulent form of lying.
Many within the media stepped in to immediately offer the public a layman's interpretation of the symptoms as well as analysis of the ongoing implications if a cure for the ailment could not be administered soon. The White House continued to downplay the seriousness of the ailment as it sought to allay the growing fears within the American public that the disease might soon decimate the bulk of their elected officials. A growing number of pundits continued to suggest that the President is in denial as to the severity of the ailment and what it might do to the Republican Party.
See a tongue-in-cheek visual spoofing an upcoming episode of Saturday Night Live featuring a guest appearance by "The President's Prevaricators"...here:
Posted by Daniel DiRito at March 29, 2007 08:08 PM