Gap in Justice, White House e-mails raises questions

[danarhea]

Watergate Redux

A similarity between the latest Bush scandal and Nixon's Watergate scandal has now appeared. Just as there was a gap in the Watergate tapes, there is a 16 day gap in the emails provided by the White House to Congressional investigators.

Article is here.

 

[Cremaster77]

Watergate Redux

A similarity between the latest Bush scandal and Nixon's Watergate scandal has now appeared. Just as there was a gap in the Watergate tapes, there is a 16 day gap in the emails provided by the White House to Congressional investigators.

Article is here.

I thought there nothing illegal about the firings, thus nothing to hide. The theme of this administration seems to be deny doing anything wrong, but cover it up anyway. Wasn't there nothing illegal about leaking Plame to the press, yet Libby lied to investigators? Wasn't there nothing illegal about the warrantless wiretaps, yet a deal was struck to setup warrants for future wiretaps? Does anyone else see a pattern?

 

[Simon W. Moon]

I thought there nothing illegal about the firings, thus nothing to hide.

It depends on the circumstances surrounding the firings.
Of course the Pres ahs teh ability to fire them as he pleases. No one's suggesting that he doesn't. However, there's some circumstantial evidence that the firings were were part of an attempt to quash some investigations into GOP members. IF that is the case then the firings could be an obstruction of justice.

Wasn't there nothing illegal about leaking Plame to the press, yet Libby lied to investigators?

Well it depends on the circumstances. If the leakers knew she was covert, then it would be illegal.

Does anyone else see a pattern?

It's the cover-up that gets ya

 

[jfuh]

Either way I'm curious, why is this administration making the same mistakes as Nixon? Why in the world would you be corresponding these details via email? Why not just talk about them in conversation rather than something in "print"?

Before this continues though, to the legal experts on this site, is there something illegal here? Yes I know Gonzales would be committing perjury per his testimony in Jan. Anything else?

 

[Cremaster77]

It's the cover-up that gets ya

I just don't get why people never learn the lesson. It's completely inconsistent to insist that no crime was committed but then get caught covering up the non-crime. You would think the Republican Party would be smarter than Martha Stewart, but apparently not.

 

[danarhea]

Either way I'm curious, why is this administration making the same mistakes as Nixon? Why in the world would you be corresponding these details via email? Why not just talk about them in conversation rather than something in "print"?

Before this continues though, to the legal experts on this site, is there something illegal here? Yes I know Gonzales would be committing perjury per his testimony in Jan. Anything else?

1) Don't forget Sampson's perjury.

2) By pressuring a prosecutor, who was later fired, to issue indictments against a state Democrat before the election, when the case was not yet ready. Because of government meddling in the case, the Democrat may walk. Whether intended or not, that is obstruction of justice.

3) By firing a prosecutor who was looking to expand the Duke Cunningham case to other congressional Republicans, it looks like obstruction of justice there too.

4) Why would shutting down the expansion of the Duke Cunningham investigation be noteworthy? It might have to do with who else may be involved. Cheney has an expense for office furniture from MZM, which, of course, is not an office furniture company. The amount? $140,000.00. At the same time, MZM bought Cunningham's yacht. The amount? $140,000.00. The prosecutor may have been getting close to nailing Cheney on this.

 

[jfuh]

1) Don't forget Sampson's perjury.

2) By pressuring a prosecutor, who was later fired, to issue indictments against a state Democrat before the election, when the case was not yet ready. Because of government meddling in the case, the Democrat may walk. Whether intended or not, that is obstruction of justice.

3) By firing a prosecutor who was looking to expand the Duke Cunningham case to other congressional Republicans, it looks like obstruction of justice there too.

4) Why would shutting down the expansion of the Duke Cunningham investigation be noteworthy? It might have to do with who else may be involved. Cheney has an expense for office furniture from MZM, which, of course, is not an office furniture company. The amount? $140,000.00. At the same time, MZM bought Cunningham's yacht. The amount? $140,000.00. The prosecutor may have been getting close to nailing Cheney on this.

You know that I'm hardcore anti-Bush admin, but with regards to #4.
"Might"

 

[BWG]

You know that I'm hardcore anti-Bush admin, but with regards to #4.
"Might"

Hey, I remember the minimum wage bill and how American Samoa (major tuna producer) was not included in the increase and the cons went nuts just because Del Monte's (parent company of StarKist) headquarters was 'located' in Pelosi's district in San Francisco. No connections, no links, no ties, just a coincidental location of a global conglomerate.

 

[PrimBabUB]

Maybe we should look back at the 93 that got fired under Janet Reno some of which might have been looking into Clinton investigations? Wonder what they would have found? Maybe they should STFU for their own good?

 

[jfuh]

Maybe we should look back at the 93 that got fired under Janet Reno some of which might have been looking into Clinton investigations? Wonder what they would have found? Maybe they should STFU for their own good?

What about the 93? Perjury? Obstruction of justice? None of those 93 have had any the same contents as we see here with these 8.
Also, care to show just how many prosecutors have been fired by this administration?

 

[CurrentAffairs]

Liberal panties are twisted in knots all over America for nothing. There is nothing illegal and this entire thing is another in a long long line of attempts to smear Bush. With no solutions or original ideas, the libs are left only with trumping up scandal.

 

[jfuh]

Liberal panties are twisted in knots all over America for nothing. There is nothing illegal and this entire thing is another in a long long line of attempts to smear Bush. With no solutions or original ideas, the libs are left only with trumping up scandal.

Perjury, obstruction of justice are felonies.

 

[danarhea]

Perjury, obstruction of justice are felonies.

And where are all those Clinton bashers telling us how Clinton did it? Clinton was impeached for lying, so they are being pretty quiet about bringing Clinton up, since that would be an admission that their guys also need to face the consequences of their actions.

 

[disneydude]

Liberal panties are twisted in knots all over America for nothing. There is nothing illegal and this entire thing is another in a long long line of attempts to smear Bush. With no solutions or original ideas, the libs are left only with trumping up scandal.

See post #2.
The Bush Apologists always raise this "nothing illegal" argument....but you never hear them talk about "ethics".
To them anything is fine as long as it doesn't cross the line of illegality...they know that if they try to argue ethics they lose the debate.

So much for restoring "Honesty and integrity to the whitehouse"....

 

[CurrentAffairs]

And where are all those Clinton bashers telling us how Clinton did it? Clinton was impeached for lying, so they are being pretty quiet about bringing Clinton up, since that would be an admission that their guys also need to face the consequences of their actions.

Isn't this where you normally say, "This thread isn't about Clinton. Please stay on topic."

 

[jfuh]

Isn't this where you normally say, "This thread isn't about Clinton. Please stay on topic."

Perjury, obstruction of justice are felonies. You have been saying?

 

[aps]

Liberal panties are twisted in knots all over America for nothing. There is nothing illegal and this entire thing is another in a long long line of attempts to smear Bush. With no solutions or original ideas, the libs are left only with trumping up scandal.

So are Spector, Graham, and Hagel liberals too? I had no idea.

SEN. ARLEN SPECTER (R-PA): Well, I think that there’s a second, very critical element in this matter, and that is whether the attorney general has been candid. And this, on top of the underlying question as to whether the Department of Justice acted properly or improperly in asking for the resignations, makes it very important that the Judiciary Committee get to the bottom of it.

MTP Transcript for Mar. 25, 2007 - Meet the Press, online at MSNBC - MSNBC.com

Lindsey Graham on Face the Nation yesterday:

The problem is, that you can--you can get a US Attorney dismissed for almost any reason but you can't dismiss them because they failed to prosecute your enemy....so Leahy's right. Senator Leahy and Specter's right to find out what happened. We were misled, apparently, by some White House--by Department of Justice officials, and we have a right, as the Congress, to find out exactly what happened.

http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/F3-25-7.pdf

Description of Hagel's opinion is in this articleABC News: GOP Support for Attorney General Erodes