Gonzales gets subpoena

Donkey® · 04-10-2007, 01:18 PM

Rove should be next...same with Bush and Cheney.

House panel subpoenas Gonzales documents - Yahoo! News

Originally Posted by articles

House panel subpoenas Gonzales

By LAURIE KELLMAN, Associated Press Writer 9 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - The
House Judiciary Committee subpoenaed new documents Tuesday from Attorney General Alberto Gonzales as part of its investigation into the firings of federal prosecutors, with panel chairman saying he had run out of patience.

"We have been patient in allowing the department to work through its concerns regarding the sensitive nature of some of these materials," Rep. John Conyers (news, bio, voting record), D-Mich., wrote Gonzales in a letter accompanying the subpoena. "Unfortunately, the department has not indicated any meaningful willingness to find a way to meet our legitimate needs.,"

"At this point further delay in receiving these materials will not serve any constructive purpose," Conyers said.

Not like this is going to matter. He won't say anything.

DosEquis · 04-10-2007, 01:48 PM

He will just take statements out of the Reagan/Clinton playbook. I do not recall...what the meaning of "is" is.

Roonie · 04-10-2007, 01:55 PM

I did not have sexual realtions with Mrs......

Oh wait wrong presidency. Looks like we have the making of another scandal on our hands.

Pro Street · 04-10-2007, 03:29 PM

I really wish the GSA scandal got more attention. That is one that I feel is very deplorable.

Stylerod · 04-10-2007, 03:35 PM

What laws were broken again?

Thorgrim · 04-10-2007, 03:36 PM

Originally Posted by Pro Street

I really wish the GSA scandal got more attention. That is one that I feel is very deplorable.

Give Waxman some time, he never disappoints, he is demanding that Rice testify about some of that this month, he won't subpoena yet but he's subtley suggested it if she doesn't show up

Pro Street · 04-10-2007, 03:54 PM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Give Waxman some time, he never disappoints, he is demanding that Rice testify about some of that this month, he won't subpoena yet but he's subtley suggested it if she doesn't show up

if he doesn't I'll pound letters to the Judiciary Committee members.. because in the GSA case laws were definitely broken.

thomez · 04-10-2007, 11:03 PM

Originally Posted by Stylerod

What laws were broken again?

lying seems to be the only thing they have uncovered "yet"

I don't think it was handled appropriately yet I'm not sure what they will accomplish here, except maybe get a resignation (which I would support, but not for this incident alone).

Stylerod · 04-11-2007, 09:35 AM

Originally Posted by thomez

lying seems to be the only thing they have uncovered "yet"

I don't think it was handled appropriately yet I'm not sure what they will accomplish here, except maybe get a resignation (which I would support, but not for this incident alone).

Lying under oath? I mean, hell, if lying were illegal every person in DC would be in jail.

Donkey® · 04-11-2007, 12:25 PM

Originally Posted by Stylerod

What laws were broken again?

Clinton didn't break any laws either until they put him under oath. So let's just see what happens.

JaJae · 04-11-2007, 12:28 PM

Originally Posted by Donkey®

Clinton didn't break any laws either until they put him under oath. So let's just see what happens.

Yes he did. Sexual harassment, perjury, obstruction of justice... take your pick. And they had concrete evidence to all three before they put him under oath. People always forget or simply don't know the truth of the Clinton thing.

The reason he was put under oath was because he was accused for sexual harassment. During that case he lied to get out of it. Later a phone conversation was recorded that showed Clinton was lying about what he said during that case. And that's what the whole thing was about. There was a little something called.. evidence. And there was an actual crime(s) involved. It is not to be confused with this circus. It was a circus on its own, but not nearly this pathetic.

DosEquis · 04-11-2007, 12:59 PM

I am not going to defend clinton's lying as lying under oath is illegal, but I can't help but question conservatives simply because they are quick to defend this administration no matter what.

What this administration is lying about and has lied about is so drastically more important than lying about sex, whether it be oral or with cigars. I can't help but think we have lost ALL perspective on what is really important here.

Under oath it is illegal, but I wish conservatives would be more upset about the context and content of the lies than the lying itself. Even though lying is illegal I can't get mad at clinton for lying about his sex. I can get mad at the shit the administration is lying about.

motivez · 04-11-2007, 01:25 PM

Irrelevant

crap aside .. a law doesn't need to be broken before a subpoena is issued right?

Stylerod · 04-11-2007, 01:35 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

Irrelevant crap aside .. a law doesn't need to be broken before a subpoena is issued right?

I guess the Clinton button was aimed at Donkey since he brought him up.

But from what I've read (I must admit I haven't kept up in the last few weeks) no one even thinks he did anything illegal. So why the subpoena?

RMNIXON · 04-11-2007, 01:42 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

Irrelevant crap aside .. a law doesn't need to be broken before a subpoena is issued right?

Great the way you lined that up!

Admit it, you love that Toy!

JaJae · 04-11-2007, 01:44 PM

Originally Posted by Stylerod

But from what I've read (I must admit I haven't kept up in the last few weeks) no one even thinks he did anything illegal. So why the subpoena?

It makes a good story.

Gonzalez is not the man for this job. He sucks.. horribly. He should be fired with those attorneys (and strangely nobody would care if he was). But the way this is being handled is laughable. It's just another media showcase to give the media something to complain about and take away from the Democratic problems (Pelosi, pork, ethics, etc). Anything to make the administration look bad and if you don't have anything worthwhile, you'll just pretend that you have something worth arguing about and argue over nothing.

thomez · 04-11-2007, 02:11 PM

Originally Posted by Stylerod

Lying under oath? I mean, hell, if lying were illegal every person in DC would be in jail.

lying to Congress, misleading them while conducting their "investigation" on the firings

Pro Street · 04-11-2007, 02:44 PM

Originally Posted by JaJae

It makes a good story.

Gonzalez is not the man for this job. He sucks.. horribly. He should be fired with those attorneys (and strangely nobody would care if he was). But the way this is being handled is laughable. It's just another media showcase to give the media something to complain about and take away from the Democratic problems (Pelosi, pork, ethics, etc). Anything to make the administration look bad and if you don't have anything worthwhile, you'll just pretend that you have something worth arguing about and argue over nothing.

You're calling pork in a spending bill a problem?

Pelosi is a problem?

ETHICS?

The war with no current end is a problem. The GSA being used to host political pow-wows is a problem. NSA wiretapping is a problem still. 1/5th of the audited war budget SQUANDERED and MISSING is a problem.

But pork in a spending bill that'll get vetoed? A non-agenda visit to Syria? no.

JaJae · 04-11-2007, 03:22 PM

Originally Posted by Pro Street

You're calling pork in a spending bill a problem?

It's not a problem?

Pelosi is a problem?

She's been chastised in the news lately for her stupid trip.

ETHICS?

The bribery and unethical means to get the votes has been all over the news. Imagine if the GOP did that.

[/quote]The war with no current end is a problem. The GSA being used to host political pow-wows is a problem. NSA wiretapping is a problem still. 1/5th of the audited war budget SQUANDERED and MISSING is a problem.

But pork in a spending bill that'll get vetoed? A non-agenda visit to Syria? no.[/quote]
There's problems on both sides. I'm willing to see them... But I'm not going to ignore the problems of the Demcrats simply because they aren't problems of the GOP.

Pro Street · 04-11-2007, 04:24 PM

Originally Posted by JaJae

It's not a problem?

it's an issue, not a scandal. It's about as much as a problem as an itch on my ass.

She's been chastised in the news lately for her stupid trip.

exactly.

The bribery and unethical means to get the votes has been all over the news. Imagine if the GOP did that.

bribery? it's bribery now?

There's problems on both sides. I'm willing to see them... But I'm not going to ignore the problems of the Demcrats simply because they aren't problems of the GOP.

wrong, you're not seeing both problems, and anyone can see from your posts. Why do I seem to be defending democrats more? because they're not doing anything that's wrong.