Thursday, May 24, 2007

The Whodunit Continues

This Washington whodunit just won't end.

Yesterday, Monica Goodling, the thirty-something former Justice Department official from Pat Robertson's Regent University, testified before the House judiciary committee, having secured a grant of criminal immunity. She confessed that she often considered the political affiliation of candidates for career jobs in the Justice Department--such as immigration court judges--which might be illegal. She said that the former Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty (who recently resigned) did not testify fully and accurately when he appeared before Congress to discuss the controversial firings of U.S. attorneys. Se insisted she had briefed him on matters he claimed to have knowledge of. She also said that Attorney General Alberto Gonzales in March had discussed with her the firings of the US attorneys, even though Gonzales subsequently told Congress he hadn't talked about the firings with other potential witnesses. This admission raised the suspicion that Gonzales had been trying to coordinate testimony with another witness. In some settings, that could be considered obstruction of justice.

But there's one subject Goodling shed no light on: who cooked up the list of the U.S. attorneys to be fired. All the top Justice Department officials involved in this matter have testified, yet we still don't know who was responsible. It's rather curious that no one at Justice can explain what happened on this front. The firings occurred only a few months ago. This was not a minor action. It shouldn't be too hard for participants to recall who was in charge.

The absence of a clear answer to the primary question supports the speculation that the White House played a significant role. Goodling said that when it comes to this mystery she does not ‚ "hold the keys to the kingdom." Well, who has those keys? Perhaps they are resting on a desk at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Congressional investigators should continue to look there.

EDWARDS NOT SO GAY? Does former Senator John Edwards have something against gay people. From today's Washington Post:

Robert Shrum, the veteran Democratic strategist who worked on John Edwards's 1998 Senate campaign in North Carolina, does not remember his onetime client very fondly.

In his new memoir, "No Excuses: Concessions of a Serial Campaigner," Shrum recalls asking Edwards at the outset of that campaign, "What is your position, Mr. Edwards, on gay rights?"

"I'm not comfortable around those people," Edwards replied, according to Shrum. He writes that the candidate's wife, Elizabeth, told him: "John, you know that's wrong."

Edwards's pollster, Harrison Hickman, who was in the room during the discussion, says Shrum "is sensationalizing and taking out of context what was an honest discussion about [Edwards's] lack of exposure to these issues and openly gay people. I don't remember anything that expressed any kind of venom or judgment about gay people."

Cat-fight on the left! Among the consultants! Who's right? I don't know, of course. But the Edwards campaign sent out an email this morning announcing he will hold a press availability this afternoon. To talk about what? The email didn't say. No doubt, he'll avail himself of the opportunity to discuss Shrum's slam.

Posted by David Corn at May 24, 2007 11:18 AM


capt said...

Mr. David Corn,

We all know it was Rove, the only question is who will take the blame.



Robert S said...

Is Bob Shrum a neutral commentator?

Winner: Hillary Clinton
Posted: Thursday, April 26, 2007 8:39 PM by Hardball
Bob Shrum, Democratic debates

Hillary Clinton was superb in saying what she would do if the US was the subject of a terrorist attack- Attack back.

Note to Barack Obama: When asked about America’s three most important allies, don’t forget about Israel.

Joe Biden had the best moment of the night when asked if he was verbose and whether he could avoid gaffs he gave a one-word answer: Yes. It was sharp, funny, and the time limits were Biden’s friend.

Winner: Hillary Clinton

Winner among the second tier: Joe Biden- seemed genuinely presidential.

Didn’t seem to be there very much: Barack Obama

No hits, no runs, no errors: John Edwards


Thanks for the comments on my letter to Senator Fienstien, it is a theme I've been thinking about expanding.

The meme of "tired of partisan politics" needs to be deconstructed for what is; a blatant attempt by the corporate media and related interests to have the vox populi reduced to irrelevancy. They are literally trying to assert that you do not wish to have a voice of advocacy for your interests in the halls of privilege and power. It is ludicrous on its face; but repeated often enough in big lie technique becomes a mantra unchallenged by thought process. It is also a direct outgrowth of the T.I.N.A. meme fostered by Thatcher and Reagan.

Robert S said...

US to let START nuclear treaty expire
Updated: 2007-05-23 09:15

WASHINGTON - The United States plans to let a landmark nuclear arms reduction treaty with Russia expire in 2009 and replace it with a less formal agreement that eliminates strict verification requirements and weapons limits, a senior US official says.


In the post-Cold war era, many provisions of the 1991 START accord, which mandated deep nuclear weapons cuts, "are no longer necessary. We don't believe we're in a place where we need have to have the detailed lists (of weapons) and verification measures," added DeSutter, who handles arms control and verification issues.

Russia agrees the treaty should not be extended but wants it replaced with another legally binding treaty that makes further cuts in strategic forces, so the two sides have significant differences.



Russian leader assails U.S. defenses

MOSCOW -- The man considered to be a leading contender to succeed President Vladimir Putin criticized a landmark Soviet-U.S. arms treaty Wednesday as a "relic of the Cold War," and promised that Russia would have a "sword" capable of piercing a U.S. missile shield.

First Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Ivanov made the statements at a two-hour news conference during which he commented on issues ranging from global security to children's sports in what sounded like a presentation of his campaign platform.

Putin has not expressed support of any potential contender for the March 2008 election, and Ivanov has not declared whether he will run. However, he and another first deputy prime minister, Dmitry Medvedev, are widely seen as leading candidates being groomed by the Kremlin.

Ivanov, a KGB veteran like Putin, harshly criticized U.S. plans to deploy elements of its missile defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic, saying Russia doesn't trust Washington's claims that they are intended to fend off potential missile threats from Iran.

"It can't be accepted on serious expert level," he said. "A radar the U.S. is planning to deploy in the Czech Republic will be capable of scanning air space up to the Ural Mountains."

Ivanov said Russia is not going to build a strategic missile defense system similar to that being developed by the United States, but will take "adequate steps" to respond to the U.S. move.

"A more efficient sword can be found for every shield," he said.

Putin and other Russian officials have said that Russia already has missiles capable of piercing any potential missile defense system and will develop even more powerful weapons.


Military Madness - Graham Nash

In an upstairs room in Blackpool
By the side of a northern sea
The army had my father
And my mother was having me
Military Madness was killing my country
Solitary Sadness comes over me
After the school was over and I moved
To the other side
I found another country but I never
Lost my pride
Military Madness was killing the country
Solitary sadness creeps over me
And after the wars are over
And the body count is finally filed
I hope that The Man discovers
What’s driving the people wild
Military madness is killing your country
So much sadness, between you and me
War, War, War, War, War, War

Robert S said...

David B. Benson said...

Somewhere I found a headline to the effect that congress is currently conducting 16 invertigations (sic) into executive branch wrong-doings.

But somehow the link didn't work for me...


As set forth in House Rule X, clause 4, the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform may, at any time, conduct investigations of any matter regardless of whether another standing committee has jurisdiction over the matter. In 1998, Rep. Waxman formed the Special Investigations Division to conduct investigations into issues that are important to members of the Oversight Committee and other members of Congress.
Current and Past Investigations

* Abstinence-Only Education
* Abu Ghraib Prison Abuses
* Administration Oversight
* Arsenic in Drinking Water
* Census Data
* Chemical Regulation
* Cheney Energy Task Force
* Congressional Preemption of State Laws
* Correspondence Regarding the Testimony of Secretary Rice
* Defense and Security
* Dietary Supplements
* Disabled Veterans Tax
* Disclosure of CIA Agent Identity
* District of Columbia
* Education
* Elections and Voting
* Energy Policy
* Enron Investigation
* Environment
* Federal Government Operations
* Fifty Caliber Rifles and Ammunition
* Flu Vaccine Crisis
* Food Safety
* Global Terrorism Report
* Global Tobacco Accord
* Government Use of Propaganda
* Guns
* Head Start
* Holocaust-Era Insurance Restitution
* Hurricane Katrina Response
* Information Technology
* Iraq Intelligence and Nuclear Evidence
* Iraq Reconstruction
* Medicaid and Medicare
* Medical Privacy
* Medicare Bill Cost Estimates
* Member Reports
* Misleading Information from the Battlefield
* National Missile Defense
* Nursing Homes
* Open Government
* Politics and Science
* Postal Reform
* Prescription Drugs
* Price Discrimination
* Public Health
* Seven Member Rule
* Social Security
* Steroid Use in Sports
* Terrorism
* Tobacco
* U.S. House Ethics
* United States Congress
* Veterans Health Care
* Waste, Fraud, and Abuse
* Western Energy Crisis
* White House Use of Private E-mail Accounts
* Workplace Injuries

Robert S said...

'DC madam' lawyer: Cheney isn't not on phone records
Ron Brynaert
Published: Wednesday May 23, 2007


"Here's a story we're working on now," Letterman said, according to Madsen's account. "Apparently, there are rumors coming out of Washington that Vice President Dick Cheney, when he was the CEO of Halliburton, used to go visit prostitutes. This could explain why one girl was paid two billion dollars. I mean, I was thinking about this and Cheney ... I mean, going to a prostitute, that's ... I mean, I can't believe a good-looking guy like that would ever have to pay for sex, you know what I'm saying?"

Wonkette explained why its staffers were "underwhelmed by this rumor."

"Because even if it’s a fact, which it probably is, there’s no way it would have any impact on Cheney’s 'career,'" Wonkette continued. "This is a draft-dodging half-human war criminal with a pregnant lesbian daughter who tells senators to fuck themselves and shoots his own friends in the face. Ordering an outcall hooker is positively innocent compared to the well-known things Cheney does every day."


Musta been written before the birth of the latest member of the Cheney family...

...Mary Cheney gave birth to a boy; her 15 year same sex companion will have no legal parental rights.

Gerald said...

This gay issue is nothing more than smoke and mirrors. I cannot judge another person.

For me there is nothing greater than to love and be loved by a woman. Making love to a woman is the greatest experience and moment in a man's life.

To love and be loved by a woman is a mind blowing experience!

Gerald said...

Dr. Demento

Gerald said...

Collateral Damage

Gerald said...

Where the DDE justification goes wrong, then, is in the moral importance it assigns to the directing of intent. That is, it relies exclusively upon the intended effect of the act as proclaimed by the actor as the crucial moral consideration for determining the permissibility and moral value of an act, rather than taking into account the entire set of foreseen probable effects. Consequently, only the intended “good effect” becomes morally relevant, and the foreseen evil effect - now termed “collateral damage” - becomes somehow abrogated and moral responsibility for the innocent deaths somehow diffused. The DDE justification fails because morality requires more than merely a proclamation of good intent.

A DDE justification in such cases and the alleged distinction between terrorism and a collaterally violent response to terrorism, between the attacks of 9/11 and the bombing of the al-Sa’ah restaurant, is misguided and merely a pretense or rationalization for retaliation and revenge. Both acts knowingly kill noncombatants to achieve some goal or objective. Both terrorists and responders violate the right to life of their innocent victims and fail to fulfill their obligation to respect such rights. Consequently, there is no moral difference between acts of terrorism and of collateral violence. They are morally equivalent. Neither are acts of war but of murder. Neither the terrorists nor the responders in such cases are combatants but brigands and murderers. With the civilian death toll in Iraqestimated at over 654,000, a recognition that collateral damage is nothing more than a rhetorical contrivance that trivializes the murder of innocent human beings, should be of moral concern to us all.

Camillo “Mac” Bica is a professor of philosophy at the School of Visual Arts in New York City. As a veteran recovering from his experiences as a United States Marine Corps Officer during the Vietnam War, he founded, and coordinated for five years, the Veterans Self-Help Initiative, a therapeutic community of veterans suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. He is a long-time activist for peace and justice, a member of the Vietnam Veterans Against the War, and a founding member of the Long Island Chapter of Veterans for Peace. Articles by Dr. Bica have appeared in The Humanist Magazine, ZNet,, Monthly Review Zine, Foreign Policy in Focus, and numerous philosophical journals.

Gerald said...

When violence against women is

Gerald said...

It must be music to the ears of Nazi Americans that we are in Iraq to spread democracy. I cannot wait from one day to the next to experience the endless bullshit from Nazi Americans.

Yanar Mohammed, president of the Organization of Women's Freedom in Iraq (OWFI), in an interview with Women's Human Rights Net highlighted the effects of this war on women (

The list is a long one: They are homeless, alone, destitute, raped, beaten and inmates of refugee camps as dangerous as the streets.

Most of all, they are prey.

Mohammed, in a CNN interview, May 19, 2007, made two points no U.S. citizen wants to hear.

First, she said, the number of honor killings in Iraq have increased by the hundreds since the invasion.

Second, she went on, 10 years ago, long before the country was "freed," honor killings did not exist.

Pressed by the CNN reporter to explain the difference, Mohammed was short and to the point: "Someone came in from the outside and gave us "democracy," she said. The problem, she went on, is that the new democracy became Islamic -- not secular.

Now, she reports, men come to a house, bang on the door, say "This is a whorehouse" and murder all the women there. … It is sectarianism hiding behind religion."

The situation is even worse than that, however. With the change in the Iraqi Constitution, articles that protected the rights of women were eliminated. Now discrimination against women is, indeed, "honorable," is "religious," is legal.


Gerald said...

What is so sad? It is that women are God's greatest creation! God gave women two characteristics that make them His greatest creation, nurturing and sensitivity, if they choose to accept these characteristics. But, there are some women who choose to function more like men and that is sad.

capt said...

The current moguls understand that true media power lies not in firing up our outrage, as Hearst did, but in befuddling it or tranquilizing it with new toys. The idea is to render us passive so that they can exercise their power to sell us a bunch of stuff we mostly don't need and mostly don't want. : Richard Schickel - Brill's Content, July/August 2000, p. 122

"When you see that trading is done, not by consent, but by compulsion - when you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing - when you see that money is flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors - when you see that men get richer by graft and by pull than by work, and your laws don't protect you against them, but protect them against you - when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice - you may know that your society is doomed: Ayn Rand - (1905-1982) Author - Source: Atlas Shrugged, Francisco's "Money Speech"

"Were the talents and virtues which heaven has bestowed on men given merely to make them more obedient drudges, to be sacrificed to the follies and ambition of a few? Or, were not the noble gifts so equally dispensed with a divine purpose and law, that they should as nearly as possible be equally exerted, and the blessings of Providence be equally enjoyed by all? -- Samuel Adams - (1722-1803), was known as the "Father of the American Revolution."


Thanks ICH Newsletter!

David B. Benson said...

Winslow Wheeler writes the lead article on AlterNet today.

Very upsetting...

capt said...

The Democrats celebrate losing

David Sirota: Democrats run to the press to brag about the brilliance of using their majority not to end the war, but to create a situation that makes it seem as if they oppose the war, while actually helping Republicans continue it.

This blog first appeared on Working For Change

In case you believe the malarkey being spewed by the House Rules Committee about the rule vote yesterday not really being the vote to give President Bush a blank check, take a look at the Washington Post and the Associated Press today. I reported this at the beginning of the day yesterday and was then criticized by House Rules Committee Chairwoman Louise Slaughter (D-NY). Now, though, it seems at least some major news organizations have caught on that I was exactly right. In the process, they are reporting what will be recorded in history as the final insult of it all: Democrats running to reporters bragging about their own brilliance in deceiving the public. Here's the Associated Press:

"In a highly unusual maneuver, House Democratic leaders crafted a procedure that allowed their rank and file to oppose money for the war, then step aside so Republicans could advance it."

Here's the Washington Post:

"Yesterday's vote to fund the war through September was a historical rarity: the passage of a bill opposed by the speaker of the House and a majority of the speaker's party. Two years ago to the day, then-Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) violated the "Hastert rule" -- that only bills supported by a majority of the majority can come up -- by bringing up legislation to allow federal funding for stem cell research. The majority of the Republican majority opposed the law. He voted against it, but he knew it would never become law over President Bush's signature...The North American Free Trade Agreement passed in 1993, over the objections of most Democrats, who were then in the majority. But NAFTA did have the support of then-Speaker Thomas S. Foley (D-Wash.), as well as the Democratic president, Bill Clinton. In contrast, the Iraq funding bill was not only opposed by the majority of House Democrats, it was also ardently opposed by the speaker and even the lawmaker who drafted it, Appropriations Committee Chairman David R. Obey (D-Wis.). And it is destined to become law. 'To have the chairman and the speaker vote against a bill like this, I've never heard of it,' Hastert said."

And here's the worst part of it all - Democrats are now bragging about it. Not only have they sent out a Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee fundraising email attempting to confuse voters by claiming with a straight face that they really stood up to President Bush. But most insulting of all, they are actually running to reporters to pat themselves on the back for engineering a procedural pirouette designed to confuse the public. Here's the Post again:

"But while protesters outside the Capitol condemned what they saw as a capitulation, Democrats inside were remarkably understanding of their speaker's contortions. Party leaders jury-rigged the votes yesterday to give all Democrats something to brag about...Democrats saw brilliance in the legerdemain. And with such contortions came more appreciation for the efforts Pelosi was making to fund the war in a fashion most palatable to angry Democrats. 'It was the responsible thing to do, and she's a responsible speaker,' said Rep. Anna G. Eshoo (D-Calif.)."

This is what we're dealing with folks. A party that runs to the press to brag about the brilliance of using their majority not to end the war, but to create a situation that makes it seem as if they oppose the war, while actually helping Republicans continue it.


*****end of clip*****

Yahoo! This is your celebration
Yahoo! This is your celebration

Celebrate good times, come on! (Let's celebrate)
Celebrate good times, come on! (Let's celebrate)

There's a party goin' on right here
A celebration to last throughout the years
So bring your good times, and your laughter too
We gonna celebrate your party with you

Come on now

Let's all celebrate and have a good time
We gonna celebrate and have a good time

It's time to come together
It's up to you, what's your pleasure

Everyone around the world
Come on!

Yahoo! It's a celebration

Celebrate good times, come on!
It's a celebration
Celebrate good times, come on!
Let's celebrate

We're gonna have a good time tonight
Let's celebrate, it's all right
We're gonna have a good time tonight
Let's celebrate, it's all right


We're gonna have a good time tonight (Ce-le-bra-tion)
Let's celebrate, it's all right
We're gonna have a good time tonight (Ce-le-bra-tion)
Let's celebrate, it's all right


Celebrate good times, come on! (Let's celebrate)
Celebrate good times, come on!
It's a celebration!
Celebrate good times, come on! (Let's celebrate)

Come on and celebrate, good times, tonight (Celebrate good times, come on!)
'Cause everything's gonna be all right
Let's celebrate (Celebrate good times, come on)
(Let's celebrate)...

Kool & The Gang - Celebration


capt said...

I can't imagine how "one party rule" would look any different?


I may have found my party hat! (hint it is not a D or an R)


capt said...

New Thread!