Comments on: 60 Days

By: 4jkb4ia

4jkb4ia — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 12:55:08 +0000

Or an Israeli salad, which is mixed chopped vegetables without any lettuce.

By: 4jkb4ia

4jkb4ia — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 12:52:01 +0000

I think you can make a fatoush salad without having to peel the cucumbers. Maybe that is sloppy.

By: masaccio

masaccio — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 00:39:11 +0000

If she’s any kind of human, she won’t put up with political interference. There are plenty of ways to blow the whistle.

By: bmaz

bmaz — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 23:01:06 +0000

Well, that is true, and Fitzgerald was consistently called a “special counsel”, in fabt that is what he and the DOJ called him. But, there are still, as you note, provisions for establishing a “special prosecutor” and none of these are that. I’m giving this one to MadDog on technical points!

By: Mary

Mary — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 22:55:35 +0000

11/29 - I think they can probably call her whatever they want and special prosecutor is as ok as anything else. There is no more true “independent” counsel status or legislation. There are a set of regulations that can be used for the AG to appoint an “outside special prosecutor”

But even Fitzgerald didn’t really have anything that was all that special in his prosecutorial stance, other than in the Church Lady sense of, “isn’t that special.” As Fitzgerald and the court both acknowledged, the grant he had was subject to review, supervision, DOJ rules and regs (which would include being bound by DOJ interpretations of law I would think) and was revocable in whole or in part and subject to amendment at any time and from time to time.

Unfortunately, no one ever seems to have nailed down whether or not DOJ did ever change that grant, either via Margolis or McNulty.

By: MadDog

MadDog — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 22:09:21 +0000

I did indeed!

By: Ann in AZ

Ann in AZ — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 20:48:47 +0000

To me, it’s obvious that Bush wants a complete list of who he must pardon while he still has time to pardon them and cover his tracks! Since when can a President or an AG whose own administration or department is under scrutiny for legal shenanigans put a time limit, much less one so short as 2 months, on a special prosecutor? And if they can, why didn’t Bill Clinton or his AG put one on Ken Starr? How many years did he ~~persecute~~ um, prosecute Bill Clinton?

By: timbo

timbo — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 20:20:54 +0000

The 60 days limit points to an attempt to pardon various personages prior to the next administration taking office. With only 60 days, it is unlikely that the prosecutor will find enough to charge anyone…and therefore, one can pardon without as heavy a price as if one pardon folks accused directly in indictments of crimes…aside from the Congressional Contempt problems for many. Still, it seems to me that this is calculated to make pardoning at the end of Bush’s term easier…while giving the appearance of investigating obvious crimes during the time Congress is campaigning for reelection.

It is to be assumed that Congress would probably begin hearings on the IG report instantly if the DOJ did not appoint someone to look into possible criminal conduct and issue an “interim report” under an “interim” mandate.

By: DWBartoo

DWBartoo — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 20:10:32 +0000

Well the d’s would LIKE to do the ‘right thing’, but they are all frightened, scared and probably being blackmailed, besides if they don’t suck up to Bu$h Co someything terrible is going to happen.

Remember, Nancy Pelosi, herownself, has told us that we “don’t know the half of it.”

It must be rather more than abundantly clear that the Political Class don’t give a rat’s rear-end about the people of this nation, the Constitution, or even the nation itself.

The Political Class are firmly, and very, very comfortably, in the pocket of the Puling Class …

And, believe it or not; The people get it.

Whether the people will DO anything, having ‘gotten it’, is the question.

The ‘upper’ Classes are gambling the people’s money that the people will do nothing.

The upper Classes have nothing to lose by sticking it to the rest of us.

The rest of us, …well …

What do we have to lose?

By: earlofhuntingdon

earlofhuntingdon — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 20:02:07 +0000

More likely, it is not Paul Newman slyly digging at his wife’s taste and for reining in his boyish excesses; it is MoDo slapping everyone’s face, most of all her own, like an Opus Dei flagellant.

Paul Newman is the marionette most readily at hand, his name, really, since he’s gone and can no longer object to her use of him (which he might have done, if she hasn’t sought, or her hasn’t given her, an interview for two decades). The name needed to pull in readers that would normally ignore her. Cool Hand Paul — a Dowd pun — cold, gray, clammy, but more comforting than Maureen’s.