The heart of a growing scandal: john mcKay, election 2004, dino rossi, doc hastings & stefan sharkansky

The Bush administration is in shambles.

The guilty verdict of Scooter Libby, the Walter Reed "support-the-troops" scandal, and the dubious firings of GOP attorneys general (AKA the 'Gonzales 8') who wouldn't play political ball, have brought a tide of "accountability moments" rushing in on George W. Bush.

(...and has speeded up the 2008 presidential campaign- in full schwing already- spurred by the fact that 58% of the people wish George Bush was out of office right now).

Today, Justice Dep't officials will testify to the Senate Judiciary Committee, and defend their actions in the speading AG firings scandal.

Locally, it harkens back to the litigious and demogogic scurrying by Republicans after the 2004 gubernatorial that we thought at the time was merely frivolous, fruitless, serving only to crap on Governor Gregoire .

But now we're beginning to understand how, as the ferocity of the Bush administration's improprieties are exposed in McKay's and others cases, that the concerted efforts and coordinated thuggery of the BIAW, Stefan Sharkansky, and the State GOP probably came down from far above.

National money, and firepower were poured into the legal and public relations efforts during that ugly time. It served to poison the governor's early days in office, and tank her honeymoon poll numbers, but it and created public disdain  for Republicans that backfired in the 2006 elections.

(Hell, if they'd lean on an Attorney General like this, why wouldn't they a slip a few honeybees to a blogger delivering headlines to a mainstream media hungry for red meat?)

Sacked Seattle U.S. Attorney John McKay testified Tuesday that Ed Cassidy, then chief of staff to our own Rep. Doc Hastings, pressed him about any "future action" by the government on the 2004 election. 

“I was told the purpose of the call was to inquire on behalf of congressman Hastings about the status of ongoing investigations of voter fraud," McKay told Sen. Dianne Feinstein in the hearing.

"I stopped him and I told him I was sure that he wasn't asking me on behalf of Congressman Hastings," McKay told Feinstein, "because we both knew that would be improper.(Cassidy) agreed it would be improper and he ended the conversation in a most expeditious manner."

McKay immediately told his staff about the call and they agreed that "I'd stopped Mr. Cassidy from doing anything improper." McKay said.

"I was concerned and dismayed by the call," which came weeks after the election, according to McKay.

Hastings, the Pasco Republican was Chairman of the House Faux Ethics Committee at the time. As a matter of fact, Jimmy (from McCranium) points out in Horse's Ass's comment threads that:

Ed Cassidy was the same guy Hastings tried to install as the Ethics Chief legal council which of course led to the complete shutdown of the committee itself because it violated committee rules.

Monday we posted a 2005 interview with McKay where it was obvious that despite he's a Republican serving a corrupt administration, he's a Boy Scout- and not about to let voter fraud go by, as his conservative detractors would have you believe he did; and not about to act illegally or improperly in going after anybody without evidence.

He needed real evidence and a suspect to start an active investigation, which would have been a pipe-bomb in a very volatile political situation.

Again: there was no such evidence.

Nevertheless, he told us that "people claiming to be Republicans" told him he was a bad Republican because "... I wasn't going to bring a criminal investigation into a highly political process." (in other words, a law abiding public servant is a bad Republican)

And the harrssment wasn't restricted to the local yokels.

The Washington Post reports that the White House brought the big guns and pressure on McKay's very career to bear.

In remarks after the hearings, McKay said that officials in the White House counsel's office, including then-counsel Harriet E. Miers, asked him to explain why he had "mishandled" the governor's race during an interview for a federal judgeship in September 2006. McKay was informed after his dismissal that he also was not a finalist for the federal bench.McKay and eight other Bush-appointed prosecuted were fired without given reasons by the Bush Justice Department in actions the Democrats say were blatantly political.

Now we know why the Bush-appointed prosecutor could not, would not, sully his office, the Constitution and his good name by investigating- because of that inconvenient "zero evidence" thing. A judge in conservative Chelan having heard the evidence presented by the expensive Republican legal team ruled the 2004 gubernatorial election legal and clean.

So when will Stefan Sharkansky, Dino Rossi, and and the Evergreen Freedom Foundation stop screaming that Republicans were ripped off?

Probably never: because keeping that falsehood alive is the only rhetoric they've got. It doesn't win elections, but it sure keeps the pot boiling, and of course, the dough rolling in.

(We'd like to repeat our invitation to John McKay- the Democrats would love to have you aboard. How much more will you take before you learn that Republicans don't like you and certainly don't have your best interests at heart?)

Comments

[cowpotpi3]

Steve, since you are on about spelling, when you refer to another person it is YOU'RE not "your."

As to being a good person Steve, I actually live my life by my morality regardless of political affiliation. Something I doubt you've ever been accused of. And yes, business is doing fine.

[joanie]

So, Duff, you like humor and lightness and Jackson and Sharpton . . . both of whom I like too but to whom I do not listen.

No problem with Randi - you said.

So, let's get back to facts.

Did you read/listen to the link? Did that help? Or, do you prefer to stop at entertainment and leave facts for someone else to know?

You seem not to know much about the federal attorneys (thanks, Steve) situation and thought you'd like to know. Was I wrong?

[cowpotpi3]

What the right wing is currently lying about on this topic is a simple twist of the truth that their Kool-Aide drinking audience seems to be unable to grasp. They state that "oh it it common for an administration to replace US Attorneys." They do not, however, qualify this to get at the truth.

Yes an administration at the BEGINNING of a term will typically appoint new US Attorneys. They will NOT, however, strategically remove those who they perceive to be political enemies or to reward cronies MID-TERM. See the following:

Earlier this week, Mary Jo White, who was U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York from 1993-2002, also stated that the Bush administration’s prosecutor purge is unprecedented in “modern history”:

"You serve at the president’s pleasure, no question about that. … However, throughout modern history, my understanding is, you did not change the U.S. attorney during an administration, unless there was some evidence of misconduct or other really quite significant cause to do so. And the expectation was, so long as that was absent, that you would serve out your full four years or eight years as U.S. attorney."

So there is the full truth that the neo-right appears unwilling to tell.

[Duffman]

"Did you read/listen to the link?"

I did and I agree that the telephone calls that Mr Iglesias got were ugly. I still 'feel' however (can't quote you chapter and verse without research) that this happens (& has happened) on both sides of the isle. It's bad, no doubt...is it the worst ever?..you know I kind of doubt it.

[cowpotpi3]

Duff...read my last post please. Try and understand what it says. It pretty much answers your question. What you are repeating is a right-wing talking point. Dig a little deeper and you'll see the difference between reality and what you seem to believe on this.

[Duffman]

"Was I wrong?"...no, you weren't wrong...you're always right (in a left sort of way, that is....ha)

[sparky]

This morning in the NYtimes Select, Paul Krugman has this to say:

"The Gonzales Eight were fired because they wouldn’t go along with the Bush administration’s politicization of justice. But statistical evidence suggests that many other prosecutors decided to protect their jobs or further their careers by doing what the administration wanted them to do: harass Democrats while turning a blind eye to Republican malfeasance.

Donald Shields and John Cragan, two professors of communication, have compiled a database of investigations and/or indictments of candidates and elected officials by U.S. attorneys since the Bush administration came to power. Of the 375 cases they identified, 10 involved independents, 67 involved Republicans, and 298 involved Democrats. The main source of this partisan tilt was a huge disparity in investigations of local politicians, in which Democrats were seven times as likely as Republicans to face Justice Department scrutiny."

so, if you choose not to be a Bushco lackey...you get the hook...

[cowpotpi3]

That information is shocking and saddening. Even sadder is that those who are administration apologists will simply see this as some kind of Democratic scandal as they are still raw over the massive number of Republican ethics issues. How un-American can these twerps get?

[Duffman]

In terms of 'Americanism', I'd put my military record up against yours any day. And, who are YOU to judge who is or isn't 'un-American'...that's such an unfair statement...I will discount it totally.

[cowpotpi3]

Duffman...do you read what is posted?

OK I will review for you very succinctly so you don't get it out of order.

CCP Posts - Information about the truth of replacing US Attorneys and how Bush's current replacements do not fit in any historical context and have never happened before.

Duff Posts - "that this happens (& has happened) on both sides of the isle. It's bad, no doubt...is it the worst ever?..you know I kind of doubt it."

CPP Posts - Did you read what I posted. This clearly relates to your comment about "has it happened before." No it hasn't and it is highly irregular.

Sparky Posts - Stuff that is shocking about how all the US Attorneys have been told to go on a Democratic witch hunt.

CPP Posts - That is un-American and anyone who supports it is as well.

OK are you with me now? Unless you consider yourself an ultra partisan righty who will excuse this egregious use of executive power for a purely political agenda then you just weren't understanding. If it is true that IS un-American. Period. Wouldn't you agree?

As an aside, your military service does not make you more or less an American in and of itself. That you would bring it into conversation as a strawman arguement is pretty telling. If you are ex-military (not doubting you) you most likely understand that this has zero to do with patriotism. In fact, think about who is calling who unpatriotic over the past few years...it is exclusively right vs. left ideologically. I find it strange that it is accepted one way but not the other.

[Duffman]

Understand! Despite my military record, I would never consider myself either more or less 'American' than any one else.
Yes, what you/CPP post has impact and seems pretty terrible...I meant in terms of topic (i.e. 'scandal'); is it the worse ever...I still doubt it.
Believe me I'm no Repub apologist, nor would I ever follow 'their' (or anyone's) 'talking points'...ain't me! I am simply saying that in terms of 'scandals', neither party can claim innocence.

[cowpotpi3]

Correct nobody can claim innocence... but that is not any excuse for the status quo. The more apathy there is the more the political machines steal our liberty and make us pawns. It is our duty to call out ever single one of these crimes and see them prosecuted. In the words of a wise man, "If not us who, if not now when?"

It just so happens that of late the executive in power has been particularly egregious in his activities. I'll also tell you now that I'll call out liberals who do this kind of thing too. That is the vast, great difference between people like me and say Steve. (sorry Steve you are a convenient and apropos example)

[Duffman]

Agreed! Me too, always. Sorry, guess I mis-communicated what my feelings were.

[Steve]

Political Profiling?

Peasant are you saying the Government shouldn't investigate because of political affiliation.

No offense Cap. We each see things differently, you just happen to go with what is percieved as mainstream where I go with my love of this country and facts.

[mercifurious]

Duff again:
In terms of 'Americanism', I'd put my military record up against yours any day.

Yeah, just like you'd put your collegiate record and intellectual integrity up against anyone's.

Give it up Duff. We all sniffed-out the empty pajamas behind your CPU long ago.

"I'm a college grad, I'm a soldier, I'm a Rocket Surgeon & a Brain Scientist, I'm Mary Queen of Scotts, yadda-blah-yadda-blah-blah"

[Duffman]

Well, it's Mr 'we' again (I guess speaking on behalf of all...again) or do you have a mouse in your pocket.
I'm sorry but I must discount you as a sore loser...and bearer of bad words; have a good life. (you should really learn how to 'ignore')

[sparky]

No, Steve, but I am not surprised you would ask.

[coiler]

Steve, if you loved your country, you wouldn't be selling out to the neo-con logic, ya know?

[sparky]

Political profiling of Elected Democratic Officials

[Duffman]

Did I miss it...I couldn't see where they examined the 'cause' of the investigations?...

[meisha]

Get a life y'all

[Tommy008]

A big standing O to Joe Conason, author of It Can Happen Here, for telling Michael Medved what he could do with his insulting, superior atitude, and refusing to continue Litterman's interview with him, after the first commercial break. Conason was scheduled for at least a half hour, but couldn't take more than ten minutes of the ass.

[Tommy008]

Conason had the class to tell Medved in private, during the commercial break, although I'm not sure why Medved deserved the courtesy.

[coiler]

I heard him on KGO, was a great interview. More people are crushing the nuts of the right wing.

[MF]

"Crushing the nuts." I have seen that phrase somewhere else recently, ya know?

[coiler]

Yes, we have kept Izzy at bay, as well...

[joanie]

So "Americanism" is now define as "military service?"

C'mon Duffman, I expected better from you.

Lukobe, get your priggish posts ready cause I'm about to unleash some more ad hominems!

[joanie]

I still 'feel' however (can't quote you chapter and verse without research) that this happens (& has happened) on both sides of the isle

What a dolt! Why don't you take one incident at a time . . . why don't you hold each person accountable for their behavior. If you did that, you wouldn't have to guess who else has done it.

How can you vote or be a good citizen if all you can say it "well, I'm sure someone else did it first."

Can you imagine me teaching my kids any sort of civic responsibility that way? Good Lord, man, woman or it, get yourself some learning.

[Duffman]

"How can you vote or be a good citizen if all you can say it "well, I'm sure someone else did it first.""
Try to keep up...read my subsequent post...and please don't ever challenge my patriotish, right to vote or being a good citizen. All I'm saying is that I put my life on the line (and could have lost it) basically for you and your rights. So, poke me for all other things you want but don't go there.

[joanie]

Earlier this week, Mary Jo White, who was U.S. attorney. . . stated that the purge is unprecedented in “modern history”

Duffman, is there something you don't understand about Coiler's QUOTE?

However, throughout modern history, my understanding is, you did not change the U.S. attorney during an administration, unless there was some evidence of misconduct or other really quite significant cause to do so.

And yet, you still respond this way:

I still 'feel' however (can't quote you chapter and verse without research) that this happens (& has happened) on both sides of the isle. It's bad, no doubt...is it the worst ever?..you know I kind of doubt it.

And since you feel it might have happened before, you are not going to hold judge these firings.

God save us from Americans like you!

[Duffman]

""well, I'm sure someone else did it first.""

Did I say that...don't think so; how can you teach your 1st graders properly if you quote incorrectly?

[Duffman]

"God save us from Americans like you!"

No, you got it wrong young lady, it's Americans like me that have saved folks like you...and God forbid you ever forget that!

[joanie]

Even sadder is that those who are administration apologists will simply see this as some kind of Democratic scandal . . .

No, cowpotpi3, what is even sadder is that there are so many idiots like Duffman who will continue to let people like those in our current administration get away with murder, lying, improper conduct and fraud just because someone else might have done it before.

I think we should go back to making voting a privilege and test for informed brains before providing a ballot. Don't you?

Sorry, Duffman, but your feelings may do it for you but are irrelevant in my quest for a truthful, upstanding and honest government.

[joanie]

"God save us from Americans like you!"

No, you got it wrong young lady, it's Americans like me that have saved folks like you...and God forbid you ever forget that!

I've already forgotten it, Duff. So what war were you in? Viet Nam was a political war. Didn't save my bacon. Korea wasn't a war. Also, meant nothing to me. Iraq is a political war. I'm sure not worried about them.

In just which war was it that my life and American opportunity was so threatened? Hmm?

[joanie]

Yes, Duff, you did say. Not those words but the meaning is exactly the same.

You can try to wiggle out of it, but it speaks volumes for itself.

Wiggle away all you want. It was clearly put.

[Pugetsound]

Ph(J)oanie sez
"I think we should go back to making voting a privilege and test for informed brains before providing a ballot. Don't you?"

Thankfully we got a little thing called the Constitution. Tests and such really smacks of the segregated south and the bigots that use to administer them to keep minorities from voting. Evidently, Ph(J)oanie is a little more comfortable with that.

Ph(J)oanie sez
"In just which war was it that my life and American opportunity was so threatened? Hmm?"

In regards to Duff's honorable service to our country, it was people like him willing to serve that allowed our Dem and Rep Presidents to negotiate with our Cold War enemies. Peace through Strength. The reality is that all during the Cold War it was never preordained that we would come out on top. People like Duff did our country a tremendous service.

Did anyone catch Congressman Obey? Looks like he is fresh out of magic WANDS and it really illustrates the frustration of the Anti War activist with the party members that they thought would end this war.

[coiler]

Oh, he quotes Malkin, must be something worthy here...

[Duffman]

Despite your elitist attitudes, I would (still, if called upon) fight and die for your rights and way of life. How very sad that you think that way...You are Americans (I assume); who would you look to to defend you if this country was saturated with terrorists?...you could always look to me...but that probably seems so trite to you...lose a few friends or relatives in that regard and then spout your brave rhetoric. But for the Grace of God and the strength of our military...what would you do?...probably flee to another country...and then expect amnesty to 'come back home'...
OMG, is that what is being taught to our beautiful youth of today...how very, very sad...and all for the sake of foolish Politics.

[Duffman]

Thanks PS for your support; I find this incredibly dishearting...such obvious intelligent folks who obviously don't have a clue...and all because of Political slants. Makes you realize what a manipulated society we are, doesn't it. They can be 'led' like sheep...and all because of phony politics...what a waste of strength and talent.
MARCH, lemmings...do you not see the cliff...of course not...

[Pugetsound]

Coiler
"Oh, he quotes Malkin, must be something worthy here.."

Err, I just linked to her website cause that had the clip.
Actually, I couldn't get it directly off of youtube for some reason -probably operator error on my part- :) otherwise I would have linked to it directly.

Hey Ph(J)oanie:
What next, a Polltax?

[coiler]

"Watergate, watergate, watergate". I loved it when the Meathead used to rub it in Archie's face way back when. So get used to it.

[Duffman]

Makes sense...can only relate to TV...we could be in deep s*** (trouble)...

[Pugetsound]

"Thanks PS for your support; I find this incredibly dishearting...such obvious intelligent folks who obviously don't have a clue...and all because of Political slants."

No problem Duff, I paid for college by serving in the military. Never met a finer group than those I was fortunate enough to serve with.

In regards to this website, from Blam who pays the bills that allow us to blather on down it is a liberal website. The great thing about this website is that you get to take the tempature of the otherside. AND I have changed my mind on some things from things points made on this website (and damn you gotta love that article by Mercifurious on the dude with those crazy signs.) But your not gonna run into Voltaire here. And yeah, it is a liberal website and so your fighting an uphill battle. Bethatasitmay, I don't like the fact that W and his administration fired the US Attorneys in such a manner. And shame on me that when the story first came out I glossed over it. And I don't care if Clinton did it as a matter of course at the start of his administration. Clinton isn't my standard of what is right.
Oh yeah, I do agree with you on Bryan Suits. When he is 'on' doing an interview he really makes me laugh with his sense of humor.

[Duffman]

Amen, thanks again. I wasn't born in this country; I was drafted and served in the US Army in the 60's (while playing in a Rock 'n Roll band). I did the Viet Nam thing and didn't become a naturalized citizen until I got out of the Army. I had to take a test to become an American (wasn't born into it)...and (as corny as this might sound) I was never more proud than when I took the oath of citizenship. As an initial 'foreigner' I continue to be amazed at how folks take this country for granted...I will go to my grave thanking God for the opportunities I've had here for myself and my family. I guess I've pretty much given away my age and probably no surprises...as I probably act as an old fogey....ha - I enjoy this blog because it stimulates...it portends everything about America that I admire...except what at times seems like disloyalty...

[Armand Tanzarian]

My unsolicited two cents.

Republican Argument: US Attorneys are employed at the pleasure of the president. Therefore it is not illegal or improper to fire them.

Democratic Argument: US Attorneys are employed at the pleasure of the president. It is common for a new administration to ask for resignation from existing US Attorneys and appoint new attorneys who are believed to better represent the ideology of the new administration.

However, firing a US Attorney who is dutifully investigating evidence of wrong doing is obstruction of justice. Threatening a US Attorney who refuses to prosecute a case for lack evidence is intimidation.

These attorneys were fired to thwart investigations that would harm the republican party or for refusing to prematurely or falsely bring cases against democrats for republican gain. I believe this is not only blatantly wrong, but illegal. And if the rest of the US Attorneys weren’t afraid of being canned, I bet they could prove it.

[Duffman]

You should testify...since you obviously know ALL the facts. I'm not saying there wasn't a serious fault committed here...all I'm saying under the topic of 'scandal' is that both parties have their share of it...and which is the worst scandal...is it always the one being presently discussed? Think about it.
Let he/she who is without 'scandal' cast the first stone.

[mark]

"Korea wasn't a war." - Joanie

Really? tell that to my old history teacher in HS, the one who was a tank commander at the big Bugout on the Yalu in the winter of 1950 (something he would NOT talk about). I did my service in the Navy in the early 80's-figured at 18 I did not do anything yet to pay my debt to society, but did not realise being 18 that I was tossing the dice as far as my life/freedom/rights were concerned.

But to hear this from a supposed educator- what sacrifices have you made? Where were you on St. Crispus' day?

[Duffman]

Mark...he/she/it obviously doesn't get it...don't waste your time...this a blog that is so far left that it seems they regard the military much like Mrs Clinton...a nuisance...or in her words 'what the f*** are you good for anyway'. They are the first to condemn and will no doubt be the first to cry for help.

[Pugetsound]

Mark
Spot on. Hard to believe that she is an educator. Her compadre, Snarky, is also an 'educator' for the Seattle School District.
But let me channel her thoughts for a second...oh yes, I think I have what she is going to say -correct me if I am wrong, Ph(J)oanie- yes, of course what Ph(J)oanie is gonna say is something along the lines that it was a 'police action' not a war as if that meant anything to the dead and wounded. But Ph(J)oanie is just pullin a weasel.

And Duff, some of the best soldiers I ever had the honor of serving with were not American citizens. Men and women from countries such as the Phillipines and Guam have done our county proud.

[Duffman]

It's no wonder we are having such apparent difficulties with our educational system here in the State of Washington...this is so sad...such delusions of grandeur...and what do our taxes pay 'per student' ?...and what does N and/or S Dakota pay per student...and the results are....
Keep supporting your union educators...like lawyers...they are the winners!