A strange, even disturbing, interview with Alabama Governor Bob Riley in today's Birmingham News.
The headline is "Riley Angered by Davis Remarks About GOP Plot: Governor Calls Claims in Siegelman case 'far-fetched'" The story is in the usual spot the News has picked out for stories attacking Jill Simpson's credibility. That's the lower right-hand corner of the front page, with an inflammatory headline, a misleading introduction, and a large amount of copy jumped inside where things usually peter out.
Some thoughts about this latest effort from "The Pravda of the South."
* Riley attacks U.S. Rep. Artur Davis (D-AL) right off the bat. "When it gets to the point where he (Davis) says he believes that the governor of Alabama went to Washington, met with the Justice Department, convinced them to put resources into a conspiracy to get Don Siegelman, that is so far-fetched, that is so totally wrong that I'm disappointed that someone like Artur Davis could possibly believe that." Perhaps I missed something, but I don't recall Davis saying the words that Riley attributes to him. In fact, to its credit, the News gets a response from Davis, and he says he's never said those words.
* From here, the piece has the scent of damage control. The theme seems to be: "Little Rob's affidavit gamble didn't go over so well in Washington, so it's time to bring out Big Bob to attack Artur Davis." One gets the feeling that Big Bob can't believe Artur Davis had the temerity to produce phone-record evidence that contradicted the main point in Little Rob's affidavit.
* Big Bob evidently is so upset that his son got shown up on Washington's big stage that be comes off as irrational. He calls Davis' words at Tuesday's U.S. House Judiciary Committee hearing "absurd." And then he says that he and Davis won't be pals any longer. "It's going to be hard for me to have the respect I have had for him . . . because now he is accusing me, he is accusing the governor of something that I think in his heart he knows never happened." Excuse me again, but I don't recall Artur Davis accusing Bob Riley of anything. Riley seems to have Davis and Jill Simpson mixed up.
* You have to admire Davis' ability to keep his cool in the face of such nutty statements. Davis points out that his statement about politics being used to destroy opponents was about Karl Rove, not Riley. "If the governor views that as a reference to him, I would ask the governor to look closely at the whole statement," Davis said.
* We've noted the tendency of Riley spokespeople to brush off questions about uncomfortable charges with words like "ridiculous," "ludicrous," and "absurd." Big Bob does the same thing in today's article, repeatedly using such language. Why? I suspect it's because those are what I call "show stopper" words. They are big, harsh, dismissive words that tend to cut off dialogue. And the last thing the Riley camp wants is dialogue on this issue. I kept wondering if News reporter Brett Blackledge was ever going to ask, "Governor, what is ridiculous or absurd about the information presented at Tuesday's hearing? What specifically do you find ridiculous and why?" Of course, that question never came from the paper's "Attack Chihuahua."
* The disturbing part comes when Riley seems to cast a thinly veiled threat Davis' way and uses the race card to do it. And in the process, Riley clearly insults the integrity of Alabama voters. "Riley said Davis risks damaging himself in the eyes of Alabama voters," Blackledge writes. Hmmm, so Bob Riley is concerned about Artur Davis' political future? And Alabama voters won't like it if a politician actually asks serious questions about the conduct of the Bush Justice Department? And Alabama voters are too stupid to notice that Justice Department officials are not turning over requested documents and Bush Administration officials are refusing to testify on the DOJ scandal? And what voters would Davis be losing credibility with? The reference clearly seems to be to white voters. Big Bob's message to Davis: "If you want to be Alabama governor someday, you'll shut up and be quiet. White Alabamians can't handle it if you unmask conservatives and show them who we really are. And if you upset white Alabamians, they will make a young black fellow like yourself pay."
* We can't finish our commentary without noting this amazing line from Blackledge. He writes: "The affidavits disputing Simpson's description of the phone call don't say the call didn't take place, only that Rob Riley and others don't remember talking to Simpson that day and that a conversation about Rove, Siegelman's prosecution and his concession never took place." AC (Attack Chihuahua) evidently thinks Alabamians are stupid, too. Rob Riley's affidavit clearly says: " . . . I do not believe a phone call occurred that involved Ms. Simpson . . . " In lawyerly, hedged language, that says a phone call didn't take place. Butts' affidavit says, " . . . nor do I believe any such call/conversation as alleged ever took place." And Matthew Lembke's affidavit says, "I do not recall the phone call that Ms. Simpson claims took place . . . "All three of them said the phone call didn't take place. What's so hard to understand?
2 comments:
It sounds to me like Bob Riley had rehearsed a denial of what he did so many times that it came out a bit prematurely.
Oil men Bush and Cheney have managed to get oil to close at above $92.00 a barrel, Gold is at a 28 year high and the U.S. dollar is at its all time low. Good job guys. There is more Federal money going to civilian mercenaries than to American solders.
During the last seven years our borders have been left open, now we have over 14 million illegal immigrants. Most people assume that they are friendly Mexicans wanting jobs picking fruit; however, every military power in the world has managed to slip spies up through Mexico and across our borders unchallenged. Who do you think has been setting fires to destroy our timber which is one our much needed natural resources?
Alabama is right in the middle of Bush's corruption. Bush has had to help Bob Riley win his elections for governor. He is being groomed as a potential vice president candidate for the 2008 election. But what about his connection to Jack Abramoff and Michael Scanlon during the 2002 election. Also, there is another cloud over Riley's head that involves their conspiracy to eliminate his opponent in the 2006 election which is starting to get national attention.
By showing no shame and declaring executive privileges the occupants in the white house have become fugitives that are untouchable. Charges can't be brought against them, because the judicial system works for the executive branch in which the President is the man in charge.
Congress has not been able to start an impeachment process because there are very few conservative (honest) Republican’s remaining in Congress who align themselves with the traditional republican values. The new group of corrupt politicians are still using the good name of the GOP and they still run on the republican ticket; however, they are aligning themselves on Bush and his corruption.
What's the next move once a new president assumes office? What could possibly be Bush’s plan? How are they going to avoid prosecutions and possibly war crime charges? How are they going to prevent the Feds. from seizing their bank accounts and their assets. Will Bush perform midnight pardons? But, first they have to be charged with a crime to be pardoned. Who then would pardon Bush?
I believe that they have all their eggs in one basket. The new President will have to be a close ally. With so many facing possible prosecutions, I believe that what they did to get Bob Riley elected governor is just an example of what might happen to their presidential opponents.
I believe that Karl Rove has never been debriefed and that he is still using the NSA to do wiretapping to gather whatever information that he needs to eliminate top presidential candidates. I believe that Bush is using the Justice department to investigate, investigate and investigate all presidential candidates, and that Karl Rove will be given the results of their investigations to be used to blackmail and to generate smear campaign ads. This is the same thing that he and Donal Segretti done for Nixon. Segretti went to prison; however Karl was only twenty one and escaped prosecution. Maybe he won't be as lucky this time. If Karl's tactics fail to get their candidate in the lead, I fear that the leading candidate(s) will be assassinated.
Post a Comment