Dems should be doing something to improve the nation. Instead, politics as usual and you are as usual a political hack on the issue.

On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 11:36:12 -0700, NoName wrote:

>On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 08:19:07 -1000, "Alvin E. Toda"
>wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 22 Mar 2007, Florida wrote:
>>
>>> http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/03/21/attorneys.email.gap/index.html?eref=rss_politics
>>>
>>>> From Kevin Bohn
>>> CNN Washington Bureau
>>>
>>> WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A 16-day gap in e-mail records
>>> between the Justice Department and the White House
>>> concerning the firing of U.S. attorneys last year has
>>> attracted the attention of congressional
>>> investigators.
>>>
>>> In an investigation into whether seven U.S. attorneys
>>> were fired for political rather than professional
>>> reasons, the Justice Department on Monday handed over
>>> 3,000 pages of documents to the House and Senate
>>> Judiciary committees.
>>>
>>> But the documents included no correspondence about
>>> the firings in the critical time period between
>>> November 15, 2006, and December 2, 2006, right before
>>> the attorneys were asked for their resignations.
>>>
>>> In addition, citing executive privilege, President
>>> Bush has refused a congressional request to have his
>>> key aide Karl Rove and former White House counsel
>>> Harriet Miers, who was involved in the firings,
>>> testify under oath. [....]
>>
>>It seems like Watergate. The scandal is getting more
>>broad at this point.
>
>That gap in the Emails does present questions. One would
>think that the Bushies would be eager to present an explanation
>if there is indeed a benign reason for no Emails during that
>time period. Such as "the staff gathering the Emails to send
>to Congress simply made an error and so here they are --
>and you can see there is no "smoking gun" to hide."
>
>The more times Tony Snow has to say he doesn't know this or
>that the more I wonder why he doesn't find out the answers?
>
>It may be that there is no one person in the Bush administration
>in charge of "handling" this inquiry. And that presents the question,
>"Why not"? It is not in the admistration's best interests to not
>provide answers to reasonable questions as quickly as possible.
>
>Seems to me it is pretty clear that Gonzalez, who after all heads
>up Justice, is not in charge of the response. He is the person who
>should be speaking up and providing the answers. He seems almost
>irrelevant at this point.
>
>I think the press should be asking Gonzalez for answers, not Tony
>Snow.