As for her look, im going with “pretending to care”.

In other words, eat it.

For the record: to me she looks more angry than abashed, and that expression is the indignant grimace of someone who’d been sure she’d never have to answer for her actions.

I don’t believe for a moment that Monica Goodling devised these corrupt practices on her own, but I doubt the investigation will go much higher. The younger neocons are good at taking one for the team, and the older ones are good at letting their underlings take the hit.

Thank you for making my day, and making me giggle uncontrollably for about 2 minutes :)

As far as this administration’s Justice is concerned, i was convinced they suck when they rationalized torture, now its like… torture and illegal hiring practices, those fiends!

I guess i expect more from a Justice department but in any event, pointing to this one stooge and gasping at her stoogery kind of misses the bigger picture, i think.

My point was not so much to explain her expression means, so much as it was to point out it is not a smirk.

Other things it isn’t (so far as I can tell) is penitent, gleeful, or angry.

If I had to guess I would say… I agreed most with BoingBoing Ate My Name’s description of “Pretending to Care.”

“On March 23, 2007, she took an indefinite leave of absence. On March 26, 2007, Goodling canceled her upcoming appearance at a Congressional hearing, citing her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. In its history, no Department of Justice employee has ever exercised his/her Fifth Amendment rights with respect to official conduct, and remained an employee.On April 6, 2007, Goodling announced her resignation from the Department of Justice, writing to Gonzales, ‘May God bless you richly as you continue your service to America.’”

Here’s Ms. Goodling in happier times: http://xrl.us/ok3mp

Here you go: according to the DoJ report, “It is not improper to consider political affiliations when hiring for political positions. However, both Department policy and federal law prohibit discrimination in hiring for Department career positions on the basis of political affiliations.”

(It’s right near the top of the report. Other misbehavior that she’s accused of includes lying during the investigation, and as it turns out, discriminating based on sexual orientation, too!)

It’s doubtful that Bush will get impeached for these crimes, or that there will be any measurable fallout, but a party affiliation test for the DOJ is actually against the law. This sort of cronyism is a recognizable pattern for the Bush White House.

Is there any evidence that either candidate is interested in talking about this mess? Or for that matter, in doing anything about it?

It’s just a “report” after all, and the Bush DOJ has already declined to appoint a special prosecutor over any of this. In general the Bush administration seems to be “waiting out the clock” until they vacate D.C. over the next six months.

Seriously, is this law she supposedly broke even a felony?

HTH. HAND.

There’s a good chance she’ll be disbarred because of it. Good, I say.

Jail, and jail alone, is the only cure for this.

Go find one!