NYT: Gonzales Aide Made Picks to Replace Attorneys (Translation: SAMPSON LIED UNDER OATH!)

[BuyingThyme]

Gonzales Aide Made Picks to Replace Attorneys


By DAVID JOHNSTON
Published: April 13, 2007

WASHINGTON, April 13 — A Justice Department e-mail released on Friday shows that the former chief of staff to Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales proposed replacement candidates for seven United States attorneys nearly a year before those prosecutors were fired, in contrast to testimony last month in which the aide said that no successors were considered before the firings.

The e-mail written by D. Kyle Sampson, who resigned last month as the top aide to Mr. Gonzales, provides the first evidence that the Justice Department wanted to appointed its own candidates, despite the insistence of Justice Department officials in recent weeks that the eight prosecutors, with one exception, were removed in December 2006 for performance reasons, without regard to who might succeed them.

Two of the replacement candidates named in the e-mail were later named to fill vacancies created by United States Attorneys who stepped down, suggesting that Mr. Sampson had a roster of preferred candidates to place in United States Attorneys’ jobs. The e-mail seemed to provide new evidence that the Justice Department removed the prosecutors, at least in part, to make room for other candidates.

The January 9, 2006 e-mail was sent by Mr. Sampson to Harriet Miers, the former White House Counsel, and William Kelley, another White House lawyer. In the e-mail, Mr. Sampson proposed the dismissal of a total of seven United States Attorneys and named at least one replacement candidate for each prospective vacancy.

...

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/13/washington/13cnd-Attorneys.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1176491325-1ZV74YGjDO+NZD7htr1Llg&oref=slogin

[BuyingThyme]

1. kcik

[BuyingThyme]

2. kcik

[myrna minx]

3. Silly. Republicans don't lie under oath, they mis-remember.

:sarcasm:

[Mandate My Ass]

5. Witch hunt!! Witch hunt!!!

I'll bet he was surprised, just like Scooter was, when the replacements he picked but doesn't remember picking were actually given those jobs.

Oh, ad there's no underlying crime in picking new AGs, they serve at the pleasure of the president.

Did I get all the talking points?

[myrna minx]

7. He's a very important person doing a very important job, so he

can't be expected to remember actually doing anything! :rofl:

[debbierlus]

4. I am shocked!

Okay, I'm not.

[me b zola]

6. k&r

:kick:

[Supersedeas]

8. we don't need no stinking qualifications

[rainy]

9. One point that doesn't seem to be talked about is that the replacement

judges are suppose to go through a review by congress for appointment. The beginning of this mess was when the Admin. put into law the right to appoint without review by congress. Of course, congress, I believe signed it, not knowing what it said. Do I have these facts right?

Shouldn't we be talking about the NEW law of simply appointing judges with out oversight?

Help me out here.

[jilln]

12. You are correct.

It was inserted into the Patriot Act reauthorization. Since all but 2 or 3 of the congress didn't even READ that act the first time, it's no wonder they don't know what they signed into law the second time.

[halobeam]

23. Didn't that just get fixed w/ legislation very recently?

or am I just confused on this.. gees.. its hard to keep up w/ all this.

[frogcycle]

24. well, alice

here on the other side of the looking glass, things are not as you would expect

[redacted]

10. Thanks Thyme. Don't we all love the smell of perjury in the morning?

Mmmmm. Great with coffee.

[MadBadger]

11. This really is the MOB

They'd rather lie and go to jail than just easily tell the truth in order to save their big dumb family. I wonder if they think going to jail for perjury is a right of passage (see Goodfellas).

[kimmylavin]

13. Come ON!

"I personally did not. On December 7th, I did not have in mind any replacements for any of the seven who were asked to resign.”

"Because of deletions in the copy of the e-mail turned over to Congress"...



The first bit is a LIE.
The second is a COVERUP.

What the hell is Congress doing, letting them get away with this?
This sort of thing wouldn't have flown with my high school principal, let alone the freaking US GOVERNMENT.

[skepticscott]

17. Congress isn't

letting them get away with it now that the Democrats are in charge. Gonzales is going back before the Judiciary Committee to get his ass toasted, Goodling may be granted immunity and be forced to testify or go to jail, since her self-incrimination privilege will longer apply and they won't be the only ones under the hot lamp. Add to that a whole boatload of documents that are finally going to be dragged into the light. Ahhhhhh....the subpoena power is a wonderful thing. Just think what would be happening if the Repugs still controlled Congress...zip..zero..nada...

[Pachamama]

14. So is this how Gonzo is going to try to prove he's innocent by showing Sampson's a liar?

All it shows is that they are both liars, both crooks....no big surprise there.

[Joanne98]

30. That's what it sounds like...

[Gman]

15. Sounds like perjury to me

maybe contempt of COngress too.

[Botany]

16. What day is this?

[SoCalDem]

18. Figures.. All Gonzo's qualified to pick..is his NOSE nt

[Fresh_Start]

19. didn't spectre and another GOP on the panel

applaud Kyles courage and honesty?

[Disturbed]

20. Lying to Congress under Oath is not a Felony

if the one lying is a Rethug. They are exempt from this Law.

[orleans]

28. isn't that in the patriot act also? something to the effect of:

"henceforth, no republic who aspires to disentell truths or speaketh thereof to any formal body of congress shall, by no means, suffer the wrath of perjury, criminal prosecution, or the shame of having any such resignation become enforced and shall be endowed with the medal of freedom forthwith."

[speedoo]

21. Perhaps Mr. Sampson would be more cooperative, if he is called again.

Seeing as how he probably perjured himself first time around.

[SharonRB]

22. WHAT??? You mean Sampson lied to Congress?

I'm shocked I tell you, just shocked!

[spanone]

25. Why in the Hell would Sampson Lie, Knowing the Truth was Out There?

Did they double-cross him? Seems pretty foolish to lie in front of Congress, on television, on videotape, in front of all America. Seems downright stupid. :shrug:

[DearAbby]

26. That was really the 123rd "I dont recall" he should have answered.

::wink wink - nudge nudge::

[Nevernose]

27. So close to perjury, and yet so far...

Mr. Sampson, who was testifying under oath, replied, “I personally did not. On December 7th, I did not have in mind any replacements for any of the seven who were asked to resign.”

Can we prove what he was thinking on December 7th? No. Ten months earlier, perhaps, but not on December 7th.

Of course we all know what really happened, or at least we're all sure that perjury was committed. But w/o something on or about December 7th (like the 6th or the 8th), it's not a provable perjury.

I guess that's why wikipedia calls qualifiers like that "weasel words."

[orleans]

29. oh YOO-HOO! KYLE......

“If a decision is made to remove and replace a limited number of U.S. Attorneys, then the following might be considered for removal and possible replacement,” Mr. Sampson’s e-mail said.

But Mr. Sampson testified under oath on March 29 at a hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee that he had no candidates in mind to replace any of the fired prosecutors.

At one point in the hearing, Charles E. Schumer, a Democratic Senator from New York, asked Mr. Sampson, “Did you or did you not have in mind specific replacements for the dismissed U.S. Attorneys before they were asked to resign on December 7th, 2006.”

Mr. Sampson, who was testifying under oath, replied, “I personally did not. On December 7th, I did not have in mind any replacements for any of the seven who were asked to resign.”

[mucifer]

31. If there is no blow job involved why would I care??

:rofl:

[SemperEadem]

32. this is humorous

when considering the conversation I overheard on the train from DC to NY about a month ago between Wolf "I'm a rich man" Blitzer's female producers/assistants-who were sitting right behind me and talking loud enough for the whole train car to hear her--that Sampson supposedly is a devout xtian guy who goes to church every Sunday and how devestated he was at having to resign... yeah, he's so xtian that he sits up before congress and dares the God he supposedly believes in by breaking the commandment against lying/bearing false witness.

They need to throw his butt in jail for perjury.

[BuyingThyme]

33. His god and our Constitution do not mix.

[Jack Rabbit]

34. Really?

(He goes into his Claude Rains impersonation)

I'm shocked -- shocked! I say -- to learn that a Bush junta officer would lie under oath.


Claude Rains and Humphrey in Casablanca (Michael Curtiz, 1943)
from CelebrityFram

[BuyingThyme]

35. This is getting confusing, so

kcik.