READER COMMENTS ON
"BREAKING: CONYERS REACHES AGREEMENT WITH ROVE, MIERS FOR 'TRANSCRIBED' TESTIMONY"
(23 Responses so far...)
COMMENT #1 [Permalink]
said on 3/4/2009 @ 3:21 pm PT...
Agreement? That tells me that something was given by the committee to Rove and Miers. What were they given to make them finally agree to testify?
COMMENT #2 [Permalink]
said on 3/4/2009 @ 3:51 pm PT...
I hope Conyers, et al. is up to the task. At the "impeachment" hearings last year, the committee members were not as well informed as we on the outside were and they really didn't ask very good questions. It just wound up giving David Addington an opportunity to sneer at Congress in public.
COMMENT #3 [Permalink]
said on 3/4/2009 @ 3:53 pm PT...
john brings up a good point. that was the first thing that occurred to me too. dig, brad, and give us the whole skedooley (as always!)
COMMENT #4 [Permalink]
said on 3/4/2009 @ 5:00 pm PT...
All this means is that the worthless democrats reached an "agreement" to completely let the treasonous war criminals totally off the hook if they just come in an LIE.
Be a whole lot better is Congress would just stay out of it, they are worthless beyond belief.
These criminals need to be handled through the private sector by someone like Bugliosi
COMMENT #5 [Permalink]
said on 3/4/2009 @ 5:15 pm PT...
I agree 100% Bugliosi should have a crack at them all. Public trials on live feed across the globe. This is how we will show the world we are serious, and to set examples to any other porcine ne'r do wells like Rove, Gonzo and Bush that we will protect and defend our Constitution.
If these repugnant criminals are allowed to walk free, then we will remain mere hipocrites in the eyes of everyone that matters. Why allow them a chance to weasel their way back into power
COMMENT #6 [Permalink]
said on 3/4/2009 @ 5:30 pm PT...
I'm with John. "Agreement" is not the word for this. The agreement that matters is that people obey subpoenas. Period. After that, "agreement" means nothing but bad. This cannot be good news.
COMMENT #7 [Permalink]
Andrew Yu-Jen Wang
said on 3/4/2009 @ 6:23 pm PT...
Speaking of George W. Bush:
George W. Bush committed hate crimes of epic proportions and with the stench of terrorism (indicated in my blog).
George W. Bush did in fact commit innumerable hate crimes.
And I do solemnly swear by Almighty God that George W. Bush committed other hate crimes of epic proportions and with the stench of terrorism which I am not at liberty to mention.
Many people know what Bush did.
And many people will know what Bush did—even to the end of the world.
Bush was absolute evil.
Bush is now like a fugitive from justice.
Bush is a psychological prisoner.
Bush has a lot to worry about.
Bush can technically be prosecuted for hate crimes at any time.
In any case, Bush will go down in history in infamy.
Submitted by Andrew Yu-Jen Wang
B.S., Summa Cum Laude, 1996
Messiah College, Grantham, PA
Lower Merion High School, Ardmore, PA, 1993
“GEORGE W. BUSH IS THE WORST PRESIDENT IN U.S. HISTORY” BLOG OF ANDREW YU-JEN WANG
I am not sure where I had read it before, but anyway, it is a linguistically excellent statement, and it goes kind of like this: “If only it were possible to ban invention that bottled up memories so they never got stale and faded.” Oh wait—off the top of my head—I think the quotation came from my Lower Merion High School yearbook.
COMMENT #8 [Permalink]
said on 3/4/2009 @ 8:00 pm PT...
Maybe testimony from them-Bush gang, ought to be done with a lie detector, and each time the lie detector tweaks out, indicating a lie, then an accompanying electrical shock would result to Rove and whoever else is involved. (Only in my dreams.) It would not be anything in contrast to the horrors brought on by them unto the multitude of innocent Iraqis, and well meaning American and other nations'soldiers, thinking they were "bringing freedom". Yeah, bombing a nation brings them freedom.....sigh. Yeah, depleted uranium, cancer, dismemberment, deformed babies born (from the DU), paralyzation, blindness, disfigurement, loss of loved ones, and on and on. No, it only brings $$$ to the already wealthy who make $$$ off of war and oil, and unimaginable misery to the rest. And of course, in a destroyed economy, a living for the soldiers who weren't able to go to college, but of course, there are those that sincerely want to be a war hero, sadly deluded. Let's bring all those war profiteering bastards to justice.
Of course screwing up the justice department was their attempt to slither out of any justice. What scum these sub-humans are!!!
COMMENT #9 [Permalink]
Mark A. Adams JD/MBA
said on 3/4/2009 @ 8:09 pm PT...
This is outrageous!!! Rove and Miers have been subpoenaed to testify before Congress, but Conyers lets them off of the hook with a deposition under penalties of perjury!?!
If a judge wants to try to stand in the way of an investigation, Conyers' committee can investigate the judge and should recommend impeachment of any judge who would try to cover-up for Rove, Miers and the Bush/Cheney gang.
This sounds like Conyers has just told them to answer some interrogatories propounded by Conyers’ committee. That type of discovery device allows plenty of time to think of a way to phrase an answer very carefully unlike being questioned in person and being required to answer under the spotlight.
This sounds like another in the long list of Democratic cover-ups for the Bush/Cheney gang. Let’s see, 9/11, false claims of WMD’s in Iraq, torture (they do that right here in America, too), widespread mortgage fraud being committed by the bankers (see Senate Bailout a.k.a. Bank Robbery Bill) and don’t forget covering up Neo-Con election theft. See Would Congressional Democrats Cover Up Neo-Con Election Fraud? Part 2 in the “Democracy” in America Series – No Way, Right?!?! This article was also a Top Scoop on Scoop for several days. See it at http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0811/S00030.htm
COMMENT #10 [Permalink]
said on 3/4/2009 @ 8:51 pm PT...
Olberman and Turley were discussing this deal and I gathered that 'under penalty of perjury' does not mean 'under oath. Turley was explaining that anyone lying to Congress can be charged for lying to Congress even without the witness being under oath. It didn't seem from that exchange or any explanation I've read that Rove and Miers are going to be under oath.
It's not being explicitly stated that he will be under oath. It sounds like the deal originally proposed- testimony in private and not under oath.
Please tell me I misunderstand what is going on.
COMMENT #11 [Permalink]
said on 3/4/2009 @ 9:52 pm PT...
Wouldn't it be nice if we could all do whatever we want and then be able to "cut deals". Unfortunately most of us have to play by the rules. We don't get preferential treatment. But these guys are supposed to be our leaders. They are supposed to be setting the moral examples for the rest of us. What a joke!
COMMENT #12 [Permalink]
said on 3/4/2009 @ 10:08 pm PT...
You know what, I feel the most ripped off by John Conyers. All the years I admired him, looked up to him, took comfort that he was on the Judiciary Committee... crap. It all comes to this flimsy shit, these intermittent bursts of talking about doing the right thing, and NEVER getting it done, NEVER going to the mat to get it done, even if he would fail. If he'd go to the mat, I could still admire him. Instead, he has been an UTTER disappointment to me. It's just a damn game of Venerable Congressman... thin air.
I know all his excuses for non-performance. They are not good enough.
COMMENT #13 [Permalink]
said on 3/5/2009 @ 3:44 am PT...
How sad. Will there come a day when I too can commit crimes against my neighbors, my country and still cut a deal with the police and the courts that I get special treatment for offering testimony? I hope to hell not.
Whatever happened to truth and justice in this country. Good grief, is this something to celibrate? Only if Rove throws his uppers under the bus in effort to free himself from being responsible for his misdoings.
Plea bargains in this country are a huge mistake, that is what this is, a trading of guilt for information.
In most plea bargains, the guilty applying the plea is throwing a more innocent person to the wolves though, that is my experience.
Should have locked the SOB up until he rotted or testified.
COMMENT #14 [Permalink]
said on 3/5/2009 @ 5:50 am PT...
Whitewash , Coverup . Will the senate do the same ?
COMMENT #15 [Permalink]
said on 3/5/2009 @ 10:08 am PT...
If they're not under oath and behind closed doors, they can dance around the truth all they want. Time for Conyers to go, but where is a replacement? They're all hooked into the mother load of the GOP/DEM gravy train.
COMMENT #16 [Permalink]
said on 3/5/2009 @ 10:35 am PT...
I don't like having any restrictions at all. And they'd likely refuse to disclose much. But we'll see.
COMMENT #17 [Permalink]
said on 3/5/2009 @ 10:54 am PT...
All this shit reminds me of what my senator specter does! Talk the talk and let people believe you'll do the right thing and then clump up with the criminals to prevent the real execution of our legal system!
COMMENT #18 [Permalink]
said on 3/5/2009 @ 11:02 am PT...
COMMENT #19 [Permalink]
said on 3/5/2009 @ 11:15 am PT...
I don't know about yinz, but I'm damn tired of feeling like we've let down OUR FOUNDING FATHERS and THEIR WIVES and MOTHERS.
COMMENT #20 [Permalink]
said on 3/5/2009 @ 12:02 pm PT...
The privacy is just so we won't have video to play of "I don't recall" being said over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again and...
We are making a deal with Rove and Miers just so they can come and lie and obfuscate. Anybody who thinks that Rove and Miers are coming to tell anything that resembles the truth are devoid of brain cells.
This "deal" is just more of the same Conyers and Pelosi BS. With the power of Inherent Contempt available to the Democratic Congress, they didn't have the BALLS to do anything.
What Pelosi and Conyers don't seem to realize is that this simply strengthens the argument against the dems and opens the door for third party candidates.
At some point, it will become IMPOSSIBLE to support the Democratic Party, no matter how disgusting, hypocritical, and lawless the Rethuglican Party becomes. At some point, the "lessor of two evils" is simply too evil to hold one's breath and support.
COMMENT #21 [Permalink]
said on 3/5/2009 @ 3:41 pm PT...
Oh wow, what a breakthrough! They get to "testify" but not under oath, with no cameras, no video... and we get the transcripts when? At some undisclosed time in the future that will either never come or will arrive long after everyone's forgotten about it?
Well what do we expect from the tampon John Conyers? He's a tool of the establishment and a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.
Brad, why do you have a quote by this piece of shit Conyers on your blog? Because he praises Brad Blog? So if Augusto Pinochet or Henry Kissinger or some other turd praises your blog you'll put their quote up there too? I am hoping this is desperate attention-seeking by the Brad Blog done without knowledge of what Conyers is and nothing more than that. But given this blog's emphasis on minutae of e-vote rigging for one of the alleged "two" political parties while seeming to ignore the vastly larger issue (that even with paper ballots and international election monitors it STILL won't matter who anybody votes for if the Republican and the Democratic candidates are both handpicked by the same bunch of people, the powers that be in the Council on Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission and Bilderberg Group) it makes me wonder.
COMMENT #22 [Permalink]
said on 3/5/2009 @ 11:00 pm PT...
Who knows what pressure Conyers is under? He's up against people that take war crimes lightly. Life, except their own lives, of course, is not a consideration. The pre-born anti-abortion stand taken, was just a means to attain a larger voting base. Other lives really mean nothing to them. Look at what they've done.
COMMENT #23 [Permalink]
said on 3/8/2009 @ 7:02 pm PT...
Well it's an improvement over previous demands. Earlier, they wanted no oath, non-public session and no transcript or recording. It's difficult to charge someone with lying to congress if you don't have a transcript.