"take five for freedom" goodling = neck bolts for gonzales. . .

sen. leahy has indicated
that the DoJ is "hopelessly
conflicted", in a letter dated
march 30, but just released by
his office today. . .

he asks alberto gonzales to advise whether
the DoJ will agree that a "special counsel"
need be appointed to advise the senate judiciary
committee about matters related to monica
"take five for freedom" goodling. . .

he goes on to point out that it might be
unprecedented for the DoJ to be paying a
"career" (important for hatch act
analysis) employee that has asserted the
5th, and or refused, prospectively, to
cooperate with an investigation of this sort. . .



and, just in case the images
are blurry on your monitor at home:

". . .On a related matter, we understand that you initially ordered an investigation by the Department's Office of Professional Responsibility and that a joint Office of Inspector General and Office of Professional Responsibility investigation is now under way. Is Ms. Goodling cooperating with that investigation? It is our understanding that career Department employees are required to cooperate with OIG and OPR investigations.

We are told by the Department that despite Ms. Goodling's unwillingness to testify, she nonetheless remains on your payroll. Has it ever happened in the history of the Department of Justice that an attorney has refused to cooperate with OIG or OPR or asserted Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination and remained an employee of the Department? Please provide information regarding any precedent for these extraordinary circumstances. . ."

the screws are tightening on gonzales'
neck-bolts, no? he should resign; monica
will take a deal, and rove will be indicted.

i can dream, right?