How About a MONICA Summary for the Cube Rats? ------>>>

[Stephanie]

Could somebody please give us a quick rundown? I don't have time to wade through all the threads until after work. What are the highlights? Give us the dirt! Thanks in advance. :hi:

[NavyDavy]

1. a lot of I dont remembers and i can't remembers; she did say one

of the MN US Attys was hired due to their being a republican

[peacetalksforall]

3. Yeah - this was a classic for all times - she said she didn't know

that the candidate was a Democrat, but she knew that the candidate was a liberal.

[CottonBear]

7. There was a grumbling roar from the crowd when she said that. n/t

[ShortnFiery]

12. being a despicable "liberal" is even worse than being a "democrat"

in the eyes of the God Fearin', Bar Exam Flunkin' grad-U-ates from Regent University. :eyes:

God wants only Republicans to lead our country - it's written in the Bible Cliff notes published through his intermediary ---> Regents. :wow: :P

[peacetalksforall]

2. I haven't been able to listen to all, but one highlight is that the

careful and persistent questioning of Cong. Arthur Davis resulted in Goodling saying that some testimony of Gonzales was inaccurate. !!!!!

[NavyDavy]

4. yes that also....Rep Ellison from MN did great also....unlike

the repuke reps all they can do is fawn over her University and how great she is!!

[peacetalksforall]

6. Ellison is brand new - but he's fast - he knew the interruption from

the Republican wasn't appropropriate. Lee allowed it to go through again to give the Republican the benefit of the doubt about where he was going, but it was obvious that it wasn't procedure and he asked for 'point of order?' and continued. He saw through the tactic and went forward like a determined racer - but all very maturely. This was about the MN selection of Palouze (sp?) who had no prosecuting experience -over a very qualified 'libbrul'.

[Robbien]

5. A bit of translation from FiredogLake. The part where she says Gonzo lied

Wow, that was fun. Rep Davis was basically asking Goodling about all the inconsistencies in AG's testimony. Her lawyer interrupted, asking for AG's testimony. Then Dan Lundgren pulled some parliamentary procedure. The committee voted to table that, but there was no clerk to record the vote. So now we have the vote, 17-8, Lundgren's motion fails.

Clerk corrects: 17-9.

Davis (AL): Ms. Goodling, when did you first become aware that AG made public statements that were inaccurate.

MG I saw the Press conference.

Davis: Did you communicate to AG that you thought his testimony wasn't right. Did you read accounts of testimony. Did you think inaccurate.

MG Some of it is muddled.

Davis: Did you communicate to McNulty that AG's statements were not accurate.

MG That was toward the end of my time. I spoke to AG on Thursday or Friday of my last full week in the dept.

Davis: Was there anything that made you uncomfortable.

MG I could not longer work. He proceeded to stay, Let me tell you what I can remember, he laid out for me his recollection of the process of replacement of USAs. He laid out a little bit of it, he asked if I had any reaction to his iteration. I remember thinking that this was something that we all had to talk about. I didn't think it was appropriate.

Guttierez (IL): Yield to Davis.

Davis: Please finish regarding conversation with AG.

MG: There was more, but I'm having trouble remembering it.

Davis You said part of the conversation was in appropriate.

MG Unconfortable.

MG I did not know if it was appropriate for both of us to be discussing our recollections.

Davis: Why inappropriate.

MG I knew we'd have to talk about our recollections. I think in all fairness, he was just talking to someone on his staff.

Davis: Did you tell AG that his statements were not fully accurate?

MG No

MG I feel like after he had the press conference, people had already raised questions.

Davis Do you think AG appreciated that he made statements that were not accurate.

MG No. He clarified the remarks from his press conference. I think he's apologized for that.

Davis: Did AG discuss circumstances around termination.

MG A little bit, he said he thought everyone on list was peformance related reason. He thought DAG testified about Cummins, he said that he thought that was wrong. He really thought Cummins was on list for performance reason. There was more to the discussion. He laid out what he remembered then asked if I had any reaction to it.

Davis You said AG asked if he had any reaction. Did you think AG was trying to shape recollection.

MG No. I just did not know if that was a conversation we should be having. To the extent that any of your questions were about testimony, I thought they were press conferences.

Davis do you think it's important that AG give accurate responses to Congress. Would you come abck to correct testimony.

Wasserman-Schutlz: One minute to Davis.

Davis You've said that if you discovered there was something incomplete you'd come back and correct it.

MG I'm going to need to consult with counsel. I was saying that if, when I go back to review the transcript Id' want to consult.

Davis Did McNulty go back and make any attempt to correct record?

MG I don't know of any.

Davis Did he go back and correct statements in closed briefings.

MG I remember hearing Dept was going to work on questions.

[iconoclastic cat]

8. "But, like, Jesus said it was okay to break the rules!" nt

[WilliamPitt]

9. Here

http://www.truthout.org/DOJGoodlingTestifies.shtml

[hlthe2b]

18. Thank you, Will....

:thumbsup:

[McCamy Taylor]

10. Her corporate lawyers that she can not afford went ballistic when she threw Gonzo under the bus.

When Davis (Dem.) got her to admit that Gonzo had said things that were not true and Davis asked when, her high powered corporate attorney muscle were all over her with objections and requests to huddle and consult.

From this, I am guessing that they are looking out for Gonzo's well being.

When she came back, Davis continued to question her, as his colleagues kept giving up their time to him. I think they had planned in advance that he would be one of the major grillers for the Dems. Monica admitted that she quit Justice, because when she called AGAG to arrange a transfer, he told her a cock and bull story about how the federal attorney firing went down and that the conversation made her very "uncomfortable" (her own term) although she would not go so far as to admit that Gonzo was trying to coach her. The way she put it, she knew that they were both involved in a case that was being investigated and she did not think that they should be discussing it.

Indeeed.

Recall that Gonzo made a big deal about how he has made a point about not talking to anyone about the attorney firings or reading anything about it or doing anything that might interfere with the investigation. How does that statement to Congress reconcile with Monica's testimony that he attempted to see if his "memory" was going to be the same as her "memory".

She became visibly distraught discussing her phone conversation with Gonzo. Lots was left unsaid.

[ShortnFiery]

13. Like it is with "The Mob" - those Corporate Lawyers belong to The Unitary Executive (Mob Bosses).

:wow: :popcorn:

[jilln]

17. Remarkable that she knows enough about law not to discuss it...

and yet not enough not to break the law herself when hiring yes men.

[underpants]

11. The first three hours was completely Xanax free

Have you ever heard someone with a squeaky voice talk nonstop for about three hours? I introduce you to Ms.Goodling

[ShortnFiery]

15. a.k.a. motor mouth

She talked nonstop when responding to questions ... sort of like the little girl "sis" character on the radio show "Fibber McGee and Molly."

"U betcha Mister" she seemingly could not STFU when answering questions posed by Democrats ... <arrgh!>

[jilln]

19. I think that, along with the endless Republican "thank yous" and "I'm a Christian too" and

"you graduated cum laude" or whatever are just designed to run the clock out.

[JDPriestly]

20. I disagree.

In the early part of her testimony, Monica desperately tried to prepare for the ultimate question about whether she and others in the AG's office attempted to prevent the fired attorneys from speaking out about their firings by threatening that "bad things" would be said about the attorneys if they spoke out.

Also, Monica immediately expressed her concern about the caging lists. She was trying to play the innocent about those lists by emphasizing that the origin of the term "caging list" is in direct mail (a hint about Rove's involvement?). She also admitted to a meeting in the White House and suggested that Gonzales was much more knowledgeable about the fired attorneys than he has admitted. She stated that she was sure Gonzales had seen a list of the attorneys' names. She spoke of the 8 attorneys and seemed puzzled that 9 were fired.

Monica was clearly trying to anticipate questions. Like any good witness or lawyer, she was trying to control her testimony, trying to frame the nasty facts and get them out early in a way that was positive for her. She said from the get go that she never intended to do anything wrong. Of course, she did all kinds of things that were very wrong and admitted having done a lot of them.

Interestingly, the only Republican who seemed to "get" much less react to the horrible damage that Monica Goodling inflicted on this administration was Lungren. The rest of them just did not seem to understand that she was confessing to all kinds of wrongdoing and incriminating her bosses as she did it.

She seemed very sweet and did behave in a very poised manner. She is clearly an extremely obedient, well-behaved young woman. Her daddy will be proud of her as will many Republicans -- at least those who do not understand what was happening.

I sympathize with her. I was also very naive as a young woman and probably still am rather naive in many ways. Some of us were just overprotected in your childhoods and youth. Unfortunately, Monica was not taught to challenge authority or to think critically.

Normally, law school professors train attorneys to think critically by using the Socratic method in their instruction. The students read a case, and the professors ask not just questions about what the case says but what the abstract rules or law that are drawn from the case mean and how they would apply in various hypothetical situations. A good professor challenges students with ever more difficult questions -- and ultimately usually the student comes to realize the complexity of law and the issues that lawyers deal with -- including moral, ethical, human rights and fairness issues. Apparently Monica was not well trained in that respect. The more brutal (intellectually) the use of the Socratic method in law school, the better the legal training. And trust me on this, it is painful to be the student facing the questions in a law class because sometimes the questioning does not end until the student has been completely humiliated or baffled or made the fool. That's also an important part of the training. It is humbling and prepares attorneys for encounters in the courtroom.

Monica also did not seem to have a sense of legal ethics. Too bad that she went to such a second rate school.

[Stephanie]

14. thanks all!

:hi:

Sounds like I can skip the first three hours of the repeat and tune in for the good stuff!

[hlthe2b]

21. I echo that.... thanks all

:7

[Stephanie]

16. Updates greatly appreciated!

We thank you from our mind-numbing, flourescent-lit hell-holes.

[RedEarth]

22. TPMuckraker has excellent summaries of her testimony

http://tpmmuckraker.com/