Why was U.S. Attorney Carol Lam Fired? Here are a Few Political Possibilities. Tell Us What You Think the Reason Was.

I believe she was fired - as many of the others here have already said - because she was getting too close to exposing the Cheney connection. I also agree that the Bushies will do *anything* to distract attention from this - up to and including another "9/11" or a nuclear attack on Iran.

Worse, I find myself very cynical with regard to the judges already in place who would hear this case if Bush does what he has threatened to do if subpoenae are issued: take the case to court. He has already put unknown numbers of cronies in place in U.S. attorney positions and judgeships all over the country.

I find myself believing that our entire justice system has become corrupted with Bush/Cheney cronyism; and thus, I'm very cynical about any REAL justice being done.

Kate
Scrawling graffiti on whited sepulchres everywhere!

I would bet that the Wilkes/Foggo/Lewis/Dukestir case is just a small portion of an enormous scandal. My theory is that Duke was funneling money through the defense appropriations process to "military contractors" like Wilkes. These companies were merely shells - accounting entities created to launder that money. The question is where that money went and why.

One guess is a GOP dirty tricks slush fund containing tens of millions of untracked, unclaimed, untraceable dollars. Dollars that could be used to pay off operatives for running phone scams and other such nonsense.

Another possibility is that it filtered its way back to cheney's OVP to provide an off-the-record operating budget to fund whatever covert plans the Dickster might have dreamed up. Things like, oh say, paying Italian operatives to steal letterhead from the Niger embassy in Rome and create the forged papers regarding Yellowcake uranium to Iraq.

This second possibility has some interesting supporting facts. These include Eliot Abrams' "lessons learned from Iran-Contra" which included the idea that administration covert ops are best run from the OVP. Also, cheney's assertion that the OVP is not part of the Executive Branch, (since he is the president of Congress - specious logic at best ... more bullshit from David Addington I bet), and hence does not have to answer to anyone about anything. And finally, cheney's $140,000 payoff to Duke in the form of "The Dukestir" - not proven but Oh so fishy.

I also agree with the above posts which say that they're on the run on this one. Even the stuff on the surface is damning. bu$hie boy definitely had that "backed into a corner and ready to slash somebody's throat" look to him as he threatened Dems about their "partisan fishing expedition".

And again last night I heard their defenders use the "Bill Clinton fired all 93" excuse. I figure if all they've got to work with is a transparently disingenuous twisting of the facts, then they are screwed.

Are you ready to RUMBLE??????

In the near corner, weighing in at 300 million strong, is the very pissed off American public and their elected representatives. In the far corner, weighing in at a couple million, is the bu$h crime family and their enablers. Let's have a fair and clean fight ...

Yeah right, who am I kidding. The bu$h/neocon axis of hegemony is now more dangerous than at any point in the past 6 years. I would say that plans for that war in Iran are now being expedited. They know they need BIG MOJO to distract us from this one.

Apparently the prosecutors were given a choice to either join the criminal Bush gang and turn each of their offices into a Party apparatus or be removed. Lam, to her credit, chose the latter.

However, progressives really should not celebrate these revelations prematurely. When the Bushies can't stand the heat, they don't get out of the kitchen. They bomb. And this time it will mean Iran. And that will mean much more heat for a great number of people, including US service personnel, and will give Bush and Cheney more excuses to hide more criminal activity and usurp more powers of other branches of government.

Hold on because it is going to be a bumpy ride!

I think the "gang" in the whitehouse are planning another 911 and then they will be going after anyone whom they deem a threat. So they are stacking the deck by getting rid of anyone they do not like.
Who knows in this godless stolen land what the white devils will do next.

You can bet on Impeachment. You can bet on Bush/Cheney resignation. You can bet this entire Attorney General Firings is a script for the Impeachment/Resignation scenario. You can bet that the corrupt global elite who have hijacked the USA are throwing us the heads of Bush and Cheney to satisfy the blood thirst of the American public which has become too knowledgeable of the inner workings of a military-for-profit/banking/media/drug syndicate which risks losing everything unless they quiet the fast growing 911 Truth movement which finally has the goods on these animals. Unless they stop the surge of Truth, all their globalist wet dreams will be over. It seems they flew too close to the sun on 911.

watch 911 Truth Surge on google video and
Eat The Inbred Global Elite

There are so many scenarios in which this could have happened, many of them listed already, that I want to address a larger issue........and that has to do with the REAL pursuit of justice.
Bush had a look I've seen before on his face last night.......someone that has something to hide, and is reacting in a primal manner (which he does oh so well..) with threatening gestures in hopes of scaring off the pursuit (bluffing, as someone mentioned earlier..). Now is the time to really tighten the screws on these guys.......they have gotten away with far too much for too long. If this and other "issues" with the Bush Administration are not pursued to the fullest by those who have the power to do so, I'm afraid I'll lose any remaining faith I might have in the justice system.....

The federal prosecutors were fired to get ready for the 2008 election by naming more loyal Bushies to those posts; note that most fired were in swing states where elections have been close. Rove's Texas strategy in the past has been to announce investigations of Dem opponents in close races. Why else should his sidekick deputy (with no prosecutorial experience) be sited in Arkansas? Anticipating Hilary as Dem nominee? Only Lam doesn't quite fit this rationale - but she was a real thorn - and obviously had integrity rather than loyalty. So the Rovian strategy has several purposes: get rid of those who demonstrated more loyalty to the rule of law than the rule of Bush, which sends a strong message to the others to toe the line - and get ready for 2008 by filling the slots with cronies who'll do Rove's bidding.
I hope someone's checking on the kind of cases the other loyal Bushies are undertaking - for example the prosecution of border agents and sheriffs for catching Mexican drug dealers and illegals.

Is stand up and repeat as loudly and as long as needed, "What do they have to hide? Why won't they testify under oath?"

Of course it is hard to get such voices heard when right wing conservative voices continue to dominate the news programs. This is why the fairness doctrine needs to be reinstated.

I saw something over the weekend that made me gasp when few things make me gasp anymore. I think it might have been on CNN. I would think it would have been Fox but the had so little coverage of the "anniversary" of the Iraq War that I'm pretty sure it was CNN.

Anyway, there was some right wing blowhard who looked to be in his early 40s, young enough, certainly, to be in Iraq, being interviewed by a female anchor, The blowhard was saying that anyone who advocated withdrawal was endangering our troops and engaging in treason, basically. They then cut to film of a Veterans Against the Iraq War meeting. There were all these heartbreakingly young men who served in Iraq and what looked like their parents mostly, having what would have been called a conciousness raising session in another war in another time. They cut back to the female achor who then asked the blowhard if those young men, our brave soldiers who walked the walk associated with blowhard's talk, were unpatriotic and undermining our country and blowhard said yes, yes they were, and continued to say, "You have what, 30 million people in the military? You're bound to have a few bad apples."

I was so shocked by that brazen, arragant, disrespect of these young soldiers and I wished blondie had had one of those young, beautiful, articulate men on to address something that is very, very ugly and a fairness doctrine would help accomplish this.

I wish I had stayed to get the names of the blowhard and anchor but I was so shocked and appalled I changed the channel.

Going after Brent Wilkes.

Does anyone else notice that claiming "politics" is getting a little like when someone conviently and inappropriately plays the race card? Someone is guilty of corruption but they happen to be republican so 1. no fellow republican would ever consider calling them on it. 2. if a Democrat dare say anything, well it has to be politics.

Has anyone made the connection between the terrorizing of the justice department and the logical persuit of taking the next step in the Valrie Plame case?
The one thing this scandal has accomplished is to have successfully pushed the guilty conviction for perjury of Scooter Libby off the headlines and out of the public consciousness. Why is no one suggesting that the wrong doing, now essentially proven, in this case be followed up on? Exposing a covert operation, putting in jeapordy the very lives of any person who may have ever had any contact with Valrie Plame, including any one else who was using the cover of the brass nameplate company Brewster Jennings she claimed to work for, to say nothing of the ongoing efforts they were conducting, all were compromised by her outing. The techical name for the crime here committed is treason, and during war time the punishment for this crime is..., well how is it that this case is now mute?
Could the shelving of this case have anything to do with these firings? Am I the only one who sees this?

At this point the concern should be: what do or what did the remaining USAs have to comply with to remain employed.Surely they all are watching and either shaking or laughing.This cannot be the most productive state of mind for anyone sitting in judgment.Or even worse someone who picks and chooses who to attack and with what force.
If nothing else this total manipulation and unlawful use of another arm of government should heighten the public awareness.A few have mentioned this in the last couple days.Don't get distracted.Stay focused.What is presented as the major news has nothing to do with what is going on.You only see what is given.Get it?
Hint: look at a current and future construction of oil/gas pipelines and exploration of same.It's all one big business.The rest is a distraction.The bank is empty now.No one cares what anyone says.The job has been done while everyone looked at the news.Besides it's their war with the people they have robbed.Don't get distracted.

...honest enough not to need to govern from a bunker was the Eisenhower administration, and Ike would probably freak out to see the treacherous right-wing death-cult his party has morphed into...

would buzzflash please stop asking such obvious questions? do you think us this stupid?

Remember Brent Wilkes, the defense-connected contractor implicated in the Cunningham case, who hosted those infamous parties at the Watergate and the Westin in DC? Kyle "Dusty" Foggo was alleged to have attended those parties. On Fri., May 5, 06, Porter Goss unexpectedly resigned. On Mon., May 8th, Lam notified Mike Battle in DC that she was going to execute a search warrant on Foggo's executive office. Foggo was Executive Director of the CIA, number three behind Goss. Sometime around the 10/11 she is fired. The day before she was to execute the search warrant she is fired. Coincidence? Her firing looks like an obstruction of justice case. I hope Sen. Leahy continues his admirable stand. Let the subpoenas fly!

She dared to investigate lawbreakers on the right side of the aisle.

She dared to follow the constitution instead of the dictatorship.

She did her job.

She upheld the Constitution.

She upheld the interests of the American People.

It is the Dictatorship that Fired Her that must be fired.

Give this Congress time to do their investigations. The pressure to impeach is good, but let us keep the word out without insulting our side. They are doing the investigations that will be necessary to net the lot of them.

Criminals, Treasonous Criminals the lot of them.

And as for you Republican people out there that voted for these criminals and continue to defend their lawbreaking? You are no better than they are. You are traitors and should not be welcome among loyal Americans.

When you get your hungry blood thirsty noses out of the gore you created in Iraq, you might find you have no nation left. You have driven it over a cliff.

Not OUR nation: YOURS.

So strongly that she sacrificed her job, rather than cave-in to the demands of this fascist junta that's seized control of our government. What could happen now that's worse? State sponsored violence, that's what. As in Nazi Germany, with our very own home-grown Brown Shirts doing the dirty work. What can we do to get back our beloved America? End the Iraq war, that's what. Because one victory, that's all it'll take.

"In the end, it appears the prosecutors were fired for one of two reasons: either they were holding up Republicans to the rule of law (and digging deep enough to reach the White House); or they refused to indict Democrats for purely partisan purposes."

That covers it for those who were fired -- or forced to resign. Except for Fitzgerald, have we any reason to suppose that those federal prosecutors who were not fired did not, regularly, indict Democrats on insufficient grounds while letting corrupt Republicans off the hook? Even a cursory look at the record reveals that Democrats were investigated 8 times as often as Republicans -- more often, that is, than a black driver is pulled over by the police compared to a white one.

This is a potentially bottomless pit we are entering. Considering that this administration owes everything to an anomolous, unprecedented, un-Constitutional, and morally putrid decision by the US Supreme Court, is it not time to stop giving them the benefit of the doubt with respect to their intentions? "You ain't never done nothing," sang Dylan, 35 years ago, "but lie and deceive" -- a chillingly accurate statement to the present, outlaw, rulers of the this country. The only question is: Can our elected representatives find the courage to bring these obvious thieves, hypocrites, and murderers to justice?