What your momma saw...

Talking Points Memo and TMP Muckraker are leading a grassroots combing of the latest attorneygate docudump. 3000 pages. Go help out if you have a moment. Some of the things people are citing are things we already know, but there's more and more stuff coming to the surface.

BZ, EAR and I were talking over the weekend about the crimes that were committed in Attorneygate. The right has been spinning that there was no crime here in the forceouts of these 8 attorneys, that clinton did this, that poppabush did this, and so forth. Neither of these Presidents did this kind of thing during their second term, no matter what the right says. But I posited to BZ the following crimes: Misleading Congress, Obstruction of Justice (influencing investigations, and also doubles as an ethics violation for at least two members of Congress), and a second Obstruction of Justice (the firing of Carol Lam). Turns out maybe I should've gone for that law degree after all. At least, according to the JM Times' Adam Cohen.

Buried at the bottom of the docudump avalanche? Check out this nugget in the AP wire:

In other trouble for the administration, the Justice Department's inspector general is to testify Tuesday and Wednesday before House and Senate committees on what he says was Justice's misuse of its power to secretly go through people's financial, Internet and other records in terrorism cases.

O RLY?! Color me surprised.

Well, Tony, where would YOU drop it?

Having changed directions with their leak to ABC, the junta has of course sent Tony Snow out for damage control to slow the Sunday headlines. With these winners:

“It has been described as her idea but ... I don’t want to try to vouch for origination,” said White House press secretary Tony Snow, who previously had asserted Miers was the person who came up with the idea. “At this juncture, people have hazy memories.”

snip

We don’t know motivations. ... I don’t think it’s safe to go any further than that.”

snip

Asked if Bush himself might have suggested the firings, Snow said, “Anything’s possible ... but I don’t think so.” He said Bush “certainly has no recollection of any such thing. I can’t speak for the attorney general.

“I want you to be clear here: don’t be dropping it at the president’s door,” Snow said.

Wow, subtle, Tony. Really subtle. First, notice a few things- the party line has constantly shifted. And maybe Tony, knowing full well that this thing is turning into an avalanche, has dropped the staunch denail of Chimpy McFuckface's involvement for a "no recollection" and "memories are hazy" defense. Especially since the emails released last night, clearly show that Gonzales was involved at the beginning and that "loyalty to Bush" was a part of the criteria. Here's where things get messy: what is loyalty to Bush? Is it prosecuting people who take bribes and ferretting out a network of bribers and illegal contributors? Because that's the only thing we can find on Carol Lam. Was it resistance to ethical breaches by lawmakers and staffers? Because that's what we've got on Iglesias and McKay.

A couple other subtleties in Tony's two step:

1) He says he can't speak for AG Gonzales. That, to me, is part of the subtle separation that's happening between Gonzalez and the Junta. It shifts the discussion back to AG Gonzales and gently shoves from the sidewalk towards the oncoming bus.

2) Well, this isn't really that subtle, but the idea that this story shouldn't end up at Chucklenutz's doorstep? That is laughable. This administration has a 6 year track record of shielding and rewarding the folks that are caught with their hands in the cookie jar. This was a sure-fire plan to make sure anyone investigating damaging activity and failing to adhere to administration pushes for questionable indictments was fired- hatched and put forward by his closest advisors. Who else has culpability on this but the President? He believes, even now, that the firings are fine, that he's only upset with how telling people about it was handled. But this was a coverup of politically motivated firings to use a provision "snuck" into the (un)Patriot(ic) act to replace decent lawyers with more loyal syncophants. This was deliberate and came from on high. And since Gonzales doesn't wipe his ass without Chucklenutz's say so, who do YOU think is responsible?

Who does the buck stop with, Tony?

California Senator knows her algebra...

Tell us, Senator Feinstein, is "lawyers who serve at the pleasure of the president" really what this thing is all about? Show us the math:

Sen. Dianne Feinstein said Wednesday she believes the ouster of San Diego U.S. Attorney Carol Lam was connected to Lam's prosecution of former Republican congressman Randy "Duke" Cunningham, even though the Bush administration has denied it.

"In my heart of hearts I do, no matter what they say," Feinstein, D-Calif., a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said in an interview with The Associated Press.

"The fact is there are additional investigations that have come from that. The fact is that the day before she left office she filed two additional indictments," Feinstein said, referring to charges Lam filed last month against an ex-CIA official and a defense contractor tied to Cunningham.

"Now they weren't of members of Congress," Feinstein added. "But whether this has had a chilling effect over that investigation I don't know. But I'm concerned about it."

Oh, I get it. They knew they couldn't fire Fitzgerald, so they fired Carol Lam instead. But what about the insistance by the AG that she was too focused on corruption and not on other issues, like immigration?

Feinstein wrote to Gonzales last June questioning border prosecution guidelines in Lam's district, but received a reply from Moschella in which he described Lam's immigration smuggling caseload as rising "favorably" in 2006.

Rising favorably. Does that sound like a negative work review to you?!