CommunityMy FDL

Tony Snowjob – Blowing my mind!

I just finished watching today’s Snowjob.  Really, this stuff needs to be moved to Comedy Central.  I couldn’t stop laughing.

Let’s see if I’ve got this straight.  Hold on, I need to pull two bongloads for this one and drop some Micro-dot, for I’m headed through the looking glass into the labyrinthine structure of Snowjob Logic:

The White House has made an EGO (Extremely Generous Offer) to allow Bush’s advisers to speak off the record and not under oath to Congress, allowing Congress to get to the truth of the matter.  We can trust that they’ll tell the truth, because when you talk to Congress, you have to tell the truth.  Therefore, there is no need for transcripts or oaths.Now, if someone should happen to not tell the truth, that would be a violation of law and the liar would be held accountable.  Somehow.  Somehow with no transcripts or recorded testimony.  I suppose at a later date a senator may say, “He said this” and the interviewee may say, “no I didn’t.”  But we needn’t worry about that, because White House officials will tell the truth, and some future court is just going to have to accept that and dismiss the senator’s claim (because senators, unlike presidents, lie, especially the Democrat ones).  After all, this administration is all about telling the truth and never about covering up political shenanigans, and frankly, we’re surprised you don’t know that and are giving any credence to this US Attorney thing in the first place.

This secrecy is very important.  The advice given to a president needs to remain confidential, or else a president’s advisors will choose their words too carefully, fearing that someday in the future, they might be caught in a lie or committing a crime.  Which, of course, is not the case here, because we can trust the Bush officials to always tell the truth and never commit crimes.

Unlike the Clinton Administration.  Back then, it was vitally important to dismiss Clinton’s claims of executive privilege to prevent his advisors from testifying under oath, because, in Tony Snow’s own words from 1998, “Taken to its logical extreme, that position would make it impossible for citizens to hold a chief executive accountable for anything. He would have a constitutional right to cover up.”

But that’s different, because Clinton was trying to hide a blowjob from his wife, whereas Gonzalez was merely making the unprecedented move of firing 8 Bush-appointed US attorneys for purely performance-related and not-political reasons.

Except that recently-released email shows that the US Attorneys were ranked by Bush loyalty and that Republican senators and Republican party chairmen were demanding the ouster of US Attorneys who didn’t prosecute enough Democrats quickly enough for election time or did prosecute high-profile Republicans with investigations leading toward the involvement of the White House.  Which, in a sense, is a performace-related reason (they weren’t performing their loyalty to party sufficiently).

Still, it’s different, because Bush’s last name isn’t Clinton and this is just a witchhunt on the part of the Democrats.  Republicans don’t do partisan witchhunts; they hold the powerful to the letter of the law that states you cannot lie about blowjobs under oath.  Democrats just want to have the political spectacle of requiring the people who run this country to swear to tell the truth on live TV before Congress and America.  How can the executive branch be expected to run the country well if they are constantly being required to talk to Americans, to Congress, and are required to tell the truth under oath?  Why, Bush & Cheney didn’t have to go before the 9/11 Commission, didn’t have to swear under oath, and didn’t have any transcripts taken, and the results of those testimonies, er, interviews, have been a completely secure America and nothing but Code Green* terror alerts since.

Besides, this is an EGO (Extremely Generous Offer).  The White House didn’t have to have the Justice Department deliver 3,000 mostly “pick up some milk after work” emails and offer to allow Congress the rare privilege of talking to White House officials with no transcripts and not under oath.  Extremely generous and downright voluminous, except for that eighteen-day gap where nobody sent any emails at all (that’s not uncommon and we have no reason to be alarmed, because Bush officials always tell the truth).  If not for their generosity, the White House could’ve gone the imminently ethical and constitutionally sound route and not spoken to Congress at all.  After all, it’s a time of war, Bush has unitary executive powers, the Constitution is just a “goddamned piece of paper”, and if you don’t like it, you just go ask Sammy, John, Clarence, and Antonin** down the street if they think we have as much right to know about this as we did to know about Cheney’s secret energy task force meetings with Kenny Boy Lay.

Finally, nobody in the president’s employ ever clued him in to what was happening with the US Attorneys, but Bush still requires the privilege of secrecy to keep out of transcripts and out of sworn testimony the conversations he never had with nobody.  However, those nobodies will be glad to talk with Congress about the conversations they didn’t have — no need for transcripts since there will be no conversations to transcribe and no need for oaths because Bush officials always tell the truth.

There.  Are we all clear?  Good.  Now, why is there a four-armed, walking erect, fuchsia-colored elephant in my room holding a pitcher of iced tea and singing the Hagdelena-Magdelena, Hoopensteiner-Wallendyner song?  Oh, right.  Micro-dot.  But you know what — this silly blabbering elephant is making more sense than the one that just left the White House press room.

* Did you even know there is a Code Green?  It goes  Red (Severe) – Orange (High) – Yellow (Elevated) – Blue (Guarded) – Green (Low).  At Green, you’re supposed to have an emergency plan for your family and be able to “shelter in place”.  At Blue, you do all that plus check to see if you’re up to date with your supplies.  Only once you hit Blue are you supposed to “Be alert to suspicious activity and report it to proper authorities.”  I suppose at Green, you can ignore suspicious activity, and even if you do see it, don’t bother the cops.

So I’m thinking that there can never be a Code Green.  Might as well change that one to “Green Light – Terorists, come right on in!”

Also, how would we define the circumstances that would lead to Green?  Obviously if terrorists hate us and want to blow us up, we have to be at least at Yellow or Blue.  Only if all the terrorists are dead can we be at Green.  Which is going to be tough, because if you kill a terrorist, at least his momma is going to hate America, and maybe she’ll come blow us up?  Only if we kill all the terrorists and all their friends and family can we be at Green.

But even that won’t work, since there could be people who hate us that haven’t made it obvious yet.  So, only once we have signed affidavits of love from every human on earth, only then can we be Green.  But that’s hopeless, both in scope and in quality… some of them may lie on their affidavit.

*Sigh*  This is what I get for doing acid on a Wednesday.

**Watch out for this.  The Bushies WANT this to go to the Supreme Court.  This is their “all in” bet on the concept of Unitary Executive.  Better we hit them now than before Stevens dies and Bush gets his majority on the court.

Previous post

Next post




Leave a reply