"And I Love What I'm doing.."

Hubert Sulmin talks about Passion

Cartoonish Work Ethic in Iraq

From the New York Times: Lawmakers Describe 'Being Slimed in the Green Zone' (link)

"Spin City," Moran grumbled. "The Iraqis and the Americans were all singing from the same song sheet, and it was deliberately manipulated."

But even such tight control could not always filter out the bizarre world inside the barricades. At one point, the three were trying to discuss the state of Iraqi security forces with Iraq's national security adviser, Mowaffak al-Rubaie, but the large, flat-panel television set facing the official proved to be a distraction. Rubaie was watching children's cartoons.

When Moran asked him to turn it off, Rubaie protested with a laugh and said, "But this is my favorite television show," Moran recalled.

Porter confirmed the incident, although he tried to paint the scene in the best light, noting that at least they had electricity.

"I don't disagree it was an odd moment, but I did take a deep breath and say, 'Wait a minute, at least they are using the latest technology, and they are monitoring the world,' " Porter said. "But, yes, it was pretty annoying."

Hillary's Christmas Present that Keeps on Giving

This is originally from a NYTimes article on 4-20-00 called: Giuliani and Clinton Argue On Gifts and Environment

Officials in the Giuliani campaign questioned how the Clinton campaign could have accepted a soft-money contribution from Ms. Mannerud. Congressional investigators found that in 1995, Ms. Mannerud solicited a $20,000 contribution to the Democratic National Committee from Jorge Cabrera, who later pleaded guilty to smuggling 6,000 pounds of heroin into the country. The contribution was returned.

I was searching for background information on the Giuliani/ Clinton Senate race and stumbled across this article then did just a little more searching and noticed some of the fringe sites that covered this issue back in 00'. Personally my favorite about this whole thing is the picture Senator Clinton took with Jorge Cabrera, the convicted heroin smuggler, in front of the White House Christmas tree.


Ho Ho Hooohhhh my goodness... (I don't want to judge Hillary too harshly because she gave back the donations from the heroin proceeds (and is 6,000 lbs of heroin even that much?.. not sure here) but her current attempts to raise the maximum donations from any donor she can get her hands on will no doubt lead to similar embarrassments :(from the USA TODAY) Big givers propel Clinton, other 2008 leaders

Nearly half of the $26 million Clinton raised for her White House bid in the first three months of the year has come from givers such as Corzine, according to a USA TODAY analysis of campaign-finance data filed with the Federal Election Commission. The New York senator has relied more heavily on donors who have hit the $4,600 limit than any other candidate.

This is exactly the reason that John Edwards and Barack Obama (maybe other Dem candidates too?) have begun to turn away money from PAC's and Lobbyists. When you accept money from less than reputable sources you are tarnished by proxy. We already know which big donors bought the current administration ( think Cheney energy task force), but who will be the interest group or individual donor to tarnish the reputation/credibility of our next president?

Classic Rudy in Drag

I think Donald Trump's hair in this video makes this cross dressing adventure even funnier


Does anyone have the May 10th 2000 video of Giuliani telling his wife that its "over"... seems to be one of those video's that has been "scrubbed" from the net

Here is a partial clip of it:
I like the quote: "Still mayor- Giuliani pleaded poverty-- 'The mayor today as we speak has $7,000 dollars under his control...'" (this was May 10th 2000- supposedly with only 7k to his name according to his attorney.)

Turkey is finally participating in Iraq--unilaterally--

Well its official-----

ANKARA, Turkey - Several thousand Turkish troops crossed into northern Iraq early Wednesday to chase Kurdish guerrillas who operate from bases there, Turkish security officials told The Associated Press.


-------------------DOHDOHDOHDOHDOHDOHDOHDOHDOHDOHDOH- Looks like the one "secure" part of Iraq is now being invaded by a foreign country. what a cluster fuck---

Read my posts below if you want some details on the history of Turkey and their love of incursions into Iraq

More Trouble on the Northern Front of Iraq

----U.S./Turkey Relations suddenly not so hospitable----
From Forbes: Gates Warns Turkey About Iraq (6/02/07):

"We hope there would not be a unilateral military action across the border into Iraq," Gates told a news conference after meetings here with Asian government officials. Turkey and Iraq were not represented.

"The Turks have a genuine concern with Kurdish terrorism that takes place on Turkish soil," he said. "So one can understand their frustration and unhappiness over this. Several hundred Turks lose their lives each year, and we have been working with the Turks to try to help them get control of this problem on Turkish soil."

Tensions have heightened in recent weeks in northern Iraq as Turkey has built up its military forces on Iraq's border, a move clearly meant to pressure Iraq to rein in the rebels of the Kurdistan Workers' Party, or PKK, separatists who launch raids into southeast Turkey's Kurdish region from hideouts in Iraq.

Turkey's political and military leaders have been debating whether to try to root out those bases, and perhaps set up a buffer zone across the frontier as the Turkish army has done in the past. Turkey's military chief said Thursday the army was ready and only awaiting orders for a cross-border offensive.

Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki on Saturday urged Turkey not to stage a new incursion, saying his government will not allow the relatively peaceful area of northern Iraq to be turned into a battleground.

Turks accuse Iraqi Kurds, who once fought alongside the Turkish soldiers against the PKK in Iraq, of supporting the separatist rebels and worry that the war in Iraq could lead to the country's disintegration and the creation of a Kurdish state in the north.

A little history on Iraq, the Kurds, and Turkey:

From the BBC on 5/30/07 : Turkey-Iraq border tension grows

In an interview with the private NTV news channel he (Recep Tayyip Erdogan,Turkish prime minister) said Iraq the US and Turkey should carry out a joint operation against the PKK.

"When the United States says that they do not consider a unilateral operation right, this could mean that we can carry out an operation altogether," he said.

However, when asked if he had given an assurance to the US that Turkey would not carry out its own operation, he said: "We cannot make any concessions to this end."

Pressure for renewed action mounted last week after a landmine attack killed six Turkish troops close to the Iraq border.

Two days earlier a suicide bombing killed six people in Ankara.(the worst bombing in Ankara in 10 years....and also from Almotamar- The PKK, which both the US and the European Union regard as a terrorist group, has been fighting for autonomy in Kuridish dominated south-eastern Turkey for many years. On May 18 it announced that it was lifting a unilateral cease-fire. In the aftermath of Tuesday's bomb attack, the Turkish army is considering carrying out military operations against PKK bases in northern Iraq.)

Authorities blamed the PKK but the group denied any involvement.

Analysts say with national elections scheduled for July, Mr Erdogan may feel the need to act strongly.

A more general history of Turkey's Kurds- Published before the Iraq War began: From Inside Out

In the late '70s Turkey's Kurds engaged in a national liberation struggle. More than 36,000 people died in an attempt to establish Kurdish autonomy, most of them Kurds. It was only in November of last year that Turkey finally ended the military state of emergency. Now that martial law has ended people are trying to enjoy the new, relaxed atmosphere.

The reason for Mehmet's anxiety is that there are millions of Kurds living just over the border in Iraq. They already have a semi-autonomous region with their own parliament. The Turkish authorities a concerned that war in Iraq might lead to renewed separatist activity in their own Kurdish territory.

A funny thing happened on the road to war, the Turkish parliament rejected its government's deal with the U.S. to allow American troops into the country to open up a second front in Iraq in the North from Turkey. It was a reflection of popular will. 95 percent of the Turkish people are against the conflict.

Turkish Prime Minister Recap Tayyip Erdogan in Front of a Poster of Kemal Ataturk (scroll down for info on Ataturk): from the Iraq Slogger: on 5/24/07 :

The Turkish government estimates that there are 3800 rebels based in Iraq and that about 2/3rds operate inside Turkey. The recent autonomy and Kurdish control of their border with Turkey has resulted in renewed fighting inside Turkey with a greater supply of weapons, explosives and manpower. Turkey has always denied the existence of a Kurdistan and considers armed Kurdish groups in their region to be terrorist groups.
"The Other Iraq" is a booming economic force and the two main factions that once fought against Turkey form the major parties of the current Kurdish government. The U.S. has steadfastly supported the Kurds against Saddam but have been pursued the policy of "out of sight, out of mind" when it comes to promoting Kurdistan as an example of a peaceful, financially successful, free and democratic region created by U.S. intervention. There are large areas of ethnic Kurds in Turkey, Syria and Iran who seek to form a greater Kurdistan.
The U.S. is currently covertly training Kurdish separatists in Iraq and Iran and see them as a key part of any upcoming conflict.

Originally from the Middle East Quarterly September 1995: (Information on the Turkey created by Kemal Atatürk)

Thanks to Kemal Atatürk's military victories in the period May 1919-October 1922, however, Sèvres was never implemented. Instead, the much more balanced Treaty of Lausanne was signed in July 1923, confirming most of Turkey's present borders.

Indeed, the Lausanne treaty specified all of Turkey's boundaries except one - that with Iraq, where only a provisional frontier (called the "Brussels line") was in place. This issue was left open for a "friendly arrangement to be concluded between Turkey and Great Britain within nine months." Failing that, the issue would be referred to the League of Nations. The Turkish government resisted giving up its old province Mosul, on several grounds: the political wishes of Mosul's inhabitants, its many Turkish-speakers, its oil reserves, and the direction of its trade. In addition, British forces were twelve miles away from the city of Mosul on 30 October 1918, the day London signed the Armistice of Mudros that ended its war with the Turks; this made the legality of the British presence in Mosul very dubious.

Despite Turkish claims to Mosul, London claimed the province in its entirety for Iraq; it also turned down Ankara's proposal that a plebiscite be held to measure views in the province. Unable to reach a "friendly arrangement," the two parties referred the dispute to the League of Nations, which endorsed Mosul's becoming part of Iraq. After prolonged tensions, which included threats of armed confrontation in the Turkish press, Ankara eventually signed a treaty in July 1926 that made the Brussels line the international frontier, leaving the Mosul region and its 600,000 or so inhabitants in Iraq.

The issue then died down for sixty years, only to revive during the Iraq-Iran War, when Saddam Husayn's government lost effective control of northern Iraq. Four times after May 1983, he gave permission for Turkish troops fighting insurgents from the Kurdish Workers' Party (Partiya Karkerana Kurdistan-PKK) to engage in hot pursuit onto Iraq territory. The Turkish press began to raise the issue of Turkey's claims to the Mosul region, and the government reportedly informed its allies of an intent to take control of Mosul in case the Iraqi regime should fall. The Kuwait war of 1991 and the subsequent collapse of Iraqi authority north of the 36th parallel stimulated Turkish warnings that it would not countenance Syrian or Iranian encroachments on the Mosul area. During the period March 20-May 2, 1995, in an effort dubbed Operation Steel, some 35,000 Turkish troops moved into northern Iraq attempting to clean out PKK strongholds.

From the Seattle Times 5/30/2007: Turkey debates Iraq incursion against Kurds

Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan on today urged the United States and Iraq to destroy bases of the Kurdistan Workers Party, or PKK, in northern Iraq as Turkish military deployed more tanks and soldiers on the border.

Iraqi Kurdish groups have threatened to resist a Turkish incursion. If U.S. forces — who are stretched thin across Iraq — take action, they risk alienating Iraqi Kurds, the most pro-American group in the region. If they don't, they risk increased tensions — and possibly worse — with two powerful rivals.

"Our expectation from the United States and Iraq is to scatter and destroy the bases of the terrorist organization in northern Iraq," Erdogan said today. "They either turn them over or send them elsewhere. We have to achieve results."

Last week, a suicide bomb blamed on the rebels killed six people in Ankara, and a bomb in a southeastern area where guerrillas are active killed six Turkish soldiers. Another soldier died on Wednesday when he stepped on a mine, believed to be planted by the guerrillas near the Iraqi border.

"All the explosives used by the PKK in Turkey are traced back to Iraq," Celikkol said.

From Fox News on April 7, 2005: Rocky U.S.-Turkey Relations Persist Since Iraq War (notice the pissy attitude taken towards Turkey just a few years ago)

WASHINGTON — The United States and its staunchest Muslim ally have been suffering from a cold snap in their relationship since the start of the war in Iraq, and analysts say it's too soon to tell if the election of a Kurd as president of Iraq will further strain U.S.-Turkey relations.

On Wednesday, Iraq's interim National Assembly elected Kurdish leader Jalal Talabani as president of the country. Ankara has had tensions with ethnic Kurds in northern Iraq and in its own country for decades.

While Talabani has stressed that Kurds have no designs on Turkish territory, where an estimated 15 million ethnic Kurds live, Turkey's suspicions about Talabani's sympathies for Kurdish terrorists in Turkey means future relations between Turkey and the new Iraqi government could be unsteady. And the more unsteady the relationship with its southern neighbor, the more difficult Turkey's relationship becomes with the United States.

"The Turks are trying to look at it from a positive point of view," said Bulent Aliriza, director of the Turkey Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies of Talabani's election and the formation of the Iraqi leadership. "It's going to be a very complicated process and frankly, the U.S. is looking at what's happening in Iraq only on Iraqi terms, which is understandable."

Turkish and American policy experts agree the relationship between the two countries has been strained as a result of divergent agendas, growing anti-American sentiment within Turkey and a set of diplomatic missteps and misunderstandings.

“My sense is it is too early to call it a crisis or something really urgent, but overall there has been a deterioration in bilateral relations,” said Omer Taspinar, a Turkish native and director of the Turkey program at the Brookings Institution (search) in Washington, D.C.

That tension resurfaced recently when Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld indirectly blamed Turkey for the strength of the insurgency in Iraq during an interview on FOX News Sunday. The remarks came two days after the March 18 resignation of U.S. Ambassador to Turkey Eric Edelman.

**********“Given the level of the insurgency today, two years later, clearly if we had been able to get the 4th Infantry Division in from the north through Turkey, more of the Iraqi Saddam Hussein Baathist regime would have been captured or killed,” Rumsfeld said, referring to the Turkish parliament’s refusal to allow coalition troops to enter Iraq from Turkey.

Had Turkey cooperated, Rumsfeld added, “The insurgency today would have been less.”

Certainly, Rumsfeld's comments were not the first made by American policymakers voicing disappointment with Turkey’s initial resistance to help out the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq — a policy that continues to be supported by a majority in Turkey, according to polls.

But in October 2003, when Turkey later offered to send in 10,000 troops for the effort, the United States turned Ankara down, seeing the potential conflict between the Turks and the Kurds, the coalition’s strongest supporters in Iraq.

“People couldn’t understand why the United States was asking for help and then refusing it,” Taspinar said. “Overall, that contributed to the bad feelings.”

On July 4, 2003, American forces briefly detained members of the Turkish special forces, who frequently enter northern Iraq to pursue Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) terrorists escaping pursuit on Turkish territory. The PKK is responsible for tens of thousands of deaths in Turkey since the early 1980s.

U.S. troops put Turkish special forces in the same restraints and hoods as Iraqi prisoners. The image still evokes anger among Turks, Taspinar said.

More recently, Turkey last month announced it was turning down a $1 billion loan from the United States that was conditioned on the promise that Turkey withdraw a small band of Turkish special forces from Iraq.

Whether unnerved by the swift invasion of its neighbor to the southeast or fearing an independent Kurdish state just over the border, Turkish public opinion has forced its government to strike a hard balance between diplomacy and security.

Also in Turkey, the government and military remain secular, but Turks are 99 percent Muslim and Islamists make up the leading plurality in the Turkish parliament. With that comes sensitivities to Turkey's Muslim neighbors.

“This [Turkish] administration has more responsibility to the Islamic currency in the Turkish constituency, so they have to be -- as the Iraq war has shown -- more careful, because it has domestic consequences,” said Gordon Adams, director of Strategic Policy Studies at George Washington University and former foreign affairs official in the Clinton administration.

Adams said Turks today are antagonistic toward the United States mostly because of the northern Iraqi Kurds, who were among the most persecuted citizens during the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein.

For more than a decade, Turkey let the United States protect the northern no-fly zone where Kurds reside. But today Kurds are fighting to reclaim the land and oil rights taken from them during Hussein's era, particularly in the city of Kirkuk and often at the expense of ethnic Turks or Turkmen in the region, Taspinar said.

Talabani's election as Iraqi president adds another layer of uncertainty for Turks, Aliriza said. The official message from the Turkish leadership on Talabani's election, Aliriza said, is that "Kirkuk now belongs to the whole of the Iraqi people ... that we very much expect them now as part of Iraq to acknowledge that Kirkuk belongs to all of them."

Aliriza added that despite past assurances by Talabani to Turkish officials that he does not support a separatist movement in northern Iraq, evidence shows that Turkish Kurds are already moving into that area in hopes of asserting authority there. Non-ethnic Kurds in Turkey are also becoming more antagonistic toward their Kurdish fellow citizens. "I'm afraid Talabani is going to have a negative spillover effect in Turkey," he said.

A survey of the Turkish people released in March by the International Strategic Research Organization found that 91 percent of the Turkish public does not agree with Bush administration policies. Seventy-four percent believes the biggest strain on the relationship is the continued existence of the PKK in northern Iraq, which Turks say is a terrorist group that the United States has ignored while it also opposes Turkish efforts to stamp it out.

The majority surveyed sees former President Bill Clinton as the more successful leader for “global peace and security.”

“There is a sense that Turkey is being punished for not helping the U.S. in its invasion of Iraq,” Taspinar said.

But some Turkish officials and experts in the United States question the accuracy of the anti-American poll responses.

“I don’t think the rise of anti-Americanism is any higher or different than in the rest of the world,” said Narguiz Abbaszade, executive director of the Assembly of Turkish American Associations (search) in Washington, D.C.

“The majority of people in Turkey are Muslim, and to the extent that the war in Iraq has been portrayed to them as a war against Muslims, I’m sure there are people who are upset,” she said. “But I do not think that is true for all Turkish people.”

Tuluy Tanc, a spokesman for the Turkish Embassy in Washington, D.C, said the rift between the two nations “is very artificial and temporary."

A quick Background on the Kurdish President of Iraq Jalal Talabani from veteran Middle East journalist, Dilip Hiro on Democracy Now! From April 7th, 2005:

...Jalal Talabani. He was born in 1934 in a place in Kurdistan called [Kelkan], and he trained as a lawyer. He went to Baghdad University, joined the Kurdistan Democratic Party, which was then run by Mustafa Barzani, a tribal Islamic leader, and then fell out with him, with Barzani, Sr., and actually went over to work with the government in Baghdad. Then after quite few twists and turns in 1975, he again, he briefly joined the Kurdistan Democratic Party, then left to go and live in Beirut, and when he was in Beirut in the mid-1970s, he came under the influence of George Habash, the leader of the Palestine Liberation Front, Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, P.F.L.P., who was a Marxist leader. And he then in 1976 set up along with others Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, the P.U.K., which actually described itself as a Marxist-Leninist organization. And that is the organization of which he had been a leader. He has changed sides so often that I think it would be very boring for me to go through each twist and turn. There's a very long entry on him in my book, The Essential Middle East: A Comprehensive Guide.

(One picture in a series of pictures of Jalal Talabani with Saddam Hussein)

Finally, I notice that he is being described as a greater leader who fought Saddam Hussein. I can tell you, Amy, that after this 1991 Gulf War, when there were uprising of Kurds which was suppressed by Saddam's regime, he then later on went to head a Kurdish delegation, and in June 1991, actually, they made a deal with Saddam Hussein, and I have a picture of him, Jalal Talabani, kissing the cheeks of Saddam Hussein. That picture appears in my book, Desert Shield, Desert Storm. Anybody can check it out. So, he is being described as a greater leader. Basically, he is, to put it simply, an opportunist.

And of course, he has his support in Kurdistan, and again, we talk of Kurdistan, two things to remember: One is that the formation of what is called Kurdistan Autonomous Region, K.A.R., happened in 1974 under the regime of Saddam Hussein, and these three provinces in the north, which are Kurdish majority, they are basically divided into two parts. The southeastern part is under the control of the P.U.K., the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, of which he, Talabani, is the leader, which is next door to Iran, and therefore, Jalal Talabani has a very long tradition of good relations with Iran(picture of Jalal Talabani with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad), though, of course, he wouldn't want to talk about them now. And in the northwestern part of Kurdistan there the Barzani is, who is the son of the senior Barzani. By the way, the senior Barzani died in a hospital in Virginia. He was very close to the Americans in the 1970s.

So, we have the situation where basically these two Kurdish parties, the K.D.P., the Kurdistan Democratic Party, and the P.U.K., the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, came together and formed the Kurdistan Alliance and contested these elections on January 30, and they won 75 seats out of 275. Now, the Kurds are no more than 15 to 16% of the population. They are entitled to maybe about 40 seats. They won 75. The 25 seats they have won have come at the expense of the Sunni-Arabs. So, by the way, all I can say that Sunni-Arabs are definitely not happy. In fact, they're very upset at what has happened, that he has become president.

That's not the only point. The other thing is that you have to remember Turkey is next door. And Turkey is, by the way, of course, we have to remind ourselves the member of NATO, is very close to America, and they have their Kurdish population, which is 20% of the national population. They are next door to the Iraqi Kurdistan. They are very unhappy at this rising influence in power of Iraqi Kurds who now want to make the regional capital of Kirkuk, which is oil-rich city, which will give them a very powerful economic base and prepare them for declaring independence of Kurdistan. So, it is something which is going to have severe repercussions as time goes by.

******MisterApologist Says********* These new developments are a long time coming..and with diplomatic relations between the U.S./Turkey/ and the Iraqi government at a "low point" there is quite possibly a military action in the near future. The Turkish government has an election this summer and can not afford to look weak due to the recent spate of bombings by "Iraqi-Kurds/terrorists" ...Does the U.S. truly believe that Jalal Talabani is going to allow military operations against his Kurdish brothers without raising a stink? This is a diplomatic cluster-fuck to the nth degree. Luckily the largest embassy is being built in Iraq... but will any diplomacy be enough to stop this "election year military campaign" by the nationalist Turkey military?- At least Turkey will finally be participating in the Iraq War--- but perhaps we could have used this type of enthusiasm at the START of OUR War... and not at the START of THEIR War.********************

Is Turkey going to War with the Kurds of Iraq?

I thought this news about US jets flying over Turkish Airspace yesterday was a bit suspicious due to the recent bombings in Ankara and in other Turkish Cities

Now it seems that Turkey is moving a bunch of their troops to the border. Ahh a nice summer war between Turkey and Iraq-Kurdistan.

Lets just say this is REALLY bad news... and there is a really good chance that something crazy is going to happen soon.... cross your fingers that it doesn't...

"Throw Momma in Front of the Train"

From Today's Testimony in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee with Monica Goodling care of the New York Times:

Ms. Goodling said that in the course of her five years at the Justice Department, she interviewed hundreds of job applicants, most of them for positions subject to partisan political appointment. “But some were applicants for certain categories of career positions,” she went on, alluding to workers who are supposed to function free of naked political considerations.

“In every case, I tried to act in good faith, and for the purpose of ensuring that the department was staffed by well-qualified individuals who were supportive of the attorney general’s views, priorities and goals,” she said, before acknowledging that she might have gone too far in asking overtly political questions of some career applicants.

But Representative Bobby Scott, Democrat of Virginia, was not satisfied. “Did you break the law?” he asked. “Is it against the law to take those considerations into account?”

“I believe I crossed the line, but I didn’t mean to,” she replied.

So now that Goodling has admitted that "some" of the career positions were filled with people (how many of the 150 regent Graduates in the Bush Whitehouse?) who were asked "inappropriate" questions like: "Do you accept Jesus Christ as your personal savior and do you have a desire to circumvent the constitution to order to install a theocratic dictatorship in the executive branch? And if no, do you know where the door is?"

**Update- For the Moron (oh no I've libeled you!) in the comments section- This is a fake quote because we DON'T know what "political" questions Goodling asked during the hiring process... it was something NOT so overt. but my snarky fake quote was meant as a HYPERBOLE (linked up for the Moron, Oh no I've libeled you again!)

Richard Parker- the real one

Well I called the Alexandria office of the US Attorney's today but got no response as to when Richard Parker started working for their office. I can only assume that they don't give this information out for some sort of security purpose, but I'm 99% sure that Richard Parker has worked continuously as Assistant US Attorney for many many years and has no connection to Monica Goodling.
But funny story, so in my search to figure out how long Mr. Parker has been employed I stumbled across a case he handled where this conman pretended to be (or was.. not very clear) a former Somalian ambassador to Canada and was making all kinds of outrageous claims against John Ashcroft, Paul O'Neill, George Tenet, and I believe the entire US government: ( I apologize for the highlighting but the original website was shutdown and I had to use a google cached version)

Defendant
USA represented by Richard Parker
United States Attorney's Office
2100 Jamieson Ave
Alexandria, VA 22314
(703)299-3700
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
John Ashcroft
Attorney General of United States represented by Richard Parker
(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
Paul O'Neill
Secretary of the Treasury represented by Richard Parker
(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
George Tenet
Director, Central Intelligence Agency represented by Richard Parker
(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Unfortunately .. this guy suing all these stand-up gentlemen was bat-shit crazy and his case was thrown out.. (he is serving prison time for tax evasion) ... but its nice to know that the real Richard Parker (with no connection to Monica Goodling) is doing his part to protect American heroes

Monica Goodling isn't corrupt?

First I'd like to make it clear that the pieces in my previous post seemed to be conclusive when you add up the fact that 150 people from Regent were hired by this administration.. and this Richard Parker not only lives in Virginia but he was connected to someone doing the majority of the hiring and firing. In my research I could not find any older references to the Assistant US Attorney Richard Parker but "Leevank" has demonstrated that there is someone named Richard Parker who was obviously working at the DOJ long before these troubles arose...

I am willing to concede that there are serious troubles with my research if the original Richard Parker was still working at the DOJ in Virginia in 2005. Here is the excerpt from the DAILYKOS post:

"It seems rather clear to me that you're talking about two different Richard Parkers. The Richard Parker shown in the photo with Monica Goodling is apparently a 1998 graduate of Regent University who majored in government. There's nothing in the photo caption indicating that he's even a lawyer, or, for that matter, that he has any kind of relationship with Monica Goodling that is anything other than happening to sit next to her at an alumni picnic.

There is a Richard Parker (who is NOT this guy) who is, or at least was, an Assistant United States Attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia, and it's damned sure Monica Goodling didn't get him his job, because he was in the U.S. Attorney's Office in Alexandria in 1990, when I started at DOJ. You'll also see his name on page 17 of this pleading dating from 1995, during the Clinton administration, and at a time when Monica Goodling hadn't even started law school.

Unless you've got some evidence that the Richard Parker who signed the pleading in the blog to which you linked is a different Richard Parker than the one who had been an Assistant U.S. Attorney in Alexandria for many years, and also is the same person shown in the Regent University alumni pictures, this diary should be deleted. Failing that, it should certainly be unrecommended."

Picnic for players

Lets get serious.Even if Richard Parker was NOT getting special placement in the US Attorney office of Virginia .. this picnic for Regent Graduates was more than just fun Christian games and barbecue... The man in this picture is Bill Condon who was an honors hire at the Civil Rights division.. The following excerpt was originally from the Washington Post:

Since 2002, when Ashcroft adopted the hiring method the department is now abandoning, a large share of honors hires have had strong conservative or Republican ties, according to Justice lawyers and law school career-placement officers.

Bill Condon, an honors hire in the civil rights division who graduated in 2004 from Regent University, a small Christian school in Virginia Beach, recounted his job interview recently in the school's alumni magazine. Condon wrote that, when an interviewer asked him which Supreme Court decision he disagreed with most, Condon cited a 2003 ruling that struck down a Texas law outlawing homosexual acts, a decision that has been a lightning rod for social conservatives.

One of his interviewers, Condon wrote, suggested that, coming from Regent, "I may be interested in some religious liberties cases" the civil rights division was bringing in a new area of emphasis for the division.

So Richard Parker was not "good friends" with Monica Goodling and also not the Richard Parker who is/was an Assistant US Attorney in Virginia. NEVERTHELESS. The hiring practices at the DOJ have included only 2 black attorney's since 2003 and Bill Condon, who sure as shit is the same one in the picture at the picnic and is now working in the Civil Rights Division at the DOJ.

These Regent grads stick together like flys on shit and are attempting to blur the lines between our seperation of church and state. To NOT investigate these people and blindly ignore their infiltration and piggybacking through all levels of government is more of an injustice than to mis-characterize a guy named Richard Parker with another Richard Parker from nearly the same region of the same state, with a "legal" background, and with serious connections to someone who has been proven to be highly dubious in her hiring and firing practices.

I apologize for nothing in my original reporting because there are 150 people in our government who are not only questionable legal scholars, but they have also been shown to hire friends, fire enemies, and create a level of incompetence the DOJ has never seen.

I will be contacting the offices of US Attorney in Virginia tomorrow and will officially retract all my statements regarding Richard Parker if and when I'm proven irrefutably wrong. But lets not forget the real message of my posts: Blind loyalty for Regent graduates during the hiring process at the DOJ is not only an injustice to the senior career staffers but the questions asked by Goodling during her hiring procedure are borderline illegal.

Even if you knock off the wheat (Monica Goodling) you still have the cuff (150 Regent graduates)

--RETRACTED--Monica Goodling and Richard Parker sitting in a tree...

These pictures are from the Washington D.C. Alumni picnic for Regent University Graduates. The man cozying up to Monica Goodling is Richard Parker. We all know Goodling and her incompetent and possibly illegal hiring and firing practices while working at the DOJ. But who is Richard Parker and how could Monica help out her "good friend?" ... scroll down for the answer...

Pictures Rmoved to Protect the Credibility of those who previously associted themselves with Goodling

Maybe she could get him a job as an Assistant U.S. Attorney in Virgina..(OH WAIT SHE DID)...Scroll Down Document or Search for Richard Parker.

U.S. Department of Justice
Antitrust Division
Networks & Technology Section
Tel: 703/299-3700
600 E Street, N.W., Suite 9500
Washington D.C. 20530
Tel: 202/307-6200
Fax: 202/616-8544

PAUL J. McNULTY

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
By: _______________/s/________________

Richard Parker
Assistant United States Attorney
VSB No. 44751
2100 Jamieson Avenue
Alexandria, VA 22314

........ Or maybe she could put him in line to get promoted to US Attorney for all of Virginia....Because its already been reported that the US Attorney for Western Virginia, John Brownlee, was the FIRST name on the list of 5 possible candidates for firing ......(among 26 others)


Monica is testifying this Wednesday before the Judiciary Committee... Perhaps it would be pertinent to ask how her boyfriend got the job as Assistant U.S. Attorney... and perhaps it might be a good time to figure out why the US Attorney from Virginia (a battleground state) was put on the termination list...

***Update- According to documents released from the DOJ and compiled by the Washington Post, John Brownlee was on the top of the list on November 1, 2006.
Kasey Warner from Charleston, West Virginia was on a Feb 24, 2005 list.

John Nowacki is Dead Meat

Well its official... John Nowacki is now a target in the Justice Probe....I'd like to thank the Chicago Tribune for their work on this story and their interest in my research.

Lets start getting down to the real problems with the Justice Department... People who care more about politics than policy, and loyalty more than competency.

John Nowacki: The Silent Aggregator

In my earlier posts I've discussed John Nowacki, his relationship with the Free Congress Foundation (and his overt partisanship), his overarching power (he holds two of the top positions in the EOUSA), and his contacts with every DOJ official that has already been subpoenaed to testify before the respective committee's. I've also discussed and documented his "aggregation" of information on US Attorney's (Warren Hamilton's investigation of Daniel Bogden), as well as his powerful position as intermediary between every US Attorney in the field and the Department of Justice. This post will consist of quotes taken from Kyle Sampson's testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee and will solidify the connections between the senior DOJ officials, John Nowacki and his position in the EOUSA, and information gathering pertaining to all 93 US Attorney's. In order to uncover further details the House and/or Senate Judiciary Committee must interview John Nowacki.

Documented using the Washington Post transcript:

Kyle Sampson:With these standards for evaluating U.S. attorneys in mind, I coordinated the process of identifying U.S. attorneys that might be considered for replacement. I received input from a number of officials at the Department of Justice who were in a position to form considered judgments about the U.S. attorneys.

These included not only senior political appointees, such as the deputy attorney general, but also senior career lawyers, such as David Margolis, a man who served justice for more than 40 years under presidents of both parties and who probably knows more about United States attorneys than any person alive.

I developed and maintained a list that reflected the aggregation of views of these department officials over a period of almost two years. I provided that information to the White House when requested and reviewed it with and circulated it to others at the Department of Justice for comment.

...

SAMPSON: Senator, as I said in my opening statement, it was not a scientific or quantitative analysis for identifying U.S. attorneys who might be considered underperforming.

HATCH: But it was more than looking at just statistics, right?

SAMPSON: Frankly, Senator, it wasn't -- it was looking at statistics in a few of the cases, but in other cases it was a process of asking leaders in the department, folks who would have a reason to have an informed judgment, who were U.S. attorneys that presented issues and concerns.

...

Sampson: It was a general process where I talked to senior leaders in the department and asked them, "If we were going to ask a handful of U.S. attorneys to resign so that others might serve, who would you have on your list?"

And so performance-related is a plastic term that included a lot of things to a lot of people in the front (ph).

...

*********************IMPORTANT*******************

CARDIN: So over two years you -- I'm a little bit confused. Your testimony says that, "I developed and maintained a list that reflected the aggregation of views of these and other department officials over a period of almost two years." Is that not accurate then?

SAMPSON: To be clear, it was not one list that was sustained through the two years. It was an...

CARDIN: And this list no longer exists?

SAMPSON: Senator, what it was -- the Executive Office of United States Attorneys prepares a running chart of all the United States attorneys, of when they were appointed, you know, and other U.S. attorneys who are in the pipeline to be appointed or are there on interim appointments. It's a master chart of the U.S. attorneys at that specific time. And...

CARDIN: But your statement said that it had an aggregation of views related, I assume, to the performance. And my question is whether that exists, and you're indicated it was more note-taking, and so you didn't maintain one consistent list over the period of two years.

SAMPSON: That's accurate. All I can say is that it wasn't scientific and it wasn't well-documented.

.....

KYL: One of the Department of Justice documents says that -- and I'm quoting now -- Charlton, quote, "worked outside of proper channels in seeking resources without regard to the process or the impact his action would have on other U.S. attorney's offices." Those are -- there's a number 168 and 169 by that.

Do you know anything about that? Was that your e-mail or document?

SAMPSON: It would be helpful to me if I could see that document. I don't remember precisely.

KYL: I'm not sure -- maybe if you look at this you can help me describe what it is. Does this look familiar to you in any way?

SAMPSON: I did not prepare this document...

KYL: It looks like it might have been prepared in the House.

Well, let me just ask you, in this what appears to be a document prepared to Judiciary in the House, there's a reference to Charlton, quote, "worked outside of proper channels in seeking resources." Do you know anything about that?

SAMPSON: I think, Senator, that this was a document prepared at the Department of Justice. I don't remember it specifically, but it looks to me like a document that was prepared in advance of Mr. Moschella's testimony so that he could go and explain the reasons why certain U.S. attorneys, these U.S. attorneys who were asked to resign, were put on the list.

...

SAMPSON: During this process, I never associated asking these U.S. attorneys to resign with a particular investigation or prosecution that they were handling.

SCHUMER: And I take it...

SAMPSON: To the best of my recollection, I never associated those things in my mind. I was aggregating information from different people at the department, but in my own mind, that would be inappropriate.

Public corruption cases were important to the department and didn't spare Republicans. And that would be wrong. And I don't remember ever associating those things in my mind.

SCHUMER: I understand that. You've said that before. But didn't you realize, when you suggested even the thought of suggesting Fitzgerald be fired, that it would at least be perceived as trying to stop a major investigation?

...

CARDIN: And the four that were selected -- how did you come up with those four? Did you just go to your -- your master list that was in your drawer and circle four names?

How did you come up with these four being the next to be considered?

SAMPSON: I think they were all close cases. They were sort of...

CARDIN: Close cases because of performance?

SAMPSON: Because there weren't specific policy conflicts or significant management challenges. They were close cases because they were four U.S. attorneys where the aggregation of information coming in was, we -- we -- we can do better here. A change would be beneficial.

...

Now you acknowledge, in Chicago, the insensitivity of your comment. Didn't any red flag go off in your mind that maybe there is an inappropriate political circumstance in your equation that at least should be investigated a little bit before you take the responsibility to recommend to the attorney general the dismissal of a U.S. attorney?

SAMPSON: In my mind, Senator, I did not make that connection. It was a lack of foresight. I was gathering information from people who had served as United States attorney, from people who were senior officials in the department, but all I can say is what I remember and what I know. And I think that I failed to consider that sensitivity of that perception, as I told you before.

CARDIN: Well, and now talk about the Chicago circumstance, which -- I'm just concerned that you put in your statement that the limited category of improper reasons includes an effort to interfere with or influence the investigation or prosecution of a particular case for political or partisan advantage.

That's in your statement. That's in your written statement.

SAMPSON: I agree with that.

CARDIN: Well, what safeguards did you have in the process to make sure that wasn't being done?

SAMPSON: Senator, as I testified to you before, I don't feel like I had any safeguards in that process. I was the aggregator of information. I wish that I would have thought of that eventuality. I wish that someone else in the process would have thought of that eventuality.

I failed to do that. And that's one of the reasons I resigned.

...

CARDIN: I thought you told me earlier, to answer a question, that you did; that that was one of the considerations you had gotten. When I asked you about the local support with government, you said: Yes, we had gotten calls from senators and we had gotten calls that people were upset. I thought you said you have that information.

SAMPSON: The department had that information. Let me...

CARDIN: The department means you. You were the person who got all of the information together.

SAMPSON: Others in the department had that information. And I think I may have generally been aware of that information. I don't remember whether, at the time, I considered that information. And as I said before, I don't remember ever hearing or observing anything that connected the notion of asking a U.S. attorney to resign with influencing a particular case for political reasons.

...

SAMPSON: I didn't focus on it. The deputy attorney general came back to the department and reported that he felt things had gone well, that he had been able to give the committee some information and promised to come up and give the committee more information about the specific reasons that these U.S. attorneys were asked to resign.

And I didn't focus on -- I didn't review his transcript, and I didn't focus on his testimony. I was busy with other things, and I didn't focus on it until much later.

SCHUMER: How about when it sort of came out in the newspapers that his testimony was incomplete? That he felt -- I think there was a story a week or so later in Newsweek or one of the -- I don't remember where it was. But there were stories out that -- that created quite a buzz, that he felt that he didn't give straightforward testimony and that he'd been ill-prepared for the meeting by you and others.

SAMPSON: Senator, I never intended to mislead Mr. McNulty or the committee, or Mr. Moschella. I did the -- my level best in the preparation to inform them of everything I knew. We failed collectively to gather all the documents and go back and look at the history...

...

So it's rather hard for me, knowing some of these cases that she was involved in, when no one spoke to her about immigration, for you to be here and tell us that the reason that she was terminated was because of an immigration record that as of August of 2006 your department was ardently defending.

And I must go back to the problem we have with Carol Lam right now. The day before you wrote that e-mail, she noticed the department that two search warrants were issued. When a U.S. attorney notices the department, how does she do that, or how does he do that?

SAMPSON: Senator, as I testified before, I don't remember receiving any notice of that myself. There is a system where United States attorneys may submit an urgent report. I believe it goes to the executive office of the U.S. attorney.

FEINSTEIN: And I believe that's what she did. She submitted an urgent report. And you're saying you knew nothing about it and no one told you about it.

SAMPSON: I don't remember ever hearing about those searches at that time. I received...

FEINSTEIN: You're under oath. No one told you about those searches?

SAMPSON: Senator, I don't remember ever hearing about those searches, and I certainly didn't associate in my mind the idea of asking Carol Lam to resign with the fact that she was -- her office was doing an investigation of Mr. Foggo and Mr. Wilkes.

...

SAMPSON: I was the aggregator of information that came in. And it came in from the deputy attorney general, who was a former U.S. attorney and had served with Carol Lam. It came in from the principal associate deputy attorney general, Bill Mercer, who was a U.S. attorney and had served with Carol Lam. It came in from David Margolis...

FEINSTEIN: I'm sorry, what came in?

SAMPSON: Information about concerns about U.S. attorneys, including Carol Lam. I trusted the information that came in.

FEINSTEIN: I would appreciate it if you would provide the committee with that information. You said it came in. I trust it came in, in writing. We would like to have that information.

SAMPSON: Senator, let me be clear. As I said in my opening statement, the process was not scientific and it wasn't well documented.

I compiled a list, based on information that came in from folks in the department who would have reason to make an informed judgment about the performance of U.S. attorneys, including former U.S. attorneys who were then serving as the deputy attorney general and the acting associate attorney general, including the career -- senior career official in the department, David Margolis, including the director of EOUSA.

And this information that came into me, I aggregated into a list and compiled in a list. But it was not scientific and it was not well-documented.

FEINSTEIN: And it was not filed?

I mean, you see, the credibility of this thing diminishes. You are the chief of staff to the attorney general. This is unprecedented. You are aggregating, by your own words. You are the one that put the cases together.

You effectively selected those who were going to go to the attorney general for his approval for dismissal. And there is no file?

SAMPSON: Senator, I didn't decide those. It was based on a consensus decision of senior Department of Justice officials.

...

SCHUMER: Thank you.

You -- one of the things you stated is, you were not aware of people being fired because they would or would not prosecute specific cases. And no one's said anything that contradicts that you were not aware of them. That would come from other witnesses, if that proves to be the case.

But it is -- I just want the record to show that it's certainly possible that people were fired for political reasons and you didn't know about them. Somebody in the White House political section, A, calls up somebody in Justice, B, and says, "We want to fire U.S. Attorney C for political reasons, but come up with another reason and tell Sampson to put him on the list."

That would be possible. I'm not saying it happened. But it certainly would be possible, right?

SAMPSON: Senator, that would be possible. I'm not aware of that being the motivating factor. And I can only speak...