Unraveling a cover-up takes a while without cooperation
The president held a 50-minute press conference in the Rose Garden this morning, offering a veritable treasure trove of content for blog posts. (Taking notes during the Q&A, I felt like a kid at a candy store…)
Here’s one of several notable exchanges:
Q: Good morning, Mr. President. I’d like to ask you about the Justice Department. In the last couple months, we have heard disturbing evidence about senior officials of the Justice Department misleading Congress. We heard disturbing evidence yesterday that a senior official at the Justice Department improperly took, by her own admission, political considerations into effect in evaluating career employees of the Justice Department.
We’ve also had evidence from the former Deputy Attorney General of the White House strong-arming a sick man into trying to approve an illegal spying program. I’m curious, Mr. President, if you are concerned about the cumulative picture that’s being drawn about your Justice Department? And what assurances can you give the American people that the department is delivering impartial justice to the American people?
BUSH: Yes, thank you, Michael. There is a — an internal investigation taking place at the Justice Department. And this will be an exhaustive investigation. And if there’s wrongdoing, it will be taken care of.
I thought it was interesting how you started your question, “over the months,” I think you said, “over the last months.” This investigation is taking a long time, kind of being drug out, I suspect for political question — for political reasons. In other words, as I mentioned the other day, it’s just grand political theater.
To fully appreciate how inarticulate all of this was, you’ll have to see the clip — Paul Kiel posted it. I particularly liked the phrase “drug out,” instead of the correct “dragged out,” in part because of the irony — the president sounded quite medicated when he said it.
Far more important, of course, was the substance of the response. For the president to accuse Congress of dragging this investigation out is almost comical, since it’s the administration’s fault that the process is taking so long.
As Kiel explained:
You might say that the investigation has taken such an awfully long time because the Justice Department misled Congress when questions were first asked about the U.S. attorney firings (senior Department officials even giving false testimony to Congress), the White House has stonewalled, a key witness invoked the Fifth Amendment, and despite all this, the revelations have just kept on coming steadily over the past three months. That might explain why Bush sounds so tired.
Exactly. As soon as Dems recognized the seriousness of this scandal, they demanded answers — quickly. They didn’t want a long investigation; they wanted an informative one. In response, the Justice Department, as disclosed emails later revealed, thought delaying tactics would help them weather the storm. Gonzales & Co. would offer a few documents here, a few there. They’d respond to some inquiries quickly, some slowly. Once lawmakers started learning more, and after administration officials got immunity from prosecution, Congress had more questions. That’s how investigations work.
For that matter, the White House certainly isn’t helping. Dems asked for testimony from Rove, Miers, and other WH aides weeks ago, only to find more delaying tactics and more stonewalling.
The president said the investigation is taking a long time “for political reasons.” On this, I think Bush is absolutely right — he’s just blaming the wrong side.
Update: An emailer notes that the question was: “What assurances can you give the American people that the department is delivering impartial justice to the American people?” Bush never did get around to answering that one, probably because he can’t.
I’m sorry to go off topic, but I have to share this- Patrick Leahy just emailed me- he’s voting no on the supplemental because there’s no withdrawl deadline. I’m so proud of him. What an awesome fucking senator we Vermonters have!
Bush really does look like hell lately, and he’s been sounding more incoherent than usual. I’ve got a feeling he’s been missing a lot of naps.
excellent news, haik. i love our senator. and i might assume bernie will vote against it as well? and peter?
It seems pretty obvious now that the Justice Department was/is being used to promote Repbulican candidates and agendas and that the President, his advisors and the AG are stonewalling efforts by Congress to find out what happened.
Will they find the smoking gun (emails)? Who knows. Not if Karl can destroy them in time.
However, I would stop pointing out Bush’s inarticulate behavior. It doesn’t really hurt him because the people who like him don’t care, and the others already dislike him.
Besides it would be possible to be inarticulate and a good president, its just that Bush is inarticulate and bad one.
Implying Congress “drug out” this investigation? You’re on drugs George … and the administration’s drugs of choice are: stonewalling, redacting content in disclosed documents, always pointing blame in new directions, communicating through secret and unofficial channels, claiming executive privelege for folks to whom it doesn’t apply …. the list goes on.
Peter yes. I don’t know about Bernie- you can’t always assume he’ll vote the right way- Usually, but not always. I think he has conflicting loyalties on occasion.
A drug is a drug is a drug is a drug. If he ever had a problem with alcohol he would have a problem with drugs.
How about the rediculous irony of the Justice Department conducting an “internal investigation?” Isn’t that exactly what he said about the Plame outing?
Also David Gregory asked why Bush should be considered credible on terrorism intellegence, and instead of answering that question, he stood there and threatened Gregory’s children.
What a piece of shit.
Update: An emailer notes that the question was: “What assurances can you give the American people that the department is delivering impartial justice to the American people?” Bush never did get around to answering that one, probably because he can’t. — CB
Actually, I blame it on the reporter. He has asked *two* questions (both long-ish, at that), thus leaving Bush to pick the one he wanted to answer (more or less) and ignore the other.
When you’re talking to someone as impaired as Bush, you should ask one — short — question at a time, which he can answer yes or no. And forget all those long “background summary” introductions to the questions; those only give the reporter a chance to preen a bit on camera and take up time. And you can bet that everyone in the audience is thinking “get to the point”. Bush particularly so, because, otherwise, he might forget what the correct spin is.
Libra’s right. White House reporters try to act like long-winded senators when they ask questions.
I found DUBYA’s answer to the latest “where’s Osama?” question to be quite telling:
“He is in a remote region of the world.”
Outstanding, they found him! Alright, which remote region of the world?
You know, it just occurred to me that it would be advantageous to a totalitarian/authoritarian regime that wanted endless war, such as the Cheney administration, to maintain that Osama Bin Laden is still at large even if in fact he is dead. Think of it. An endless boogey-man whose very message you could control. A hand puppet that elicits fear on cue and forces submission of the 74 millilion American Idol minions in teevee-land.
since it’s the administration’s fault that the process is taking so long.
and did any of the white house press whores care to make this point.
oh, silly me. of course not.
Whiny Ass Titty Baby In Chief:
Translation: My buddy testified AND produced documents! Who cares if he lied his ass off and didn’t produce the documents that were requested? Alberto is a good man! End this witch hunt already!
This man is on drugs. Lots of drugs:
The Middle East looked nice and cozy??? Everything looked fine on the surface? When? I am 45 yrs old and the middle east has been a fucking CAULDRON as long as I can remember. And 19 kids? Was Mohammed Atta a kid?
And this is… indescribably retarded:
Let’s see, the 19 “frustrated kids” were Saudis. So we’re “address[ing] the forms of government under which people live” in… IRAQ?
And he finally defines “victory”. Let’s see some polling to see how long Americans think this “victory” would take…
Apparently he thinks that it’s appropriate to make jokes when you’re talking about extending a quagmire:
And how can anyone argue with this kind of genius logic:
And I thought it was because Bush needed a bogeyman.
Libra’s right. White House reporters try to act like long-winded senators when they ask questions.
Comment by Dale
Agreed. veteran reporters should know better. Ask one very specific question and stay on it until you receive a factual answer. Well, with bush maybe not factual, but at least he would have to respond with something.
My vote for comment of the day…
Bush press confrence as a haiku:
I’m the decider
Because I know things ya know
You can’t fool again
Bush – perhaps accidentally – did slip into telling the truth for a moment there, when he said, “I’m halfway done anyway”.
That you are, Mr. President. That you are.