No discussion of the Comey testimony?

[MDC 5,895]

It's a pretty fascinating read. Here's my favorite part:

 

COMEY: In the early part of 2004, the Department of Justice was engaged -- the Office of Legal Counsel, under my supervision -- in a reevaluation both factually and legally of a particular classified program. And it was a program that was renewed on a regular basis, and required signature by the attorney general certifying to its legality. And the -- and I remember the precise date. The program had to be renewed by March the 11th, which was a Thursday, of 2004. And we were engaged in a very intensive reevaluation of the matter. And a week before that March 11th deadline, I had a private meeting with the attorney general for an hour, just the two of us, and I laid out for him what we had learned and what our analysis was in this particular matter. And at the end of that hour-long private session, he and I agreed on a course of action. And within hours he was stricken and taken very, very ill...

 

SCHUMER: (inaudible) You thought something was wrong with how it was being operated or administered or overseen.

 

COMEY: We had -- yes. We had concerns as to our ability to certify its legality, which was our obligation for the program to be renewed. The attorney general was taken that very afternoon to George Washington Hospital, where he went into intensive care and remained there for over a week. And I became the acting attorney general. And over the next week -- particularly the following week, on Tuesday -- we communicated to the relevant parties at the White House and elsewhere our decision that as acting attorney general I would not certify the program as to its legality and explained our reasoning in detail, which I will not go into here. Nor am I confirming it's any particular program. That was Tuesday that we communicated that.

 

COMEY: The next day was Wednesday, March the 10th, the night of the hospital incident. And I was headed home at about 8 o'clock that evening, my security detail was driving me. And I remember exactly where I was -- on Constitution Avenue -- and got a call from Attorney General Ashcroft's chief of staff telling me that he had gotten a call...

 

SCHUMER: What's his name?

 

COMEY: David Ayers. That he had gotten a call from Mrs. Ashcroft from the hospital. She had banned all visitors and all phone calls. So I hadn't seen him or talked to him because he was very ill. And Mrs. Ashcroft reported that a call had come through, and that as a result of that call Mr. Card and Mr. Gonzales were on their way to the hospital to see Mr. Ashcroft.

 

SCHUMER: Do you have any idea who that call was from?

 

COMEY: I have some recollection that the call was from the president himself, but I don't know that for sure. It came from the White House. And it came through and the call was taken in the hospital. So I hung up the phone, immediately called my chief of staff, told him to get as many of my people as possible to the hospital immediately. I hung up, called Director Mueller and -- with whom I'd been discussing this particular matter and had been a great help to me over that week -- and told him what was happening. He said, "I'll meet you at the hospital right now." Told my security detail that I needed to get to George Washington Hospital immediately. They turned on the emergency equipment and drove very quickly to the hospital. I got out of the car and ran up -- literally ran up the stairs with my security detail.

 

SCHUMER: What was your concern? You were in obviously a huge hurry.

 

COMEY: I was concerned that, given how ill I knew the attorney general was, that there might be an effort to ask him to overrule me when he was in no condition to do that.

 

SCHUMER: Right, OK.

 

COMEY: I was worried about him, frankly. And so I raced to the hospital room, entered. And Mrs. Ashcroft was standing by the hospital bed, Mr. Ashcroft was lying down in the bed, the room was darkened. And I immediately began speaking to him, trying to orient him as to time and place, and try to see if he could focus on what was happening, and it wasn't clear to me that he could. He seemed pretty bad off.

 

SCHUMER: At that point it was you, Mrs. Ashcroft and the attorney general and maybe medical personnel in the room. No other Justice Department or government officials.

 

COMEY: Just the three of us at that point. I tried to see if I could help him get oriented. As I said, it

wasn't clear that I had succeeded. I went out in the hallway. Spoke to Director Mueller by phone. He was on his way. I handed the phone to the head of the security detail and Director Mueller instructed the FBI agents present not to allow me to be removed from the room under any circumstances. And I went back in the room. I was shortly joined by the head of the Office of Legal Counsel assistant attorney general, Jack Goldsmith, and a senior staffer of mine who had worked on this matter, an associate deputy attorney general. So the three of us Justice Department people went in the room. I sat down...

 

SCHUMER: Just give us the names of the two other people.

 

COMEY: Jack Goldsmith, who was the assistant attorney general, and Patrick Philbin, who was associate deputy attorney general. I sat down in an armchair by the head of the attorney general's bed. The two other Justice Department people stood behind me. And Mrs. Ashcroft stood by the bed holding her husband's arm. And we waited. And it was only a matter of minutes that the door opened and in walked Mr. Gonzales, carrying an envelope, and Mr. Card. They came over and stood by the bed. They greeted the attorney general very briefly. And then Mr. Gonzales began to discuss why they were there -- to seek his approval for a matter, and explained what the matter was -- which I will not do. And Attorney General Ashcroft then stunned me. He lifted his head off the pillow and in very strong terms expressed his view of the matter, rich in both substance and fact, which stunned me -- drawn from the hour-long meeting we'd had a week earlier -- and in very strong terms expressed himself, and then laid his head back down on the pillow, seemed spent, and said to them, "But that doesn't matter, because I'm not the attorney general."

 

SCHUMER: But he expressed his reluctance or he would not sign the statement that they -- give the authorization that they had asked, is that right?

 

COMEY: Yes.

And as he laid back down, he said, "But that doesn't matter, because I'm not the attorney general. There is the attorney general," and he pointed to me, and I was just to his left. The two men did not acknowledge me. They turned and walked from the room.

 

Here is the full link.

 

So the deputy attorney general says that:

 

1) the Justice Department refused to certify that the NSA program was legal (and the White House went ahead with it anyway).

2) Alberto Gonzalez tried to convince Ashcroft to certify it anyway while he was in the hospital.

 

Not too surprising to know the White House was deliberately breaking the law. I am kind of shocked to hear that John Ashcroft of all people was the guy who told them the NSA program was illegal. Anyway, this story should be getting a lot more press - I guess our liberal media took the week off.

[Jessy 0]

You don't really get the full effect until you see The Daily Show's Mexican soap opera reenactment of it.

[Snoopy1 0]

It's a pretty fascinating read. Here's my favorite part:

Here is the full link.

 

So the deputy attorney general says that:

 

1) the Justice Department refused to certify that the NSA program was legal (and the White House went ahead with it anyway).

2) Alberto Gonzalez tried to convince Ashcroft to certify it anyway while he was in the hospital.

 

Not too surprising to know the White House was deliberately breaking the law. I am kind of shocked to hear that John Ashcroft of all people was the guy who told them the NSA program was illegal. Anyway, this story should be getting a lot more press - I guess our liberal media took the week off.

 

It is actions like this, that I...and from my understanding, our countries forefathers, find most frightening about the current administration.

[Uh-huh 0]

It's a pretty fascinating read. Here's my favorite part:

Here is the full link.

 

So the deputy attorney general says that:

 

1) the Justice Department refused to certify that the NSA program was legal (and the White House went ahead with it anyway).

2) Alberto Gonzalez tried to convince Ashcroft to certify it anyway while he was in the hospital.

 

Not too surprising to know the White House was deliberately breaking the law. I am kind of shocked to hear that John Ashcroft of all people was the guy who told them the NSA program was illegal. Anyway, this story should be getting a lot more press - I guess our liberal media took the week off.

Nice find, MDC.

 

I expect our resident right-wingers will be in here shortly trying to spin this.

[Angry White Male 0]

[MDC 5,895]

Nice find, MDC.

 

I expect our resident right-wingers will be in here shortly trying to spin this.

 

Let me take a wild guess on their explanations:

 

1. Comey is a wild-eyed liberal who's out to get the President.

2. Who cares if the White House breaks the law? You'll never get them!

3. Clinton!

[Uh-huh 0]

Let me take a wild guess on their explanations:

 

1. Comey is a wild-eyed liberal who's out to get the President.

2. Who cares if the White House breaks the law? You'll never get them!

3. Clinton!

You forgot this one: "Well, Comey never actually said he was referring to the NSA program... maybe the White House was trying to get Ashcroft to endorse the new NSA cafeteria menu."

[MDC 5,895]

I forgot:

 

4. Quit about Bush you ###### baby!

5. I'll ignore this because I either don't understand the issue or have no reply. Post and call it a day.

[MDC 5,895]

5. I'll ignore this because I either don't understand the issue or have no reply. Post and call it a day.

 

[wiffleball 4,646]

More often than not, I keep thinking back to Bob Dole's "where's the outrage?" comment.

 

The friggin airwaves were filled with non-stop MonicaGate for frigging months and months. This stuff? "meh"

 

Bottom line is, I think the American People in general are stupid and apathetic. BJ's, they get. BCCI?, not so much. If it can't be wrapped up in a soundbite or involve sex, then people pretty much don't give a damn any more.

[Bert 1,092]

I guess our liberal media took the week off.

 

They didn't take the week off. They are dealing with much more important issues like defending the "civil liberties" of millions of wetbacks.

[Angry White Male 0]

They didn't take the week off. They are dealing with much more important issues like defending the "civil liberties" of millions of wetbacks.

call it what it is: Amnesty.

[Uh-huh 0]

Caller ID

It's not whether the president called. It's what he did.

 

Friday, May 18, 2007

 

IT DOESN'T much matter whether President Bush was the one who phoned Attorney General John D. Ashcroft's hospital room before the Wednesday Night Ambush in 2004. It matters enormously, however, whether the president was willing to have his White House aides try to strong-arm the gravely ill attorney general into overruling the Justice Department's legal views. It matters enormously whether the president, once that mission failed, was willing nonetheless to proceed with a program whose legality had been called into question by the Justice Department. That is why Mr. Bush's response to questions about the program yesterday was so inadequate.

 

"I'm not going to talk about it," Mr. Bush told reporters at a news conference with departing British Prime Minister Tony Blair. "It's a very sensitive program. I will tell you that, one, the program is necessary to protect the American people, and it's still necessary because there's still an enemy that wants to do us harm."

 

Liberal Media starts the ball rolling...

[IGotWorms 3,317]

 

Wow, I remember reading about strange circumstances surrounding Ashcroft's illness back when it happened, and that he had refused to sign off on the domestic spying program, but I thought it would never come up again.

 

 

They didn't take the week off. They are dealing with much more important issues like defending the "civil liberties" of millions of wetbacks.

 

Ah, the old "change the debate" tactic. This thread is NOT about illegal immigration. HTH.

[Bert 1,092]

Ah, the old "change the debate" tactic. This thread is NOT about illegal immigration. HTH.

 

I know what the thread is about I can read. I was simply pointing out another one of MDCs mistakes. The liberal media was busy with important things not taking the week off.

 

 

BTW shouldn't you be making a between feedings snack for your future CBF?

[MDC 5,895]

I know what the thread is about I can read. I was simply pointing out another one of MDCs mistakes. The liberal media was busy with important things not taking the week off.

 

Wouldn't a liberal media make a bigger deal out of a former Justice Department official accusing the President of knowingly breaking the law? Anyway, I expected the resident dittoheads to attack Comey's credibility - looks like they're taking the "ignore it and hope it goes away" approach.

[Bert 1,092]

Wouldn't a liberal media make a bigger deal out of a former Justice Department official accusing the President of knowingly breaking the law?

 

Apparently not or they would be doing it. The media is all about sizzle not news. The media doesn't give a carp about real issues, like the one you bring up, because that would require more than 10 seconds of thought by the American people. Now you get a bunch of criminals potesting and saying their civil rights have been violated bam there is the media defending them 24/7.

[MDC 5,895]

Apparently not or they would be doing it. The media is all about sizzle not news. The media doesn't give a carp about real issues, like the one you bring up, because that would require more than 10 seconds of thought by the American people. Now you get a bunch of criminals potesting and saying their civil rights have been violated bam there is the media defending them 24/7.

 

I was being sarcastic - I don't think the media is liberal, but I don't think this non-story is evidence of their bias or lack of bias either way. I actually haven't noticed any liberal bias in coverage of the immigration bill. It seems to me no one in Congress, Dem or Rep, really wants to do anything about illegal immigration except for passing a pet rock bill so they can point to "progress."

 

At any rate, I think this story is more interesting than immigration or media bias.

[Bert 1,092]

I was being sarcastic - I don't think the media is liberal, but I don't think this non-story is evidence of their bias or lack of bias either way. I actually haven't noticed any liberal bias in coverage of the immigration bill. It seems to me no one in Congress, Dem or Rep, really wants to do anything about illegal immigration except for passing a pet rock bill so they can point to "progress."

 

At any rate, I think this story is more interesting than immigration or media bias.

 

I know you were being sarcastic. We'll have to agree to disagree on the media coverage of immigration. Your right congress didn't do anything with that bill except waste our money. The Comey issue is not only more interesting it is more important. So we prolly won't be hearing about it very much. Immigration on the other hand will be headline news all the way thru the presidential election.

[MDC 5,895]

I know you were being sarcastic. We'll have to agree to disagree on the media coverage of immigration. Your right congress didn't do anything with that bill except waste our money. The Comey issue is not only more interesting it is more important. So we prolly won't be hearing about it very much. Immigration on the other hand will be headline news all the way thru the presidential election.

 

I think illegal immigration is an important issue too, but it's hard for me to get worked up about it since we've had petty much an open borders policy for decades. If I thought Congress was serious about coming up with a solution I'd be very interested. The problem is there are no easy or cheap ways to round up 10 million plus illegal immigrants, deport them and secure the border, and politicians from both sides of the aisle are afraid of offending the hispanic community.

 

Far as the Comey thing though, I think the NSA scandal even moreso than the Iraq war is an impeachable offense and I'm surprised that Congress has wasted so much time on piddly dink bullsheet like the attorney firings (although the firings investigation helped uncover this story, so it wasn't a total loss). If Gonzalez point blank admitted they fired the attorneys for partisan reasons there'd be political fallout but nobody would be charged with a crime or seriously hurt.

 

We pretty much can prove that the White House deliberately and knowingly broke the law for years, and a Dem majority in Congress doesn't have the balls to start issuing subpeonas and talking impeachment. If roles were reversed the GOP would be screaming bloody murder.

[IGotWorms 3,317]

BTW shouldn't you be making a between feedings snack for your future CBF?

 

 

 

Thats the last time I share something with the geek bored!

[Recliner Pilot 61]

Yo MDC, I'll wait until someone is charged with a crime.

 

Until then threads like this are purely entertainment on my part. It's fun watching you and your ilk get your panties in a bunch anytime some Demwit in DC goes off on a witchunt, ala the "Plamegate" affair that amounted to nothing.

[MDC 5,895]

2. Who cares if the White House breaks the law? You'll never get them!

 

Typical response from small government "conservative" Imposter Pilot.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

Typical response from small government "conservative" Imposter Pilot.

 

 

Already resorting to lame quote manips.

 

6+ hours and that's the best you could come up with?

[MDC 5,895]

6. Quick! Change the subject! Change the subject!!!! The Great Leader is under attack!!!!!!!

[Flashover 0]

[Recliner Pilot 61]

At least you only spent a little over an hour developing that gem.

[MDC 5,895]

6. Quick! Change the subject! Change the subject!!!! The Great Leader is under attack!!!!!!!

 

You can practically order up Recliner Pilot responses by number like a chinese menu.

[BudBro 117]

sorry for being away while mdc was looking for right wingers to chime, so...

 

why, exactly, are you in favor of not being able to listen in on conversations of terrorists? it's generally used as a tactic to thwart bad outcomes for us, america. i doubt they're worried about listening in on your personal conversations, though they probably should be after reading all the treasonous posts you have on this bored.

 

bobby kennedy wire tapped martin luther king, jr., because he thought he was a communist. was that ok? or just because it's bush doing it, it's wrong. turns out he should have been wire tapping brother ted, who is one.

 

let's not talk about taking away liberties, since that is the ultimate goal of the left.

[MDC 5,895]

sorry for being away while mdc was looking for right wingers to chime, so...

 

why, exactly, are you in favor of not being able to listen in on conversations of terrorists? it's generally used as a tactic to thwart bad outcomes for us, america. i doubt they're worried about listening in on your personal conversations, though they probably should be after reading all the treasonous posts you have on this bored.

 

I'm not against listening in on conversations of suspected terrorists. I am against listening in on conversations of US citizens without any oversight or demonstrated probable cause. I'm particularly against the executive branch knowingly breaking the law, especially since Bush could have gone to a congress that would have bent over backwards to change the laws if he felt FISA was too restrictive. His program was illegal and in violation of the 4th amendment, and demonstrated a supreme arrogance toward the legislative branch.

 

Since when is it treason to criticize your government? Are we in Soviet Russia or the United States? :

 

bobby kennedy wire tapped martin luther king, jr., because he thought he was a communist. was that ok? or just because it's bush doing it, it's wrong. turns out he should have been wire tapping brother ted, who is one.

 

I will confess to not knowing much about Bobby Kennnedy tapping Martin Luther King Jr. so it's hard to have an opinion, but if he was wiretapping MLK without any probable cause in violation of the law yes, it was wrong.

 

let's not talk about taking away liberties, since that is the ultimate goal of the left.

 

I always get a kick out of Republicans who (rightly) criticize Democrats for stuff like hate crimes legislation and gun control ... and then defend a President who decides he has the right to label US citizens an enemy combatant and imprison them indefinitely without charging them with a crime or access to the courts.

 

[Stalker711 0]

I always get a kick out of Republicans who (rightly) criticize Democrats for stuff like hate crimes legislation and gun control ... and then defend a President who decides he has the right to label US citizens an enemy combatant and imprison them indefinitely without charging them with a crime or access to the courts.

 

 

You don't see anyone besides money hungry lawyers coming to these fokcers defense, do you? Probably a reason for that.

 

I don't like the illegal wire taps, but frankly, the government can listen in on any conversation I have on the phone. If you aren't doing anything illegal, what do you have to be affraid of? The intent of the wiretaps is not bad, its the execution.

 

oh, in case I forgot to mention this before: The ACLU's existence is a sign of the coming apocolypse. Carry on.

[MDC 5,895]

You don't see anyone besides money hungry lawyers coming to these fokcers defense, do you? Probably a reason for that.

 

I don't like the illegal wire taps, but frankly, the government can listen in on any conversation I have on the phone. If you aren't doing anything illegal, what do you have to be affraid of? The intent of the wiretaps is not bad, its the execution.

 

oh, in case I forgot to mention this before: The ACLU's existence is a sign of the coming apocolypse. Carry on.

 

Just making the point, if you're going to complain about gun control, speech codes, taxes, etc. as a violation of your personal liberties, it's hypocritical to defend wiretapping without a warrant and imprisoning US citizens without access to the courts. What's the bigger violation of your rights? Not being able to buy an automatic weapon or getting thrown in jail for years without a day in court?