5 thoughts on “Crack Van: Gonzales Testimony Edition

  1. well, durn it. the IT people must have blocked this.
    have fun, peeps, I was looking forward to the liveblogging. oh well.

  2. Aw, TJ, sorry you couldn’t join us! It was fun. Well, except for the eye-popping inanity that was Orrin Hatch.

  3. Dumb Question: As an attorney, isn’t his job based on his ability to put the facts together in a coherrent whole and present them? Shrub says that he’s a great attorney.
    I haven’t seen much of the testimony yet, but based on what I’ve seen, my conclusion is either that a) he got his attorney decoder ring from a box of crackerjacks or b) he’s a good attorney but he can’t get facts straight (which means either he doesn’t know what happened in his own department or he’s lying).
    What am I missing?

  4. Now, now, MapleStreet: Why be churlish? Is there, truly, any reason why Danglin’ Al cannot be a bad attorney, ignorant and a liar, all at once? I think not.

Comments are closed.