by emptywheel
Probably not. At least not yet. I'm probably over-reading a sentence from this article, which reads:
Justice Department officials said private attorneys allied with the Bush administration could be recruited to help Gonzales to prepare in the back-and-forth sessions. It was not immediately clear who those attorneys might be.
But the thought of some "private attorneys allied with the Bush administration" helping Gonzales to prepare for his Senate grilling raises all sorts of questions. Such as:
- Will these attorneys be compensated? If so, by whom? By GWB43, or by DOJ?
- If these attorneys are compensated by GWB43, would that constitute a gift?
- Will these attorneys accompany Gonzales to the hearing? All the other DOJ employees are entitled to (and in the case of Sampson, Goodling, and Elston are using) their own private attorneys at the hearings.
- Do these lawyers have any conflicts in the case? Such as that of (private attorney affiliated with the Bush administration) Ted Olsen, who works at Gibson, Dunn, & Crutcher, the firm that paid Deborah Wong Yang $1.5 million to leave off her investigation of Congressman Jerry Lewis and enter the private sector?
It's a question I think taxpayers have a right to know the answers to.
One more detail about the article. You know Gonzales is worried. He canceled spring break to prepare:
Gonzales postponed tentative plans to take a spring break with his wife and three sons, opting instead to prepare for what even Republicans say will be a "make or break" April 17 appearance.
These Bushies never cancel vacations, not even when New Orleans is drowning. So this Senate hearing must really be serious.
If the private lawyers are compensated by the RNC or the Bush campaign committee there are at least two possible violations of law I would want to explore:
1) Gonzales taking a gratuity, a thing of value.
2) violation of campaign finance law since GWB isn't running for anything at this point is spending is pretty much limited to donations to other candidates.
I'll go you one further, Has anybody looked into whether conituning to pay for the GWB email account violates campaign finance law???????
Posted by: looseheadprop | April 03, 2007 at 13:37
Oh, I was using GWB somewhat metaphorically, as the signifier for all those things they do off the books.
But you raise some important issues. If Bush isn't doinking around with the RNC in hopes of getting re-elected, doesn't that make it an even clearer violation of the Hatch Act?
Posted by: emptywheel | April 03, 2007 at 13:43
Vacation? Ohh no, surely you jest. This is just so Bush can lambast Congress for going on "vacation".
Rover may be down but he's not done barking.
Posted by: Bugboy | April 03, 2007 at 14:04
Do we at this point have any reason to believe the selection of judges hasn't been corrupted as well? I wonder what sort of loyalty oath Alito had to cough up.
Posted by: SaltinWound | April 03, 2007 at 15:14
The quality, direction/spin of his testimony might be surmised simply by finding out who jumped on board with him; Victoria T? Barbara Comstock? Ben Ginsberg? Their presence will tell whether we'll hear simply spin or any kind of substance.
Posted by: mainsailset | April 03, 2007 at 15:18
is there any way that the AG can get anything but a private lawyer? All else would seem to be completely illegal as he would use resources he is not entitled to.
let's face it. it's them against us. and they have voted to kill us. and they are going to bankrupt the treasury so that they can gain the absolute power if they don't have enough now.
Posted by: oldtree | April 03, 2007 at 15:57
mainsail
I was thinking it might be Ben Ginsberg. The perfect mix of representation of party and representation of law.
Posted by: emptywheel | April 03, 2007 at 16:24
Perhaps a bit off topic, but certainly related to any discussion of a runaway administration. There has been a lot of reporting on NPR and now a post on Raw Story related to "BLACKWATER" - the massive contract security force that can really only be understood as a private army. Run by men with strong neo-con ties, and building private bases with money from government contracts. Man o' man if there were ever anything that needs nipped in the bud. Do we really want the neocons to have a private army? This to me is far and away the most ominous sign yet of the very real threat our current leadership poses to our 'democracy'.
Posted by: Dismayed | April 03, 2007 at 17:50
yo, dismayed
bring them on
the neocon freepi wouldn't survive 10 minutes in my neighborhood
did I ever mention that I live about 10 blocks from the central headquarters of a "Bloods" gang ???
Around my house, you don't wanna be outside at midnight on New year's Eve, falling bullets and all, you know ...
we also got "Crips" that live a few miles away
and then there are the parts of town where the cops won't go at night ... (I don't go there much after dark either)
frightened pasty white fat guys with guns don't scare me much
I live in a town where we got thousands of people who would relish the opportunity to shoot the freepi
they might even do it for free
let the freepi mastadon come forth
Posted by: freepatriot | April 03, 2007 at 19:45
bty, I don't live anywhere near Los Angeles
I live closer to Frisco than LA (close enough to know that calling it "frisco" pisses them off, far enough away that I don't care that it pisses them off)
(wink)
Posted by: freepatriot | April 03, 2007 at 19:50
Ha. Fortunately, we have lots o' guns here in TX as well, although I'm afraid we could get surrounded here in Austin. Still, I don't like this Blackwater thing. Private military bases, no thanks.
Posted by: Dismayed | April 03, 2007 at 20:35
The question of Abu's attorneys and who is paying for them is a good one.
And there are so many others, including: have any of the interim attorneys taken office and begun to perform their duties? If so, cannot they be called before the Judiciary Committee to discuss their actions thus far, along with their qualifications?
Why hasn't Griffin been hauled up to account for himself? He's a government employee, after all. Is he on the USA payroll? What cases is he currently pursuing? I'd say Congressional oversight is quite appropriate.
Posted by: Veritas78 | April 03, 2007 at 20:41
Blackwater's new haunt, the tiny town of Potrero, looks to be quite close to the CA/Mexico border...800+ acres, helped through the approval process by the friendly hands of Duncan Hunter, whom I seem to remember had a 3rd cousin once removed relationship to the MZM/Cunningham adventure. I wonder if Blackwater is hoping to help stem that nasty illegal immigrant problem that Carol Lam was fired over.
Same old actors, different day.
Posted by: mainsailset | April 03, 2007 at 22:07
Veritas 78, Griffin became USA under the provisions inserted into the Patriot in the wee hours, the AG appointed him to a full term. The only way to get him before the Senate is to first get Gonzales out, and as part of a confirmation package for a new AG -- require that all Senate-unconfirmed AG's be sent up for confirmation in a short time span. Then the Senate can hear him and decide whether to confirm him. If he is not confirmed, then the President would have to nominate a new candidate USA. The vacancies they filled under the provisions of the Patriot Act (now repealed) were law from last fall till just a few weeks ago. This is why making the office of Attorney General vacant is so important. If Gonzales doesn't read the writing on the wall, Conyers may have to start impeachment proceedings to push just a little harder.
What we are watching is one of the most interesting "claw back's" of power on the part of Congress in decades. In both the House and Senate the vote on revoking the special provision of the Patriot Act is stunning -- totally veto-proof. I think it was 94-2 in the Senate, and in the House they got half the Republicans. They even managed to get Spector to go on as a co-author of the revocation. (he had to eat his own shit.) Between this issue and the play out of the war funding bill -- it is just beautiful to watch what's happening. But they may have to do a couple more "claw back's" before the message gets through GWB's thick skull.
Today MPR on the noon forum from the Humphrey Institute, our new Senator, Amy Klobuchar gave a report on the coordination now in process between the Senate Agriculture Committee and the Environment and Public Works Committee with regard to Global Warming. Of course she is just a very junior member of both -- but she presented it as how Harkin (chair of ag) and Boxer (chair of Ev) are crafting all the elements of a major alternative energy policy -- the research, the demo projects, the policy questions all in a totally integrated way. It is really too bad the press isn't covering this, because unlike Cheney's energy policy efforts, this is all being done up-front and in public. Amy had great fun with Inhofe comments, reprising Boxer's theme that elections have consequences. Apparently Inhofe has virtually no support on the Republican side of the Aisle.
Posted by: Sara | April 03, 2007 at 22:14
深圳物流、深圳物流公司,深圳货运公司,深圳搬迁 深圳搬迁公司 深圳搬家公司 深圳市清洁服务公司
Posted by: kjl | June 05, 2007 at 05:00