Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community  

Go Back   Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community > The Academy > Tilted Politics


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 03-30-2007, 08:39 PM   #1 (permalink)
Apocalypse Nerd
 
Astrocloud's Avatar
 
Hubris (video NSW)

This roving asshole is responsible for subverting the constitution whenever possible. At every picture shoot -you see him making faces at the camera. Now this comes out -shortly after escaping prosecution for politically exposing a "liberal" CIA agent -he is dancing and singing. I guess, he is beyond prosecution.


Last edited by Astrocloud; 03-30-2007 at 09:09 PM..
Astrocloud is offline  
Old 03-30-2007, 08:51 PM   #2 (permalink)
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
 
Willravel's Avatar
 
He's certainly not beyond bad taste and blatant whitism.
Willravel is offline  
Old 03-30-2007, 09:04 PM   #3 (permalink)
Apocalypse Nerd
 
Astrocloud's Avatar
 
If the video doesn't load try this link:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ln5RD9BhcCo

Last edited by Astrocloud; 03-30-2007 at 09:09 PM..
Astrocloud is offline  
Old 03-31-2007, 07:14 AM   #4 (permalink)
Asshole
 
The_Jazz's Avatar
 
Administrator
Location: Chicago
Quote:
Originally Posted by willravel
He's certainly not beyond bad taste and blatant whitism.
Just like me. And everyone else.

Rove sucks, but he's at least making an attempt. I have to give him some credit for that.
__________________
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - B. Franklin
"There ought to be limits to freedom." - George W. Bush
"We have met the enemy and he is us." - Pogo
The_Jazz is offline  
Old 03-31-2007, 07:37 AM   #5 (permalink)
Banned
 
35 years of Rove as an enemy of the state....of a "free people"!

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/0...en-thread-433/
host is offline  
Old 03-31-2007, 03:05 PM   #6 (permalink)
Junkie
 
It wasn't funny. I don't think there is much to discuss here.
Rekna is offline  
Old 03-31-2007, 03:59 PM   #7 (permalink)
Thank You Jesus
 
reconmike's Avatar
 
Location: Twilight Zone
Quote:
Originally Posted by host
35 years of Rove as an enemy of the state....of a "free people"!

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/0...en-thread-433/
Oh my god, Rove trying to get young people out to vote, every jackass musician, and celeb that try and wooo the mtv morons to vote must be enemies of the state also if thats your point.

And also how dare Nixon have $500 a plate dinners, dam Hellary has marked up that plate price quite a bit since then.

Plus does anyone else find it mildly amusing that young Rather was already doing lefty hit pieces?
__________________
Where is Darwin when ya need him?
reconmike is offline  
Old 04-01-2007, 01:00 AM   #8 (permalink)
All important elusive independent swing voter...
 
jorgelito's Avatar
 
Location: People's Republic of KKKalifornia
Why is this is in Poltics? What is "whitism"? If what Bobby posted wasn't allowed in Politics then this definitely shouldn't be allowed here either. Try Nonesense or Found on the Net....
jorgelito is offline  
Old 04-01-2007, 01:38 AM   #9 (permalink)
Apocalypse Nerd
 
Astrocloud's Avatar
 
Let's see, why is this in Politics?

Here we have two seemingly unrelated items:

Item One:

Quote:
Rove has never publicly acknowledged talking to any reporter about former ambassador Joseph Wilson and his wife. But last week, his lawyer, Robert Luskin, confirmed to NEWSWEEK that Rove did—and that Rove was the secret source who, at the request of both Cooper's lawyer and the prosecutor, gave Cooper permission to testify.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8525978/site/newsweek/

Remember that Cooper would only testify if his source allowed him to do so.

and this image below:



In light of the most recent scandal (which is probably not disconnected from the last scandal) -What are we supposed to think of this?

I suppose it's not political at all.
Astrocloud is offline  
Old 04-01-2007, 10:49 PM   #10 (permalink)
All important elusive independent swing voter...
 
jorgelito's Avatar
 
Location: People's Republic of KKKalifornia
I was referring to the video link you posted.
jorgelito is offline  
Old 04-02-2007, 04:50 AM   #11 (permalink)
Asshole
 
The_Jazz's Avatar
 
Administrator
Location: Chicago
Quote:
Originally Posted by jorgelito
Why is this is in Poltics? What is "whitism"? If what Bobby posted wasn't allowed in Politics then this definitely shouldn't be allowed here either. Try Nonesense or Found on the Net....
I wasn't the mod that moved the other piece, but I think that this definetly belongs in Politics so I've left it alone and joined in the conversation, such as it is. This video made the front page of Drudge last week.

Back on topic, I really don't see why anyone would get bent out of shape one way or the other. Rove tried to be funny and failed. Who among us hasn't been down that road? Rove, because of who he is and his reputation, didn't have the luxury of failing privately.

And reconmike, your post just seems like a big nonsequeter. I don't think anyone's saying anything beyond "God, that was painful to watch." I'll respect the guy for trying, but that doesn't mean I'm going to even crack a smile.
__________________
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - B. Franklin
"There ought to be limits to freedom." - George W. Bush
"We have met the enemy and he is us." - Pogo
The_Jazz is offline  
Old 04-02-2007, 08:16 AM   #12 (permalink)
Thank You Jesus
 
reconmike's Avatar
 
Location: Twilight Zone
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Jazz
I wasn't the mod that moved the other piece, but I think that this definetly belongs in Politics so I've left it alone and joined in the conversation, such as it is. This video made the front page of Drudge last week.

Back on topic, I really don't see why anyone would get bent out of shape one way or the other. Rove tried to be funny and failed. Who among us hasn't been down that road? Rove, because of who he is and his reputation, didn't have the luxury of failing privately.

And reconmike, your post just seems like a big nonsequeter. I don't think anyone's saying anything beyond "God, that was painful to watch." I'll respect the guy for trying, but that doesn't mean I'm going to even crack a smile.
You see Jazz my point being is that Host will try at any given time to try and make either Bush or Rove look like some sort of criminal, he attempted to just that with his little one liner about 35 years of rove being an enemy of the state, and he posts a video of him as a young republican doing the same thing young dems are doing, so I called him on it, and as you see he has yet to respond to it.
But I know there will be numerous cut and pastes to come that Rove's fingerprints were found all over the Watergate hotel and covered up by G Gordon Liddy because Liddy knew of his destiny.
__________________
Where is Darwin when ya need him?

Last edited by reconmike; 04-02-2007 at 08:18 AM..
reconmike is offline  
Old 04-02-2007, 08:21 AM   #13 (permalink)
Asshole
 
The_Jazz's Avatar
 
Administrator
Location: Chicago
OK, sorry, I thought you were commenting on the video on the OP in a portion. My bad.
__________________
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - B. Franklin
"There ought to be limits to freedom." - George W. Bush
"We have met the enemy and he is us." - Pogo
The_Jazz is offline  
Old 04-03-2007, 10:12 AM   #14 (permalink)
Banned
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by reconmike
You see Jazz my point being is that Host will try at any given time to try and make either Bush or Rove look like some sort of criminal, he attempted to just that with his little one liner about 35 years of rove being an enemy of the state, and he posts a video of him as a young republican doing the same thing young dems are doing, so I called him on it, and as you see he has yet to respond to it.
But I know there will be numerous cut and pastes to come that Rove's fingerprints were found all over the Watergate hotel and covered up by G Gordon Liddy because Liddy knew of his destiny.
Well....I've re-examined my position.....and I don't think calling Rove a chronic, "enemy of the state", is too harsh a term. Here is the "record" of Rove and his "mentors". If their lawlessness doesn't qualify them as "enemies of the state"... even Buchanan apparently lied, under oath....to congress....how would you describe them? They have no parallel in executive branch politics.....until this administration trumped their infamy. Somehow, just calling Rove a "thug", doesn't do "justice" to the criminal intent and the harm that he has done. Rove appointed Susan Ralston, as his key assistant, almost as his incoming act, at the white house in 2001. Susan was Abramoff's key assistant at the last two lobbying firms that he "worked" at.

Why don't you read the posts that I've inserted recently in three threads just below this one? These are not "nice" people who you are supporting, reconmike....I have every reason to believe that Libby is not the only convicted obstructionist to legitimate investigations of treasonous acts committed by the highest officials of the United States, during "war time", and I've posted plenty to support why I believe this...
Quote:
http://www.counterpunch.org/madsen1101.html
November 1, 2002
Exposing Karl Rove

by WAYNE MADSEN
In the video located at the link that I posted, Rove can be seen in a video taped interview, cutting his "eye teeth" at C.R.E.E.P., clearly a criminal organization that masqueraded as a political "front" for the 2nd Nixon campaign. It is common knowledge that Lee Atwater was mentored by Segretti, and that Atwater and Rove were "products" of this "fetid" group of criminals posing as "political strategist". Rove is still "posing"....as the OP video shows...

....and these are the criminals who schooled Rove in his "political" crafts:
Quote:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv...chananmemo.htm
Buchanan Outlined Plan to Harass Democrats in '72, Memo Shows

By George Lardner
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, March 4, 1996; Page A07

Republican presidential candidate Patrick J. Buchanan strongly favored a plan of "covert operations" to harass and embarrass Democratic contenders in the heady days at the Nixon White House before the Watergate scandal.

Then a White House speechwriter and enthusiastic member of the Nixon campaign's "attack group," Buchanan laid out his ideas in an April 10, 1972, memo looking ahead to that summer's Democratic National Convention in Miami Beach. It was addressed to Attorney General John N. Mitchell and White House Chief of Staff H.R. Haldeman.

On the memo's last page -- one never turned over to Watergate congressional investigators -- Buchanan and his top aide recommended staging counterfeit attacks by one Democrat on another, fouling up scheduled events, arranging demonstrations and spreading rumors to plague the rival party, all the while being careful not to run afoul of the Secret Service.

Buchanan denied in testimony before the Senate Watergate committee in 1973 that he was aware of any "covert operations" that the GOP had sponsored for the Democratic convention.

It is unclear whether the last page of the four-page memo, composed by Buchanan and his chief aide Ken Khachigian, was ever sent. But it shows how the blunt-spoken Buchanan felt about political espionage against the Democrats. It also indicates that he knew that covert operations were being "directed" out of the White House "as they have been in the past.".....

The 1972 document, as well as others offering a glimpse of Buchanan's White House work, are in the custody of the National Archives, preserved under a 1974 law designed to protect records of historical significance and to "provide the public with the full truth, at the earliest reasonable date, of the abuses of governmental power popularly identified under the generic term 'Watergate.' "

Despite that mandate, many of the Nixon records are still tied up as a result of objections by the late president's lawyers and many more, including Buchanan's papers before 1971, have yet to be processed.

His April 10, 1972, memo began by proposing creation of an overt and hard-hitting outpost in Miami Beach to take advantage of "running sores" at the forthcoming Democratic convention there.

It said the outpost -- which Buchanan planned to head -- should be made public and should spend almost all of its time with the national press. "Anyone at the Observation Post should be clean as a hound's tooth -- and the Observation Post should have no hand in any 'covert operations' ongoing in Miami," it said.

Eventually, in the wake of the Watergate break-in and coverup, the memo was among records subpoenaed by Senate investigators for an inquiry into alleged sabotage and "dirty tricks" during the 1972 campaign. White House counsel told Buchanan not to produce his political memos, but Senate lawyers obtained what they thought was a complete copy of the April 1972 document by serving another subpoena on the Committee to Re-Elect the President, popularly known as CREEP.

Only three pages were produced. The Senate Watergate committee never learned that there was a fourth page. On it, Buchanan and Khachigian proposed:

"COVERT OPERATIONS -- We should have as many of these down there [at Miami Beach] as needed to conduct harassment exercises, and embarrassment exercises for the Democrats. They should have no connection at all with the GOP Observation Post, and should be directed out of here, as they have been in the past.

"They should be able to help put demonstrations together, get leaflets out, start rumors, and generally foul up scheduled events -- and add to the considerable confusion and chaos that will inevitably exist."

It continued:

"The preparation of attacks on one Democrat by another -- and 'endorsements' of one Democrat by another, which has to be repudiated, are examples of what can be done. Nothing should be done here, incidentally, which can seriously backfire and anything done should be cleared by the highest campaign authority. The Secret Service, it should be noted, will be all over Miami; and any activity will have to take into consideration their capabilities.

"We should guard here against a) anything which enables the Democrats to blame us for the mess which takes place in Miami Beach; b) anything which can be traced back to us and c) anything which is so horrendous as to damage us, if the hand is discovered."

The memo was labeled "CONFIDENTIAL" and contains typographical errors indicating it was a draft. It was among the Buchanan papers once relegated to the Nixon White House's "special files unit," a section that maintained files considered sensitive because of their political content or security classification.

Asked about the three-page version of the memo at a Sept. 26, 1973, Senate Watergate committee hearing, Buchanan said the observation post was never set up at the convention "because, frankly, of the Watergate incident and apprehension on my part" that the Democrats would have accused those manning the post of being spies. He envisioned the post, operating out of the Fontainebleau Hotel, as being headed by two "politically savvy" spokesmen, one of them a "tough cop" to counterattack the Democrats and the other a "nice cop" to praise the president's record "and to answer, more in sorrow than in anger, the charges being elevated" by the Democrats.

The Watergate break-in at Democratic National Committee offices took place on June 17, 1972. The bitterly contested Democratic convention at Miami Beach, ending with the nomination of Sen. George S. McGovern (D-S.D.), was held July 10-13.

In preparation for the convention, G. Gordon Liddy, subsequently convicted of the Watergate burglary, laid out an elaborate covert operations plan, "Operation Gemstone," at a Jan. 17, 1972, Justice Department meeting with Attorney General and Nixon campaign director Mitchell, White House counsel John Dean and deputy campaign director Jeb S. Magruder.

His proposals included CRYSTAL, an electronic surveillance to be directed at the Democratic convention from an opulent houseboat; SAPPHIRE, a spying caper relying on prostitutes working out of a lush houseboat bedroom, wired for sound [the ceiling was too low for an overhead camera]; and TURQUOISE, a disruption scheme relying on what Liddy called "a commando team of Cubans" to sabotage all of the convention hall's air-conditioning units.

At the January meeting, Mitchell rejected the scheme as too expensive. But on April 1, Liddy has said, Magruder finally conveyed approval of a $250,000 "Gemstone" budget, including two prostitutes, four spies in the Democratic camps and a series of surreptitious break-ins.

The arrest of five men at the Watergate in the early morning hours of June 17 apparently derailed the rest of "Gemstone" and led instead to a long coverup culminating in Nixon's resignation in August 1974.

The Buchanan-Khachigian memo of April 10, 1972, makes no mention of "Gemstone" or any other code word and, on its face, cautions against anything "so horrendous as to damage us, if the hand is discovered." It also says that "anything done should be cleared by the highest campaign authority."

Terry Lenzner, former assistant chief counsel for the Senate Watergate committee, said on learning of the memo last week that it was more reminiscent of the separate program of "dirty tricks" directed against Democratic presidential candidates in the 1972 primaries by individuals such as White House-hired political saboteur Donald H. Segretti.

<h3>With funds supplied by Nixon's personal lawyer, Segretti crisscrossed the country under assumed names, planting spies, disrupting rallies and creating divisiveness among the Democrats with false press releases, bogus letters and fake ads. After plea bargaining, he drew a six-month prison term for fabricating literature in the Florida primary. One was a letter on the campaign stationery of Sen. Edmund S. Muskie (D-Maine) accusing Sens. Henry M. Jackson (D-Wash.) and Hubert H. Humphrey (D-Minn.) of sexual misconduct.</h3>

Minor Republican rivals such as then-Rep. Pete McCloskey (R-Calif.) were also fair game in Buchanan's view. His White House papers include a Dec. 15, 1971, memo to Haldeman and Mitchell outlining "an anti-McCloskey campaign in New Hampshire." One idea, Buchanan said, would be to find a way of getting a gay rights group or the Black Panthers or the radical Students for a Democratic Society at Dartmouth "to contribute a grand or so to the McCloskey campaign" and then alert the highly conservative Manchester Union Leader about the donation.

The three-page version of the April 10, 1972, memo that was given to the Senate Watergate Committee was accompanied by a cover memo, dated April 12, 1972, from Magruder to Mitchell, recommending approval. The attorney general checked "Approve," added the phrase "subject to comments," and initialed it.

Buchanan dominated the 1973 Senate hearing, playing, as one commentator put it, "the dirtiest trick a witness can play on televised senators -- he made them look like a bunch of nitpickers. For every supposed political dirty trick they asked him about, he had either an explanation, a denial of involvement or a similar example from the lore of Democratic politics."

At one point, the committee's chief counsel, Sam Dash, asked Buchanan: "Were you aware of the covert activities sponsored by the Republican Party for the Democratic National Convention during . . . the convention?"

Buchanan responded: "Was I aware of any? No, I was not aware of any. I would trust we had some intelligence people down at Miami Beach to see how they handled their convention -- that is a gigantic affair -- how they handled their press, how they handled their demonstrations . . . but this was not my function."

He was asked only briefly about the April 10 memo. "I did recommend a forward observation post," Buchanan said.

"But you recommended that it be kept clear or clean, away from any covert operations?" Dash said.

"Right," Buchanan replied. "There were 2,000 press in Miami Beach. I certainly hope we had people down there demonstrating for Richard Nixon. But anything like that should be kept away from the observation post, we should be clean as a hound's tooth out of apprehension at the allegations made against us so we could say flatly, no, we had nothing to do with X, Y or Z."

No one asked him about his endorsement of covert operations because no questioner at the hearing knew about page 4 of the memo. Lenzner said he was unaware of its existence until Friday when a reporter asked him about it. "We assumed we were given the entire document," Lenzner said.

Last edited by host; 04-03-2007 at 10:19 AM..
host is offline  
Old 04-05-2007, 06:08 PM   #15 (permalink)
Apocalypse Nerd
 
Astrocloud's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jorgelito
I was referring to the video link you posted.

I guess it was my assumption that generally people would know who and what a Karl Rove is. My bad.

Here is a another article delivered ala Host (in the style of host):

Quote:
Elizabeth de la Vega: Doin' the Karl Rove Dance

Thursday, 5 April 2007, 2:20 pm
Opinion: Elizabeth de la Vega

Doin' the Karl Rove Dance

Last week, Americans with access to YouTube were subjected to a once-in-a-lifetime performance by President Bush's senior political adviser Karl Rove. At least, I fervently hope that this event will only happen once in our lifetimes. Watching Rove, at the White House Correspondents' Dinner, bobbing and weaving awkwardly in a pathetic parody of a rapper was painful. However, more excruciating than his routine - "MC Rove: Doin' the Dance, the Karl Rove Dance" to lyrics supplied by comedian Brad Sherwood - was the sight of the members of our so-called independent Washington press corps laughing amiably at the antics of a senior presidential aide whose conduct is so universally considered despicable that no one even flinches at ill-timed lines like: "Don't get the jitters/but MC Rove tears the head off of critters." That scene was the stuff of nightmares.

Rove's rap performance was disturbing, yes; but, in the end, it was also relatively brief and harmless. The same cannot be said of the danse macabre he has been directing since the Bush administration took over the White House. We know that Rove is a master of the quick-step and the hustle, but he almost never makes his moves in public. Instead, he has been directing the Bush production from the Office of Political Affairs whose purpose is, according to the White House website, to ensure "that the executive branch and the President are aware of the concerns of the American citizen."

Karl Rove has, for years, been choreographing an elaborate dance of death for the federal government designed to give life to the Republican Party, and yet the public remains largely ignorant of his activities because he so rarely takes the stage. That honor is reserved for an apparently infinite supply of young Republicans eager to dance their little hearts out for a chance to get plum appointments. In other words, the prerequisite for the success of the Bush administration's extravaganza - whether in Washington, Iraq, or elsewhere - has been a chorus line of "loyal Bushies."

Of course, the term "loyal Bushie" requires no definition, but one has recently been supplied by Kyle Sampson, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales's former deputy chief of staff. Undoubtedly to his everlasting regret, Sampson, who resigned just prior to his testimony last week before the Senate Judiciary Committee, used this term to describe those United States Attorneys who should be retained by the White House because they had "managed well and exhibited loyalty to the president and attorney general." Those who "chafed against administration initiatives" were recommended for removal, according to Sampson; while the rest of the lot, including U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois and Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, were unranked.

I spent last Thursday watching Sampson testify about the White House choreographed firings of seven U.S. Attorneys who were chafers. I was compelled to watch, even though, having worked for more than 21 years as an Assistant United States Attorney myself, I considered the revelation of this latest outrage to be the least horrific of a long string of horrors carried out by the Bush administration in the name of the Department of Justice for the advancement of the Republican Party.

To satisfy the tobacco lobby, for instance, President Bush's Department of Justice (DOJ) appointees gutted the most significant case ever brought against the giant tobacco companies. To assuage the Republican base, Bush's DOJ brought an unprecedented number of civil rights cases on behalf of non-minorities, while drastically limiting its traditional affirmative-action lawsuits. In order to portray themselves as representatives of the party most likely to make the American people feel safe - a cherished nugget of political wisdom from Karl Rove's constant polling activities - Bush's Attorneys General have sanctioned, caused to be carried out, and/or turned a blind eye to the use of illegal spying on citizens, illegal detentions at Guantanamo and elsewhere, kidnappings and "extraordinary renditions" to countries which the State Department has classified as the most egregious of human rights violators and, worst of all, administration-sanctioned acts of torture.

It is these activities that, to adopt the words of a fellow former Assistant United States Attorney and lifelong Republican, "turn my stomach." Given that, under the stewardship of John Ashcroft and then Alberto Gonzales, the Department of Justice has consistently engaged in heinous criminal activity and blatant civil-rights violations around the world, I was finding it difficult to be as exercised as some about the firing of the U.S. Attorneys. Certainly, there is abundant evidence that as many as seven U.S. Attorneys were removed for no other reason than to enable the administration to fill their positions with up-and-coming Republicans or, worse, to interfere with or influence the investigation of one or more cases for partisan political reasons - a purpose that even Sampson acknowledged would be improper. But that didn't get to me. Nor was I particularly incensed by the fact that, as former U.S. Attorney Bud Cummins of Little Rock, Arkansas commented on CBS's Face the Nation, the authority to make presidential appointments may possibly have been "delegated down through Harriet Miers, Karl Rove, Judge Gonzales and all the way down to a bunch of 35-year-old-kids who - who got in a room together and tried to decide who was the most loyal to the president." That story seemed to me to be less an accurate description of what happened than a blame-it-on-the-kids alibi offered on behalf of Bush, Rove, Miers, and Gonzales.

Listening to Sampson, however, and reading the careless, often juvenile emails he exchanged with fellow loyal Bushies, 33-year-old Monica Goodling (Gonzales' top aide, now on administrative leave because she pleaded the Fifth Amendment to avoid testifying before Congress) and Scott Jennings (another thirty-something aide to Karl Rove in the Office of Political Affairs), I felt my stomach beginning to roil again. In the end, what really got me was the realization that none of these Republican-politicians-in-training had any concept of public service. Worse, they were entirely contemptuous of the very government they had been entrusted to run.

I spent my entire career in federal service, starting with a stint as a clerk for a federal judge. Modest and self-effacing as he was, just like every other judge I've ever known, he had a fondness for dispensing homely wisdom to his clerks. One of his favorites - "When in doubt, do right" - always made me laugh. It was, for starters, ridiculously corny. I thought, what a no-brainer - except in those agonizing situations where competing moral or ethical concerns caused uncertainty about what course of action to follow. If you knew what was right, of course you would do it.

It never occurred to me that anyone would behave otherwise, but then again, I was young - and I hadn't been around Karl Rove. On the other hand, the judge, a Republican, had been around his share of rogues. Indeed, he had survived an administration that was remarkably similar to the one we have today. Years before I clerked for him, he had been appointed United States Attorney by President Richard Nixon. As his first official act, the judge had selected a trusted colleague to be his First Assistant and they both went about their business.

One day not long afterwards, however, the judge returned from lunch to find a member of Nixon's legal staff waiting for him: The man had traveled from Washington, D.C to tell him that he had to fire his First Assistant because he was a Democrat. What did the judge do? He told the lawyer to get out of his office - politely, I would imagine - and not come back. That was the end of the matter.

As it happens, the judge's homely advice to his clerks is almost exactly the title of the Department of Justice Ethics Rules provided to every new employee. They inform the ethics training that DOJ employees around the country receive once a year. The standards of conduct issued by Alberto Gonzales' own shop are called "Do it Right" and here is the introductory paragraph:

"You may have heard it said that 'public service is a public trust.' This means that each Federal employee has a responsibility to the United States Government and its citizens to place loyalty to the Constitution, laws and ethical principles above private gain. The public deserves and should expect no less."

Tragically, the public has been receiving so much less from the entire Bush administration. What would have happened to a Bush-appointed U.S. Attorney who engaged in the sort of brazen display of integrity I just described? We now know exactly what. Main Justice, as the DOJ's Washington, D. C. office is called, is well-staffed with "loyal Bushies" who will apparently carry out any tasks assigned, regardless of how unethical, illegal, or immoral they may be. The President is now trying to staff the U.S. Attorney's Offices throughout the country with the same feckless loyalists. If he is allowed to proceed unimpeded, those offices too will be run by United States Attorneys "Doin' the Karl Rove Dance."
Astrocloud is offline  
Old 04-05-2007, 06:29 PM   #16 (permalink)
Thank You Jesus
 
reconmike's Avatar
 
Location: Twilight Zone
Quote:
Originally Posted by Astrocloud
I guess it was my assumption that generally people would know who and what a Karl Rove is. My bad.

Here is a another article delivered ala Host (in the style of host):
Excellent Host style, cut and paste some op piece from some anti-Bush writer and call it an article. I am sure I can find a op piece with a google seach thats states Rove already has his seat next to Jesus already on reserve.
__________________
Where is Darwin when ya need him?
reconmike is offline  
Old 04-05-2007, 10:56 PM   #17 (permalink)
Apocalypse Nerd
 
Astrocloud's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by reconmike
I am sure I can find a op piece with a google seach thats states Rove already has his seat next to Jesus already on reserve.
Sure, but do you believe in either Jesus or Rove? If so then why do you always disappear when asked to back up your beliefs with facts? -A search on your name with both those names is rather lacking.
Astrocloud is offline  
Old 04-06-2007, 05:15 AM   #18 (permalink)
Asshole
 
The_Jazz's Avatar
 
Administrator
Location: Chicago
Folks, you are off topic and debating each other, not the matter at hand. Stop the personal attacks.
__________________
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - B. Franklin
"There ought to be limits to freedom." - George W. Bush
"We have met the enemy and he is us." - Pogo
The_Jazz is offline  
Old 04-06-2007, 04:37 PM   #19 (permalink)
Apocalypse Nerd
 
Astrocloud's Avatar
 
My point was that it is easy to sit back and shoot potshots at someone's post when you don't actually post anything of substance yourself.

This is done repeatedly by certain individuals -attacking the source of an article rather than on the merits (or dismerits) of it's content.
Astrocloud is offline  
Old 04-06-2007, 05:02 PM   #20 (permalink)
has all her shots.
 
mixedmedia's Avatar
 
Location: Florida
He is definitely guilty of the crime of participating in a bit that is so appallingly bad that it is unwatchable. Fuck that guy.
__________________
Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus
PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce
mixedmedia is offline  
Old 04-06-2007, 07:37 PM   #21 (permalink)
Banned
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by reconmike
Excellent Host style, cut and paste some op piece from some anti-Bush writer and call it an article. I am sure I can find a op piece with a google seach thats states Rove already has his seat next to Jesus already on reserve.
uhhhh.....these are news reports, just as more than 90 percent of the rest of what I've ever posted on this forum, are:
Quote:
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/print?id=2954988

E-Mails Show Rove's Role in U.S. Attorney Firings
White House Says E-Mails Are Consistent With Its Original Statements on the Controversy
By JAN CRAWFORD GREENBURG

March 15, 2007 — - New unreleased e-mails from top administration officials show that the idea of firing all 93 U.S. attorneys was raised by White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove in early January 2005, indicating Rove was more involved in the plan than the White House previously acknowledged. The e-mails also show how Alberto Gonzales discussed the idea of firing the attorneys en masse while he was still White House counsel -- weeks before he was confirmed as attorney general.

The e-mails put Rove at the epicenter of the imbroglio and raise questions about Gonzales' explanations of the matter.

The White House said Thursday night that the e-mails did not contradict the previous statements about former White House counsel Harriet Miers' role. The e-mail exchange, dated January 6, 2005, is between then-deputy White House counsel David Leitch and Kyle Sampson at the Justice Department. According to a senior White House official who has seen the e-mail exchange, "It's not inconsistent with what we have said."

Justice Department spokeswoman Tasia Scolinos said Gonazales "has no recollection of any plan or discussion to replace U.S. attorneys while he was still White House counsel." She said he was preparing for his attorney general confirmation hearing and was focused on that.

"Of course, discussions of changes in presidential appointees would have been appropriate and normal White House exchanges in the days and months after the election as the White House was considering different personnel changes administration-wide," Scolinos said.

The e-mail exchange is dated more than a month before the White House acknowledged it was considering firing all the U.S. attorneys. On its face, the plan is not improper, inappropriate or even unusual: The president has the right to fire U.S. attorneys at any time, and presidents have done so when they took office.

What has made the issue a political firestorm is the White House's insistence that the idea came from Miers and was swiftly rejected.

White House press secretary Tony Snow told reporters Tuesday that Miers had suggested firing all 93 attorneys, and that it was "her idea only." Snow said Miers' idea was quickly rejected by the Department of Justice.

The latest e-mails show that Gonzales and Rove were both involved in the discussion, and neither rejected it out of hand.

According to the e-mails, Rove raised the issue with Leitch, prompting Leitch to e-mail Sampson, who was, at the time, a lawyer in the Justice Department. Sampson moved over to the Justice Department after working with Gonzales at the White House.

Sampson responded to Leitch that he had discussed the idea with Gonzales two weeks earlier, and that they were considering several different options.
Here is am image of the email described in the preceding news article, note the mention of Rove at the bottom, and earlier in the email, note the "loyal Bushies" description of the still employed US Attorneys:
<center><img src="http://talkingpointsmemo.com/docs/files/1173998679Leaked%20email%20-%20Sampson%202005%20copy.jpg"></center>

....and reconmike, in today's news:
Quote:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070406/...ed_prosecutors
By LARA JAKES JORDAN, Associated Press Writer Fri Apr 6, 7:41 PM ET

WASHINGTON - A top aide to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales abruptly quit Friday, almost two weeks after telling Congress she would not testify about her role in the firings of federal prosecutors.

Monica M. Goodling, the Justice Department's liaison to the White House, gave no reason for her resignation. Since she was at the center of the firings, Goodling's refusal to testify has intensified questions about whether the U.S. attorney dismissals were proper and heightened the furor that threatens Gonzales' own job.......
Quote:
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/...opinion-center
Bush's long history of tilting Justice
The administration began skewing federal law enforcement before the current U.S. attorney scandal, says a former Department of Justice lawyer.
By Joseph D. Rich, JOSEPH D. RICH was chief of the voting section in the Justice Department's civil right division from 1999 to 2005. He now works for the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law.
March 29, 2007

THE SCANDAL unfolding around the firing of eight U.S. attorneys compels the conclusion that the Bush administration has rewarded loyalty over all else. A destructive pattern of partisan political actions at the Justice Department started long before this incident, however, as those of us who worked in its civil rights division can attest.

<b>I spent more than 35 years in the department enforcing federal civil rights laws — particularly voting rights.</b> Before leaving in 2005, I worked for attorneys general with dramatically different political philosophies — from John Mitchell to Ed Meese to Janet Reno. Regardless of the administration, the political appointees had respect for the experience and judgment of longtime civil servants.

Under the Bush administration, however, all that changed. Over the last six years, this Justice Department has ignored the advice of its staff and skewed aspects of law enforcement in ways that clearly were intended to influence the outcome of elections.

It has notably shirked its legal responsibility to protect voting rights. From 2001 to 2006, no voting discrimination cases were brought on behalf of African American or Native American voters. U.S. attorneys were told instead to give priority to voter fraud cases, which, when coupled with the strong support for voter ID laws, indicated an intent to depress voter turnout in minority and poor communities.

At least two of the recently fired U.S. attorneys, John McKay in Seattle and David C. Iglesias in New Mexico, were targeted largely because they refused to prosecute voting fraud cases that implicated Democrats or voters
likely to vote for Democrats.   click to show 

At the same time, career staff were nearly cut out of the process of hiring lawyers. Control of hiring went to political appointees, so an applicant's fidelity to GOP interests replaced civil rights experience as the most important factor in hiring decisions.

For decades prior to this administration, the Justice Department had successfully kept politics out of its law enforcement decisions. Hopefully, the spotlight on this misconduct will begin the process of restoring dignity and nonpartisanship to federal law enforcement. As the 2008 elections approach, it is critical to have a Justice Department that approaches its responsibility to all eligible voters without favor.
Quote:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...ck=1&cset=true
Cummins fears corruption investigation led to his firing
By Richard A. Serrano, Times Staff Writer
March 16, 2007

WASHINGTON — Still uncertain exactly why he was fired, former U.S. Atty. H.E. "Bud" Cummins III wonders whether it had something to do with the probe he opened into alleged corruption by Republican officials in Missouri amid a Senate race there that was promising to be a nail-biter.

Cummins, a federal prosecutor in Arkansas, was removed from his job along with seven other U.S. attorneys last year.

In January 2006, he had begun looking into allegations that Missouri Gov. Matt Blunt had rewarded GOP supporters with lucrative contracts to run the state's driver's license offices. Cummins handled the case because U.S. attorneys in Missouri had recused themselves over potential conflicts of interest.

But in June, Cummins said, he was told by the Justice Department that he would be fired at year's end to make room for Timothy Griffin — <b>an operative tied to White House political guru Karl Rove.....</b>
...and another politically motivate prosecution falls apart:
Quote:
http://www.madison.com/tct/mad/topst...128250&ntpid=1
Thompson freed; judge chides prosecutors
Doyle taint lifted?
By David Callender and Judith Davidoff

.......In an interview, Michelle Jacobs of the U.S. Attorney's Office in Milwaukee denied that the prosecution was politically motivated.

"I can tell you that from our perspective it was not, but that is as far as I'm going to go," said Jacobs, a first assistant U.S. attorney.

The charges against Thompson were a central part of the gubernatorial campaign last year, in which Doyle defeated Republican challenger Mark Green. One TV ad sponsored by a Republican group showed a personnel chart leading from Thompson to former Administration Secretary Marc Marotta to Doyle's Chief of Staff Susan Goodwin to Doyle himself. Other GOP-linked ads compared Doyle to former President Richard Nixon, who resigned in disgrace over the Watergate scandal.

During a Capitol press conference Thursday, Doyle hailed Thompson's release and charged that the veteran civil servant, who was hired during the administration of Republican Gov. Scott McCallum, had been made a "political football."

Doyle said Thompson would be entitled to resume her $75,000-a-year job as well as receive back pay and other benefits. He also said she could be eligible to have her legal bills paid, since state employees who face legal action in performing their official duties are eligible for reimbursement.

"Can you imagine the horror of this? She's doing her job and then she gets caught up in all this," he said. "Millions and millions of dollars were spent by my political opponents trying to make this woman appear to be a terrible criminal."

In arguments Thursday on her appeal, the panel of 7th Circuit judges called the charges unfounded.

"It strikes me that your evidence is beyond thin," Judge Diane Wood told prosecutors. "I'm not sure what your actual theory in this case is."

The court then acquitted Thompson on the spot and ordered her immediate release......
Quote:
http://www.kstp.com/article/stories/s39841.shtml
Updated: 03/23/2007 05:53:12 PM

Was U.S. Attorney's swearing-in ceremony too extravagant?

When Rachel Paulose was sworn-in on March 9th as U.S. Attorney for Minnesota, she had already held the job for more than a year. The White House named Paulose to take over on an interim basis early in 2006, when Tom Heffelfinger resigned. In December, the U.S. Senate confirmed Paulose to hold the job permanently.

Paulose's investiture was the first ever held outside the Federal courthouse. Due to the large number of invited guests, the ceremony was held in the atrium at the University of St. Thomas law school.......
Quote:
http://www.myfoxtwincities.com/myfox...Y&pageId=1.1.1
Exclusive: Shake Up at the U.S. Attorney's Office
Last Edited: Thursday, 05 Apr 2007, 9:35 PM CDT
Created: Thursday, 05 Apr 2007, 9:11 PM CDT

Controversy Surrounding MN U.S. Attorney
U.S. Attorney General Talks to FOX 9
Attorney General Says Adoption Agency Didn't Deliver
MINNEAPOLIS -- It’s a major shakeup at the offices of new U.S. Attorney Rachel Paulose.

Four of her top staff voluntarily demoted themselves Thursday, fed up with <b>Paulose, who, after just months on the job, has earned a reputation for quoting Bible verses and dressing down underlings.</b>

Deputy U.S. Attorney John Marty is just one of the people dropping themselves in rank to simply a U.S. Attorney position. Also making the move are the heads of Paulose’s criminal and civil divisions and the top administrative officer.

The move is intended to send a message to Washington – that 33-year-old Paulose is in over her head.

Paulose was appointed before the 8 U.S. Attorneys were given their pink slips, but she has deep connections to the scandal.

She was a special assistant to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, worked as a senior counsel for deputy attorney general Paul McNulty <h3>and is best buds with Monica Goodling – the assistant U.S. Attorney who recently took the Fifth rather than testify before Congress. ....</h3>
Quote:
http://www.twincities.com/allheadlines/ci_5610028
Paulose shakeup spills into national controversy over U.S. attorneys
BY SHANNON PRATHER
Pioneer Press
Article Last Updated: 04/06/2007 06:38:15 PM CDT

Minnesota U.S. Attorney Rachel Paulose tried Friday to downplay the resignations of three top aides, but she couldn't keep the shakeup from getting drawn into the furor over the hiring and firing of the nation's top prosecutors.

Three of Paulose's ranking assistants surrendered their management posts Thursday to become rank-and-file prosecutors, expressing frustration with her dictatorial management style and priorities, according to sources familiar with the situation. ....
Quote:
http://www.startribune.com/462/story/1104033.html
3 federal prosecutors quit manager posts
They left their management jobs with the Minnesota U.S. Attorney's Office and will go back to prosecuting cases.

By Dan Browning and Pam Louwagie, Star Tribune

Last update: April 06, 2007 – 3:22 PM

In a surprising move, three top lawyers in the Minnesota U.S. Attorney's Office resigned their management positions Thursday and will return to prosecuting cases.

The resignations of the first assistant U.S. attorney, who is second in command, and the chiefs of both the criminal and civil divisions of the office, were communicated internally late Thursday afternoon, according to a source with direct knowledge of the events. The job changes followed a visit to the office by a representative from the Executive Office of the U.S. Attorney in Washington, D.C.....
The_Jazz.....consider that my post is relevant because it provides unequivocal and thorough support (from sources that are exclusively news reporting....)for the accusations and opinions against Karl Rove in the "article" that Astrocloud posted. The points here are that Rove has done too much damage to the nation to be celebrated by the blindly partisan or the uninformed, or simply scorned without additional comment....because the damage he has inflicted by designed, is so troubling, far reaching, and so significant in it's scope and detail. Do we even have a fair DOJ existing today, thanks largely to Rove?

Last edited by host; 04-06-2007 at 07:46 PM..
host is offline  
 

Tags
hubris, nsw, video


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:32 PM.

Tilted Forum Project

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360