By MANIFESTO JOE
Are the ides of March finally arriving for Karl Rove? Bush's "turd blossom" has led a charmed life for many years. But with the U.S. attorneys scandal now exploding, can it be that Doughface is about to, at long last, face the long knives?
I will present an excerpt here from a report from the McClatchy Newspapers Washington Bureau:
"... Allen Weh, the [New Mexico Republican] party chairman, said he complained in 2005 about then-U.S. Attorney David Iglesias [for New Mexico] to a White House liaison who worked for Rove and asked that he be removed. Weh said he followed up with Rove personally in late 2006 during a visit to the White House.
" 'Is anything ever going to happen to that guy?' Weh said he asked Rove at a White House holiday event that month.
" 'He's gone,' Rove said, according to Weh.
" 'I probably said something close to 'Hallelujah,' said Weh.
"Weh's account calls into question the Justice Department's stance that the recent decision to fire Iglesias and seven U.S. attorneys in other states was a personnel matter - made without White House intervention. Justice Department officials have said the White House's involvement was limited to approving a list of the U.S. attorneys after the Justice Department made the decision to fire them.
"Rove could not be reached Saturday, and the White House and the Justice Department had no immediate response.
" 'The facts speak for themselves,' Iglesias said, when he was told of Weh's account of his conversation with Rove."
With congressional subpoenas still in the works, it remains to be seen whether anything illegal was done. But what has come out, clearly, was that Iglesias and most of the other fired U.S. attorneys had been getting good job evaluations. They were fired because they weren't being cooperative right-wing Republican political hacks.
Iglesias wasn't bringing the right cases against Democrats, as he apparently learned under pressure from the GOP's U.S. Sen. Pete Domenici and U.S. Rep. Heather Wilson, both of New Mexico. He was, he says, pressured to bring indictments against certain Democrats in time for the 2006 congressional elections. And he wasn't quite cooperating. (Our Republican moguls, of course, deny it all.)
But, back to Herr Rove. It's too bad that so many are focused on getting Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, a scummy enough right-winger himself, to step down, and not recognizing who the more experienced and enthusiastic hatchetman is here.
Herr Rove doesn't lack for chutzpah. Like other large rodents, he tries to spit like a puma when cornered. But the sound of him accusing congressional Democrats of playing partisan politics on this issue rises to a new level of absurdity. This sleazy man has built a lucrative career on character assassination, partisan dirty tricks and, arguably, electoral larceny.
Like other large rodents, Herr Rove has a talent for being able to find a secure spot in the woodpile when he needs to hide. But let's hope that this time he can't. And beyond him, the woodpile still needs plenty of cleaning. One can only hope that Scattergun Dick, and then Il Doofus himself, will be outed, too. Senator Leahy -- let's roll that wood. And get the rat poison ready.
Manifesto Joe is an underground writer living in Texas. Check out his blog at Manifesto Joe's Texas Blues.
Keith Olbermann discusses the U.S. attorneys scandal:
Posts
Trump And Vance Political Agenda
3 hours ago
8 comments:
The premise of your rant is off base. U.S. Attorneys (sp?) are political appointees. Any change of status whether hiring or firing is a political act by default. Duh!
Rove and Bush have nothing to explain or hide from. Their tendency to roll on their backs and apologize when accused of anything is frustrating, and they lose all of the tiny bit of respect I had for them as a result. The proper response would have been "So what. I can fire any U.S. Attorney I want to for no reason at all. Shut the hell up, ya pinko."
Bush and Rove are pussies.
(Captain Conservative is a non-partisan pussy pointer-outer.)
re:
>>Their tendency to roll on their
>>backs and apologize when accused
>>of anything is frustrating, and
>>they lose all of the tiny bit of
>>respect I had for them as a
>>result.
This is rich. BushBots have been fanatically defending their beloved Fuhrer from all kinds of horrifying outrages for years.
Torture? No problem!
Lying America into a disastrous war? No problem!
Letting Halliburton steal our tax dollars in closed, no-bid contracts? No problem!
Bush, the GOP and NeoCons in general have dragged this once-great nation's reputation through the mud.
So frankly, we don't care what you Cons have to say any more. It's all a bunch of fucking lies.
I think the confusion here is in definitions. My response is from the position of a conservative, not as a Republican or as a Bush supporter since I am neither. Captain Conservative supports any president in wartime and finds it reprehensible that dissenters wish so stongly to lose in order to grab power.
Lies: The war was justified based on the best available knowledge of the persons who voted it in. Until facts to the contrary are provided (there are none) your argument is empty. This speaks to the liberal Republicans and the liberal Democrats who chose to go to war. They made the right decision. the next right decision is to go to war with Iran. but this time, we should attack the populous. They must be crushed to the point the resolve to attack us no longer exists. That is how you win a war. You cannot win by cutting an running. The retreat option offered by the left would satisfy only their desire to wallow in self-pity and self-indignation It is a policy driven by fear.
Halliburton: You are getting what you wanted. The most efficient and resourceful military ally of the US military is moving its operation to the middle east. The vice president may lose stock value in the company making him only worth lots and lots of millions instead of lots and lots and lots of millions. A secondary benefit is the military will hopefully (if you want America to lose the war) be more poorly supported and equipped. Dead bodies of Americans coming back from Iraq support the hand wringing lack of resolve from the left and increase that shrill fearful sound they make when they are defended by the brave. Dead soldiers are good for liberal politics. Losing is good for liberal politicians. poverty is good for liberal politicians. a horrible economy is good for liberal politicians. Global doom is good for liberal politicians. They will take care of the simpletons who vote for them. Yeah right.
Bush, GOP, Neo-cons: Captain Conservative is none of these. The president is a liberal. The GOP is mostly liberal and has no direction or convictions, and in order to be a neo-con, I would have to have been at one time a liberal who became enlightened by reading the constitution. Captain Conservative has always been conservative. If you wonder about my direction, read the constitution. It's all in there. If it's not there, guess what: it is a state issue.
Full Disclosure Statement: Captain Conservative is a relative and close personal friend of the author of this blog. While the tone of some of the posts (on both sides) may seem a little combative, we have an unspoken agreement of completely open discourse regarding politics. We do not pull punches. As far apart as we may seem on singular issues, it is surprising how much we agree with each other on many topics. We both have the same desire: fairness in government. We just seek to achieve fairness through different means. Please do not mistake my criticism for disrespect of his ideas.
My own blog will be started soon, but I will most certainly affiliate with this blog.
Captain Conservative
re:
>>>That is how you win a war.
Hmmm, I'm just curious: have you ever seen combat yourself? (I get the feeling that you have as much combat experience as your heroes Bush and Cheney). You chickenhawks think you know everything about war and in fact, you know nothing. That's why we're embroiled in the catastrophe known as Iraq.
Oh, and since when is torture an "American value"?
re:
>>If you wonder about my
>>direction, read the constitution.
Is that before or after Bush shredded the Constitution? You NeoCons always claim to be upholders of the Constitution and "American values." It's interesting how you have nothing but contempt for the Constitution.
You NeoCons are quite happy to give your hero Bush sweeping, dictatorial powers, from illegal wiretaps to detaining and torturing anyone Bush deems a threat for any reason to Big Brother-like surveillance of American citizens' financial and health records.
Jesus, even the fucking Saudis refused to let the U.S. snoop through the financial records of the 9/11 suspects. But then Bush is good buddies with the Saudis, so he gave them a pass on this---and as a result, Bin Laden still roams free.
Personally, I don't want the U.S. government snooping through my personal, private records any time they feel like it. THAT is the true American way. Get a clue and read the fucking Bill of Rights sometime.
Thank God, the Dems are now in the majority and can halt America's slide into Nazism.
Captain Conservative does not need to have been shot at in order to support the troops who are currently in action. That is not a condition of constitutional conservatism. Conversely, those who seek the defeat of American patriots, our soilders who defend our freedoms in Iraq and Afganistan, obviously care little or nothing for the individual souls risking life and limb nor for those who have already made incredible sacrifices for the cause of American freedom and victory. You should be ashamed of your position on the war. It is anti-American to wish that our troops will be defeated. Before I comment further on your embarassing, indefensible position, let me pose a couple of questions that actually have validity:
1) Do you want the US to win the war against the terrorists in Iraq and Afganistan?
If you wish to speak critically about the war, please do. But offer a solution. Stop whining.
2) Do you have the guts to grunt out a campaign that will last a generation in order to secure a lasting peace in the Middle East? We still have troops in Bosnia, Korea, Germany and Japan. In fifty years we will still have troops in Iraq. Do you have the cajones to look beyond the politics today as a statesman instead of acting as an impediment to victory? More people will have to die on both sides to end the conflict. But if we do not end it there, the conflict will be brought to our shores. So far the military and the current administration has prevented that from happening by keeping the pressure on in the middle eastern theatre. When it comes here after the cowards take over, will that be OK with you?
Torture is not an American value; however, to prevent loss of American life on a mass scale, it may sometimes be necessary. It should remain illegal, and if the circumstances require it, the sacrifice of the freedom of the individual committing the offense may be required. In other words, if I firmly believed a person in my control had evidence that could prevent a nuclear explosion, for instance, I would personally extract the evidence using whatever means necessary to save your sorry ass even if it meant I would be imprisoned or executed as a result. You can only wish to have such conviction in your ideals.
Why are you so worried about the Patriot Act? The persons reviewing the resulting data could care less about the kiddie porn on your hard drive or the pot growing in your closet. The primary function is data mining which is a method of using powerful computers to locate the use of key words and focus attention on FOREIGN threats. Unless you are planning to blow someting up, you do not have to worry about someone snooping around in your personal life. Stop being so paranoid. It will give you a stomach ache.
Ouch! Sounds like I touched a nerve. Was it the porn or the pot that ruffled your feathers?
OK. Let me get this straight. Your solution to the Iraq/Afganistan crisis is to invade Saudi Arabia? OK. I'm on board, but only if we attack Iran and Syria as well. They have been proven to have contributed personnel and munitions that have led to U.S. deaths on the battlefield. Those acts of war require an intense response. So looky there! We agree on something!
How do you propose we "go after Bin Ladin?" Do you know where he is? That is like saying we need to solve the homeless problem or deal with poverty in America. It is a complaint without a solution. Didn't I tell you to quit whining, boy?
Now call me some more names.
Wow. This is almost like reading a transcript of trash talk from the World Wrestling Federation, but over politics.
Post a Comment