Note the date of my last post. Yup, that says July 14th. The Washington Post finally realized this was a rather big deal today. How is that for crack reporting.
Wa Po story
"Mark J. Rozell, a professor of public policy at George Mason University who has written a book on executive-privilege issues, called the administration's stance "astonishing."
"That's a breathtakingly broad view of the president's role in this system of separation of powers," Rozell said. "What this statement is saying is the president's claim of executive privilege trumps all.""
Friday, July 20, 2007
Saturday, July 14, 2007
President or King, we will know soon.
The Republicans may want to take a deep breath and consider what extensive powers they are about to give the President. If a Democrat wins the next election (s)he will be able to do just about what ever (s)he wants.
Here is the article by John Dean.
Here is the article by John Dean.
Thursday, July 12, 2007
Senate prayer disrupted.
Since when is it that the prayer in our Senate has to be Christian? Listen while this man tries to read a wonderful invocation. He is called an abomination by some misguided fool.
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
The War in Iraq is costing us 12 billion every month. That is about $40 for every American. When I do the math, the war is costing my family $1,920 this year. I could think of a lot better ways to spend this.
By the way, this cost is not reflected in our government budget. It is "off the books." Our government is already going into debt about 2,000 per person each year, because they cut taxes when they did not have the money. When you add it up, this year my family will go into debt $10,000 just based on the government spending more than it takes in. I wonder when we will have to pay this off?
By the way, this cost is not reflected in our government budget. It is "off the books." Our government is already going into debt about 2,000 per person each year, because they cut taxes when they did not have the money. When you add it up, this year my family will go into debt $10,000 just based on the government spending more than it takes in. I wonder when we will have to pay this off?
Saturday, July 7, 2007
Brothel Bust in Minneapolis
"The 41-year-old 3M engineer from Woodbury sat quietly on the bed in his underwear, arms behind his back in handcuffs."
I live in the city with my family. I am frustrated by families that move to the suburbs for "safer neighborhoods" and then come into the city to participate in crime. They come back to buy drugs or hire women for sex. The hypocrisy is amazing to me.
We have good friends that helped shut down a house of prostitution in their wealthy city neighborhood five years ago. They kept track of the license plates of the johns going in and out of the house.
When the police investigators ran the plates they found over 90% of the men lived in the suburbs. One was even a police officer, another was on the suburban city council. Most of the johns were family men that would stop by for sex on their way to or from their white collar jobs in the city. Almost all had families with children.
I often wonder how much safer the city would be if suburban men did not use our wonderful city to buy drugs and pay for sex.
I live in the city with my family. I am frustrated by families that move to the suburbs for "safer neighborhoods" and then come into the city to participate in crime. They come back to buy drugs or hire women for sex. The hypocrisy is amazing to me.
We have good friends that helped shut down a house of prostitution in their wealthy city neighborhood five years ago. They kept track of the license plates of the johns going in and out of the house.
When the police investigators ran the plates they found over 90% of the men lived in the suburbs. One was even a police officer, another was on the suburban city council. Most of the johns were family men that would stop by for sex on their way to or from their white collar jobs in the city. Almost all had families with children.
I often wonder how much safer the city would be if suburban men did not use our wonderful city to buy drugs and pay for sex.
Thursday, July 5, 2007
Armitage leak does not exonerate Libby
From Media Matters:
"Media still repeating false claim that Armitage role in Plame leak exonerates Libby
Following President Bush's decision to commute the prison sentence for former vice presidential chief of staff I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, media figures have continued to repeat the false claim that former deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage's role as columnist Robert D. Novak's original source for Valerie Plame's identity as a CIA operative proves Libby was not involved in the leak of her identity. However, as Media Matters for America has previously noted, the fact that Armitage was the original source for Novak's column revealing Plame's identity is not inconsistent with Libby's disclosure of Plame's identity -- specifically, to then-New York Times reporter Judith Miller -- before the publication of Novak's column.
On the July 3 edition of NBC's Today, Weekly Standard editor William Kristol claimed: "Scooter Libby does not deserve to go to jail. I would remind Joe Wilson that Scooter Libby did not leak Valerie Plame's name. Richard Armitage told Robert Novak, we now know, about Valerie Plame's name, so this was an investigation that should never have happened. There was no underlying crime." Kristol was referring to former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, Plame's husband, who reportedly issued a statement saying that "the president's actions send the message that leaking classified information for political purposes is acceptable" and that "Mr. Libby not only endangered Valerie and our family, but also our country's national security."
As Media Matters has previously documented, journalist Murray Waas noted in his book The United States v. I. Lewis Libby (Union Square Press, June 2007), Miller testified on January 30 that Libby had disclosed Plame's CIA employment to her at a July 8, 2003, breakfast meeting at the St. Regis Hotel in Washington, D.C., well before Novak publicly revealed it in his July 14, 2003, column. As Media Matters has also noted, it is likely of little significance whether Libby disclosed Plame's name, as opposed to the identity of Joseph Wilson's wife as a CIA employee, to a reporter.
From the edited trial transcript of Miller's January 30 testimony during Libby's trial, included in Waas' book:
Q: Did there come a time following the publication of [Ambassador Joseph] Wilson's op-ed [July 6, 2003] that you met with Mr. Libby again?
A: Yes.
Q: When was that?
A: July 8th.
[...]
Q: Was there discussion at any time about Mr. Wilson's wife [Plame] on this occasion?
A: Yes.
Q: Can you tell us what you recall about that?
A: Yes. Mr. Libby was discussing what he called two streams of reporting on uranium and on efforts by Iraq to acquire sensitive materials and components. He said the first stream was reports like that of Joe Wilson. Then he said the second stream, and at that point he said, once again, as an aside, that Mr. Wilson's wife worked at WINPAC.
Q: Can you tell us what WINPAC is?
A: Yes, WINPAC is, stands for Weapons Intelligence Non-Proliferation and Arms Control. It's a part of the CIA which is specifically focused on weapons of mass destruction.
More here
"Media still repeating false claim that Armitage role in Plame leak exonerates Libby
Following President Bush's decision to commute the prison sentence for former vice presidential chief of staff I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, media figures have continued to repeat the false claim that former deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage's role as columnist Robert D. Novak's original source for Valerie Plame's identity as a CIA operative proves Libby was not involved in the leak of her identity. However, as Media Matters for America has previously noted, the fact that Armitage was the original source for Novak's column revealing Plame's identity is not inconsistent with Libby's disclosure of Plame's identity -- specifically, to then-New York Times reporter Judith Miller -- before the publication of Novak's column.
On the July 3 edition of NBC's Today, Weekly Standard editor William Kristol claimed: "Scooter Libby does not deserve to go to jail. I would remind Joe Wilson that Scooter Libby did not leak Valerie Plame's name. Richard Armitage told Robert Novak, we now know, about Valerie Plame's name, so this was an investigation that should never have happened. There was no underlying crime." Kristol was referring to former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, Plame's husband, who reportedly issued a statement saying that "the president's actions send the message that leaking classified information for political purposes is acceptable" and that "Mr. Libby not only endangered Valerie and our family, but also our country's national security."
As Media Matters has previously documented, journalist Murray Waas noted in his book The United States v. I. Lewis Libby (Union Square Press, June 2007), Miller testified on January 30 that Libby had disclosed Plame's CIA employment to her at a July 8, 2003, breakfast meeting at the St. Regis Hotel in Washington, D.C., well before Novak publicly revealed it in his July 14, 2003, column. As Media Matters has also noted, it is likely of little significance whether Libby disclosed Plame's name, as opposed to the identity of Joseph Wilson's wife as a CIA employee, to a reporter.
From the edited trial transcript of Miller's January 30 testimony during Libby's trial, included in Waas' book:
Q: Did there come a time following the publication of [Ambassador Joseph] Wilson's op-ed [July 6, 2003] that you met with Mr. Libby again?
A: Yes.
Q: When was that?
A: July 8th.
[...]
Q: Was there discussion at any time about Mr. Wilson's wife [Plame] on this occasion?
A: Yes.
Q: Can you tell us what you recall about that?
A: Yes. Mr. Libby was discussing what he called two streams of reporting on uranium and on efforts by Iraq to acquire sensitive materials and components. He said the first stream was reports like that of Joe Wilson. Then he said the second stream, and at that point he said, once again, as an aside, that Mr. Wilson's wife worked at WINPAC.
Q: Can you tell us what WINPAC is?
A: Yes, WINPAC is, stands for Weapons Intelligence Non-Proliferation and Arms Control. It's a part of the CIA which is specifically focused on weapons of mass destruction.
More here
Tuesday, July 3, 2007
Who will pay the piper?
From Greenwald:
"We have the country we have -- one in which our most powerful political leaders are literally beyond the reach of the law in every sense, where we casually invade and bomb and occupy countries that have not attacked us, where our moral standing in the world has collapsed with good reason, where we are viewed on every continent in the world as a rogue, dangerous and lawless nation -- because we are ruled by a Beltway elite and political press that is sickly and cowardly and slavish at its core. "
"We have the country we have -- one in which our most powerful political leaders are literally beyond the reach of the law in every sense, where we casually invade and bomb and occupy countries that have not attacked us, where our moral standing in the world has collapsed with good reason, where we are viewed on every continent in the world as a rogue, dangerous and lawless nation -- because we are ruled by a Beltway elite and political press that is sickly and cowardly and slavish at its core. "
Libby skates with 5mil in his defense fund.
I can hear it now: "but his still has to pay the $250,000 fine." Yeah right, he has five million dollars that have been donated to his defense fund.
Libby's only punishment for lying to a Grand Jury and the FBI during an investigation of the outing a CIA agent, in a time of war, is he will have to show up for his probation meetings for the next two years.
I agree with Josh Marshall:
"Many others will note this but I feel obliged to do so for the record. The real offense here is not so much or not simply that the president has spared Scooter Libby the punishment that anyone else would have gotten for this crime (for what it's worth, I actually find the commutation more outrageous than a full pardon). The deeper offense is that the president has used his pardon power to shortcircuit the investigation of a crime to which he himself was quite likely a party, and to which, his vice president, who controls him, certainly was."
_____
By the way, if you really think that it was Armatage that outed Plame then why did Scooter lie?
Libby's only punishment for lying to a Grand Jury and the FBI during an investigation of the outing a CIA agent, in a time of war, is he will have to show up for his probation meetings for the next two years.
I agree with Josh Marshall:
"Many others will note this but I feel obliged to do so for the record. The real offense here is not so much or not simply that the president has spared Scooter Libby the punishment that anyone else would have gotten for this crime (for what it's worth, I actually find the commutation more outrageous than a full pardon). The deeper offense is that the president has used his pardon power to shortcircuit the investigation of a crime to which he himself was quite likely a party, and to which, his vice president, who controls him, certainly was."
_____
By the way, if you really think that it was Armatage that outed Plame then why did Scooter lie?
Thursday, June 28, 2007
The death of Executive Privilege?
"As Columbia University law professor Michael Dorf points out, the Supreme Court ruled in United States v. Nixon that, “where the President asserts only a generalized need for confidentiality, [executive privilege] must yield to the interests of the government and defendants in a criminal prosecution.”
Bush is invoking such “a generalized need for confidentiality,” according to a senior administration official this morning:
“This is not a mere exercise relating to a particular event. This is an exercise in an attempt to protect the prerogatives of the president for this president and for future presidents.”"
As I read this, the current administration has so abused the concept of executive privilege that it's future use is in doubt.
More here.
Bush is invoking such “a generalized need for confidentiality,” according to a senior administration official this morning:
“This is not a mere exercise relating to a particular event. This is an exercise in an attempt to protect the prerogatives of the president for this president and for future presidents.”"
As I read this, the current administration has so abused the concept of executive privilege that it's future use is in doubt.
More here.
Wednesday, June 27, 2007
Senate Republican's are blocking these bills:
– Conservatives blocked debate on raising the minimum wage (54-43, Roll Call Vote #23)
– Conservatives blocked debate ethics reforms (Rejected 51-46, Roll Call Vote #16)
– Conservatives blocked debate on funding for renewable energy (Rejected 57-36, Roll Call Vote #223)
– Conservatives blocked a vote on funding for the intelligence community (Rejected 41-40, Roll Call Vote #130)
– Conservatives delayed legislation fulfilling the 9/11 Commission recommendations (Passed 97-0, Roll Call Vote #53)
Read the story here.
– Conservatives blocked debate ethics reforms (Rejected 51-46, Roll Call Vote #16)
– Conservatives blocked debate on funding for renewable energy (Rejected 57-36, Roll Call Vote #223)
– Conservatives blocked a vote on funding for the intelligence community (Rejected 41-40, Roll Call Vote #130)
– Conservatives delayed legislation fulfilling the 9/11 Commission recommendations (Passed 97-0, Roll Call Vote #53)
Read the story here.
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
Ever wonder why 91% of talk radio is conservative?
No, it is not because the market demands conservative talkers. It turns out that "the gap between conservative and progressive talk radio is the result of multiple structural problems in the U.S. regulatory system, particularly the complete breakdown of the public trustee concept of broadcast, the elimination of clear public interest requirements for broadcasting, and the relaxation of ownership rules including the requirement of local participation in management."
Read the report here.
Thanks to this post from Think Progress.
Read the report here.
Thanks to this post from Think Progress.
Tuesday, June 19, 2007
Bush and Clinton agree on one thing.
Al Qaeda is the most important issue that America faces.
If President Bush believes that Iraq and Al Qaeda are the nexus of terrorism then why does the American ambassador in Iraq say this: "Simply put, we cannot do the nation's most important work if we do not have the Department's best people," It turns out that only ten people in the American embassy even speak Arabic. You gotta be kidding me. I have more people in my neighborhood that speak Arabic than he has in the Iraqi embassy.
Here is the story.
If President Bush believes that Iraq and Al Qaeda are the nexus of terrorism then why does the American ambassador in Iraq say this: "Simply put, we cannot do the nation's most important work if we do not have the Department's best people," It turns out that only ten people in the American embassy even speak Arabic. You gotta be kidding me. I have more people in my neighborhood that speak Arabic than he has in the Iraqi embassy.
Here is the story.
Don't bother to click if you think Bush is a disaster.
However, if you think that Bush serves as the beacon of democracy to the rest of the world then click here.
Why is this relevant? Well, President Bush just nominated a man that endorses this kink of thing.
Oh, I know, the supremely idiotic will say, "well, they did it to us first," or "Ya do what ya gotta do when your way of life is at risk."
I say this in response:
What do you think the rest of the world thinks of us?
Is this what you call "setting a good example."
What would Jesus do?
What would Buddha do?
What would Gandhi do?
If we are in a battle of the hearts and minds of the Middle East, do you think this is working?
Why is this relevant? Well, President Bush just nominated a man that endorses this kink of thing.
Oh, I know, the supremely idiotic will say, "well, they did it to us first," or "Ya do what ya gotta do when your way of life is at risk."
I say this in response:
What do you think the rest of the world thinks of us?
Is this what you call "setting a good example."
What would Jesus do?
What would Buddha do?
What would Gandhi do?
If we are in a battle of the hearts and minds of the Middle East, do you think this is working?
Sunday, June 17, 2007
Let me get this straight.
What is it that Bush objects to, paying people the going wage?
From Think Progress:
"Bush promises to veto homeland security bill.
Yesterday, the House passed a bill to fund the Department of Homeland Security, despite President Bush’s veto threat. The White House objects to a provision that would require DHS contractors to “pay their employees at least the local prevailing wage.” It also “funds the hiring of 3,000 new border patrol agents, rejects the cuts President Bush sought in the training and equipping of first responders, and improves aviation and port security.” June 16, 2007 6:10 pm "
From Think Progress:
"Bush promises to veto homeland security bill.
Yesterday, the House passed a bill to fund the Department of Homeland Security, despite President Bush’s veto threat. The White House objects to a provision that would require DHS contractors to “pay their employees at least the local prevailing wage.” It also “funds the hiring of 3,000 new border patrol agents, rejects the cuts President Bush sought in the training and equipping of first responders, and improves aviation and port security.” June 16, 2007 6:10 pm "
Friday, June 15, 2007
Take note
From Digby:
"I think that when the "honest conservatives" reject Bush they're just setting up their assault on the Democratic president they expect to see elected next year. Their way of digging themselves out from under the Bush disaster (and obscuring their own massive role in that disaster) will be to swear that "Never again can an American President be allowed that kind of free hand!" This will justify their fighting the new Democratic President tooth and nail for every inch of ground.
For example, Bush's politicization of the career staff in Justice and elsewhere was a very bad thing, no? And certainly this kind of thing has to stop, no? So we will forbid the new Democratic President to interfere with career personnel, with the result that all of the political hacks Bush put in civil service positions will be untouchable. (When that happens, can we expect the media to understand what's going on? No, of course not....)"
I have known this would happen for years. The radical right pollutes the water and the Democrats have to spend all their time cleaning up the mess, and paying the bills. The Republicans then get to say "see, those Democrats just tax and spend." Yeah, cleaning up your mess and paying off the debts you accrued for eight years. Some dolts even have the gall to blame Clinton for the current mess. I know not all Republicans believe this, but the talking heads do, and all too many Americans take what they say as Gospel.
"I think that when the "honest conservatives" reject Bush they're just setting up their assault on the Democratic president they expect to see elected next year. Their way of digging themselves out from under the Bush disaster (and obscuring their own massive role in that disaster) will be to swear that "Never again can an American President be allowed that kind of free hand!" This will justify their fighting the new Democratic President tooth and nail for every inch of ground.
For example, Bush's politicization of the career staff in Justice and elsewhere was a very bad thing, no? And certainly this kind of thing has to stop, no? So we will forbid the new Democratic President to interfere with career personnel, with the result that all of the political hacks Bush put in civil service positions will be untouchable. (When that happens, can we expect the media to understand what's going on? No, of course not....)"
I have known this would happen for years. The radical right pollutes the water and the Democrats have to spend all their time cleaning up the mess, and paying the bills. The Republicans then get to say "see, those Democrats just tax and spend." Yeah, cleaning up your mess and paying off the debts you accrued for eight years. Some dolts even have the gall to blame Clinton for the current mess. I know not all Republicans believe this, but the talking heads do, and all too many Americans take what they say as Gospel.
Tony Snow Lies??!!....No, tell me it isn't so Tony!
In Tony's defense. He has to lie a lot or he would be out of a job. It really is not that hard to catch him at lying either. Just listen to any press conference with even a basic understanding of his topic du jour.
Thursday, June 14, 2007
Oh the Drama!
All the over-the-top drama about Scooter Libby's prison sentence, from the Right wing, amazes me. Libby broke an actual law. He broke the law when he obstructed an investigation of actual state business. That is, he was not being coy about who he slept with, or who he cheated on in his personal life. He lied about how his office, the Office of the Vice President, intentionaly outed a CIA agent, in a "time of war," and then tried to hide that from the special prosecutor. 'Nuf said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
