Ooh, it gets better...
Gonzales delegated all his hiring and firing decisions to Sampson and Goodling.
An original draft of Gonzales's delegation of authority to Sampson and Goodling was so broad that it did not even require the two aides to obtain the final approval of the attorney general before moving to dismiss other department officials, according to records obtained by National Journal.
The department's Office of Legal Counsel feared that such an unconditional delegation of authority was unconstitutional, the documents show. As a result, the original delegation was rewritten so that in its final form the order required "any proposed appointments or removals of personnel" be "presented to the Attorney General... for approval, and each appointment or removal shall be made in the name of the Attorney General."
17 comments:
I love it how much time you left-freaks spend on this.
I gotta believe that if any laws were broken, Bush would have jettisoned Gonzales long ago.
But if laws weren't broken, You folks are being played. The GOP can point to all of this bullshit in '08 as much ado about nothing as Clinton did in '96.
"I gotta believe that if any laws were broken, Bush would have jettisoned Gonzales long ago."
BWAHAHAHAHAAAA!!!!!
Bush doesn't care about legality: Bush cares about loyalty. That's been clear for years.
And the reason that you "gotta" believe is that you've spent so much effort painting us as moonbats that it would be too painful for you to admit that we've been right about a lot more than you've claimed. That's your problem, not ours.
"I gotta believe" is a turn of phrase, not a literal. You know that.
And Bush is not the evil genious who would keep even the most loyal supporter if laws were being broken.
Bush Derangement Syndrome again. You hate Bush, therefore cannot think clearly.
Gonz, it is not mutually exclusive to hate Bush and be right about what he does.
You are only right when proven you're right. Until then it's a bias.
so when the adminstration lies and lies and lies and destroys evidence, you don't see a need to investigate this because they are probably hiding something?
Gonz wrote:
And Bush is not the evil genious who would keep even the most loyal supporter if laws were being broken.
GDit!!! YES HE WOULD! YES HE WOULD! HE HAS PROVEN THIS TIME AND AGAIN!
Of course I see the need to oversight and investigation.
As to the rest, prove it. That's a simple request.
Proving it is what will come out of the investigation. Why is it you can't understand that?
we can't prove it YET, gonzo, that's what the @$%^ investigation is for. Are you really that thick?
I do understand that; you don't - which is why you and Garrett scream about Bush breaking laws when no proof is there for the offering.
Signing statements are a good place to start. Funny how the FBI just got busted for not doing something a signing statement said they didn't have to do...
"You are only right when proven you're right. Until then it's a bias."
Ah, nice of you to admit you're biased too. :-)
"As to the rest, prove it. That's a simple request."
See the last blog post showing DoJ emails, Congressional testimony that was contradicted by the emails, and references to two more emails that weren't released.
Oh, right, that's not proof, that's a fishing expedition. My mistake.
Umm, that's not blood in the water. It's ketchup.
On a side note, I must admit being amused that you both stridently accuse me of assuming GOP talking points (which I don't). Yet when I trackback 90+% of your posts or opinions I end up at the DailyKos.
Not for a long, long time has either one of you drones posted something original and not what someone else wanted repeated.
So rather than be the liberal robots you're becoming, try to actually FUCKING READ what's happening and not some mouth-breathers interpretation of it. Post your OWN thoughts. That is if you have them, of which I am beginning to have my doubts.
And yes, Garrett, my confused friend, by strict definition what's going on now IS a fishing expedition. Regardless of merits. It may become more but it isn't now.
And you know that, which is why your responses are getting more strident.
Would you like me to trace back your posts and see where they came from?
Honestly, I have better things to do with my time, but if that's the level of the discussion here, so be it.
Sure thing. Track back all you want....you'll find my stuff comes from either my own brain or from a diverse number of sites. I don't take marching orders from anyone. I can't recall ever posting anything from the FreeRepublic.
What good is this site if we offered only regurgitations of others opinions?
I don't know. What good is Scoble's link blog?
Post a Comment