Funny. From reading this story, you’d never know that Monica had to take the Fifth—or why. Unbelievable, even for a Pulitzer-light newspaper like the Post—Charlie Savage got one, for actually covering the news—which put Sally Quinn in charge of an entire new religion section. WaPo:
Regent has had 150 of its graduates working in the White House; the school estimates that one-sixth of its alumni are in government work. Call them the Goodlings: scrubbed young ideologues, ready to serve their nation, the right’s version of the Peace Corps generation.
Monica “scrubbed”? I’d say she was filthy as hell. From the testimony, watch Monica evade, deny, crawfish, filibuster and finally admit what we all know. She broke the law (shit, that’s why she got lawyered up for the immunity deal!):
Mr. Scott: In your testimony, you indicated that you have “may have taken inappropriate political considerations into account on some occasions.” Do you believe that those political considerations were not just inappropriate, but in fact illegal?
Ms. Goodling: That’s not a conclusion for me to make. I know I was acting …
Mr. Scott: Do you believe that were legal or illegal for you to take those political considerations in mind? Not whether they were legal or illegal, what do you believe? Do you believe that they were illegal?
Ms. Goodling: I don’t believe I intended to commit a crime.
Mr. Scott: Did you break the law? Is it against the law to take those political considerations into account? You have civil service laws, you have obstruction of justice, any laws that you could have broken by taking political consideration into account, “on some occasions.”
Ms. Goodling: The best that I can say is that I took political considerations into account on some occasions.
Mr. Scott: Was that legal?
Ms. Goodling: Sir, I’m not able to answer that question. I know I crossed the line.
Mr. Scott: What line? Legal?
Ms. Goodling: I crossed the line of the civil service rules.
Mr. Scott: Rules? Laws? You crossed the law on civil service laws. You crossed the line on civil service laws. Is that right?
Ms. Goodling: I believe I crossed the law—lines. But I didn’t mean to.
“I didn’t mean to.” For Monica, “I didn’t mean to” is all important. To them, their inner, spiritual state—as self-perceived, that is—is all-important (“We create our own reality”). It’s a miniature version of Nixon’s authoritarianism—“If the President does it, it is not illegal.”
For Monica, and the rest of the Christianists now infesting our government, “If a Christianist
does it, it is not illegal.” So much for the rule of law. The Christianists would say they are following a higher law, God’s law, and that’s worked out so well in the past, hasn’t it?
But don’t cry for Monica! I’m sure things will work out very well for her. The Christianist talk show circuit can be quite lucrative, I understand, and no doubt the VRWC will throw some money her way by making her a “scholar” at some second-rate think tank. And admitting you broke the law is no bar to getting a job in a Republican administration, so her government career is by no means over.
It’s really a shame. Now that the Republicans have completely polluted the professional civil service with Christianists, I’m going to have to find out whether I’m dealing with one before having any dealings (heaven forfend) with the government.
Because after Monica, it’s clear not non-Christianists, and non-Republicans, will never get a fair shake from a Christianist.
NOTE The lead is cute, too. It starts out with the old Bush hatred lie:
To the Bush haters of America….
It’s a slick rhetorical move: Anything negative said about Monica, or about the Christianists, can be deflected onto “hatred.”
Actually, I hate what Bush and his authoritarian regime have done to the country. I reserve hatred of people for those with stature.
UPDATE The author of the article is Hanna Rosin. I dropped her a polite note:
One would never know, from your article, that Monica got herself a lawyer, took the Fifth, got an immunity deal, and then testified she broke the law.
How contemptible.
However, I’m sure that your book will do very well, so that will be a consolation for you. Good luck with it, and if you’re even more lucky, you can become a TV commentator. I understand that’s quite lucrative.
My light touch with irony seems to have deserted me these days….
UPDATE Why am I not surprised that Hannah Rosin worked for the New Republic? The incomparable archives at the Daily Howler have more.
Front page
Don't Believe She's Naive
Somebody must have told the lawyers over at the Justice Department that whoever appears the smartest at the end of the day is going to be left holding the bag. Gonzales presents himself as smug but incredibly dumb, and his minions follow his example.
Goodling is a lawyer. Goodling is ambitious. Goodling promoted her own career by ruining others’. Goodling actively worked to remove Democrats from the democratic process. Goodling actively worked to remove Democrats and insufficiently rabid Republicans from the Justice Department. Goodling ran for the Fifth as soon as the spotlight landed on her.
She succeeded in securing immunity for herself (there goes the selflessness) and then proceeded to give testimony that plainly and simply is not credible. She was not that nice, not that dumb, not that trusting, and not that ignorant. And her curiosity was never idle.
And (contrary to her testimony) it’s been a few years since she was a girl.
If the stories she is telling—under oath or not—are unbelievable, we need to resist any further discussion of them. Why should we be interested in what she has to say if it’s not true?
The only point she made with her testimony so far is that she’s a liar, and so are her bosses.
Defending the indefensible...
I don’t “hate bush” or think he is stupid. I think he is incompetent and incapable of doing his job properly. This is what I hate: what the Bush administration policies have done to this country. If Bush supporters can’t distinguish between the man and his policies that is not my problem. You know what I think? I think Bush missed his true calling, he would make a great televangelist. Given all the God talk he spouts, money he is able to raise, and laws he is willing to break he seems perfectly suited for the job.
Setting aside my atheism and assuming for the sake of debate that God exists - why on earth would he pick people like Bush, Falwell, Dobson, Robertson et al. to be his emissaries? If God thinks people like this best represent him - what does that say about God? On the other hand, as I have pointed out before, if they are all saying stuff in his name without his approval, Proverbs 6:16-19 indicates that God will not be pleased one bit. Ah well, you know what they say: you reap what you sow.
Falwell is dead. He is the
Falwell is dead. He is the last of the fundamentalists who got on TV as a group and damned people for no reason. Maybe they like Harley Davidson bikes?