Tuesday, July 31, 2007
Sunday, July 29, 2007
Saturday, July 28, 2007
Thursday, July 26, 2007
Can we all please get a grip here? Remember: revenge is a dish best served cold.
Wednesday, July 25, 2007
Tuesday, July 24, 2007
If they've committed criminal acts, and that seems pretty certain on a pretty broad scale, the statute of limitations is more than likely not set as 'until you leave office'. So, it would seem to me that, if they're prosecutable, they would have a series of problems that are increased by running out the clock.
First, come Jan 09, the odds are much better than even that they will be completely out of power. As it stands now, it is highly unlikely that the Repugs will recapture either house of Congress; it is pretty unlikely, tho not beyond conception, that they will keep the White House. So the political 'atmosphere' will completely against them, or at least, out of their control, come Jan 09. Second, they will (most likely) not be able to claim 'privilege' as they are no longer working for an active President. Third, in the event that they are convicted of something, they will not be able to count on a Presidential pardon (and the more that are convicted, the longer it's likely to be before a 'friendly' Pres gets back into the WH to pardon them.
So, running out the clock doesn't seem, to me, anyway, to be a very smart option. Of course, these guys have demonstrated repeatedly an inability to choose the smart option.
(This is all, of course, assuming there IS an election in 08. It wouldn't surprise me at all if sometime next year, something happened that called on Dumbfuck to declare martial law and cancel the elections til it's safer to have them (say 2199?) My faith in these guys is limitless (at least, in the negative))
Monday, July 23, 2007
Friday, July 20, 2007
CHEERS to putting the opposition in their proper place. In today's must-read, Paul Waldman takes down conservatism hard. Here's a taste:
Conservatives supported slavery, conservatives opposed women's suffrage, conservatives supported Jim Crow, conservatives opposed the 40-hour work week and the abolishment of child labor, and conservatives supported McCarthyism. In short, all the major advancements of freedom and justice in our history were pushed by liberals and opposed by conservatives, no matter the party they inhabited at the time.
Conservatism is Bill Bennett lecturing you about self-denial, then rushing off to feed his slot habit at the casino. It's James Dobson telling you that children need regular beatings to stay in line. It's a superannuated nun rapping you on the knuckles so you won't think about your dirty parts. It's Jerry Falwell watching "Teletubbies" frame by frame to see if Tinky Winky is trying to turn him gay. Conservatism is everyone you never wanted to grow up to be.
[7/20/07 Update: We would add: It's Mark Foley chairing the Exploited Children Caucus while having online fantasy sex with congressional pages. It's former House Speaker Newt Gingrich railing against Bill Clinton's blow job while cheating on his own wife. It's Senator David Vitter lecturing you on fidelity and then slinking off to have diaper sex with prostitutes. Etc. Etc. Etc. Wholesome bunch.]
Impeach their asses now!
Thursday, July 19, 2007
Googling bush +9/11 +saddam shows nothing at all, Tony. Well, except 2+million hits..... so you're right, the President NEVER EVER tried to link Saddam to 9/11.
She corrected herself, and apologized for the error, this morning. Apparently, in response to viewer communications. Since she has been honest and gracious with her correction, I would like to apologize to her for my outburst.
I've always kind of liked her anyway, so it was hard for me to go off on her like that. Phew I feel better!
Wednesday, July 18, 2007
(use the links for the papers in the blogroll to the right... I'm too pissed to link to them directly right now)
UPDATE: dKos has a winner in the Best of the Worst Coverage category SHEEESH!
Tuesday, July 17, 2007
You are a profit source and otherwise a complete and valueless annoyance. There is no impetus to treat you with anything other than contempt. There are options, but most are no better, and despite the whole concept of transportability, it's usually more effort than it's worth to switch carriers.
Judge Green is spinning in his grave.
Saturday, July 14, 2007
Friday, July 13, 2007
This is an absurd loophole, and Congress is now dithering about whether to close it. (The fact that they're dithering, instead of competing with each other to express outrage and then closing it immediately on a unanimous vote, is yet another demonstration of the immense stranglehold that the rich have on American politics right now, but that's another story.) However, David Cay Johnston tells us today that even if this loophole gets closed, there's another one waiting in the wings.
Thursday, July 12, 2007
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
Monday, July 09, 2007
Kevin sums it up correctly:
If it mattered that the Attorney General was a perjurer, this would be a pretty big deal.
UPDATE: TPM has more
Sunday, July 08, 2007
Saturday, July 07, 2007
What I don't understand, what I'd like to ask Ignatius is, What is the Republican Party today offering that makes them people anybody in their right minds would want to get along with?
Asking Democrats to compromise and work together with the Republicans and the Bush Leaguers is like asking the cops to compromise and work together with the Mob. It's like asking doctors to compromise and work together with a plague. It's like asking...people living in a democracy to compromise and work together with people who want to overthrow that democracy and replace it with an aristocracy that bows to a dictator.
Friday, July 06, 2007
The Coalition of the Billing had retract the announcement that it had killed a 'key' Al Qaeda figure when it was pointed out that they had already trumpeted his death a year ago. Apparently, the military is taking notes from Halliburton and has adopted double billing?
It's very unlikely we'll get lucky enough to get rid of them before January, 2009, barring a colossal fuckup on there (and given the general competence level at 1600 Pennsylvania, that's a distinct possibility!). But, if something does break, and the MSM does pick up on it (assuming they'd recognize a real story), and with this level of public support for it already, an impeachment could happen. Wouldn't that be lovely? A situation so dire for Bu$hCo that their pet Congressmen would HAVE to vote to blow them out of office to save their own necks come November 08? Yum.
At this point, if it happens, it'll probably be related to Plame/Libby. Everything else is convoluted, arcane, and legalistic. If something breaks to show there's been a coverup at the WH over Libby (let me rephrase... if something breaks to PROVE there's been a coverup.....), then it gets pretty simple, and the comparisons to Watergate make it slamdunk even for our currently mentally deficient newsies.
UPDATE: Atrios seems worked up over impeachment.... check out the third link, particularly. [OOPS... it's Avedon, in for Atrios, not the man himself!]
Thursday, July 05, 2007
Wednesday, July 04, 2007
Tuesday, July 03, 2007
We don't know why Libby decided to lie to federal investigators about his role in the leak. But it's reasonable to conclude -- or at least strongly suspect -- that he was doing it to protect Cheney, and maybe even Bush.
Why, after all, was special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald so determined to get the truth from Libby and, barring that, to punish him for obstructing justice? Prosecutorial ethics preclude Fitzgerald, a Bush appointee, from answering such questions. But the most likely scenario is that he suspected that it was Cheney who committed the underlying crime -- that Cheney instructed Libby to out a CIA agent in his no-holds-barred crusade against a critic. (See my Feb. 21 column, The Cloud Over Cheney and my May 29 column, Fitzgerald Again Points to Cheney.)
All of this means that Bush's decision yesterday to commute Libby's prison sentence isn't just a matter of unequal justice. It is also a potentially self-serving and corrupt act.
Was there a quid pro quo at work? Was Libby being repaid for falling on his sword and protecting his bosses from further scrutiny? Alternately, was he being repaid for his defense team's abrupt decision in mid-trial not to drag Cheney into court, where he would have faced cross-examination by Fitzgerald? (See my March 8 column, Did Libby Make a Deal?)
Bush and Press Secretary Tony Snow this morning continued to stonewall when it comes to any of the important questions about this case, Cheney and Bush's involvement, and the commutation itself. Bush said he wouldn't rule out a future pardon for Libby -- but didn't have much else new to say. Snow was simply ducking questions while asserting repeatedly that the president is entitled to exercise his clemency power when he sees fit.
Among the questions that Bush, Cheney and others should be facing:
* Does the president approve of Libby's conduct?
* On whose behalf did Libby act?
* Did the White House make any sort of a deal with Libby or his defense team?
* What did Bush know and when did he know it?
* When did he find out that Karl Rove and Libby had both leaked Plame's identity? Before or after he vowed that any leakers would be fired? Did anyone lie to him about their role? Why didn't he fire them?
* How does the conduct of his aides comport with Bush's vow to restore ethics to the White House? How does the commutation?
* What factors did the president take into account in deciding to commute the sentence?
* What does the president consider an appropriate punishment for perjury and obstruction of justice?
* What was Cheney's role in the commutation?
That's just for starters. Send more questions to email@example.com. I'll publish more on Thursday.
UPDATE: the estimable Hunter at DKos smacks AD around as well
Monday, July 02, 2007
Jared Bernstein has a good post today at TPM Cafe on economists and why they are wrong so often. Most of it confirms my suspicions.
In a not unexpected move, Dumbfuck commuted Libby's sentence today, via a press release (too chicken to face questions, I quess) The reaction is, needless to say, a shitstorm. The commutation does NOT remove the conviction, the fine, or the probation, but does eliminate his going off to the pokey.
The Public is NOT amused.
Biden suggests electronic bombardment of the WH.
Fred 'the Hammer' Thompson is, of course, "very happy".
Per TPM, the commutation is in violation of the regs.
Atrios has a collection of responses/statements from players and candidates.