"What they wanted me to do was come up with some bogus prosecutions with no evidence of voter fraud..that's number one. Number two, they wanted me to rush indictments against Democrats who were engaging in corrupt activities.

It is interesting that David’s own testimony before Congress never mentioned any of this. If I remember correctly, David testified that Pete called him at home and asked if there were going to be any indictments soon. When David responded with No then Pete said “Sorry to here that” and hung up without saying goodbye. We later learned that the call from Pete was to his DOJ cell phone and probably did not know he was home.

As far as Heather, again if I remember correctly he testified that she called asked a couple of questions about why indictments might be sealed and then hung up.

None of this supports David’s latest statement. I guess David cannot stand the TRUTH.
Rory Ogle | 05.01.07 - 8:40 am | #

Nice attempt at covering for Pete and Heather. Which phone they were called on and where Iglesias was located at the time of the call have no baring on this fact. It is a VIOLATION of the Senate Ethics Manual as it pertains to Rule 43 reference Senators calling a Federal Prosecutor about a criminal case that has completed final adjudication. Period.

Do you know where Mr Iglesias was when he received his call from Heather? It was reported.

The Ethics Committees of the respective bodies will decide if in fact any action should be taken.

I always thought ol' Joe was the liberal enemy media. It suits your purposes to now agree with him?

Iglesias' message delivery is interesting. My take is that he has been consistent in his message and that lends itself to making it more concise. This tells me that Iglesias is still a Republican. He is good at staying on message. It just so happens the facts are on his side. A very rare thing for a Republican these days. Maybe you guys should elect him to office! THEN the rest of us would believe you when you say he is not telling the truth and completely inept.
David Jacobs | 05.01.07 - 9:48 am | #

Mario,

Is it possible that David Iglesias received some media training and tightened up his command messages? After all, it's not the truth being honed, but the delivery of his messages. There's a major difference there.

You and I both work in public relations. We both know the importance of being able to deliver sharp, concise points when being interviewed. Iglesias is a lawyer and knows the importance of being prepared before going into court and has probably been advised to prepare his messages before meeting with the media.

Ben

P.S. Thanks for the congrats this past weekend.
Ben | Homepage | 05.01.07 - 11:04 am | #

I disagree. The "presentation" of the truth absolutely can be honed and polished without detracting or adding to the inherent "truthiness".
ched macquigg | Homepage | 05.02.07 - 6:12 am | #