It certainly does clarify things for me, Brad. You were lying through your frigging teeth. You still are. This letter is what’s called an evasive rationalization. You think you’ve found a way to justify bringing this suit that will keep you out of prison. That may or not be true. But what you’re avoiding answering is, "Why did you want to file this case before an election?" The question wasn’t, "Can you lie about that first, and then go to plan B and claim that you didn’t break any laws?" The question was, "Why did you want to file this case before an election?"If you meant, "I take full responsibility for the decision to move forward with the prosecutions related to ACORN while I was interim U.S. Attorney." And it’s clear that you pushed to find a way to bring this suit before the election when you knew that that was not what was recommended – Why? Try to explain to us why it’s not what it looks like – a direct attempt to discredit Democrats before an election.
And another thing, Bradley, they weren’t asking for your legal opinion about the case. You’re not being called as a legal expert. You’re being called as a suspected traitor – using your office as a Federal Prosecutor for a partisan dirty trick. If you want to be a legal expert, act like a legal expert instead of a sleazy political operative.
Note to Senator Leahy: Call this slime ball witness back to the Committee ASAP. Ask him why again. Ask him if he spoke to Mark Thor Hearne about this case, ever…
Have you written or called Senator Leahy’s office? Because the Democrats in Congress need all the help they can get with the deep ridden election scam that is going on. And we wonder why G W B was selected President in 2000 and Republicans got the Senate majority in 2004 and the President was re-elected in the same year.
Oh, calling Schlozman Tweety Bird is an insult to the cartoon character,
Waiting the 4 days to move ahead with this action would have not made a difference. He could have waited, but he didn’t. There is motive in that, plain and simple.