Submitted by Fernando on Wed, 06/20/2007 - 11:52pm.
McNulty - ROUND II
HEARING PRIMER: THE FOLLOWING FROM VARIOUS SOURCES
Goodling accused McNultyof failing to disclose knowledge of the White House role in the selection of Tim Griffin as the interim U.S. attorney in the Eastern District of Arkansas. She accused him of inaccurately describing the department's internal assessment of the Parsky Commission, a committee set up in California to find candidates for political appointments. Then she accused him of failing to disclose that he had some knowledge of allegations that Griffin had been involved in vote caging, a potentially illegal effort to target blacks for voter challenges, during the 2004 campaign.
Now we're on to Gonzales' statement that Sampson did not share information about the firing process with senior DoJ officials who subsequently testified to Congress. " I was very open and collaborative in the process," Sampson said. When asked specifically whether Sampson had shared information with the two DoJ officials who testified falsely to Congress about the process, Will Moschella and Paul McNulty, Sampson said that he had.
Schumer: "So the Attorney General's statement is false. How can it not be?" It sounds like that Sampson was about to repeat his line that it was something that wasn't deemed important (the White House involvement in the firing plan), but Schumer cuts him off.
11:44 Update: Schumer's on to the next inaccurate statement, by DoJ spokesperson Tasia Scolinos on March 24 that the AG "did not participate" in the process to select the U.S. attorneyys to be fired. Sampson admits that wasn't an accurate statement.
(snip)
Sampson says that the November 27 meeting during which Alberto Gonzales was present about the U.S. attorneys wasn't that long -- "maybe 20 minutes."
Sampson then goes on to explain how it was that DAG Paul McNulty managed to give false information to Congress. "In the preparation for Mr. McNulty, we really focused on the issues of the day... Mr. McNulty was focused on trying to provide the Congress with the information it wanted." Sampson said that they talked about the "performance reasons" for the firings, about "whether we tried to circumvent the Senate confirmation process," and about whether "anyone had been removed for an improper political reason," but
that they didn't focus on the White House role.
(snip)
2:00 Update: Kyl continues to hit the question of whether Charlton was dismissed because of his investigation of Rep. Rick Renzi (R-AZ). Sampson said that he was the "aggregator of information" but that he wasn't aware of that as an issue.
2:03 Update: Kyl says that Gonzales personally called him December 7th to inform him that Charlton has been fired. Kyl expressed "shock and dismay" and then Gonzales sent DAG Paul McNulty to speak with him. Kyl says that McNulty explained to him the policy differences that were behind Charlton's firing, and Kyl responded by asking McNulty to reconsider the decision and allow Charlton to stay on.
(snip)
4:15 Update: Feinstein still going.
Sampson just said that after the November 27 meeting, McNulty pulled him aside and said that USA for San Francisco Kevin Ryan should be added to the list.
(snip)
He rounds out by asking why Gonzales was mad about McNulty's February 6 testimony. Sampson replies that it was because the Department's position before then was not to discuss the reasons for the firings publicly.
When asked whether it ever occurred to Sampson to correct the record after he realized that McNulty had given false tesitmony to Congress, Sampson says that the first time he was aware of that was March 9, and he subsequently resigned.
(snip)
Sampson remembers a conversation with the Deputy Attorney General McNulty) that Domenici wouldn't object to Iglesias being on the list.
Now, where this thread began, McNulty's original testimony : ) this is going to be fun folks...
A senior Justice Department official acknowledged yesterday that a top federal prosecutor in Arkansas was removed to make room for a former aide to presidential adviser Karl Rove, but he said that six other U.S. attorneys were fired for "performance-related" issues.
(snip)
"The attorney general's appointment authority has not and will not be used to circumvent the confirmation process," McNulty said. "All accusations in this regard are contrary to the clear factual record."
(snip)
Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) said the firings "reek of politics" and warned McNultythat the panel would consider issuing subpoenas for job evaluations of the fired prosecutors unless the Justice Department agrees to hand them over. Justice officials said they will work to accommodate the request.
"What happened here doesn't sound like business as usual," Schumer said. "Even the hiring and firing of our top federal prosecutors has become infused and corrupted with political, rather than prudent, considerations."
McNulty responded later: "When I hear you talk about the politicizing of the Department of Justice, it's like a knife in my heart. . . . Your perspective is completely contrary to my daily experience."
(snip)
Gonzales told the committee last month that the forced resignations were not politically motivated, but he declined to comment on details of the cases. McNulty went further in some of his testimony yesterday, talking at length about the Arkansas case and defending Griffin's record as a military and civilian prosecutor, in addition to his role as a prominent GOP operative.
Serious questions remain about the involvement of the White House in the dismissals.McNulty was "largely leftout of the loop when Gonzales" in early 2005 ordered his chief of staff to identify top prosecutors for dismissal. McNulty has said he was not aware of the plans until last fall, "two months beforethe firings were executed." McNulty told one fired attorney that he'd had only "limited input" in the firing process. Commenting on McNulty's dismissal, Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-IL) said yesterday that key questions remain unanswered. "We continue to wait for answers:Who developed the list of the U.S. attorneys to be fired?How did U.S. attorneys end up on that list? What happened to the public corruption cases those U.S. attorneys were investigating at the time of their departures?" And as Congress seeks the answers to those questions, it will undoubtedly call upon McNulty to help provide answers.
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales told reporters at the National Press Club Tuesday in Washington that he is "really going to miss" outgoing Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty, who resigned Monday. (CBS)
President George W. Bush has steadfastly supported Gonzales, saying the firings were appropriate based on the attorneys' performance, but conceding that Gonzales and the Justice Department did a poor job of communicating to Congress how the changes in the federal prosecutor offices were handled. "You have to remember, at the end of the day, the recommendations reflected the views of the deputy attorney general. He signed off on the names," Gonzales told reporters at a National Press Club forum in Washington. "And
he would know better than anyone else, anyone in this room, anyone — again, the deputy attorney general would know best about the qualifications and the experiences of the United States attorneys community, and he signed off on the names."
Gonzales also called McNulty's pending departure "a loss.... I'm really going to miss him." But he said he relied on McNulty's views more than another other adviser, and said he was reassured by his deputy as recently as March that the firings all were justified. "The one person I would care about would be the views of the deputy attorney general, because the deputy attorney general is the direct supervisor of the United States attorneys," Gonzales said.
Questions I have. My natural distrust of the Bush Administration pleads me to side with McNulty. It seems like he quit, Gonzales put all of the blame on him, then testified. Following that Goodling and Sampson both came out with statements indicating that McNulty did in fact play a central role as Gonzales had said. He maintained he was left out of the loop during the testimony. However, McNulty is a proven liar. His original assertion that the firings were performance related started this cluster engagement.
There is also this odd mob style protection. Isn't it coincidental that South Carolina Treasurer Thomas Ravenel, the state chairman for former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani's presidential campaign, was indicted Tuesday on federal cocaine charges this week. When did U.S. Attorney Reggie Lloyd start his investigation? The FBI wasn't brought in until April. Could it have been delayed for political reasons? Ravenel beat incumbent Patterson in November. Was he pressured by the Administration not to prosecute last year hoping the Republican Governor would replace him?
What about Michael Battle Director of the Executive Office for United States Attorneys U.S. Department of Justice? The third from Justice to leave? Will he have to be brought in for questioning?
THEY ALL SOUND SO GUILTY -
THIS MUST BE ALL BE ABOUT VOTER SUPPRESSION. That's how I see it. It looks to me like they were all in on a plan to politicize the department, force "voter fraud" cases and protecting weak Republican candidates. All of these are tactics of voter suppression.
The last time a senior Justice official was brought in twice was James Comey with his stunning testimony of Fredo's bedside manner towards Ashcroft. Strap yourselves in. It could get bumpy.
TUNE IN AT NOON EASTERN. C-Span 3 or blog it live here on Open Mic.
Submitted by toniD on Wed,
06/20/2007 - 10:15pm.
McNulty Testimony at Noon on Thursday
Wednesday, June 20th, 2007 by Jesse Lee
From the Judiciary Committee:
Deputy Attorney General to Testify About U.S. Attorney Firings
Washington – On Thursday, June 21, the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law (CAL) is scheduled to hear the testimony of Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty as part of the House Judiciary Committee’s investigation into the Bush Administration’s mass firing of U.S. Attorneys.
WHAT: Oversight Hearing, “Hearing on the Continuing Investigation into the U.S. Attorneys Controversy”
WHEN: Thursday, June 21, 2007, 12:00 pm
WHERE: House Judiciary Committee Hearing Room 2141 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC
WHO: Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty
UPDATE: Mr. McNulty’s opening statement as prepared:
Madam Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee,
I appear before you today at a significant stage in my professional life. Last month I announced my intention to leave the Department of Justice later this summer. My transition to the private sector comes after more than two decades of public service, including more than eleven years as a lawyer in the House of Representatives and nine years at the Department of Justice. As you may know, most of my eleven years in the House were spent right here as counsel for the Judiciary Committee.
At my confirmation hearing for the job of Deputy Attorney General, I was asked how I would handle a potential conflict between the values of integrity and loyalty. I responded by saying that in my view these values never conflicted; integrity always trumps loyalty. Indeed, Madam Chairman, I have sought throughout my many years of public service to act with integrity by the grace of God in all that I have been called to do. And yes, that includes the many, many times I have been asked to testify before Congress.
Submitted by Crank Bait on Thu, 06/21/2007 - 9:41am.
"UPDATE: Mr. McNulty’s opening statement as prepared:"
-----------------------------------------------------
In today's world, a speech or a statement or an announcement is often released before the fact. In days of yore, a speech or a statement or an announcement did not exist until it was actually uttered or released on its scheduled date. That, strangely enough, is what the speech was for; to relay information.
So here's my question: What if the speech giver releases a hard copy of his/her speech-to-come, then he dies without ever actually orating the speech. Does it still count?
What if the purpose of the speech is monumental? What if the President is announcing that he is commencing hostilities against another nation at midnight? What if the President is announcing that he is instituting marshal law? What if the press has the text for the speech but the speech is never given because the President has died of a heart attack? Are we faced with a do-over? Do we pretend that the speech was actually given and follow, post mortem, the intentions of the deceased President?
In conclusion, I would now like to release the text of a post that I intend to publish tomorrow...
Gonzales also called McNulty's pending departure "a loss.... I'm really going to miss him." But he said he relied on McNulty's views more than [any] other adviser,
==
suggest that he "iterate" his remembrances to Ms. Goodling?
Submitted by Fernando on Thu, 06/21/2007 - 10:15am.
jbenet from an earlier comment as to where you were. Nice picture.
It's going to be a busy day. Am I the only one who can't see the druid's above? I'm at work, I posted it early this morning. The tag looks fine so I don't understand why I can't see it.
Probably one of the work filters.
Earthcam has a live shot of Times Square I was about to post till I figured out I was already late to work. I hadn't even taken a shower!
HERE is the EarthCam link of New York's Time's Square.
Submitted by Crank Bait on Thu, 06/21/2007 - 10:24am.
Submitted by Fernando on Thu, 06/21/2007 - 10:13am.
...Am I the only one who can't see the druid's above? I'm at work, I posted it early this morning. The tag looks fine so I don't understand why I can't see it.
Probably one of the work filters...
--------------------------------------------------
I am I.E. all the way; updated and Service Packed. Your post "Submitted by Fernando on Thu, 06/21/2007 - 8:49am." is a large, framed rectangle with a tiny red "X" in the corner.
The only filters are AVG free edition and Windows XP Security.
Submitted by Fernando on Thu, 06/21/2007 - 12:24pm.
already. Conyers is pissed because of Cannon's bs opening statement. You can tell McNulty met with the Republicans on the committee before the hearing.
Submitted by Fernando on Thu, 06/21/2007 - 12:31pm.
McNulty is a proven liar. He lied when he said it was all for performance reasons. He says he was left out of the loop, everyone else he was involved. I'm thinking he was involved along with the rest, in an effort to cover up the White House involvement.
He didn't accuse anyone, just info not available at that time!
Dept should not dismiss us atty in middle of investigation.
He said it doesn't fit. Investigations go on for a long time. If removal of US atty would interfere with investigation. That's why career attys are there.
Date McN was aware of the order giving Sampson and Goodling had authority to make hiring and firing decisions in his office. Was it policy when you were first employed as Deputy Atty General.
Was there a WH liason when you hired your assistant?
Opportunity why that order was developed or executed?
Were you surprised when it was taken away from you and given to aides.
Were you disturbed when that happened. It was a concern, at the time.
Mike Elston call to US Attys asking atttys to remain silent about firings.
Jan. call was aware of not the other calls.
What were the purpose of the phone calls .
the phone calls made in March to Mr. Cummings, the purpse was to encourage Mr. Cumming that assured him that no personal info was being release by Dept.
January phone calls - made b4 anyone knew about testifying to the House and SEnate.
McN- point Sen Schumer said I told him I didn't have info or was mislead. Trying to tell him I didn't have all the info at that time . Wasn't mislead. Didn't blame or accuse Ms. Goodling that she mislead or misinformed him.
Trying to respond to questions, moving quickly. He's saying nothing.
Submitted by Fernando on Thu, 06/21/2007 - 1:55pm.
Could Monica just be mad at you. Re. Parskey (sp.)Commission.
A) My opinion was that things worked. Others didn't see it that way. Shummer asked who recommended Tim Griffin. I didn't know how specifically Griffin came to our attention. I knew he was making room for him. Now we know Meyers called Sampson. About Caging. Shummer asked if I was aware of caging. I said I didn't know anything about it personally, just an article I read.
McNulty Was ‘Cut Out Of The Loop,’ Learned About Controversial Memo From Press »
On March 1, 2006, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales signed “a highly confidential order” delegating extraordinary new powers to his then-chief of staff Kyle Sampson, and his then-White House liaison Monica Goodling. The memo, first revealed by Murray Waas in the National Journal, gave Sampson and Goodling power to hire and fire most non-civil-service employees at the Justice Department.
Asked about the order in his testimony before the House Judiciary Committee today, former Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty, who resigned in May, said that he only became aware of it after it was reported in the press.
“I became familiar when there was a story on the subject in the National Journal,” said McNulty. “In the past month or so.”
Rep. Hank Johnson (D-GA) then asked if he was “surprised” when he “first learned” that his authority to hire and fire within his own office “had been taken away” from him “and given to a couple of inexperienced political appointees.” McNulty said he was “struck” by the move.
MCNULTY: What struck me was the guidance on the control sheet, if you will, that said ‘this is to not be circulated through the office of the Deputy Attorney General.’ And I still don’t know to this day why that was the case.
JOHNSON: Were you disturbed because you were cut out of the loop, as the chairman indicated?
MCNULTY: Well, that definitely was a concern to me when I saw that. And I’ve heard Ms. Goodling’s explanation of it, I didn’t quite understand it. And I’m still not clear as to her position on that subject. What I understood it to be, it looked like it was something that wasn’t going through the Deputy’s office for recommendation to the Attorney General, as most of our documents do. I can’t say much more about it than that.
Watch it:
Despite the evidence that McNulty was purposefully “cut out of the loop,” Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has tried to throw him under the bus, claiming that McNulty had “most of the operational authority and decisions” at the Department of Justice.
SEDER ON SUNDAYS
has ended.
Stay Tuned for news of Sam Seder's next Show. Sign up for our Newsletter and check out Seder V. Maron usually on Tuesdays.
======================
Past Show Rundowns and Podcasts
Links Here======================EMAIL THE SHOW: samsedershow (replace this with the "at" symbol)gmail.com
======================
We still will feature our
Weekend Watchdog: with Bill Scher in it's written form, every Friday..
A Bad Situationist
Directed by Sam Seder
Feature Film starring Sam Seder,Jon Benjamin, Marc Maron, Janeane Garofalo, Sarah Silverman, David Cross, Ross Brockley
GOOD MORNING
This June 21'st, 2007 I bid you all happy Summer Solstice.
Shuttle Landing Link
GET YOUR NASA TV HERE.
McNulty Testimony Link
Right click on the link below to open in a new window. Resize it to fit video outside of blog.
C-Span3
Back To The Future
"UPDATE: Mr. McNulty’s opening statement as prepared:"
-----------------------------------------------------
In today's world, a speech or a statement or an announcement is often released before the fact. In days of yore, a speech or a statement or an announcement did not exist until it was actually uttered or released on its scheduled date. That, strangely enough, is what the speech was for; to relay information.
So here's my question: What if the speech giver releases a hard copy of his/her speech-to-come, then he dies without ever actually orating the speech. Does it still count?
What if the purpose of the speech is monumental? What if the President is announcing that he is commencing hostilities against another nation at midnight? What if the President is announcing that he is instituting marshal law? What if the press has the text for the speech but the speech is never given because the President has died of a heart attack? Are we faced with a do-over? Do we pretend that the speech was actually given and follow, post mortem, the intentions of the deceased President?
In conclusion, I would now like to release the text of a post that I intend to publish tomorrow...
nice work friend
been out of touch with this reality
just a little wine last night, but hung over
you see the moon alignments past few nights?
then did McNulty...
Gonzales also called McNulty's pending departure "a loss.... I'm really going to miss him." But he said he relied on McNulty's views more than [any] other adviser,
==
suggest that he "iterate" his remembrances to Ms. Goodling?
oh yes
that is me at the bridge yesterday
I figured it was you
jbenet from an earlier comment as to where you were. Nice picture.
It's going to be a busy day. Am I the only one who can't see the druid's above? I'm at work, I posted it early this morning. The tag looks fine so I don't understand why I can't see it.
Probably one of the work filters.
Earthcam has a live shot of Times Square I was about to post till I figured out I was already late to work. I hadn't even taken a shower!
HERE is the EarthCam link of New York's Time's Square.
OPEN THE NASA LINK
in the second comment. The views from the station downlink on Summer Solstice are stunning.
This'll Keep You Busy
Submitted by Fernando on Thu, 06/21/2007 - 10:13am.
...Am I the only one who can't see the druid's above? I'm at work, I posted it early this morning. The tag looks fine so I don't understand why I can't see it.
Probably one of the work filters...
--------------------------------------------------
I am I.E. all the way; updated and Service Packed. Your post "Submitted by Fernando on Thu, 06/21/2007 - 8:49am." is a large, framed rectangle with a tiny red "X" in the corner.
The only filters are AVG free edition and Windows XP Security.
I can't do anything about the picture
The site is forbidden from work
Here it is:
http://witcombe.sbc.edu/earthmysteries/EMMidsummerDruids.jpg
I couldn't see druids
http://witcombe.sbc.edu/earthmysteries/EMMidsummerDruids.jpg
your link from the page source and it yeilded
Forbidden
You don't have permission to access /earthmysteries/EMMidsummerDruids.jpg on this server.
Dang Druids
with their voodoo pictures.
Fernando on Thu, 06/21/2007 - 8:49am.
firefox- xp as a guest- no permissions -
no pic and no indication that should be one- just the text
druids - what a party
You found it.
That's it ok. Druids are no match for you jbenet.
McNulty Starts Now
whew. Thought I wasn't going to make it.
Criminal charges?
Which ones?
INVESTIGATION MUST INCLUDE WH
Go Sanchez!!!!
R-UT Cannon
Nothing to look at..... move along.
What a wanker.
Sorry Fernando
Forgot about the time diff!
np - ITS GETTING HEATED
already. Conyers is pissed because of Cannon's bs opening statement. You can tell McNulty met with the Republicans on the committee before the hearing.
McNulty
looks pleased that Conyers is pushing back on him.
The C-Span Link is on the second comment
If you need a video link.
I already have it shrunk so I can watch
and post at the same time.
Conyers is a diplomat isn't he. Cannon's an ass.
Go Linda!!
He is a diplomat
in a very uncomfortable position.
Remember
McNulty is a proven liar. He lied when he said it was all for performance reasons. He says he was left out of the loop, everyone else he was involved. I'm thinking he was involved along with the rest, in an effort to cover up the White House involvement.
Sanchez
said earlier that the investigation now includes the White House.
Conyers
What bothers me is the alledged caging of black voters. Mr. McNulty may be able to help us on that subject.
Conyers has a working relationship with McNulty from years ago.
Country is trying to determine from the DOJ that the laws may have been politcized.
Stacks of evidence of contradictions!!
WH has made DOJ look great.
The Republicans
keep trying to put words in his mouth.
Lamar Smith Up
Goodling never spoke to Karl Rove or Harriet Miers about the firing of US attys. per Goodling. Goodling blamed McNulty!
Typical winger
President's pleasure again.
Still trying to deny!
That web site scares them
Look at that worm.
If he sounds like Goodling
I'm going to vomit.
McNulty up
Opening Statement
He's Lying
He said there is no partisanship in the DOJ!
Someone got to him also. Threat? Who knows!
McNulty re-iterates
that politics plays no part in the Department.
He learned new information since his original testimony.
Fishy as
HECK.
You are such a pro toniD. Thanks for being here.
White House involvement
WH was notified before the calls were made.
He's now calling Monica a liar. He disputes Monica's statement.
He's trying to spin Monica's testimony about himself.
Didn't he just oxymoron himself?
First he said he was mis characterized by Goodling, now he says no conflict with his testimony.
Not a pro
Just passionate! Hate these lying wingers.
Now he can't remember
WTH?
Running back to work
Let me know what I miss in the next 15 min.
PLEASE!
Cannon
Spinning this.
Leading questions..,
Schumer conversation.
He didn't accuse anyone, just info not available at that time!
Dept should not dismiss us atty in middle of investigation.
He said it doesn't fit. Investigations go on for a long time. If removal of US atty would interfere with investigation. That's why career attys are there.
a blog question
while I am here
can anyone direct me to MMRules' unofficial JFK Mic (I think thats what it was). I wanted to check it out but can't find it.
Fernando, remember? We talked about that on the blog last week.
I am sorry ,Fernando
this was not supposed to go on your blog
it was meant to go on the general thread
very sorry
Conyers up
Both House and Senate have subpoenaed the WH people involved.
What is policy of the DOJ to help enforce these subpoenas?
McN recuesed.
Conyers- will you help us enforce Subpoenas?
I am recused so I can't.
Conyers- Just want you to do what the DOJ ought to be doing.
You cut yourself out of the loop here. We want to know where the lines go from the DOJ to the WH, where the bread crumbs lead.
--
McN - I was consulted in the process at the end of this process.
Conyers
Liason to WH was told not to attend because if someone recognized her as Liason to WH there would be problems.
McN - DOJ was the dept that looked into the firings not the WH.
Rep Keller
Was testimony incomplete.
McN From tesitoney in Feb, new things have come up, so yes it was incomplete at that time.
Back
I listened on c-span radio in the car.
McNulty is totally trying to obfuscate.
Thanks toniD
I can help wiyh that bridge after the hearing.
REp Hank Johnson
Asking about Monica G and Sampson's
Date McN was aware of the order giving Sampson and Goodling had authority to make hiring and firing decisions in his office. Was it policy when you were first employed as Deputy Atty General.
Was there a WH liason when you hired your assistant?
Opportunity why that order was developed or executed?
Were you surprised when it was taken away from you and given to aides.
Were you disturbed when that happened. It was a concern, at the time.
Mike Elston call to US Attys asking atttys to remain silent about firings.
Jan. call was aware of not the other calls.
What were the purpose of the phone calls .
the phone calls made in March to Mr. Cummings, the purpse was to encourage Mr. Cumming that assured him that no personal info was being release by Dept.
January phone calls - made b4 anyone knew about testifying to the House and SEnate.
Lots of info here. will post vid later.
Rep Tom Feeney R- Fl
Elaborate on Schumers Conv.
McN- point Sen Schumer said I told him I didn't have info or was mislead. Trying to tell him I didn't have all the info at that time . Wasn't mislead. Didn't blame or accuse Ms. Goodling that she mislead or misinformed him.
Trying to respond to questions, moving quickly. He's saying nothing.
More winger spin here. Video Later.
Have to leave around 2 to get ready for work.
You can inset the videos later from the Gavel.
D-Mass Delahunt
You were unaware of political consideration and the process. You were the caboose, brought in until the end.
It was clear that the process was routed outside of the your office.
Gonzales said the one person who I would listen to is the Deputy Attny Gen.
Delahunt
You were the caboose, you were brought in at the end.
At least one name was removed one was not based on his input. (That tells me he was in fact involved).
Rep DElahunt D-MA
DEvelopment of the list of US attys.
You were left out of process?
McN yes, came in at the end.
Unaware a month or six weeks ago?
McN don't have recolection before that.
Were you Zoned out of this? I don't know for what reason!
Good questions.
Not involved with process?
Didn't talk to him b4 the phone calls were made.
Meeting w/AG in November 27, 2006 - First time aware of firings list.
McN given opportunity to object, one person was taken off list. AG relying on Sampson to get info to McN.
Delahunt thinks McN was thrown under the bus.
thank you, Fernando
I'll check back later
there is no hurry at all so whenever you have the time :)
Mcnulty
nice hair
all the various ways
to say, I don't remember/know
D Cohen
Why would she suggest you weren't forthcoming in her testimony?
A) I don't know.
She says she crossed the line. Did you feel she crossed the line.
A) I don't know.
questions about the honors program. Were recommendations based on political considerations.
A) I don't know.
How was moral when he started, now and in Bush 1.
A) Hard to be specific.
If Gonzales was asked to resign would that affect moral
A) I don't know.
hard to answer precisely
precisely specifically
Steve Cohen D TN
Who was taken off list?
Won't answer
Why Monica said what she said. She said she crossed the line.
Do you know why she said that?
McN - don't know
Honors program?
Should politics be involved?
McN- should not be involved!
Honors program see video!
Dif of moral between Bush 1 & 3?
Alot of people have good morale, love what they do. Didn't answer!
If Gonzales were to resign, would it hurt morale?
Don't know but think not.
D-NC Rep Mel Watt
Get ready. He's great.
I'd like to see..
any questions from the gallery?
Rep Mel Watt D NC
Goodling questions
This needs the vid.
Did you instruct Goodling not to infer ref to Dominici in her briefing material. Let Sen Dominici speak for himself.
Re; Mr. Iglasius.
McN - Conversation between Dominici and McN
Video later
Did you instruct Monica
Did you instruct Monica Goodling not to include Domenici materials?
A) I don't know. Goodling may be correct.
Was Domenici's comments an influencing factor?
A) Was a factor in his mind. And Gonzales..
Nasa debanking orbit. Both too risky due to weather.
Thunderstorms within both area's. They are reopening shuttle bay doors.
the magic list
don't know it where it came from
the sources
golly gee
Why were people on list?
Sampson put list together, based on various inputs he recieved, came to a point in Oct 06 with a near final list.
ag directs that a list be made
ag directs that a list be made
Any criteria for inclusion
or what was the under riding goal of this selection process. Why these people at this time.
what was/is the ultimate effect/affect desired
Sanchez 2nd rnd of questions
Did you ask Goodling to stand outside during his briefing.
A) his judgement b/c she was political and what he was doing was not political.
Her testimony is not his memory.
Mr Elson was your cief of staff
A) yes
Elston ref about Lamb that she would be gone in weeks not months.
A) He was refering to the Attny Gen office. The highest levels of gov.
Elston called attny with threats that details would be released
A) disagree w/assesment
I'm taking a rest
Go for it guys!
Nasa
postponed landing until tomorrow. Intend to land at Edwards :(
keller
looks like oft uses the phrase --
supersize that
all we are saying
is give griffin a chance
R -Fl Keller
Could Monica just be mad at you. Re. Parskey (sp.)Commission.
A) My opinion was that things worked. Others didn't see it that way. Shummer asked who recommended Tim Griffin. I didn't know how specifically Griffin came to our attention. I knew he was making room for him. Now we know Meyers called Sampson. About Caging. Shummer asked if I was aware of caging. I said I didn't know anything about it personally, just an article I read.
go john
...
Conyers brings up Palast
good article.
hahahahaha
I didn't read the article.
Good cover.
Wasn't caging a priority to you?
Goodling showed it to you and you say you didn't look at it.
Wasn't it a priority.
VOTER SUPPRESSION
STUNNING
John rocks.
mcnut
actually smurks
Caging issue
I didn't know anything about it personally.
Knew about existence of issue but didn't get opportunity to read about it prior to my Senate hearing.
Conyers.
Was article by Greg Palast June 16, 2006?
That's the article.
M Goodling told him it would come up at hearing.
Aware article existed and Goodling raised issue but I didn't read artcle.
Tim Griffen email about article.
Caging was not high item on list as your job as Asst Atty General?
Conyers presses on caging issue.
Why does it not generate much attention and concern from you?
McN - spinning it. Didn't focus on article
caging votes issue. Commitment to wrk with House.
Spinning again.
Obfuscator
Article is about an allegation that had nothing to do with what I was testifying about.
I'll work with you on caging but I'm not going to be there long.
yes they take it seriously
that is why they are doing it
good technique
good technique by conyers - put the yield request
off to the end, the threw the attempted disruption back in kellers face
Why did you belive that
Mr. Cummings was forced out so mr. Griffin could step in.
Was not a perfprmance issue with Mr. Cummings.
Why was Mr. Griffin put in?
Angered several people at WH and Atty Gen.
Johnson asking the hard questions.
He never answered
the question about how Monica's allegation about knowing Griffin's background.
He said she was correct then I learned about it later.
Sara Taylor email
Brings the WH right into this one. Re: Cummings!
Did Kyle
Sampson brief you on the delegation.
A) I don't remember.
Rep Zoe Lofgren D CA
Brings Schlozman into the frey!
with unanimous consent
let them ask questions as long as they want
What can you tell us about
What can you tell us about mr. Schlozman's selection
Schlozman brought in when I was brought in.
Acorn Case
Did you have a roll in those indictments?
McN - David Margolis involved.
No this is about acorn. Elston
Video needed lots of info here.
Criminal Dev consulted and Schloz was told oaky to go forward.
back tracker!
He can't answer the inconsistency.
"Let me have a drink and write down some rambling crap."
Didn't he
just admit that he didn't want questions so sent someone who just joined and new nothing?
Cannon again
Mr. Mashella(sp)
Why did you ask him to testify.
McN He's an excellent witness. Very informed.
What a flood of foder
Cannon was.
thank god for rep. cannon
you've been honest, forthright and and all around good guy.
say it long enough...
I don't know..
What led to you being cut out? I see an email saying lets do this outside of the system from Goodling.
Were aware she requested you be cut out?
A) I learned it a month ago. I don't know why that happened.
sometimes
hand a question on a silver platter, it can backfire
Goodling email cut McNulty
Goodling email cut McNulty out of the issue.
Mc Nulty doesn't know why.
Adjorned
just like that.
Adjourned! Written
Adjourned!
Written testimoney and answers to questions to follow.
Bak
to main bloggie
Videos of Testimony now up on the Gavel
http://speaker.gov/blog/
goodling replay
testimony
I'll have to look
after work toniD.
monica
I met with the AG or AAG at least once a week about the attorneys because he was so interested
McNulty Was ‘Cut Out Of
McNulty Was ‘Cut Out Of The Loop,’ Learned About Controversial Memo From Press »
On March 1, 2006, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales signed “a highly confidential order” delegating extraordinary new powers to his then-chief of staff Kyle Sampson, and his then-White House liaison Monica Goodling. The memo, first revealed by Murray Waas in the National Journal, gave Sampson and Goodling power to hire and fire most non-civil-service employees at the Justice Department.
Asked about the order in his testimony before the House Judiciary Committee today, former Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty, who resigned in May, said that he only became aware of it after it was reported in the press.
“I became familiar when there was a story on the subject in the National Journal,” said McNulty. “In the past month or so.”
Rep. Hank Johnson (D-GA) then asked if he was “surprised” when he “first learned” that his authority to hire and fire within his own office “had been taken away” from him “and given to a couple of inexperienced political appointees.” McNulty said he was “struck” by the move.
MCNULTY: What struck me was the guidance on the control sheet, if you will, that said ‘this is to not be circulated through the office of the Deputy Attorney General.’ And I still don’t know to this day why that was the case.
JOHNSON: Were you disturbed because you were cut out of the loop, as the chairman indicated?
MCNULTY: Well, that definitely was a concern to me when I saw that. And I’ve heard Ms. Goodling’s explanation of it, I didn’t quite understand it. And I’m still not clear as to her position on that subject. What I understood it to be, it looked like it was something that wasn’t going through the Deputy’s office for recommendation to the Attorney General, as most of our documents do. I can’t say much more about it than that.
Watch it:
Despite the evidence that McNulty was purposefully “cut out of the loop,” Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has tried to throw him under the bus, claiming that McNulty had “most of the operational authority and decisions” at the Department of Justice.
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/06/21/mcnulty-memo/
Did you just say you didn't know anything about caging?
I didn't read that article.... ahahahahahah
what a bafoon.