Documents contradict Gonzales' testimony

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by zimv20, Jul 25, 2007.

  1. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #1
    AP

    seems clear that gonzales perjured himself. in any other administration, he would have been fired ages ago.
     
  2. Swarmlord macrumors 6502a

    Swarmlord

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2006
    #2
    Schumer reminds me of that teacher that Sam Kinneson played in Back to School with Rodney Dangerfield. "Say it! AHHHHHHHHH"

    Lol!
     
  3. miloblithe macrumors 68020

    miloblithe

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2003
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    #3
    He's either a criminal, or criminally incompetent. Neither one exactly recommends him for the job.
     
  4. ham_man macrumors 68020

    ham_man

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2005
    #4
    I really don't see why Gonzales would have an incentive to lie, so I don't know why he would, but maybe I'm just missing something...
     
  5. zimv20 thread starter macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #5
    because there was likely illegal activity taking place in the DoJ, and it was likely directed from the WH.

    are you asking if there's really nothing to hide, or if he should tell the truth and expose the entire operation?
     
  6. SMM macrumors 65816

    SMM

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2006
    Location:
    Tiger Mountain - WA State
    #6
    Yes, you are missing much. Read, study and then come back and offer opinions.
     
  7. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #7
    Another thing to ponder is bush's long standing relationship with Gonzales. bush has made it clear that he demands loyalty to himself above all other qualities.

    Gonzales probably knows every shady thing there is to know about bush, along with Harriet Miers of course.

    He has every incentive in the world to lie through his teeth.

    With all the controversy surrounding gonzo now, he can forever kiss goodbye the possibility of becoming a judge at any level of the US system. His only hope is to continue to show his fealty and pray that bush doesn't take him down if push comes to shove.
     
  8. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #8
    What does that have to do with Gonzales being caught lying? Again? Are you trying to say he shouldn't be as angry as he is, because frankly, I can only wonder why you aren't.

    You're kidding right? Yes. Yes you are missing something. It's no longer a question of him lying, though actually I think we've known that for awhile. He's just been caught in another one. And for anyone who knows anything about the case, it's obvious why he's lying and what he's trying to cover up.

    Please tell me you're joking.
     
  9. Swarmlord macrumors 6502a

    Swarmlord

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2006
    #9
    No, he has every incentive in the world to decline to comment or fail to recall what transpired.

    I couldn't "testify" to what was discussed at a meeting taking place months ago and I don't think that anyone else can either unless they referred to the minutes of the meeting.

    Let's face it. This country has embraced the "most votes win" mentality. Put it up for a vote before the entire Senate and he will either be convicted or not. Truth is determined by polls now, so let's go with it.
     
  10. atszyman macrumors 68020

    atszyman

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Location:
    The Dallas 'burbs
    #10
    I can understand if he doesn't recall what happened at a meeting. But if there are minutes and he knew he was going to be questioned about that meeting it would have been beneficial to review the minutes so he have some idea what the meeting was about. If they bring up a specific meeting with now prior warning he should have said "I don't recall" rather than testify with some other story. The existence of the other story is suspicious. If I'm asked about a meeting I can't recall I say I don't remember, I don't try to spin a tale to make it look like I remember...
     
  11. Swarmlord macrumors 6502a

    Swarmlord

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2006
    #11
    So, what's the point of him testifying at all? If I were him I'd tell Senator Schumer to just read the meeting minutes and draw his own conclusions.
     
  12. atszyman macrumors 68020

    atszyman

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Location:
    The Dallas 'burbs
    #12
    I would have had no problem with that, but when the meeting minutes don't match his testimony and he's sworn to tell the truth, he's either lying, or can't remember. What's the point of the alternate story if he simply can't remember the meeting in question? Why make something up when "I can't remember" seems to be an acceptable (if overused) answer. He either honestly thought they were talking about a different meeting or he's covering something up and perjuring himself.
     
  13. Swarmlord macrumors 6502a

    Swarmlord

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2006
    #13
    I don't know what the fascination is with answering these questions in front of committees other than to hear your own voice or see yourself on television. These days saying anything is an invitation for a charge of perjury no matter what the charges are or what's being investigated. You can't perjure yourself if you say nothing, so that would be my advice to anyone.
     
  14. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #14
    You wouldn't feel the need to perjure yourself if you behaved correctly.
     
  15. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #15
    Gee...I don't know why we can't seem to prosecute dishonest politicians and get rid of people who should be out of jobs because they obviously aren't competent. Isn't that a function of capitalism after all?
     
  16. Swarmlord macrumors 6502a

    Swarmlord

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2006
    #16
    No, that's the point. These days you can be entirely innocent of something, be called in for questioning and then later on if they find a discrepancy in your testimony they can get you for perjury even though the original charges yielded nothing.

    Lawyers and wordsmiths have made it so that you're best not saying anything. Confuse a phone call you made Wednesday with one you made on a Tuesday and you've technically perjured yourself. It isn't worth it to answer.
     
  17. dswoodley macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    #17
    Of course this premise depends upon having someone prejudiced against you (judge, prosecutor, ringleader, whatever) who can pursue the perjury route. Not unheard of, but not worth it for most legal attendants to pursue if the perjured information is in fact trivial as in your example. On a related note, Gonzales' hole looks deeper

    Link

     
  18. atszyman macrumors 68020

    atszyman

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Location:
    The Dallas 'burbs
    #18
    So Gonzales is a lawyer right? Is he lying or just stupid? He's either making stuff up that he can't remember he's either lying or he's not taking advice any lawyer should be able to give...

    Either way do we want him to stay the AG?
     
  19. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #19
    Your use of "these days" is an indication as to how secretive bushco has become and how much this is a problem of their own making. Since gonzo is an attorney and the US Attorney General, I feel no sympathy for him whatsoever. He's created the hydra that is now coming after him.

    Yeah, that second bit is to make it appear as though gonzo's being ganged up on by the school bullies. Cute.
     
  20. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #20
    So, you're going to use this arguement to now protect Libby, Gonzalez and anyone else in this administration?
     
  21. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #21
    He tried that, but with the evidence against him, he just can't keep doing it. Especially when it's clear from other testimony, he remembers the details quite clearly. They'd share the notes and e-mails, but they don't want to for some reason. Hm. Maybe it's because the ones we have seen have been incriminating. If you were familiar with the details of the issue, you'd know that.

    Actually, the opposite is happening. There probably aren't enough votes to really go after him, no matter how much evidence is against him, because of some wussy Dems and some Repubs who still care more about their party than the truth. Nice to find another GOP talking point to obfuscate the issue.

    And there's another one. Now you're really reaching. He was caught in a lie. An outright lie. Again. He's trying to cover his ass because they screwed up, and he knows it, but the evidence is against him, which is now just making things worse for him the more he lies. And people like you keep defending it for some reason, again despite the overwhelming evidence that there is some wrong doing here.

    I'm surprised you're not just saying "Clinton did it too" over and over again, as if that would make it ok, even if that anything to do with anything.

    I'm sorry, but this just amazes me that people are still going along with an obviously corrupt AND incompetent administration, even when they're flat out caught red handed.
     
  22. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #22
    Let the administration's diehard supporters have their say. If they don't know that the Bush White House is pounding their party into the dust, then who are we to disabuse them of the idea?
     
  23. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    OBJECTIVE reality
    #23
    We probably would leave them alone if their "arguments" and "explanations" consisted of something other than parroting disproven talking points and rationalizing assaults on the Constitution.

    As it is, if we do leave them alone it'll be because talking to them is like talking to flat-Earthers, or alcoholics who insist they don't have a drinking problem.
     
  24. Maui macrumors 6502a

    Maui

    Joined:
    May 18, 2007
    #24

    The difference is that Rodney answered the question.....Gonzo is stuck on "eh, I don't recall" or "it's secret and if I tell you Bin Laden will get the bomb."

    I can only imagine how demoralizing it is the for the career prosecutors in the DOJ to have to work for this man. This is the best we can come up with?
     
  25. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #25
    At this point, it's okay with me. Let 'em think they're making sense. No skin off my nose.
     

Share This Page