Comments on: “Republican Holy Office of the Inquisition” http://www.mahablog.com/2007/03/22/republican-holy-office-of-the-inquisition/ Exposing the ugly truths about the Bush Administration. Mon, 13 Oct 2008 17:50:26 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1.3 by: Daniel DiRito http://www.mahablog.com/2007/03/22/republican-holy-office-of-the-inquisition/#comment-181484 Fri, 23 Mar 2007 16:37:49 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2007/03/22/republican-holy-office-of-the-inquisition/#comment-181484 So on Thursday Alberto Gonzales once again told us he is working tirelessly to be sure he has every American's back covered...especially our children. Should the alleged firing of six top performing U.S. Attorneys make us feel better? I don’t know about anyone else but I’ve always been suspicious of the guy that seems to go out of his way to tell you he’s "got your back covered". See a sarcastic visual that demonstrates how many Americans feel when the Attorney General reassures us that he's got our backs covered...here: http://www.thoughttheater.com/2007/03/the_white_house_goes_on_the_offensive.php So on Thursday Alberto Gonzales once again told us he is working tirelessly to be sure he has every American’s back covered…especially our children. Should the alleged firing of six top performing U.S. Attorneys make us feel better?

I don’t know about anyone else but I’ve always been suspicious of the guy that seems to go out of his way to tell you he’s “got your back covered”.

See a sarcastic visual that demonstrates how many Americans feel when the Attorney General reassures us that he’s got our backs covered…here:

http://www.thoughttheater.com/2007/03/the_white_house_goes_on_the_offensive.php

]]> by: Douglas Hughes http://www.mahablog.com/2007/03/22/republican-holy-office-of-the-inquisition/#comment-179919 Fri, 23 Mar 2007 00:47:47 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2007/03/22/republican-holy-office-of-the-inquisition/#comment-179919 I want to expand on Donnas example. It's the 9th game of the Worls Series. A pitcher, who has benefited from contributions from gambler-tied betting concerns ops to 'soften' his pitching style. Would you say that's his prerogative? I gues not if your money was on the other team. Me, I am an idealist. No mater which team wins, I want both teams to bring their best game, and let the chips fall. Otherwise the game has no meaning, other than to measure the skill of the cheaters. The allegation (not yet proven) is that the White House, who benefited from consideable contributions from the Tobacco Industry, MAY have interfered with an ongoing trial, and directed that the Justice Dept., 'throw the game'. This is alleged, not proven. Yet. But if it turns out to be true, how can it NOT be criminal Obstruction of Justice if directions originated from the White House? I want to expand on Donnas example. It’s the 9th game of the Worls Series. A pitcher, who has benefited from contributions from gambler-tied betting concerns ops to ’soften’ his pitching style. Would you say that’s his prerogative? I gues not if your money was on the other team.

Me, I am an idealist. No mater which team wins, I want both teams to bring their best game, and let the chips fall. Otherwise the game has no meaning, other than to measure the skill of the cheaters. The allegation (not yet proven) is that the White House, who benefited from consideable contributions from the Tobacco Industry, MAY have interfered with an ongoing trial, and directed that the Justice Dept., ‘throw the game’.

This is alleged, not proven. Yet. But if it turns out to be true, how can it NOT be criminal Obstruction of Justice if directions originated from the White House?

]]> by: Donna http://www.mahablog.com/2007/03/22/republican-holy-office-of-the-inquisition/#comment-179667 Thu, 22 Mar 2007 22:43:10 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2007/03/22/republican-holy-office-of-the-inquisition/#comment-179667 jpe, I think the phrase that applies is 'throwing the case', sort of like an athlete 'throwing a game'. You want to say such is upright behavior? jpe, I think the phrase that applies is ‘throwing the case’, sort of like an athlete ‘throwing a game’. You want to say such is upright behavior?

]]> by: maha http://www.mahablog.com/2007/03/22/republican-holy-office-of-the-inquisition/#comment-179367 Thu, 22 Mar 2007 19:58:39 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2007/03/22/republican-holy-office-of-the-inquisition/#comment-179367 jpe -- it's not a "policy change" to sabotage a case that's already in court. If the Bush Administration had made the decision not to use JD resources to pursue additional cases against Big Tobacco that's one thing, but this case was close to completion -- the money was spent, in other words -- and the politicians stepped in and sabotaged it, clearly because the defendants were friends of the administration. That's just wrong. I don't understand how you can't see that. jpe — it’s not a “policy change” to sabotage a case that’s already in court. If the Bush Administration had made the decision not to use JD resources to pursue additional cases against Big Tobacco that’s one thing, but this case was close to completion — the money was spent, in other words — and the politicians stepped in and sabotaged it, clearly because the defendants were friends of the administration.

That’s just wrong. I don’t understand how you can’t see that.

]]> by: jpe http://www.mahablog.com/2007/03/22/republican-holy-office-of-the-inquisition/#comment-179352 Thu, 22 Mar 2007 19:51:53 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2007/03/22/republican-holy-office-of-the-inquisition/#comment-179352 Per the article, they were only changing the tone of the testimony. That's the difference that makes the difference, if you will. Per the article, they were only changing the tone of the testimony. That’s the difference that makes the difference, if you will.

]]> by: .mr http://www.mahablog.com/2007/03/22/republican-holy-office-of-the-inquisition/#comment-179283 Thu, 22 Mar 2007 19:15:14 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2007/03/22/republican-holy-office-of-the-inquisition/#comment-179283 Even John Yoo said today: "Unless there are more clear facts of interference with prosecutors for partisan purposes, Mr. Gonzales should keep his job." This is getting pretty close...wouldn't you say? Even John Yoo said today: “Unless there are more clear facts of interference with prosecutors for partisan purposes, Mr. Gonzales should keep his job.”

This is getting pretty close…wouldn’t you say?

]]> by: maha http://www.mahablog.com/2007/03/22/republican-holy-office-of-the-inquisition/#comment-179083 Thu, 22 Mar 2007 17:15:22 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2007/03/22/republican-holy-office-of-the-inquisition/#comment-179083 Lawyers are allowed to coach witness about how to conduct themselves and to not offer more information than is asked, but they are <i>not</i> allowed to coach witnesses to change their testimony. In some cases that might amount to suborning perjury, which is a crime. Lawyers are allowed to coach witness about how to conduct themselves and to not offer more information than is asked, but they are not allowed to coach witnesses to change their testimony. In some cases that might amount to suborning perjury, which is a crime.

]]> by: jpe http://www.mahablog.com/2007/03/22/republican-holy-office-of-the-inquisition/#comment-179067 Thu, 22 Mar 2007 17:06:26 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2007/03/22/republican-holy-office-of-the-inquisition/#comment-179067 <blockquote>Since when is instructing witnesses to change their testimony for any reason “a perfectly legit policy decision”?</blockquote> That's a tactical decision, and doesn't impact the legitimacy of the policy decision. (nonetheless, lawyers frequently opine to witnesses on how testimony should be given, no?)

Since when is instructing witnesses to change their testimony for any reason “a perfectly legit policy decision”?

That’s a tactical decision, and doesn’t impact the legitimacy of the policy decision. (nonetheless, lawyers frequently opine to witnesses on how testimony should be given, no?)

]]> by: diane http://www.mahablog.com/2007/03/22/republican-holy-office-of-the-inquisition/#comment-178901 Thu, 22 Mar 2007 15:38:57 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2007/03/22/republican-holy-office-of-the-inquisition/#comment-178901 DId you watch Obermann last night with Chuck Schumer? He said Enough people are pissed off in the justice community that the information will come out in drips. Obermann interpreted that as Kyle but to me "enough people' sounds like more then one. Do you really think bush is smart enough for this? This has the makings of CHENEY!!!!! DId you watch Obermann last night with Chuck Schumer?
He said Enough people are pissed off in the justice community that the information will come out in drips.
Obermann interpreted that as Kyle but to me “enough people’ sounds like more then one.

Do you really think bush is smart enough for this?
This has the makings of CHENEY!!!!!

]]> by: maha http://www.mahablog.com/2007/03/22/republican-holy-office-of-the-inquisition/#comment-178847 Thu, 22 Mar 2007 15:05:40 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2007/03/22/republican-holy-office-of-the-inquisition/#comment-178847 <i>Absent evidence of kickback or something, the tobacco seems to me to be a perfectly legit policy decision</i> Since when is instructing witnesses to change their testimony <i>for any reason</i> "a perfectly legit policy decision"? Absent evidence of kickback or something, the tobacco seems to me to be a perfectly legit policy decision

Since when is instructing witnesses to change their testimony for any reason “a perfectly legit policy decision”?

]]>