Captain's Quarters -

Since when has the WaPo been a trusted source? The WaPo joins the rest of the MSM as aiding and abetting the enemies of US .

It would be good to hear also from Andy Card, who was present at the meeting, and Dicky Cheney, who dispatched Card and Gonzales.

That does not sound like Ashcroft was feeble or barely articulate during the meeting with Gonzales and Card, but instead engaged in a complex discussion comprising several topics.

So... were you there? Mueller met with him moments later and describes his state as feeble and barely articulate. You're saying his "notes" don't make him sound such?

Notes often have a way of cleaning stuff up.

If I stubbed my toe on a door and screamed "godd*mmit" at the top of my lungs, someone taking notes could describe it as "Mr. Shipley stubbed his toe and conveyed his displeasure verbally."

One extra caveat - Mueller wasn't actually present at the meeting. He's recounting the version of events that Comey told him. The only part of the story of which he recounts direct, personal knowledge is the part that Eggen talks about.

One extra caveat - Mueller wasn't actually present at the meeting. He's recounting the version of events that Comey told him. The only part of the story of which he recounts direct, personal knowledge is the part that Eggen talks about.

None of the above addresses the propriety of going over Comey's head when authority had legitimately and officially been transferred to him by Ashcroft.

Y'know, nobody offers even third-hand accounts of John Ashcroft yelling at Card and Gonzales to get the hell out and talk to Comey.

"One extra caveat - Mueller wasn't actually present at the meeting. He's recounting the version of events that Comey told him."

Heresay. Inadmissible. If this is true, and Mueller wasn't there, why are his notes relevant? These guys are lawyers?

More to the point, what do we pay these clowns for? Nobody can change the past. We would be better served by a Congress that spent more of its time planning for the future, instead of investigating something the administration had the right to do.

Yes, Gonzales is an incompetent. Bush nominated him and the Senate confirmed him. The approval ratings for the president and Congress are justified. Don't like it? Too bad. The remedy is different clowns in November, 2008 - not a new circus now.

In today's NYT, the reporter mentioned the "feeble, barely articulate and clearly stressed" part of Mueller's quote, but left out the "AG in chair" part.
That is because the NYT did not want to leave the reader the impression that AG Ashcroft was well enough to be able to sit in a chair.

I think Gonzalez should stay, he is worth his weight in gold, to the democrats. He continues the sad tradition and just bolsters the 60 percent dis-approval rating of the president.

hey monkei; how come no mention of the 97% dis-approval rating of this Democrat controlled Congress?

Just wondering...

I wondering what the deal is with Comey. He called the FBI director during dinner basically because he was upset Card and Gonzales went over his head. Comey wanted Mueller to come and put Comey's version of events on the record and to keep people, including the President's Chief of Staff from speaking with Ashcroft.

Fast forward a bit and Comey appoints his friend Fitzgerald as special prosecutor in the Plame case and watches as Fitzgerald keeps expanding his mandate to keep himself in the spotlight.

I thought Congress was concerned about Bush politicizing the Justice Department . . . Comey seems a lot like a politician to me. I guess Congress only gets upset when our democratical elected leaders make political decisions about the justice department but not when an unelected bureaucrat is making a power play.

Mueller wasn't present for the meeting, and (surprise!) Mueller isn't a physician. His editorialism isn't evidence of anything.

If this is true, and Mueller wasn't there, why are his notes relevant?

Because they can be used to demonize Gonzalez, of course. Actual factual relevance is immaterial in a smear job, even a deserved one.

Another point: Ashcroft himself undermined Comey's authority by continuing to exercise his office.

And it's certainly possible that Ashcroft was briefed on the discussed program -- but Comey or one or more of the persons present (including Ashcroft's wife) wasn't. Additionally, the facility where this discussion took place was not cleared. Under those conditions, Ashcroft could not discuss the classified aspects of the program.

As discussed over at JoustTheFacts, Mueller's notes were hearsay from Comey and he saw Ashcroft about 1 hour after the meeting which may explain part of his condition from being out of bed that long or other reasons.

''I think Gonzalez should stay, he is worth his weight in gold, to the democrats.''

Typical leftist. Don't give a darn about what is good for the country. Just what is good for the dem party.

Is Ashcroft dead or incapacitated? Why are we getting this all second hand from notes, rather than asking Ashcroft himself.

Is Ashcroft dead or incapacitated? Why are we getting this all second hand from notes, rather than asking Ashcroft himself.

I don't like Gonzales much either. I think he's ineffective and largely unable to do his job.

But if Gonzales quit Dubya would have a heck of a time getting a new AG confirmed by the Senate. He'd probably be forced to make a deal that commissions yet another independent prosecutor to go fishing for something indictable at the White House.

We should have learned something from the last ten years of independent prosecutions, especially Starr and Fitzgerald. They are always loose cannons. They are always ridiculously costly, search for conviction in the press, produce laughable results, and make things worse, not better. If Dubya needs to keep Gonzales in office as a lightning rod, better that than commissioning another awful independent prosecutor.

Dubya should just have a news conference. Say "I can fire any US attorney I want at any time I want for any reason I want," and then demonstrate that by firing Johnny Sutton and pardoning the border control agents who Sutton put in jail. Then announcing that US attorneys who do not meet numerical goals to investigate voter fraud, which strikes at the heart of our electoral system and government, will be fired for their incompetence.

"The AG also told them that he was barred from obtaining the advice he needed on the program by the strict compartmentalization rules of the WH."

So the AG of the united states is barred from getting the legal basis to review the program. Which he had OK'd for two years? That's awfully fishy.

Someone wants to talk about incompetence? I nominate Ashcroft and his 'standing by' that nasty political hack Comey.

When I read this article the first time, there was only one thing of interest since I do not trust one word that came from Comey.

Mueller also contemporaneously describes how Comey related the Gonzales visit to him.

Exactly. Comey is so excited that he riles up Mueller to come across town. Mueller gets all this 'interesting' info from...........da ta........Comey.

Comey. What nasty little politcal operatives in control of our government. Give me Gonzales and Card, thank you. That article is nothing but another Dem MSM hit. Second hand info promoted as news to attack Bush.

If Ashcroft was in such bad condition an hour after Gonzales talk to him which could be explain by many things such as exhaustion on medication given in that time, how could anything Ashcroft told Mueller be considered as reliable. Therefore all the hearsay contradictions from Mueller earlier testimony should be disregarded, as it always should have been.

Some are suggesting that the Director of the FBI cannot be believed, even though his notes were typed up shortly after the hospital visit. Now that's a scary thought - an FBI Director who is either a liar or incompetent.

"He also asked that inform the detail that no visitors, other than family, were to be allowed to see the AG without my consent."

Why was Comey asking the Muller to limit access to Ashcroft? Nether Comley or Muller is a qualified medical doctor and should not be limiting access to anyone.

It sounds to me that Comey was upset that his authority was abridged and was (and still is) attempting to punish anyone that 'dissed" him and his authority.

"Goody-two-shoes" resignation requests, notwithstanding, Mueller's no different than Tenet; who was very incompetent. And, now has been kicked "OUT."

Mueller is also acting like Mark Felt, but with "more exposure."

I do believe the Bonkeys are DESPERATE, now! They're like the losing side of a battlefield, but as long as they have troops willing to "go for it" they stay in business.

The Internet grows stronger.

And, even if Gonazales isn't what you want him to be; he's been attacked. For that, alone, he's showing you that he has strength of character.

You want the Department of Justice to run well?

Well, it didn't with the religious idiot, Ashcroft, who schmeared oil all over himself, before he "took the job." And, then he immediately failed. Perhaps you don't remember his "big order" of bolts of cloth, to cover "naked lady statuary." Now, that was a bozo! When Bush thought he "owed something" to the right-wing-lunatic fringe.

Up ahead? More than a handful of Americans are thoroughly disgusted with BOTH parties, and their stupid games. There's no other words for this. Just an attempt for the pork guzzling turkeys in congress to keep doing what they normally do. Which is jerk around for pork.

Good luck to the next guy who gets in, if this crap still holds the microphones. (Personally, I go around it all. Through the Internet.)

And, nobody's proven to me that Alberto Gonzales needs to resign. Seems he's got a legal right to his job. Bush is satisfied.

The lead that is buried in these notes is that Comey has an Al Haig moment, seeing his boss in the hospital he grabs for power after two aides to the President had the temerity to see the real AG and thereafter bars everyone but family from seeing the AG, thereby solidifying Comey's position at Justice. A naked power grab pure and simple, and then Comey whacks the WH by approving a limitless Special Prosecutor to hound the President (I wonder if Comey knew at the time that Armitage was the Plame leaker and appointed Fitzgerald anway?-wouldn't be surprised).

monkei says:

"I think Gonzalez should stay, he is worth his weight in gold, to the democrats. He continues the sad tradition and just bolsters the 60 percent dis-approval rating of the president."

1. Yeah, the Dems have really made hay over him. That must be why their approval numbers are even lower than Bush's.

2. In the most recent poll re. Gonzalez, 30% of those asked (in other words, 1/3 of them) had NO idea who he was.

3. What's Bush running for? Nothing. So his approval/disapproval numbers are only "relevant" to his enemies. A higher percentage of Americans disapprove of the job Congress is doing.

And specifically, a majority of Americans, 54%, told the Pew pollsters in late July that they disapprove of the job the Dems in Congress are doing. That's a 20 point increase since the beginning of the year. And guess what? Pew only asked this question about the Dems. So this particular poll cannot be used for a side by side comparison.

I see where someone said that congress should just stop this investigation and start thinking about the future of America. There were millions of us saying this when the republicans were spending tens of millions of dollars investigating EVERYTHING Bill Clinton did! There was on limit to how low they would go to try to make Clinton out to be the criminal that Bush is! And after all that money , all you have is Monica. How lame.
As for Al G,, he is without a doubt the worst AG in Americas history. And before it is all said and done, he will resign in disgrace, like Bush should.

Mueller wasn't even there at the meeting with Gonzales and Card (and Comey). All we have here is a (previously acknowledged CYA) note about what Comey told Mueller.

I believe they call all of this .. hearsay

Some are suggesting that the Director of the FBI cannot be believed, even though his notes were typed up shortly after the hospital visit. Now that's a scary thought - an FBI Director who is either a liar or incompetent.

That's the standard smear applied to anything written by the Administration. Either its proof of "incompetence" or it's false. We have to vote on one or the other!

Here's what I don't believe is even remotely possible--that Mueller wrote notes in 2004 in the event that a Democrat witchhunt called him on Ashcroft's aptitude in 2007. It's not a sworn deposition even to hearsay. It's his private notes.

What makes this ridiculous is that Gonzales is recounting an episode in which he sought extraordinary shortcuts through red tape and, by everybody's account, got a door slammed in his face. Nobody suggests Ashcroft assented to Gonzales' request. Everybody agrees he refused it. What is happeneing here is chronic liars on Congressional committees are trying to warp differing hearsay accounts of Ashcroft's statements into a perjury frame on a political target.

The proof of dhimmie intentions, and the feebleness of their cause, is that they have declined to speak with Ashcroft.
If the dhimmie leadership had any serious intention about abuse or the health of Ashcroft they would bring him in to testify.
What we are seeing here is how the WH and Ashcroft intervened to prevent a bunch of lefty bureaucrats at the DoJ from highjacking a vital intel program while he was sick.

I believe that Comey assumed the mantle as deputy AG through the machinations of Chuck Schumer. 'Nuff said.

tony,
The difference between clinton andBush is that clinton had people actively obstructing investigations on his side.
Bush ahs done nothing to that needs to be covered up, despite your side's sorry delusions to the contrary.

Carol, dont you think Gonzalez is some what of a puss? Ashcroft did seem to have a set (remember the 9-11 commission).

tony,

A lot of people were charged and convicted of committing crimes as a result of the Clinton investigations like the Whitewater investigation. One of them was Webster Hubbell, who was appointed by President Clinton in 1993 as the Associate Attorney General of the United States of America, the third highest position in the DoJ. He plead guilty to federal mail fraud and tax evasion charges and was sentenced to 21 months of imprisonment. Those charges, and that guilty plea, would never have occurred if it wasn't for the Whitewater investigation.

To date, only one member of the Bush administration has been convicted of, let alone charged with, a crime That was "Scooter" Libby, as you well know. So, based on the two administrations and their relevant investigations and the results of those investigations (charges and convictions), which one would you say is or was inundated with useless and costly investigations which lead nowhere? Here's a hint: It's wasn't Clinton.

Great thread.....

The WAPO, NYT, Tribune, Lat, et al; can all be summed up by the following words:

Lately, the New York Times's Public Editor has been on a tear about the fact that the paper's reporters and editors can't spell, a fact which we noted here. They can't multiply, either. In today's Corrections section, the paper corrects a prior mathematical error:

An article on Tuesday about the governing party of Turkey’s presidential nomination of Abdullah Gul, an economist and practicing Muslim, misstated the number of votes he would need to win confirmation in the 500-seat Parliament if he failed in the first two rounds of voting, when a two-thirds majority, or 367 votes, is required. In a third round, he would need 276 votes, not 267.

Oops. Still not right: two-thirds of 500 is 333. It's hard to imagine how the paper's reporters and editors--including whoever edits the Corrections section!--could look at this calculation and fail to realize that it's wrong. (Two-thirds of 500 is the same, obviously, as one-third of 1,000.)

There is an explanation for this numerical fog. The Turkish Parliament has 550 seats, not 500. Further corrections will no doubt be forthcoming; maybe the Times will get it right the third time.

You should keep this kind of thing in mind when you consider that the people who work for the Times, and similar newspapers, think they are qualified to instruct you in political, social and ethical matters because they are smarter than you are.