« Flu Stories: The Pandemic Flu Leadership Blog | Main | The Latest from SSCI »

May 27, 2007

Comments

I read an article at FireDogLake that said this:

"...There in the hospital room Comey held firm. Card got all bent out of shaped and ordered Comey go to the White House the next day for a one-on-one meeting with Bush. Comey refused unless he could have an independent witness to the meeting. No deal.

The next day Bush and Comey met and Comey let it be known that he, and Mueller, and others would resign en masse if the pressure continued. Bush backed down. But within a few months, the program resumed, without Justice Department approval. No one was the wiser."

http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/05/25/no-comment/

This also seems wrong. The threat to resign was because the program had been authorized by Bush. And Andy Card wanted to see Comey the evening of the hospital visit, and Comey went. The next day's WH visit was a scheduled daily briefing by head of DOJ and FBI. On FDL, I couldn't find any comments which pointed this out.

Agree, TomJ--that's the chronology.

Card called Comey at the hospital and made him come ot the WH that night. It's not clear when the meeting about resigning took place--though I'm skeptical that McCallum was a party to it at all. But Comey was clear: the meeting with Bush took place after an ordinary morning briefing on the 12th.

Great points, wheel. Your close reading skills continue to amaze. Was the San Francisco USA who fought hanging the pictures the same one everyone agrees wasn't fired for political reasons? I'm probably barking up the wrong tree, but I tend to be skeptical of positions on which everyone agrees.

The SF USA wouldn't be a career appoint--he was as political as they come. Corallo's implication was that the career appoints are all raving lefties. You know--lefties are always drawn to be prosecutors...

They've made similar accusations about Civil Rights Div.

Collapsing the action allows it to be more easily manipulated. "Back at the ranch" lingo suggests this is just a daily soap; if you don't like it, change the channel.

Most damningly, it understates the enormity of the problem. I believe that at no time before in American history has the entire top echelon of the Department of Justice, as many as thirty conservative Republican lawyers, including the government's chief law enforcement officer and the director of the FBI, all appointed by the sitting President, threatened to resign.

John le Carre would describe that without exaggeration as an attempt to stop a coup.

The article also blithely repeats the unsupported assumption that this unprecedented lawyers' revolt was over "the" spying program. We don't know that. There may be many programs, including one or more that Congress has specifically prohibited, that continue in ways that grossly violate the law of the land, with nothing more to support them than the President's assertion that the Vice President said that it was OK for him to say, "Because I said so".

I love the bit about hanging the Cheney picture. Just a silent way of inserting himself into the chain of command. Man, a picture really is worth a thousand words.

Dismayed

And I'm not sure, but I think that only Bush and Gonzales are standard. Was Kevin Ryan, a good Bushie, pushing for Cheney's picture of his own accord? Because I could see objecting to that. Of course, I'm a screaming leftie, so...

okay -- i love this granularity here,
EW -- and i have to admit, i think you
really have hit on something with the
veep pictures thing. i am loathe to
give this hint of my long-teeth, but. . .
the last time i clearly seeing any veep's
pictures in so many government offices. . .

was. . . 1970. . . and it was spiro agnew.
and, everywhere. wow. just. . . wow.

i snorted audibly when i read your line about
how career prosecutors are generally raging
lefties, to start with! tremendous!

hmmmm. . .

i also recall that most of the members
of my law school republicans' club were,
en masse, headed off to become
public defenders, and protect the innocent. . .

really. it. could. be. true. . .

[seems 'tis often the case that the truth will
be far stranger than anything we might make up
. . .]

finally, sorta' O/T, but there are
two very worthy opinions in today's
newspapers
. . . that is all.

off for a bike-ride. . .

If you go to AfterDowningStreet.org and look at the left-hand side of the screen, you'll find some photos

of the Decider in Chief, the "Commander Guy" and his hatchet man, "Big Time" Cheney...together.

With the photos it says: Celebrate MEMORIAL DAY with some DRAFT DODGERS.

That one's going up on my fridge for this weekend.

One thing about Comey that really makes me wonder if he is the hero people are calling him. He kept this secret for over three years, waiting until the right somebody asked him about. What else does he know, that he refuses to reveal, until the right person asks him. This man is a lawyer, and was a USA, and is supposedly an officer of the court, but because being a Republican, and needing cover for his revelations, is more important to him than the subversion of the Justice Department by the Bush Administration. And know he is a highly paid flack for the premier war profiteer, Lockheed-Martin, reportedly taking home over a million $$$ a year. Some hero!

I don't begrudge him the right to make a good living, but his reticence about telling what he knows makes me sick.

Of course most career appointees the Buhies found in DOJ were liberals. When the salaries that big law firms offer new grads are more than the top career salaries at DOJ, it is very likely that the kind of people who go into government service have a commitment to public service

Moreover, when Bush came in, the hires for the previous 8 years were all people who came to work for DOJ during the Clinton years. When Clinton came in, there had been 12 years of hires while there were Republican Presidents. Sometimes people choose to work for the Gov't because they like the idea of public service, and believe (as Comey did) that proescutors go catch the bad guys (although there are all kinds of civil specialists in the DOJ as well). Some are drawn by the priorities of the President in power or the mission of a particualr division.

For decades attorneys went into the Civil Rights Division because they believed in equal rights for minorities. Were they liberal Democrats? Many probably were, because as we saw under Nixon, Reagan and Bush II, when the GOP is in power there is little zeal or internal recognition for that kind of work. Whose fault is that?

When Nixon was Pres the US passed many of the seminal environmental laws, and the Nixon DOJ did enforce them. For years environmentally minded young lawyers applied to work in natural resources and enforcement of environmental laws. Of course under Reagan enforcement was less zealous, but it still took place. Again, Bush II was the big turnaround, when the corporations and the regulated industries took over the shop. That both groups had a dedication to the laws they were supposed to enforce must have made them "liberal" in the eyes of the Bush ideologues.

Since right-wing Republicans are a minority of the US population, and most Republican law grads go into investment banking or corporate law, it isn't surprising that most applicants for career DOJ jobs might have liberal sympathies and it would take some scouring to find hard-right applicants to hire and promote.

I'm pretty sure only Bush and Gonzo would be standard. It's not so different than the military where the chain of command is often on the wall. The pres (Commander and Chief), a couple of generals, a Colonel, then probably your captain and XO would be on the wall. I dont' recall ever seeing a Veep in these photo on the wall situations.

Was Ryan pushing for Cheney of his own accord? Just a wild out of my arse opinion, but knowing the mentality of Cheney I'm automatically looking for Dick or one of his minions to be driving it. I'd be interested to know about other offices, if Cheney is on the wall.

Cheney has never liked or in any way behaved as if he's out of the Chain of Command on anything. YET - ATTENTION DICK YOU ARE NOT IN THE CHAIN OF COMMAND ON ANYTHING, AND WHEN YOU ACT AS SUCH YOU ARE A CRIMINAL. (unless specifically designated by your puppet)

The photo on the wall thing just seems so damn telling to me. Any good marketing person will tell you that perception is much more important than fact. The photo on the wall speaks to perception, and ever perhaps to the reality of this administration, though not to legal fact. It just fits, to think CheneyCo is driving it, though it may very well just be an isolated incident.

The idea of Comey being Mr. Upright, only after the right person asks the right queston at the right time, does take a bit of the gloss off for me as well. Kind of like a commenter over at the Washington Note opined about folks getting all mistry about Larry Wilkerson, not to mention Colin Powell for dropping a dime on Tenet after they're long out of power, or office at least, and Iraq is boiling away just fine.

Now its true that you and I are looking at some of these later day heroes with the benefit of hidsight -- although I will say that I was screaming and shouting about Iraq, the Patriot Act, etc., long before there was much cover for a dissenting pov.

And its true that the Cheney admiistration is the most notably corrupt since the Nixon crooks. Uh, btw, didn't Elliot Richardson and a few others manage to remember what it meant to represent the people with honor, under intense pressure, with and out-of-control WH, pointing out the emperor's naked corruption on the way out?

My point would be, I guess, that the vereties of honor in public servants is timeless, regardless of how corrupt, manipulative and high tech the pols are in their fearmongering. Seems like that sort of honor is only possible when great personal courage and risk are involved, when its a very personal case of me against the CW and the powers that be. Because its right, though few may appreciate it at the time.

I, too, remember those pics of Agnew everywhere you turned in DC. Spare me.

"...it would take some scouring to find hard-right applicants to hire and promote."

They must have thought they hit the mother lode when they got to Regent. I guess that also explains why they got 150 of those -- the Repugs from the good law schools wouldn't condescend to work for government pay. The Regent lawyers may not have had as many options.

". . .He kept this secret for over three years, waiting until the right somebody asked him about. What else does he know, that he refuses to reveal, until the right person asks him. This man is a lawyer, and was a USA, and is supposedly an officer of the court, but because being a Republican, and needing cover for his revelations, is more important to him than the subversion of the Justice Department by the Bush Administration. . . I don't begrudge him the right to make a good living, but his reticence about telling what he knows makes me sick.

Posted by: Seamus | May 27, 2007 at 15:00

seamus -- i absolutely hear you.

but here is the nut of it:

i think -- politics aside -- because he
is licensed to practice in DC -- i.e., the
"strongest-attorney-client-confidences-
rules
"-jurisdiction in the nation -- he
very well may have been precluded from
speaking about it, unless "directly asked"
pursuant to the "lawful process of [a tribunal]
of competent jurisdiction
" -- and, those were the
united states congressional committees. . .

under the DC rules, as i read them, he could
not lawfully "volunteer" the march 2004 information,
except in response to a lawful process by a court,
or the congress.

this is so, because the program, at least after two
weeks, was amended to stop the violation of law.

once it was in the past, it was a confidence.

he could only lawfully disclose what he knew
if an ongoing pattern of law-violation was underway,
and that pattern was likely to result in continuing,
significant, harm to person, or property.

some even read the DC rules to say his only
course would have been to STAY MUM, and simply
resign his position.

i do not hold a license in DC, but i think
there is much room for legitimate debate about
whether there really was anything he could
have done differently, at the time -- thus the
threat of mass-resignations (30-plus, ashcroft
and mueller, included!) was about the best,
most lawful, response -- at the time. . .

just my $0.02 -- for a fellow-irishman. . .

". . .The idea of Comey being Mr. Upright, only after the right person asks the right queston at the right time, does take a bit of the gloss off for me as well. . ."

-- Don S

see mine, above -- it is maddening, i
understand -- but, i submit that
because mr. comey always was such
a straight-shooter, he had scarcely
any others, in the way of lawful
choices, at the time. . .

it is hard to fathom, but this is
the way the system is designed to
work -- so that clients will be
forthcoming to their lawyers, with-
out fear. . . unless they are discussing
a planned-mob-hit, etc. . . with the
attorney. . . it is hard to make sense
of, unless one has done a lot of reading
in this area. . .

i'm sorry that i cannot devote about
twenty paragraphs to the ideas, here. . .

I do hold a licnese to practice in DC, but mericfully have not been forced to do so for almost 40 years. While I understand the proscription against unethical lawyer behavior -- though I wasn't aware DC was so stringent -- I guess my question would be: aren't there some things in this world, albeit fraught with future financial uncertainty, more sacred even than the code of ethics of the bar association. Like turning the DOJ into an arm of the politcal mafia?

This is not intended as criticism of anyone here for the light they shed on the issue.

i do not hold a license in DC, but i think there is much room for legitimate debate about whether there really was anything he could have done differently, at the time -- thus the threat of mass-resignations (30-plus, ashcroft and mueller, included!) was about the best,most lawful, response -- at the time. . .

just my $0.02 -- for a fellow-irishman. .

Posted by: nolo | May 27, 2007 at 15:35

Nolo,
I am not an lawyer, and i am sometimes very grateful for that fact. This is one time. It is very difficult for me to get my head around this the fact that a DOJ lawyer, and DAG, not being able to blow the whistle on a White House end-run around the law, and the Constitution he is sworn to uphold & protect? Who is his client supposed to be, whose confidentiality he is protecting, and why can he not ask to be released from said confidentiality?

.

Isakoff and Thomas don't give any indication that they fact-checked Corallo's story about the allegedly recalcitrant career attorneys. The story sure doesn't ring true to me. First of all, I'd wager that DOJ attorneys don't hang pictures -- a job more appropriate for the custodial department. Second, if the career attorneys were told to hang the pictures and failed to do so, the USA or someone in D.C. could have ordered the custodial department to do so. Or someone in D.C. could have ordered the USA to order the custodial department to do it.

OK, I agree, the threat of mass resignations may have been the most effective tool at the moment. But obviously Comey hung around for another couple of years. We're not dealing with some flaming lefty here of course (not that there is anything wrong with flaming lefties, ahem).

Who knows, perhaps he was feeding all sorts of subersive information to committee staff on the qt. Deep throat style. Doubtful.

so we can assume that Mark Corallo doesn't have children

why else would he use the favorite excuse OF A FUCKING CHILD

will all the Mothers out there like to help me with the rejoinder ???

all together now, one, two, three ...

Bill Clinton Did It Too

If Bill Clinton Jumped Off A Cliff, Would You Jump Off The Same Cliff ???

kinda makes you wonder about the parenting skills of this hack's mother

i will admit that i sort of cringe
when i try to explain this particular
facet of the DC rules -- understand
that the district of columbia, has,
for almost a half-century, departed
from the model rules of the ABA in
this critical respect. . .

let me say that this same result
would not necessarily always obtain
OUTSIDE the DC-beltway. . . now,
were i a political creature, i might
suggest that the DC rules are designed
the way they are -- WITH A PURPOSE.

and, we just saw that purpose play
out -- but, since i am NOT a political
creature. . . i won't make any such
suggestion. [he he!]

but it is true that the comey-facts
are absolutely the most difficult ones
to help understand the general rule,
because the comey situation invokes about
five exceptions to that general rule. . .

maybe this warrants a post, over at my
joint, on client confidences -- it will
take some time and research, but i will
(ultimately) get to it. . .

i hate telling everyone, just trust me,
it is complicated -- but it is. especially
inside the district of columbia. . .

gotta.jet.now. . .

There is an undercurrent to Corrallo's argument that is deeply disturbing, even though we get it all the time from this Administration and its shills. They delight in setting up false equivalences that trivialize the depth of their own depravity. An alleged disagreement over whose pictures should be displayed in one U.S. Attorney's office proves that repeated violations of the Hatch Act, firing U.S. Attorneys to protect ones' friends from corruption investigations, and using the DOJ to disenfranchise voters are all "politics as usual". This deviancy is only possible because the old-line media's rules ensure that they never question these absurdities.

ah -- sir william of occam -- DING!

and a great handle -- parsimony, indeed!

Seconded, William of Occam! Rove has noticed a salient fact about 21st Century America, that he who comes up with the coolest sound bite wins. Truth doesn't matter. All you need is 25 words or less that your kool-aid drinkers can repeat ad nauseum: "Cut and Run." "Defeatocrats." "Support the Troops." "Surrender Dates." "Politics as Usual."

And they still have control of the media. I'd be really raising hell with our Dems over this latest war funding, but I'm not sure they are not right in the long haul.

The right screams all sorts of childish shit bloody murder, and the press parrots it. While seldom communicating the weight of real issues. It's not just lazyness. The right still has strong influence over media through their corp. sponsors who also pay for most advertising. It's a tough tought sound bite battle, and still we are not playing on a level field.

We really really need two more seats in the Senate, about 10 more in the house, and a democratic president.

I think we'll get it. But Lord what a long road it's going to be until then.

Who would be in charge of sending the USA's offices framed photos for hanging? Public Affairs? Would Barbara Comstock's deputy, the perfectionistic Monica Goodling, be responsible for ensuring these photos were not only distributed but hung on the wall?

And would failure to hang the photos merit a little black checkmark from the PA Deputy?

We will be hearing from Comey again. If not about the DOJ it's a possibility he will show up for Lockeed-Martin about the Coast Guard ship stretching and unsecure radio debacle. He is still ONE OF THEM.

"Democrats do this too?!?!":

A. E-mail evidence destruction;
B. Lying to Congrses;
C. War crimes
D. FISA violations
E. Transfer of illegally captured data to abuse prisoners
F. Unlawful surveillance to support war crimes
G. Use of illegally capture information to kidnap, detain, and interrogate people without judicial procedures

OK: Then lets get the evidenc eon teh table. There is no statute of limitations for war crimes. if the GOP has "evidence" the DNC committed war crimes, let's hear it.

Wait a minute, this whole, "Lst's destroy the Constitution"-attitude is getting old.

I would like to know: Who in the legal community is leading the effort to prosecute the President -- outside the impeachment process -- at the state level with grand juries? Talk to Janathan Turley at Georgetown about this.
Again, big picture time: We have a Constitution; Congress refuses to defend it; time for We the People to direct the State/local legal experts to assert their oath.

I appreciate the politics of "Oh, the DNC/GOP do this all the he time and nothing is done." That attitude needs to end. Time for WE the People -- and I mean YOU reading this comment thread -- to stop whining, "Nothing can be done," or "Congress won't do their job," Or "Nobody is listening," and pick up the phone, can call your friends. Ask them if they knew the President could be prosecuted outside impeachment; then get your friends to agree to contact your State Attorney General: Politely ask your AG to discuss this with Jonathan Turley at Georgetown.

Enough of this waiting around. We the People aren't going to "wait around" until 2008. We waited since 2001. This GOP-DNC government has done jack. Let's quit wasting time hoping Wash DC might get a wake up: They're not listening. Time to get the States working on this: Prosecute the President at the State level outside the impeachment process. Charges include: Violating your state's guarantee to a republican form of government -- one that includes an enforcement mechanism; and violating your privacy rights. The FISA statutes are clear, yet this arrogant US government put itself above FISA. Wrong.
WE the People mobilized on House Rule 603. Many states know about this. This was not mentioned until Jan of 2006. Look where things have come. The point is that the States -- all fifty of them -- can be used to squeeze DC and say, "You didn't do your job; we will; and you're next." WE the People -- not this lazy US Government -- have to defend this Constitution. The legal community needs to decide: Will the support the Constitution or the President. Time for the waiting needs to end.

It is unacceptable this this arrogant DNC-GOP leadership in Congress have jointly agreed to not enforce or protect the Constitution through impeachment. Fine, then let's prosecute them as well: All 535 of them. We outnumber them. They have an oath and are ignoring it. Time for WE the People to work at the state level like the 603 effort.

There is too much uproar about the Hospital Scene.

The scene sounds to me more like a "family dispute!"

And if anyone had a real complaint it was Mrs Ashcroft. She could have called Hospital security and demanded everyone out, and if that failed the press, or whatever.

Comey like most careerists, isn't going to the mat unless he is forced to. He will seek another path that is quieter and less disturbing.

The complaints here are like when Novak knew something about Plame (Armitage) and Bob Woodward knew stuff (again Plame) where everyone in the left liberal blog world seemed to think they were owed an immediate alert from those guys and all they knew or could guess. They don't owe you anything.

It doesn't work that way.

Comey has a career and a family (I presume) he has to think about. He isn't going to jump up and put everything on the line to satisfy bloggers or MSM, unless it is very, very important, or unless he has run through all other options.

Remember, Comey handled it. Mr Ashcroft didn't sign anything, nor was his hand and pen forced along the signature line by anyone.

What not be happy, that this good man took care of the situation?

Jodi, if you see the hospital scene as nothing more than a "family dispute", then you might do yourself a favor and go read Marty Lederman's post today on the esteemed law blog BALKINIZATION..."the crisis within..."

http://balkin.blogspot.com/

All this non-sense with the US government. Something can be done. Here's the citation:

http://www.fas.org/irp/ops/ci/king/ssci_turley.html#1
Jonathan Turley, "From Pillar to Post": The Prosecution of Sitting Presidents, 37 American Criminal Law Review 1049-1106 (2000);

Having ridden out the wave to go tit for tat wit Jodi in satire it should be said that there is behaviour in family disputes that is beyond the pale of law. It is worth repeating that far from criminalizing politics in its grab for power and money Bush et al. repeatedly seek to normalize the illegitimate. It is an abuse in power that is well cognizable in law if it will but applied. What the law would call this little family dispute is "undue influence" and not only had Ashcroft delegated his authority which raises a further question of the intent of fraud with Card and Gonzales there is a question of in his post operative and medicated frame of mind whether Ashcroft was competent to make a legally binding decision. The question is whether Gonzales was attempting to pray on this weakened state of mind and body to avoid a legitmate the legal requirments of a valid authorization.

Jodi illustrates perfectly the rhetoric of false equivalences William Ockham cites. Here the hospital room drama is characterized as a trivial family dispute. But the scenario is not eqivalent. It is a naked and calculated to improperly wrest legal authority and title from a man in a compromised situation. A judgment of this behavior in the ancient canons of the law of equity applied by our courts daily would find authority obtained in this manner illegitmate. It is not a trivial family dispute. It is an abuse of authority and disrespect for the law in a the leadership constituted in the rule of law more like treason than a question of whether junior can have the car keys tonight.

Now go to your room Jodi and we will talk about not grounding you further when you can learn to honor the shared and time tested rules of the household. (Alas I am overcome by snark but it is a long holiday weekend and my neighbors are drinking. I plead earnestness for the most part).

"naked and calculated"..."effort"

"be" ... "but applied" ... no more posting after naps...

tokyo jodi is a shit stain on humanity

that's all there is to it

Do over:

Having ridden out the wave to go tit for tat with Jodi in satire it should be said that there is behaviour in family disputes that is beyond the pale of law. It is worth repeating that far from criminalizing politics in its grab for power and money Bush et al. repeatedly seek to normalize the illegitimate. It is an abuse in power that is well cognizable in law if it will be but applied. What the law would call this little family dispute is "undue influence" and not only had Ashcroft delegated his authority which raises a further question of whether the intention to defraud motivated Card and Gonzales, there is a question of whether Ashcroft in his post-operative and medicated frame of mind was competent to make a legally binding decision. The issue is whether Gonzales was attempting to prey on this weakened state of mind and body to avoid the legitmate requirments of a valid authorization. As an officer of the court Gonazales far from being a doting uncle has a duty to avoid this effort at impropriety.

Jodi illustrates perfectly the rhetoric of false equivalences William Ockham cites. Here the hospital room drama is characterized as a trivial family dispute. But the scenario is not eqivalent. It is a naked and calculated effort to improperly wrest legal authority and title from a man in a compromised situation. A judgment of this behavior in the ancient canons of the law of equity applied by our courts daily would find authority obtained in this manner illegitmate. It is not a trivial family dispute. It is an abuse of authority and disrespect for the law in a leadership holding offices constituted in the rule of law more akin to treason than a question of whether junior can have the car keys tonight. Trivial family dispute or attempted coup d'etat, both relevant to issues of power but not equal in a constitutionally established nation under the rule of law.

No snark.

Bravo, J. Thomason, bravo! There is none so blind as she who will not see.

Ockham points out the frequent use of false equivilences by Bush/Cheney supporters; they always seek to trivialize their depravity.

As if on cue, along comes Idjo to deride Comey as a 'careerist', claim that the Ashcroft shakedown in post-op was merely a 'family dispute', and fail to so much as mention larger implications of the situation. And then Idjo claims (yet again) that Armitage was Novak's source for Plame. (Armitage, who didn't work at the WH, and could not, therefore have been a figure in 1x2x6, but whatever....)

J Thomason, astutely points to Idjo's comment as a fine specimen of precisely the kind of conduct and rationalization that Wm Ockham described. Agree.

Signs suggest Idjo's paymasters are worried how that hospital scene plays in the minds of most observers. No doubt certain missing emails would shed light on the causes of anxiety. So with all the NSA spying going on, and all the daggers drawn in DC, why haven't a few purloined copies of those emails turned up yet?

Jodi, of course, is troll-silly.

Govt's and legal systems don't function because dedicated public servants get called on the way home, drive across downtown DC at breakneck speed, sirens blaring, and arrive at a hospital bedside in the nick of time to prevent unethical and possibly illegal behavior by men who report directly to the President.

They work when Presidents recognize those who make them work day in and day out, when no one's looking, when no bonuses are paid, no photographs taken, no votes counted. Just a good job done. People like that, this President fires and demotes and drives from govt service, as if they were cops who won't take a bribe.

"There is too much uproar about the Hospital Scene."

This is what Tokyo Jodi's handlers at the GOP told her.

"The scene sounds to me more like a "family dispute!""

WTF?

"And if anyone had a real complaint it was Mrs Ashcroft. She could have called Hospital security and demanded everyone out,"

Tokyo Jodi, have you been drinking?

Hospital security against the Secret Service (and almost the FBI)?

ROFLMAO. Hospital Security's flashlights against Glocks, Sigs, and the threat of waterboarding at Guantanomo. Oh yeah, I'm betting on Hospital Security to successfully defend the Constitution.

"and if that failed the press, "or whatever."

Oh sure, Timmeh Russert to the rescue fighting DeadEye.

"Comey like most careerists, isn't going to the mat unless he is forced to. He will seek another path that is quieter and less disturbing."

Yep, that was the attitude at Bunker Hill, Valley Forge, Yorktown, Gettysburg, Guadalcanal, and Omaha Beach too.

"The complaints here are like when Novak knew something about Plame (Armitage)"

Tokyo Jodi, this is more evidence that you do get paid. Who but you would go to such subtle lengths to insulate KKKarl?

"and Bob Woodward knew stuff (again Plame)"

Tokyo Jodi, it was "classified" stuff.

"where everyone in the left liberal blog world"

Yep, everyone in the "left liberal blog world" agrees complete monolithically about everything.

"seemed to think they were owed an immediate alert from those guys and all they knew or could guess. They don't owe you anything. It doesn't work that way."

Sure it is Tokyo Jodi. They're impersonating journalists. If they don't act in a way that is consistent with the "reader's right to know," circulation goes down and that hurts advertising revenue. Check out supply and demand curves some time.

"Comey has a career and a family (I presume)
he has to think about. "

Five kids.

"He isn't going to jump up and put everything on the line to satisfy bloggers or MSM, unless it is very, very important,"

Toky Jodi, it was because of the Bill of Rights. Have you heard of it?

"or unless he has run through all other options."

Tokyo Jodi, if we lose habeas corpus and the Bill or Rights, there are no other "options."

"Remember, Comey handled it."

One of your least attractive qualities as a commenter (and there are many) is your condescending one.

Neither you or anyone would know that "Comey handled it," without great Americans such as emptywheel, Jane Hamsher, and many others who you consistently demean.

"Mr Ashcroft didn't sign anything, nor was his hand and pen forced along the signature line by anyone."

Yeah, but this wasn't what the Shrub and DeadEye wanted to happen. They were very unhappy, which is one reason Comey no longer works for the DOJ.

"What not be happy, that this good man took care of the situation?"

Because real Americans know that eternal vigilance is the price of freedom.

Per FreePatriot above, it takes a special kind of banality to comment as you do.

EW,

Great Analysis! I agree with William Ockham about the misuse and abuse of the eternal "false equivalence" that the extreme right talking heads trot out everytime they need to deflect attention from a crime or yet another instance of depraved indifference to the law. As reality intrudes, they furiously spin their own new reality, aided and abetted as usual by the stenographers in the Washington Press Pool.

"Is" our reporters learning? Perhaps the Demoocratic Congress can fund a No Journalist Left Behind Act to introduce the press corps to the exhilarating but liberating art of logic. Some journalists may yet be born again.

quote by readerofTeaLeaves:
"No doubt certain missing emails would shed light on the causes of anxiety. So with all the NSA spying going on, and all the daggers drawn in DC, why haven't a few purloined copies of those emails turned up yet?"

Maybe there aren't any letters like that? You think?


Tokyo John Casper,

Sure, call hospital security. If you had an ounce of understanding about these things you would realize that a poor bereaved wife trying to help her sick husband by tossing a flower pot at the intruders (including WH, FBI, and the like), and getting the local rent a cops to toss them out would excite the public more than all that went on. If they had to restrain her, or slap the plastic cuffs on, so much the better for your purposes. (I guarantee they would have vamoosed much quicker than with Comey showing up.)

And you forget Comey's bill of rights. He doesn't have to talk to bloggers or MSM. He did have to talk to the committee. There, do you have it now? Do I have to write it again?

And it makes my heart glad at the start of this Memorial holiday to see you associating so closely with with potty mouth freepatriot.

That makes me smile a bit.

I haven't been reading this blog all that long, but one of the lessons I learned in the first couple of days was to check the byline of each comment before I invested time and attention in it. Some of the bylines, I learned, guarantee a good, thought-provoking read; other posters might be a little too shoot-from-the-hip for my taste, but there's usually something there. Others illuminate the fine points of law as it's practiced, and the workings of the court system (always useful when Republicans operate, as most of them do, outside the law.)

And then there's Jodi.

One I learned right off the bat: not to waste any time, thought or attention on a Jodi post, and it's an extra fillip of enjoyment for me when she posts & posts, and NOBODY responds...the conversation just continues as if no one's there. Because aside from a shallow receptacle of cheap right-wing talking points, bad-faith arguments and manifest ill will toward this little blog community we have here, there IS no one there.

Just ignore it; maybe it'll slink back to Troll Central and whine to Al (who torments Kevin Drum on a regular basis) "It's like I'm not even THERE!"

Now that would be sweet indeed. And that's my last word on Jodi.

You came to it quick, dougR. However, today's jodi post was one that probably deserved an exception to the troll cookie policy.

I have now come to the inescapable conclusion that jodi is in fact a paid troll, many of us have speculated on it in the past, but just lately culminating in today jodi has simply gotten more obvious about it. Perhaps the workload is getting overwhelming.

Also, I've begun to consider the handle jodi - jodi (spelled jodi) is the guy who fucks your girl while you're away to war, for those of you who don't know this little bit of military vernacular. I think that was considered in selecting the handle.

Okay, I'm back to ignoring. A happy holiday to all. Perhaps we'll be blessed with no soundbites from dick.

Wow - I'm speaking Italics - how'd that happen?

"If you had an ounce of understanding about these things you would realize that a poor bereaved wife trying to help her sick husband by tossing a flower pot at the intruders (including WH, FBI, and the like),[...] If they had to restrain her, or slap the plastic cuffs on, so much the better for your purposes."

Tokyo Jodi, the WH would spin such a stunt as evidence of Mrs. Ashcroft's mental instability.

"and getting the local rent a cops to toss them out would excite the public more than all that went on."

LMAO. Tokyo Jodi, I guess I was too subtle up above. FBI and Secret Service routinely carry 9mm semi-automatics and body armor. Hosptial security aka "rent-a-cops" carry flashlights and keys. Nobody tosses Secret Service and FBI agents anywhere. FWIW, FBI Director Mueller appears to be one of the unsung heroes in the attempted coup against the separations of powers.

"(I guarantee they would have vamoosed much quicker than with Comey showing up.)"

I hope the neocons are paying you double time for the holiday.

"And you forget Comey's bill of rights. He doesn't have to talk to bloggers or MSM. He did have to talk to the committee. There, do you have it now? Do I have to write it again?"

Yep, I have no idea what you mean. It's irrelevant to anything I wrote above.

Are you going to post at TNH when you and your "hero," the "King of his gender," are frolicking on that island?

"And it makes my heart glad at the start of this Memorial holiday to see you associating so closely with with potty mouth freepatriot."

I'm happy I could help. I always look forward to freepatriot's comments. freepatriot gave you the oh-so-appropriate nickname, "Tokyo Jodi."

I hold you and the real filth that you so routinely comment here fully responsible for the completely unnecessary casualties that we and the Iraqi's have taken in this occupation. Congratulations to you, every day we stay makes Iran and Russia more dominant in the region. As far as I'm concerned, you've got a lot of damned nerve commenting here anytime, but especially on Memorial Day. Through your comments you spit in the face of everything that is good and noble about our country.

close italics

back on topic -- here. . .

i've added a whole new, shiny
post about how the d.c. rules
of "professional" conduct, in
part, caused the almost-three-year
delay in america's learning about
the FISA violative warrantless
wire-tapping of domestic calls
between u.s. citizens
. . .

i'll be refining it, after my
barbeque -- but the gist of it
is all there, now. . .

p e a c e

Ahh, Tokyo John Casper,

at least you haven't picked up pottymouth freepatriot's worse habits.

As for the Bill of Rights remark, I see you forget quickly and don't read well. I'm not surprised there I suppose.

from Tokyo John Casper,
quote May 27, 2007 at 22:57 (right above in fact)
""He isn't going to jump up and put everything on the line to satisfy bloggers or MSM, unless it is very, very important,"

Toky Jodi, it was because of the Bill of Rights. Have you heard of it?

"or unless he has run through all other options."

Tokyo Jodi, if we lose habeas corpus and the Bill or Rights, there are no other "options.""

And of course the rent a cops at the Hospital would't try to really toss the US SS or the FBI, or the US Marshals. That is the point, the line up on one side of the bereaved wife of the sick man and such meager help as she could muster against the evil splendidly armed forces of the WH would have brought about a mighty public reaction. If they grabbed the wife that would have brought even more knee jerking. I can see you are not very effective gamer Tokyo John Casper.

The funny thing is that I was on your side with the hospital travesty John, except as to Mr Comey's actions. He acted quite nobly. But you are knee jerking, unable to see the shifts in movement.


dougR,

I see that you can find nothing reasonable to say against my logical and common sense argments, so you must resort to attacking me personally. Just in case you thought I might miss it.

I know I'm feeding the troll - but:

Jodi, you have no logical and common sense arguments.

hey shit stain jodi, do you have any real friends in this world

or are the people at this site the only friends you have ???

cuz if we're your only friends, and we call you shit stain, .well, that would be really bad ...

nobody here takes you seriously shit stain

you have no logic, you have no common sense

you're just a shit stain around here, and everybody knows it

so why do you continue to come here, shit stain ???

you don't have to come here to be called shit sure a person of your caliber can be recognized as a shit stain wherever you go

so why do you hang out where you're called SHIT STAIN ???

Like I say, I see the handle "jodi" at the end of a post, I ignore the post. Works for me.

oh, come on Doug ...

admit it

you laugh a little before you ignore it

don't cha ???

>Which begs the question: what was the debate over the pictures of Bush, Ashcroft, and Cheney?

To beg the question does not mean "to raise the question." See http://begthequestion.info/

RS2 Money Runescape RS Gold fast delivery 24/7
http://www.runescapevip.com is a provider of services tailored to the needs of RS2 players who want to maximize their online gaming experience. Whether you are looking for game items, currency, or power leveling, we provide these services at competitive prices while maintaining the highest of standards.
Low price, high standard service, fast delivery, Live-help system
Totally refund if not delivery within 24hours
buy now, save more
All the price update on 30.september
RS: ONLY6.99$/m
If you find a lower price,please tell us, we will update.

http://www.runescapevip.com/Runescape-Gold/Runescape-Gold-USD.html
http://www.runescapevip.com/Runescape-Gold/Runescape-Gold-USD.html


http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/052507J.shtml

I realize no one will read such a late comment, especially after this troll-fight, but EW did you notice this quote further down in Isikoff's article?

The morning after the scene at Ashcroft's hospital bed, the president met with Comey. "We had a full and frank discussion, very informed. He was very focused," Comey later testified, choosing his words carefully.

Now this is utterly conflating and collapsing the timeline, since the hospital confrontation was March 10, and the WH meeting with Bush was on the 12th.

yo, sponson, somebody saw it

The comments to this entry are closed.

Where We Met

Blog powered by Typepad