GOP blocks Gonzales no-confidence vote
GOP blocks Gonzales no-confidence vote
GOP blocks Gonzales no-confidence vote #1
Posted: 6/11/07 at 7:24pm
Chicken $hit Republicans agree with the Democrats but won't buck Bush. Freaking cowards. They don't stand for anything but corruption.
WASHINGTON - Republicans blocked the Senate's no-confidence vote on Attorney General Alberto Gonzales Monday, rejecting a symbolic Democratic effort to prod him from office despite blistering criticism from lawmakers in both parties.
The 53-38 vote to move the resolution to full debate fell seven short of the 60 required. In bringing the matter up, Democrats dared Republicans to vote their true feelings about an attorney general who has alienated even the White House's strongest defenders by bungling the firings of federal prosecutors and claiming not to recall the details
(more)
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19165190
re: GOP blocks Gonzales no-confidence vote #2
Posted: 6/11/07 at 8:06pmThe fact will not change that the majority of the senators, including seven republicans, voted to go forward with the debate and NOT ONE republican expressed confidence in the AG.
re: GOP blocks Gonzales no-confidence vote #2
Posted: 6/11/07 at 9:29pm
Yes yes whatever.
Do you not realize that RAUL WAS ROBBED last night?
re: GOP blocks Gonzales no-confidence vote #3
Posted: 6/11/07 at 11:31pm
For those who are interested...from the Democratic Caucus
FICTION: The Attorney General said he was unaware of the plan to fire U.S. Attorneys. "As we can all imagine, in an organization of 110,000 people, I am not aware of every bit of information that passes through the halls of the Department of Justice, nor am I aware of all decisions. As a general matter, some two years ago, I was made aware that there was a request from the White House as to the possibility of replacing all the United States attorneys. That was immediately rejected by me. I felt that that was a bad idea and it was disruptive." (Press Conference by Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, 3/13/07)
FACT: Kyle Sampson, the Attorney General's former Chief of Staff, said that Attorney General Gonzales was not being truthful. "I don't think the attorney general's statement that he was not involved in any discussions about U.S. attorney removals is accurate" (Kyle Sampson Testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, 3/29/07)
FACT: Kyle Sampson discussed the plan with Attorney General Gonzales before he left the White House Counsel's office.
Senator Schumer (D-NY): First, let's go over some of the attorney general's statements.
As you know, at a press conference on March 13th, the attorney general discussed this process of dismissing the U.S. attorneys and he said, "I never saw documents. We never had a discussion about where things stood." Was that statement accurate?
Kyle Sampson: I don't think it's entirely accurate what he said. I don't remember if the attorney general ever saw documents. I didn't prepare memos for him on this issue. But we did discuss it as early as -- before he became the attorney general, when he was the attorney general designate in January of 2005, I think; and then, from time to time, as the process was, sort of, in a thinking phase through 2005 and 2006. And then I remember discussing it with him as the process sort of came to a conclusion in the fall of 2006. (Kyle Sampson Testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, 3/29/07)
FACT: Kyle Sampson discussed the plan with Gonzales multiple times.
Senator Schumer (D-NY): So were there at least five?
Kyle Sampson: I don't remember specifically, but it would -- I spoke with him every day, so I think at least five. (Kyle Sampson Testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, 3/29/07)
FACT: Kyle Sampson continually briefed Attorney General Gonzales on the progress of the plan to fire eight United States attorneys. "Well, as I said in a previous answer, the attorney general was aware of this process from the beginning in early 2005. He and I had discussions about it during the thinking phase of the process. Then after the, sort of, more final phase of the process in the 2006 began, we discussed it. He asked me to make sure that the process was appropriate, that I was consulting with the deputy attorney general and others in developing the list. And then ultimately he approved both the list and the notion of going forward and asking for these resignations." (Kyle Sampson Testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, 3/29/07)
FACT: Karl Rove and then-White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales decided that the U.S. Attorneys should go. "David – Karl Rove stopped by to ask you (roughly quoting) 'how we planned to proceed regarding US Attorneys, whether we were going to allow all to stay, request resignations from all and accept only some of them, or selectively replace them, etc.' I told him that you would be on the hill all day for the Judge's hearings, and he said the matter was not urgent." (Email from Colin Newman, Office of White House Counsel, to David Leitch, Office of White House Counsel, as reported by ABC News, 3/15/07)
FACT: Attorney General Gonzales was even involved in picking the U.S. Attorneys to be fired.
Senator Schumer (D-NY): Similarly, DOJ spokesman, on March 24th, Ms. Scolinos, said the attorney general did not participate in the selection of U.S. attorneys to be fired. Was that an accurate statement?
Kyle Sampson: I don't think that's an accurate statement. (Kyle Sampson Testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, 3/29/07)
FICTION: Attorney General Gonzales denied being involved in White House deliberations regarding the US Attorney firings. "I don't remember that conversation…During the process there may have been other conversations about specifically about the performance of U.S. attorneys. But I wasn't involved in the deliberations as to whether or not a particular United States attorney should or should not be asked to resign.' (NBC News, 3/26/07)
FACT: This was contradicted by his Chief of Staff Kyle Sampson and Associate Attorney General William Mercer. "Mr. Schumer said Monday that Mr. Sampson recalled that in early March, Mr. Gonzales had told him about the White House conversation -- the first time, Mr. Sampson said, that he learned of the president's concern. Mr. Sampson's lawyer, Bradford A. Berenson, declined to comment on the interview. According to Mr. Schumer, Mr. Sampson said he believed Mr. Gonzales had attended a June 2006 meeting in which Ms. Lam's removal was discussed. Another official, William W. Mercer, the acting associate attorney general, recalled with greater certainty that Mr. Gonzales was at the meeting, Mr. Schumer said." (New York Times, 4/17/07)
Broadway Legend Joined: 11/11/06
re: GOP blocks Gonzales no-confidence vote #4
Posted: 6/12/07 at 11:49am
Yes, it seems that these democrats are determined to give the term "do-nothing" congress a new definition. They can't debate or pass immigration reform, they can't end the war in Iraq, and they can't pass any of the items on which they were elected, but they have time to worry about Gonzales.
Hilarious.
re: GOP blocks Gonzales no-confidence vote #5
Posted: 6/12/07 at 11:52am
Where have you been?
Say something good about Alberto Gonzales, you silly little sockpuppet.
Broadway Legend Joined: 4/12/06
re: GOP blocks Gonzales no-confidence vote #6
Posted: 6/12/07 at 11:55amHD though you are correct in your assessment of a do-nothing congress, that immigration bill is bullsh!t. It is not workable and is a red herring. No one in either party could say yes to it. It's a huge waste of tax dollars and money. Bush never tires of his old tricks.
re: GOP blocks Gonzales no-confidence vote #7
Posted: 6/12/07 at 12:09pm
These are the Senators who couldn't be bothered to show up and vote.
Not Voting ---7
Biden (D-DE)
Brownback (R-KS)
Coburn (R-OK)
Dodd (D-CT)
McCain (R-AZ)
Obama (D-IL)
and
Johnson (D-SD) who of course is unable to vote
re: GOP blocks Gonzales no-confidence vote #8
Posted: 6/12/07 at 12:14pm
"They can't debate or pass immigration reform, they can't end the war in Iraq,"
I am terribly disappointed and saddened by this, but it's true.
Click on my profile and watch Chita Rivera "Put On A Happy Face"
Broadway Legend Joined: 4/12/06
re: GOP blocks Gonzales no-confidence vote #9
Posted: 6/12/07 at 1:14pm
Don't feel that sad, (you should be pissed) Republicans can't do any of that either.
If they have their way, we will have ANOTHER war and the immigration system will stay intact.
Broadway Legend Joined: 11/11/06
re: GOP blocks Gonzales no-confidence vote #10
Posted: 6/12/07 at 2:05pm
I am neither sad nor pissed. I am laughing at the inability of these democrats to get anything done at all.
The voters will remember the little games they played while ignoring the major issues.
re: GOP blocks Gonzales no-confidence vote #11
Posted: 6/12/07 at 2:10pm
Like they remembered the games the Republicans played in 2006?
You now, like closeted homophobes having cybersex with underage pages?
Broadway Legend Joined: 4/12/06
re: GOP blocks Gonzales no-confidence vote #12
Posted: 6/12/07 at 2:55pm
HDThoreau2 - I don't know why you are laughing HD. Democrats have all but switched over to your party's shortsighted behavior. Hillary, Obama and Edwards are practically Bushes as it is. They are doing everything you want from your own fascist regime.
Sure the voters formally known as Democrats are going to raise hell come election time with these spineless candidates. But let's take a look at the flakes on the other side? You are really gonna run with Giuliani? McCain? LOL Thompson?
Like I have said, things are pretty bad if a minority can get elected president in this country. Pretty bad.
The GOP is going to run on Gay issues for 2008. That’s about as much as I can see. Hillary, Obama and Edwards all support privatized oil in Iraq so War wont be really on the table. Not if they wanna steer clear. Healthcare will probably be the straw that breaks Hillary’s back… not the war. Gay Issues. This attorney general business is quite possibly Karl Rove’s finest hour.
Broadway Legend Joined: 11/11/06
re: GOP blocks Gonzales no-confidence vote #13
Posted: 6/12/07 at 3:10pmThe pages were not underage. It's funny that the gay community likes to devour their own.
re: GOP blocks Gonzales no-confidence vote #14
Posted: 6/12/07 at 3:15pmHe's not "our own" if he's closeted...like you, Blanche, like YOU.
Broadway Legend Joined: 10/13/03
re: GOP blocks Gonzales no-confidence vote #15
Posted: 6/12/07 at 3:21pm
"Devouring your own," in the gay community, is hardly a pejorative phrase. It's a way to pass a rainy Tuesday evening, particularly effective (and easier) of course if you're in Cirque du Soleil.
Broadway Legend Joined: 4/12/06
re: GOP blocks Gonzales no-confidence vote #16
Posted: 6/12/07 at 3:25pm
"The pages were not underage" - um.... so that makes it ok?
re: GOP blocks Gonzales no-confidence vote #17
Posted: 6/12/07 at 3:29pm
And, the some of the pages were underage.
I guess 16 is an adult in HD's world. Explains a lot.
re: GOP blocks Gonzales no-confidence vote #18
Posted: 6/12/07 at 3:30pmThat's how old Chanticleer's, um, students are.
Joined: 12/31/69
He Baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack!#19
Posted: 6/12/07 at 4:46pm
Hello Chanti! Well Hello Chanti! It's so nice to have you back where you belong!
Where have you been you naughty little boy! We have missed you so!
Broadway Legend Joined: 4/12/06
He Baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack!#20
Posted: 6/12/07 at 5:01pmMaybe he was hiding with Bin Laden in Pakistan.
Broadway Legend Joined: 11/11/06
He Baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack!#21
Posted: 6/12/07 at 5:22pm
I have not been hiding anywhere. If I were hiding, it would be behind Hillary's hippo hips.
If someone is 18 or older, the law contemplates that the individual must be responsible for their actions. This law was passed with liberals leading the charge in congress. Do you disagree with this law?
Broadway Legend Joined: 4/12/06
He Baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack!#22
Posted: 6/12/07 at 5:26pm
What about sexual harassment laws?
HD if you and your precious GOP are so smart, why the hell are we in Iraq and Afghanistan while Pakistan is hosting Osama Bin Laden and they HAVE a nuclear arsenal?
Broadway Legend Joined: 11/11/06
He Baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack!#23
Posted: 6/12/07 at 5:40pmNo one claimed sexual harassment. Is there a pending lawsuit that I haven't heard about?
He Baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack!#24
Posted: 6/12/07 at 8:48pmIf Chanticleer ever sucked the cOck of any of his male students, would you tell us?
Videos
.jpg?format=auto&width=365)
