Constant's pations

If it's more than 30 minutes old, it's not news. It's a blog.

Thursday, March 29, 2007

Sampson Inconsistent Statements On Documentation to AG

Sampson, if he is not lying, appears to not understand his contradictions.

How does someone like this [a] graduate from law school, [b] pass the bar, [c] survive disbarment investigations, [d] avoid DoJ OPR reviews; and [e] get into the Department of Justice with this kind of access to key decision makers?

Someone tell me we aren't in the Sampson Zone.

* * *

Clip one shows Sampson did provide written recommendations, which he says Gonzalez reviewed. These must have been in writing. [ Ref ]

Yet, yet clip two shows Sampson saying that he didn't provide any memos to the Attorney General. Ref

The two statements to not reconcile. Either Sampson did or did not document something; he's contradicted himself.

Things that should have been documented were supposedly not; yet, things that show Gonzalez was briefed or not briefed cannot be nailed down to a specific document.

___ What is Sampson's view of what a "written" document is?

___ Is a list of recommendations not the same as a memo?

___ How do we reconcile these two inconsistent statements?

___ What is Sampson's view of what a memo to Gonzalez is?

___ Is a list of recommendations not a memo?

* * *

Time to stop messing around with the witness statements. We need an audit of the workflows so Sampson and Gonzalez can be held to account for the apparent reckless disregad for basis internal controls, workflows, and other things which an attorney of this statute should be able to logically think through.

Then, we need to look at how they, despite this bungling in staff notes, were able to convince anyone that they should be in the Department of Justice.

Then the burden shifts to how they were able, despite this bungling, able to survive DOJ IG audits, or credibly convince anyone that they should be seriously considered.

This does not add up. These people are idiots. How were they able to move from their stupidity to the results: No accountability, and illegal conduct which defies the Constitutional requirement to include the Senate in the Attorney confirmation process.

We have a group of attorneys in Congress and the Department of Justice who are stupid. They are running the country. They refuse to enforce the Constitution. Americans should not be surprised why people living in caves are able to run circles around the Americans engaged in rabbit hunting in Afghanistan and Iraq: Their leaders are incompetent; and the Congress is incapable of understanding this problem, or their role in assenting to recklessness by the American legal community.

Stupid lawyers overseeing stupid lawyers has given us war crimes. We need real leaders in the US government not stupid people who have somehow slipped through the bar screen process. Bars are barriers, not rubber stamps. Lawyers with an ideology are incapable of adjusting to reality, much less comprehending when their idology is illegal, reckless and unconstitutional.

America's leaders in the District of Colubia are buffoons.