Saturday, March 24, 2007

the panicked succession of lies

* Josh:
"Now we know with crystal clear proof what we really already knew a week ago: that Alberto Gonzales was lying about his role in the US Attorney Purge. So add that to the list of all the other things he's lied about.

But don't get distracted by the lying or even the cover-up.

Right-wing shills want to chalk the blundering administration response to US Attorney Purge scandal to incompetence. But just as we can infer the force of gravity from the descent of the falling apple, the panicked succession of lies and dodges out of the administration implies not incompetence but guilty knowledge of underlying bad acts.

This isn't about the AG's lies. It's not about the attempted cover-up. It's not about executive privilege and investigative process mumbojumbo.

This is about using US Attorneys to damage Democrats and protect Republicans, using the Department of Justice as a partisan cudgel in the war for national political dominance. All the secrecy and lies, the blundering and covering-up stems from this one central fact."

9 comments:

ewastud said...

I recall when Harriet Miers made the surprise announcement of her resignation -- I believe it was mid-Januayr 2007 -- there was immediate speculation then that she was resigning because she was afraid of being caught in some corruption scandal that was about to be revealed, although those speculating seemed not to be sure what that scandal might be. Well now we know!

lukery said...

good point, ewastud. I'd forgotten that.

let's hope that she had something to worry about.

meanwhile, the DoJ/WH interface just took leave of absence too.

steven andresen said...

This came up,

"...This is about using US Attorneys to damage Democrats and protect Republicans, using the Department of Justice as a partisan cudgel in the war for national political dominance. All the secrecy and lies, the blundering and covering-up stems from this one central fact."

In thinking about the crimes of 9-11 and the way we were manipulated into our war in Iraq, I think the central underlying issue is the danger and destructiveness of secrecy in government.

I supposed that the politicians thought we needed to have more secret things going on in order to protect ourselves from our enemies. That is, if they knew what we were up to, like the development of new ever more destructive weapons systems, then they would be able to stop us somehow.

I think now that the dangers of having secrecy in government outweigh any advantages we were ever promised secrecy would provide us. This example is one more support for my claim. If politicians thought they couldn't do anything without being discovered, they would think twice about using their positions for partisan or personal gain.

I of course think that the Bush administration is the kind of criminal operation that could easily have planned and personally carried out the murder of 3,000 Americans on 9-11. They are the same folks shop have been responsible for another 3,000 dead in Iraq along with almost a million Iraqis. It does not seem beyond them from where I sit.

I think secrecy in government and the desire for complete lucidity would be a great political issue for a political party. It's an issue that could be easily explained. There are a lot of problems that are caused by it. It would seem that both Democrats and Republicans have been guilty of taking advantage of the American people because they assume they don't have to be forthcoming about it.

Such an issue could attract bipartisan support. It would have far reaching benefits.

noise said...

Was it simply another White House powerplay driven by their "with us or against us" ideology? Or could it be something worse...like specific intent to obstruct certain investigations that were getting too close to key players in the Bush Crime Syndicate? Perhaps the White House used the domestic spying program to keep track of investigations. Maybe Carol Lam was the only person they were concerned about but they fired the others to disguise the real motive.

noise said...

Steven:

I think a faith based ("trust us") policy has worked rather well. It seems the hint of scandal is due to an overzealous liberal media who may very well be on al Qaeda's payroll.

damien said...

I assume Lukery that you spotted the GWB43 item at Cannonfire. None of the important WH emails are ever coming out.

damien said...

...btw, thanks for those holiday snaps. Why don't you just rub our faces in it. :) Have fun on hol2.

lukery said...

D - there are a bunch of reasons why i'd rather not be going on holidays at the mo... think of all the fun i'll miss!

(oh - there are a bunch of other reasons why this trip will be perfect! on those fronts, i can't wait)

lukery said...

steve A - good post, as always. the only issue i'd take with it is that there are two kinds of 'bipartisan support' - the kind you find in congress (and generally outside the politico-insider complex), and 'bipartisan support' of the voting public.

one is supposed to follow the other, but alas...