Monday, August 07, 2006
CO, CT, GA, MI, MO: Tuesday Primary Election Preview
Posted by RBHHere's the rundown of the elections which will likely produce news tomorrow.
Starting off first in Colorado where the biggest races are the Republican Primary in the 5th District and the Democratic Primary in the 7th District.
In the 5th district race, the winning Republican will likely face Jay Fawcett (who is the frontrunner in his primary). From a short combing though Google News, we find that Doug Lamborn has the Club for Growth supporters with him, Hefley supporters are apparently supporting Crank. Basically the entire primary could end with the winner recieving a very low percentage of the vote, under 40%, maybe under 35%. But right now, the winner is anybody's guess. I should note that Anderson (who is running as pro-choice, which means "pro-choice compared to other Republicans), Bremer (Paul Bremer's brother), and Rayburn (retired Air Force General) are all wildcards and they could get a surprising number of votes.
In the 7th district, the favorite to face Rick O'Donnell appears to be Ed Perlmutter. Ed has had a pretty solid lead in SurveyUSA polls over Peggy Lamm. But then again in an election like this, surprises will occur.
Moving on to Connecticut.
The big race is between Joe Lieberman and Ned Lamont. It appears to be a pretty big deal. Basically the results could go either way, although Lamont is going into the election with a 6 point lead in the latest Quinnipac poll. I'm pretty sure that this race will be the top attraction, and also the one race which does not require a long explanation.
In Georgia, the big election is between Cynthia McKinney and Hank Johnson in the 4th district. McKinney had a plurality last time, but for this election, it could go either way.
In Michigan, the biggest race will be in MI-07 between Congressman Joe Schwarz and Tim Walberg. Schwarz is under fire from the right in this campaign and could be on the way out of Congress. The likely Democratic nominee is Sharon Renier. In other races, I'm expecting Keith Mike Bouchard to win the Republican Senate primary and I wouldn't be stunned if Patricia Godchaux got around 1/3rd of the vote in her primary against Congressman Joe Knollenberg.
In Missouri, no major races will occur in the primaries. The closest primary race will probably be in MO-02 between Akin and Sherman Parker, and that's probably not due to be close at all. Claire McCaskill and Jim Talent are expected to cruise over their unknown opponents.
So, on this election day, there's one more question: What Races Are You Interested In?
Posted at 11:48 PM in 2006 Elections, 2006 Elections - House, 2006 Elections - Senate, Colorado, Connecticut, Democrats, Georgia, Michigan, Missouri, Netroots, Republicans | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Friday, January 20, 2006
OH-18: Ney to OH GOP: I'm Taking You Down with Me
Posted by DavidNYCWhoa. Now THIS is something:
Ohio Republican Chairman Bob Bennett said Thursday that he'd ask Rep. Bob Ney to resign from Congress if he were indicted on felony charges....
"No party boss tells my constituents what to do," Ney said. "They will decide this thing."
...
Asked if Ney planned to step down if Bennett urged him to do so, Ney said: "I would say if he asked me to step down that he'd better look in the mirror because glass houses break easily." (Emphasis added.)
Did I read that right, or did Bob Ney just accuse the entire Ohio GOP of corruption and threaten to take them down with him? Cuz that's what I think I read. Wow. This could really be explosive. I fully expect Ney to be indicted. If he is, and he carries through on his threat, we will see some serious freakin' fireworks.
(Thanks to OHDemVoter.)
UPDATE: Like cockroaches scurrying from the light! Bob Bennet has already caved in to Ney at warp speed:
Bennett backed off Thursday, saying: ``Rep. Ney has said he believes a fair and thorough investigation will help to clear his name, and I take him at his word. It's important to let that process play out and to get all the facts on the table.''Bennett also told Fox the party would find a candidate to oppose Ney in a primary if he were indicted and refused to step down. Bennett also backpedaled on that statement Thursday.
``We are actively working toward his re-election, and I am confident that he will handle this challenge with the best interest of his constituents in mind,'' Bennett said.
Ney must have something on this guy - on all these guys - for Bennet to backpedal so quickly. What an unbelievable admission of guilt! Now, imagine if Ney gets indicted and refuses to resign. That's gonna get nas-tay!
(Thanks to RBH.)
Posted at 01:43 PM in 2006 Elections - House, Ohio, Republicans | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Thursday, December 01, 2005
Talk About Disarray
Posted by DavidNYCIt just gets more amazing by the minute. The New York State Republican Party is fighting itself over literally ever important statewide race next year:
• Senate: Jeanine Pirro has been a total bust. She's a gaffe-prone bumbler who hasn't shown herself to be an adept fundraiser. So now State Sen. Majority Leader Joe Bruno, along with a growing crowd of other malcontents, are trying to force her from the race. However, as far as I can tell, they don't have a backup plan. Would they really go back to Ed Cox, hat in hand - the man whom Pirro and the powers-that-be forced from the race?• Governor: This fight is a little more interesting. Totally checked-out George Pataki supports Bill Weld, but he's doing little to help him. (Pataki hasn't even endorsed Weld yet.) Bruno, meanwhile, wants Tom Golisano to get the nod - a guy whom Pataki hates, given that Golisano ran against him as an independent three times and spent (I'm ballparking) at least $100 mil combined on those efforts. It's a strange battle, though, between an enfeebled Bruno and an out-of-touch, unconcerned Pataki. It's like watching an aged, washed-up prize fighter duke it out against a basketball team which is resting its stars because it thinks it's made the playoffs. And yes, the fight is so strange, it merits a completely messed up sports analogy like that.
• Attorney General: Ha! Did you even know there was a squabble here, too? Bruno wants Pirro to pirouette into the AG's race. But why? As I noted above, it's not like he's got someone great waiting in the wings to run for senate. (The second coming of Rick Lazio?) Here's your answer: State Sen. Michael Balboni, who represents a chunk of Nassau County right on the Queens border, wants to run for AG himself. This is a huge problem for Bruno, who is perilously close to losing his majority in the State Senate. An open seat in NY-SS-07 is an awesome opportunity for the Dems. Even though Balboni won his last election by 20 points, Dem registration actually outnumbers GOP totals in the district: 77,612 to 72,788. Bruno, predictably, wants Pirro in the AG's race to keep Balboni from going anywhere.
I think the only statewide race the GOP isn't warring over is comptroller, but just wait. I'm sure they'll start bickering over that one soon enough.
Posted at 04:02 AM in New York, Republicans | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Monday, November 07, 2005
VA-Gov: Republican Governor's Association Misleads for Jerry Kilgore
Posted by Bob BrighamUPDATE (David): An MP3 of the call is available here. (Thanks for hosting it, Markos.) The sound quality isn't exactly great, so make sure you check out the transcript while you listen.
UPDATE (David): Folks, do NOT contact VPAP (the site we link to which has the Honest Leadership/RGA information). VPAP is just a campaign info database, like Tray.com or OpenSecrets.org. They have nothing to do with this.
In the final days of the Virginia gubernatorial campaign, the Republican Governor's Association is resorting to disgusting tactics in their support of Jerry Kilgore, even going so far as use robo-calls pretending to come from Tim Kaine.
These Republican Governors' Association prerecorded telephone calls are misleading and violate Federal law intended to prevent such political dirty tricks. Consider that "The Honest Leadership for Virginia PAC" is not just a front group, it is the Republican Governors Association's Virginia political committee. The "Honest" Leadership for Virginia PAC received just three contributions totaling $1,860,000 in 2005 – all from one donor, the Republican Governors Association.
RGA's Pre-Recorded Telephone call misleads recipients by implying that it is sponsored by Tim Kaine and fails to disclose the actual entity paying for the call – the Republican Governors Association. Using Tim Kaine's voice implies that he sponsored the call. Using a misleading name, like Honest Leadership for Virginia PAC, for their Virginia political committee, the RGA further misleads recipients that this entity is something other than what it is – an arm of the RGA. In fact, just check the contact info, the Treasurer's email ends in @rga.org.
Here is a transcript of the ad:
[Voice of Tim Kaine] I am running for Governor and I am not afraid to tell you where I stand.I am conservative on issues of personal responsibility. As a former Christian missionary, faith is central to my life. I oppose gay marriage. I support restrictions on abortion: No public funding and parental consent. And I've worked to pass a state law banning partial birth abortion.
Paid for and authorized by Honest Leadership for Virginia PAC.
Registration number 05-034.
Now I'm no big city lawyer, but a former Hill staffer sent me an email that lays out a convincing case against the RGA:
Federal law requires disclosure of the entity that is responsible for initiating a pre-recorded telephone call to disclose its true identify at the beginning of the message. 47 CFR Sec. 64.1200(b)(1).• The Federal regulation states: "All artificial or prerecorded telephone messages shall:
(1) At the beginning of the message, state clearly the identity of the business, individual, or other entity that is responsible for the call. 47 CFR Sec. 64.1200(b)(1).
• Neither the RGA, nor its shadow organization, Honest Leadership for Virginia PAC, is identified at the beginning of the prerecorded message.
• RGA violated Federal Communication Commission regulations by failing to identify the entity responsible for initiating the prerecorded message.
4. Federal law requires the entity making prerecorded telephone calls to provide a telephone number in the message. 47 CFR Sec. 64.1200(b)(2).
• The FCC regulation states: "All artificial or prerecorded telephone messages shall:
(2) During or after the message, state clearly the telephone number (other than that of the autodialer or prerecorded message player that placed the call) of such business, other entity, or individual. The telephone number provided may not be a 900 number or any other number for which charges exceed local or long distance transmission charges. For telemarketing messages to residential telephone subscribers, such telephone number must permit any individual to make a don-not-call request during regular business hours for the duration of the telemarketing campaign. 47 CFR Sec. 64.1200(b)(2).
• No telephone number is provided in the RGA's prerecorded message for the RGA or its shadow organization, Honest Leadership for Virginia PAC.
• RGA violated Federal Communication Commission regulations by failing to clearly state telephone number during or after the prerecorded message.
Lies and distortion, the Kilgore campaign is clearly desperate.
Posted at 04:45 PM in 2005 Elections, Culture of Corruption, Republicans, Scandals, Virginia | Comments (13) | TrackBack (2) | Technorati
Tuesday, November 01, 2005
The Day Democrats Said Enough
Posted by Bob BrighamEvery Republican Senator should be on notice, today isn't like yesterday. Tomorrow won't be either. We have new rules, Democrats with spine, and enough is enough. Today, Harry Reid attempted to end the cover-up surrounding how the Administration lied to the American people while fabricating a case for a needless war. Kos says:
Reid asked the Senate to go into special session on intelligence -- that is, a closed session -- to discuss prewar intelligence. This mostion, along with a second (provided by Durbin), requires all Senators to report to the Senate floor. It is a non-debatable motion.Cue in lots of hystrionics from Frist and company. Republicans whined that this was a violation of Senate tradition. This coming from the gang that wants to eliminate the judicial filibuster. Frist whined that he wasn't consulted. As though Democrats have had a seat at the table in this Congress. They want to play hardball? Fine. Reid sent notice that he can play that game as well.
Frist whined, "Senator Daschle never did anything like this." Damn right. A new sheriff is in town.
Now, this is more than a temporary stunt. The Democratic leadership has promised to call a special session in the Senate every single day until Republicans alllow for a real investigation.
So let's see what we have here --
Democrats showing leadership and fight. Very nice. Democrats creating a media narrative around Republican stonewalling of a real investigation into pre-war intelligence. Also very nice. Republicans getting a taste of things to come if they initiate the nuclear option? Very crafty.
Here are some quick facts on Rule 21:
KEY FACTS ON SECRET SESSIONS OF THE SENATE
* Since 1929, the Senate has held 53 secret sessions, generally for reasons of national security.
* For example, in 1997 the Senate held a secret session to consider the Chemical Weapons Convention (treaty).
* In 1992, the Senate met in secret session to consider “most favored nation” trade status for China.
* In 1988, a session was held to consider the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces Treaty and in 1983 a session was held on Nicaragua.
* In 1942, a secret session was held on navy plans to build battleships and aircraft carriers, and in 1943 a secret session was held on reports from the war fronts.
* Six of the most recent secret sessions, however, were held during the impeachment trial of President Bill Clinton.
SENATE RULES ON SECRET SESSIONS
* During a secret session, the doors of the chamber are closed, and the chamber and its galleries are cleared of all individuals except Members and those officers and employees specified in the rules or essential to the session.
* Standing Senate Rules 21, 29, and 31 cover secret sessions for legislative and executive business. Rule 21 calls for the Senate to close its doors once a motion is made and seconded. The motion is not debatable, and its disposition is made behind closed doors.
Reid's full statement in the extended entry.
Reid ask to go into special session on intelligence to discuss intelligence failures and the war in Iraq. Statement belowStatement by Senator Reid
Troops and Security FirstThis past weekend, we witnessed the indictment of the I. Lewis Libby, the Vice President's Chief of Staff and a senior Advisor to President Bush. Libby is the first sitting White House staffer to be indicted in 135 years. This indictment raises very serious charges. It asserts this Administration engaged in actions that both harmed our national security and are morally repugnant.
The decision to place U.S. soldiers in harm's way is the most significant responsibility the Constitution invests in the Congress. The Libby indictment provides a window into what this is really about: how the Administration manufactured and manipulated intelligence in order to sell the war in Iraq and attempted to destroy those who dared to challenge its actions.
As a result of its improper conduct, a cloud now hangs over this Administration. This cloud is further darkened by the Administration's mistakes in prisoner abuse scandal, Hurricane Katrina, and the cronyism and corruption in numerous agencies.
And, unfortunately, it must be said that a cloud also hangs over this Republican-controlled Congress for its unwillingness to hold this Republican Administration accountable for its misdeeds on all of these issues.
Let's take a look back at how we got here with respect to Iraq Mr. President. The record will show that within hours of the terrorist attacks on 9/11, senior officials in this Administration recognized these attacks could be used as a pretext to invade Iraq.
The record will also show that in the months and years after 9/11, the Administration engaged in a pattern of manipulation of the facts and retribution against anyone who got in its way as it made the case for attacking Iraq.
There are numerous examples of how the Administration misstated and manipulated the facts as it made the case for war. Administration statements on Saddam's alleged nuclear weapons capabilities and ties with Al Qaeda represent the best examples of how it consistently and repeatedly manipulated the facts.
The American people were warned time and again by the President, the Vice President, and the current Secretary of State about Saddam's nuclear weapons capabilities. The Vice President said Iraq "has reconstituted its nuclear weapons." Playing upon the fears of Americans after September 11, these officials and others raised the specter that, left unchecked, Saddam could soon attack America with nuclear weapons.
Obviously we know now their nuclear claims were wholly inaccurate. But more troubling is the fact that a lot of intelligence experts were telling the Administration then that its claims about Saddam's nuclear capabilities were false.
The situation was very similar with respect to Saddam's links to Al Qaeda. The Vice President told the American people, "We know he's out trying once again to produce nuclear weapons and we know he has a longstanding relationship with various terrorist groups including the Al Qaeda organization."The Administration's assertions on this score have been totally discredited. But again, the Administration went ahead with these assertions in spite of the fact that the government's top experts did not agree with these claims.
What has been the response of this Republican-controlled Congress to the Administration's manipulation of intelligence that led to this protracted war in Iraq? Basically nothing. Did the Republican-controlled Congress carry out its constitutional obligations to conduct oversight? No. Did it support our troops and their families by providing them the answers to many important questions? No. Did it even attempt to force this Administration to answer the most basic questions about its behavior? No.
Unfortunately the unwillingness of the Republican-controlled Congress to exercise its oversight responsibilities is not limited to just Iraq. We see it with respect to the prisoner abuse scandal. We see it with respect to Katrina. And we see it with respect to the cronyism and corruption that permeates this Administration.
Time and time again, this Republican-controlled Congress has consistently chosen to put its political interests ahead of our national security. They have repeatedly chosen to protect the Republican Administration rather than get to the bottom of what happened and why.
There is also another disturbing pattern here, namely about how the Administration responded to those who challenged its assertions. Time and again this Administration has actively sought to attack and undercut those who dared to raise questions about its preferred course.
For example, when General Shinseki indicated several hundred thousand troops would be needed in Iraq, his military career came to an end. When then OMB Director Larry Lindsay suggested the cost of this war would approach $200 billion, his career in the Administration came to an end. When U.N. Chief Weapons Inspector Hans Blix challenged conclusions about Saddam's WMD capabilities, the Administration pulled out his inspectors. When Nobel Prize winner and IAEA head Mohammed el-Baridei raised questions about the Administration's claims of Saddam's nuclear capabilities, the Administration attempted to remove him from his post. When Joe Wilson stated that there was no attempt by Saddam to acquire uranium from Niger, the Administration launched a vicious and coordinated campaign to demean and discredit him, going so far as to expose the fact that his wife worked as a CIA agent.
Given this Administration's pattern of squashing those who challenge its misstatements, what has been the response of this Republican-controlled Congress? Again, absolutely nothing. And with their inactions, they provide political cover for this Administration at the same time they keep the truth from our troops who continue to make large sacrifices in Iraq.
This behavior is unacceptable. The toll in Iraq is as staggering as it is solemn. More than 2,000 Americans have lost their lives. Over 90 Americans have paid the ultimate sacrifice this month alone - the fourth deadliest month since the war began. More than 15,000 have been wounded. More than 150,000 remain in harm's way. Enormous sacrifices have been and continue to be made.
The troops and the American people have a right to expect answers and accountability worthy of that sacrifice. For example, 40 Senate Democrats wrote a substantive and detailed letter to the President asking four basic questions about the Administration's Iraq policy and received a four sentence answer in response. These Senators and the American people deserve better.
They also deserve a searching and comprehensive investigation about how the Bush Administration brought this country to war. Key questions that need to be answered include:
o How did the Bush Administration assemble its case for war against Iraq?
o Who did Bush Administration officials listen to and who did they ignore?
o How did senior Administration officials manipulate or manufacture intelligence presented to the Congress and the American people?
o What was the role of the White House Iraq Group or WHIG, a group of senior White House officials tasked with marketing the war and taking down its critics?
o How did the Administration coordinate its efforts to attack individuals who dared to challenge the Administration's assertions?
o Why has the Administration failed to provide Congress with the documents that will shed light on their misconduct and misstatements?Unfortunately the Senate committee that should be taking the lead in providing these answers is not. Despite the fact that the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee publicly committed to examine many of these questions more than 1 and ½ years ago, he has chosen not to keep this commitment. Despite the fact that he restated that commitment earlier this year on national television, he has still done nothing.
At this point, we can only conclude he will continue to put politics ahead of our national security. If he does anything at this point, I suspect he will play political games by producing an analysis that fails to answer any of these important questions. Instead, if history is any guide, this analysis will attempt to disperse and deflect blame away from the Administration.
We demand that the Intelligence Committee and other committees in this body with jurisdiction over these matters carry out a full and complete investigation immediately as called for by Democrats in the committee's annual intelligence authorization report. Our troops and the American people have sacrificed too much. It is time this Republican-controlled Congress put the interests of the American people ahead of their own political interests.
Indeed. In terms of the 2006 mid-term elections, it is important to note that Democrats have the high-ground:
Democratic Efforts to Address Misuse of Intelligence Have Been Repeatedly Blocked by Republicans
For more than two years, Senate Democrats have pressed Republicans to address the misuse of intelligence. At every turn, Republicans have blocked efforts to investigate how intelligence was used in the run-up to the war in Iraq. Below details the long record established by Democrats to investigate this matter.March 14, 2003 – Senator Rockefeller sent a letter to Director Mueller requesting an investigation into the origin of the Niger documents.
May 23, 2003 – Senators Roberts and Rockefeller sent a letter to the CIA and State Department Inspectors General to review issues related to the Niger documents.
June 2, 2003 – Senator Rockefeller issued a press release endorsing a statement made of the previous weekend by Senator Warner calling for a joint SSCI/SASC investigation.
June 4, 2003 – Senator Rockefeller issued a press release saying he would push for an investigation. Senator Roberts issued a press release saying calls for an investigation are premature.
June 10, 2003 – Senator Rockefeller sent a letter to Senator Roberts asking for an investigation.
June 11, 2003 – All Committee Democrats signed a letter to Senator Roberts asking for a meeting of the Committee to discuss the question of authorizing an inquiry into the intelligence that formed the basis for going to war.
June 11, 2003 – Senator Roberts issued a press release saying this is routine committee oversight, and that criticism of the intelligence community is unwarranted. Senator Rockefeller issued a press release calling the ongoing review inadequate.
June 20, 2003 – Senators Roberts and Rockefeller issued a joint press release laying out the scope of the inquiry.
August 13, 2003 – Senator Rockefeller sent a letter to Senator Roberts making 14 points about the investigation, asking to expand the inquiry to address the “use of intelligence by policy makers” and asking for several other actions.
September 9, 2003 – After press reports quoting Senator Roberts as saying the investigation was almost over, Senator Rockefeller sent a letter to Senator Roberts urging him not to rush to complete the investigation prematurely.
October 29, 2003 – Senators Roberts and Rockefeller sent a letter to Director Tenet expressing in strong terms that he should provide documents that have been requested and make individuals available.
October 30, 2003 – Senators Roberts and Rockefeller sent letters to Secretaries Rumsfeld and Powell, and National Security Advisor Rice expressing in strong terms that they should provide documents that have been requested and make individuals available.
October 31, 2003 – Senator Rockefeller sent a letter to Director Tenet asking for documents related to the interaction between intelligence and policy makers, including the documents from the Vice President’s office related to the Powell speech.
November 2, 2003 – Senator Roberts made statements during a joint television appearance with Senator Rockefeller claiming that the White house would provide all documents they jointly requested.
December 5, 2003 – Senator Rockefeller sent a letter to National Security Advisor Rice asking for her help getting documents and access to individuals.
January 22, 2004 – Senator Rockefeller sent a letter to Director Tenet asking for compliance with the Oct. 31 request for documents.
February 12, 2004 – Senators Roberts and Rockefeller issued a joint press release announcing the Committee’s unanimous approval of the expansion of the Iraq review, to include use of intelligence in the form of public statements, and listing other aspects of what became Phase II.
March 23, 2004 – Senator Rockefeller sent yet another letter to Director Tenet asking for compliance with the Oct. 31 request for documents.
June 17, 2004 – Senators Roberts and Rockefeller joint press release announcing the unanimous approval of the report.
July 16, 2004 – Committee Democrats sent a letter to Bush asking for the one page summary of the NIE prepared for Bush. The Committee staff had been allowed to review it but could not take notes and the Committee was never given a copy.
February 3, 2005 – Senator Rockefeller sent a letter to Senator Roberts outlining Committee priorities for the coming year and encouraging completion of Phase II.
August 5, 2005 – Senator Rockefeller sent a letter to Senator Roberts expressing concern over the lack of progress on Phase II and calling for a draft to be presented to the Committee at a business meeting in September.
September 29, 2005 – All Committee Democrats joined in additional views to the annual Intelligence Authorization Bill criticizing the lack of progress on Phase II.
With actions like this, I think we will soon be hearing the title Majority Leader Harry Reid.
Posted at 04:14 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Culture of Corruption, Nuclear Option, Republicans, Scandals, Supreme Court | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Friday, October 28, 2005
Official Statements on the Indictment of Lewis "Scooter" Libby
Posted by Bob BrighamThe old thread was getting crowded, here is an updated, alphebetical list of official statements on the indictment of Assistant to the President and Chief of Staff to the Vice President Scooter Libby.
Rep. Rob Andrews (D-NJ) Statement on the Indictment of I. Lewis LibbyToday's indictment of Vice President Cheney's Chief of Staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, demonstrates yet another significant failure for this Administration in their attempt to earn the respect and trust of the American people. Mr. Libby was one of the senior most aides to this Administration and these charges, as well as the continuing investigation into other members of this Administration provide more questions then they do answers.
This President has repeatedly asked Americans to trust him. Trust him that he has a plan to repair our Nation's economy. Trust him that we are doing the things needed to be done in Iraq to protect our soldiers and win the peace. Trust him that help is on the way to victims in the Gulf. Trust him that his appointees will prove to be both ethical and effective in performing the duties of their post.
The time for political maneuvering and spin is over. The Administration owes the citizens of this Nation a clear and thorough explanation of its answer to the charges against it.
PA-10 Candidate Chris Carney (D)
CHRIS CARNEY: INDICTMENT SHOWS NATIONAL SECURITY COMPROMISEDDimock, Pa.-Chris Carney, Democratic candidate for U.S. Congress, has released the following statement after the announcement of the indictment of Vice-President Cheney's Chief of Staff, Scooter Libby.
"While we cannot presume guilt at this point, today’s indictment seems to begin another gloomy chapter in an already sad story. We must let the justice system do its work. But, anyone in our government that endangered the life of an American covert agent for any reason--political or otherwise--is a coward and without honor."
"As the former Director of Intelligence Support for the War on Terrorism, I can testify that the leak of a covert operative's identity does grave damage to our overall national security and to our efforts in the war on terror."
"We all know the name of Valerie Plame now and we all know her work. Her cover has been revealed, her work endangered, and her contacts put at risk. Possibly worse, anyone that considers working for America in a covert capacity must consider that they may not be protected."
"Perhaps more than in any other American conflict, the war on terror relies upon covert agents and human intelligence assets. To risk compromising these scarce assets is to risk another 9/11—or worse."
"We need new leadership in Washington--new leadership that understands that national security is not a political game, new leadership that will always put the security of the American people first."
"Mr. Libby has informed me that he is resigning to fight the charges brought against him. I have accepted his decision with deep regret.""Scooter Libby is one of the most capable and talented individuals I have ever known. He has given many years of his life to public service and has served our nation tirelessly and with great distinction."
"The prosecutor has performed his job in pursuing this case vigorously and fairly. However, the charges really beg the larger question - what did the president and vice president know about these and related matters, and when did they know it?"
Democracy for America:
Stop the SpinThe culture of corruption in Washington is toxic. Already, the White House has started its spin machine, throwing out bogus talking points about "an overzealous prosecutor1" and "the criminalization of politics2." You know what? We need to quit playing that game.
On Wednesday, November 2, join DNC Chair Howard Dean and DFA Chair Jim Dean on a conference call to discuss how to change the culture of corruption in Washington. Sign up on DFA-Link for a conference call event in your area:
http://www.dfalink.com/november2
It grows clearer by the day that the President's advisors were willing to do anything to quiet opposition to the war -- even if it meant breaking laws designed to protect our national security. And it leaves us questioning: what other deceptions and mistruths did they tell to lead us into war? If we want the truth, we need to demand answers.
Join the conference call with Governor Dean and Jim Dean next week. If you can't find an event in your area, invite some friends over and join the conference call from home:
It's time for the truth. It's time to take our country back: neighbor to neighbor, friend to friend, from the ground up.
RSVP for the conference call with DNC Chair Howard Dean and DFA Chair Jim Dean today:
Sincerely,
Tom Hughes
Democracy for America
1: Republicans Testing Ways to Blunt Leak Charges
2: Bill Frist's Interview With Sean and Alan
Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald today indicted Vice President Cheney's chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, on two counts of perjury, two counts of making false statements and one count of obstruction of justice. Libby was known to have been part of a group of White House officials that included Deputy White House Chief of Staff Karl Rove, Deputy National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley, White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card, and Press Secretary Scott McClellan who were charged with selling the Bush Administration's rationale for the Iraq war to the American people.Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean today issued the following statement:
"This is a sad day for America.
"Beyond the evidence that the White House manipulated the intelligence used to justify the war in Iraq, a group of senior White House officials not only orchestrated efforts to smear a critic of the war, but worked to cover up this smear campaign. In so doing, they ignored the rule of law, endangering our national security and the brave men and women who dedicate their lives to protecting our nation's security. I. Lewis Libby was a part of this internal White House group.
"This is not only an abuse of power, it is an un-American abuse of the public trust. As Americans, we must hold ourselves and our leaders to a higher standard. We cannot fear dissent. We cannot fear the truth. And we cannot tolerate those who do.
"More importantly, we can't ignore the glaring questions this case has raised about the rationale the Bush Administration used to send us to war in Iraq, a war that continues. American soldiers are still in harms way. Over 2,000 brave Americans have lost their lives, thousands of American soldiers have been wounded, and thousands of American families have made the ultimate sacrifice. Still, the President has no plan and no exit strategy. And still he hasn't answered the question, what are we doing in Iraq and when can our troops come home?
"President Bush faces a serious test of leadership; will he keep his pledge to hold his Administration to high ethical standards and give the American people what they deserve, and will he answer to the American people for these serious missteps?"
Diana DeGette
Democratic Chief Deputy Whip Diana DeGette (CO-01) released the following statement regarding the five-count indictment against Vice President Dick Cheney's Chief of Staff, Lewis "Scooter" Libby:"Today, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, the Chief of Staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, was indicted by Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald on charges of obstruction of justice, false statements and perjury. Allegations that a senior government official tried to subvert the criminal justice process by lying to a grand jury are very serious. This is made even more serious by the fact that the investigation is focused on whether classified national security information was compromised during a time of war. The outcome is now in the hands of our independent judicial system."
Chris Dodd:
Statement of Senator Chris Dodd on the Indictment of I. Lewis Libby“These are very serious charges that if found to be true, show an extreme arrogance on behalf of this White House. Leaking a CIA agent’s identity is extremely dangerous, reckless and wrong. But doing so for the larger purpose of discrediting someone who did not believe the Administration’s untruths about Iraq and misleading the country into war is reprehensible and damaging to our country’s interests. These events are clearly distracting this White House which is reeling from ineptitude and mismanagement on a variety of fronts – most importantly the war, but also our economy, Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, spiraling gas prices. The list goes on and on. The American people demand better.”
Tom Harkin:
Statement of Senator Tom HarkinOctober 28, 2005
“Today, a top White House official was indicted for lying to cover his tracks in outing a CIA official. Sadly, this is not limited to this circumstance or this one individual. It sheds light on just how far this White House is willing to go to obstruct the truth and justify a war otherwise based on faulty intelligence, misrepresentation and distortion.
“When a President takes the American people to war, it is an act of utmost gravity and consequence. Two thousand Americans and tens of thousands of Iraqis have perished because of President Bush’s decision.
“There are still questions about who in this Administration—all the way up to Vice President Cheney—sought retribution against those who questioned the war and the justification for it. It is time to come clean. It is time for President to show leadership and answer these very serious questions.”
Ted Kennedy:
”Today is an ominous day for the country, signifying a new low since Watergate in terms of openness and honesty in our government. This is far more than an indictment of an individual. In effect it’s an indictment of the vicious and devious tactics used by the Administration to justify a war we never should have fought. It’s an indictment of the lengths Administration officials were willing to go to cover up their failed intelligence, their distortion on Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction, and their serious blunders on the war. It is an indictment of their vindictive efforts to discredit anyone who challenge their misrepresentations.
The American people know the high cost of this misguided war – 2,000 U.S. soldiers dead, more than 15,000 wounded, hundreds of billions of dollars spent with no end in sight, and a continuing shameful effort by the White House to silence those who try to tell the truth about the war. Dissent is the ultimate form of patriotism, and it’s time we return to having an honest discourse in this country about changing direction and paying attention to the needs of the American people.The President should take this opportunity to do everything he can to heal the country by not interfering with the prosecution of this case or the continuing investigation, and by cleaning house at the White House to immunize the country against any further corruption and dishonesty. As the President promised, anyone still in the White House who had anything to do with this scandalous plot or the cover-up should be dismissed immediately, whether or not they have been indicted. Something has to give — America can’t stand three more years of this failed Bush presidency. “
Robert Menendez
U.S. Representative Robert Menendez (D-NJ), Chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, issued the following statement today on the indictment of White House official I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby:"It is a sad day for America when one of the senior most officials in the White House is indicted on felony charges. I. Lewis Libby is one of the top advisors to the president, one of the chief architects of his foreign policy, and one of the masterminds behind the way the administration sold to the public the war in Iraq.
"Of all the things we have learned over the course of this investigation, two facts stand out: President Bush stood before Congress and spoke of attempts by Saddam Hussein to acquire uranium from Africa, a charge that the administration knew was not true. And Valerie Plame's name was released to the public because Joseph Wilson dared to point out that the claim was not true.
"As the investigation into this leak has unfolded, we have also learned that the White House engaged in a coordinated campaign of unprecedented intensity to discredit its critics. In the course of that campaign, they blew the cover of one CIA operative and thereby jeopardized the lives of other CIA agents.
"Last year, the president said he would fire anyone found leaking information in this case, and we now know the official who was indicted today was not the only one who leaked information. If the president hopes to undo the damage he has done to this country and restore what is left of his credibility, he needs to follow through on his pledge. He cannot hide behind legalistic denials, or pretend that the resignation of one official removes the stain that has been left on his White House.
"Today's indictments came because this administration misled the country over the most important issue any president faces, the decision on whether to take the country to war, and then tried to cover up that fact by silencing its critics and, it appears in at least one case, lying to a grand jury.
"The president now has a rare chance to come clean. I hope he takes it."
White House Indictment Was About Cover-Up Of Iraq LiesToday, Vice President Cheney’s Chief of Staff was indicted for obstructing an investigation into the White House cover-up of the lies that led our nation to war in Iraq.
The Bush administration outted CIA operative Valerie Plame as punishment for her husband's revelations about the Administration's Iraq lies. Today, a top White House official was indicted for obstructing the investigation into that cover-up. The White House will try to pretend that this is not a big deal. With a strong letter to the editor campaign, we can defeat the Republican spin machine and let the American people know the truth: that today's indictment was about the cover-up of Bush's Iraq lies and we demand that Bush clean house of all the liars.
U.S. Rep. Bill Pascrell, Jr. (D-NJ-8) expressed concern after learning that Vice President Dick Cheney's Chief of Staff, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, threatened national security, obstructed justice, and perjured himself to a federal grand jury, in order to stifle opposition to the case President Bush made for going to war in Iraq."Five years ago, President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney pledged to "restore honor and dignity to the White House," stated Pascrell, a member of the House Committee on Homeland Security. "It is clear today that this insincere pledge has been utterly decimated. Exposing national security information to reap political revenge, and then obstructing a federal investigation, is not "honorable or dignified" -- it is corrupt, shameful, immoral and a reason for national concern. With three years to go, this Administration has officially lost any remaining credibility.
At the heart of this issue is an Administration that will stop at nothing to hide the truth from the American people. The indictment reveals that a top official in the United States government placed politics over national security. The President invaded Iraq under false pretenses; today we have learned that Mr. Libby perjured himself to defend those false pretenses that enabled the President to invade Iraq. This isn't a Republican or Democrat issue, this Administration has dishonored all Americans.
President Bush is struggling with the economy at home and with war overseas. Now he will begin struggling to relieve himself of the burden he created within his own ranks."
“The criminal indictments of a top White House official mark a sad day for America and another chapter in the Republicans’ culture of corruption. At the heart of these indictments was the effort by the Bush Administration to discredit critics of its Iraq policy with reckless disregard for national security and the public trust.”
John Podesta:
Statement of John Podesta on the Fitzgerald IndictmentsIts time to get out the broom at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and clean house.
We now know that Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald believes that crimes were committed in an effort to cover up the White House's involvement in the outing of an undercover CIA officer.
At its core, this case is about the Administration's manipulation of intelligence to sell the war in Iraq. Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald's continuing investigation may reveal more about the White House's efforts to cover up its missteps in the lead up to the war.
But we should not have to wait for Fitzgerald's findings for the President to take responsibility for what went on in his White House. We know Karl Rove was a source of the leak. We know Karl Rove lied to the President, the White House Press Secretary and the public. We also know that Vice President Cheney was Lewis Libby's source for the CIA officer's identity. He must come forward and explain his role.
There is no question this is a Presidency in crisis. Bush has a chance to salvage his credibility and last three years of his Presidency - but only if he stands by his word to fire anyone involved in the leak starting with the immediate resignation of Lewis Libby and Karl Rove.
In addition to Rove and Libby, we know that senior Presidential aides National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley and White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan were either complicit in the leak and the cover up, or grossly negligent in their duties. The Press Secretary's credibility is in tatters. It is clear he can no longer be an effective spokesperson for the President. Finally, as Chief of Staff, Andrew Card has presided over a White House staff that is guilty of a disservice to the President and the country. Each of these aides should resign.
----
National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley
Stephen Hadley knew for more than two years that Karl Rove was lying about his role in the leak. In July of 2003, Rove sent then-Deputy National Security Advisor Hadley an email relaying a conversation Rove had with a reporter about Ambassador Wilson.The CIA alerted Hadley three times between October 2002 to January 2003 that the uranium intelligence was unreliable. The State Department told Hadley and Rice in the National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq's WMD capability that they found the uranium intelligence "highly dubious." Hadley d [approved?] the use of the erroneous claim in the State of the Union anyway.
White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card
Andrew Card has presided over a White House staff that has actively misled the public on its role in the leak, and allowed the President to present faulty intelligence to the American people. Mr. Card has either been lied to about the White House staff's role in the leak or he has been complicit in it.White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan
The White House Press Secretary is not just the President's spokesperson; he or she speaks for the United States government. Beginning in the summer of 2003, Scott McClellan has made categorical statements denying any White House involvement in the CIA leak case. Whether McClellan was lying or was lied to by other staff, he no longer has the credibility to speak for the President or the United States government and should resign.
Harry Reid:
“These are very serious charges. They suggest that a senior White House aide put politics ahead of our national security and the rule of law.
“This case is bigger than the leak of highly classified information. It is about how the Bush White House manufactured and manipulated intelligence in order to bolster its case for the war in Iraq and to discredit anyone who dared to challenge the president.
“It's now time for President Bush to lead and answer the very serious questions raised by this investigation. The American people have already paid too steep a price as a result of misconduct at the White House, and they deserve better.”
Tim Ryan:
Congressman Tim Ryan (D-Ohio) issued the following statement today following the indictment and resignation of Vice President Cheney's Chief Of Staff, I. Lewis Libby:"This is a very sad day for the United States of America. Today, the Chief of Staff of Vice President Cheney was indicted on five counts of making false statements, perjury and obstruction of justice during an investigation into the illegal outing of an undercover CIA agent. In the course of serving her country, that agent was compromised and placed at grave risk by her own government. The deliberate and reckless disclosure placed her life and the lives of her colleagues in significant danger, not to mention irrevocably harming their professional public service careers. And why? It was done merely because her husband had the courage to take a stand and challenge the lies the Bush Administration was telling the American public.
"The allegations contained in the indictments are not just unlawful -- they are an egregious violation of the public trust, and they devalue the presidency of the most powerful nation in the world."
Henry Waxman
Rep. Waxman Renews Call for Hearings on CIA Leak Case
Libby Indictment Underscores Need for Congressional InquiryOctober 28, 2005 -- Today, in light of the indictment of Lewis (Scooter) Libby by Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, Rep. Waxman has renewed a request to Chairman Davis that the Government Reform Committee, the principal investigative committee in the House, hold hearings into the leak of the identity of covert CIA agent Valerie Plame Wilson. Rep. Waxman has previously requested such hearings on September 29, 2003, October 8, 2003, December 11, 2003, and July 11, 2005.
Today’s press conference by Special Counsel Fitzgerald makes clear that such hearings are necessary because the leak of Ms. Wilson’s identity raises broad questions of national interest which the Justice Department’s criminal investigation will not address. Mr. Fitzgerald today repeatedly underscored the narrow, legal focus of his investigation and the extensive limits placed on his ability to reveal what he learned by the rules of grand jury secrecy.
Rep. Waxman details the three areas that the Committee’s inquiry should address: (1) what caused this breach of national security and who should be held accountable; (2) why the White House failed to meet its obligations to investigate the leak; and (3) how the leak of Ms. Wilson’s identity relates to the broader issue of whether the President and his top advisors used misleading intelligence to initiate war in Iraq.
(To be read by his attorney Christopher Wolf at 3:00 p.m. - 10/28/05)
The five count indictment issued by the Grand Jury today is an important step in the criminal justice process that began more than two years ago. I commend Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald for his professionalism, for his diligence, and for his courage.
There will be many opportunities in the future to comment on the events that led to today's indictment. And, it appears that there will be further developments before the grand jury. Whatever the final outcome of the investigation and the prosecution, I continue to believe that revealing my wife Valerie's secret CIA identity was very wrong and harmful to our nation, and I feel that my family was attacked for my speaking the truth about the events that led our country to war. I look forward to exercising my rights as a citizen to speak about these matters in the future.
Today, however, is not the time to analyze or to debate. And it is certainly not a day to celebrate. Today is a sad day for America. When an indictment is delivered at the front door of the White House, the Office of the President is defiled. No citizen can take pleasure from that.
As this case proceeds, Valerie and I are confident that justice will be done. In the meantime, I have a request. While I may engage in public discourse, my wife and my family are private people. They did not choose to be brought into the public square, and they do not wish to be under the glare of camera. They are entitled to their privacy. This case is not about me or my family, no matter how others might try to make it so.
This case is about serious criminal charges that go to the heart of our democracy.
We, like all citizens, await the judgment of the jury in a court of law.
Posted at 05:46 PM in 2006 Elections, Culture of Corruption, Democrats, Republicans | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
UPDATED: Statements on Assistant to the President and VP Chief of Staff Indicted
Posted by Bob BrighamThe Culture of Corruption meme just ratched up a notch. Assistant to the President and Chief of Staff to the Vice President Scooter Libby was indicted on five felony counts.
The fallout from this will effect every single race in 2006. Please use the comments to post statements by Democrats and Republicans so we can try to get a fuller picture of the dynamics at play in political races.
UPDATED Initial Statements:
Statement from Senator Harry Reid:
“These are very serious charges. They suggest that a senior White House aide put politics ahead of our national security and the rule of law.
“This case is bigger than the leak of highly classified information. It is about how the Bush White House manufactured and manipulated intelligence in order to bolster its case for the war in Iraq and to discredit anyone who dared to challenge the president.
“It's now time for President Bush to lead and answer the very serious questions raised by this investigation. The American people have already paid too steep a price as a result of misconduct at the White House, and they deserve better.”
Statement from Senator Ted Kennedy:
”Today is an ominous day for the country, signifying a new low since Watergate in terms of openness and honesty in our government. This is far more than an indictment of an individual. In effect it’s an indictment of the vicious and devious tactics used by the Administration to justify a war we never should have fought. It’s an indictment of the lengths Administration officials were willing to go to cover up their failed intelligence, their distortion on Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction, and their serious blunders on the war. It is an indictment of their vindictive efforts to discredit anyone who challenge their misrepresentations.
The American people know the high cost of this misguided war – 2,000 U.S. soldiers dead, more than 15,000 wounded, hundreds of billions of dollars spent with no end in sight, and a continuing shameful effort by the White House to silence those who try to tell the truth about the war. Dissent is the ultimate form of patriotism, and it’s time we return to having an honest discourse in this country about changing direction and paying attention to the needs of the American people.The President should take this opportunity to do everything he can to heal the country by not interfering with the prosecution of this case or the continuing investigation, and by cleaning house at the White House to immunize the country against any further corruption and dishonesty. As the President promised, anyone still in the White House who had anything to do with this scandalous plot or the cover-up should be dismissed immediately, whether or not they have been indicted. Something has to give — America can’t stand three more years of this failed Bush presidency. “
Democracy for America
Stop the SpinThe culture of corruption in Washington is toxic. Already, the White House has started its spin machine, throwing out bogus talking points about "an overzealous prosecutor1" and "the criminalization of politics2." You know what? We need to quit playing that game.
On Wednesday, November 2, join DNC Chair Howard Dean and DFA Chair Jim Dean on a conference call to discuss how to change the culture of corruption in Washington. Sign up on DFA-Link for a conference call event in your area:
http://www.dfalink.com/november2
It grows clearer by the day that the President's advisors were willing to do anything to quiet opposition to the war -- even if it meant breaking laws designed to protect our national security. And it leaves us questioning: what other deceptions and mistruths did they tell to lead us into war? If we want the truth, we need to demand answers.
Join the conference call with Governor Dean and Jim Dean next week. If you can't find an event in your area, invite some friends over and join the conference call from home:
It's time for the truth. It's time to take our country back: neighbor to neighbor, friend to friend, from the ground up.
RSVP for the conference call with DNC Chair Howard Dean and DFA Chair Jim Dean today:
Sincerely,
Tom Hughes
Democracy for America
1: Republicans Testing Ways to Blunt Leak Charges
2: Bill Frist's Interview With Sean and Alan
PA-10 Candidate Chris Carney (D)
CHRIS CARNEY: INDICTMENT SHOWS NATIONAL SECURITY COMPROMISEDDimock, Pa.-Chris Carney, Democratic candidate for U.S. Congress, has released the following statement after the announcement of the indictment of Vice-President Cheney's Chief of Staff, Scooter Libby.
"While we cannot presume guilt at this point, today’s indictment seems to begin another gloomy chapter in an already sad story. We must let the justice system do its work. But, anyone in our government that endangered the life of an American covert agent for any reason--political or otherwise--is a coward and without honor."
"As the former Director of Intelligence Support for the War on Terrorism, I can testify that the leak of a covert operative's identity does grave damage to our overall national security and to our efforts in the war on terror."
"We all know the name of Valerie Plame now and we all know her work. Her cover has been revealed, her work endangered, and her contacts put at risk. Possibly worse, anyone that considers working for America in a covert capacity must consider that they may not be protected."
"Perhaps more than in any other American conflict, the war on terror relies upon covert agents and human intelligence assets. To risk compromising these scarce assets is to risk another 9/11—or worse."
"We need new leadership in Washington--new leadership that understands that national security is not a political game, new leadership that will always put the security of the American people first."
Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi:
“The criminal indictments of a top White House official mark a sad day for America and another chapter in the Republicans’ culture of corruption. At the heart of these indictments was the effort by the Bush Administration to discredit critics of its Iraq policy with reckless disregard for national security and the public trust.”
Diana DeGette
Democratic Chief Deputy Whip Diana DeGette (CO-01) released the following statement regarding the five-count indictment against Vice President Dick Cheney's Chief of Staff, Lewis "Scooter" Libby:"Today, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, the Chief of Staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, was indicted by Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald on charges of obstruction of justice, false statements and perjury. Allegations that a senior government official tried to subvert the criminal justice process by lying to a grand jury are very serious. This is made even more serious by the fact that the investigation is focused on whether classified national security information was compromised during a time of war. The outcome is now in the hands of our independent judicial system."
"The prosecutor has performed his job in pursuing this case vigorously and fairly. However, the charges really beg the larger question - what did the president and vice president know about these and related matters, and when did they know it?"
John Podesta:
Statement of John Podesta on the Fitzgerald IndictmentsIts time to get out the broom at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and clean house.
We now know that Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald believes that crimes were committed in an effort to cover up the White House's involvement in the outing of an undercover CIA officer.
At its core, this case is about the Administration's manipulation of intelligence to sell the war in Iraq. Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald's continuing investigation may reveal more about the White House's efforts to cover up its missteps in the lead up to the war.
But we should not have to wait for Fitzgerald's findings for the President to take responsibility for what went on in his White House. We know Karl Rove was a source of the leak. We know Karl Rove lied to the President, the White House Press Secretary and the public. We also know that Vice President Cheney was Lewis Libby's source for the CIA officer's identity. He must come forward and explain his role.
There is no question this is a Presidency in crisis. Bush has a chance to salvage his credibility and last three years of his Presidency - but only if he stands by his word to fire anyone involved in the leak starting with the immediate resignation
of Lewis Libby and Karl Rove.In addition to Rove and Libby, we know that senior Presidential aides National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley and White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan were either complicit in the leak and the cover up, or grossly negligent in their duties. The Press Secretary's credibility is in tatters. It is clear he can no longer be an effective spokesperson for the President. Finally, as Chief of Staff, Andrew Card has presided over a White House staff that is guilty of a disservice to the President and the country. Each of these aides should resign.
----
National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley
Stephen Hadley knew for more than two years that Karl Rove was lying about his role in the leak. In July of 2003, Rove sent then-Deputy National Security Advisor Hadley an email relaying a conversation Rove had with a reporter about Ambassador Wilson.The CIA alerted Hadley three times between October 2002 to January 2003 that the uranium intelligence was unreliable. The State Department told Hadley and Rice in the National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq's WMD capability that they found the uranium intelligence "highly dubious." Hadley d [approved?] the use of the erroneous claim in the State of the Union anyway.
White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card
Andrew Card has presided over a White House staff that has actively misled the public on its role in the leak, and allowed the President to present faulty intelligence to the American people. Mr. Card has either been lied to about the White House staff's role in the leak or he has been complicit in it.White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan
The White House Press Secretary is not just the President's spokesperson; he or she speaks for the United States government. Beginning in the summer of 2003, Scott McClellan has made categorical statements denying any White House involvement in the CIA leak case. Whether McClellan was lying or was lied to by other staff, he no longer has the credibility to speak for the President or the United States government and should resign.
Robert Menendez
U.S. Representative Robert Menendez (D-NJ), Chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, issued the following statement today on the indictment of White House official I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby:"It is a sad day for America when one of the senior most officials in the White House is indicted on felony charges. I. Lewis Libby is one of the top advisors to the president, one of the chief architects of his foreign policy, and one of the masterminds behind the way the administration sold to the public the war in Iraq.
"Of all the things we have learned over the course of this investigation, two facts stand out: President Bush stood before Congress and spoke of attempts by Saddam Hussein to acquire uranium from Africa, a charge that the administration knew was not true. And Valerie Plame's name was released to the public because Joseph Wilson dared to point out that the claim was not true.
"As the investigation into this leak has unfolded, we have also learned that the White House engaged in a coordinated campaign of unprecedented intensity to discredit its critics. In the course of that campaign, they blew the cover of one CIA operative and thereby jeopardized the lives of other CIA agents.
"Last year, the president said he would fire anyone found leaking information in this case, and we now know the official who was indicted today was not the only one who leaked information. If the president hopes to undo the damage he has done to this country and restore what is left of his credibility, he needs to follow through on his pledge. He cannot hide behind legalistic denials, or pretend that the resignation of one official removes the stain that has been left on his White House.
"Today's indictments came because this administration misled the country over the most important issue any president faces, the decision on whether to take the country to war, and then tried to cover up that fact by silencing its critics and, it appears in at least one case, lying to a grand jury.
"The president now has a rare chance to come clean. I hope he takes it."
"Mr. Libby has informed me that he is resigning to fight the charges brought against him. I have accepted his decision with deep regret.""Scooter Libby is one of the most capable and talented individuals I have ever known. He has given many years of his life to public service and has served our nation tirelessly and with great distinction."
Bill Pascrell, Jr. via Blue Jersey::
U.S. Rep. Bill Pascrell, Jr. (D-NJ-8) expressed concern after learning that Vice President Dick Cheney's Chief of Staff, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, threatened national security, obstructed justice, and perjured himself to a federal grand jury, in order to stifle opposition to the case President Bush made for going to war in Iraq."Five years ago, President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney pledged to "restore honor and dignity to the White House," stated Pascrell, a member of the House Committee on Homeland Security. "It is clear today that this insincere pledge has been utterly decimated. Exposing national security information to reap political revenge, and then obstructing a federal investigation, is not "honorable or dignified" -- it is corrupt, shameful, immoral and a reason for national concern. With three years to go, this Administration has officially lost any remaining credibility.
At the heart of this issue is an Administration that will stop at nothing to hide the truth from the American people. The indictment reveals that a top official in the United States government placed politics over national security. The President invaded Iraq under false pretenses; today we have learned that Mr. Libby perjured himself to defend those false pretenses that enabled the President to invade Iraq. This isn't a Republican or Democrat issue, this Administration has dishonored all Americans.
President Bush is struggling with the economy at home and with war overseas. Now he will begin struggling to relieve himself of the burden he created within his own ranks."
(To be read by his attorney Christopher Wolf at 3:00 p.m. - 10/28/05)
The five count indictment issued by the Grand Jury today is an important step in the criminal justice process that began more than two years ago. I commend Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald for his professionalism, for his diligence, and for his courage.
There will be many opportunities in the future to comment on the events that led to today's indictment. And, it appears that there will be further developments before the grand jury. Whatever the final outcome of the investigation and the prosecution, I continue to believe that revealing my wife Valerie's secret CIA identity was very wrong and harmful to our nation, and I feel that my family was attacked for my speaking the truth about the events that led our country to war. I look forward to exercising my rights as a citizen to speak about these matters in the future.
Today, however, is not the time to analyze or to debate. And it is certainly not a day to celebrate. Today is a sad day for America. When an indictment is delivered at the front door of the White House, the Office of the President is defiled. No citizen can take pleasure from that.
As this case proceeds, Valerie and I are confident that justice will be done. In the meantime, I have a request. While I may engage in public discourse, my wife and my family are private people. They did not choose to be brought into the public square, and they do not wish to be under the glare of camera. They are entitled to their privacy. This case is not about me or my family, no matter how others might try to make it so.
This case is about serious criminal charges that go to the heart of our democracy.
We, like all citizens, await the judgment of the jury in a court of law.
THE WHITE HOUSE STRATEGY TO DEFEND THE CASE FOR WAR: IN THIS CASE, THE CRIME IS AS BAD AS THE COVERUPWhen President Bush came into office, he promised that his staff would "not just do what is legal, but what is right." But now, public confidence in the direction of our country is crumbling, and nine out of 10 Americans believe that the Bush Administration did something illegal or unethical in connection with the CIA leak scandal. After the indictment of Scooter Libby on two counts of perjury, two counts of making false statements to the FBI, and one count of obstruction of justice, and with questions still lingering about Karl Rove's role, the White House can no longer deny its efforts to manipulate the intelligence to win support for the war in Iraq, orchestrating efforts to smear opponents of that war, and then conspiring to cover it up.
2002: POLITICIZING INTELLIGENCE IN THE RUN UP TO WAR
CARD CREATES WHITE HOUSE IRAQ GROUP (WHIG)
Card Formed White House Iraq Group To Formulate "Meticulously Planned" Strategy To Sell Iraq War to American People. "Systematic coordination began in August, when Chief of Staff Andrew H. Card Jr. formed the White House Iraq Group, or WHIG, to set strategy for each stage of the confrontation with Baghdad. A senior official who participated in its work called it "an internal working group, like many formed for priority issues, to make sure each part of the White House was fulfilling its responsibilities." The group met weekly in the Situation Room. Among the regular participants were Karl Rove, the president's senior political adviser; communications strategists Karen Hughes, Mary Matalin and James R. Wilkinson; legislative liaison Nicholas E. Calio; and policy advisers led by Rice and her deputy, Stephen J. Hadley, along with I. Lewis Libby, Cheney's chief of staff." [Washington Post, 8/10/03; New York Times, 9/7/02]
Card Described Intricate Marketing Strategy to Sell The Iraq War. In September of 2002 White House Chief of Staff, Andy Card admitted the start of a "meticulously planned strategy to persuade the public, the Congress and the allies of the need to confront the threat from Saddam Hussein" saying, "From a marketing point of view, you don't introduce new products in August." [New York Times, 9/7/02] WHIG PUSHES NEW, SHARPER IRAQ RHETORIC
WHIG Pushed Iraq Nuclear Threat In Papers and Planned Speeches. Under a special "strategic communications" group associated with WHIG, White House staff planned speeches and wrote papers which emphasized Iraq's supposed nuclear threat. According to the Washington Post, "The escalation of nuclear rhetoric a year ago, including the introduction of the term 'mushroom cloud' into the debate, coincided with the formation of a White House Iraq Group, or WHIG, a task force assigned to 'educate the public' about the threat from Hussein, as a participant put it." [Washington Post, 8/10/03]
Cheney Trumpeted Iraq Nuclear Threat In August of 2002. "Cheney raised the alarm about Iraq's nuclear menace three times in August. He was far ahead of the president's public line. ... On Aug. 7, Cheney volunteered in a question-and-answer session at the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco, speaking of Hussein, that 'left to his own devices, it's the judgment of many of us that in the not-too-distant future, he will acquire nuclear weapons.' On Aug. 26, he described Hussein as a 'sworn enemy of our country' who constituted a 'mortal threat' to the United States. He foresaw a time in which Hussein could 'subject the United States or any other nation to nuclear blackmail.' 'We now know that Saddam has resumed his efforts to acquire nuclear weapons,' he said. 'Among other sources, we've gotten this from firsthand testimony from defectors, including Saddam's own son-in-law.'" [Washington Post, 8/10/03]
Bush Cited Iraq's Nuclear Threat On At Least Three Separate Occasions. In the fall of 2002, while making the case for war, Bush began to highlight Iraq's supposed Iraq threat. On September 7, 2002 he cited a non-existent IAEA report that Iraq was "six months away from developing a nuclear weapon." On September 12, 2002, in front of the United Nations Bush said, "Iraq has made several attempts to buy high-strength aluminum tubes used to enrich uranium for a nuclear weapon." Finally, on October 7, 2002, Bush warned, "America must not ignore the threat gathering against us. Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof, the smoking gun that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud." [Bush Remarks, 9/12/02; Bush Remarks, 9/7/02; Washington Post, 8/10/03; Bush Remarks, 10/7/02 ]Rice Warned of Smoking Gun as Mushroom Cloud. "'The problem here is that there will always be some uncertainty about how quickly he can acquire nuclear weapons. But we don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud.' national security adviser Condoleezza Rice said." [AP, 9/8/02]
OCTOBER 7TH: CONFLICT OVER NIGER REFERENCES IN STATE OF THE UNION
White House Dropped Niger Uranium Reference From Bush's Address To The Nation, After Tenet's Concern's. In October 2002, CIA Director George Tenet personally and repeatedly warned Stephen Hadley, a deputy of Condoleezza Rice, as well as other White House officials that references to Niger be dropped from Bush's October 7 speech to the nation. The Niger allegation was omitted from that speech. [Washington Post, 7/25/01; New York Times, 7/16/03; 7/13/03]
2003: INTERNAL WHITE HOUSE BATTLES INTENSIFY
JANUARY 28TH: LINE ON NIGER RETURNS TO THE STATE OF THE UNION
Bush Claimed That Iraq Was Seeking Uranium From Africa. "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." [Bush, State of The Union, 1/28/03]
FEBRUARY 4TH: LIBBY TAKES INTELLIGENCE CRUSADE DIRECTLY TO POWELL
Libby Lobbied Powell To Add Intelligence Information He Favored To UN Speech, The Night Before The Address. Another official recalled that Libby was pushing so hard to include certain intelligence information in the speech that Libby lobbied Powell for last minute changes in a phone call to Powell's suite at the Waldorf Astoria hotel the night before the speech. Libby's suggestions were dismissed by Powell and his staff. [National Journal, 10/27/05]
FEBRUARY 5TH: WHIG PROVIDES POWELL WITH SCRIPT FOR UN
Whig Provided Powell With "Script" For Speech to United Nations on Iraq's WMD Threat. The final step was to get Powell to make the case to the United Nations. This was handled by the White House Iraq Group, which, Bamford says, provided Powell with a script for his speech, using information developed by Feith's group. Much of it was unsourced material fed to newspapers by the OSP. Realizing this, Powell's team turned to the now-discredited National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq. But some of Feith's handiwork ended up in Powell's mouth anyway. [UPI, 7/19/04]
MAY 29TH 2003: LIBBY BEGINS TO COLLECT INFORMATION ON WILSON
Libby Collected Information on Wilson. Beginning in late May of 2003, Libby allegedly began acquiring information about a 2002 trip to the African country of Niger by Joseph Wilson...to investigate allegations concerning efforts by the former government of Iraq to acquire uranium yellowcake..."[DOJ Press Release, 10/28/05]
JUNE 2003: WILSON EXPOSED THE TRUTHSUMMER, 2003: WHIG MEMBERS REUNITE TO DEFEND THE IRAQ WAR
Whig Members Reunite To Back Up Their Faulty Intelligence. During the summer of 2003, Hughes and Mary Matalin joined Dan Bartlett in formulating a strategy to pushback on general questions about the White House's credibility over its handling of the Iraq war. "The plan: Release all relevant information. Try to shift attention back to Bush's leadership in the war on terrorism. Diminish the significance of that single piece of iffy intelligence by making the case that Saddam was a threat for many other reasons. Put Republican lawmakers and other Bush allies on TV to defend him. Most important: Question the motives of Democrats who supported the war but now are criticizing the president." [New York Times, 10/21/02; USA Today, 7/24/03,]
MEMO TO UNDERCUT WILSON'S CRITICISM WAS PREPARED
June 2003: The State Department Compiled a Memo on Joe Wilson. On June 10, 2003 the State Department's Office of Intelligence and Research compiled a memo for Marc Grossman, then the Under Secretary of State for political affairs, on Joe Wilson's mission to Niger. The memo included the fact that Wilson's wife was a CIA operative working on WMD issues. At the time, Wilson was criticizing the administration's justification for the war, specifically discrediting the charge that Iraq was attempting to purchase yellow cake uranium. [Newsweek, 7/25/05; New York Times, 7/16/05]
State Department Memo Was Marked as Containing Sensitive Information. According to officials familiar with the case, the memo compiled by the State Department's Office of Intelligence and Research was marked as sensitive information. The section of the document pertaining to Plame's role in the trip to Niger was marked as especially sensitive. "[T]he paragraph in the memo discussing Ms. Wilson's involvement...is marked at the beginning with a letter designation in brackets to indicate the information shouldn't be shared...Such a designation would indicate to a reader that the information was sensitive." [Bloomberg, 7/18/05; Wall Street Journal, 7/19/05] June 9, 2003: Libby Received Classified Documents from CIA on Wilson's Trip. "On or about June 9th, 2003, a number of classified documents from the CIA were faxed to the Office of the Vice President to the personal attention of Libby and another person in the Vice President's office. The documents, which bore classification markings, discussed, among other things, Wilson and his trip to Niger, but did not mention Wilson by name. After receiving these documents, Libby and one or more other persons in the Vice President's office handwrote the names 'Wilson' and 'Joe Wilson' on the documents." [DOJ, 10/28/05]
June 12, 2003: Cheney Met With Libby About Plame. "Libby was advised by the Vice President of the United States that Wilson's wife worked at the CIA in the Counterproliferation Division. Libby understood that the Vice President had learned this information from the CIA." [New York Times, 10/25/05]
THE LEAK
June 23, 2003: Libby Disparaged Selective Leaking, and Then Sprung a Leak of His Own. Libby met with Judith Miller of the New York Times. Libby was critical of the CIA and disparaged what he termed "selective leaking" by the CIA...Libby informed Miller Wilson's wife might work at a bureau of the CIA. [DOJ, 10/28/05]
JULY 2003: WILSON SPOKE OUT
First Week Of July 2003: Wilson Appeared On Meet The Press And Wrote An Op-Ed Critical of Administration's Iraq Uranium Claims. In July of 2003 Wilson went on the record with his concerns about the Administration's claims that Iraq had attempted to acquire Uranium from Niger. Wilson wrote an Op-Ed in the New York Times on July 6 and then appeared on Meet the Press to voice his concerns. Up until that point Wilson had only been commenting on background. [Newsweek, 7/25/05]
DID YOU GET THE MEMO? THEY GOT THE MEMO...
July 6, 2003: Armitage Asked For State Department Memo To Be Forwarded To Powell After Wilson's Critical Op-Ed Appeared. When Mr. Wilson's Op-Ed article appeared on July 6, 2003, a Sunday, Richard L. Armitage, then Deputy Secretary of State, called Carl W. Ford Jr., the Assistant Secretary for Intelligence and Research, at home, a former State Department official said. Mr. Armitage asked Mr. Ford to send a copy of the State Department memo to Mr. Powell, who was preparing to leave for Africa with Mr. Bush, the former official said. Mr. Ford sent it to the White House for transmission to Mr. Powell. [New York Times, 7/16/05]
July 7, 2003: Powell Circulated The Memo That Identified Plame To White House Officials on Air Force One. The Los Angeles Times reported that, "[Armitage] was forwarded a copy of a memo classified 'Secret' that included a description of Wilson's trip for the CIA, his findings, a brief description of the origin of the trip and a reference to 'Wilson's wife.'... July 7, this memo and the notes were removed from the safe and forwarded to Powell via a secure fax line to Air Force One. Powell was on the way to Africa with the president...Powell told prosecutors that he circulated the memo among those traveling with him in the front section of Air Force One." It was also reported Ari Fleischer and other high level officials were seen with the memo. According to individuals connected to the case, the Special Prosecutor, Peter Fitzgerald believed "that a printout of memo was in the front of Air Force One" during the trip, making it available to various members of the Bush staff. [Los Angeles Times, 8/25/05; Washington Post, 7/17/05; Bloomberg, 7/18/05]
Fleischer Claimed He Never Saw The Memo. "Among those asked if he had seen the memo was Ari Fleischer, then the White House press secretary, who was on Air Force One with Mr. Bush and Mr. Powell during the Africa trip. Mr. Fleischer told the grand jury that he never saw the document, a person familiar with the testimony said, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of the prosecutor's admonitions about not disclosing what is said to the grand jury." [New York Times, 7/22/05] ... AND USED IT TO MAKE THEIR CASE IN THE MEDIA
State Department Memo May Have Been Used to Brief Rice for Sunday Shows. "Meanwhile, in transatlantic secure phone calls, the message machinery focused on a crucial topic: who should carry the freight on the following Sunday's talk shows? The message: protect Cheney by explaining that he had had nothing to do with sending Wilson to Niger, and dismiss the yellowcake issue. ...Condi Rice, the ultimate good soldier... To allow her to prepare on the long flight home to D.C., White House officials assembled a briefing book, which they faxed to the Bush entourage in Africa...It contained classified information—perhaps including all or part of the memo from State. The entire binder was labeled TOP SECRET." [Newsweek, 7/25/05]
Administration Officials Pushed Information To Reporters That Was Contained in Memo. During the Bush Administration's trip to Africa, Fleischer and Dan Bartlett urged reporters to look into the origins of Wilson's trip. The fact that Plame had been involved in the initial meetings on Wilson's trip was contained in the State Department Memo and was in the section marked "sensitive." [Wall Street Journal, 7/19/05; Newsweek, 7/25/05]
THE LEAK: WHY WON'T JUDY WRITE?
July 8, 2003: Libby Met Again with Judy Miller. "When the conversation turned to the subject of Joseph Wilson...Libby advised Miller of his belief that Wilson's wife worked for the CIA". [DOJ, 10/28/05]
July 12, 2003: Libby Called Judy Miller. "In the late afternoon, Libby spoke by telephone with Miller and discussed Wilson's wife, and that she worked at the CIA." [DOJ, 10/28/05]
July 10, 2003: Libby Informed that Novak Will Write About Wilson's Wife. Libby spoke to a senior White House official (Offical A) who advised Libby a conversation Official A had earlier that week with columnist Robert Novak in which Wilson's wife was discussed as a CIA employee involved in Wilson's trip. Libby was advised by Official A that Novak would be writing a story about Wilson's wife." [DOJ, 10/28/05]
Novak Attempted to Contact Fleischer While He was On Air Force One. According to sources close to the investigation, Air Force One call logs show that Bob Novak attempted to get in contact with White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer while he was on Air Force One during the White House's Trip to Africa. Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald subpoenaed the phone and fax records of Air Force One. [LA Times, 7/18/05]
JULY 2003: THE SMEAR CAMPAIGN BEGINS
ROVE AND LIBBY WORKED TO OUT WILSON'S WIFE IN THE PRESS
July 2003: Rove Declared Wilson's Wife "Fair Game." Wilson said that Chris Matthews called him one week after Novak's column ran saying, "I just got off the phone with Karl Rove. He says your wife is fair game." [Face the Nation, 10/3/03; CNN, 7/14/05]
July 11, 2003: Rove Gave Matthew Cooper A "Big Warning" That Wilson's Assertions Might Not Be Accurate. Rove had a conversation with Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper on July 11, 2003. Cooper wrote an email about the conversation to his Time bureau chief, describing how Rove gave him a "big warning" that Wilson's assertions might not be entirely accurate and that it was not the director of the CIA or the vice president who sent Wilson on his trip. Rather, "it was, KR said, wilson's wife, who apparently works at the agency on wmd who authorized the trip." Wilson's wife is Valerie Plame, who was then an undercover agent working as an analyst in the CIA's Directorate of Operations counter proliferation division. [Washington Post, 7/11/05; Newsweek, 7/18/05]
THE LEAK: NOVAK COMES THROUGH
July 14, 2003: Novak Revealed The Classified Identity Of Wilson's Wife In His Column. Bob Novak named Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, in his syndicated column, revealing the classified identity of a CIA agent as sourced by two White House aides. [Chicago Sun-Times, 7/14/03]
Libby and Rove Were "Especially Intent" On Discrediting Wilson. "Prosecutors investigating whether administration officials illegally leaked the identity of Wilson's wife, a CIA officer who had worked undercover, have been told that Bush's top political strategist, Karl Rove, and Cheney's chief of staff, I. Lewis 'Scooter' Libby, were especially intent on undercutting Wilson's credibility, according to people familiar with the inquiry. Although lower-level White House staffers typically handle most contacts with the media, Rove and Libby began personally communicating with reporters about Wilson, prosecutors were told." [Los Angeles Times, 7/18/05]
WHIG "Determined to Fight". When the disclosure of Wilson's CIA mission to Niger put the White House on the defensive, one administration official said it reminded a tight-knit group of Bush neoconservatives of their longtime battles with the agency and underlined their determination to fight. Many of those officials also were members of the White House Iraq Group, established to coordinate and promote administration policy. It included the most influential players who would represent two elements of the current scandal: a hardball approach to political critics and long-standing disdain for CIA views on intelligence matters. [Los Angeles Times, 8/25/05]
Rove Takes the Lead. "There were grounds to challenge the former diplomat on the substance of his uranium findings...But it appears Rove was more focused on Wilson's background, politics and claims he ostensibly had made that his mission was initiated at the request of the vice president. Rove mentioned to reporters that Wilson's wife had suggested or arranged the trip. The idea apparently was to undermine its import by suggesting that the mission was really "a boondoggle set up by his wife," as an administration official described the trip to a reporter...This approach depended largely on a falsehood: that Wilson had claimed Cheney sent him to Niger. Wilson never made such a claim... In one White House conversation, investigators have learned, Rove was asked why he was focused so intently on discrediting the former diplomat. 'He's a Democrat,' Rove said, citing Wilson's campaign contributions." [Los Angeles Times, 8/25/05] SEPTEMBER 2003: A COVER-UP IS BORN
September 14, 2003: Cheney Said He Didn't Know Who Sent Wilson To Niger. Asked on Meet The Press about Joe Wilson's trip to Niger Cheney said: "I don't know Joe Wilson. I've never met Joe Wilson...And Joe Wilson--I don't know who sent Joe Wilson." [Meet The Press, 9/14/03]
JUSTICE DEPARTMENT BEGAN INVESTIGATION
September 27, 2003: Justice Department Began Investigating The Leak. The Justice Department begins investigation into whether a law against disclosure of the identities of covert U.S. intelligence agents was violated when Plame was named in Novak's column and who was responsible. [CBSNews.com, 7/28/03; AP, 12/31/03]
WHITE HOUSE SAID THE LEAK WOULD BE TAKEN CARE OF, STOOD BEHIND ROVE
September 29, 2003: McClellan Said Leaker Would Be Fired. Scott McClellan said: "If anyone in this administration was involved in it, they would no longer be in this administration." [White House Press Briefing, 9/29/03]
September 30, 2003: Bush Said That If There Was A Leak In His Administration They Would Be "Taken Care Of." President Bush reiterated stern treatment for the culprit, saying, "if there was a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is. And if the person has violated law, the person will be taken care of...And so I welcome the investigation...I have told our administration people in my administration to be fully cooperative. I want to know the truth." [White House, Bush Travel Pool, 9/30/03]
OCTOBER 2003: THE WHITE HOUSE RESPONDS, BUSH SPEAKS OUT
October, 2003: Bush "Furious" With Rove for His Role in the Leak. "An angry President Bush rebuked chief political guru Karl Rove two years ago for his role in the Valerie Plame affair, sources told the Daily News. "He made his displeasure known to Karl," a presidential counselor told The News. "He made his life miserable about this."...Bush was initially furious with Rove in 2003 when his deputy chief of staff conceded he had talked to the press about the Plame leak." [New York Daily News, 10/19/05]
October 30, 2003: Bush Said Appropriate Action Would Be Taken Against The Leaker. President Bush said: "I don't know of anybody in my administration who leaked classified information. If somebody did leak classified information, I'd like to know it. And we'll take the appropriate action. And this investigation is a good thing." [Remarks by the President, 10/30/03]
October 6, 2003: Bush Said The Leak Was A "Criminal Action." When asked about the severity of the CIA Leak President Bush said, "this is a serious charge, by the way. We're talking about a criminal action." [Federal News Service, 10/6/03] MCCLELLAN JOINED IN THE MIS-DIRECTION GAME
October 10, 2003: McClellan Said He Spoke With Rove And Libby Personally, And That They Denied Being Involved. Press Secretary Scott McClellan said political advisor Karl Rove, Vice Presidential Chief of Staff Lewis Libby, and National Security Council member Elliott Abrams had each denied being the source of the leak. Said McClellan, "Those individuals — I talked — I spoke with those individuals, as I pointed out, and those individuals assured me they were not involved in this. And that's where it stands." [WH Briefing, 10/10/03]
McClellan Said It Would Be Absurd To Suggest Anyone In The White House Would Punish Someone For Speaking Out With A Different View. "It is absurd to suggest that this White House would seek to punish someone for speaking out with a different view," McClellan said, adding: "It's perfectly acceptable when someone makes statements that aren't based on the facts to correct that information." [Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/8/03] McClellan: Ridiculous To Think Rove Was To Blame for Leak. "'There's been nothing, absolutely nothing, brought to our attention to suggest any White House involvement [in the CIA leak],' said White House spokesman Scott McClellan... McClellan dismissed the suggestion and said the White House would cooperate with a Justice Department probe. But he said it was 'ridiculous' to blame Rove." [Daily News, 10/30/03]
JUSTICE DEPARTMENT HANDED OVER THE CASE TO A SPECIAL PROSECUTOR
December 30, 2003: Special Prosecutor Appointed. Attorney General John Ashcroft and his office staff recused themselves from the Justice Department's criminal investigation into the leak of the name and identity of an undercover CIA officer. Deputy Attorney General James Comey announced at a news conference in Washington December 30 that he has named Patrick Fitzgerald, the U.S. attorney for the northern district of Illinois, to lead the probe. [State Department Briefing, 9/30/03]
Fitzgerald Recruited To The Case Because Of His Lack Of Political Agenda. "Fitzgerald was recruited to the case in December 2003 by close friend James B. Comey, deputy attorney general to John D. Ashcroft. He was two years into a posting as Chicago's U.S. attorney, a job he won partly because he was a seasoned outsider with no evident political agenda, qualities that inspired Comey to appoint him to a case with powerful partisan overtones." [Washington Post, 10/24/05] 2004: INVESTIGATIONS FOCUSES ON THE WHITE HOUSE
WHIG Documents Subpoenaed In Leak Investigation. "Also sought in the wide-ranging document requests contained in three grand jury subpoenas to the Executive Office of President Bush are records created in July by the White House Iraq Group, a little-known internal task force established in August 2002 to create a strategy to publicize the threat posed by Saddam Hussein." [The Times Union (Albany, NY), 5/5/04]
Scooter Libby and Karl Rove Testified in Front of Grand Jury. "Presidential adviser Karl Rove has...[made] another trip — his fourth — to the grand jury investigating who leaked the name of CIA agent Valerie Plame. Mr. Fitzgerald is also re-examining grand jury testimony by Mr. Libby." [New York Times, 10/7/05; Los Angeles Times, 10/7/05]
Mary Matalin Testified in Front of Grand Jury. Matalin appeared before the grand jury January 23, 2004 the day after the subpoenas were issued. [Newsday, 3/5/04]
Condoleeza Rice Questioned By Special Prosecutor. "Among those who are known to have been interviewed by the FBI or testified before the grand jury [include] Bush White House national security adviser Condoleezza Rice." [Washington Post 11/26/04]
Andy Card, Stephen Hadley Questioned in Leak Case. White House Chief of Staff Andrew H. Card...[and] Deputy National Security Advisor, Stephen Hadley...are believed to have been questioned in the leak case; papers and e-mails about the group were subpoenaed. [Los Angeles Times, 8/25/05]
Karen Hughes Questioned in Leak Case. Karen Hughes told the Senate Foreign Relations committee that she had been "questioned" by Fitzgerald about the Plame leak. [Los Angeles Times, 7/23/05]
Jim Wilkinson Questioned in Leak Case. Fitzgerald has questioned ... ex-White House aide Jim Wilkinson about the vice president's knowledge of the anti-Wilson campaign and his dealings on it with Libby, his chief of staff, the people said. [Bloomberg, 10/17/05]
John Hannah Testified in Leak Case. "Special prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald began an inquiry in December 2003 into whether the exposure of Plame's status was a violation of federal law. He has since discussed the matter with President Bush and Vice President Cheney and questioned more than two dozen other people [including] ... John Hannah, Cheney's deputy national security adviser." [Washington Post, 10/20/05]
Cheney and Libby Withheld Documents From Senate Investigation. "Vice President Cheney and his chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, overruling advice from some White House political staffers and lawyers, decided to withhold crucial documents from the Senate Intelligence Committee in 2004 when the panel was investigating the use of pre-war intelligence that erroneously concluded Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, according to Bush administration and congressional sources. Among the White House materials withheld from the committee were Libby-authored passages in drafts of a speech that then-Secretary of State Colin L. Powell delivered to the United Nations in February 2003 to argue the Bush administration's case for war with Iraq, according to congressional and administration sources. The withheld documents also included intelligence data that Cheney's office -- and Libby in particular -- pushed to be included in Powell's speech, the sources said." [National Journal, 10/27/05]
2005: THE WHITE HOUSE BACKS AWAY FROM ROVE AND LIBBY
ROVE WAS IDENTIFIED AS COOPER'S SOURCE
July 10, 2005: Rove Confirmed As Cooper's Source. Rove's attorney, Robert Luskin, confirmed that Rove was the secret source who, at the request of both Cooper's lawyer and the prosecutor, gave Cooper permission to testify. Cooper avoided jail time by agreeing to testify before the grand jury about conversations with his sources, while New York Times reporter Judith Miller was jailed for refusing to discuss her confidential sources. [Washington Post, 7/11/05; Newsweek, 7/18/05]
WHITE HOUSE BACKED AWAY FROM ITS UNFAILING SUPPORT FOR ROVE AND CHANGES ITS REQUIREMENTS FOR FIRING ANYONE INVOLVED
July 11, 2005: White House Press Secretary Refused to Answer Questions About Press Leak. Scott McClellan refused to answer questions about the leak days after Rove was identified as a source in the CIA leak, saying: "The criminal investigation that you reference is something that continues at this point. And as I've previously stated, while that investigation is ongoing, the White House is not going to comment on it." [Transcript of White House Press Briefing, 7/11/05]
July 12, 2005: Bush Refused to Comment; McClellan Expressed President's "Confidence in Rove." Bush "ignored a question" about whether he would fire Rove now that it's known his adviser did talk to Cooper. But White House Press Secretary McClellan said later that "any individual who works here at the White House has the confidence of the president." McClellan said that includes Rove." [AP, 7/13/05; Los Angeles Times, 7/14/05; Washington Times, 7/14/05]
July 18, 2005: Bush Changed His Standard; Said That A Crime Must Be Committed To Warrant Being Fired. "During his joint press conference with Indian Prime Minister Singh today, President Bush was asked again about Karl Rove, and whether he would still fire somebody found to be 'involved in the CIA leak case.' The President replied, '...I don't know all the facts. I want to know all the facts...I would like this to end as quickly as possible so we know the facts. And if someone committed a crime, they will no longer work in my administration.'" [White House Bulletin, 7/18/05]
Posted at 02:14 PM in 2006 Elections, Culture of Corruption, Republicans | Comments (1) | TrackBack (1) | Technorati
Wednesday, October 26, 2005
Republican Electoral Liability on Karl Rove
Posted by Bob BrighamOK, this is funny. In the last post, I pointed out how the Swing State Project would be focusing on the electoral fallout of the White House Indictments. As always, I made a point of mentioning that our readers are our eyes and ears to what is going on race-by-race. However, the Republican National Committee decided to pull all of this information together for us:
Republican Senators Defend Karl Rove:
NRSC Chairwoman Elizabeth Dole (R-NC): “The Partisan Attacks Against Karl Rove Are Out Of Control And Entirely Inappropriate. He Is A Distinguished Member Of The White House And He Is My Friend.” (National Republican Senatorial Committee, “Elizabeth Dole Statement On Karl Rove,” Press Release, 7/13/05)
- Dole: “It Is Incredibly Irresponsible For Individuals And Organizations To Make Accusations Based On Rumor And Innuendo. It Is Unfair To The Investigation And Even More Unfair To Karl Rove.” (National Republican Senatorial Committee, “Elizabeth Dole Statement On Karl Rove,” Press Release, 7/13/05)
Sen. Norm Coleman (R-MN): “My Democratic Friends Would Be Doing The Nation A Great Service If They Spent Half As Much Time Getting Legislation Passed That Will Benefit The Country As They Do In Attacking Karl Rove.” (Sen. Norm Coleman, Press Release, 7/13/05)
- Coleman: “We Have Enough To Do In The Senate In Minding Our Own Business Than To Be Sticking Our Noses Into Someone Else’s Business. Everyone Needs To Cool The Rhetoric, Focus On The Business Of The People, And Allow The Investigation To Run Its Course.” (Sen. Norm Coleman, Press Release, 7/13/05)
Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA): “I Don’t See Any Evidence Out There That He Violated The Law.’’ (Richard Keil and Holly Rosenkrantz, “Rove’s Role In Spy Inquiry Reverberates Throughout Capital,” Bloomberg, 7/12/05)
Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-UT): “In All Honesty, The Facts Thus Far – And The E-Mail Involved – Indicate To Me That There Is Not A Problem Here…” (Jim VandeHei, “GOP On Offense In Defense Of Rove,” The Washington Post, 7/13/05)
Hatch: “I Have Always Thought This Is A Tempest In A Teapot." (Jim VandeHei, “GOP On Offense In Defense Of Rove,” The Washington Post, 7/13/05)
Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX): “If Anyone Thought The Anger And Political Sniping That Infested The Capital During The Campaign Would End After The Election, They Were Flat Wrong. Partisan Attacks In Lieu Of The Facts Have Replaced Ideas, Action And Cooperation.” (Sen. John Cornyn, “Attacks On Rove ‘More Anger And Political Sniping,’” Press Release, 7/13/05)
- Cornyn: “Sadly, These Attacks Are More Of The Same Kind Of Anger And Lashing Out That Has Become The Substitute For Bipartisan Action And Progress. While Republicans Focus On Accomplishing An Ambitious Agenda For The American People, Some Democrats And Their Allies In The Hyper-Partisan Interest Groups Continue On Their Path Of Smear And Distract.” (Sen. John Cornyn, “Attacks On Rove ‘More Anger And Political Sniping,’” Press Release, 7/13/05)
Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA): “I Support Karl Rove.” (Tom Raum, “Newsview: CIA Leak Probe Focuses On Rove,” The Associated Press, 7/13/05)
Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL): “Karl Rove Is A Friend Who, By All Accounts, Is Fully Cooperating With The Investigation. He Has Been A Most Valuable Member Of President Bush’s Team And Has Always Conducted Himself According To High Standards. It’s Disappointing That Some Democrats Are Using An Ongoing Investigation To Try And Score Political Points. Instead Of Focusing On The People’s Business, Democrats Are Prejudging An Incomplete Investigation And Doing Nothing More Than Mounting Partisan Political Attacks.” (Sen. Jeff Sessions, “Statement Of U.S. Sen. Jeff Sessions On Karl Rove,” 7/13/05)
Republican Congressmen Defend Karl Rove:
House Majority Whip Roy Blunt (R-MO): “I Think We See Too Many Efforts Now Where People Quickly Rush To Judgment, Rush To Call For The Most Bizarre Solutions To Problems That Are Problems That Are Often Just Created In Their Own Minds.” (Rep. Roy Blunt, Floor Statement, U.S. House Of Representatives, 7/13/05)
Blunt: “Karl Rove Has Fully Cooperated In Any Investigation, And For More Than A Year Now Has Permitted Investigators To Talk To Him.” (Rep. Roy Blunt, Floor Statement, U.S. House Of Representatives, 7/13/05)
House Republican Conference Chair Deborah Pryce (R-OH):” I Think What The Democrats Are Doing With Karl Rove Is Just Another Politically Motivated Part Of Their Agenda.” (CNN’s “Wolf Blitzer Reports,” 7/13/05)
NRCC Chairman Tom Reynolds (R-NY): “The Extreme Left Is Once Again Attempting To Define The Modern Democrat Party By Rabid Partisan Attacks, Character Assassination And Endless Negativity. And As Has Become Their Custom, The Rest Of The Democrat Party Is Standing By Silently.” (National Republican Congressional Committee, “NRCC Chairman Tom Reynolds Statement On Karl Rove, Democrat Partisan Attacks,” Press Release, 7/13/05)
- Reynolds: “Democrats Are Bitter About Losing In 2004. And They Will Stop At Nothing To Accomplish Through Character Assassination What They Could Not Accomplish At The Ballot Box.” (National Republican Congressional Committee, “NRCC Chairman Tom Reynolds Statement On Karl Rove, Democrat Partisan Attacks,” Press Release, 7/13/05)
Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA): “Karl Rove Is Just The Latest In A Long Line Of Targets For The Democrats Vitriol And Political Games. The American People Want To Know How Congress Is Going To Keep The Economy Growing, Lower Energy Prices And Keep Them Secure At Home.” (Rep. Eric Cantor, “Cantor Statement on Democrat Attacks On Karl Rove,” Press Release, 7/13/05)
Rep. Jack Kingston (R-GA): “Karl Rove Who Did Not Even Know This Woman’s Name Did Not Have Any Information Of Her Acting In Any Covert Manner. It Is Just Silly.” (“Fox News’, “Fox News Live,” 7/13/05)
- Kingston: “The Democrats Are Absent On Issues Such As Social Security, They Are Ambivalent About Iraq To Begin With And They’re Throwing Up One More Smoke Screen Aimed At Karl Rove Who They’re Mad At.” (“Fox News’, “Fox News Live,” 7/13/05)
House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX): “I Support Karl Rove …” (Tom Raum, “Newsview: CIA Leak Probe Focuses on Rove,” The Associated Press, 7/13/05)
DeLay: “This Is Typical Of The Democrats. They Smell Blood And They Act Like Sharks. Karl Rove Is A Good Man. He Was Doing His Job. He Was Trying To Talk A Reporter Out Of Filing A False Story Based Upon False Premise. I Don’t See That He Has Done Anything Wrong.” (Fox News’ “Studio B,” 7/13/05)
Rep. Kay Granger (R-TX): “The President And Karl Rove Are Doing Exactly What They Should. They Are Cooperating Fully With The Pending Investigation.” (Rep. Kay Granger, “Congresswoman Granger Calls Democrat Attacks On Rove Partisan Gamesmanship,” Press Release, 7/13/05)
- Granger: “He Knew Then That Much Of What Joe Wilson Was Saying Was Untrue. The Calls For Mr. Rove’s Resignation Are Simply Partisan Gamesmanship.” (Rep. Kay Granger, “Congresswoman Granger Calls Democrat Attacks On Rove Partisan Gamesmanship,” Press Release, 7/13/05)
Rep. Peter T. King (R-NY): “Republicans Should Stop Holding Back And Go On The Offense: Fire Enough Bullets The Other Way Until The Supreme Court Overtakes.” (Jim VandeHei, “GOP On Offense In Defense Of Rove,” The Washington Post, 7/13/05)
Thank you to the RNC for pulling all of the quotes together on which Republicans are defending the treasonous outing of undercover CIA agent Valerie Plame.
Posted at 06:01 PM in 2006 Elections, 2006 Elections - House, 2006 Elections - Senate, Culture of Corruption, Plamegate, Republicans, Scandals | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Indictments of White House Staff
Posted by Bob BrighamThe Swing State Project has devoted a good deal of time to the Karl Rove Scandal. As the indictments come down, we will be looking for information on how this is influencing specific races, please feel free to use the contact info to keep us in the loop.
This is a story that the netroots have been all over from day one and I'm sure there will be plenty of electoral fallout for SSP to cover.
Strategically, I prefer to devote my time blogging to issues at their beginning or end. I have said that I don't believe blogs are the best vehicle for sustained engagement. However, I am questioning that after viewing the coverage to date from Talk Left:
October 26, 2005 - Fitzgerald Meets With Judge, No Announcement Today
October 26, 2005 - Report: Indictments May be Announced Today
October 26, 2005 - Indictment Watch
October 26, 2005 - Hutchison's Spokesman Deflects Criticism With a Lie
October 26, 2005 - How Karl Rove Could Walk
October 25, 2005 - Reviewing Cheney
October 25, 2005 - Report: Fitzgerald Visited Rove's Lawyer Today
October 25, 2005 - Report: Fitz Talked to Wilsons' Neighbors Today
October 25, 2005 - Clemons: Other Shoe Drops Tomorrow
October 25, 2005 - The Crime in Outing a CIA Agent
October 24, 2005 - NYT: Tenet Told Cheney Who Told Libby
October 24, 2005 - Report: Wurmser Told Libby and Hadley
October 24, 2005 - Pre-Indictment Spin Planning
October 24, 2005 - The Cover Up Statutes
October 23, 2005 - Report: Novak Cooperated
October 23, 2005 - Fitzgerald to Decide and Tell Lawyers Monday
October 23, 2005 - Hannah's Lawyer Denies Target Status
October 22, 2005 - A Kinder, Gentler Libby
October 21, 2005 - Plame Grand Jury Met With Prosecutors Today
October 21, 2005 - Launchdate for Campaign to Discredit Wilson
October 21, 2005 - Pow-Wow at Camp David This Weekend
October 21, 2005 - Fitzgerald Launches Website
October 21, 2005 - Libby: As the Worms Turn
October 21, 2005 - PlameGate and Bush's Pardon Power
October 20, 2005 - Report: White House Charges Will Relate to Cover-up
October 20, 2005 - The Valerie Flame Name Game
October 20, 2005 - Miller Asked About June Meeting During First Grand Jury Visit
October 20, 2005 - Stalking Russert in PlameGate
October 20, 2005 - RoveGate Update
October 19, 2005 - Ex-Intel Officers: Miller a Charter Member of White House Iraq Group
October 19, 2005 - Report on Fitzgerald and A Final Report Is Misleading
October 19, 2005 - Is Rove Cooperating?
October 19, 2005 - Raw Story: Wurmser Cooperating
October 19, 2005 - PlameGate: Powell and Flesicher
October 19, 2005 - Myths About PlameGate
October 18, 2005 - Murray Waas: It's Libby vs. Miller Time
October 18, 2005 - Plame Grand Jury Still Meeting
October 18, 2005 - No Passes for Judy Miller
October 18, 2005 - The Latest Rumor: Cheney Might Resign
October 18, 2005 - Raw Story: John Hannah Is Cooperating
October 18, 2005 - Let's Make a Deal : The Legalese of PlameGate
October 17, 2005 - Report: White House Official May Have Flipped
October 17, 2005 - Fitzgerald Speaks: Decision to be Announced in D.C.
October 17, 2005 - Was the AP Snookered on WINPAC story?
October 17, 2005 - List of Reporter Contacts Subpoenaed by Fitzgerald
October 17, 2005 - Conyers and Skelton Demand Info on Miller's Security Clearance
October 17, 2005 - The Leaks Probe: Andrea Mitchell, Cheney and Ari
October 17, 2005 - On Cheney's Role in Leaks Probe
October 17, 2005 - Bennett's Role in Judith's Tell-All
October 17, 2005 - Bloomberg: Wilsons May Sue Bush, Cheney
October 16, 2005 - Judith Miller Talks on Belatedly Discovered Notes
October 16, 2005 - Federal Grand Jury Witnesses & Secrecy Laws
October 16, 2005 - Was Novak's Source in the CIA or White House?
October 16, 2005 - Time: Rove, Libby Will Resign if Indicted
October 16, 2005 - Miller's Lawyer Turns on Libby
October 15, 2005 - NY Times Uncorks on Judith Miller
October 14, 2005 - Rove Testifies for FourthTime
October 14, 2005 - Questions About Miller and The Times
October 13, 2005 - Cheney, The White House and Wilson: Part One
October 12, 2005 - Report: Fitzgerald Examining Cheney's Role
October 12, 2005 - Judith Miller Released From Contempt Order
October 12, 2005 - Miller's Source(s)
October 12, 2005 - Fitzgerald Widening His Probe
October 11, 2005 - Miller to Testify Again Before Grand Jury
October 11, 2005 - Bushies: Special Prosecutor "a Bully"
October 11, 2005 - New From Waas: Libby in Cross-Hairs Over Miller
October 9, 2005 - Judy Miller and Her June Notes
October 8, 2005 - Weekend RoveGate Reading
October 7, 2005 - Waas: Rove, Novak and Bush
October 7, 2005 - Judith Miller Finds Earlier Notes on Libby
October 6, 2005 - Karl Rove Will Testify Friday Morning
October 6, 2005 - More on Target Notices and Rove
October 6, 2005 - AP: Rove to Testify Again in Leaks Probe
October 6, 2005 - Target Letters: Terminology
October 5, 2005 - Rumor: 22 Plame Indictments Imminent
October 5, 2005 - Judith Miller Talks to Lou Dobbs
October 4, 2005 - Fitzgerald's Letter to Scooter Libby's Lawyer
October 2, 2005 - Newsweek: Libby Did Not Talk to Novak
October 2, 2005 - Stephanopoulos: Source Says Bush, Cheney Directly Involved
October 2, 2005 - Judith Miller and Fitzgerald's Agreement
October 1, 2005 - A Crucial Time Period in PlameGate
October 1, 2005 - Cheney, Libby and Miller Leads Where?
September 30, 2005 - Judith Miller Grand Jury Day
September 29, 2005 - Judith Miller Released, Will Testify Tomorrow
September 20, 2005 - PlameGate: Moving Towards John Bolton?
September 15, 2005 - Justice Department Balks at Turning Over Plame Records
September 14, 2005 - House Committees Reject Plame Resolution of Inquiry
September 9, 2005 - Is Judith Miller Getting Ready to Fold?
September 7, 2005 - RoveGate: What Statute Would Fitzgerald Use?
August 25, 2005 - New Plame Leak Analysis
August 20, 2005 - RoveGate Tidbit: Look for Fitzgerald to Go for the Top Dog
August 18, 2005 - RoveGate, Watergate and Lessons for the White House
August 18, 2005 - Miller, Sulzberger and Kovac
August 17, 2005 - Is Rove Facing an Obstruction of Justice Charge?
August 16, 2005 - New Murray Waas Exclusive: Dems to Demand Investigation of Ashcroft in Plame Leak
August 16, 2005 - Is a Criminal Contempt Charge Looming for Judith Miller?
August 15, 2005 - Report: Bolton Visits Judy Miller in Jail
August 15, 2005 - Ashcroft, Fitzgerald and Rove: New From Murray Waas
August 12, 2005 - Fitzgerald Gets New Boss in Leaks Probe
August 12, 2005 - A Who's Who in RoveGate
August 10, 2005 - Pincus on Plame: Who Really Sent Joseph Wilson to Niger?
August 8, 2005 - Judy, Jehl and the New York Times
August 8, 2005 - Dems Demand Libby Give Personalized Waiver to Judith Miller
August 7, 2005 - Newsweek: Fitzgerald Could Thwarted by Comey's Replacement
August 7, 2005 - Sunday RoveGate Roundup
August 7, 2005 - Judith Miller and Lewis Libby
August 4, 2005 - Waas and Wilson Discuss Fitzgerald
August 4, 2005 - Fitzgerald, Cooper, Sauber, Rove , Luskin and Ginsberg
August 3, 2005 - Beware Immunity for Rove and Company
August 2, 2005 - Rove Aides Queried About Matt Cooper Testimony
August 2, 2005 - Was Tenet a Source for Novak?
August 2, 2005 - RoveGate Debates
August 2, 2005 - Rove Pals Called to Grand Jury
August 2, 2005 - Novak and the Plame Name
August 1, 2005 - Novak Breaks His Silence
July 31, 2005 - Time: Rove May Have Learned of Plame From White House
July 29, 2005 - RoveGate: Where Does Condi Rice Fit In
July 29, 2005 - Back to Connecting Judith Miller Dots
July 29, 2005 - Fitzgerald Knew It Was Rove All Along
July 28, 2005 - NYT Late to the Pincus Party
July 27, 2005 - Was Judith Miller the Leaker or Leakee?
July 27, 2005 - Karen Hughes Declines to Answer Plame Questions At Confirmation Hearing
July 27, 2005 - Judith Miller's Husband Goes on Cruise
July 27, 2005 - Beware Congressional Immunity for Rove and Others
July 27, 2005 - House Judiciary Documents
July 27, 2005 - Who Was Novak's Second Source?
July 26, 2005 - Judiciary Dems Seek 12-Hour Gap Investigation
July 26, 2005 - Rove-Plame-Miller Primer
July 25, 2005 - Will Fitzgerald Extend the Grand Jury?
July 25, 2005 - Senators Call for Congressional Plame Investigation
July 24, 2005 - Alberto Gonzales Told Card Immediately About Preservation Order
July 23, 2005 - Who Was On Air Force One?
July 22, 2005 - Statements of Witnesses at CIA Leak Hearing
July 22, 2005 - Report: Bolton Was a Frequent Source for Judy Miller
July 22, 2005 - Testimony: Bush Jeopardizes National Security
July 22, 2005 - O'Donnell's Latest on Luskin
July 22, 2005 - Who is Leaking the Grand Jury Testimony
July 22, 2005 - Bloomberg's Latest: Back to Ari Fleischer
July 22, 2005 - Karl Rove's Newest Version: George Tenet
July 21, 2005 - Bloomberg Scoops New Rove Story
July 21, 2005 - Memo Marked Plame's Identity as Secret
July 20, 2005 - Sports Book Odds on Karl Rove's Departure : 1-6
July 20, 2005 - Hearing Set on Disclosure of Covert Officers' Identities
July 19, 2005 - New Damaging Information About Karl Rove
July 19, 2005 - Ex-CIA Agents Send Letter on Valerie Plame
July 18, 2005 - Judith Miller's Life Behind Bars
July 18, 2005 - News Report: Ari Saw the Memo on Air Force One
July 18, 2005 - Bush Speaks: Will Fire Anyone 'Who Committed a Crime'
July 18, 2005 - Open Thread on Judith Miller
July 17, 2005 - Question About Cheney and Wilson
July 17, 2005 - From the Vanity Fair Article on Joseph Wilson
July 17, 2005 - Is Rove Now Implicating Judith Miller?
July 17, 2005 - Cooper and Libby Old News: Miller and Libby is the Question
July 17, 2005 - Matthew Cooper: Rove Said, ' I' ve Already Said Too Much'
July 17, 2005 - Who Really Sent Wilson to Africa?
July 16, 2005 - Judith Miller: Why is She Protecting Lewis Libby
July 16, 2005 - Frank Rich: Rove Resignation Is a Certainty
July 16, 2005 - The Mechanics of the Rove-Cooper Waiver
July 16, 2005 - Criminal vs. Civil Contempt
July 16, 2005 - John Hannah and Lewis Libby: Still Key in Plame Probe
July 15, 2005 - Classified Memo Naming Wilson's Wife Was on Air Force One
July 15, 2005 - Rove Didn't Go to Africa, Not On Air Force One
July 15, 2005 - Rove E-Mailed Hadley About Conversation With Cooper
July 15, 2005 - Keeping an Eye on Fitzgerald's Big Picture
July 15, 2005 - Dean on Rove
July 15, 2005 - Fact Sheet on Karl Rove's Non-Disclosure Agreement
July 15, 2005 - Karl Rove's Latest Version: Reporters Told Me
July 14, 2005 - What Fitzgerald's Indictment Might Look Like
July 14, 2005 - Bloomberg: Joseph Wilson's Accusations Hold Up
July 14, 2005 - What Novak Said Then About Import of Disclosure
July 14, 2005 - Where Does Ari Fleischer Fit In?
July 13, 2005 - House Dems to Call for Karl Rove Inquiry Tomorrow
July 13, 2005 - Text of Karl Rove's Waiver to Cooper
July 13, 2005 - Cooper Testifies, Names Karl Rove as Source
July 13, 2005 - Bush Answers (Not) Questions on Rove
July 13, 2005 - Midnight Plame Gate Roundup
July 12, 2005 - Walter Pincus' Source: Was it Karl Rove?
July 12, 2005 - Murray Waas Exclusive: Novak Cooperated
July 12, 2005 - Luskin Speaks on Rove and Cooper
July 12, 2005 - Where Did Karl Rove Get the Information on Valerie Plame?
July 12, 2005 - White House Breaks Silence: Has Confidence In Rove
July 12, 2005 - Say Hello: Fire Him Now
July 12, 2005 - Update on Judith Miller: How Did They Know
July 12, 2005 - Judith Miller: How Did They Know?
July 12, 2005 - Will Karl Rove Resign?
July 12, 2005 - Watergate Deja Vu
July 11, 2005 - President Bush Called Leak 'A Criminal Action'
July 11, 2005 - Don't call Rove at the Congressional Hearings
July 11, 2005 - Calls for Rove's Resignation
July 11, 2005 - Ethics Group Asks Bush to Revoke Rove's Security Clearance
July 11, 2005 - Former President Bush's Comments on Leakers
July 11, 2005 - Cat and Mouse With McClellan
July 11, 2005 - The Name Game : Rove and Plame
July 11, 2005 - Rove's Lawyer's Admission: Nothing New Here
July 10, 2005 - Reactions to Newsweek's Latest on Karl Rove
July 10, 2005 - Robert Novak's Version Of the Plame Leak
July 10, 2005 - Newsweek to Name Rove as Cooper Source
July 9, 2005 - Lewis Libby and the Valerie Plame Investigation
July 7, 2005 - Rove-Plame Speculation Update
July 7, 2005 - O'Donnell Says 'Good Reason' Rove Might Be Indicted
July 7, 2005 - Wapo and NYT Differ on Karl Rove as Source
July 6, 2005 - White House Press Corps Blackout on Rove
July 6, 2005 - Judith Miller Placed in Alexandria Detention Center
July 6, 2005 - Who is Judith Miller Protecting?
July 6, 2005 - Judith Miller Jailed, Cooper Agrees to Testify
July 5, 2005 - Joe Wilson on What Rove Didn't Know
July 5, 2005 - Joe Wilson on Leakers: Elliot Abrams, Libby & Rove
July 5, 2005 - Prosecutor Addresses Jail Requests for Judith Miller
July 5, 2005 - O'Donnell Has Questions Re: Rove
July 5, 2005 - Cooper and Miller: The Subpoenas
July 5, 2005 - Fitzgerald Plays Hardball in Leaks Probe
July 5, 2005 - When Can DOJ Subpoena Reporters?
July 4, 2005 - Valerie Plame Returns to Work at CIA
July 3, 2005 - O'Donnell Snaps Back at Rove's Lawyer
July 3, 2005 - Rove's Lawyer Denies Rove Leaked to Cooper
July 3, 2005 - The Bush Administration's War Against Open Government
July 3, 2005 - Time's Decision: The Rule of Law Trumps Confidentiality
July 2, 2005 - The Plame Leak InvestigationTime Line
July 2, 2005 - Rove Update
July 2, 2005 - Could the Perjury Investigation Evolve Into Obstruction of Justice?
July 2, 2005 - O'Donnell Says Rove as Leak Source is Confirmed
July 2, 2005 - What Does the Government Really Want from Miller and Cooper?
July 2, 2005 - Miller and Cooper Submit Jail Preferences
July 2, 2005 - Was Karl Rove The Leaker?
June 30, 2005 - Time Magazine to Turn Over Matthew Cooper's Notes
June 28, 2005 - Hearing Weds. for Reporters Miller and Cooper
June 27, 2005 - Why the Support for Only One Reporter?
June 27, 2005 - Reporters Lose in Leaks Case
May 26, 2005 - Judge Rules Against DeLay Pac Member
April 28, 2005 - Reporter Switches Lawyers in Plame Appeal
April 17, 2005 - Gonzales Speaks to Plame Investigation
April 7, 2005 - Valerie Plame Investigation May Be Over
February 16, 2005 - A Shield Law For Reporters
February 15, 2005 - Appeals Court Rules Against Reporters in Plame Case
December 31, 2004 - Valerie Plame Investigation Review
October 15, 2004 - Karl Rove Testifies Before Grand Jury Re: Plame
October 7, 2004 - NYT Reporter Judith Miller Ordered Jailed, Stayed
September 16, 2004 - Court Orders NYTimes Reporter to Testify in PlameGate
August 13, 2004 - NY Times Reporter Judith Miller Subpoenaed in Plame Investigation
August 9, 2004 - Reporter Held in Contempt in CIA-Plame Leak Probe
June 24, 2004 - Bush Interviewed in Plame Leak Probe
June 5, 2004 - Cheney Interviewed in Plame Investigation
June 4, 2004 - Cheney May Have Consulted Outside Counsel Over Plame Investigation
June 3, 2004 - Report: Bush Knew of Leak of Valerie Plame's Identity
June 3, 2004 - CIA Director George Tenet Resigns
June 2, 2004 - Bush Seeks Legal Advice over Plame Leak
May 22, 2004 - Reporters Subpoenaed in Plame Investigation
May 3, 2004 - Joseph Wilson Names Possible Plame Leakers
April 29, 2004 - Wilson's Book Points to Cheney
April 2, 2004 - Plame Leak Investigation Widened
March 9, 2004 - Details of Karl Rove's Plame Testimony Revealed
March 9, 2004 - Karl Rove Profile
March 5, 2004 - Subpoenas Issued in Plame Investigation
February 9, 2004 - Bush's Press Secretary Testfies in Leaks Probe
February 5, 2004 - Cheney Employees Implicated in Valerie Plame Scandal
January 22, 2004 - Grand Jury Begins Hearing Valerie Plame Case
January 6, 2004 - 'I Got a Witness': Plame Investigation
January 2, 2004 - Plame: It's Still Bush Investigating Bush
January 2, 2004 - Will Reporters Talk in the Plame Case?
January 1, 2004 - Plame Leak Not a Crime?
December 30, 2003 - Joseph Wilson Interview
December 30, 2003 - Ashcroft Recuses Himself from Valerie Plame Investigation
December 25, 2003 - Movement in the Valerie Plame Investigation
December 10, 2003 - Whatever Happened to the Valerie Plame Investigation?
October 27, 2003 - CIA Leak May Violate Patriot Act
October 23, 2003 - FBI Interviews Rove and McClellan in Leaks Probe
October 16, 2003 - Alterman on Abrams, Novak and Plame
October 16, 2003 - Ashcroft Takes Heat from Within in Leaks Probe
October 12, 2003 - Leaks Probe: FBI Focusing on Month Before the Leak
October 11, 2003 - White House E-Mails Mention Wilson and Plame
October 10, 2003 - More Agents Added to CIA Leaks Probe
October 9, 2003 - Executive Privilege in the CIA-Plame Affair
October 8, 2003 - Bush is Downplaying Leaks Investigation
October 7, 2003 - Bush Now Uncertain Leaker of CIA Information Will Be Found
October 7, 2003 - Bush Calls CIA Leak a 'Criminal Action'
October 4, 2003 - What the Wilson-Plame Affair Reveals About Bush
October 3, 2003 - David Corn Interview on 'Treason Gate'
October 1, 2003 - News Descriptions of Plame and Wilson
October 1, 2003 - What the Meaning of CIA Operative Is
September 30, 2003 - Can Novak Be Ordered to Divulge Source?
September 30, 2003 - Guardian's Borger Names Rove
September 30, 2003 - New: On the CIA's Request for Justice Department Investigation of Plame Leak
September 30, 2003 - Petition for Independent Investigation of Plame Leak
September 30, 2003 - Justice Opens Full-Blown Investigation in Valerie Plame Affair
September 30, 2003 - Robert Novak's Column on Valerie Plame
September 29, 2003 - White House: No Independent Counsel For CIA Leak
September 29, 2003 - CIA Leak Investigation: Who Goes Down First
September 29, 2003 - Reaction to Report of Justice Dept. Intelligence Probe
September 28, 2003 - Schumer's FBI Request for Investigation of Plame Leak
September 28, 2003 - White House Leaks in Plame Affair
September 27, 2003 - CIA Asks for Probe of Valerie Plame Leaks
July 25, 2003 - Valerie Plame Update
July 22, 2003 - Valerie Plame: Some Call it Treason
Posted at 05:42 PM in Culture of Corruption, Netroots, Plamegate, Republicans, Scandals | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Wednesday, October 19, 2005
TX-22: Warrant Issued for Tom Delay
Posted by Bob BrighamRepublican Congressman and de-throned Republican Majority Leader Tom DeLay is facing a perp walk in Texas:
AUSTIN, Texas — A Texas court issued a warrant Wednesday for former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay to appear for booking, where he is likely to face the fingerprinting and photo mug shot he had hoped to avoid.Bail was initially set at $10,000 as a routine step before his first court appearance on conspiracy and money laundering charges. Travis County court officials said DeLay was ordered to appear at the Fort Bend County jail for booking.
The warrant was "a matter of routine and bond will be posted," DeLay attorney Dick DeGuerin said.
The lawyer declined to say when DeLay would surrender to authorities but said the lawmaker would make his first court appearance Friday morning.
Tom "The Hammer" DeLay is facing life in prison for his role in the Republican Party culture of corruption.
The smart money is being contributed to Nick Lampson, who is on track to beat Representative DeLay is 2006.
Posted at 05:06 PM in Culture of Corruption, Republicans, Scandals, Texas | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Wednesday, October 12, 2005
OH-Sen: Bob McEwen to Challenge Mike DeWine in the Primary?
Posted by Bob BrighamThere has been previous mention of former Congressman Bob McEwen challenging Ohio Republican Senator Mike DeWine in the primary. As was pointed out in the comments, there is a new website coming soon: www.BobMcEwenForSenate.com:
Welcome to the home of Bob McEwen for US SenateThis web site is currently under construction. To stay up-to-the-minute on all the latest happenings, join the McEwen for Senate mailing list by emailing us at:
info@bobmcewenforsenate.com
Whoever bought the URL, did so today.
Posted at 08:35 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Ohio, Republicans | Comments (4) | TrackBack (3) | Technorati
CA-26: David Dreier, the GOP, and a Re-Election Challenge
Posted by Bob BrighamDuring the few brief hours David Dreier was Republican Majority Leader, there was speculation that Dreier was gay. Actually, for a long time it has been conventional wisdom among insiders that Dreier is in fact gay. Now, it is is coming out that Dreier is not Majority Leader because of this scandal.
California congressman David Dreier (R-CA) was passed over to replace House Majority Leader Tom DeLay in part because of questions about his sexuality, a congressman and several reporters told RAW STORY this week.Dreier was expected to replace DeLay after the tough-talking Texan was indicted for conspiracy to violate campaign finance laws. After being rebuffed, media reports indicated that conservatives were upset about the congressman’s “moderate positions.”
But several Washington reporters and an openly gay congressman say Dreier’s views were not the ultimate factor, asserting that speculation the Republican was gay played a major role in derailing his nomination.
This crazy episode made Dreier look pretty weak in his home district. And now that the cat is out of the bag, Dreier won't be able to count on the conservative base if he ends up in a tight race.
A dispatch from a Swing State Project source in southern California indicates that Congressman Dreier can look forward to a challenge in 2006. Not only a challenge, but a challenge by a Democrat with a story to tell and resources to invest...Dreier came so close, but the GOP homophobia caught up with him and now he might even lose his seat in congress. Here is some more background on CA-26
John Aravosis has more on GOP Closet Heterosexuals.
Posted at 04:37 PM in 2006 Elections - House, California, Republicans, Scandals | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Friday, October 07, 2005
VA-Gov: Jerry Kilgore a Porn Star?
Posted by Bob Brigham
Jerry Kilgore is running for Governor of Virginia, but looks a helluva lot like a former porn star. I'm not one who usually makes generalizations from a photo, but the Republican candidate really does look like a vintage porn star.
Anyway, I'm guessing the voters of Virginia are far more concerned about the issues then the fact the GOP nominee looks like an old-school porn star. I mean, voters decide on the issues, don't they?
If voters do decide on the issues, then Jerry Kilgore has a bigger problems then the fact he looks like a seventies porn star. Go watch the video the pic is taken from, it is Kilgore back when he ran the prisons. He is bragging about going an entire day without a prison break.
I'm not making this up, he actually brags about this. If you look at the hard numbers, prison escapes jumped 300% under Jerry Kilgore.
Now I'm not saying that somebody who looks like a third-rate porn star can't run a prison system. And I'm not saying that somebody who looks like a dirty porn star can't run an entire state. But Jerry Kilgore both looks like a pervert porn star and the way he ran the prison system suggests he would be an awful Governor.
Me, I hope the voters decide on the issues rather than the fact Jerry Kilgore sported a porn star mustache. Because somebody who is both incompetent and sets the bar that low has no business running Virginia.
Go check out the video at www.TheRealJerryKilgore.com.
Posted at 04:52 PM in 2005 Elections, Republicans, Scandals, Virginia | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
MT-Sen: Conrad Burns Denies Being Corrupt
Posted by Bob BrighamMontana Senator Conrad Burns is a key figure in multiple investigations (FBI, Justice Department, and the Interior Department Inspector General), the scandals are hurting his re-election chances, and even Karl Rove is worried.
Burns first ran a campaign against Washington politicians, vowing to only serve to terms so he wouldn't become corrupted by Washington politics. But Burns loved Washington politics so he broke his word to the voters and ran for a third term. Now, even though his is up to his cowboy hat in corruption, he is running for his fourth term. And it is playing out in the Montana newspapers.
Today, Conrad Burns had an op-ed distancing himself from his close ties to indicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff and playing himself off as a victim. He even goes so far as to say:
They have declared me guilty of ethics violations. Absolutely not true. I am not under any investigation, nor have I been.
That is the type of spin you would expect from somebody who has been in DC for too long. As a Swing State Project reader notes in an email:
The Senate Ethics Committee was asked to investigate these claims by Montana Democratic Party Chairman Bob Ream. The Ethics Committee does not comment on ongoing investigation, therefore Sen. Burns cannot honestly say that he knows he is not under investigation. However, this is what we do know:
• The Senate Gifts Rule restricts gifts from lobbyists. Members, officers, and employees of the Senate may not accept “gifts of personal hospitality” from registered lobbyists. Jack Abramoff was a registered lobbyist. As a result, neither Sen. Burns nor any member of his staff was permitted to accept reimbursement for travel expenses from Mr. Abramoff. [Senate Ethics Manual, ch.2, p. 43]
• Members and staff of the Senate are only permitted to accept reimbursement for officially related travel. “Reimbursement for necessary expenses for events which are substantially recreational in nature, however, is not considered to be ‘in connection with the duties of a Member, officer or employee . . . and will not be allowed.’” As examples of travel that may not be accepted, the Senate Ethics Manual includes “charity golf, tennis, fishing, or ski tournaments.” It is extremely difficult to believe that a trip to the Super Bowl with a side trip to a gambling ship wouldn’t fall into the same category. [Rule 35, Senate Ethics Manual, p. 44.]
Burns can play himself off as the victim, but Montanans know Senator Burns is crooked. Montana voters are the victims, the taxpayers are the victim, good government is the victim. Burns is so out of touch, you would think he has been in DC for 17 years. Wait, he has. And during that time, he has become exactly what he campaigned against when he first ran in 1988.
Posted at 12:40 PM in 2006 Elections, 2006 Elections - Senate, Culture of Corruption, Montana, Republicans, Scandals | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Thursday, October 06, 2005
MO-07: Roy Blunt Exposed as Central Figure in GOP Culture of Corruption
Posted by Bob BrighamIn 1998, the Democrat challenging Republican Congressman Roy Blunt in Missouri's 7th District didn't raise or spend a dime. In 2000 and 2002, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee didn't even field a candidate against Blunt, allowing Blunt to focus on his "Battleground 2002" project which moved $5.6 million to Republican House candidates. In 2004, Democrats at least bothered to field a candidate, but Blunt had a 15:1 cash advantage and wasn't pinned down, allowing him to raise money for other Republicans to the point where he is now Republican Leader in Congress.
But, the rising profile for Congressman Blunt is a double-edged sword, because he just got busted by the AP for his role in laundering money with Tom DeLay (who is currently facing life in prison for illegally laundering money):
Tom DeLay deliberately raised more money than he needed to throw parties at the 2000 presidential convention, then diverted some of the excess to longtime ally Roy Blunt through a series of donations that benefited both men's causes.When the financial carousel stopped, DeLay's private charity, the consulting firm that employed DeLay's wife and the Missouri campaign of Blunt's son all ended up with money, according to campaign documents reviewed by The Associated Press.
Jack Abramoff, a Washington lobbyist recently charged in an ongoing federal corruption and fraud investigation, and Jim Ellis, the DeLay fundraiser indicted with his boss last week in Texas, also came into the picture.
The complicated transactions are drawing scrutiny in legal and political circles after a grand jury indicted DeLay on charges of violating Texas law with a scheme to launder illegal corporate donations to state candidates.
Congressman Roy Blunt needs a strong Democratic challenger willing to expose Blunt's "Culture of Corruption" and pin him down in Missouri so he isn't raising money for candidates in targetted races.
Blunt's crooked transactions with DeLay deserve an investigation:
The government's former chief election enforcement lawyer said the Blunt and DeLay transactions are similar to the Texas case and raise questions that should be investigated regarding whether donors were deceived or the true destination of their money was concealed."These people clearly like using middlemen for their transactions," said Lawrence Noble. "It seems to be a pattern with DeLay funneling money to different groups, at least to obscure, if not cover, the original source," said Noble, who was the
Federal Election Commission's chief lawyer for 13 years, including in 2000 when the transactions occurred.None of the hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations DeLay collected for the 2000 convention were ever disclosed to federal regulators because the type of group DeLay used wasn't governed by federal law at the time.
Check out Blunt's spin and tell me he isn't vulnerable.
Blunt and DeLay planned all along to raise more money than was needed for the convention parties and then route some of that to other causes, such as supporting state candidates, said longtime Blunt aide Gregg Hartley."We put together a budget for what we thought we would raise and spend on the convention and whatever was left over we were going to use to support candidates," said Hartley, Blunt's former chief of staff who answered AP's questions on behalf of Blunt.
Hartley said he saw no similarity to the Texas case. The fact that DeLay's charity, Christine DeLay's consulting firm and Blunt's son were beneficiaries was a coincidence, Hartley said.
Whoops, the fact that money ended up going to Blunt and DeLay family members was an accident...
Much of the money — including one donation to Blunt from an Abramoff client accused of running a "sweatshop" garment factory in the Northern Mariana Islands — changed hands in the spring of 2000, a period of keen interest to federal prosecutors.During that same time, Abramoff arranged for DeLay to use a concert skybox for donors and to take a golfing trip to Scotland and England that was partly underwritten by some of the lobbyist's clients. Prosecutors are investigating whether the source of some of the money was disguised, and whether some of DeLay's expenses were originally put on the lobbyist's credit card in violation of House rules.
Both DeLay and Blunt and their aides also met with Abramoff's lobbying team several times in 2000 and 2001 on the Marianas issues, according to law firm billing records obtained by AP under an open records request. DeLay was instrumental in blocking legislation opposed by some of Abramoff's clients.
Noble said investigators should examine whether the pattern of disguising the original source of money might have been an effort to hide the leaders' simultaneous financial and legislative dealings with Abramoff and his clients.
"You see Abramoff involved and see the meetings that were held and one gets the sense Abramoff is helping this along in order to get access and push his clients' interest," he said. "And at the same time, you see Delay and Blunt trying to hide the root of their funding.
Blunt is just as crooked as DeLay:
Blunt and DeLay have long been political allies. The 2000 transactions occurred as
President Bush was marching toward his first election to the White House, DeLay was positioning himself to be House majority leader and Blunt was lining up to succeed DeLay as majority whip, the third-ranking position in the House.The entities Blunt and DeLay formed allowed them to collect donations of any size and any U.S. source with little chance of federal scrutiny.
DeLay's convention fundraising arm, part of his Americans for a Republican Majority Political Action Committee (ARMPAC), collected large corporate donations to help wine and dine Republican VIPs during the presidential nominating convention in Philadelphia in late summer 2000. DeLay's group has declined to identify any of the donors.
Blunt's group, a nonfederal wing of his Rely on Your Beliefs Fund, eventually registered its activities in Missouri but paid a $3,000 fine for improperly concealing its fundraising in 1999 and spring 2000, according to Missouri Ethics Commission records.
Blunt claims he had no clue he was crooked:
Hartley said Blunt was unaware that Mrs. DeLay worked at the firm when he made the payments, and that she had nothing to do with Blunt's group. [...]Hartley said Blunt always liked to help the state party and the fact that his son got party help after his donation was a coincidence. "They are unrelated activities," he said.
When Congressman Roy Blunt runs for re-election, he needs to be met with a full court press. The voters deserve a choice.
Posted at 12:29 PM in 2006 Elections - House, Activism, Culture of Corruption, Missouri, Republicans, Scandals | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Tuesday, October 04, 2005
TX-22: Tom DeLay Facing Life in Prison
Posted by Bob BrighamThere is a major political battle brewing in the twenty-second congressional district of Texas where embattled Republican Majority Leader Congressman Tom DeLay is being challenged by former Congressman Nick Lampson.
Last spring, this race looked competitive because everyone knew Rep. Tom DeLay was crooked. Then this race catapulted because Tom DeLay was indicted for conspiracy to committ crookedness. Yesterday, DeLay was indicted again, this time for money laundering with a bonus charge of conspiring to launder money.
And now DeLay's trickster lawyers have him looking at life in prison:
A bit of a chess game is developing in Texas, as Ronnie Earle attempts to make Tom DeLay pay for his sins. First, we had an indictment on conspiracy, a charge which carries a penalty of six months to two years in jail. "Conspiracy!" Republican operatives mocked. "This is just a conspiracy against Tom DeLay." And really, people said, conspiracy is just what you charge when you've got nothing better.But then DeLay lawyer Dick Deguerin, who embarrassed Ronnie Earle in the Kay Bailey Hutchison case, files a motion to say the conspiracy statue didn't apply to campaign finance law in TX until September 2003, a year after DeLay dreamt up his little conspiracy.
Wham!! Just a few hours later, Earle (who seems to have snuck a new grand jury into his back pocket without Deguerin noticing) gets a jury to indict on money laundering and conspiracy to commit money laundering. Charges which carry sentences of up to life in prison for the money laundering charge, and twenty years for the conspiracy to commit money laundering.
So DeLay's lawyers had a client looking at 2 years and their expert legal maneuvering positioned their client to now be looking at life behind bars?
Back in Sugar Land, the Democratic candidate for congress is letting the courts and the national media give Congressman DeLay his due. Reports indicate Nick Lampson is keeping his focus on running hard for the Texans in the district, instead of just running against DeLay.
Here is Lampson's statement:
"We always knew ethics would be an issue for Tom DeLay, but I cannot make that the entire basis of my campaign. I now have to work even harder to get my agenda out to the voters of this district, and present a positive alternative to Congressman DeLay. I will campaign on a return to fiscal discipline, service to constituents and security for Southeast Texans. Ethics will inevitably be a part of this race, but it will be up to the judicial system to decide whether or not Tom DeLay is guilty."
Indeed, the judicial system will decide whether DeLay is guilty of corruption, but the voters are already making up their minds about whether Tom DeLay is crooked.
DeLay's re-election campaign will be one of the most expensive in the nation and is anchored in a high-dollar media market. But if Nick Lampson has enough money to get out his message, Tom DeLay's past will continue to fuel the ethical fires consuming the Republican Party.
Posted at 01:19 PM in 2006 Elections - House, Culture of Corruption, Republicans, Scandals, Texas | TrackBack (1) | Technorati
Monday, October 03, 2005
Bush Chickens Out; Conservative Heads Explode
Posted by Bob BrighamThe consensus is established: Bush is a lame duck and the reaction to Harriet Miers is nothing but angst from the Republican base. Because President George Bush is a "Lame Duck" who fears the Democrats more than the loss of his base. Here is the raw political analysis...
The New York Times:
By instead settling on a loyalist with no experience as a judge and little substantive record on abortion, affirmative action, religion and other socially divisive issues, Mr. Bush shied away from a direct confrontation with liberals and in effect asked his base on the right to trust him on this one.The question is why.
On one level, his reasons for trying to sidestep a partisan showdown are obvious, and come down to his reluctance to invest his diminished supply of political capital in a battle over the court.
The White House is still struggling to recover from its faltering response to Hurricane Katrina. The Republican Party is busily trying to wave away a scent of second-term scandal. The relentlessly bloody insurgency in Iraq continues to weigh heavily on his presidency. And no president can retain his political authority for long if he loses his claim to the center.
"The swagger is gone from this White House," said Charles E. Cook Jr., editor of The Cook Political Report, a nonpartisan newsletter, citing a litany of other difficulties afflicting the administration, including high gasoline prices and the failure of Mr. Bush's push to overhaul Social Security. "They know they have horrible problems and they came up with the least risky move they could make."
The Bush Administration and the Republican Party have been gripped by the Fear. They are playing defense. One might even say the GOP is behaving like the Democratic Party (ouch).
The Washington Post:
If President Bush's goal is to shift the Supreme Court in a more conservative direction, his nomination of White House counsel Harriet Miers yesterday signaled a desire to do so as quietly as possible. The nomination appeared designed primarily to avoid a major fight in the Senate and, said skeptics on the left and right, was made out of a position of political weakness, not strength.Bush's decision confounded both right and left, as perhaps the president's advisers had hoped. In nominating someone who caused dismay among conservative activists but who provoked little strong opposition among Democrats -- and words of praise from Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) -- the White House may have calculated that Bush can more easily afford some early heat from the right than a titanic struggle with Democrats that could tie up the Senate and leave him in an even weaker position three months from now.
Reaction to Harriet Miers from the Republican Party
The Republican Establishment is pissed, just ask Richard Viguerie:
“Congratulations are due to Ralph Neas, Nan Aron, and Chuck Schumer for going toe-to-toe with President Bush and forcing him to blink,” said conservative activist Richard A. Viguerie. “Liberals have successfully cowed President Bush by scaring him off from nominating a known conservative, strict constructionist to the Court, leaving conservatives fearful of which direction the Court will go.”“President Bush desperately needed to have an ideological fight with the Left to redefine himself and re-energize his political base, which is in shock and dismay over his big government policies,” Viguerie added.
“With their lack of strong, identifiable records, President Bush’s choices for Supreme Court nominees seem designed more to avoid a fight with the extreme Left than to appeal to his conservative base,” lamented Viguerie.
Many conservatives worry that without verifiable records, President Bush’s Supreme Court nominees will be more like the liberal Justice Souter than the conservative, strict constructionists Scalia and Thomas.
Remembering and still dismayed about how his father, President George H. W. Bush (the 41st), lied to conservatives and American voters by saying he was a conservative and expressly stating he would not raise taxes, conservatives fear President George W. Bush (the 43rd) has done the same by failing to nominate well-known conservative, strict constructionists to the U.S. Supreme Court.
“President Bush has presided over the largest growth in government since Lyndon Johnson, and now he appears willing to lose all credibility with conservative voters by failing to fulfill his campaign vow to nominate an openly Scalia- or Thomas-like justice,” Viguerie concluded.
Conservatives are also exceedingly disappointed in the Republican Leadership in Congress as well. Conservatives will now begin to seriously consider why they should continue to give their support –money, labor, and votes – to Republican politicians who take their conservative base for granted by continually lying to them.
The Emerging Republican Base is pissed, as the National Journal's Beltway Blogroll reports:
Then came Miers' nomination to the Supreme Court today. The current White House counsel has never served as a judge; she apparently has no substantial paper trail that would enable conservatives to vet her record; and perhaps worst of all, she contributed money to Bush's 2000 nemesis, Democrat Al Gore, when Gore sought the presidency in 1988.The rhetorical dam burst wide open after Bush announced her nomination, and the flood of criticism is thick with conservative voices.
Once again, Malkin is at the forefront. Numerous blogs are quoting her refrain: "What Julie Myers is to the Department of Homeland Security, Harriet Miers is to the Supreme Court." And Mike Krempasky of RedState said bluntly: "Mr. President, you've got some explaining to do. And please remember -- we've been defending you these five years because of this moment."
Right Thinking from the Left Coast eloquently connected the cronyism dots from Brown to Miers. "I'd like to take a moment to coin a new phrase: Brownie moment. A Brownie moment can be defined simply as the moment when a supporter of President Bush is smacked in the head by reality and loses any and all faith in the president from that moment forward. ... This was my Brownie moment," Lee wrote of the Miers nomination.
Bush made the type of cowardly move you would expect from a Lame Duck Chickenhawk. We'll see whether the GOP base sticks to their beliefs or is forced to stand by their failed President. Either way, the political entertainment value of Harriet Miers is significant.
UPDATE: USAToday:
WASHINGTON — President Bush's decision to nominate White House counsel Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court shows that he isn't afraid to disappoint conservatives, prefers to promote trusted advisers and listens to his wife.
Not a good night to be a conservative.
Posted at 11:51 PM in Netroots, Republicans, Scandals | TrackBack (1) | Technorati
Harriet Miers Homosexual Agenda and the Republican Party
Posted by Bob BrighamLast week, Gay Republican David Dreier was (briefly) annointed as Republican Majority Leader, until the radical right realized he was gay and flipped out. The fact Congressman David Dreier was even considered was perceived to be a major slap to the conservative base.
Harriet Miers does not have much of a paper trail, but there is clear records documenting her support for gay rights. And, gay adoption. Did Bush really ignore the entire Christian Right and nominate a lesbian and gay support for a lifetime gig on the Supreme Court? So far, this is the only paper trail available.
This has set up a scenario where the Republicans are heading into the 2006 election cycle, without the support of their base.
This began during the filibuster battle. The GOP blogs called it their Not. One. Dime. campaign:
Not. One. Dime. The next time Ken Mehlman sends you a request for money, that's the message he needs to get back. We ponied up in 2004, and in 2002, and in 2000. The GOP not only has not delivered, its current leadership won't even try. Frist and Rick Santorum claim they don't have the votes. Balderdash -- they don't have the leadership to get the votes. I'm not going to fund or support people who won't try to win, especially when the issue is so important.Not. One. Dime. We're not in an election year, so this makes it easy for the Republicans to get this message to party leaders. No balls, no Blue Chips, boys. I don't mean just for the Senate, either. I mean for the entire Republican party. Feeding a fever may be good medicine, but feeding a failure only makes it last longer. Perhaps hunger will work where courage has so obviously failed.
Not. One. Dime. And when a vote does come, those Republicans who wind up supporting the minority's extortion over the majority in defiance of the Constitution will never see another dime from me -- but their opponents will, at every level of contest. Honestly, with Republicans like these in the Senate, we may as well have Democrats.
Not. One. Dime. If Bill Frist can't lead the GOP, then let's get rid of him now and find someone with the stomach for it. As long as he dithers, he'll never see a dime out of me for any election. Kay Bailey Hutchinson would have more guts and could pull the troops in line better; maybe we should give her a try as Majority Leader for a while.
It's time to send a real message to the Republicans about their priorities and their lack of leadership. This fight has been brewing for months, and it should have already been resolved by now. If they can't hack it, then we will find -- and fund -- the leaders who can.
That was before today, now the Republican base is really pissed off (see here and here).
What's happening over in Right Blogostan right now is simply amazing. It's like the political equivalent of Yugoslavia -- and Tito just died.Suddenly all the repressed anger and resentment at Bush and Rove is boiling over. Hordes of wing nuts are almost literally howling (in ALL CAPS) about the metric tons of shit they've put up with -- the round-the-clock pork festivals, the federal entitlement for drug companies, the congressional leadership so corrupt it would make Boss Tweed blush, the bloody quagmire in Iraq, Mike Brown, the New Deal on the Mississippi, etc. etc. [...]
Meanwhile the hardcore Bush loyalists kinda have their backs pressed up against the wall, with big, round, white eyes -- like a bunch of guards in an asylum for the violently insane who've just realized the Thorazine shots aren't working any more.
I haven't seen anything like this -- a full-scale, knock-down, intra-party brawl that doesn't involve Democrats -- since Shrub's daddy decided he didn't want people to read his lips after all. And all because Harriet Miers gave a few bucks to Al Gore!
I'm sure there is much, much more to come.
Posted at 08:48 PM in 2006 Elections, Republicans, Scandals | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Harriet Miers & 2006
Posted by Bob BrighamToday, Bush nominated Harriet Miers in a move that is fracturing the GOP. As Kos notes:
Mier's nomination was predicated by fear. Bush is afraid. That's why the right-wingers are pissed. Their fearless leader couldn't muster up the courage for a real fight against Senate Democrats.
Fear yes, but of the Senate Democrats or fear of more conspiracy charges? From Think Progress:
Near the end of a round table discussion on ABC’s This Week, George Stephanopoulos dropped this bomb:Definitely a political problem but I wonder, George Will, do you think it’s a manageable one for the White House especially if we don’t know whether Fitzgerald is going to write a report or have indictments but if he is able to show as a source close to this told me this week, that President Bush and Vice President Cheney were actually involved in some of these discussions.This would explain why Bush spent more than an hour answering questions from special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald. It would also fundamentally change the dynamics of the scandal.
Indeed, serious people are using the term "unindicted co-conspirator". While Harriet Meirs doesn't have much of a paper trail legally, she does has a strong background when it comes to Bush scandals:
But she does know better than just about anyone else where the bodies are buried (relax, it's a just a metaphor...we hope) in President Bush's National Guard scandal. In fact, Bush's Texas gubenatorial campaign in 1998 (when he was starting to eye the White House) actually paid Miers $19,000 to run an internal pre-emptive probe of the potential scandal. Not long after, a since-settled lawsuit alleged that the Texas Lottery Commission -- while chaired by Bush appointee Miers -- played a role in a multi-million dollar cover-up of the scandal.
How will this effect the 2006 midterm elections?
More immediately, this is the sort of pick that can have real-world repercussions in 2006, with a demoralized Republican Right refusing to do the heavy lifting needed to stem big losses. That Bush went this route rather than throwing his base the red meat they craved is nothing less than a sign of weakness. For whatever reason, Rove and Co. decided they weren't in position to wage a filibuster fight with Democrats on a Supreme Court justice and instead sold out their base.We'll have several months to pick through Miers' record, as well as highlight her role in any number of Bush scandals (like Georgia10 notes).
The GOP is totally on defense. Just look at the slate of GOP Senate challengers with a shot of being competitive. The only problem is that there is no list, the GOP senate plan is to minimize losses.
As for the House, Tom DeLay's indictment means that the gains could be tidal.
The GOP Culture of Corruption is catching up and the backlash is building for 2006 and 2008 campaigns.
Too many scandals. Too much corruption. And yet another crony appointed to a key post without any experience.
------
Wikipedia on Harriet Miers
Posted at 12:55 PM in 2006 Elections, Culture of Corruption, Republicans, Scandals, Supreme Court | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Harriet Miers Fractures GOP in Real-Time
Posted by Bob BrighamAn important function of the blogosphere is a peek into real-time politics. Bloggers show and create what is going on in politics right now. The announcement of Harriet Miers gives us a short window to peer into the GOP.
First, look at the National Review's David Frum. Last week, Frum blasted Harriet Meirs:
In the White House that hero worshipped the president, Miers was distinguished by the intensity of her zeal: She once told me that the president was the most brilliant man she had ever met.
Today, not only did he blast her again, but he then deleted the middle paragraph in the following:
Harriet Miers is a taut, nervous, anxious personality. It is impossible to me to imagine that she can endure the anger and abuse - or resist the blandishments - that transformed, say, Anthony Kennedy into the judge he is today.She rose to her present position by her absolute devotion to George Bush. I mentioned last week that she told me that the president was the most brilliant man she had ever met. To flatter on such a scale a person must either be an unscrupulous dissembler, which Miers most certainly is not, or a natural follower. And natural followers do not belong on the Supreme Court of the United States.
Nor is it safe for the president's conservative supporters to defer to the president's judgment and say, "Well, he must know best." The record shows I fear that the president's judgment has always been at its worst on personnel matters.
Right now, the White House is spinning like a top in GOP circles. Ankle Biting Pundits is "highly disappointed" and points out, "politically it's not good because it just opens the President up to charges of "cronyism"" while offering the following roundup of conservative bloggers reaction to the nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court:
John Hawkins of RightWingNews goes further than me and calls Miers a "disaster"
Michelle Malkin is "utterly underwhelmed"
Powerline is also disappointed.
Confirm Them is underwhelmed.
John Podhoretz calls it dumb.
Mike Krepasky at Red State rightly says the President has some explaining to do.
Polipundit isn't exactly thrilled but is willing to give her a chance.
Andrew Sullivan is going the "Crony" route. But can we say he's wrong?
Mark Levin says that the President "flinched"
Betsy Newmark has a hard time putting an adjective on just how disappointed she is and says the President bowed to pressure.
Gerry Daly is in the "Anger" stage (#2 of the 5 stages)
Captain Ed is "mystified", and not in a good way.
The timing couldn't be worse for the GOP as today's newsstands are graced with a new Newsweek cover-story titled, Troubled Waters: War, storms, leak probes—and a growing array of ethics clouds. Dark days for the Republican Party:
Bush and his fellow Republicans have little margin for error. Three forces—sky-high gasoline prices, the massive costs of rebuilding the Gulf Coast and ever-gloomier public assessments of the war in Iraq—have combined to weaken Bush's reputation as a strong leader, and leave him vulnerable to the kind of second-term fiascoes that tend to befall all presidents: think Ronald Reagan and Iran-contra, or Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky. Indeed, polltaker Frank Luntz, who helped develop the "Contract With America" message that swept Republicans to power in 1994, was on the Hill last week warning the party faithful that they could lose both the House and the Senate in next year's congressional elections.The Republicans' power outage is real—and the historical irony is as vast as Texas. Beginning in the 1950s, the Democratic Party of Texans Lyndon Johnson and Sam Rayburn built a congressional machine of unrivaled power. But starting in the '80s, led by a firebrand named Newt Gingrich, Republicans led a revolt from below in the name of smaller government and an ethically cleansed Congress. In 1989 Newt & Co. forced out Democratic Speaker Jim Wright—a Texan, too, who resigned over charges that he profited improperly from book sales—and five years later the GOP took control of the House after a Biblical 40 years in the wilderness. But it took the Republicans only 10 years to become yet another ruling party beset by charges of profligate spending, bloated government and corruption—a party led by two Texans, Bush and DeLay, who don't particularly care whether they are beloved outside their inner circle. To paraphrase David Mamet, the Republicans became what they beheld.
And there is much to behold. Michael Brown, the hapless yet arrogant former head of FEMA, managed to anger even putative Republican allies in an appearance before a House committee.
Michael Brown is a name that should come up a great deal during the Miers' confirmation process. Harriet Miers is a Michael Brown quality pick. Even right-wing bloggers are using the word 'cronyism' and are worried because they know Bush can't afford this.
The storyline of Bush giving key jobs to completely unqualified political hacks is connecting with the American people. By picking people on the basis of loyalty, rather than effectiveness, Bush has set the stage for the Culture of Corruption that engulfs the entire Republican Party.
When these are the rules (or lack thereof), you have multi-million bagmen like Jack Abramoff. You have conspiring congressmen like Tom DeLay. You have national security traitors like Scooter Libby and Karl Rove.
Today's Republican Party puts allegiance to Party above duty to country. But individual Republicans are growing increasingly disgusted, because like so many members of the National Guard, they aren't getting what they signed up for.
The stakes are high, this is the swing vote, as evidenced by the following 5-4 decisions:
Sandra Day O'Connor has been the deciding fifth vote in many important Supreme Court decisions affecting civil rights, environmental protection, personal privacy, reproductive freedom and reproductive health, religious liberty, consumer protection and much more. If she is replaced by someone who doesn't share her fair and impartial perspective -- someone in the mold of Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia -- the constitutional consequences will be devastating. These are among the key 5-4 decisions in danger of being overturned:Environmental protection
Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation v. EPA (2004) said the Environmental Protection Agency could step in and take action to reduce air pollution under the Clean Air Act when a state conservation agency fails to act.
Reproductive rights and privacy
Stenberg v. Carhart (2000) overturned a state law that would have had the effect of banning abortion as early as the 12th week of pregnancy and that lacked any exception to protect a woman’s health.
Consumer protection and corporate power
Rush Prudential HMO, Inc. v. Moran (2002) upheld state laws giving people the right to a second doctor's opinion if their HMOs tried to deny them treatment.
Civil rights: affirmative action and discrimination based on sex, race, and disability
Jackson v. Birmingham Bd. Of Educ. (2005) ruled that federal law protects against retaliation against someone for complaining about illegal sex discrimination in federally assisted education programs.
Tennessee v. Lane (2004) upheld the constitutionality of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act and required that courtrooms be physically accessible to the disabled.
Grutter v. Bollinger (2003) affirmed the right of state colleges and universities to use affirmative action in their admissions policies to increase educational opportunities for minorities and promote racial diversity on campus.
Davis v. Monroe County Bd. of Educ. (1999) ruled that it is a violation of federal law for school districts to be deliberately indifferent towards severe and pervasive student-on-student sexual harassment.
Brentwood Academy v. Tennessee Secondary School Athletic Association (2001) affirmed that civil rights laws apply to associations regulating interscholastic sports.
Morse v. Republican Party of Virginia (1996) said key anti-discrimination provisions of the Voting Rights Act apply to political conventions that choose party candidates.
Hunt v. Cromartie (2001) affirmed the right of state legislators to take race into account to secure minority voting rights in redistricting.
Access to justice
Zadvydas v. Davis (2001) told the government it could not indefinitely detain an immigrant who was under final order of removal even if no other country would accept that person and that access to federal courts is available to combat improper, indefinite detention.
Brown v. Legal Foundation of Washington (2003) maintained a key source of funding for legal assistance for the poor.
Hibbs v. Winn (2004) subjected discriminatory and unconstitutional state tax laws to review by the federal judiciary.
Religious liberty and church-state separation
McCreary County v. ACLU of Kentucky (2005) upheld the principle of government neutrality towards religion and ruled unconstitutional Ten Commandments displays in several courthouses
Lee v. Weisman (1992) continued the tradition of government neutrality toward religion, finding that government-sponsored prayer is unacceptable at graduations and other public school events.
Money, politics and government accountability
McConnell v. Federal Election Commission (2003) upheld most of the landmark McCain-Feingold campaign finance law, including its ban on political parties’ use of unlimited soft money contributions.
Federal Election Commission v. Colorado Republican Federal Campaign Committee (2001) upheld laws that limit political party expenditures that are coordinated with a candidate and seek to evade campaign contribution limits.
UPDATE: From Atrios:
Wingnuttia is rather angry at the choice. I don't think this is because they're really concerned that she's not conservative enough for their tastes, although that's part of it. They're angry because this was supposed to be their nomination. This is was their moment. They didn't just want a stealth victory, they wanted parades and fireworks. They wanted Bush to find the wingnuttiest wingnut on the planet, fully clothed and accessorized in all the latest wingnut fashions, not just to give them their desired Court rulings, but also to publicly validate their influence and power. They didn't just want substantive results, what they wanted even more were symbolic ones. They wanted Bush to extend a giant middle finger to everyone to the left of John Ashcroft. They wanted to watch Democrats howl and scream and then ultimately lose a nasty confirmation battle. They wanted this to be their "WE RUN THE COUNTRY AND THERE'S NOTHING YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT" moment.Whatever kind of judge she would be, she doesn't provide them with that.
Indeed.
------
Wikipedia on Harriet Miers
Posted at 11:20 AM in 2006 Elections, Culture of Corruption, General, Netroots, Republicans, Scandals, Supreme Court | TrackBack (7) | Technorati
Wednesday, September 28, 2005
CA-26: Gay Republican Leader David Dreier
Posted by Bob Brigham
The accession of David Dreier as GOP Leader could fracture the GOP and cost Dreier his seat. The potential for Dreier to suffer the same fate as Bob Livingston is very real.
The first major problem for Dreier is the fact that the press is covering the reports Dreier is a closetted gay man:
My latest L.A. Weekly article, THE OUTING: DAVID DREIER AND HIS STRAIGHT HYPOCRISY, has only been out on the Weekly's website for a little while, but it is already causing quite a stir. I've already been interviewed live on-air by four L.A. radio stations that broadcast into Congressman Dreier's Los Angeles County district, one of the daily newspapers in his district has been in touch with me requesting information (this is a story they wouldn't touch up until now)--and, I hear, ABC News is on the story and looking for people in Dreier's district who will go on-camera and say he's gay.I have not the slightest doubt that the outing campaign initiated by Mike Rogers' blogactive.com and supported by Raw Story's reporting is accurate in exposing Dreier. I first heard that Dreier was gay back when he first came to Congress over two decades ago and I was Washington correspondent for New York Magazine--in those days, Dreier was much more active on the gay social scene than he was later as he mounted the Republican food chain. Moreover, in the course of reporting this story, I talked to a gay Member of Congress who has observed Dreier in gay behavior and is 100% "sure," as this member told me, that Dreier is gay. And, clearly, Dreier's demagogic political homophobia justifies reporting the outing campaign targeting him.
Right now, the Christian Right looks like it has zero power in the Republican Party. I would not expect this trend to continue for long.
The other fault line that opens up by Dreier having a prominent role in the GOP is immigration. In his last election, Dreier was targeted by a Fire Dreier campaign that used radio to organize protests and has already purchased the following domains:
Dreier2006.org
Dreier2006.com
Dreier2006.net
Dreier2006.us
ElectDreier.org
ElectDreier.com
ElectDreier.net
ElectDreier.org
In 2004, Dreier outspent his opponent 50 to 1 yet received the lowest percentage of the vote during any of his elections since 1980. Dreier's district is surrounded by Democratic areas and has a significant immigrant population that could easily shift in 2006.
Right now, Dreier needs to shore up his flank, but getting today's Republicans to rally around a gay guy who is soft on immigration presents challenges that I doubt Dreier can overcome. With DeLay gone, internal GOP politics are going to get nasty. Via MyDD an important quote from Off Center
In American politics, centrifugal tendencies are everywhere. Asked to contemplate a House of Representatives without the leadership of the great coordinator, Tom DeLay, a Republican strategist with close ties to the White House commented: "It would be complete and total chaos. The House would descend into 'Lord of the Flies.'" (p. 137)
Now throw in the fact that most of GOP leadership is looking at jail time:
Washington, DC - Today, a Texas grand jury returned a criminal indictment against House GOP Leader Tom DeLay on a charge of conspiracy. Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean issued the following statement, saying DeLay's indictment is symptomatic of the Republicans' culture of corruption in Washington, DC:"Today, the state of Texas is doing what the Republican-controlled federal government has failed repeatedly to do, which is hold Republicans in Washington accountable for their culture of corruption. This alleged illegal activity reaches to the highest levels of the Republican Party.
"With House Republican Leader Tom DeLay under criminal indictment, Senate Republican Leader Frist facing SEC and Department of Justice investigations, and White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove under investigation, the Republican leadership in Washington is now spending more time answering questions about ethical misconduct than doing the people's business."
“Tom DeLay is neither the beginning nor the end of the Washington Republicans' ethical problems. America can do better than leaders who use their power to promote their own personal interests instead of the interests of the American people who elected them. We simply must change the way business is done in Washington."
The GOP is totally FUBAR and Democrats are Fighting.
Posted at 03:09 PM in 2006 Elections - House, California, Culture of Corruption, Republicans, Scandals | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
TX-22: Tom DeLay Indicted
Posted by Bob Brigham
From CNN:
BREAKING NEWS
House Majority Leader Tom DeLay indicted on one count of criminal conspiracy by Texas grand jury, according to Travis County clerk's office.
Tom DeLay is the poster boy for the Republican Culture of Corruption.
UPDATE (Tim): The media has already started consistently placing the word "Democrat" before the name of prosecutor Ronnie Earle in an attempt to perpetuate the Republican meme that the indictment is a "partisan witch hunt." It would be helpful for media-types to consider this nugget from the Houston Chronicle:
During his long tenure, Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle has prosecuted many more Democratic officials than Republicans. The record does not support allegations that Earle is prone to partisan witch hunts.
UPDATE (Bob): Via Atrios we learn the time DeLay is looking at:
The charge, a state jail felony punishable by up to two years incarceration, stems from his role with his political committee, Texans for a Republican Majority, a now-defunct organization that already had been indicted on charges of illegally using corporate money during the 2002 legislative elections.
Posted at 12:48 PM in 2006 Elections, 2006 Elections - House, Culture of Corruption, Republicans, Scandals, Texas | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati
Thursday, September 22, 2005
TX-Gov: Rick Perry, "Adios, Mofo"
Posted by Bob BrighamI snapped this pic when I went to the gulf coast for Katrina. I hope the Texas bloggers won't have to see (and smell) such a sight, but recent news is not encouraging.
The last hurricane was bad, but the real destruction did not come from the storm, but from the response (or lack thereof because Bush stayed on vacation). The Republican Administration did nothing to evacuate those who could not themselves, they did nothing to stop the flooding until it was too late. And that is why the Bush Bodies floated and bloated.
Have the Republicans learned from their incompetence? It doesn't appear they have (hat-tip to Atrios).
As Hurricane Rita approaches, once again, bloggers will be documenting the story, this time with institutional help from the Houston Chronicle. Godspeed to those fleeing the storm, Godbless to those stuck in the path, and God Damn to Texas Governor Rick Perry for offering little more than an, "Adios, Mofo" to those who can't fend for themselves.
I hope that this time the Republican response isn't more of a disaster than the disaster itself, but I'm not holding my breath. You can't trust Republicans with government.
Posted at 07:34 PM in Culture of Corruption, Republicans, Texas | Technorati
Thursday, September 15, 2005
2006: GOP Fears Accountability for Lake George
Posted by Bob BrighamFrom Americablog:
54 US Senators today KILLED legislation establishing an independent, bipartisan commission to investigate what went so horribly wrong with Hurricane Katrina.
76% of Americans want an independent bipartisan commission, like the one that investigated the 9/11 attacks, to investigate what went wrong. In fact, according to the same poll, Americans of all stripes, Republicans and Democrats, are united behind their support for such a commission (64% of all Republicans and 83% of all Democrats want a commission) even though they were aware that the Republicans in Congress are doing their own biased and partisan investigation (see below).
So why did every Republican US Senator (save the Senator from Louisiana, who simply didn't vote) vote AGAINST forming this independent, bipartisan commission to investigate what went so horribly wrong, and to find out how we avoid an even larger catastrophe the next time Osama attacks a major American city with a chemical, biological or nuclear bomb?
It's time to find out.
Call all the Republican Senators, fill their office voice mails with messages. Ask them why they voted against forming an impartial, independent commission to find out the truth about what went wrong with Hurricane Katrina? (Or in the case of the Louisiana Republican Senator, ask him why he didn't vote.) Ask them why they would rather have America unprepared for a future chemical, biological or nuclear attack from Al Qaeda? If we don't know why we were unprepared today, we will surely be unprepared tomorrow.
Every senator on this list will face a tough re-election campaign due to this scandal. This is disgusting. This is a cover-up.
Call them
Alexander, Lamar- (R - TN) Class II
302 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4944
Web Form: www.alexander.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.HomeAllard, Wayne- (R - CO) Class II
521 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5941
Web Form: www.allard.senate.gov/contactmeAllen, George- (R - VA) Class I
204 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4024
Web Form: www.allen.senate.gov/index.cfm?c=emailBennett, Robert- (R - UT) Class III
431 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5444
Web Form: www.bennett.senate.gov/contact/emailmain.htmlBond, Christopher- (R - MO) Class III
274 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5721
Web Form: www.bond.senate.gov/contact/contactme.cfmBrownback, Sam- (R - KS) Class III
303 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-6521
Web Form: www.brownback.senate.gov/CMEmailMe.cfmBunning, Jim- (R - KY) Class III
316 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4343
Web Form: www.bunning.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.EmailBurns, Conrad- (R - MT) Class I
187 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2644
Web Form: www.burns.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Home.ContactBurr, Richard- (R - NC) Class III
217 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3154
Web Form: www.burr.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.HomeChafee, Lincoln- (R - RI) Class I
141A RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2921
Web Form: www.chafee.senate.gov/webform.htmChambliss, Saxby- (R - GA) Class II
416 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3521
Web Form: cwww.hambliss.senate.gov/Contact/default.cfm?pagemode=1Coburn, Tom- (R - OK) Class III
172 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5754
Web Form: www.coburn.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.HomeCochran, Thad- (R - MS) Class II
113 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5054
Web Form: www.cochran.senate.gov/contact.htmColeman, Norm- (R - MN) Class II
320 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5641
Web Form: www.coleman.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.ContactFormCollins, Susan- (R - ME) Class II
461 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2523
Web Form: www.collins.senate.gov/low/contactemail.htmCornyn, John- (R - TX) Class II
517 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2934
Web Form: www.cornyn.senate.gov/contact/index.htmlCraig, Larry- (R - ID) Class II
520 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2752
Web Form: www.craig.senate.gov/email/Crapo, Michael- (R - ID) Class III
239 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-6142
Web Form: www.crapo.senate.gov/contact/email.cfmDeMint, Jim- (R - SC) Class III
340 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-6121
Web Form: www.demint.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.HomeDeWine, Mike- (R - OH) Class I
140 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2315
Web Form: www.dewine.senate.govDole, Elizabeth- (R - NC) Class II
555 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-6342
Web Form: www.dole.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=ContactInformation.ContactFormDomenici, Pete- (R - NM) Class II
328 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-6621
Web Form: www.domenici.senate.gov/contact/contactform.cfmEnsign, John- (R - NV) Class I
356 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-6244
Web Form: www.ensign.senate.gov/forms/email_form.cfmEnzi, Michael- (R - WY) Class II
379A RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3424
Web Form: www.enzi.senate.gov/email.htmFrist, Bill- (R - TN) Class I
509 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3344
Web Form: www.frist.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=AboutSenatorFrist.ContactFormGraham, Lindsey- (R - SC) Class II
290 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5972
Web Form: www.lgraham.senate.gov/index.cfm?mode=contactGrassley, Chuck- (R - IA) Class III
135 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3744
Web Form: www.grassley.senate.gov/webform.htmGregg, Judd- (R - NH) Class III
393 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3324
Web Form: www.gregg.senate.gov/sitepages/contact.cfmHagel, Chuck- (R - NE) Class II
248 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4224
Web Form: www.hagel.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Offices.ContactHatch, Orrin- (R - UT) Class I
104 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5251
Web Form: www.hatch.senate.gov/index.cfm?Fuseaction=Offices.ContactHutchison, Kay- (R - TX) Class I
284 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5922
Web Form: www.hutchison.senate.gov/e-mail.htmInhofe, James- (R - OK) Class II
453 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4721
Web Form: www.inhofe.senate.gov/contactus.htmIsakson, Johnny- (R - GA) Class III
120 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3643
Web Form: www.isakson.senate.gov/contact.cfmKyl, Jon- (R - AZ) Class I
730 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4521
Web Form: www.kyl.senate.gov/contact.cfmLott, Trent- (R - MS) Class I
487 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-6253
E-mail: www.senatorlott@lott.senate.govLugar, Richard- (R - IN) Class I
306 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4814
E-mail: www.senator_lugar@lugar.senate.govMartinez, Mel- (R - FL) Class III
317 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3041
Web Form: www.martinez.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ContactInformation.ContactFormMcCain, John- (R - AZ) Class III
241 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2235
Web Form: www.mccain.senate.gov/index.cfm?fuseaction=Contact.HomeMcConnell, Mitch- (R - KY) Class II
361-A RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2541
Web Form: www.mcconnell.senate.gov/contact_form.cfmMurkowski, Lisa- (R - AK) Class III
709 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-6665
Web Form: www.murkowski.senate.gov/contact.cfmRoberts, Pat- (R - KS) Class II
109 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4774
Web Form: www.roberts.senate.gov/e-mail_pat.htmlSantorum, Rick- (R - PA) Class I
511 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-6324
Web Form: www.santorum.senate.gov/contactform.cfmSessions, Jeff- (R - AL) Class II
335 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4124
Web Form: www.sessions.senate.gov/email/contact.cfmShelby, Richard- (R - AL) Class III
110 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5744
E-mail: www.senator@shelby.senate.govSmith, Gordon- (R - OR) Class II
404 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3753
Web Form: www.gsmith.senate.gov/webform.htmSnowe, Olympia- (R - ME) Class I
154 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-5344
E-mail: www.olympia@snowe.senate.govSpecter, Arlen- (R - PA) Class III
711 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4254
Web Form: www.specter.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=ContactInfo.HomeStevens, Ted- (R - AK) Class II
522 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3004
Web Form: www.stevens.senate.gov/contact_form.cfmSununu, John- (R - NH) Class II
111 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2841
Web Form: www.sununu.senate.gov/webform.htmlTalent, James- (R - MO) Class I
493 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-6154
Web Form: www.talent.senate.gov/Contact/default.cfm?pagemode=1Thomas, Craig- (R - WY) Class I
307 DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-6441
Web Form: www.thomas.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.HomeThune, John- (R - SD) Class III
383 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2321
Web Form: www.thune.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.HomeVitter, David- (R - LA) Class III
516 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4623
Web Form: www.vitter.senate.gov/contact.cfmVoinovich, George- (R - OH) Class III
524 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-3353
Web Form: www.voinovich.senate.gov/contact/index.htmWarner, John- (R - VA) Class II
225 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2023
Web Form: www.warner.senate.gov/contact/contactme.cfm
Posted at 10:04 AM in 2006 Elections, Culture of Corruption, Louisiana, Mississippi, Republicans, Scandals, Texas | Technorati
Wednesday, September 14, 2005
KY-Gov: Walls Closing in Around Fletcher
Posted by DavidNYCEmbattled Kentucky Republican Governor Ernie Fletcher just fired nine staffers who have been involved in a major crony hiring scandal - all of whom he had recently pardoned:
Among those to be sacked are Richard Murgatroyd, Fletcher's deputy chief of staff and close friend. Fletcher said he would also ask the state Republican Party to oust Darrell Brock as its chairman. Brock used to be head of Fletcher's local development office.
Of course, with Republicans, accountability never goes all the way to the top, even in the face of indictments:
Except for Murgatroyd, though, Fletcher left the highest ranking members of his administration who were indicted in their jobs, notably acting Transportation Secretary Bill Nighbert and deputy secretary Jim Adams.
But the walls are nevertheless closing in:
Fletcher and his supporters have accused Stumbo of pursuing the investigation for his own political agenda when there was no real wrongdoing.Fletcher said he hoped to "bury the hatchet" with Stumbo and work together.
For Fletcher to say he wants to "bury the hatchet" in this case is the political equivalent of crying uncle. I think things are gonna get a lot worse for Fletcher & Co.
In any event, The BluegrassReport sums up Ernie Fletcher, flip-flopper extraordinaire, perfectly:
Governor Fletcher Version 1.0 (2003) -- Send me to Frankfort so that I can clean-up the mess and restore hope by bringing in people with rock solid values.Governor Fletcher Version 2.0 (June 2005) -- This is all political witch hunt and the beginning of the 2007 governor's race. We didn't do anything wrong. All we did was level the playing field.
Governor Fletcher Version 3.0 (Today) -- "It is now clear to me that there were mistakes made by staff members who either did not understand - or appreciate - the spirit of the merit system rules. And it is now time for me to take action that I believe is appropriate for the circumstances at hand."
Hopefully Version 4.0 is right around the corner -- "I resign."
I look at this as just one more example of the utterly corrupt-to-the-bone state the modern Republican party finds itself in. Ethics really has got to be our big issue for 2006.
(Hat tip to BluegrassReport, as you might expect. They also have some thoughts on why Fletcher has chosen this moment to start caving.)
Posted at 06:18 PM in Culture of Corruption, Kentucky, Republicans, Scandals | Comments (3) | Technorati
Saturday, September 03, 2005
Katrina: Live from Houston, TX
Posted by Bob BrighamI'm at the Houston airport, waiting for a flight into Birmingham, then driving south.
During Paul Hackett's campaign, I think we proved that being on the ground is a great fulcrum. "Showing up maximizes" the leverage and we need it now, more than ever. Bush failed America, so now the burden falls to each American to help do what needs to be done.
My specialty is using the internet, which is a perfect vehicle. From ABC News:
"When I put the listing on the Web site in the evening, I had five or six families respond by the morning," van Gelderen said while he was sending out e-mails to his friends challenging them to help. Van Gelderen had his entire staff mobilizing relief efforts, rather than focusing on business. "The private sector has to start doing just as much as the government."Van Gelderen listed his available housing through Moveon.org, a liberal-leaning non-profit political organization.
MoveOn launched its hurricane housing site on Thursday afternoon, and within 25 hours received offers for 45,000 beds — 11,500 within driving distance of New Orleans, according to MoveOn president Eli Pariser.
"Basically we were just racking our brains trying to figure out how we could help our members provide some help for victims," said Pariser. "We have a direct line to 3 million people and there might be a lot who might be able to open up their homes."
At Swing State Project, I will continue to examine the electoral implications of the second disaster: the response. When Bush's poll numbers dropped below 40%, I didn't think they could go lower. I mean, he would always hold the Republicans, wouldn't he?
Apparently not...
The right wing realizes Bush's decision to continue his vacation kick-started a chain of events that will haunt the Republican Party for a long time. Geographically, Bush's incompetence has put the entire south in play. As the harvest forces tough conversations about transportation, the Midwest will also come into play. Not only is the Republican congress corrupt, but voting Republican gives another vote to the incompetent Republican Administration.
Bush fucked up. And even rabid right-wingers know it. The Washington Times knows it; Fox News knows it. Hell, even the Bull Moose is talking about impeachment. These organizations have propped Bush up for years and now they are cutting him loose, realizing that it is impossible to defend Bush's response – it is a credibility killer.
The hurricane was a disaster, but Bush's vacation-based reaction has been the real catastrophe.
So I'm going in. We're bringing in a SUV full of supplies, I also have my laptop and video camera.
Please sign up for Hurricane Housing.
Additionally requests will be coming.
Posted at 03:26 PM in 2006 Elections, Activism, Culture of Corruption, Republicans, Scandals, Site News, Texas | Comments (2) | Technorati
Wednesday, August 31, 2005
News From Lake New Orleans
Posted by Bob BrighamGotta love this update:
8:04 P.M. - Mayor Nagin: Unhappy that the helicopters slated to drop 3,000-pound bags into the levee never showed up to stop the flow of water.
Bush can't handle an unexpected event. After 9/11, he kept reading My Pet Goat and then hid on Air Force 1. After the Tsunami, he did almost nothing until the entire world community's outrage forced him to act. After the worst distaster ever, Bush took a break from his vacation to try and swindle seniors -- but not to help victims. Bush has the reflexes of a coward. Bush isn't just a chicken-hawk, yet another disaster proves he's chicken-shit -- instead of dealing with the problem Bush let's it get worse.
Posted at 12:36 AM in Republicans | Comments (3) | Technorati
Tuesday, August 30, 2005
Kentucky: Ernie Fletcher Takes 5th Amendment
Posted by Bob BrighamGov. Ernie Fletcher kissed his wife, Glenna, before heading into a grand jury room this morning.Fletcher stayed in the room for 2 minutes and 18 seconds, then proceeded with his attorneys to the office of Franklin Circuit Judge William Graham.
At a news conference later at the Capitol, Fletcher said he gave the grand jury his name, address and occupation but did not answer any other questions.
He said he did invoke his 5th Amendment right against self incrimination.
Name, rank, and serial number? Lots more at Bluegrass Report.
Posted at 06:10 PM in Culture of Corruption, Kentucky, Republicans, Scandals | Technorati
Bush Flip-Flops on Vacationing During Disaster
Posted by Bob BrighamAP:
President Bush will cut short his vacation to return to Washington on Wednesday, two days earlier than planned, to help monitor federal efforts to assist victims of Hurricane Katrina, the White House said Tuesday.''We have got a lot of work to do,'' Bush said, referring to the damage wrought by the hurricane along Gulf Coast areas.
The president had been scheduled to return to the nation's capital on Friday, after spending more than four weeks operating from his ranch in Central Texas. But after receiving a briefing early Tuesday on the devastation Katrina unleashed, the president decided that he needed to be in Washington to personally oversee the federal effort, White House spokesman Scott McClellan said.
Either you can manage hurricane relief sufficiently while on vacation, and in that case there's no need for you to return to DC tomorrow, or you can't, and in that case where the hell have you been the past 5 days?So which one is it, Mr. President?
Where the hell has Bush been? Here are the pics.
Posted at 05:27 PM in Louisiana, Republicans, Scandals | Technorati
Monday, August 29, 2005
Kentucky: Impeach Governor Ernie Fletcher
Posted by Bob BrighamI was shocked to hear this was happening, but Governor Ernie Fletcher has abused his position by seeking to cover-up a corruption scandal before he testifies tomorrow. It is unknown whether Governor Fletcher will take the 5th, but it is certain that he has created a gigantic political scandal. Bluegrass Report has been the source on this and Bluegrass Report has a legal source who understands Section 77 of the Kentucky Constitution:
Section 77 relates to retrospective acts only -- the Governor is empowered to nullfy punishment. This was the ruling (dicta) of the Kentucky Supreme Court in Anderson v. Commonwealth, 107 S.W.3d 193 (Ky. 2003) -- opinion by Johnstone -- all concur! In the opinion (p. 196) the Court looked to the US Supreme Court's decision in Schick v. Reed, 419 U.S. 256 (1974) for guidance from the English common law in construing a President's power to pardon under Article II. The Schick Court observed that the Constitution gives "plenary authority to the President to "forgive" the convicted person in part or entirely." Id. at 266. The Governor just has no authority to pardon indicted persons because there is no fine to remit, no sentence to commute and no punishment imposed from which to grant a pardon or reprieve. There sure as hell is no authority to pardon persons who "might" be indicted!
No wonder serious legislators are talking about impeachment. And now, the suspects -- who were potentially illegally pardoned -- will be compelled to testify and can no longer take the fifth.
Posted at 09:23 PM in Activism, Culture of Corruption, Kentucky, Republicans, Scandals | Comments (2) | Technorati
Culture of Corruption -- Kentucky Style
Posted by Bob BrighamFrom Bluegrass Report (source to follow on this):
Governor Ernie Fletcher has called a news conference for a major announcement regarding the merit hiring investigation. The conference is scheduled for 6 p.m. (EDT) tonight.Reports from the media are inconsistent, but there is a consensus emerging that Fletcher is issuing pardons -- some say nine of them. Mark Hebert (WHAS-11 Louisville) and Bill Bryant (WKYT-27 Lexington) are both reporting online. Sources inside the investigation have told BluegrassReport.org that they expect Fletcher will pardon himself as well.
Stay tuned as BluegrassReport.org will be reporting on this development all evening if pardons are issued.
I hope some lawyers in bluegrass country are looking into impeachment, looking into recall. This is an obscene abuse of power. And the timing is disgusting, not just for trying to get it buried in the Katrina coverage, but because of what happens tomorrow:
Gov. Ernie Fletcher will appear Tuesday before a special grand jury investigating personnel actions in his administration.At a court hearing today, Fletcher’s attorney, James Neal of Nashville, told Franklin Circuit Judge William L. Graham that he and Assistant Attorney General Scott Crawford-Sutherland had agreed that Fletcher would appear Tuesday. The deal also calls for the prosecutor to issue a new subpoena for records from the governor’s office, giving Fletcher and his attorney more time to respond.
Neal had filed a motion earlier in the day asking the judge to delay Fletcher’s grand jury appearance for a few days. Neal said he requested the delay because he had a medical appointment.
The judge accepted the agreement between Neal and Sutherland. Neal declined afterwards to say if Fletcher would answer the jury’s questions Tuesday or invoke his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.
stay tuned...
Posted at 06:38 PM in Culture of Corruption, Kentucky, Republicans, Scandals | Comments (1) | Technorati
CA-48: Special Election Turns Negative
Posted by Bob BrighamCA-48 has Club For Growth's new negative ad:
...SHE MISSED MORE THAN THREE HUNDRED VOTES IN ALL.WHEN SHE DID SHOW UP, SHE VOTED FOR A STATE BUDGET THAT WAS SO BLOATED EVEN GRAY DAVIS THOUGHT IT SPENT TOO MUCH MONEY.
MARILYN BREWER. SO LIBERAL, TAXPAYERS ARE BETTER OFF WHEN SHE DOESN'T VOTE. ...
These wounds won't heal by the runoff election. A fractured GOP, a third party nut, and Democratic West Coast Offense could all come together to give Democrats a shot in Orange County.
Posted at 12:12 PM in 2005 Elections, California, Open Seats, Republicans, Special Elections | Technorati
National Guard Belongs in the Nation
Posted by Bob BrighamMaybe Katrina will kickstart the debate on how Bush is destroying the National Guard. Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer has been trying to get the conversation started for some time. From Roll Call:
It’s forest fire season in the Mountain West.But if disaster were to strike in drought-stricken Montana, many of the people who would be expected to fight the fires are half a world away.
Fully half of Montana’s National Guard — and most of its helicopters — are deployed in Iraq. And Gov. Brian Schweitzer (D) is fired up about it.
Schweitzer wants to start a dialogue about the way the military has changed its ratio of active-duty to Reserve and Guard forces — a policy in place long before the war in Iraq but one whose full impact is only now being felt.
“One of the things they didn’t consider in this policy,” said Schweitzer, “is that there are governors who are commanders-in-chief of the Guard and they have important missions for them at home.”
We should never have to see quotes like this:
JACKSON BARRACKS -- When members of the Louisiana National Guard left for Iraq in October, they took a lot equipment with them. Dozens of high water vehicles, humvees, refuelers and generators are now abroad, and in the event of a major natural disaster that, could be a problem."The National Guard needs that equipment back home to support the homeland security mission," said Lt. Colonel Pete Schneider with the LA National Guard.
I wrote about this yesterday because we need to have the debate about why the Louisiana National Guard is in Iraq instead of defending their state. Why?
Posted at 11:16 AM in International, Republicans, Scandals | Comments (1) | Technorati
Sunday, August 28, 2005
Katrina Proves Bush is a Failure
Posted by Bob BrighamThree reasons why George Bush has failed the entire gulf coast -- especially New Orleans -- and should be held accountable for the result of Katrina:
3. The Louisiana National Guard is in Iraq
2. The energy of the storm is compounded by the higher sea tempurature that is forced upon a hurricane by Global Warming
1. Bush received warnings that this was one of the "three likeliest, most castastrophic disasters" and did nothing but stay on vacation and cut funding
Posted at 09:09 PM in Culture of Corruption, International, Republicans, Scandals | Comments (5) | Technorati
Katrina Proves Bush Failed New Orleans
Posted by Bob BrighamUPDATE (Bob) Here is the full recap
So far today, I've looked at Global Warming and Katrina and the crisis resulting from Lousiana's National Guard being in Iraq instead of defending their state.
Will Bush stay on vacation? At this point, it doesn't really matter. Because Bush has been asleep at the wheel for four years. From the Houston Chronicle in 2001:
New Orleans is sinking.And its main buffer from a hurricane, the protective Mississippi River delta, is quickly eroding away, leaving the historic city perilously close to disaster.
So vulnerable, in fact, that earlier this year the Federal Emergency Management Agency ranked the potential damage to New Orleans as among the three likeliest, most castastrophic disasters facing this country.
The other two? A massive earthquake in San Francisco, and, almost prophetically, a terrorist attack on New York City.
The New Orleans hurricane scenario may be the deadliest of all.
FEMA said this was the "three likeliest, most castastrophic disasters". Bush's response? Cut preparedness:
(UPDATE -- Tim:) I wanted to take a moment to spell it out for the visiting freepi fawning over the head start the Superdome is giving you supporters of minority internment. Of course we don't believe Bush caused the hurricane, although I think many of us wish he would have asked Pat Robertson to pray for a re-direction.
And most of you failed to read the article Bob linked, no surprise there. But inbetween vacations, the preznit got massive tax-cuts passed at the expense of important projects. Among them, preparedness for natural disasters--some of which happen to be in New Orleans.
In general, funding for construction has been on a downward trend for the past several years, said Marcia Demma, chief of the New Orleans Corps' programs management branch.In 2001, the New Orleans district spent $147 million on construction projects. When fiscal year 2005 wraps up Sept. 30, the Corps expects to have spent $82 million, a 44.2 percent reduction from 2001 expenditures. [...]
Unfunded projects include widening drainage canals, flood- proofing bridges and building pumping stations in Orleans and Jefferson parishes. The Corps also wants to build levees in unprotected areas on the West Bank.
Irresponsible distribution of resources has, yet again, put American lives in peril. If the freepi were able to see past 9/11 and recognize the difference between real life, health, and safety risks (ie. environment & port protection among others) and not get distracted by contrived security risks (ie. Iraq), things might not look so grim tonight.
In fiscal year 2006, the New Orleans district of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is bracing for a record $71.2 million reduction in federal funding.It would be the largest single-year funding loss ever for the New Orleans district, Corps officials said.
I've been here over 30 years and I've never seen this level of reduction, said Al Naomi, project manager for the New Orleans district. I think part of the problem is it's not so much the reduction, it's the drastic reduction in one fiscal year. It's the immediacy of the reduction that I think is the hardest thing to adapt to.
There is an economic ripple effect, too. The cuts mean major hurricane and flood protection projects will not be awarded to local engineering firms. Also, a study to determine ways to protect the region from a Category 5 hurricane has been shelved for now.
Remember, this was a top-three "likeliest catastrophic disasters" and Bush shelved the study of how to protect against Category 5 hurricanes like Katrina? For most of Bush's time as President, FEMA has been saying this could be the deadliest scenario facing America. And Bush cut the preparedness funding, sent our strategic reserve National Guard troops to fight an unnecessary war and then went on vacation. Not only is Bush the worst President ever, but he is also a total asshole for fucking over New Orleans.
Hat tip to Ms Librarian and commentors.
UPDATE: (Bob) Here is some more...
BUSH LEFT GULF COAST VULNERABLE TO DISASTER
Katrina could be the worst natural disaster in the history of the United States. But it was not a surprise. Experts have been warning for years of the potential catastrophic devastation that a category 4 or 5 hurricane could have on the Gulf Coast. And in Louisiana, local officials have fought for federal funding to implement hurricane defense plans that could have avoided the widespread flooding of New Orleans. But under the Bush Administration, funding for those projects has been continuously slashed, leaving the Gulf Coast unprepared for such a disaster.
DISASTER PREPAREDNESS FUNDING CUT BY BUSH ADMINISTRATION
Federal Government Has Neglected Disaster Preparedness, Left Enormous Vulnerabilities. Disaster and emergency experts have warned for years that governments, especially the federal government, have put so much stress on disaster response that they have neglected policies to minimize a disaster's impact in advance. Robert Hartwig, chief economist for the Insurance Information Institute, said “It's going to be very evident that there were an enormous number of vulnerabilities that weren't addressed. There's going to be a lot of finger-pointing.” [Newhouse News Service, 8/31/05]
Disaster Mitigation Programs Slashed Since 2001. Since 2001, key federal disaster mitigation programs, developed over many years, have been slashed and tossed aside. FEMA’s Project Impact, a model mitigation program created by the Clinton administration, has been canceled outright. Federal funding of post-disaster mitigation efforts designed to protect people and property from the next disaster has been cut in half, and now communities across the country must compete for pre-disaster mitigation dollars. [Baltimore City Paper, 9/29/04]
In 2003 White House Slashed Mitigation Programs In Half. In 2003, Congress approved a White House proposal to cut FEMA's Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) in half. Previously, the federal government was committed to invest 15 percent of the recovery costs of a given disaster in mitigating future problems. Under the Bush formula, the feds now cough up only 7.5 percent. Such post-disaster mitigation efforts, specialists say, are a crucial way of minimizing future losses. [Gambit Weekly, 9/28/04]
Bush Continuing To Propose Cuts To Army Corps of Engineers. The Army Corps of Engineers will be cut in 2006. Bush’s 2005 budget proposal called for a 13 percent reduction in the Army Corps of Engineers’ budget, down to $4 billion from $4.6 billion in fiscal 2004. [Associated Press, 2/6/05; Congressional Quarterly Online, 2/3/04]
Under Bush, FEMA Reverted To Pre-Clinton Status As One Of The Worst Agencies. Former President Clinton appointed James L. Witt to take over FEMA after its poor response to Hurricane Andrew. Witt adopted recommendations and FEMA was described as an agency reborn: “transformed itself from what many considered to be the worst federal agency to among the best.” But FEMA under the Bush administration has destroyed carefully constructed efforts. After the 9/11 attacks the agency’s inspector general in 2003 criticized portions of FEMA’s response, citing “difficulties in delivering timely and effective” mortgage and rental assistance to those in need. [USA Today, 6/1/2005]
STATES FORCED TO CARRY MORE OF THE BURDEN
States Expected To Shoulder More Of The Burden In Emergency Management With Fewer Funds. “The federal focus on terrorism preparedness has left states with an increased responsibility to provide support for natural disasters and emergencies,” noted a report released by the National Emergency Management Association (NEMA) this summer. “State budget shortfalls have given emergency management programs less to work with, at a time when more is expected of them. In fiscal year 2004, the average budget for a state emergency management agency was $40.8 million, a 23 percent reduction from fiscal year 2003.” [Gambit Weekly, 9/28/04]
Bush Tried to Cut Federal Percentage of Large-Scale Natural Disaster Preparedness. The administration made a failed attempt to cut the federal percentage of large-scale natural disaster preparedness expenditures. Since the 1990s, the federal government has paid 75 percent of such costs, with states and municipalities funding the other 25 percent. The White House's attempt to reduce the federal contribution to 50 percent was defeated in Congress. [Gambit Weekly, 9/28/04]
BUSH CRIPPLED HURRICANE PREPAREDNESS IN LOUISIANA
Bush Opposed Necessary Funding For Hurricane Preparedness In Louisiana. The Louisiana congressional delegation urged Congress earlier this year to dedicate a stream of federal money to Louisiana's coast, only to be opposed by the White House. Ultimately a deal was struck to steer $540 million to the state over four years. The total coast of coastal repair work is estimated to be $14 billion. In its budget, the Bush administration also had proposed a significant reduction in funding for southeast Louisiana's chief hurricane protection project. Bush proposed $10.4 million, a sixth of what local officials say they need. [Newhouse News Service, 8/31/05]
Republican Budget Cut New Orleans’ Army Corps Of Engineers Funding By A Record $71.2 Million. In fiscal year 2006, the New Orleans district of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is bracing for a record $71.2 million reduction in federal funding. It would be the largest single-year funding loss ever for the New Orleans district, Corps officials said. “I've been here over 30 years and I've never seen this level of reduction,” said Al Naomi, project manager for the New Orleans district. The cuts mean major hurricane and flood protection projects will not be awarded to local engineering firms. Money is so tight the New Orleans district instituted a hiring freeze. The freeze is the first of its kind in about 10 years, said Marcia Demma, chief of the Corps' Programs Management Branch. [New Orleans City Business, 6/6/05]
Landrieu Called Bush’s Funding Priorities Shortsided. Landrieu said the Bush Administration is not making Corps of Engineers funding a priority. “I think it's extremely shortsighted,” Landrieu said. “When the Corps of Engineers' budget is cut, Louisiana bleeds. These projects are literally life-and-death projects to the people of south Louisiana and they are (of) vital economic interest to the entire nation.” [New Orleans City Business, 6/6/05]
Emergency Preparedness Director Furious With Project Cuts. A study to determine ways to protect the region from a Category 5 hurricane has been shelved for now. Terry Tullier, the New Orleans emergency preparedness director, said he was furious but not surprised to hear that study had been cut from the Bush budget. “I’m all for the war effort, but every time I think about the $87 billion being spent on rebuilding Iraq, I ask: What about us?” he said. “Somehow we need to make a stronger case that this is not Des Moines, Iowa, that we are so critical that if it hits the fan in New Orleans, everything this side of the Rockies will feel the economic shock waves.” [Times-Picayune, 9/22/04; New Orleans City Business, 6/6/05]
Flood Protection Projects Put On Hold Because Of Republican’s 2006 Budget. One of the hardest-hit areas of the New Orleans district's budget is the Southeast Louisiana Urban Flood Control Project. SELA's budget is being drained from $36.5 million awarded in 2005 to $10.4 million suggested for 2006 by the House of Representatives and the president. The Army Corps of Engineers in New Orleans has identified $35 million in projects to build and improve levees, floodwalls and pumping stations in St. Bernard, Orleans, Jefferson and St. Charles parishes. Those projects in a line item where funding is scheduled to be cut from $5.7 million this year to $2.9 million in 2006. “We don't have the money to put the work in the field, and that's the problem,” Naomi said. [New Orleans City Business, 6/6/05]
Senator Landrieu Urged Action After SELA Budget Slashed. Louisiana’s congressional delegation assured local officials they would seek significant increases for SELA. “We could have lost 100,000 lives had Hurricane Ivan hit the mouth of the (Mississippi) River before it turned,” said Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., alluding to last year’s storm that largely spared Louisiana but devastated parts of Alabama and Florida. “God has been good, but one of these days a hurricane is going to come and, if we don’t get projects . . . finished, we’re sitting ducks,” she said. [Times-Picayune, 3/11/05]
NATIONAL GUARD AND COAST GUARD UNDERFUNDED AND OVERSTRETCHED
LOUISIANA GUARD WARNED OF EQUIPMENT SHORTAGES BEFORE KATRINA
Louisiana National Guard Said Before Katrina That It Needed Equipment Back From Iraq If It Is To Respond To A Natural Disaster. “The National Guard needs that equipment back home to support the homeland security mission,” said Lt. Colonel Pete Schneider with the LA National Guard. “You've got combatant commanders over there who need it they say they need it, they don't want to lose what they h ave, and we certainly understand that it's a matter of us educating that combatant commander, we need it back here as well,” Col. Schneider said. [ABC 26 WGNO, 8/1/05]
NATIONAL GUARD STRETCHED THIN, UNABLE TO FULFILL DUTIES AT HOME
Iraq Has Left National Guard Units At Home Short Of Equipment. Already suffering from manpower shortages, the National Guard’s overstretched forces are being confronted with another problem: not enough equipment to supply Guard troops at home. “To fully equip troops in Iraq, the Pentagon has stripped local Guard units of about 24,000 pieces of equipment. That has left Guard units at home, already seriously short of gear.” [Detroit Free Press, 6/13/05]
Gen. McCaffrey Said We Could Permanently Damage The Guard And Reserve. Gen. McCaffrey warned against overstretching Guard and Reserve. “[W]e're going to damage fatally the National Guard if we try and continue using Reserve components at this rate. Forty percent of that force in Iraq right now is Reserve component. We have shot the bull. We've got to back off and build an Army and Marine Corps capable of sustaining these operations.” [Meet the Press, 8/28/05]
Governors Say Long Deployments Leaving Their States Vulnerable. “[S]tate officials think continued deployments will have an effect on people who sign up for or remain in the Minnesota National Guard. At a National Governor's Association meeting…some governors criticized the burden of repeated deployment, saying that the troops' absence leaves their states unprotected against things like natural disasters. Officials in Idaho and Montana have said they are unprepared if forest fires hit their states this summer.” [AP, 8/10/05]
COAST GUARD’S RESPONSIBILITIES INCREASING WITHOUT ADEQUATE FUNDS
Coast Guard Gave Congress List of $919 Million in Unfunded Priorities. The Coast Guard has given Congress a $919 million wish list of programs and hardware not funded in the Bush Administration's fiscal 2006 budget request. For the first time, the Coast Guard has sent Congressional representatives an unfunded priorities list - a tally of needed items not included in the fiscal 2006 request. The list includes an additional $637 million for the service's Deepwater recapitalization program; $11.6 million for helicopter repairs; $4 million to increase aviation maritime patrol hours, and $59 million to renovate shore stations. [Journal of Commerce Online, 5/11/05]
Coast Guard Faced With Helicopter Problems. The head of the US Coast Guard told Congress his equipment is failing at unacceptable rates. Despite increases in spending on maintenance, the agency's older large craft -- called cutters -- experience equipment failures capable of ruining a mission almost 50 percent of the time, according to Coast Guard officials. Further, the agency's HH-65 helicopters suffered a rate of 329 mishaps per 100,000 flight hours in 2004, way over the Federal Aviation Administration's acceptable standard of 1 mishap per 100,000 hours. [UPI, 6/10/05; USA Today, 7/6/05]
Commandant Says Coast Guard Short On Resources. Coast Guard Commandant Adm. Thomas H. Collins said, “Do we have more business than we have resources? Yes.” The Coast Guard has put the cost of implementing safety regulations laid out by Congress at $7.3 billion over the next ten years. The Bush administration only asked for $46 million for aid to the ports in the 2005 budget. [Budget of the United States, www.omb.gov; House Approps Cmte Transcript, 3/31/04; Washington Post, 4/2/03; Boston Globe, 6/30/04]
Posted at 06:27 PM in 2006 Elections, Culture of Corruption, Economy, General, Louisiana, Republicans, Scandals | Comments (57) | Technorati
Katrina and Global Warming
Posted by Bob BrighamFrom WWLTV's great coverage:
Katrina could be strongest storm in recorded history
Mayor Ray Nagin ordered an immediate mandatory evacuation Sunday for all of New Orleans, a city sitting below sea level with 485,000 inhabitants, as Hurricane Katrina bore down with wind revved up to nearly 175 mph and a threat of a massive storm surge.The storm had the potential for storm surge flooding of up to 25 feet, topped with even higher waves, as much as 15 inches of rain, and tornadoes, the National Hurricane Center said.
Only three Category 5 hurricanes - the highest on the Saffir-Simpson scale - have hit the United States since record-keeping began. The last was 1992's Hurricane Andrew, which leveled parts of South Florida, killed 43 people and caused $31 billion in damage. The other two were the 1935 Labor Day hurricane that hit the Florida Keys and killed 600 people and Hurricane Camille, which devastated the Mississippi coast in 1969, killing 256.
Category 5's are rare, but for how long?
The strongest hurricanes in the present climate may be upstaged by even more intense hurricanes over the next century as the earth's climate is warmed by increasing levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Although we cannot say at present whether more or fewer hurricane will occur in the future with global warming, the hurricanes that do occur near the end of the 21st century are expected to be stronger and have significantly more intense rainfall than under present day climate conditions. This expectation is based on an anticipated enhancement of energy available to the storms due to higher tropical sea surface temperatures.
When you hear "global warming" think "George Bush". Global warming is now a national security crisis. Bush's oil buddies have endanged American soil with their corrupt refusal to deal with the consequences of their greed. Bush doesn't get it.
Posted at 01:37 PM in Culture of Corruption, International, Republicans, Scandals | Comments (2) | Technorati
Thursday, August 18, 2005
GOP Culture of Corruption
Posted by Bob BrighamI think this post is the ideal way to kick off our new Culture of Corruption category. From Grow Ohio:
11:15 A.M. - Taft plead no contest and waived his right to a jury trial. He was spared jail time (of course), but is forced to pay the maximum fines and court fees allowable ($1,000 x 4). Embarassingly, Taft has to send an email to every Ohio media outlet and stateworker outlining an apology for his ethical violations.[...]11:30 A.M. - Governor Taft steps to the podium to make a statement after the hearing. "I am here today to publicly apologize to the people of Ohio." The Republican Governor just called the events "social" -- He later called them "recreational events with friends." It will be interesting to see what State Senator Marc Dann and the press can uncover about who the outings were with and what state contracts/other benefits were potentially on-the-table with those individuals.
Ah, "recreational" corruption...
Posted at 02:42 PM in Culture of Corruption, Ohio, Republicans, Scandals | Comments (4) | Technorati
Tuesday, August 02, 2005
OH-02: Jean Schmidt Campaign Manager Joe Braun
Posted by Bob Brighamoh man, apparently someone is too busy covering their ass to run a campaign today...
If you want to know why she said that, it is because she has sources...
UPDATE: (Bob) Atrios says:
Schmidt Campaign Imploding?Word is that Spankin' Joe Braun is too obsessed with what's being said about him on the internets to actually actively manage the campaign...
Wow. Must suck to be Joe Braun. Remember Friday's Hotline? The Washington Republicans didn't write the big checks because Joe Braun was doing a good job.
Posted at 01:21 PM in 2005 Elections, Ohio, Open Seats, Republicans, Scandals, Special Elections | Comments (1) | Technorati
Wednesday, July 27, 2005
OH-02: Jean Schmidt Cracks in Debate
Posted by Bob Brigham
After watching this video, I can think of few words that describe Jean Schmidt better than batshit crazy.
She lost her last her last election by 22 votes and it appears that the Fear has taken ahold of her. She's cracking, maybe she's already cracked. Who knows what type of crazed hallucinations have overcome her, but the Fear has taken it's toll.
It ended up in the local press and now the video is online.
Some people are good under fire, some crack up.
Posted at 02:54 PM in Ohio, Open Seats, Republicans, Scandals, Special Elections | Comments (2) | Technorati
Friday, July 22, 2005
Karen Hughes and Karl Rove Scandal
Posted by Bob BrighamVia email, I received an important DNC Press Release on Karen Huges: Queen of the Spin-Doctors and Captain of the White House Smear Campaign. Full post in extended entry.
Karen Hughes, Queen of the Spin-Doctors
and Captain of the White House Smear Campaign
President Bush has nominated his closest adviser, Karen Hughes, to be Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy. In this new position, Hughes will be responsible for kick-starting America’s diplomatic marketing effort in the Muslim world. However, Hughes’ involvement in the Bush Administration’s manipulation of pre-war intelligence, her leadership role in the White House smear campaigns against Joe Wilson and Richard Clarke, and her potential involvement with the Plame leak, makes her an unlikely candidate for this position.Hughes Involved in Pre-War Manipulation of Intelligence...Hughes Part of Iraq Working Group, Which Set Strategy for Marketing War in Iraq. Despite formally leaving the White House in July of 2002, Hughes was one of the regular participants in the White House Iraq Group which set the strategy for going to war in Iraq. The “internal working group”, which was began its formal coordination in August of 2002, was responsible for marketing the war in Iraq and involved other political strategists such as Mary Matalin, Karl Rove, Lewis “Scooter” Libby, and Andy Card. Card hinted at the WHIG’s mission to the New York Times saying “From a marketing point of view, you don’t introduce new products in August.” [Washington Post, 8/10/03; KTVT, 7/8/02]
Escalation of False Rhetoric Regarding Iraqi Threat Came After Formation of White House Iraq Group. The Washington Post reported that the “escalation of nuclear rhetoric” during the pre-war stage, “ including the introduction of the term ‘mushroom cloud’ into the debate, coincided with the formation of a White House Iraq Group, or WHIG, a task force assigned to ‘educate the public’ about the threat from Hussein, as a participant put it.” [Washington Post, 8/10/03]
Hughes Was Intimately Involved In Preparation Of Discredited 2003 State Of The Union. The Houston Chronicle reported that Hughes “was involved in drafting the speech.” Hughes said that convincing Americans of the dangers of Iraq was a primary goal of the speech. Hughes: “What people want to hear is the comprehensive logic: Why is Saddam Hussein's continued defiance a threat to our country and to peace in the world?” [Houston Chronicle, 1/27/03; NBC Today, 1/28/03]
…And Led White House Smear Campaigns to Cover Up the Lies
HUGHES PROMISED TO ELEVATE POLITICAL DIALOGUE
Hughes Claimed She Would Not Engage In Anonymous Attacks And Wanted To “Elevate Political Dialogue.” “I worry that Christians, myself included, give Christianity a bad name because we so often fail to model the love and humility displayed by the life of Jesus Christ,” she writes [in her new book “Ten Minutes from Normal”]. Hughes, in what she called an effort to elevate political dialogue, vowed that she will no longer provide quotes to reporters without attaching her name to them. “I admit in the book: In the past, I’ve done it myself,” she said. “You tend to be harsher and meaner when you can make those charges anonymously.” [Washington Post, 3/29/04]
BUT LED SMEAR CAMPAIGN AGAINST CLARKE AND WILSON
Hughes Led Attempts To Smear Richard Clarke. The New York Times reported, “Ms. Hughes was an advocate of the howitzer treatment of Mr. Clarke, the former counterterrorism chief who was attacked by the White House as politically motivated and dishonest. She was also a sounding board for Condoleezza Rice, the national security adviser, who reached out to Ms. Hughes this week for advice on how to present her case against the criticisms of Mr. Clarke, who said she had ignored his dire warnings about terrorism.” [New York Times, 3/28/04]
Hughes Admitted To Being Involved In Attempts To Smear Clarke. When asked by Barbara Walters on 20/20 whether she was involved in the White House’s response to Richard Clarke’s allegations, Hughes said, “I'm involved in White House discussions about those issues, and I try to help… I think, from personal knowledge, that many of the things he said are not true.” [ABC’s 20/20, 3/29/04]
Hughes Constructed Strategy To Defend Against Criticisms Of Bush’s Use Of False Evidence In The State of the Union, Focusing On Discrediting Democrats. After the Niger/uranium scandal escalated, the White House struggled to confront the charges. Hughes helped to devise a communications plan. As reported by USA Today, the plan was to: “Most important: Question the motives of Democrats who supported the war but now are criticizing the president.” [USA Today, 7/24/03]
AND POSSIBLY EXPOSED VALERIE PLAME AS A CIA OPERATIVE
White House Iraq Group Subpoenaed In Leak Probe. In March 2004, the investigation of who leaked the identity of undercover CIA operative to the media subpoenaed all White House records pertaining to the White House Iraq Group (WHIG) from July 6 through July 30, 2003. Hughes was a member of the WHIG. [Newsday, 3/6/03]
Hughes Defended Rove In Leak Charge. Hughes said that the public disclosure of a CIA operative's name was a disservice to the president and “very disruptive to democracy.” Hughes “said she was confident that her fellow Texan and sometime rival, Karl Rove, the president's chief political adviser, didn't leak the name to a syndicated columnist because ‘Karl has said that he was not involved.’” [Houston Chronicle, 10/2/03]
WIDESPREAD CONCERN ABOUT HUGHES APPOINTMENT
GAO Said Administration Failing To Develop A Strategy To Improve US Image Abroad. The GAO criticized the administration in April 2005 for failing to develop a strategy to improve the image of the United States as "recent polling data show that anti-Americanism is spreading and deepening around the world." The report warned that anti-American sentiments could increase support for terrorism. [Washington Post, 4/18/05]
Despite Administration Failures, Hughes Delayed Reporting to State Department. Hughes isn't slated to arrive in Washington, where she still faces a confirmation vote, until the fall. The frustration of some diplomats has prompted quiet criticism of Hughes for waiting so long after her March nomination to join the team. "She should have joined immediately," said one diplomat. [The White House Bulletin, 6/23/05]
Arab Leaders Worried About Hughes Appointment. James Zogby, director of the Arab-American Institute, who has advised several administrations on both policy and public diplomacy in the Arab world, worries that Hughes will adopt "what seems to be in vogue today - the explanation that (the Arabs) don't really dislike us, they dislike their own governments, so if we advocate freedom, we'll win" as the main message for Washington to crank out to the region. [Inter-Press Service, 3/15/05]
Muslim Community Skeptical of Hughes Appointment. Muslims are skeptical of Hughes’s appointment, saying that Bush administration policies, chiefly the war in Iraq, remain sources of animosity and distrust in the Muslim world. "We can reduce anti-Americanism, but it is difficult to salvage anti-Bushism," said Muqtedar Khan, director of international studies at Adrian (Mich.) College. If Hughes makes it her task to defend the Bush administration, her appointment will prove to be "a waste of time and money," Khan said. [Religion News Service, 3/16/05]
HUGHES USED 9/11 FOR POLITICAL GAIN
Hughes Defended Politicizing 9-11 In Campaign Ads. In March 2004, during the early stages of the presidential campaign, the Bush campaign released an ad showing the charred shell of the World Trade Center, and another showing firefighters removing shrouded remains from ground zero. A firefighters union and relatives of victims objected to the politicization of 9-11. Discussing the campaign on CNN, Ms. Hughes said of the ads: ''I think it's very tasteful.” [NYT, 3/5/04]
Hughes Linked Pro-Choice Supporters to Terrorists. “Wolf Blitzer asked the Bush adviser whether abortion would be an issue in this election. ‘Well, Wolf, it’s always an issue,’ she answered. ‘And I frankly think it’s changing somewhat. I think after September 11th the American people are valuing life more and realizing that we need policies to value the dignity and worth of every life.’ Just in case anyone didn’t get it, she added that ‘the fundamental difference between us and the terror network we fight is that we value every life.’” [Goodman, Washington Post Writers Group, 4/30/04, accessed on workingforchange.com]
For more information on the scandal, visit our Karl Rove Blog.
Posted at 01:25 PM in DNC Chair, Plamegate, Republicans | Technorati
Sen. Democratic Policy Committee and House Gov. Reform Committee Hearing on Leak
Posted by Bob BrighamWatch live on C-SPAN 3. I'll use this thread for updates. Here is the background on today's committee investigation
UPDATE: (Bob) Check out the c-span live blog at Mahablog and Republic of T.
UPDATE: (Bob) DC Media Girl has Larry Johnson's prepared opening testimony (full remarks posted in extended entry)
UPDATE: (Bob) Good Americans are talking about the hearings over at AmericaBlog.
UPDATE: (Bob) Great moments in mainstream media asking great questions and getting proportional responses:
Carl, and then I'll go to Bob.Q Scott, the Senate Democratic Policy Committee, lead by Byron Dorgan, along with the Democrats of the House Government Reform Committee, are going to hold a hearing tomorrow at 10:00 a.m. on the leaking of classified information and the damage that it could cause. Do you think that that investigation that they're conducting on -- just Democrats is helpful?
MR. McCLELLAN: I think that it's helpful for all of us to make sure we're doing our part to allow the people overseeing the investigation to do their job. And that's what we've been doing from this White House. And I really don't have anything to add beyond that.
UPDATE: (Bob) Building is NOT being evacuated.
UPDATE: (Bob) Daily Kos has Live Open Thread.
UPDATE: (Bob) If you have surround sound, put your settings to "Hall" (or equivalent)...if you're looking for something to read, browse our backfiles on the Karl Rove Scandal.
Via DC Media Girl, Larry Johnson's prepared opening testimony:
Copy of my testimony to be presented on Friday, 22 July 2005 before a joint session of Congressional Democrats.CORRECTING THE RECORD ON VALERIE PLAME
by Larry C. Johnson I submit this statement to the Congress in an effort to correct a malicious and disingenuous smear campaign that has been executed against a friend and former colleague, Valerie (Plame) Wilson. Neither Valerie, nor her husband, Ambassador Joseph Wilson has asked me to do anything on their behalf. I am speaking up because I was raised to stop bullies. In the case of Valerie Plame she is facing a gang of bullies that is being directed by the Republican National Committee.
I entered on duty at the CIA in September 1985 as a member of the Career Trainee Program. Senator Orin Hatch had written a letter of recommendation on my behalf and I believe that helped open the doors to me at the CIA. From the first day all members of my training class were undercover. In other words, we had to lie to our family and friends about where we worked. We could only tell those who had an absolute need to know where we worked. In my case, I told my wife. Most of us were given official cover, which means that on paper we worked for some other U.S. Government Agency. People with official cover enjoy the benefits of an official passport, usually a black passport--i.e., a diplomatic passport. If we were caught overseas engaged in espionage activity the black passport was a get out of jail free card. It accords the bearer the protections of the Geneva Convention.
Valerie Plame was a classmate of mine from the day she started with the CIA. At the time I only knew her as Valerie P. Even though all of us in the training class held Top Secret Clearances, we were asked to limit our knowledge of our other classmates to the first initial of their last name. So, Larry J. knew Val P. rather than Valerie Plame. Her name did not become a part of my consciousness until her cover was betrayed by the Government officials who gave columnist Robert Novak her true name.
Although Val started off with official cover, she later joined a select group of intelligence officers a few years later when she became a NOC, i.e. a Non-Official Cover officer. That meant she agreed to operate overseas without the protection of a diplomatic passport. She was using cover, which we now know because of the leak to Robert Novak, of the consulting firm Brewster-Jennings. When she traveled overseas she did not use or have an official passport. If she had been caught engaged in espionage activities while traveling overseas without the black passport she could have been executed.
We must put to bed the lie that she was not undercover. For starters, if she had not been undercover then the CIA would not have referred the matter to the Justice Department. Some reports, such as one in the Washington Times that Valerie Plame’s supervisor at the CIA, Fred Rustman, said she told friends and family she worked at the CIA and that her cover was light. These claims are not true. Rustman, who supervised Val in one of her earliest assignments, left the CIA in 1990 and did not stay in social contact with Valerie. His knowledge of Val’s cover is dated. He does not know what she has done during the past 15 years.
Val only told those with a need to know about her status in order to safeguard her cover, not compromise it. Val has never been a flamboyant, insecure person who felt the need to tell people what her “real” job was. She was content with being known as an energy consultant married to Joe Wilson and the mother of twins. Despite the repeated claims of representatives for the Republican National Committee, the Wilson’s neighbors did not know where Valerie really worked until Novak’s op-ed appeared.
I would note that not a single member of our training class has come forward to denounce Valerie or question her bona fides. To the contrary, those we have talked to have endorsed what those of us who have left the CIA are doing to defend her reputation and honor.
As noted in the joint letter submitted to Congressional leaders earlier this week, the RNC is repeating the lie that Valerie was nothing more than a glorified desk jockey and could not possibly have any cover worth protecting. To those such as Victoria Toensing, Representative Peter King, P. J. O’Rourke, and Representative Roy Blunt I can only say one thing—you are wrong. I am stunned that some political leaders have such ignorance about a matter so basic to the national security structure of this nation.
Robert Novak’s compromise of Valerie caused even more damage. It subsequently led to scrutiny of her cover company. This not only compromised her “cover” company but potentially every individual overseas who had been in contact with that company or with her.
Another false claim is that Valerie sent her husband on the mission to Niger. According to the Senate Intelligence Committee Report issued in July 2004, it is clear that the Vice President himself requested that the CIA provide its views on a Defense Intelligence Agency report that Iraq was trying to acquire uranium from Niger. The Vice President’s request was relayed through the CIA bureaucracy to the Director of the Counter Proliferation Division at the CIA. Valerie worked for a branch in that Division.
The Senate Intelligence Report is frequently cited by Republican partisans as “proof” that Valerie sent her husband to Niger because she sent a memo describing her husband’s qualifications to the Deputy Division Chief. Several news personalities, such as Chris Matthews and Bill O’Reilly continue to repeat this nonsense as proof. What the Senate Intelligence Committee does not include in the report is the fact that Valerie’s boss had asked her to write a memo outlining her husband’s qualifications for the job. She did what any good employee does; she gave her boss what he asked for.
The decision to send Joe Wilson on the mission to Niger was made by Valerie’s bosses. She did not have the authority to sign travel vouchers, issue travel orders, or expend one dime of U.S. taxpayer dollars on her own. Yet, she has been singled out by the Republican National Committee and its partisans as a legitimate target of attack. It was Karl Rove who told Chris Matthews, “Wilson’s wife is fair game”.
What makes the unjustified and inappropriate attacks on Valerie Plame and her reputation so unfair is that there was no Administration policy position stipulating that Iraq was trying to acquire uranium in February 2002. That issue was still up in the air and, as noted by SSCI, Vice President Cheney himself asked for more information.
At the end of the day we are left with these facts. We went to war in Iraq on the premise that Saddam was reacquiring weapons of mass destruction. Joe Wilson was sent on a mission to Niger in response to a request initiated by the Vice President. Joe Wilson supplied information to the CIA that supported other reports debunking the claim that Saddam was trying to buy yellow cake uranium from Niger. When Joe went public with his information, which had been corroborated by the CIA in April 2003, the response from the White House was to call him a liar and spread the name of his wife around.
We sit here more than two years later and the storm of invective and smear against Ambassador Wilson and his wife, Valerie, continues. I voted for George Bush in November of 2000 because I wanted a President who knew what the meaning of “is” was. I was tired of political operatives who spent endless hours on cable news channels parsing words. I was promised a President who would bring a new tone and new ethical standards to Washington.
So where are we? The President has flip flopped and backed away from his promise to fire anyone at the White House implicated in a leak. We now know from press reports that at least Karl Rove and Scooter Libby are implicated in these leaks. Instead of a President concerned first and foremost with protecting this country and the intelligence officers who serve it, we are confronted with a President who is willing to sit by while political operatives savage the reputations of good Americans like Valerie and Joe Wilson. This is wrong.
Without firm action by President Bush to return to those principles he promised to follow when he came to Washington, I fear our political debate in this country will degenerate into an argument about what the meaning of “leak” is. We deserve people who work in the White House who are committed to protecting classified information, telling the truth to the American people, and living by example the idea that a country at war with Islamic extremists cannot expend its efforts attacking other American citizens who simply tried to tell the truth.
You can find more in our backfiles on the Karl Rove Scandal.
Posted at 10:00 AM in 2006 Elections - House, 2006 Elections - Senate, Activism, Democrats, Netroots, Plamegate, Republicans, Scandals | Technorati
Thursday, July 21, 2005
Scandal in the White House
Posted by Bob Brigham
A couple of updates on the Karl Rove Scandal.
* New website: www.IsItTreason.com
* Congressman Henry Waxman's first Kos Diary
* The June 2003 AP photo by Lauren Shay has been getting lots of attention in the last 24 hours, Rove's button says, "'I'm a source, not a target."
* Tune in to C-SPAN (hopefully) for coverage of the 10:00 AM, Friday, July 22, 2005 U.S. Senate Democratic Policy Committee (DPC) and the U.S. House Government Reform Committee Minority joint committee to investigate the national security implications of disclosing the identity of a covert intelligence officer:
SENATE AND HOUSE DEMOCRATIC PANELS TO HOLD OVERSIGHT HEARING ON NATIONAL SECURITY CONSEQUENCES OF DISCLOSING THE IDENTITY OF A COVERT INTELLIGENCE OFFICER(WASHINGTON, D.C.) -- The U.S. Senate Democratic Policy Committee (DPC) and the U.S. House Government Reform Committee Minority will conduct a joint hearing at 10:00 AM, Friday, July 22, in Room 138 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building in Washington, DC, to examine the national security implications of disclosing the identity of a covert intelligence officer. The hearing will be co-chaired by Senate DPC Chairman Byron Dorgan (D-ND), and U.S. Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-CA), the Ranking Member of the House Government Reform Committee.
The panel of witnesses will include former intelligence officers and analysts who will discuss the impact of such disclosures, based on decades of experience and service to our country on intelligence and national security matters.
The hearing comes only days after the witnesses who will appear at the hearing, along with other former intelligence officers and analysts, delivered to the House and Senate leadership a letter expressing deep concern over both the disclosure of the identity of a covert intelligence officer and the continuing partisan attacks on that officer. The letter said that public statements questioning her status and the significance of disclosing her identity "reveal an astonishing ignorance of the intelligence community and the role of cover."
Details on Monday's hearing follow:
WHO: Members of Congress: U.S. Senator Byron Dorgan (D-ND), U.S. Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-CA), Rep. Rush Holt (D-NJ), and other members of the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives.
Witnesses: Larry Johnson, former CIA analyst; Jim Marcinkowski, former CIA
case officer; David McMichael, former CIA case officer; Mel Goodman, former
senior CIA analyst.
WHAT: Oversight hearing on the impact of disclosing the identity of a covert intelligence officer
WHEN: 10:00 AM, Friday, July 22, 2005
WHERE: Room 138 - Dirksen Senate Office Building, United States Senate, Washington, D.C.
WHY: To examine the national security consequences of disclosing the identity of a covert intelligence officer.
And the scandal is not going away:
- We now know that Karl Rove disclosed Plame's status to at least two reporters, contradicting two year old White House denials that Karl Rove had "no involvement" in the leak. We know that White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer read a classified State Department memorandum which revealed information about Plame's CIA status in a paragraph marked '(S)' for secret, a day before Karl Rove confirmed this information to the columnist Robert Novak. We know that the Vice President's Chief of Staff, Lewis Libby, confirmed Plame's status to at least one reporter. We know that the CIA classified Valerie Plame's identity as covert and she wasn't, as Rove's defenders say, just a desk jockey at Langley. We know that President Bush promised to fire "those involved" in the leak and is now backing away from that promise.
- And we learned in today's Washington Post, that the State Department's own investigations "already had disproved the allegation that Iraq was seeking uranium from Niger" in February 2002 -- nearly a year before President Bush tried to terrify the American people by including that claim in his State of the Union speech. In the end, this matter all comes back to Iraq. The White House got into this trouble through its concerted and coordinated effort to smear anyone questioning its erroneous intelligence about WMD in Iraq [USA Today 7/24/03]. Continuing to stonewall and smear opponents will not get them out of it.
- Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald will determine if the White House officials' leaks violated the law. But it is undeniable that the White House has violated the public's trust. President Bush should put an end to the stonewalling and explain to the American people the facts about his White House's role in this grave matter.
Posted at 07:05 PM in Plamegate, Republicans, Scandals | Technorati
Wednesday, July 20, 2005
Stop the Cover-up
Posted by Bob Brigham
The DSCC has a new website: www.StopTheCoverup.com:
The media is swarming with reports that Karl Rove may have illegally leaked the identity of an undercover CIA agent to a reporter, but you wouldn't know it by listening to the "no comments" coming out of the White House.Congressional Republicans, instead of tending to the people's business, have been distracted by the need to go into "defense mode." Instead of wasting time defending Karl Rove, Congressional Republicans ought to be standing up for what's right and demanding answers.
George Bush promised to fire anyone in his administration responsible for the leak. Now that new information suggests Rove had something to do with it, the White House has refused to answer any questions about the case. No one will even say whether the president is sticking to his promise to fire those responsible.
This is the worst kind of cover-up. It's up to us to show George Bush that the American people want answers. Sign the new DSCC petition and tell the White House to stop the cover-up today.
I don't normally sign petitions, but I signed this one because the cover-up needs to stop. Liberal Oasis reminds us that, It has been 740 days since Karl Rove violated his obligations under Standard Form 312 without the White House taking “corrective action.”.
740 days of covering up for the partisan hacks in the Bush White House.
Posted at 10:45 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Plamegate, Republicans, Scandals | Technorati
Karl Rove's Last Stand
Posted by Bob BrighamBush White House #2 Man and Senior Advisor to the President Karl Rove is in a pile of shit. It is up to his second chin.
Billmon's Rove's Last Stand -- an instant legend.
Fitzgerald is honing in and Rove's days are limited. Scott McClellan is now completely worthless as a Press Secretary -- he was busted lying to the American press to cover-up the sins of Karl Rove. Scooter Libby is also in trouble, along with Ken Mehlman and Ari Fleisher.
So when Bush nominates a partisan hack to distract attention I'm not going to let the arrogance of the Washington Republicans distract me from the White House Scandal.
John Roberts is nothing but a partisan hack, he won the spot for his partisanship, not his judicial record. I mean, the guy is a fucking lobbyist. And the Radical Right will spend millions on lobbyists to try to get a lobbyist on the bench.
But back to the Karl Rove scandal...
Play the West Wing game, the entire senior staff may have liability on this scandal:
| POSITION | CAST | THE WEST WING | SUSPECTS | BUSH WHITE HOUSE |
| Chief of Staff |  | Leo McGarry |  | Andy Card |
| Deputy Chief of Staff |  | Josh Lyman |  | Karl Rove |
| Communications Director |  | Toby Ziegler |  | Dan Bartlett |
| Press Secretary |  | C.J. Cregg |  | Ari Fleisher Scott McClellan |
| VP Chief of Staff |  | Will Bailey |  | Lewis "Scooter" Libby |
Play along. If Will Bailey and Josh Lyman were busted leaking the identity of an undercover CIA operative to Danny, who else would be involved. Let's say C.J. was caught on tape lying about Lyman. Who else? My guess is another Bush partisan hack.
Either Rove lied to the President or Bush lied to the American People.
What did the President know and when did he know it?
Why hasn't the White House followed protocol and initiated investigation into Rove's violation of his nondisclosure agreement.
Did Rove lie and committ perjury under oath?
Fire Karl Rove.
Posted at 12:01 AM in Plamegate, Republicans, Scandals, Supreme Court | Comments (2) | Technorati
Monday, July 18, 2005
Bush's Watergate: Karl Rove Scandal
Posted by Bob BrighamWatergate scandal's John Dean (10-3-2003):
I thought I had seen political dirty tricks as foul as they could get, but I was wrong. In blowing the cover of CIA agent Valerie Plame to take political revenge on her husband, Ambassador Joseph Wilson, for telling the truth, Bush's people have out-Nixoned Nixon's people. And my former colleagues were not amateurs by any means.
Then Republican National Committee Chair Ed Gillipsie:
Hardball (MSNBC - 9/30/03):CHRIS MATTHEWS: Don't you think it's more serious than Watergate, when you think about it?
RNC CHAIRMAN ED GILLESPIE: I think if the allegation is true, to reveal the identity of an undercover CIA operative -- it's abhorrent, and it should be a crime, and it is a crime.
CHRIS MATTHEWS: It'd be worse than Watergate, wouldn't it?
GILLESPIE: It's -- Yeah, I suppose in terms of the real world implications of it. It's not just politics. [via mediawhores]
Yeah, this is worse than Watergate. But it is also very similiar...check out the Ron Ziegler video Crooks and Liars dug up.
Posted at 06:22 PM in Plamegate, Republicans | Technorati
GOP Smear Machine History
Posted by Bob BrighamWatching the White House Scandal unfold, it has become clear that the GOP is smearing anyone and everyone not hyping RNC talking points. This isn't anything new, in fact, this is part of a very clear pattern.
A DNC press release:
THE REPUBLICAN SMEAR MACHINE CONSTANTLY IN MOTIONRepublicans follow a tried and true tactic of attacking, smearing, and sliming anyone who might get in their way or threaten their political survival. Their ongoing effort to discredit Joe Wilson and their destruction of his wife's career is just the latest in a long line of questionable tactics that the Bush Administration, Karl Rove, and Ken Mehlman consistently use to protect themselves and ensure their continued political power.
ARMY CHIEF OF STAFF PUNISHED FOR TROOP LEVEL ASSESSMENTShinseki Punished For Honest Assessment Of Troop Levels Needed In Iraq; Retribution Intimidated Commanders. Then Army Chief of Staff Gen. Eric Shinseki told Congress in 2003 that the occupation of Iraq would require 'several hundred thousand' troops. Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz called that estimate 'wildly off the mark.' The Pentagon leaked the name of Shinseki's replacement months before his scheduled retirement, rendering him a lame duck. The Washington Times reported that some officers said privately that the rebuke intimidated commanders in Iraq. [UPI, 4/12/04; Washington Times, 4/10/04]
FORMER COUNTER-TERRORISM CHIEF SMEARED
FOR CRITICISMSRichard Clarke Smeared After Talking About White House Lackadaisical Attitude Towards Al-Qaeda. The Bush White House worked hard to discredit its counterterrorism czar, Richard Clarke, after he wrote a book suggesting the President let down his guard on al-Qaeda because of an obsession with Iraq. After Clarke testified to White House inadequacies, the White House assailed Clarke's motives. "In an interview evening, Dan Bartlett, the White House communications director, dismissed Mr. Clarke's charges as 'politically motivated,' 'reckless' and 'baseless.'" [ New York Times, 3/22/04; AP, 11/16/04]
TREASURY SECRETARY FIRED FOR OPPOSITION TO TAX CUTS
- White House Tried To Paint Picture of Disgruntled Former Employee. After claiming that Clarke is linked to Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry, Bush spokesman Scott McClellan said "Mr. Clarke has been out there talking about what title he had...He wanted to be the deputy secretary of the Homeland Security Department after it was created. The fact of the matter is, just a few months after that, he left the Administration. He did not get that position. Someone else was appointed to it." [White House Briefing, 3/22/04]
- Cheney Claimed That Counterterrorism Chief Was Not "In the Loop." Cheney: "[Clarke] wasn't in the loop, frankly, on a lot of this stuff...It was as though he clearly missed a lot of what was going on." [Cheney to Rush Limbaugh, 3/22/04]
- White House Asked the CIA to Declassify Select Material to Highlight "Contradictions." In response to Richard Clarke's call on "Meet the Press" for "all" of his testimony to be classified, NBC's Andrea Mitchell reported, "NBC News has learned, at the request of the White House, the CIA is already going through Clarke's testimony to Congress to see what could be declassified, supposedly to show contradictions. All part of an unrelenting White House counteroffensive." [NBC Nightly News, 3/29/04]
- Frist Called Clarke Apology to 9-11 Families Arrogant and Manipulative. Sen. Bill Frist (R-TN) said "In his appearance before the 9/11 commission, Mr. Clarke's theatrical apology on behalf of the nation was not his right, his privilege or his responsibility. In my view it was not an act of humility, but an act of supreme arrogance and manipulation." [Frist Statement, 3/26/04]
O'Neill Fired For Expressing Misgivings Over Bush's Additional Tax Cuts. Paul O'Neill, his first treasury secretary, was fired after expressing misgivings about the need for additional tax cuts proposed by the president. [AP, 11/16/04]
Administration Launched Investigation After O'Neill Wrote A Book. Defense Secretary Rumsfeld called O'Neill twice after hearing he was writing a book on the Bush Administration. Rumsfeld called it a "sour grapes" book. Soon after the book was published the Treasury department launched an investigation into whether O'Neill shared secret documents with 60 Minutes. Ron Suskind, the author of the book, who was given access by Mr. O'Neill to 19,000 documents that were turned over to him by the department after his departure, said the document that was shown on "60 Minutes" was the cover sheet for a February 2001 briefing paper on planning for a post-war Iraq. But he said Mr. O'Neill was not provided with the briefing paper itself. [NYTimes, 1/13/04; NYTimes, 1/14/04]
ECONOMIC ADVISER FORCED TO RESIGNLindsey Forced to Resign After Citing Large Cost of Iraq War. White House economic adviser Larry Lindsey annoyed the White House in September 2002 when he suggested that war with Iraq would cost between $100 billion and $200 billion, an estimate Administration officials insisted was too high. In December 2002, the White House requested Lindsey resign from his post. "While I think this economic team has clearly had problems working together, I think the criticisms of Larry Lindsey have often been inconsistent and unfair for someone who was loyally carrying out the president's agenda, however much I disagreed with it," said Gene Sperling, Mr. Lindsey's immediate predecessor under Mr. Clinton. [NYTimes, 12/8/02; Houston Chronicle, 12/7/02]
ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS DIRECTOR FIRED FOR
BUDGET CRITICISMArmy Corps Director Fired For Comments On Bush Budget. "Mike Parker, director of the Army Corps of Engineers and a former Republican congressman from Mississippi, testified on the Hill that Bush budget cuts would have a 'negative impact' on the Corps and that he had no 'warm and fuzzy' feelings toward the Administration. A furious (Office of Management and Budget Director Mitchell) Daniels sent a transcript of Parker's comments to the White House. Soon after, he was given 30 minutes to resign or be fired." [ Christian Science Monitor, 12/17/02; USA Today, 3/14/02]
PARK POLICE CHIEF FIRED FOR CRITICM OF BUSH POLICYPark Police Chief Fired For Comments On Bush Policy. U.S. Park Police Chief Teresa Chambers was suspended from her job when she said her "understaffed department had to curtail critical patrols in Park Service jurisdictions beyond the Mall, such as major parkways and crime-ridden U.S. parkland in neighborhoods, because of Interior Department orders requiring more officers to guard downtown national shrines... For responding with the truth to questions from The Washington Post and other news outlets about staffing in her department, U.S. Park Police Chief Teresa Chambers has been placed on leave and notified that superiors in the National Park Service and Interior want her fired." [Washington Post, Editorial, 12/24/03]
Department of Interior Threatened Lawsuit Against Chambers; Turns Down Gag Deal. The Department of Interior's Park Service announced that it wanted to fire Chambers in December and was considering pressing charges related to release of sensitive information, lobbying, insubordination and breaking the chain of command. Chambers rejected an offer from the National Park Service that would have resulted in all charges against her being dropped in exchange for her agreeing to receive permission before speaking to Congress or the media. [Greenwire, 1/21/04]
REPORTER SMEARED FOR REPORTING ON TROOP MORALEABC News Reporter Smeared By Bush Administration For Documenting Low Troop Morale. After ABC News reporter Jeffrey Kofman did a story on "World News Tonight" detailing low morale among the troops serving in Iraq, the Bush Administration sought to discredit the messenger rather than refute the message. The internet's Drudge Report published a headline that read: "ABC News correspondent who filed troop complaints story is openly gay, Canadian." Site publisher Matt Drudge later told the Washington Post that "someone in the White House communications shop tipped me" to the ABC correspondent's piece and the Advocate profile. [Chicago Tribune, 7/23/03; Washington Post, 7/18/03]
INS AGENTS DEMOTED FOR POINTING OUT LAX SECURITYINS Agents Demoted for Discussing Lax Security On Canadian Border. Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) Agents Mark Hall and Robert Linderman were demoted from their positions after they told reporters that United States security at Canadian borders was lax. The demotions were later over-ruled by INS Commissioner James W. Ziglar after a report by the INS Office of Special Council found that Hall and Linderman were not aware of rules against INS agents speaking with the media. [Washington Post, 4/6/02]
Posted at 04:37 PM in Plamegate, Republicans, Scandals | Technorati
Karl Rove Scandal Mementos
Posted by Bob Brigham
Nothing like a t-shirt vendor to compliment the festival-like atmosphere as we watch the Bush Administration attempt to cover-up treason. Either Karl Rove lied and should be fired or Bush lied to us all. So enjoy the entertainment and get your Karl Rove Scandal T-Shirt.
Posted at 12:55 PM in Activism, General, Plamegate, Republicans, Scandals | Technorati
Sunday, July 17, 2005
Howard Dean: American People "Deserve Answers"
Posted by Bob BrighamThe DNC issued a great press release on the abuse of power scandal. I've included the whole thing postjump.
DEAN: AMERICAN PEOPLE “DESERVE ANSWERS”"Despite his best efforts to cloud the facts, not even Ken Mehlman and the Republican spin machine can change the fact that the Bush Administration's credibility problem is only getting worse. The list of unanswered questions surrounding the Rove scandal and its impact on our national security continue to grow," said DNC Chairman Howard Dean. "The American people deserve answers to these questions. And they deserve to know whether the President is a man of his word. Mr. President, keep your word."
See below for a new document from DNC Research:
WHAT DID ROVE KNOW AND WHEN DID HE KNOW IT?
THE UNANSWERED QUESTIONS ABOUT THE PLAME LEAKUntil recently, Karl Rove had denied even knowing Valerie Plame’s name. Then, after the release of emails from Time magazine reporter Matt Cooper revealing the name of the White House source, Rove’s lawyer confirmed that Rove did speak with reporters about the case. Now, previously secret Time emails demonstrate that Rove did indeed leak to Cooper information about “Wilson’s wife” -- Valerie Plame, and lawyers revealed that Rove confirmed Valerie Plame’s identity for Bob Novak. That means that Karl Rove spoke with both of the journalists who published original accounts about Plame, and places him squarely in the center of this scandal.
“If left unpunished, this cowardly act will not only hinder our efforts to recruit qualified individuals into the clandestine service, but it will have a far-reaching, deleterious effect on our ability to recruit foreign intelligence assets overseas.”
— Larry Johnson, former CIA Analyst [Senate Democratic Policy Committee Hearing, 10/24/03]
DID ROVE DELIBERATELY MISLEAD?
McClellan Said Rove Never Told Reporters that Plame Worked for CIA. White House Press Secretary Scott McCllelan was asked whether Karl Rove, Elliot Abrams or Lewis Libby told any reporter that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA?” McClellan responded by denying that Rove or the others had leaked any classified information. “Those individuals — I talked — I spoke with those individuals, as I pointed out, and those individuals assured me they were not involved in this. And that’s where it stands.” [WH Briefing, 10/10/03]
THE NEXT LOGICAL QUESTION:
We know Rove’s initial public statements and his statements to Scott McClellan were false. And we know that after testifying once in front of the grand jury, they called him back. Did he knowingly lie to Scott McClellan? Did McClellan knowingly mislead the press? Did Rove change his answers to the grand jury? Did Rove commit perjury in front of the grand jury? Regardless of where Rove heard about Plame, wasn’t it a violation of national security policy for him to confirm her identity to Novak?
ROVE REVEALED “WILSON’S WIFE” TO COOPER,
CONFIRMED HER IDENTITY FOR NOVAKRove Told Cooper That It Was “Wilson’s Wife” Who Worked on WMDs for the CIA. Rove had a conversation with Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper on July 11, 2003. Cooper wrote an email about the conversation to his Time bureau chief, describing how Rove gave him a “big warning” that Wilson’s assertions might not be entirely accurate and that it was not the director of the CIA or the vice president who sent Wilson on his trip. Rather, “it was, KR said, wilson’s wife, who apparently works at the agency on wmd who authorized the trip.” Wilson’s wife is Valerie Plame, then an undercover agent working as an analyst in the CIA’s Directorate of Operations counterproliferation division. [Washington Post, 7/11/05; Newsweek, 7/18/05]
Rove Confirmed Plame’s Identity for Bob Novak. Rove indirectly confirmed the CIA affiliation of Joe Wilson’s wife for Robert Novak the week before he named her and revealed her position. “Novak said he had learned that Wilson's wife worked for the CIA…"I heard that, too," Rove replied.” [Washington Post, 7/15/05]
THE NEXT LOGICAL QUESTION:
Now that we know that Rove told Cooper about “Wilson’s wife,” who told Rove? Who was Bob Novak’s original source? If Rove really didn’t have first-hand knowledge of Plame’s work as an operative, why did he lead Matt Cooper to believe he did? Why did Novak use the name Valerie Plame when Cooper used the name Valerie Wilson?
WHO ELSE LEAKED BESIDES KARL ROVE?
Rove Gave Cooper Permission to Testify—Allowing Cooper to Avoid Jail Time—But Miller Chose to Go to Jail. Rove’s lawyer confirmed that Rove was the secret source who, at the request of both Cooper’s lawyer and the prosecutor, gave Cooper permission to testify. Cooper avoided jail time last week by agreeing to testify before the grand jury about conversations with his sources, while New York Times reporter Judith Miller was jailed for refusing to discuss her confidential sources. [Washington Post, 7/11/05; Newsweek, 7/18/05]
THE NEXT LOGICAL QUESTION:
Rove has “released” Cooper from confidentiality. If Rove were Miller’s source, wouldn’t he do the same for her? So who was Miller talking to? If everyone is cooperating with this investigation, why hasn’t Miller’s source released her from her promise of confidentiality? If everyone is cooperating with investigators, why hasn’t Bush fired those that have refused to sign waivers of confidentiality?
ROVE HAD PREVIOUSLY DENIED HIS INVOLVEMENT—WHY?
Rove Had Previously Denied Any Involvement: In August 2004, Rove Claimed He Did Not Know Who Plame Was. In August of 2004, facing questions of his role in the Plame leak scandal, Rove denied his involvement, saying that he did not even know who Plame was at the time of the leak. “I didn’t know her name and didn’t leak her name.” [CNN, 7/4/05]
Rove Spoke With Novak Five Days Before Plame’s Name Became Public. Novak telephoned Rove in the week before the publication of the July 2003 column. Rove confirmed Plame’s identity for Novak, saying that he too had heard that she was a CIA operative. [Washington Post, 7/15/05]
Rove Spoke to Cooper Three Days Before Plame’s Name Became Public. To be considered a violation of the law, a disclosure by a government official must have been deliberate, the discloser must have known that the CIA officer was a covert agent, and he or she must have known that the government was actively concealing the covert agent’s identity. Although Cooper’s email does not prove that Rove knew Plame was a covert operative, “… it is significant that Rove was speaking to Cooper before Novak’s column appeared; in other words, [three days] before Plame’s identity had been published.” [Washington Post, 7/11/05; Newsweek, 7/18/05]
In Rove’s Defense, His Lawyer Claims that Rove Did Not Identify Plame by Name—But Who Else Could “Wilson’s Wife” Be? According to the Washington Post, “Rove’s lawyer said yesterday that his client did not identify her by name.” Yet, the substance of the email from Cooper to Time editors states that it was “Wilson’s wife.” Since there is as yet no evidence that Wilson was a bigamist, just who else “Wilson’s wife” could be besides Plame is unclear. [Washington Post, 7/11/05]
THE NEXT LOGICAL QUESTION:
If Rove is innocent, then why would he claim that he didn’t know who Plame was? Why was he so careful, saying that “I didn’t know her name and didn’t leak her name”? Even though Cooper’s email does not indicate that Rove knew what Plame’s job was, couldn’t this fact simply mean that Rove did not reveal any more than he needed to Cooper?
Get the latest scandal news.
Posted at 07:35 PM in DNC Chair, Democrats, General, Plamegate, Republicans, Scandals | Technorati
Thursday, July 14, 2005
Harry Reid on Rove Scandal: Cover-Up...Abuse of Power
Posted by Bob BrighamAP:
Democrats stirred the pot Thursday in the case of powerful presidential aide Karl Rove and the news leak that unmasked a CIA agent. They triggered a partisan clash in the Senate, sought a House investigation and brought the husband of the undercover operative to the Capitol, where he accused the White House of a "smear campaign." [...]Speaking in favor of his legislation to strip Rove of his clearance for classified information, Reid said the president should already have done so. Instead, Reid said, the administration has attacked its critics. "This is what is known as a cover-up. This is an abuse of power," Reid said.
Indeed.
But here's the best quote:
"I made my bones confronting Saddam Hussein. ... Karl Rove made his bones by dirty political tricks," said Joseph Wilson, who was the top U.S. diplomat in Iraq during the first Persian Gulf War.At a news conference hosted by Sen. Charles Schumer (news, bio, voting record), a New York Democrat who heads his party's Senate campaign organization, Wilson said he has been targeted by a "smear campaign launched from the West Wing of the White House."
A smear campaign against somebody who disagrees with the Bush White House?
Senate Republicans countered with legislation — swiftly sidetracked — put together largely to embarrass Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid and his deputy. [...]In rebuttal, the Republican National Committee distributed a document entitled "Joe Wilson's Top Ten Worst Inaccuracies and Misstatements."
Senate Democrats attempt to defend National Security against a White House leaker and the GOP tries to embarrass Democrats. Joe Wilson, who like his wife has dedicated his entire career to America, is smeared as a liar by the RNC.
The GOP is beyond belief in their efforts to cover-up for a traitor.
Posted at 11:01 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Plamegate, Republicans, Scandals | Technorati
Will Patrick Fitzgerald Hear Karl Rove
Posted by Bob BrighamHere is what I think the Rove thing will come down to: Is Patrick Fitzgerald, U.S. Attorney for northern Illinois, the special prosecutor investigating the Plame leak, able to withstand the kind of intense pressure and character assassination that will be applied to him?If Karl Rove is known for anything, it is what happens to people who go against him. Remember the Rove quote, "We will fuck him. Do you hear me? We will fuck him. We will ruin him. Like no one has ever fucked him!"
Can Fitzgerald hear Rove? Rove's trying, turn on any tv and watch the Republican lies.
Posted at 10:58 PM in Plamegate, Republicans, Scandals | Technorati
Convention Wisdom: Bush Fucked Up
Posted by Bob BrighamThere is a confluence of events right now with the bad news on the ground in Iraq, the Downing Street memos, the London bombings and Rovegate flaring up that are beginning to filter into the body politic. A new conventional wisdom is being written. I think that people are putting these things together which is why you are seeing the preciputous dip in the president's approval ratings. It's not that people know, or even want to know, the details. Only junkies like me (and you) get this into it. But the ground has shifted and people are understanding that something went terribly wrong.The president's right hand man exposing a covert CIA agent for political puposes perfectly symbolizes the entire fetid mess.
The backlash is building. Rove failed Bush. They wanted that war so bad they would do anything for the adventure. But they lied and got caught, people have heard about the Downing Street Memos and the Rove Scandal. People get it, Bush fucked up. He forced a war for no reason and is now losing.
Posted at 10:45 PM in Plamegate, Republicans, Scandals | Technorati
Rove Scandal: W Ain't No H.W.
Posted by Bob BrighamThere was a time when self-respecting Republicans didn't take shit from anybody – least of not Karl Rove. President George H.W. Bush fired Karl Rove for leaking (to Bob Novak).
President George W. Bush is covering for Karl Rove's leaks – and this time the leaks the leaks are worse. (link via Dave after heard on Randi.) Wayne Madsen Report:
Another source reported that at least one Brewster Jennings NOC operating in a hostile intelligence environment was executed by counter-intelligence agents as a result of the White House disclosure.
more…
Other B&JA assets were forced to abandon their ongoing operations to identify networks involved in weapons of mass destruction proliferation. The CIA has been working on a damage assessment report on the Plame/B&JA disclosures. If no indictments of White House officials result from the Fitzgerald investigation, look for parts of that highly classified report to be leaked and then look for more imprisonments of journalists who refuse to divulge the source(s) of those leaks. Word from intelligence sources is that the damage assessment report is "devastating."
The L.A. Times remembers how Daddy did it:
During George H.W. Bush’s second presidential campaign, Rove was fired from the campaign team because of suspicions that he had leaked information to columnist Robert Novak — the same columnist who first reported Plame’s CIA role in 2003, citing anonymous administration sources.
Rove own's Bush's ass. Rove will go when W. goes. Fire Karl Rove!
Posted at 10:39 PM in Plamegate, Republicans, Scandals | Technorati
Bush Botching to Blame for Bombing???
Posted by Bob BrighamABC News just reported that the British authorities say they have evidence that the London attacks last week were an operation planned by Al Qaeda for the last two years. This was an operation the Brits thought they caught and stopped in time, but they were wrong. The piece of the puzzle ABC missed is that this is an operation the Bush administration helped botch last year.1. The London bombers, per ABC, are connected to an Al Qaeda plot planned two years ago in Lahore, Pakistan.
2. Pakistani authorities recovered the laptop of a captured Al Qaeda leader, Mohammed Naeem Noor Khan, on July 13, 2004. On that laptop, they found plans for a coordinated series of attacks on the London subway. According to an expert interviewed by ABC, "there is absolutely no doubt that Khan was part of a worldwide Al Qaeda operation, not just in the United States but also in Great Britain and throughout the west."
3. ABC reports that names in the computer matched a suspected cell of Britain's of Pakistani decent, many of who lived near the town of Luton, England. According to ABC, authorities thought they had stopped the subway plot with the arrest of more than a dozen people last year. Obviously, they hadn't.
4. Those arrests were the arrests that the Bush administration botched by announcing a heightened security alert the week of the Democratic Convention. Because the US let the cat out of the bag, the media got a hold of Khan's name, his Al Qaeda contacts found out he was co-opted, and they fled. The Brits had to have a high speed chase to catch some of them as they fled, and, according to press reports, the Brits and Pakistanis both fear that some slipped away.
Again, these were guys involved with the plot to blow up the London subway last week. Some may have escaped because of Bush administration negligence.
I'm sure John Aravosis will have more...
Posted at 08:15 PM in International, Republicans, Scandals | Technorati
NJ-GOV: Lautenberg Says: Give Back the Blood Money
Posted by Bob BrighamAs was to be expected, the Karl Rove Scandal is now turning into an elections issue.
Check out the email Senator Frank Lautenberg sent today:
Last month, Doug Forrester and the New Jersey Republican Party held a fundraiser with Karl Rove as the star attraction. We don't know what Rove said, because the event was closed to the press and public. But we can guess, because the day after the Forrester fundraiser Karl Rove tore into progressives, saying "liberals saw the savagery of the 9-11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers." What did Forrester have to say about this baseless partisan attack? Nothing.Now according to his own lawyer, Karl Rove is involved in leaking the identity of a CIA undercover agent working to prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Yet Forrester is still silent, apparently believing that it's more important to protect the patronage of the national Republican Party leadership than the safety of our country.
Sign the petition demanding Forrester repudiate Karl Rove's despicable behavior and return the blood money Karl Rove raised at the Forrester fundraiser:
http://www.corzineforgovernor.com/roveDamaging national security for partisan revenge threatens the safety of all Americans. And having it come from inside the White House threatens the stability of our political system. Early last week, I called for Karl Rove's security clearance to be revoked. But we must ask for more than this. We must ensure that anyone who profits politically by the divisive and possibly illegal activity of high level operatives like Karl Rove be held to account for their implicit endorsement of such behavior. Add your voice to those demanding Forrester repudiate Rove's support: http://www.corzineforgovernor.com/rove
It's not yet known how much damage Karl Rove has done to this country by compromising CIA assets. I hope and pray that this White House recommits itself to protecting Americans instead of playing partisan games.
Until then, we can only ask Republicans and Democrats of good conscience to demand that this behavior stop, and that those who compromise national security be brought to justice.
Thanks for your help, and if you have a moment, please forward this petition to your friends and family.
Best,
Senator Frank Lautenberg
Posted at 06:42 PM in 2005 Elections, New Jersey, Plamegate, Republicans, Scandals | Technorati
Monday, July 11, 2005
Scott McClellan on Karl Rove Scandal
Posted by Bob BrighamOne thing we all know, is that the White House Press Secretary knows what he is going to say before the question is asked. Senior White House officials work together to figure out these answers, so that they can be fine-tuned before the cameras are on. So when Scott McClellan misleads the press corps about Karl Rove, it isn't just McClellan, but probably points towards a concerted effort at a cover up.
And it is clear that McClellan repeated mislead the press about Rove's involvement in the Plame outing scandal. Which means this isn't just a case of the Deputy White House Chief of Staff outing an undercover CIA agent (treason), but also a case of the Republican White House working to cover-up the treason.
If there are any doubts, the historical record should put those to rest. Billmon stayed up late researching, I've included the entire results in the extended entry to make it easier for reporters researching the scandal to find:
Vouching for Karl---
QUESTION: The Robert Novak column last week . . . has now given rise to accusations that the administration deliberatively blew the cover of an undercover CIA operative, and in so doing, violated a federal law that prohibits revealing the identity of undercover CIA operatives. Can you respond to that?McCLELLAN: Thank you for bringing that up. That is not the way this President or this White House operates. And there is absolutely no information that has come to my attention or that I have seen that suggests that there is any truth to that suggestion. And, certainly, no one in this White House would have given authority to take such a step.
Scott McClellan
Press Briefing
July 22, 2003
---QUESTION: Scott, has there ever been an attempt or effort on the part of anyone here at the White House to discredit the reputations or reporting of former Ambassador Joe Wilson, his wife, or ABC correspondent Jeffrey Kofman?McCLELLAN: John, I think I answered that yesterday. That is not the way that this White House operates. That's not the way the President operates . . . No one would be authorized to do that within this White House. That is simply not the way we operate, and that's simply not the way the President operates.QUESTION: In all of those cases?McCLELLAN: Well, go down -- which two?QUESTION: Joe Wilson and his wife?McCLELLAN: No. Scott McClellan---
Press Briefing
July 23, 2003QUESTION: Wilson now believes that the person who did this was Karl Rove . . . Did Karl Rove tell that . . . McCLELLAN: I haven't heard that. That's just totally ridiculous. But we've already addressed this issue. If I could find out who anonymous people were, I would. I just said, it's totally ridiculous.QUESTION: But did Karl Rove do it?McCLELLAN: I said, it's totally ridiculous. Scott McClellan---
Press Briefing
September 16, 2003This morning, ABC News producer Andrea Owen happened to find herself near Karl Rove (who was walking to his car), and an ABC camera.Owen: "Did you have any knowledge or did you leak the name of the CIA agent to the press?"Rove: "No."At which point, Mr. Rove shut his car door as Ms. Owen asked, "What is your response to the fact that Justice is looking into the matter?" ABC News---
The Note
September 29, 2003
(courtesy of Think Progress)QUESTION: Has the President either asked Karl Rove to assure him that he had nothing to do with this; or did Karl Rove go to the President to assure him that he . . .McCLELLAN: I don't think he needs that. I think I've spoken clearly to this publicly . . . I've just said there's no truth to it.QUESTION: Yes, but I'm just wondering if there was a conversation between Karl Rove and the President, or if he just talked to you, and you're here at this . . .McCLELLAN: He wasn't involved. The President knows he wasn't involved.QUESTION: How does he know that?McCLELLAN: The President knows. Scott McClellan---
Press Gaggle
September 29, 2003QUESTION: Weeks ago, when you were first asked whether Mr. Rove had the conversation with Robert Novak that produced the column, you dismissed it as ridiculous. And I wanted just to make sure, at that time, had you talked to Karl?McCLELLAN: I've made it very clear, from the beginning, that it is totally ridiculous. I've known Karl for a long time, and I didn't even need to go ask Karl, because I know the kind of person that he is, and he is someone that is committed to the highest standards of conduct.QUESTION: Can you say for the record whether Mr. Rove possessed the information about Mr. Wilson's wife, but merely did not talk to anybody about it?McCLELLAN: I don't know whether or not -- I mean, I'm sure he probably saw the same media reports everybody else in this room has.QUESTION: When you talked to Mr. Rove, did you discuss, did you ever have this information?McCLELLAN: We're going down a lot of different roads here. I've made it very clear that he was not involved, that there's no truth to the suggestion that he was. Scott McClellan---
Press Briefing
September 29, 2003QUESTION: Yesterday we were told that Karl Rove had no role in it. . .THE PRESIDENT: Yes.QUESTION: Have you talked to Karl and do you have confidence in him . . . THE PRESIDENT: Listen, I know of nobody -- I don't know of anybody in my administration who leaked classified information. If somebody did leak classified information, I'd like to know it, and we'll take the appropriate action. George W. Bush---
Remarks to Reporters
September 30, 2003McCLELLAN: Let me make it very clear. As I said previously, he [Karl Rove] was not involved, and that allegation is not true in terms of leaking classified information, nor would he condone it.QUESTION: He does not condone people pointing reporters toward classified information that's been released; he would not condone that either? Is that what you're saying?McCLELLAN: The President doesn't condone the activity that you're suggesting, absolutely he does not. Scott McClellan---
Press Briefing
October 1, 2003QUESTION: Scott, you have said that you, personally, went to Scooter Libby, Karl Rove and Elliot Abrams to ask them if they were the leakers . . . Why did you do that, and can you describe the conversations you had with them?McCLELLAN: They're good individuals, they're important members of our White House team, and that's why I spoke with them, so that I could come back to you and say that they were not involved. I had no doubt of that in the beginning, but I like to check my information to make sure it's accurate before I report back to you, and that's exactly what I did.QUESTION: So you're saying -- you're saying categorically those three individuals were not the leakers or did not authorize the leaks; is that what you're saying?McCLELLAN: That's correct. Scott McClellan---
Press Briefing
October 7, 2003QUESTION: Scott, earlier this week you told us that neither Karl Rove, Elliot Abrams nor Lewis Libby disclosed any classified information with regard to the leak. I wondered if you could tell us more specifically whether any of them told any reporter that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA?McCLELLAN: I spoke with those individuals, as I pointed out, and those individuals assured me they were not involved in this. And that's where it stands.QUESTION: So none of them told any reporter that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA?McCLELLAN: They assured me that they were not involved in this. Scott McClellan---
Press Briefing
October 10, 2003Rove also adamantly insisted to the FBI that he was not the administration official who leaked the information that Plame was a covert CIA operative to conservative columnist Robert Novak last July. Rather, Rove insisted, he had only circulated information about Plame after it had appeared in Novak's column. The American Prospect---
Plugging Leaks
March 8, 2004I didn't know her name. I didn't leak her name. Karl Rove---
CNN Interview
August 31, 2004"Karl did nothing wrong. Karl didn't disclose Valerie Plame's identity to Mr. Cooper or anybody else . . . Who outed this woman? . . . It wasn't Karl." Luskin said Rove "certainly did not disclose to Matt Cooper or anybody else any confidential information."Rove attorney Robert Luskin---
CNN Interview
July 4, 2005Luskin confirmed that Rove and Cooper had spoken prior to the publication of the original Time article, but said that Rove “did not tell any reporter that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA” nor did he “knowingly disclose classified information.” Newsweek---
Turning Up the Heat
July 6, 2005Rove told Cooper that Wilson's trip had not been authorized by "DCIA"—CIA Director George Tenet—or Vice President Dick Cheney. Rather, "it was, KR said, wilson's wife, who apparently works at the agency on wmd [weapons of mass destruction] issues who authorized the trip." Wilson's wife is Plame, then an undercover agent working as an analyst in the CIA's Directorate of Operations counterproliferation division . . . Rove was speaking to Cooper before Novak's column appeared; in other words, before Plame's identity had been published. Newsweek
Matt Cooper's Source
July 10, 2005
As Atrios says:
Free research for the taking, reporters.
Posted at 01:38 PM in Plamegate, Republicans, Scandals | Comments (1) | Technorati
MoveOn PAC: Rove Should Resign
Posted by Bob BrighamThe Karl Rove Treasongate scandal is really taking off. From a MoveOn PAC press release:
MoveOn PAC Calls for Rove’s Resignation
Questions President’s Failure to ActMichael Isikoff reports in the July 18 issue of Newsweek that White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove revealed to Time Magazine reporter Matt Cooper that Valerie Plame, the wife of Ambassador Joe Wilson, worked for the CIA.
Statement by Tom Matzzie, Washington Director, MoveOn PAC:
“This report makes two things clear:First, in revealing the identity of a covert CIA agent, Rove either knowingly broke the law, or committed an act of gross negligence. In either case he should resign or the President should fire him.
Second, the President failed to act upon learning that his chief political adviser blew the cover of a CIA agent.These facts raise several questions to which the President owes the American people answers: What did he know? When did he know it? And why did he fail to act?
Clearly Rove sought to retaliate against Plame’s husband, Ambassador Joe Wilson, for correctly refuting Administration claims that Saddam Hussein sought to acquire ‘yellowcake’ uranium in Africa, part of the case the President was attempting to make for invading Iraq. Clearly, Rove put the protection of President Bush's political agenda ahead of national security when he disclosed Plame’s identity. He jeopardized the safety of an under cover intelligence agent who was working to stop the spread of nuclear weapons. Clearly Rove’s and the President's willingness to remain silent about this until the very last minute caused significant pain and anguish to two journalists, one of whom is now in jail, for refusing to reveal Rove as their source.”
Posted at 11:06 AM in Plamegate, Republicans, Scandals | Technorati
Friday, July 08, 2005
FL-Gov: Bush Lies (Jeb)
Posted by Bob BrighamYou might remember the leading role Jeb Bush played during the Schiavo revival. If you do remember, you'll recall Jeb was a real asshole. Now he's flipped, via the Washington Post:
Florida's state attorney said there was no evidence Terri Schiavo's collapse 15 years ago involved criminal activity, and Gov. Jeb Bush on Thursday declared an end to the state's inquiry.Bush had asked State Attorney Bernie McCabe to investigate Schiavo's case after her autopsy last month. He said he now considers the state's involvement finished.
"Based on your conclusions, I will follow your recommendation that the inquiry by the state be closed," Bush said in a two-sentence letter.
I don't know what scares me more, the Governor of Florida listening to bat-shit crazy radicals or the fact he doesn't really care for the views of the bat-shit cray Radical Right. While the Bush brothers fucked with Schiavo, people died in London. More here.
Posted at 02:32 AM in Republicans | Technorati
Thursday, July 07, 2005
Fox News Delighted by Terror Attacks
Posted by Bob BrighamVia Atrios, we have reason #200,507,070,005 why I'm glad Media Matters watches Fox News so I don't have to:
The following exchange between Fox News host Brian Kilmeade and Fox News business contributor and substitute host Stuart Varney occurred during breaking news coverage of the attacks on London subways and buses on the July 7 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends:KILMEADE: And he [British Prime Minister Tony Blair] made the statement, clearly shaken, but clearly determined. This is his second address in the last hour. First to the people of London, and now at the G8 summit, where their topic Number 1 --believe it or not-- was global warming, the second was African aid. And that was the first time since 9-11 when they should know, and they do know now, that terrorism should be Number 1. But it's important for them all to be together. I think that works to our advantage, in the Western world's advantage, for people to experience something like this together, just 500 miles from where the attacks have happened.
VARNEY: It puts the Number 1 issue right back on the front burner right at the point where all these world leaders are meeting. It takes global warming off the front burner. It takes African aid off the front burner. It sticks terrorism and the fight on the war on terror, right up front all over again.
KILMEADE: Yeah.
I'm glad that Fox is there to remind us that 40 people dying in London is more important than millions in Africa. The right is downright giddy at the prospect of using the London terrorist attacks as an excuse to push the radical right agenda -- the same way they lied to the America people and used 9/11 as an excuse to invade Iraq.
When you are a propaganda machine Fox News, the thought this "works" to an advantage makes all the sense in the world.
Posted at 02:57 PM in Republicans | Technorati
Radical Clerics Making Americans Stoopider
Posted by Bob BrighamOur homegrown Taliban -- the radical right clerics -- are achieving success in dumbing down Americans. Just check out the new Harris Interactive poll (1,000 U.S. adults, June 17-21):
A majority of U.S. adults (54%) do not think human beings developed from earlier species, up from 46 percent in 1994.
Who makes up the flat earth society science rejectionists?
In general, older adults (those 55 years of age and older), adults without a college degree, Republicans, conservatives, and Southerners are more likely to embrace the creationism positions in the questions asked.
Obviously, our schools suck. But he said/she said "journalism" also deserves scorn. When Dobson lies, the press needs to call bullshit, not follow it with an opposing quote...the earth is not the center of the universe, the earth is not flat, the earth isn't 3,000 years old and treating facts like differences of opinion hurts society as a whole.
Posted at 02:26 PM in Republicans | Technorati
Tuesday, July 05, 2005
CA-50: Randy "Duke" Cunningham Scandal
Posted by Bob BrighamFew things have given me such pleasure as of late as watching Josh Marshall spin the tale of Randy "Duke" Cunningham and the scandal that keeps going and going and going -- with no end in sight. As usual, Marshall has focused attention by asking all of the right questions while letting the story tell itself. As the Washington Post reports, we now have a second boat. To keep everything clear, I've provided the following chart:
| scandal watch | Number 1 | Number 2 |
| BAGMAN | Mitchell J. Wade | Thomas T. Kontogiannis |
| BUSINESS | Defense Contractor | Developer |
| PRIORS | unknown | In 2002, plead guilty in connection with alleged bribes involving a school superintendent and $6 million contracts |
| YACHT | Duke-Stir | Kelly C |
| YACHT $ | Cunningham stayed rent-free on this 42-foot namesake | Cunningham bought it in 1997, for a reported $200,000.00, in 2002, appraised at $1.2 million and sold to Kontogiannis for $600,000.00 (but kept in Cunningham's name while Kontogiannis spent $100,000 on refurbishments), as of a month ago, Cunningham was planning to take boat back to D.C. |
| MANSION | Del Mar | Rancho Santa Fe |
| MANSION $ | Cunningham sold to Wade for $1.675 million, Wade then sold for a $700,000 loss | Cunningham has Kontogiannis finance mortage (at wholesale rate) on $2.55 million home, then Kontogiannis pays off second mortage and |
| SCORE | Wade banked tens of millions of dollars in defense and intelligence-related contracts | unknown |
| MONEY QUOTE | Cunningham lawyer K. Lee Blalack said he couldn't talk about the case because he "hadn't gotten his hands dirty on this thing yet." | Kontogiannis: "Why would I do that? I don't need the man" |
And let's not forget the Top Gun scandal:
Cunningham's troubles may have extended this week to a company he owns, Top Gun Enterprises Inc. He started that company in 1987, primarily as a means of marketing a book he wrote about his experiences as a Navy fighter pilot during the Vietnam War.A Web site for the company sold the book and other items, including a $595 Buck knife that featured an imprint of Cunningham in his flight suit and what the site said was the Seal of Congress.
Use of that seal on commercial products is prohibited without specific approval from Congress, which Cunningham does not appear to have secured. On Thursday, the Web site had removed the knife and all the products it had been offering and put up a note saying only that the site was under construction.
So I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest the California's 50th Congressional District could be competitive in 2006.
UPDATE: (Bob) While we're doing charts, what about this chart on Randy Cunningham:
1 Voting percentage with DeLay:
calculated through: www.cq.com96%
2 Vote to weaken ethics rules:
H Res. 5, Roll Call #6, 1/4/05YES
3 Vote to weaken ethics rules:
H Res. 5, Roll Call #6, 1/4/05YES
4 Vote to table Democratic solution:
H. Res. 153, Roll Call #70, 3/15/05
YES
5 Closed door indictment rule vote:
http://www.pcactionfund.org/votecount/dr.htmYES
6 Donations to DeLay's Legal Defense Fund:
www.citizen.org, www.tray.com
$6,000
Ladies and Gentleman, this is your Republican Congress!
Posted at 10:10 AM in 2006 Elections - House, 2006 Elections - House, California, Republicans, Scandals | Comments (6) | Technorati
Saturday, July 02, 2005
Karl Rove: It's Not the Lying, It's the Treason
Posted by Bob BrighamUpdated with more on TreasonGate.
The blogosphere is a buzzing with news that Karl Rove has been exposed as the source of the Plame leak. In the next week, we're going to hear a great deal about the timeline and the two-person rule, the former centering on the federal crime of outing an undercover agent and the later necessary to establish the bonus charge of perjury.
Over at the Huffington Post, Lawrence O'Donnell hints that Rove may be in trouble on both counts.
I revealed in yesterday's taping of the McLaughlin Group that Time magazine's emails will reveal that Karl Rove was Matt Cooper's source. [...]Since I revealed the big scoop, I have had it reconfirmed by yet another highly authoritative source. Too many people know this. It should break wide open this week. I know Newsweek is working on an 'It's Rove!' story and will probably break it tomorrow.
If Rove is the traitor and if he lied about it before the Grand Jury -- then he could achieve rare political status of having the cover-up not as bad as the crime -- for him at least. But cover-ups usually involve more than a single man, and this could turn into one giant shitburger considering who "Bush's Brain" spends time with in the West Wing (where he now serves as both Senior Advisor to the President of the United States and Deputy White House Chief of Staff).
Last week, the story was about the move to fire Karl Rove. This week, at a minimum, Rove should have his security clearance yanked while this is investigated. From AmericaBlog:
And now that this allegation is out there, of Karl Rove being a TRAITOR who divulged national security information putting our lives and the lives of CIA agents and their contacts at risk around the world, is this suspected threat to national security still AT the White House at this moment? Is he in the proximity of the president of the United States? What does the Secret Service have to say about that? Simply because of this allegation, a very serious public allegation by a credible on-the-record source, this man's security clearances should be revoked immediately, albeit temporarily, until this matter can be resolved.Is the Secret Service REALLY going to let a man facing these accusations have access to the president of the United States in a time of war?
Come on MSM, ask the White House NOW if Karl Rove is still in the building, or if his clearances have been temporarily revoked.
Now remember, the idea that Rove is responsible for this is nothing new, yet the Secret Service has done nothing to-date to secure the President and the White House from whoever is guilty. For more on Rove as the source, check out the "historical briefings" here, here, here, here, here, and here,
Also, a full investigation of Rove and the media, will of course come back to Jeff Gannon. Somebody in the inner-circle of the White House planted Jeff Gannon and with Jeff Gannon's relationship to the Plame Affair, we're going to see a lot more on this. Which could potentially even move the scandal into something beyond lying about treason. When I searched my computer for "Rove + Source" I found the following transcript from an appearance I had on Air America earlier this year. The transcript is from this MP3, about a 102 minutes in (from 02/03/2005):
Sam Seder: Just go back to the Gannon thing for a little bit, where do you think the investigation is going to come from?Bob Brigham: I think that Congress, in one way or anot her, is going to have to start investigating. If this continues to be a blog-driven investigation, it's a worse case scenario for a lot of Republicans, specifically Republicans who might have hypocrisy liability on a gay prostitute story and it will actually defuse the story somewhat by there being an investigation, just because then it won't be just constantly the blogosphere outing more and more Republican hypocrites.
Sam Seder: So Bob, let me read between the lines here. What you're saying is that there may be information out there, that there are some gentleman involved in the White House, who have taken some positions that would be inconsistent with perhaps some of their sexual dalliances.
Bob Brigham: You know, the Republican Party has more perverts than a whorehouse on Saturday night.
Sam Seder: Sweet Bob
Janeane Garofalo: Nice one.
Bob Brigham: We saw this in the nineties with Clinton. And the hypocrisy there when that come to light was very telling in the true moral character of the Republican Party.
Sam Seder: That's right. Henry Hyde had like three girlfriends or something like that.
Bob Brigham: Livingston was taken down, was Speaker for what, a week? And now that that the Republican Party has spent two years bashing gays, that is going to catch up with the Republican Party also. The fact that they are now bashing the AARP on gay marriage, they're seniors, they aren't having gay sex, they aren't having any sex. It's seniors. It just shows how ridiculous the entire smearing people as homosexual, conduct has become in the Republican Party and they're going to pay a price for their hubris.
Sam Seder: So you're saying that there's going to be perhaps a couple of Ed Shrockian moments coming up?
Bob Brigham: I think definitly. I think that is going to be a very interesting swing of the penjelum.
Janeane Garofalo: May I throw my two cents in Bob, because you've be unbelievably polite about this. Here's exactly is going to happen. Here is what the Gannon/Guckert sexual hypocrisy, whatever the scandal is, beyond the scandal we all know about. My gut feeling is that Karl Rove is either bisexual or gay, Scott McClellan, either bisexual or gay and either one of those two men – I tend to think it is Karl Rove – has had an affair with Ganon/Guckert.
[SILENCE]
Janeane Garofalo: Oh, don't be so silenced.
Bob Brigham: Oh, well that is a very interesting theory.
Sam Seder: Well it remains to be seen. It remains to be seen.
Janeane Garofalo: I'm telling you that Rove and McClellan, I mean, Ken Mehlman is at least up front about being gay, is he not?
Sam Seder: I don't know.
Janeane Garofalo: He at least admits to being gay, doesn't he?
Sam Seder: I don't think so.
Bob Brigham: He refuses to claim that he's straight in public.
Janeane Garofalo: Well I mean at least's he's, I don't think he's as closeted. He unfortunately supports a homophobic, bigoted, hypocritical agenda and that's the problem, not his gayness. And who cares if Gannon/Guckert is gay or bi and who cares if Rove or McClellan are gay except for their hypocrisy and their gay-unfriendly agenda. But I'm telling you McClellan, Rove, Ralph Reed, these guys are the gay mafia, they are gay as French horns as they say. I don't know why French horns are gay, but I think that the Gannon/Guckert scandal is, that the source of it is that Rove is his lover.
Discovering where this leads is going to be great fun, hubris is expensive and the bill is now past-due. Sure you're saying that would be totally ridiculous. Let me remind you of this White House exchange with Scott McClellan (via slate):
Q: On the Robert Novak-Joseph Wilson situation, Novak reported earlier this year quoting "anonymous government sources" telling him that Wilson's wife was a CIA operative. Now, this is apparently a federal offense, to burn the cover [of] a CIA operative. Wilson now believes that the person who did this was Karl Rove. He's quoted from a speech last month as saying, "At the end of the day, it's of keen interest to me to see whether or not we can get Karl Rove frog-marched out of the White House in handcuffs." Did Karl Rove tell that—A: I haven't heard that. That's just totally ridiculous. But we've already addressed this issue. If I could find out who anonymous people were, I would. I just said, it's totally ridiculous.
Q: But did Karl Rove do it?
A: I said, it's totally ridiculous.
Hubris is costly.
UPDATE: (Bob): This is getting good, from Newsweek (via Atrios):
The e-mails surrendered by Time Inc., which are largely between Cooper and his editors, show that one of Cooper's sources was White House deputy chief of staff Karl Rove, according to two lawyers who asked not to be identified because they are representing witnesses sympathetic to the White House. Cooper and a Time spokeswoman declined to comment. But in an interview with NEWSWEEK, Rove's lawyer, Robert Luskin, confirmed that Rove had been interviewed by Cooper for the article. It is unclear, however, what passed between Cooper and Rove.
But this is very interesting:
Novak appears to have made some kind of arrangement with the special prosecutor, and other journalists who reported on the Plame story have talked to prosecutors with the permission of their sources. Cooper agreed to discuss his contact with Lewis (Scooter) Libby, Vice President Dick Cheney's top aide, after Libby gave him permission to do so. But Cooper drew the line when special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald asked about other sources.
It appears that unlike Vice President Dick Cheney's Chief of Staff Scooter Libby, Karl Rove did not give Cooper permission to discuss the scandal with the Special Prosecutor. Which is odd, given that Rove serves at the pleasure of the United States of America (via AmericaBlog):
Q Mr. President, on another issue, the CIA leak-gate. What is your confidence level in the results of the DOJ investigation about any of your staffers not being found guilty or being found guilty? And what do you say to critics of the administration who say that this administration retaliates against naysayers?
PRESIDENT BUSH: First of all, I'm glad you brought that question up. This is a very serious matter, and our administration takes it seriously. As members of the press corps here know, I have, at times, complained about leaks of security information, whether the leaks be in the legislative branch or in the executive branch. And I take those leaks very seriously.
And, therefore, we will cooperate fully with the Justice Department. I've got all the confidence in the world the Justice Department will do a good, thorough job. And that's exactly what I want them to do, is a good, thorough job. I'd like to know who leaked, and if anybody has got any information inside our government or outside our government who leaked, you ought to take it to the Justice Department so we can find out the leaker.
I have told my staff, I want full cooperation with the Justice Department. And when they ask for information, we expect the information to be delivered on a timely basis. I expect it to be delivered on a timely basis. I want there to be full participation, because, April, I am most interested in finding out the truth.
And, you know, there's a lot of leaking in Washington, D.C. It's a town famous for it. And if this helps stop leaks of -- this investigation in finding the truth, it will not only hold someone to account who should not have leaked -- and this is a serious charge, by the way. We're talking about a criminal action, but also hopefully will help set a clear signal we expect other leaks to stop, as well. And so I look forward to finding the truth.
Actually, I doubt Bush is looking forward to anything that is remotely related to the Truth when it comes to this TreasonGate.
UPDATE (Bob): We all knew that more and more people are going to be sucked into the TreasonGate Scandal, Digby gets the following tip:
Wilson indicates that the work up on him beginning March, 2003, turned up the information on Valerie -- which was then shared with Karl Rove who then circulated it through Administration and neo-Conservative circles. He cites conservative journalists who claimed to have had the information before the Novak column.So the question is -- in the work-up process beginning about March 2003, who had the information re: Plame?
I think it was John Bolton. At the time he was State Department Deputy Secretary with the portfolio in WMD and Nuclear Proliferation. Assuming that Valerie Plame's identity was that of a NOC (No Official Cover) the information about her would have been highly classified, compartmentalized, and only those with a need to know would know. Bolton's Job probably gave him that status. However to receive it he would have to sign off on the classification -- that is he would have to agree to retain the security the CIA had established.
At the time, Bolton had two assistants who also worked in the White House in Cheney's office, David Wurmser and John Hannah. Their names have been around as the potential leakers -- Hannah if you remember is the guy who kept putting the Yellow Cake back in Bush's speeches even though Tenet had demanded it be removed.
So -- I think we have a game of catch going on here -- or maybe some version of baseball, and the scoring is Bolton to Wurmser and Hannah, to Cheney (and/or Libby) to Rove.
more to come...
Posted at 01:59 PM in General, Plamegate, Republicans, Scandals | Comments (5) | Technorati
GOP: Rove Fingered for Outing Plame
Posted by Bob BrighamOh boy, we're talking federal crime. Via Americablog, the transcript shows up on DailyKos:
"What we're going to go to now in the next stage, when Matt Cooper's emails-within Time Magazine, uh, are handed over to the grand jury is the ultimate revelation, probably within the week of who his source is. And I know I'm going to get pulled into the grand jury for saying this but the source of-for Matt Cooper was Karl Rove, and that will be revealed in this document dump that Time Magazine's going to do with the grand jury."
More at Catch and discussion on Eschaton.
UPDATE: (B0b): From Editor and Publisher:
Tonight, on the syndicated McLaughlin Group political talk show, Lawrence O'Donnell, senior MSNBC political analyst, claimed to know that name--and it is, according to him, top White House mastermind Karl Rove.Here is the transcript of O'Donnell's remarks:
"What we're going to go to now in the next stage, when Matt Cooper's e-mails, within Time Magazine, are handed over to the grand jury, the ultimate revelation, probably within the week of who his source is.
"And I know I'm going to get pulled into the grand jury for saying this but the source of...for Matt Cooper was Karl Rove, and that will be revealed in this document dump that Time magazine's going to do with the grand jury."
Other panelists then joined in discussing whether, if true, this would suggest a perjury rap for Rove, if he told the grand jury he did not leak to Cooper.
On top of the federal crime of outing a covert operative, it now looks like perjury bonus points would pile on.
Posted at 12:45 AM in Plamegate, Republicans | Technorati
Wednesday, June 29, 2005
MT-Sen: Conrad Burns Supports Testing Pesticides on Kids
Posted by DavidNYCWell, I threatened to do it over at DailyKos, and so here I am. The story formerly known as "EPA Human Pesticide Testing & Anti-Democracy Republicans" has been appropriately re-christened.]
GOP opponents of the filibuster like to claim, among other things, that it's undemocratic. But it's no surprise, of course, that the GOP is utterly hypocritical when it comes to issues of democratic process. While I could probably spend a lifetime documenting GOP hypocrisy - and while the Republicans may never be shamed by it - that won't stop me from highlighting a current egregious example.
Today, the Senate passed an amendment (proposed by Sen. Boxer) by a wide margin (60-37) prohibiting the EPA from testing pesticides on humans. What the EPA has been doing is pretty awful: They promise families some cash in order to carry out experiments, often on kids and often in low-income neighborhoods. Take this one example:
The tests include a 2002-04 study by University of California-San Diego in which chloropicrin, an insecticide that during World War I was a chemical warfare agent, was administered to 127 young adults in doses that exceeded federal safety limits by 12 times.
Lovely. But believe it or not, the typically incorrigible House also passed an amendment barring this practice, with language identical to the Senate bill. What's the problem, you ask, apart from a potential veto threat by Bush?
A nasty little thing called the conference committee. Conference committees are supposed to hammer out differences between House and Senate bills so that one bill can be presented to the President. But they've been repeatedly abused by the GOP to kill legislation even when there are no disagreements to work out. And guess who's behind this?
Ordinarily, approval by both House and Senate would ensure the language is retained in the final version of the bill. But GOP floor manager Conrad Burns, R-Mont., opposed Boxer's amendment, and as lead Senate negotiator on the bill, is well-positioned to kill it in future talks with the House.
Ahh, our good friend Conrad Burns. So one lone jerk (though probably tacitly backed by his 36 other GOP colleagues who also voted against the Boxer amendment) stands between a bill supported by majorities in both houses of Congress. Now that's democracy!
Anyhow, I could have headlined this piece "Burns Supports Testing Pesticides on Kids" and it would have been entirely accurate. While I don't expect the GOP to change course and actually allow the Boxer amendment to become law, at least we can hope that Jon Tester can turn this into a powerful issue on the campaign trail in Montana.
And even if Burnsie does back away from his conference committee trickery, he is still on record as voting against the Boxer amendment. Would you want this man protecting your children?
Posted at 06:35 PM in Montana, Republicans | Technorati
Tuesday, June 28, 2005
Bush Speech: What Bush Didn't Say
Posted by Bob BrighamBush didn't offer a plan to win. Bush didn't offer a strategy. Bush offered nothing to our troops. Bush failed.
While Bush recycled Washington Republican talking points, he didn't tell the American people why today was any different day. He still has no plan and our problems in Iraq continue to grow.
Bush failed tonight just like he's failed in the everything relating to his war.
Tonight the American people saw a failed speech by a failure of a President.
Posted at 09:49 PM in Republicans | Comments (2) | Technorati
Bush Talks: Applause is Fake
Posted by Bob BrighamPosted at 09:35 PM in Republicans | Technorati
Bush Speech Response
Posted by Bob BrighamThink Progress is slapping Bush like he's the doormat at an ATV convention.
Like this:
References to “September 11″: 5References to “weapons of mass destruction”: 0
References to “freedom”: 21
References to “exit strategy”: 0
References to “Saddam Hussein”: 2
References to “Osama Bin Laden”: 2
References to “a mistake”: 1 (setting a timetable for withdrawal)
References to “mission”: 11
References to “mission accomplished”: 0
Posted at 09:29 PM in Republicans | Technorati
Sen. Feingold: Bush Disappoints
Posted by Bob BrighamSenator Russ Feingold on Bush speech at Fort. Bragg:
"I am disappointed in the President's failure to lay out a clear and candid assessment of where we stand in Iraq today, where we are going, and how we plan to get there. I share the President's broad goal of helping to support a free and stable Iraq. But lofty goals are no substitute for a strategic plan and our excellent and courageous troops deserve sound policy.The President urges us to remember the lessons of 9/11. But it is with those lessons in mind that I oppose the Administration's current approach to Iraq. The U.S. military presence in Iraq has become a powerful recruiting tool for terrorists, and Iraq is now the premier training ground and networking venue for the next generation of jihadists. We need a strategy to win the global fight against terrorism, and that strategy has to include a timetable for achieving the remaining military mission in Iraq and then bringing American troops back home."
Feingold introduced a resolution, S. Res. 171, earlier this month -- the first resolution of its kind in the Senate -- that calls on the President to create a timetable for achieving clear goals and bringing American troops home from Iraq.
It is important to note that Bush once agreed with Senator Feingold:
In 1999, George W. Bush criticized President Clinton for not setting a timetable for exiting Kosovo, and yet he refuses to apply the same standard to his war.
George W. Bush, 4/9/99:
“Victory means exit strategy, and it’s important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is.”
And on the specific need for a timetable, here’s what Bush said then and what he says now:
George W. Bush, 6/5/99
“I think it’s also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn.”
[ed. note: article originally ran in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer on 6/5/99]
VERSUS
George W. Bush, 6/24/05:
“It doesn’t make any sense to have a timetable. You know, if you give a timetable, you’re — you’re conceding too much to the enemy.”
Posted at 09:01 PM in Republicans | Technorati
Bush Supports Yellow Elephant
Posted by Bob BrighamPresident George Bush is only slightly more non-gay than Jesus General. So it isn't surprising that the two Men agree on Operation Yellow Elephant. In tonight's speech, Bush said:
And to those watching tonight who are considering a military career, there is no higher calling than service in our Armed Forces.
No higher calling, not even a career in the College Republicans is a higher calling. I'm glad to see the President embrace, with no qualification, Operation Yellow Elephant. I hope Karl Rove will use his impressive communication apparatus to let all College Republicans know that there is NO HIGHER CALLING. Godspeed Young Republicans (who aren't too chickenshit to act as tough as they talk).
Posted at 08:46 PM in Republicans | Technorati
Reid: Bush Blew Speech Like he Blew Post-War Planning
Posted by Bob BrighamSenator Reid's remarks:
(Washington, DC) “Tonight’s address offered the President an excellent opportunity to level with the American people about the current situation in Iraq, put forth a path for success, and provide the means to assess our progress. Unfortunately he fell short on all counts.
Indeed.
“There is a growing feeling among the American people that the President’s Iraq policy is adrift, disconnected from the reality on the ground and in need of major mid-course corrections. “Staying the course,” as the President advocates, is neither sustainable nor likely to lead to the success we all seek. “The President’s numerous references to September 11th did not provide a way forward in Iraq, they only served to remind the American people that our most dangerous enemy, namely Osama bin Laden, is still on the loose and Al Qaeda remains capable of doing this nation great harm nearly four years after it attacked America.“Democrats stand united and committed to seeing that we achieve success in Iraq and provide our troops, their families, and our veterans everything they need and deserve for their sacrifices for our nation. The stakes are too high, and failure in Iraq cannot be an option. Success is only possible if the President significantly alters his current course. That requires the President to work with Congress and finally begin to speak openly and honestly with our troops and the American people about the difficult road ahead.
“Our troops and their families deserve no less.”
Posted at 08:35 PM in Republicans | Technorati
Bush Tells the Truth (Unless You're a College Republican)
Posted by Bob BrighamFrom tonight's speech:
And to those watching tonight who are considering a military career, there is no higher calling than service in our Armed Forces.
Unless you are a (chickenshit) College Republican:
"Frankly, I want to be a politician. I'd like to survive to see that," said Vivian Lee, 17, a war supporter visiting the convention from Los Angeles,Lee said she supports the war but would volunteer only if the United States faced a dire troop shortage or "if there's another Sept. 11."
"As long as there's a steady stream of volunteers, I don't see why I necessarily should volunteer," said Lee, who has a cousin deployed in the Middle East.
In an election season overwhelmed by memories of the Vietnam War, the U.S. military's newest war ranks supreme among the worries confronting much of Generation Y'ers. Iraq is their war.
"If there was a need presented, I would go," said Chris Cusmano, a 21-year-old member of the College Republicans organization from Rocky Point, N.Y. But he said he hasn't really considered volunteering.
Posted at 08:31 PM in Republicans | Technorati
Bush Lies
Posted by Bob BrighamFrom tonight's speech:
These are savage acts of violence – but they have not brought the terrorists any closer to achieving their strategic objectives. [...] They failed to break our Coalition and force a mass withdrawal by our allies.
Actually, Bush failed:
United Kingdom 8,761 12,000
South Korea 3,600 2,800
Italy 3,600 3,169 (pullout begins 9/05)Poland 1,700 2,400 (zero by end of '05)
Ukraine 1,450 1,400 (zero by 10/05)Georgia 898 0
Romania 730 700Japan 550 750
Denmark 496 496Bulgaria 450 485
Australia 400 920El Salvador 380 380
Mongolia 180 180Azerbajian 151 151
Latvia 122 122Czech 110 110
Lithuania 120 105Slovakia 105 105
Albania 71 71Estonia 55 55
Armenia 46 0Macedonia 33 28
Kazakhstan 29 29Norway 10 10
Netherlands 0 1,345Hungary 0 300
Portugal 0 128Tonga 0 45
Moldova 0 12
Posted at 08:26 PM in Republicans | Comments (1) | Technorati
Bush Speech on Iraq
Posted by Bob BrighamMEMO
| TO: | PRESIDENT BUSH |
| FROM: | SOME BLOGGER |
| DATE: | JUNE 28, 2005 |
| RE: | MEMORIES OF NEW YORK |
This is on open memo to all members of the Republican Administration. As all facts have proven, Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Please refrain from cheapening the legacies of those who were slaughtered on 9/11 by linking the issue to the war in Iraq.
This memorandum applies to all events by all Republican Administration events.
While it is no longer acceptable to exploit 9/11 for our Crusade in Iraq, please feel free to continue wrapping all Administration events in the flag.
Posted at 08:06 PM in Republicans | Technorati
Saturday, June 25, 2005
Poll: Iraq Disaster Bush's Fault
Posted by Bob BrighamJune 23, 2005--Forty-nine percent (49%) of Americans say that President Bush is more responsible for starting the War with Iraq than Saddam Hussein. A Rasmussen Reports survey found that 44% take the opposite view and believe Hussein shoulders most of the responsibility.In late 2002, months before the fighting began, most Americans thought that Hussein was the one provoking the War. Just one-in-four thought the President was doing the provoking at that time.
The biggest change in perceptions has come among Democrats.
This proves that the Democratic base is capable of learning what some Democratic "leaders" refuse to admit. On such a major issue, the degree the people have moved on this issue is overwhelming. As a new ARG poll on job performance shows:
Among Independents (26% of adults registered to vote in the survey), 17% approve and 75% disapprove of the way Bush is handling his job as president.
The weak Democrats need to show some spine, if for no other reason than it is pragmatic. Bush can receive no free passes, no compromise...Democrats need solidarity and boldness -- the incompetence of the Washington Republicans will take care of the rest. Throw the anvil. And then another.
Posted at 08:50 PM in Republicans | Comments (1) | Technorati
Friday, June 24, 2005
NJ-Gov: Karl Rove Scandal Scalds Doug Forrester
Posted by Bob BrighamI knew the Karl Rove scandal would have impacts in local elections when I received the following email with an hour of the scandal blowing up:
Vicious Karl Rove Just Raised Money for Republican Doug ForresterI’m sure you’ve heard about Karl Rove calling liberals and Democrats traitors, and the White House supporting his comments.
linkI think it’s interesting that Karl Rove was just in New Jersey raising money for Republican gubernatorial candidate Doug Forrester: link
Now there is an Action Alert to contact NJ Gubernatorial candidate Doug Forrester, New York City Mayor Michael Bloombloog and New York state Governor Bill Pataki. This already has support from Americablog, Eschaton, Steve Gilliard's News Blog, and Chris Bowers at MyDD.
From AmericaBlog:
Anti-Karl Rove Action Alert1. CALL THE NJ GOP CANDIDATE FOR GOVERNOR
Atrios suggests we all do the following. I agree:This week Karl Rove headlined a couple of fundraisers for the Republican candidate for governor of New Jesrsey, Doug Forrester.
Call his campaign office and demand to know if Forrester stands by Karl Rove's assertion that Democrats like Dick Durbin are motivated by a desire to see troops die (especially if you live in New Jersey or imagine that you do). Demand that he return the money he raised. Find out if he's proud to stand with Karl Rove, and if also thinks that New Jersey Democrats are motivated by a desire to see our troops die.
609-452-0101
email: info@doug2005.com
2. CALL MAYOR BLOOMBERG OF NYC
GOP Mayor Bloomberg of NYC has refused to repudiate what Rove's, Mehlman's, and the White House's assertion that YOU want to kill the troops and didn't give a damn about September 11. And remember folks, this is New York City, if they want to play that "liberal" card, let them. 80% of the city would call itself "liberal." So Bush thinks 80% of New Yorkers didn't give a damn about September 11. You're traitors, you dishonor the dead. When your friends died that day, you wanted to give Osama a hug.
Call Mayor Bloomber and demand he publicly repudiate the White House's slander against New Yorkers and all those who survived September 11. Bloomberg's wishy-washy statement about how we wishes all sides would stop politicizing September 11 is cute, but "all sides" weren't politicizing it. Only one party has. That would be the party he invited to hold its patriotic orgasm of a convention there last fall, the one that politicized September 11.
It's time for Bloomberg to tell New Yorkers, is he with them or against them? Does he stand by the White House's words that 80% of New Yorkers are motivated by a desire to kill our troops, and that 80% of NYers didn't give a damn about September 11? Answer the damn question, or don't be mayor.
Email bloomberg here.
Then make some phone calls to Bloomberg's press people:
Edward Skyler, Robert Lawson, Jennifer Falk (212) 788-2958
3. CALL GOP NY GOVERNOR PATAKI
Pataki refused to even give a wishy-washy answer yesterday about the White House's slander of NYers and all Americans. He stood by Rove 100%. Give him a call too, and demand that he publicly repudiate this disgusting use of the 9/11 dead to help George Bush's polls.
Main governor's office phone: 518-474-8390, 212-681-4580
Email the governor here
Lynn Rasic (Governor)
(212) 681-4640
Forrester, Bloomberg and Pataki need to do the right thing by denouncing Karl Rove and returning the poisoned money.
Posted at 12:59 PM in 2005 Elections, 2006 Elections - State, Activism, New Jersey, New York, Republicans, Scandals | Technorati
Thursday, June 23, 2005
Democrats vs. Republicans -- See the Difference
Posted by Bob BrighamIn response to the outrageous statements by Bush Political Chief Karl Rove (which resulted in the Fire Karl Rove Movement), the DNC blog Kicking Ass reminded us of the true differences between the two parties:
Democrats
Believe capturing the person primarily responsible for the attack should be a top priority.Republicans
It's been four years, and Osama bin Laden is still free, even though Bush's CIA chief says he knows where he is.Democrats
Investigate the intelligence failures that led to 9/11.Republicans
Do everything in their power to block the 9/11 Commission from doing its work.Democrats
Propose creating the Department of Homeland Security.Republicans
Push tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans.Democrats
Believe we should have stayed the course in Afghanistan, not allowing the Taliban to resurge, the warlords to take power, and the opium trade to skyrocket.Republicans
Ignore Afghanistan as the situation worsens.Democrats
Believe that we should be honest with our troops about the reasons we go to war, give them everything they need to be safe, and make sure we go in with an exit plan.Republicans
Manipulate intelligence to trump up reasons to go to war, don't give our troops the support they need, constantly mislead the public about the direction the war is going, and fail to make an exit plan. And turn Iraq into the ultimate terrorist training ground.
Differences indeed.
Posted at 06:19 PM in Democrats, Republicans | Comments (2) | Technorati
Rove Resignation Watch
Posted by Bob BrighamUPDATE: Sign the petition.
America has never been as united as we were following September 11th. In fact, the whole world stood with us in our time of need. But Bush squandered that moment, that rare opportunity. Since then, support for both Bush and America has been in a tailspin because of the abuse of power by the Republican Administration. Now Karl Rove is seeking to further divide Americans to distract from the fact that Bush is losing the war on terror, has lost the war in Iraq, failed to privatize Social Security, was checked upon trying to eliminate the filibuster, and is widely considered to be a failed, lame-duck. Karl Rove's desperate maneuver must be dealt with promptly, Rove must either resign or be fired.
Here are the ACTION ITEMS, this entry will serve as a home for the blogswarm calling upon Rove to retire. It will be updated, feel free to send track-backs to be included and of course, feel free to repost:
AmericaBlog: "Fire this asshole, now."
Kos: "as their fortunes circle the drain, they resort to outrageous attacks in an attempt to distract from their own incompetence."
Paul Waldman: "Karl Rove's comments are even more despicable than what we've come to expect from Republicans. There is no depth to which they will not sink, no tragedy they will not exploit for political gain."
Talking Points Memo: "Rove should apologize or resign."
Mixter's Mix: "Seems our favorite neo-fascist is back to identifying enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause. (#3 on the list of The 14 Characteristics of Fascism by Laurence W. Britt.)"
Pissed on Politics: "Rove, sensing Bush is in trouble, has decided to harkin back to the dark days of 9/11 in hopes of re-vitilizing that blind patriotism and mindless flag waiving this administration so desperately needs in order to propagate their agenda."
A Liberal Marines Progressive Perspective: "My only response to this kind of lame nonsense is to say, Mr. Rove...shut the f**k up! See, people like this guy should be VERY QUIET when it comes to the subject of warfare or anything that even remotely pertains to warfare and warfighting. People like Rove, et al. are extremely dangerous and should be taken with a grain of salt whenever they start flapping their gums about military service, war or any other activity in which they have no real knowledge. George C. Scott (as General George S. Patton) said the following about clowns like Mr. Rove in the opening monologue of the Academy Award winning movie 'Patton' (http://www.simplyscripts.com/oscar_winners.html):
"...They don't know any more about real fighting, under fire, than they do about fornicating...""
Patridiot Watch: "Karl Rove's Pants Are on Fire"
Capitol Buzz: "Call the White House and tell him to shut the fuck up!!!"
Yowling from the Fencepost: "Rove, hubris, and foot-in-mouth disease."
Born Angry: "You know, when this is all over--if it is ever all over--Karl Rove and the entire Bush Bundestag should be sent to Gitmo!"
Democratic Planks: "How dare he say that as I sat terrified in my New York apartment and watched the twin towers crumble, my thoughts were "let's give therapy to these people... these poor people are just misunderstood."
No, Karl, you are totally fucking wrong.
How dare you play petty politics with the tragedy of 9/11?
And isn't it convenient that you are raking up the mud at the point when your brainchild administration's poll numbers are in the toilet? [...]
Rove's statement is simply gross, and right now I want to kick him in the head. What he suggested said out loud at a ballroom event held only a few miles from gound zero is reprehensible, dispicable and totally characteristic of the entire Bush administration."
Posted at 02:08 PM in Republicans, Scandals | Technorati
Wednesday, June 01, 2005
TX-22: Fire Tom DeLay
Posted by Bob BrighamFrom MoveOn PAC:
Fire Tom DeLayHouse Republican Majority Leader Rep. Tom DeLay has a pattern of repeated legal and ethical scandals. Yet he remains in one of the most important positions in our government—deciding what legislation Congress considers. Sign our petition to urge Congress to fire Tom DeLay as Majority Leader. Our goal is to top 500,000 petition signers by the end of the month and deliver these petitions to Republican members of Congress and local Republican Parties during the first week in June.
His offenses?
- Accepted trips from corporations and later helped kill legislation they opposed
- Accepted trips from the lobbyist for a foreign government in violation of House rules
- Paid family members more than $500,000 out of campaign contributions
- Helped sweatshops in the Mariana Islands at the behest of a lobbyist.
- Promised a role in drafting legislation to a corporate donor
- Tried to coerce a Congressman for a vote on Medicare
- Allegedly used corporate money given to his PAC to finance Texas campaigns in violation of state law
- Used Homeland Security resources in a dispute with Democrats in Texas
- Diverted funds from a children's charity for lavish celebrations at the Republican convention
- Threatened retaliation against interest groups that don't support Republicans
- Stacked the House Ethics Committee with representatives who have contributed to his legal defense fund
- Crippled the effectiveness of the House Ethics Committee by purging members who had rebuked him
- Pushed for a rules change for the House Ethics process that paralyzed the panel
- Sought a rule change that would have no longer "required leaders to step aside temporarily if indicted"
Totally corrupted and abusing power to stay in power, Tom DeLay is a disgrace to Congress.
Posted at 01:14 PM in Republicans, Scandals, Texas, Texas | Technorati
Monday, May 23, 2005
Voter Backlash Against GOP Abuse of Power
Posted by Bob BrighamYet another new poll and yet further evidence that voters are pissed off at the Republican abuse of power. This is going to have serious ramifications in 2006.
Posted at 05:37 PM in 2006 Elections, 2006 Elections - Senate, Nuclear Option, Republicans | Technorati
Sending Rule Breakers Back to the Senate
Posted by Bob BrighamAs everyone knows, the only way the GOP can end the filibuster without the 67 votes needed to change senate rules, is to break the rules. Will voters re-elect Senators who break the rules? Will voters re-elect Senators who are going nuclear against the institution of the senate? I'm sure it is on the minds of:
• Senator George Allen (R-VA)*
• Senator Conrad Burns (R-MT)*
• Senator Lincoln Chafee (R-RI)*
• Senator Mike DeWine (R-OH)
• Senator John Ensign (R-NV)*
• Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT)*
• Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX)*
• Senator Jon Kyl (R-AZ)*
• Senator Trent Lott (R-MS)*
• Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN)*
• Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA)*
• Senator Olympia Snowe (R-ME)
• Senator Jim Talent (R-MO)*
• Senator Craig Thomas (R-WY)*
* Social Security: on record voting in favor of "deep benefit cuts or a massive increase in debt."
Posted at 10:33 AM in 2006 Elections, 2006 Elections - Senate, Nuclear Option, Republicans | Technorati
Saturday, May 21, 2005
Nuclear Option, GOP Firing Blanks
Posted by Bob BrighamIt doesn't matter who you have on the team roster, what matters is who you put in the game. While the GOP has the White House and both chambers, in the battle for the constitution they aren't fielding their best team. I'm not just talking about Manny Miranda's screw-ups, I'm talking about the ad I just saw on Drudge:
Fill in the Blank
OK, if they want me to fill in the blank, how about I fill in the blank about that Social Security card linked to Bush. How about I fill in the blank with Bush's poll numbers on the Social Security issue the up or down vote people brought into the debate (and tied to Bush).
"Do you approve or disapprove of the job President Bush is doing in each of these areas? Handling of Social Security issues."
Approve: 31% (40%)
Disapprove: 59% (49%)
That is a helluva shift so far this year, the public has soundly rejected Bush's Social Security privatization.
But now the "nuclear option" crowd is dragging Social Security into the fight against the institution of the Senate. People need to realize that this lust for absolute power has serious implications when it comes to whether the GOP will break the rules (to change the rules) to end Social Security like they are trying to do with the filibuster. It is the "nuclear option" lobby who is linking Social Security to the quest for total GOP domination -- be worried, they will stop at nothing, least of not the rules.
Posted at 12:29 AM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Nuclear Option, Republicans | Comments (2) | Technorati
Saturday, May 14, 2005
Bush Justice Department Smears Reid
Posted by Bob BrighamThe GOP political assassination push leading up to the filibuster is now being financed by your tax dollars. From the AP:
The Justice Department is edging into the Senate controversy over judicial nominees, writing key lawmakers after Democratic Leader Harry Reid publicly referred to an FBI file on one of President Bush's controversial appointees."The letter expressed concern about recent remarks on the floor of the Senate which alluded to an FBI background investigation file provided by the Department of Justice to the Senate Judiciary Committee on a confidential basis in connection with a judicial nomination," a department official said Friday night.
The official, who spoke only on condition of anonymity, said the letter did not refer specifically to Reid, or to 6th Circuit Court nominee Henry Saad.
1. For years, everyone has known about this (public knowledge in the public domain).
2. This is a politically motivated "leak" by a Justice Department "anonymous source" -- total partisan politics.
3. No where does the letter mention Reid, but the "leak" brings Reid into the story, not Orin Hatch who has also spoke on this.
This is disgusting.
UPDATE: Matt Singer has more...Bush Admin Still Trying to Push Story, Going Into Violate Separation of Powers Mode:
Where was this concern a year ago, when Carl Levin, Debbie Stabenow, and Charles Hurt all referred to these materials? It was nowhere. This isn’t concern about what’s going on. It’s the Bush Administration trying to hijack democracy by meddling in the legislative process, inferring that the legislative branch must defer to the executive, and generally ransacking the principles of our Constitution.
Posted at 12:10 PM in Nuclear Option, Republicans | Comments (3) | Technorati
Larry Flint Sets Sights on John Bolton
Posted by Bob BrighamThe John Bolton mess has been causing quite a rift in the Republican Party.
But I'm more interested in Raw Story's exclusive on Larry Flint joining the battle. During the impeachment fiasco, you might remember that Flint placed a bounty on the heads of GOP members with hypocrisy liability when it came to infidelity. Flint took down Speaker Livingston and exposed many a secret that the Republicans were hoping to keep between God and their mistresses. Now Flynt is striking again.
The controversial Hustler Magazine publisher Larry Flynt has waded into the conflict surrounding the nomination of Bush hawk John Bolton to a UN post by revealing Bolton's divorce records and unanswered questions about his sexual past, RAW STORY has learned.The following release was issued early this afternoon. RAW STORY will provide more details as they become available.
The records show that Bolton's wife left him during a trip to Vienna in two weeks in 1982 and never returned.
From the release:
Corroborated allegations that Mr. Bolton’s first wife, Christina Bolton, was forced to engage in group sex have not been refuted by the State Department despite inquires posed by Hustler magazine publisher Larry Flynt concerning the allegations. Mr. Flynt has obtained information from numerous sources that Mr. Bolton participated in paid visits to Plato’s Retreat, the popular swingers club that operated in New York City in the late 1970s and early 1980s.“The first Mrs. Bolton’s conduct raises the presumption that she fled out of fear for her safety or, at a minimum, it demonstrates that Mr. Bolton’s established inability to communicate or work respectfully with others extended to his intimate family relations,” said Mr. Flynt. “The court records alone provide sufficient basis for further investigation of nominee Bolton by the Senate.” These court records are enclosed here as an attachment. Mr. Flynt continued, “The U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations must be free of any potential source of disrepute or blackmail.”
The blackmail potential is something that should be considered by the Senate as they advise and do not consent.
As happened in the 90's, once Flynt gets the ball rolling, it empowers people to step forward:
Mr. Flynt has personal knowledge about sources corroborating the allegations of nominee Bolton’s misconduct, and he has called upon these persons to publicly come forward with their information.“First wife Christina Bolton has understandably remained silent on what led her to flee her husband of 10 years and to take the family belonging with hers. A full inquiry would necessarily involve meetings with Mrs. Bolton to uncover the circumstances of her flight and the Committee should subpoena her in private session,” Mr. Flynt said.
I'm sure Raw Story will have more.
Posted at 10:36 AM in Republicans | Technorati
Monday, May 09, 2005
TX-22: DeLay on the Run
Posted by Bob BrighamSorry to get your hopes up with the headline, Majority Leader Tom DeLay hasn't tried to skip town yet, but he is retreating, from the Washington Post:
In the euphemism favored on Capitol Hill, House Majority Leader Tom DeLay is "not staff driven." Translation: He is used to doing what he wants. [...]Suddenly, the old Texas brio that carried him through years of smaller controversies is on the wane. The leader recognizes -- belatedly, some GOP colleagues say -- that the latest questions about his relationships with lobbyists are a problem threatening his career and the GOP majority he helped to build and sustain since coming to the House 20 years ago. Everywhere there are signs of a politician in retreat.
DeLay's prowess in fundraising, for instance, was always a pillar of his power in the House. Lining up a corporate aircraft to ferry him to an event was usually arranged with a single phone call. These days, Republican officials report that they are having trouble finding available aircraft -- as businesses fret that DeLay may be radioactive.
DeLay, likewise, usually no longer attends joint news conferences of the GOP leadership. His presence, Republicans say, would distract from the party's message about gas prices or other topics of the day.
Now comes the excruciating period of waiting for the final blow.
Posted at 12:59 AM in 2006 Elections - House, Republicans, Texas | Technorati
Thursday, May 05, 2005
GOP Too Extreme
Posted by Bob Brigham"I think the Republicans are more polarized than they ever have been." No, it wasn't a liberal Democratic member of Congress who said this to NBC News on April 27; it was Rep. Charlie Bass, Republican from New Hampshire. There are many moderate Republican politicians and citizens who feel left out of the modern-day extremist Republican Party. The leaders of the party, Bush, Cheney, Frist, DeLay, Hastert, etc, are clearly out of the mainstream. Moderate Republicans like Rep. Bass, Rep. Christopher Shays of Connecticut, Sen. Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, and Christine Todd Whitman, the former Governor of New Jersey and former Environmental Protection Agency chief, have all spoken out on this issue.
As the extremist domination continues, the wedge is driven further with each action.
Tom DeLay, who could be considered the most corrupt politician in Washington today, is the Republican House Leader. Bill Frist, who is now attempting to change long standing judicial laws, is the Republican Senate Majority leader. George W. Bush's nominee to be U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton, once said, "There is no such thing as the United Nations. There is an international community that may perhaps occasionally be guided by the sole real power left in the world, that is, the United States - when that suits our interests and when we can bring others to follow us." No wonder moderates are angry. The Republican leadership is drunk with power.
Indeed.
Posted at 10:58 AM in Republicans | Comments (1) | Technorati
Monday, April 25, 2005
MT-Sen: Conrad Burns and Jack Abramoff Staff Scandal
Posted by Bob BrighamWhat is the one thing that makes a worse scandal than an Jack Abramoff golf trip? A hunting trip.
Shawn Vasell has made Swing State Project before. He is one of the major links between Jack Abramoff and Montana Senator Conrad Burns, having worked for Abramoff directly before and after working for Burns (he was State Director).
Vasell was already a key figure in multiple investigations and now he is at the center of a scandal that will enrage Montanans in a way that the corruption scandal never could.
Even before this latest scandal, Sen. Conrad Burns was in trouble. The Abramoff corruption scandal was hurting his campaign, he was sinking in the polls, and the press had tired of his B.S. responses to the corruption investigations. And now this...
The Thanksgiving Deer Scandal
New West Network Managing Editor Courtney Lowery has THE SCOOP:
Washington lobbyist Shawn Vasell, a former aide to Montana Sen. Conrad Burns, has already attracted some unwanted media attention in our nation's capital as a key link between Burns and controversial lobbyist Jack Abramoff. Now we've come across an interesting little story on the Web (with photos) about Mr. Vasell and his Thanksgiving deer that if true, is not likely to endear him even to loyal Republicans.Vasell, who Burns’ spokesman J.P. Donovan said worked as the office’s state director for about a year before stepping down in December of 2002 to go back to Abramoff's firm, was named and pictured on a Web site about hunting and fishing written by one J.R. Reger. Reger, in what can only be read as a fit of macho hubris, details the rockin' good time that he, Mike Reger and Vasell apparently had on a spur-of-the-moment, day-after-Thanksiving hunting outing. Only problem is, the story depicts the boys in apparent violation of at least four Montana hunting laws.
FOUR VIOLATIONS? Like Conrad Burns; like Jack Abramoff; Shawn Vasell appears to have a total disregard for the law.
In particular, Vasell allegedly shot a deer from the window of a pickup truck, a clear no-no. And, a quick phone call to the Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks licensing department tells us that state records (which search back to 2002) show there have been no hunting licenses issued to a Shawn Vasell in the state of Montana. So if that's his deer he's posing with in the photos ...
It gets better...
So what is the response?
Reger, reached on Saturday via phone, would not comment on the story or confirm or deny its accuracy, but told New West he would have time to talk about it later. Alas, he has not returned repeated phone calls since then and - surprise - his site had been taken down by Sunday morning. We figured this might happen, so we made sure we recovered it through Google's cache of pages, which is where you can read it here.
Why would anyone so brazenly brag about breaking the law?
The story certainly doesn't read like something that was made up, though it's a bit of a mystery as to why Reger would be so eager to brag publicly about things like his hunting buddy shooting a deer on someone else's land after dark. There is one clue though. Elsewhere on his site, Reger writes: "Every Monday morning I look forward to reading the paper. Moreover, I look forward to reading about one of my delinquent friends or acquaintances getting into trouble with the Fish, Wildlife and Parks Department. For the fine amount paid, and trust me on this one, the amount of good press you get from doing something wrong is totally worth it. I highly recommend poaching a little or doing something minor to get your name in the paper at least once a year."
Montana blogger Matt Singer points out:
This trip was illegal. If Reger reported the details accurately, multiple laws were broken. Shawn Vasell has not had a hunting permit in Montana (at least not since 2001). He apparently shot the deer from inside a car (illegal). Later, he helped one of the Regers move a deer that had been shot on a neighbor's property without permission after dark following drinking (illegal). This isn't just illegal. It violates many of the unwritten rules of landowner/hunter relations.
Violating the unwritten rules of the west will result in the worst punishment. Singer also focuses on a fact all of you Jack Abramoff scandal watchers will appreciate:
One of the most interesting points is buried in the story. Shawn Vasell's official website lists one of his accomplishments as having "obtained federal [Indian school construction] monies for participating clients." This is exactly the question at issue in the original Washington Post article that brought this former Conrad Burns staffer's name to our attention. Burns was accused of giving money to Abramoff clients because of special connections. Now, one of Abramoff's former coworkers is claiming that their firm was responsible for lining up Indian school construction monies for their clients. Hmmm....
Conrad Burns lied when he said he would only serve two terms (he is running for his fourth). He didn't want to lose touch with Montana, but he did. Burns has been spending time with some very crooked people back in Washington, DC. But that isn't as bad as bringing those crooked people back to Montana to break Montana's laws and the rules of the west.
In Montana, you don't violate your neighbor's property and start shooting. Especially after dark.
You never shoot from a vehicle. There is an exception to this rule if you have a permit saying you are disabled, but otherwise you never, ever, shoot from a vehicle.
If someone is shooting -- after dark -- on another person's property, you call the sheriff. You don't help them drag their poached deer to the truck in a conspiracy to move the game across the property line before it is gutted and tagged.
In Montana, you respect guns, you respect property lines, you respect hunting safety, you respect the law, and you respect the game. Nothing is worse than an east-coaster disrespecting law, custom, and common sense...with a gun in his cityfolk hand. Actually, there is one thing worse, when that person was State Director for a Montana politician.
Here is the contact info for the eight offices that Shawn Vasell managed as Burn's State Director:
Senator Conrad Burns - Billings Office
222 N.32nd St., Suite 400
Billings, MT 59101
Tel: 406-252-0550
Fax: 406-252-7768Senator Conrad Burns - Bozeman Office
211 Haggerty Lane, Suite A & B
Bozeman, MT 59715
Tel: 406-586-4450
Fax: 406-586-7647Senator Conrad Burns - Butte Office
125 W. Granite St., Suite 200
Butte, MT 59701
Tel: 406-723-3277
Fax: 406-782-4717Senator Conrad Burns - Glendive Office
324 West Towne
Glendive, MT 59330
Tel: 406-365-2391
Fax: 406-365-8836Senator Conrad Burns - Great Falls Office
321 First Ave. North
Great Falls, MT 59401
Tel: 406-452-9585
Fax: 406-452-9586
TDD: 406-761-6885Senator Conrad Burns - Helena Office
208 N. Montana Ave., Suite 202A
Helena, MT 59601
Tel: 406-449-5401
Fax: 406-449-5462Senator Conrad Burns - Kalispell Office
1845 Highway 93 South, Suite 210
Kalispell, MT 59901
Tel: 406-257-3360
Fax: 406-257-3974Senator Conrad Burns - Missoula Office
116 West Front Street
Missoula, MT 59802
Tel: 406-728-3003
Fax: 406-728-2193
Posted at 11:15 PM in 2006 Elections, 2006 Elections - Senate, Montana, Republicans | Comments (2) | Technorati
Thursday, April 21, 2005
IL-6: This is Your GOP
Posted by Bob BrighamApril 21, 2005 — Republican Congressman Henry Hyde made some surprising comments Thursday on the impeachment hearings of President Bill Clinton. He now says Republicans may have gone after Clinton to retaliate for the impeachment of Richard Nixon. Hyde is stepping down after this term.
Hyde lost the battle against Clinton. And when his seat opens up, the Republicans are going to lose it. Sorry Mr. Hyde, but your politics are finished.
Posted at 11:39 PM in Republicans | Technorati
2006 Senate: Voters Fear "Nuclear Option"
Posted by Bob BrighamEarlier today, I posted on Santorum's Slowdown of the "Nuclear Option" -- which was rumored to be in reaction to internal polling showing that such a move would doom GOP Senators in the 2006 election.
This is true, and some smart Republicans decided they didn't want Frist's lust for absolute power to sink the ship, so somebody leaked the numbers...
This is the current state of the GOP, staffers leaking ugly numbers to keep the religious zealots from destroying the institution of the U.S. Senate. From the AP:
WASHINGTON - Private Republican polling shows scant support for a plan to stop minority Democrats from blocking judicial nominees, officials said Thursday, as two of President Bush's most controversial appointments advanced toward a possible Senate confrontation.These officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said a recent survey taken for Senate Republicans showed 37 percent support for the GOP plan to deny Democrats the ability to filibuster judicial nominees, while 51 percent oppose.
Additionally, the survey indicated only about 20 percent of Americans believe the Republican statement that Bush is the first president in history whose court appointees have been subjected to a filibuster, a tactic in which opponents can prevent a vote unless supporters gain 60 votes. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity, noting the survey data has not been made public.
When timing collides with hubris, ain't it a bitch?
Coincidentally, the polling was presented to GOP aides a few hours after the Senate Judiciary Committee voted along party lines to send the nominations of Texas judge Priscilla Owen and California judge Janice Rogers Brown to the full Senate for confirmation. Bush picked Owen for the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans and Brown for the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in the District of Columbia.Democrats filibustered the nominations in 2003, preventing a final vote on both. Bush resubmitted the names when the new Congress convened following last fall's elections.
Conservatives have signaled they hope Majority Leader Bill Frist will use either Brown or Owen — or both — as the trigger for a confrontation with Democrats.
At this point, if Frist chickens out his Presidential campaign becomes a joke. On the other hand, the GOP moves forward, then they are jumping off a bridge. It appears that the Republican Senate is just another extremist cult with a suicide pact, because public opposition means nothing to the zealots who think they are hearing the voice of God:
Republican strategists concede their efforts to swing public opinion behind their move suffered in the wake of congressional intervention in the case of Terri Schiavo, the brain-damaged woman in Florida who was being kept alive with a feeding tube. The survey suggested the GOP faces a challenge if it hopes to gain significant public support before moving ahead on banning judicial filibusters."Polling on this issue is not going to make a difference. We are going to try to do what's right," Hutchison said during the day.
Crazy fuckin' idiots.
The Family Research Council, a conservative organization, has arranged a rally for this weekend in Tennessee to build support for the GOP plan and accuse Democrats of waging filibusters based on faith. Frist is scheduled to appear by videotape.
Again, the GOP is lead by crazy fuckin' idiots.
Posted at 10:21 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, 2008 President - Republicans, Republicans | Technorati
PA-Sen: Santorum, from Showdown to Slowdown
Posted by Bob BrighamSen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.), a leading advocate of the “nuclear option” to end the Democrats’ filibuster of judicial nominees, is privately arguing for a delay in the face of adverse internal party polls.Details of the polling numbers remain under wraps, but Santorum and other Senate sources concede that, while a majority of Americans oppose the filibuster, the figures show that most also accept the Democratic message that Republicans are trying to destroy the tradition of debate in the Senate.
The Republicans are keeping the “nuclear” poll numbers secret, whereas they have often in the past been keen to release internal survey results that favor the party.
While these numbers are secret, Santorum's poll numbers are public and sinking. The GOP now has solid evidence that the "nuclear option" is political suicide, yet they will probably do it anyway. The backlash brewing against the zealots could be a powerful force in 2006 Senate elections. While Santorum may have cold feet, this has gone too far for Frist to chicken out. As the 2008 Presidential campaign heats up, it looks like Frist is the crazy one and Santorum the one doing the daring, but too chicken to do the deed. Keep handing them rope and please, somebody make some popcorn.
Posted at 02:48 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, 2008 President - Republicans, Pennsylvania, Republicans | Technorati
Wednesday, April 20, 2005
TX-22: Tom DeLay Getting Probed for Corruption
Posted by Bob BrighamAP:
WASHINGTON - Retreating under pressure, Republicans on the House ethics committee said Wednesday they were ready to open an investigation into allegations of wrongdoing against Majority Leader Tom DeLay.
This is going to get good!
Four of the five Republicans on the committee were ready to move ahead, said Rep. Doc Hastings, the panel's Republican chairman. The panel also has five Democratic members.The Republicans were "prepared to vote at the earliest opportunity to empanel an investigations subcommittee to review various allegations concerning travel and other actions" by DeLay, he said.
The ethics committee has authority to start an investigation based on information it receives "through public and other sources," Hastings said.
This is a big day for DeLay news, this broke earlier:
House Majority Leader Tom DeLay treated his political donors to a bird's-eye view of a Three Tenors concert from an arena skybox leased by a lobbyist now under criminal investigation.DeLay's political action committee did not reimburse lobbyist Jack Abramoff for the May 2000 use of the skybox, instead treating it as a type of donation that didn't have to be disclosed to election regulators at the time.
The skybox donation, valued at thousands of dollars, came three weeks before DeLay also accepted a trip to Europe — including golf with Abramoff at the world-famous St. Andrews course — for himself, his wife and aides that was underwritten by some of the lobbyist's clients.
Two months after the concert and trip, DeLay voted against gambling legislation opposed by some of Abramoff's Indian tribe clients.
House ethics rules require lawmakers to avoid the appearance of any conflict of interest.
Posted at 03:39 PM in 2006 Elections - House, Republicans, Texas | Comments (2) | Technorati
Saturday, April 16, 2005
2006 Elections: Backlash Against GOP Holy War
Posted by Bob BrighamHere is the headline you don't want on the Editorial Page of the New York Times:
Bill Frist's Religious War
Right-wing Christian groups and the Republican politicians they bankroll have done much since the last election to impose their particular religious views on all Americans. But nothing comes close to the shameful declaration of religious war by Bill Frist, the Senate majority leader, over the selection of judges for federal courts.Senator Frist is to appear on a telecast sponsored by the Family Research Council, which styles itself a religious organization but is really just another Washington lobbying concern. The message is that the Democrats who oppose a tiny handful of President Bush's judicial nominations are conducting an assault "against people of faith." By that, Senator Frist and his allies do not mean people of all faiths, only those of their faith.
Indeed. And people are talking about how the GOP Theocracy now extends to the highest level of government:
It is one thing when private groups foment this kind of intolerance. It is another thing entirely when it's done by the highest-ranking member of the United States Senate, who swore on the Bible to uphold a Constitution that forbids the imposition of religious views on Americans. Unfortunately, Senator Frist and his allies are willing to break down the rules to push through their agenda - in this case, by creating what the senator knows is a false connection between religion and the debate about judges.Senator Frist and his backers want to take away the sole tool Democrats have for resisting the appointment of unqualified judges: the filibuster. This is not about a majority or even a significant number of Bush nominees; it's about a handful with fringe views or shaky qualifications. But Senator Frist is determined to get judges on the federal bench who are loyal to the Republican fringe and, he hopes, would accept a theocratic test on decisions.
Senator Frist has an even bigger game in mind than the current nominees: the next appointments to the Supreme Court, which the Republican conservatives view as their best chance to outlaw abortion and impose their moral code on the country.
We fully understand that a powerful branch of the Republican Party believes that the last election was won on "moral values." Even if that were true, that's a far cry from voting for one religion to dominate the entire country. President Bush owes it to Americans to stand up and say so.
So Mr. Bush, will you stand up and say no before the Theocrats' Nuclear Holy War begins?
Posted at 01:59 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Nuclear Option, Republicans | Technorati
Friday, April 15, 2005
Thick as Thieves
Posted by DavidNYCAnti-immigrant thug Rep. Tom Tancredo is now the second Congressman, after Cowardly Chris Shays, to dis Tom DeLay. Staying true to my pledge to make sure everyone knows that DeLay's stench befouls all Republicans - even those who make a public show of disavowing him - I offer you A Brief History of Tom & Tom. Thick as thieves, these two are.
Posted at 03:55 PM in Republicans | Technorati
Tuesday, April 12, 2005
Damned if They Don't
Posted by DavidNYCMatt Yglesias is spot-on in his assesment of how certain Dem groups are handling L'Affaire DeLay:
I continue to have concerns about the Democratic strategy surrounding the Tom DeLay matter. What, for example, is the DCCC doing trumpeting efforts by vulnerable Republicans to distance themselves from DeLay? They should be emphasizing everyone's ties with DeLay. Rick Santorum is just the Senate version of DeLay. And I'm totally unimpressed with Chris Shays's conversion to the anti-DeLay cause. Abandoning your friends when they get in hot water shows you're a coward, not a principled and independent thinker.
Bob's post below about Nancy Johnson has got me thinking. We should stick it to every Republican no matter what they say about Tom DeLay.
Don't back away from DeLay? Well, then you're definitely scum and we'll be sure to point that out, thank you very much. Try to distance yourself, ala the cowardly Shays? Well, then we'll just point out how close you are to the guy in the first place. It wasn't long ago that Shays had this to say about The Bugman:
"I think he's been a great majority leader."
The GOP loves to pull this kind of stunt no matter how far Dems bend over backwards - think of how they tried to blow Mary Landrieu out of the water even after she had loudly supported Bush's tax cuts and the Iraq war resolution. The Rove rule is: You hurt us, we hurt you; you help us, we hurt you. For the schoolyard bully crowd, that's heads I win, tails you lose.
Guess what, chumps? Now the tables have turned. So here's your choice on DeLay: Damned if you do back away from him, damned if you don't. Enjoy, suckers.
(Shays quote thanks to Cunctator.)
Posted at 07:33 PM in Republicans | Technorati
TX-22: Barney Frank Afraid of Tom DeLay...Leaving
Posted by Bob BrighamDemocrats think they can make DeLay an issue that costs Republicans seats in next year's elections. "Democrats have gone from being frustrated that people weren't paying enough attention to DeLay to being afraid he's going to be thrown out too soon," says Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass.
DeLay will be throw out, either by the Republicans or by the voters -- or he'll be dragged out in handcuffs. No matter what happens, Democrats have captured the ethics high-ground and GOP corruption will be a major issue in 2006. As Kos notes:
Republicans can expect attack ads featuring DeLay whether they speak out against DeLay or not. The Hammer is endemic of what the modern Republican Party has become -- a cesspool of corruption. It is, indeed, everything they ran against in 1994.
Posted at 12:57 PM in 2006 Elections, 2006 Elections - House, 2006 Elections - Senate, Republicans, Texas | Technorati
Sunday, April 10, 2005
Shays: Buzzoff Bugman
Posted by Bob BrighamAP:
WASHINGTON (AP) - Rep. Christopher Shays said Sunday that fellow Republican Rep. Tom DeLay should step down as House majority leader because his continuing ethics problems are hurting the GOP."Tom's conduct is hurting the Republican Party, is hurting this Republican majority and it is hurting any Republican who is up for re-election," Shays told The Associated Press on Sunday.
Shays is right, of course. Hopefully, DeLay won't listen because if DeLay were to step down it would rob Democrats across the country of a great campaign issue. Thanks to DeLay getting caught, the entire country is learning of the vast corruption that controls the Republican Party. It isn't just the corruption of one man, it is the web of corruption.
Posted at 06:15 PM in 2006 Elections, 2006 Elections - House, 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut, Republicans, Texas | Technorati
TX-22: Tom DeLay Corruption News
Posted by Bob BrighamThree big stories for those following the corruption scandal that has engulfed the GOP:
• Jack Abramoff is indicating he'll cut a deal with prosecutors and says, "Those S.O.B.s. DeLay knew everything. He knew all the details."• Congressman Chris Shays bucks DeLay, calls him, "an absolute embarrassment to me and to the Republican Party."
• A Washington Post story on DeLay's offensive notes, "DeLay is continuing his high-decibel comments -- including his warning last week about "a judiciary run amok" -- on the theory that he is going to remain himself and not bend to the opposition, friends say."
Remember, Clinton suffered the worst damage not from Republican attacks, but when Lieberman joined the Republican chorus attacking Clinton. Now that Chris Shays is playing the same roll the momentum will increase faster than any other milestone short of the indictments.
The Abramoff story is also key. In addition to saying he had the goods on DeLay, he also said, "There are e-mails and records that will implicate others." Which could be devasting to Republicans in the 2006 mid-term election. When Senator Conrad Burns was implicated in an Abramoff scandal his re-elect number dropped to 36 and the White House had to dispatch Karl Rove to Montana to clean things up. Can the GOP afford to have any others implicated?
The DeLay offensive that the GOP is plotting will probably be remembered as the best thing to ever happen to the Democratic Party in a long time. The GOP seems to be going out of their way to tie Republicans to a corrupt lawmaker who is so unpopular he'll lose his re-election if he isn't locked up first.
DeLay's days our numbered, but thanks to the wingnuts, this will drag out far longer than it should.
The 2006 backlash is coming.
Posted at 01:01 PM in 2006 Elections, 2006 Elections - House, 2006 Elections - Senate, Connecticut, Montana, Republicans, Texas | Technorati
Saturday, April 09, 2005
TX-22: Tom DeLay Corruption: Drop the Hammer
Posted by Bob BrighamI have taken a previous look at Drop the Hammer, but I wanted to come back to the subject to focus on a couple of key points in the effort to expose Republican Majority Leader Tom DeLay as corrupt.
First of all, I think www.DropTheHammer.org deserves some serious credit. The Drop the Hammer effort deserves an 11 on a ten point scale when it comes to online activism. The American Progress Action Fund has given clear notice that companies willing to facilitate corruption will face accountability.
But what I really like about the Drop the Hammer effort is the flow-chart of the corruption. If you care at all about America's democracy, you should check out the DeLay corruption page on Drop the Hammer.
Posted at 09:01 PM in 2006 Elections, 2006 Elections - House, Activism, Netroots, Republicans, Texas | Technorati
Republican absolute power
Posted by Bob BrighamFrom the AP:
WASHINGTON - Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid said Saturday that the fight over President Bush's judicial nominees is really a battle between Democrats who believe in checks and balances and Republicans who want everything their way. [...]"When it comes down to it, stripping away these important checks and balances is about the arrogance of those in power who want to rewrite the rules so that they can get their way," Reid, D-Nev., said in his party's weekly radio address.
The Republican plan has been dubbed the "nuclear option" because some say it would blow up Senate relations.
If the GOP goes forward with their plan for absolute power, it will shut down the Senate:
Reid has threatened to retaliate by slowing down or stopping Senate business through procedural maneuvers.While the fight is technically over the internal rules of the Senate, Reid said it is still important. "This isn't about some arcane procedures of the Senate. It is about protecting liberty and our limited government," he said.
Without the judicial filibuster, "the U.S. Senate becomes merely a rubber stamp for the president," Reid said. "It would mean that one political party — be it Republicans today or Democrats tomorrow — gets to have all the say over our nation's highest courts."
Reid also targeted House Majority Leader Tom DeLay in his remarks. While not identifying him by name, Reid said there was a "Republican leader threatening judges who protect our rights and corrupting our government by running roughshod over the ethics committee to protect himself."
Listening to Tom DeLay or the Constitution...Democrats are 100% right. There are no two sides to this story.
Posted at 06:54 PM in 2006 Elections, 2006 Elections - Senate, Nuclear Option, Republicans | Technorati
Friday, April 08, 2005
Everyone hates Republicans
Posted by Bob BrighamAP:
When Bush's face appeared on giant screen TVs showing the ceremony, many in the crowds outside St. Peter's Square booed and whistled.
President Bush's standing with the public is slumping just three months into his final term, but Americans have an even lower regard for the job being done by Congress. Bush's job approval is at 44 percent, with 54 percent disapproving. Only 37 percent have a favorable opinion of the work being done by the Republican-controlled Congress, according to an AP-Ipsos poll.Bush's job approval was at 49 percent in January, while Congress was at 41 percent. [...]
The number supporting Bush's handling of some domestic issues dipped between March and April, to 42 percent for the economy and 38 percent for issues like education and health care, according to the poll conducted for The Associated Press by Ipsos-Public Affairs.
Support for the president's approach to his top domestic priority, Social Security, remained at 36 percent, while 58 percent oppose it.
But Democrats say they intend to use the renewed focus on energy issues to revive their case that Mr. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney, both of whom worked in the oil business, are more interested in helping oil companies than in helping consumers. And several recent polls suggest that the spike in oil prices and the resulting rise in gasoline prices have undermined Mr. Bush's political standing."When gas prices go up to the level they're at now, they are in some ways the economic equivalent of the color-coded terrorism alerts," said Geoff Garin, a Democratic pollster. "They work their way through into public opinion very quickly in terms of affecting people's opinions about the direction of the nation and raising the stakes on pocketbook issues generally."
An NBC News/Wall Street Journal survey published Thursday showed a drop in approval of Mr. Bush's handling of the economy to 41 percent from 46 percent two months ago. A USA Today/CNN/Gallup poll released this week found an even sharper drop, to 41 percent from 48 percent five weeks earlier.
The 2006 backlash is materializing.
Posted at 05:51 PM in 2006 Elections, 2006 Elections - House, 2006 Elections - Senate, Nuclear Option, Republicans | Comments (1) | Technorati