Comments on: Gonzales Testimony Begins with Arguably False Statement Right Out of the Gate http://patterico.com/2007/04/19/gonzales-testimony-begins-with-arguably-false-statement-right-out-of-the-gate/ Harangues that just make sense Mon, 22 Mar 2010 04:04:11 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Bill's Bites http://patterico.com/2007/04/19/gonzales-testimony-begins-with-arguably-false-statement-right-out-of-the-gate/comment-page-1/#comment-260588 Bill's Bites Fri, 20 Apr 2007 09:28:26 +0000 http://patterico.com/2007/04/19/gonzales-testimony-begins-with-arguably-false-statement-right-out-of-the-gate/#comment-260588 <strong>Bye Bye 'Berto?...</strong> I didn't try to keep up with the Gonzales hearing but Patterico did and he says he's toast. Click here, here, here and .here. Captain Ed wasn't too impressed either. Adios, amigo.... Bye Bye ‘Berto?…

I didn’t try to keep up with the Gonzales hearing but Patterico did and he says he’s toast. Click here, here, here and .here. Captain Ed wasn’t too impressed either. Adios, amigo….

]]> By: Dafydd http://patterico.com/2007/04/19/gonzales-testimony-begins-with-arguably-false-statement-right-out-of-the-gate/comment-page-1/#comment-260585 Dafydd Fri, 20 Apr 2007 08:41:12 +0000 http://patterico.com/2007/04/19/gonzales-testimony-begins-with-arguably-false-statement-right-out-of-the-gate/#comment-260585 <b>Patterico:</b> Honestly, my friend, I think your hatred of Alberto Gonzales is beginning to reach BDS levels. You are so fixated upon finding some lie or falsehood or other reason that would <i>force</i> Bush to throw him out, that you will attack anything he says. Sampson clearly and unambiguously testified that he <i>did not</i> seriously seek to have Fitzgerald put on that list: <blockquote><b>I know that I never seriously considered putting Pat Fitzgerald on a list.</b></blockquote> He said he tossed out the "suggestion" just to get a rise out of Miers and Kelley. It was a silly joke that fell flat. He said it as plain as day. Now maybe you believe Sampson was lying. And maybe you believe that Gonzales spontaneously agreed with you that Sampson was lying. And maybe therefore you think that Gonzales must have been lying when he said that nobody sought to remove an attorney for improper reasons. But to the rest of us -- who merely dislike Gonzales and think he's probably incompetent for the job he is in, rather than despise him so much that we want to see him gone, <b>no matter how much the resulting food fight damages the war, the president, and the chances to elect a Republican in 2008</b> -- it seems like a perfectly normal thing for Gonzales to <i>take Sampson at his word</i> that he did not, in fact, seriously try to get Patrick Fitzgerald's name on the list of attorneys to be ousted. And therefore, we don't think Gonzales lied. Cushlamochree! Dafydd Patterico:

Honestly, my friend, I think your hatred of Alberto Gonzales is beginning to reach BDS levels. You are so fixated upon finding some lie or falsehood or other reason that would force Bush to throw him out, that you will attack anything he says.

Sampson clearly and unambiguously testified that he did not seriously seek to have Fitzgerald put on that list:

I know that I never seriously considered putting Pat Fitzgerald on a list.

He said he tossed out the “suggestion” just to get a rise out of Miers and Kelley. It was a silly joke that fell flat.

He said it as plain as day.

Now maybe you believe Sampson was lying. And maybe you believe that Gonzales spontaneously agreed with you that Sampson was lying. And maybe therefore you think that Gonzales must have been lying when he said that nobody sought to remove an attorney for improper reasons.

But to the rest of us — who merely dislike Gonzales and think he’s probably incompetent for the job he is in, rather than despise him so much that we want to see him gone, no matter how much the resulting food fight damages the war, the president, and the chances to elect a Republican in 2008 — it seems like a perfectly normal thing for Gonzales to take Sampson at his word that he did not, in fact, seriously try to get Patrick Fitzgerald’s name on the list of attorneys to be ousted.

And therefore, we don’t think Gonzales lied.

Cushlamochree!

Dafydd

]]> By: wls http://patterico.com/2007/04/19/gonzales-testimony-begins-with-arguably-false-statement-right-out-of-the-gate/comment-page-1/#comment-260584 wls Fri, 20 Apr 2007 07:36:37 +0000 http://patterico.com/2007/04/19/gonzales-testimony-begins-with-arguably-false-statement-right-out-of-the-gate/#comment-260584 I don't think its lawyerly hair-splitting to distinguish between saying no one's resignation was "sought" -- meaning they were actually asked for their resignation as was the case with the 8 US Attorneys who are the subject of this non-scandal -- and Sampson's comment about Fitzgerald which was nothing more than an idiot giving voice to a stupid idea which popped into his head. I don’t think its lawyerly hair-splitting to distinguish between saying no one’s resignation was “sought” — meaning they were actually asked for their resignation as was the case with the 8 US Attorneys who are the subject of this non-scandal — and Sampson’s comment about Fitzgerald which was nothing more than an idiot giving voice to a stupid idea which popped into his head.

]]> By: Scott Jacobs http://patterico.com/2007/04/19/gonzales-testimony-begins-with-arguably-false-statement-right-out-of-the-gate/comment-page-1/#comment-260536 Scott Jacobs Fri, 20 Apr 2007 03:25:42 +0000 http://patterico.com/2007/04/19/gonzales-testimony-begins-with-arguably-false-statement-right-out-of-the-gate/#comment-260536 Gods I feel such shame at having Durbin as one of my Senators... And don't get me started about the other one we have... Gods I feel such shame at having Durbin as one of my Senators…

And don’t get me started about the other one we have…

]]> By: stevesturm http://patterico.com/2007/04/19/gonzales-testimony-begins-with-arguably-false-statement-right-out-of-the-gate/comment-page-1/#comment-260522 stevesturm Fri, 20 Apr 2007 02:27:37 +0000 http://patterico.com/2007/04/19/gonzales-testimony-begins-with-arguably-false-statement-right-out-of-the-gate/#comment-260522 I know I'm attempting to defend the gang that can't shoot straight, but his opening statement had to have been vetted by counsel and it's unlikely they would have signed off on anything blatently false or misleading. I know I’m attempting to defend the gang that can’t shoot straight, but his opening statement had to have been vetted by counsel and it’s unlikely they would have signed off on anything blatently false or misleading.

]]> By: DRJ http://patterico.com/2007/04/19/gonzales-testimony-begins-with-arguably-false-statement-right-out-of-the-gate/comment-page-1/#comment-260519 DRJ Fri, 20 Apr 2007 02:04:23 +0000 http://patterico.com/2007/04/19/gonzales-testimony-begins-with-arguably-false-statement-right-out-of-the-gate/#comment-260519 <blockquote>Did Gonzales watch Sampson’s testimony? Or is he making a lawyerly distinction between the words “suggested” and “sought”?</blockquote>I vote for option 3 - he'll say whatever he thinks he can get away with. It's refreshing that Senator Coburn, a Republican, flatly told him to resign.

Did Gonzales watch Sampson’s testimony? Or is he making a lawyerly distinction between the words “suggested” and “sought”?

I vote for option 3 – he’ll say whatever he thinks he can get away with. It’s refreshing that Senator Coburn, a Republican, flatly told him to resign.

]]> By: stevesturm http://patterico.com/2007/04/19/gonzales-testimony-begins-with-arguably-false-statement-right-out-of-the-gate/comment-page-1/#comment-260516 stevesturm Fri, 20 Apr 2007 01:34:06 +0000 http://patterico.com/2007/04/19/gonzales-testimony-begins-with-arguably-false-statement-right-out-of-the-gate/#comment-260516 Let me jump to the guy's defense. While the idea of replacing Fitzgerald may have been a real stupid idea (i.e., at least in this context, <i>inappropriate</i>), there may not have been anything <i>improper</i> about the reason for suggesting it, at least from the perspective of whatever they were using to put US Attorneys on the list. Let me jump to the guy’s defense. While the idea of replacing Fitzgerald may have been a real stupid idea (i.e., at least in this context, inappropriate), there may not have been anything improper about the reason for suggesting it, at least from the perspective of whatever they were using to put US Attorneys on the list.

]]>