The Chairman of the Judiciary Committee writes a letter (slightly paraphrased):
Mr. Robert D. Luskin
Patton Boggs LLP
2550 M Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20037-1350
Dear Mr. Luskin:
Fuck you and your monstrously detestable client. He'll be allowed to only respond by post when monkeys fly out of my ass. Please contact the Committee counsel no later than May 21 as to whether that corpulant suckhole will make himself available for questioning, or he may just face prison time. I've just about had it with the both of you.
As our previous letters have made clear, the Siegelman case is a principal reason for our invitation to Mr. Rove. But that issue cannot be separated from the broader concerns about politicization within the Department and the U.S. Attorney firings, and your spurious dipshit of a client has made on-the-record comments to the media about all these interrelated matters. As we have made clear, he can decline to answer specific questions based on privilege or other grounds -- not by a refusal to appear altogether.
If that distented rectum is now willing to submit written answers to questions, which by definition would be recorded in a manner similar to a transcript, we do not understand why he would not submit to providing transcribed answers to live questions, as he has done in media interviews. We are willing to consider other possible accommodations, such as providing a list of initial questions that may be asked, or having the hearing conducted right from his prison cell. But your suggestion that the Committee be limited to written answers is unacceptable. Jerkoff.
Sincerely,
John Conyers, Jr.
Chairman, Judiciary Committee
Your Worst Nightmare
“The change you deserve” (snort!)
Patton Boggs LLP
2550 M Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20037-1350
Dear Mr. Luskin:
Fuck you and your monstrously detestable client. He'll be allowed to only respond by post when monkeys fly out of my ass. Please contact the Committee counsel no later than May 21 as to whether that corpulant suckhole will make himself available for questioning, or he may just face prison time. I've just about had it with the both of you.
As our previous letters have made clear, the Siegelman case is a principal reason for our invitation to Mr. Rove. But that issue cannot be separated from the broader concerns about politicization within the Department and the U.S. Attorney firings, and your spurious dipshit of a client has made on-the-record comments to the media about all these interrelated matters. As we have made clear, he can decline to answer specific questions based on privilege or other grounds -- not by a refusal to appear altogether.
If that distented rectum is now willing to submit written answers to questions, which by definition would be recorded in a manner similar to a transcript, we do not understand why he would not submit to providing transcribed answers to live questions, as he has done in media interviews. We are willing to consider other possible accommodations, such as providing a list of initial questions that may be asked, or having the hearing conducted right from his prison cell. But your suggestion that the Committee be limited to written answers is unacceptable. Jerkoff.
Sincerely,
John Conyers, Jr.
Chairman, Judiciary Committee
Your Worst Nightmare
“The change you deserve” (snort!)
And that goes double for Robert Wexler.
2 comments:
Yup. Ah-YUP! Fuckin' YUPPERS!
Today, Conyers opined as how it was time someone kicked KKKarl in the (butt)Krack. I could spring for spike-soled shoes, flavoured with Scotch bonnet peppers.
O NOEZ, thepoliticalcat!! We NAWT torture!
You can only waterboard him while you taze him, bro.
O, and NBC gift shop sells Hillary Nutcrackers that might be helpful in squeezing the truth out of the venomous fat molerat, Teh KKKarl.
Hope that helps. If not, I have some steeled-toed boots I could lend you to kick 10 colors of shit out of teh Nozz.
Post a Comment