Weekly posts on politics, the presidential election, news, education, career, food, men, women, and whatever sets off a rant.
HispanicBusiness reported his behavior has "Echoes of Watergate" and is "enormously problematic" on March 12, 2007.See the report of his lies to Congress on the Attorney General firings at WaPo here. Howard Kurtz on 3/16 is here.
See his lies to Congress on torture on NPR here, at WaPo here and here.
See his lies on the NSA warrantless spying program at Slate here, DemocracyNow here, at TalkLeft here and at TPM Muckraker here.
Yes, assuming the various things alleged about his lying, etc., are facts shown true after one runs through the legal hoops, he should be disbarred.
Thanks for the comment. President Clinton was disbarred for 5 years for a lot less. Even though state prosecutors decided not to file perjury charges, the case was pursued obsessively by Robert Ray. Ray is the counsel who took over after Kenneth Starr left his job as Special Persecutor for a cushy job funded by Richard Mellon Scaife at Pepperdine U. Ray is also the counsel who appointed Jennifer Safavian as an Associate Counsel. Somehow afterward, Safavian got a job on Tom Davis's Reform Committee, and she's married to the felon David Safavian who sold access to the GSA for Jack Abramoff and other campaign contributors of Davis and the RNCC.Considering what was supposed to be the limited scope of Starr's inquiry (Whitewater), Clinton never should have been put under oath for this matter anyway. I certainly don't want to minimize what he did to his family, but he just agreed to settle since he wasn't going to practice law, anyway.I got on a rant, but if Clinton is disbarred for an irrelevant non-perjury, Gonzales's statements to Congress were certainly more relevant and significant to democracy and the functioning of honest government.
Post a Comment