And skdadl, I agree totally, it’s about getting committee members to ask the right question. We desperately need another “Butterfield moment” or someone with the guts to just lay it all out….that the orders to disappear the e-mails and fire the U.S. attys came from the top. In needs to be out there, in a public hearing….all the stuff that those of of who have been following it figured out a long time ago…..so that maybe just maybe the MSM can’t ignore it. (Yeah, right, they’ve ignored everything else.) Spitzer’s lost his career, so I was rather hoping that he’d come out with a “Harper Valley PTA” smackdown about a few things.

But it’s so troubling that Congress doesn’t want to hear from Sibel Edwards and others who were willing to take the risk of coming forward. All the pieces of this tabletop sized jigsaw puzzle are already there and most sections have been assembled…in large part thanks to .

We need someone who could get the MSM’s attention to publicly assemble all those sections and hold that ugly picture up until everyone gets it. (There’s the energy task force in one corner, FISA in another, the Valerie Plame leak, the US attorney firings…Siegelman..election fraud (we’ll need more corners!), and the war smack in the middle.) After everyone sees it, then that puzzle needs to be made into a tabletop, and if Nancy won’t put impeachment on that table, then we need to know why the hell not.

I suppose this would only fit the 2008 circumstances if Cheney is impeached first (imperative) and someone the GOP wants (McCain or other) becomes VP, and then W is impeached, all before the GOP convention, so that the new VP becomes prez and then becomes the GOP nominee.

The new VP would have to be approved by Congress. What they can do is to approve only a short-timer who will not run on his own, e.g. Sen. John Warner. I thought McCain might have been offered up if impeachment had happened a year ago, but I don’t think the Democrats would approve a choice like that now.

Bob in HI

Wow.
This is really just blowing my tiny little mind.
This goes waaayyyyyy beyond ‘audacity’, but I can’t think of a word for it yet.

Chutzpah?

BTW, thanks to bmaz and everyone for keeping this topic alive. I just have to hope that we are near the point where pulling on one more string will cause the whole massive BushCo con game to unravel in ways that even the Democratic Leadership will have to say, OK, enough is enough, its time to frog march these perps out of office.

Bob in HI

This paragraph in particular, doesn’t quite jibe with other info I’ve seen about the Labat-Anderson company:

Lockheed Martin said in a written statement that “through the acquisition of Aspen Systems, [it] has been providing litigation support services to federal customers since 1987.” Labat-Anderson did not respond to e-mails seeking comment.

Did Lockheed Martin buy Aspen Systems from Labat-Anderson some time during the last several years?

Maybe it’s the echoes of Scooter’s letter to Judy Blew-Lies Miller and the aspens joined at the roots that are nagging me.

The WH IT folks know exactly when (or whether) workstations were replaced. They keep tight (anal) track of workstations in government (my experience is with the Air Force). There are stickers and bar codes and serial numbers logged. When they pull one out of service, they make a note of exactly what serial number/machine when where in replacement.

The only way that all hasn’t happened is if Bush put out a Presidential directive ordering that records and accounting no longer be kept. Unlikely though possible, given the criminality of the current regime.

Ding ding. And if he didn’t he’ll say he was thinking about about it.