"Let me pick the alfalfa sprouts from between my teeth and we'll celebrate with some tofu and Pete Seeger records while my boobs swing freely 'neath my Che Guevara t-shirt."
I wonder if medieval scribes bitched incessently about Gutenburg, the way this Harris clown was bitching about Froomkin.
cleter |
12.22.05 - 5:45 pm | #
How does the MSM feel about liberals and wingnuts?
Liberals = annoyance (use the fly-swatter)
Wingnuts = fear (immediate kowtowing)
Max |
12.22.05 - 5:49 pm | #
The senior management of the WaPo like and understand hierarchy, not *wirearchy*.
They will want to feel *in control* until much too late .. it's been an essential part of their professional socialization (and especially the mangerial part of that).
Jon Husband |
12.22.05 - 5:49 pm | #
Old Media is freaked out about the blogosphere, because they are getting called on their bullshit, and they are no longer able to pontificate from their ivory tower without fear that they might actually get their asses fact-checked once in awhile. They are being subjected to scrutiny and quality control, and they don't like it one bit.
global yokel |
12.22.05 - 5:52 pm | #
And tell us, Jane, has Kobe been a good boy this year? What's Santa going to bring him?
Thesaurus Rex |
Homepage |
12.22.05 - 5:53 pm | #
Harris calls us the "crankosphere" and Powell thinks we're stupid, that we're suddenly going to go all damp and start noodling to Phish because he uses the word "union.
Do these dickheads honestly think that accessing computer databases determines someone's credibility? I researched stuff on microfiche last week -- does that make me REALLY REALLY into Phish (or Fiche)?
Peanut |
12.22.05 - 5:53 pm | #
I guess not everyone a WaPoo is getting the message.
Washington Post chairman Don Graham said publicly for the first time this week that the future of news is on the Internet, not in print newspapers like the Washington Post.
“The Web site simply has to come through, ours and that of other newspapers, for us to be successful,” Graham told investment analysts Wednesday in New York.---more at link
-
Valley Girl |
12.22.05 - 5:59 pm | #
Very informative post. I learned a lot about the relationship between the WaPo paper and online WaPo that I didn't know.
Alvord |
12.22.05 - 6:01 pm | #
Jane as usual....BRILLIANT...thanks!
Pattylou |
12.22.05 - 6:05 pm | #
OT, but I posted something at the end of a previous thread- the Obama one. It includes a link to contact Obama via email, plus my own email message. Short version- "Bush is not a nice man"
In his defiance, there may be peril for the president, as President Nixon discovered when the House Judiciary Committee voted three articles of impeachment against him, one of them for abusing the power of three agencies - the FBI, CIA, and IRS. Nixon took the position that he was using inherent presidential powers granted by the Constitution.
The Constitution says that the president shall exercise the "executive power" and shall be commander in chief of the armed forces, but it doesn't spell out what those powers are. Some presidents have come up with what they call the "inherent power" of the presidency, which tends to be what they make it.
Historians have said that President Lincoln freed the slaves, blockaded Southern ports, and instituted a draft all without constitutional authority. President Reagan invoked "inherent powers" to justify the illegal sale of missiles to Iran and the illegal financing of the civil war in Nicaragua. Short of impeachment, the Congress has no way of stopping a willful president except to deny him funds. That, of course, is unlikely, especially with a Republican-controlled Congress.
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter promises open hearings on eavesdropping early in the new year. This is clearly an issue which is not likely to go away.
Jayne-- Your writing is superb- you have a gift.
rwcole |
12.22.05 - 6:06 pm | #
OT - I don't know if this is a good thing or bad, but CNN reports that Hubble has found new moons and rings around Uranus.
Sorry for the interruption.
Ardant |
12.22.05 - 6:07 pm | #
Jane
You are on to it. With your posts on Image, Branding, Obamarama you have hit the nail on the head.
I don't know how many remember the early 90s, but Newt and his fellow travellers where bomb throwers who were not afraid to use blow torches to maim and scorch their opponents, Democrats in Congress and the "liberal" MSM. They had no compunction making the most outlandish assertions. But the key was that they were relentless.
Getting back to your Obamarama post, the Rethugs have made character assasination into a martial art form. From Ann Richards being a closet lesbo to Clinton being an embezzler and womanizer, these guys had no problems in laying it on thick.
Nov 2006 is not that far away. If the Dem leadership believe that by doing nothing and maintaining status quo the tide will sweep them in, I think they are your proverbial ostrich. Bush and Cheney are fighting to prevent all out congressional investigations of their corruption and malice. Rove will pull out the stops and this will be dirtiest election we have seen. If 2000 and 2004 were bad, we aint seen nothing yet.
Have the Dems learnt from all the swiftboating? Or are they still traingulating? Have they no ambition that a decade in the congressional wilderness does not get them going? Are they just a bunch of masochists? And what about the liberal activists who don't have much choices?
Max |
12.22.05 - 6:08 pm | #
rwcole | 12.22.05 - 6:06 pm
It's Hamsher, not Mansfield. Jane, not Jayne. Different screen goddesses.
-
Valley Girl |
12.22.05 - 6:09 pm | #
Oops--thanks Valley-- don't know where that came from.
rwcole |
12.22.05 - 6:11 pm | #
That was poetically righteous. WPNI understands its core audience and treats the reader as sentient and savvy. The Washinton Post hoity toity set acts as if they are entitled by virtue of continuous deep breathing to WPNI's success.
Froomkin writes topically and right away. Unlike some other WaPo *reporters*/assist managing editors... whose book deals supersede informing said public.
Pithy Cherub |
12.22.05 - 6:12 pm | #
Hope no one minds my referring back to Mrs K8's post. This link too is about keeping on keeping on. It's a great read.
Hussein charged Thursday that the Bush administration lied when it claimed there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, just at it lied by disputing his claims of being beaten.
"The White House lies once more," Hussein said, "the No. 1 liar in the world. They said in Iraq, there is chemicals, and there is a relation to terrorism, and they announced later we couldn't find any of that in Iraq.
"Also, they said that what Saddam Hussein (said) was not true," he continued in an apparent reference to his claims Wednesday that he and all seven of his codefendants were beaten and tortured by their American captors.
Hehe. Well, I don't think we'd torture Saddam. In my experience, bullies normally accord each other some courtesy. 'sides, since he's mostly a figment of Clusterfuck's imagination, we really don't want to know anything he'd have to say to us anyway :)
Blub |
12.22.05 - 6:32 pm | #
Yet another great post Jane.
Its worth adding into the equation that WaPo has owned Slate for just about a year now.
My guess is that WaPo's board is thinking that WPNI and Slate are enough for the left leaners. The print edition will cater to the right.
RBG |
12.22.05 - 6:42 pm | #
Valley Girl--Nice letter to Obama. The thing I object to is when people attack Obama personally. Disagreeing with his views, or mistakes, is fine. Attacking him by mentioning his skin color, making fun of his name or calling him things like "useless" seem to me to be counterproductive and sad. Hopefully some of the worst comments will be deleted from that thread so the Repubs cannot cite them from here.
BushCo should be the evil entity of our focus, not Barack Obama.
karen allen |
12.22.05 - 6:43 pm | #
"I wonder if medieval scribes bitched incessently about Gutenburg, "
Some 15th C. Italian with a massive library of manuscripts said he would not dream of owning a new-fangled mechanically produced codex - they were too vulgar. I have been trying to find this quote for years.
The 15th C. weavers tossed their sabots into the new mechanical looms.
RJJ |
12.22.05 - 6:48 pm | #
Well done again Jane.
You manage to speak the words we feel but cannot express so often, thanks.
justin |
12.22.05 - 6:48 pm | #
Today I released a staff Report entitled, “The Constitution in Crisis: The Downing Street Minutes and Deception, Manipulation, Torture, Retribution and Coverups in the Iraq War.”
In addition to highlighting the devastating arrogance, hubris, and wrongheadedness of the Bush Administration, the Report also highlights the danger of one party rule in Washington and inability of the Republican Congress to operate as any sort of check or balance on the Administration. It is important that we as a nation say “never again” to going to war under false pretenses, and covering up official wrongdoing. ---
-
Valley Girl |
12.22.05 - 6:51 pm | #
OT but MR. Judy Miller Chalabi gets LESS...you heard it LESS than 1% of the vote...LMAO....Take that CLUSTERFUKK
Are there any nice Bush people? We have Prescott, the Bush grandaddy who was a major crook in league with the Nazi banks and investment companies prior to, and during WWII. And George Sr. who is so rude he throws-up in folks' laps. And of course there's the queen bee not nicester, Babs Bush who said of the Katrina victims 'they like being in the shit-hole' New Orleans stadium. They were poor anyway, so hey, enjoy. And we have Jeb Bush, Florida Gov. who was so instrumental in stealing the 2000 presidental election for his idiot brother. And leave us not leave out the adorable and perennial shopping and partying twins Jenna and Babs Jr. Real contributors to society, this pair. The no-redeeming-qualities Bush bunch. What a group!
goodnight and good luck |
12.22.05 - 6:54 pm | #
"My guess is that WaPo's board is thinking that WPNI and Slate are enough for the left leaners. The print edition will cater to the right."
True, but at the same time the Old Guard at the Post is extremely jealous of all the traffic those supposedly "leftist" online columnists like Froomkin get. The Right likes to talk about the virtues of the free market and accountability, but in a case like this--where the online reading public is letting them know that their columns are boring and irrelevant--they get into a self-righteous snit.
marysz |
12.22.05 - 6:55 pm | #
Speaking of Slate, Dahlia Lithwick wrote a great piece yesterday about Bush's decision to pretend like the administration respects our civil liberties.
Dover Bitch |
Homepage |
12.22.05 - 6:58 pm | #
I think you are very unjust to Powell. If you read the business section you would know that he is a quality reporter and major asset to the Washington Post. He also showed a lot of courage going public with this.
Show a little more solidarity and little less blogger triumphalism.
Alice Marshall |
Homepage |
12.22.05 - 6:59 pm | #
With all the outrage over WaPo's not running an impeachment poll, where are the polls on other sites... including other online newspapers, cable news outlets, political action orgs, and even lefty blogs?
I'm ready to cast my vote!
roberto |
Homepage |
12.22.05 - 7:01 pm | #
I keep saying that if a newspaper would simply print the truth and not simply be a mouthpiece for the Bush administration then their readership would increase tenfold.
That's why the internet news is doing so well. IT'S WHAT PEOPLE WHO READ NEWSPAPERS WANT.
cathy |
12.22.05 - 7:04 pm | #
Dan Froomkin has lots of readers because his column always has a link on the front page of the online WaPo? Maybe.
Or maybe not. I'm a devoted reader and I didn't even notice that Dan's column always has a link on the front page. I read it because I consider it more worth reading than the sum total of the rest of the WaPo, not because it's easy to find.
MEC |
Homepage |
12.22.05 - 7:11 pm | #
Michael Powell: "it would be terrific if the Web triumphalists, who seem never to have experienced a moment’s doubt, could acknowledge that this just might, possibly, be honestly felt."
Alice Marshall: "Show a little more solidarity and little less blogger triumphalism."
Do you take cream with your talking points?
Alan |
12.22.05 - 7:16 pm | #
Max: Have the Dems learnt from all the swiftboating? Or are they still traingulating? Have they no ambition that a decade in the congressional wilderness does not get them going? Are they just a bunch of masochists?
It's been said many times before but I'll say it again: it's battered wife syndromw.
The Dems are like an abused puppy that puts it's tail between its legs and cowers up to its abuser begging for love.
They make me sick.
Riesz Fischer |
12.22.05 - 7:18 pm | #
goodnight and good luck | 12.22.05 - 6:54 pm
I agree. That comment of mine reflected Obama's phrase. (see the link to the previous thread.)
-
Valley Girl |
12.22.05 - 7:25 pm | #
I don't think it's blogs that put the phalism into triumphalism.
BTW - Judge Robertson is at it again and do we have a freakin mess in Gitmo or what?
So - they are taken in as "enemy combatants" Now a military tribunal say - um, no, not so much. But, if they turn them over to China, they will likely be tortured. OTOH, the US Court has almost nada it can do with respect to a non-US citizen, not on US soil, held by the military as, inessence POWs but "enemy combatants" if you will, in order to order their release anywhere.
I need a spirograph - do they still make those?
Mary |
12.22.05 - 7:25 pm | #
Do you take cream with your talking points?
give it a rest, does it not occur to you that someone could take a different view of this. Especially someone familiar with Powell's work, very superior financial reporting.
Alice Marshall |
Homepage |
12.22.05 - 7:32 pm | #
At the risk of looking like I get paid to link to Slate, I'll post a second link to the magazine because there is a pretty good story on there explaining the history of Gitmo detentions exactly like the one your link describes.
It's not a friendly article to Clinton, but not to Bush 41 or 43, either.
Dover Bitch |
Homepage |
12.22.05 - 7:36 pm | #
V.Girl: "Bush is not a nice man"
Are there any nice Bush people? We have Prescott, the Bush grandaddy who was a major crook in league with the Nazi banks and investment companies prior to, and during WWII. And George Sr. who is so rude he throws-up in folks' laps. And of course there's the queen bee not nicester, Babs Bush who said of the Katrina victims 'they like being in the shit-hole' New Orleans stadium. They were poor anyway, so hey, enjoy. And we have Jeb Bush, Florida Gov. who was so instrumental in stealing the 2000 presidental election for his idiot brother. And leave us not leave out the adorable and perennial shopping and partying twins Jenna and Babs Jr. Real contributors to society, this pair. The no-redeeming-qualities Bush bunch. What a group!
goodnight and good luck | 12.22.05 - 6:54 pm | #
but you have neglected the 'forgotten' brother's bush; NEIL and MARVIN.
I imagine the WaPo print guys striking lapel-clutching (imaginary toga) attitudes and spouting lines from Coriolanus.
RJJ |
12.22.05 - 7:37 pm | #
Mary--I remember the old spirographs. I think it was made bu Kenner.
karen allen |
12.22.05 - 7:37 pm | #
goodnight and good luck | 12.22.05 - 6:54 pm
Don't forget about brother Neil, who helped skim a billion dollars from US taxpayers and is now palling it up with the Russion mafia , selling 'educational software'
I guess there won't be any Russian children left behind either
Mack |
Homepage |
12.22.05 - 7:38 pm | #
---got it. thnx.
goodnight and good luck |
12.22.05 - 7:43 pm | #
Wilson--have you tried the spirograph? I don't know how to work it, even after reading the directions.
karen allen |
12.22.05 - 7:44 pm | #
I agree with Alice. Powell is a very good reporter. Actually, Wapo has some excellent reporters who don't get much publicity because their articles are buried deep in Online edition. In print, they get enough space and attention. This is one of the paradoxes of print vs online. Online has unlimited space, but most articles are hard to get to unless you click on Section heading. In print, the headline, reporter's name are clearly visible.
ecoast |
12.22.05 - 7:46 pm | #
Sorry if this was posted earlier; estimate that Abramoff will get a sentence reduction down to five to seven years in return for cooperation.
IheartJane--Neil's former wife has a lot to say about his mother Barbara's mean and spiteful nature. Reporters described her as a white-haired grandmother type, but no one who knows her would describe her as nice.
karen allen |
12.22.05 - 7:46 pm | #
re spirography: just play with the sliders. also hit the "random" button
Wilson46201 |
12.22.05 - 7:47 pm | #
I'm so glad you said it before me Karen. I can't figure out how to work it either.
Mary |
12.22.05 - 7:48 pm | #
John Casper--Scanlon got 5 years and a fine of, I think, $17.5 million. Surely Abramoff will get more, as the chief crook?
karen allen |
12.22.05 - 7:51 pm | #
John--Wouldn't you love to be a fly on the wall, listening as Abramoff unravels his tale of congressional malfeasance?
karen allen |
12.22.05 - 7:52 pm | #
Link to great editorial up at NYT--Mr. Cheney's imperial presidency.
Warning- they get a little rough with ol Ticky Dicky.
rwcole |
12.22.05 - 7:54 pm | #
IheartJane--Neil's former wife has a lot to say about his mother Barbara's mean and spiteful nature. Reporters described her as a white-haired grandmother type, but no one who knows her would describe her as nice.
karen allen | 12.22.05 - 7:46 pm | #
hey karen,
ya ---- last year? kitty kelly's book on the bushes came out -- great read BTW. some really endearing stories of what a great momma babs is a real peach.
neils ex wife was a major source and very scared after the book hit . . . bet she got a death threat or two.
babs and poppa did a 'heckofajob' 'parenting' those bush kids. no wonder they are all misfits.
iheartjane! |
12.22.05 - 7:55 pm | #
I know that you usually "snitch up" but I wonder a bit about Susan Ralston if Abramoff is flipping. Depending on what his story is, will there be maybe a bit more incentive for her to come clean on things relating to her later employer - Rove, if her former employer - Abramoff - might be saying things that pull her into the cesspool, even though the targets will be higer up?
Just wondering how the pieces go together.
Slate article is interesting. I do think it is a pretty complicated question as to what should be done with them and under what basis. Esp when their "native" countries are likely to persecute/torture them.
Hey - maybe Iraq will take them. I hear it's really nice there and they don't torture anyone.
Mary |
12.22.05 - 7:56 pm | #
The Bush administration requested, and Congress rejected, war-making authority "in the United States" in negotiations over the joint resolution passed days after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, according to an opinion article by former Senate majority leader Thomas A. Daschle (D-S.D.) in today's Washington Post.
Daschle's disclosure challenges a central legal argument offered by the White House in defense of the National Security Agency's warrantless wiretapping of U.S. citizens and permanent residents. It suggests that Congress refused explicitly to grant authority that the Bush administration now asserts is implicit in the resolution.
From the story linked above --Like we say on the golf course-- nothing raises a golf score like witnesses!
rwcole |
12.22.05 - 7:56 pm | #
rwcole--could you copy the article here? Or is it too long?
karen allen |
12.22.05 - 7:56 pm | #
...bedlam is dreaming of rain...
I finally understood this header quote because someone (sorry, can't remember who) posted the link to the song lyrics. General idea is, LA basin with all those fires.. etc. But, CA is the cutting edge of Western civilization, or at least it was way back when... Now, can we say---?
...bedlam is dreaming of impeachment...
-
Valley Girl |
12.22.05 - 7:57 pm | #
Mr. Cheney's Imperial Presidency
E-Mail This
Printer-Friendly
Save Article
Published: December 23, 2005
George W. Bush has quipped several times during his political career that it would be so much easier to govern in a dictatorship. Apparently he never told his vice president that this was a joke.
Virtually from the time he chose himself to be Mr. Bush's running mate in 2000, Dick Cheney has spearheaded an extraordinary expansion of the powers of the presidency - from writing energy policy behind closed doors with oil executives to abrogating longstanding treaties and using the 9/11 attacks as a pretext to invade Iraq, scrap the Geneva Conventions and spy on American citizens.
It was a chance Mr. Cheney seems to have been dreaming about for decades. Most Americans looked at wrenching events like the Vietnam War, the Watergate scandal and the Iran-contra debacle and worried that the presidency had become too powerful, secretive and dismissive. Mr. Cheney looked at the same events and fretted that the presidency was not powerful enough, and too vulnerable to inspection and calls for accountability.
The president "needs to have his constitutional powers unimpaired, if you will, in terms of the conduct of national security policy," Mr. Cheney said this week as he tried to stifle the outcry over a domestic spying program that Mr. Bush authorized after the 9/11 attacks.
Before 9/11, Mr. Cheney was trying to undermine the institutional and legal structure of multilateral foreign policy: he championed the abrogation of the Antiballistic Missile Treaty with Moscow in order to build an antimissile shield that doesn't work but makes military contactors rich. Early in his tenure, Mr. Cheney, who quit as chief executive of Halliburton to run with Mr. Bush in 2000, gathered his energy industry cronies at secret meetings in Washington to rewrite energy policy to their specifications. Mr. Cheney offered the usual excuses about the need to get candid advice on important matters, and the courts, sadly, bought it. But the task force was not an exercise in diverse views. Mr. Cheney gathered people who agreed with him, and allowed them to write national policy for an industry in which he had recently amassed a fortune.
The effort to expand presidential power accelerated after 9/11, taking advantage of a national consensus that the president should have additional powers to use judiciously against terrorists.
Mr. Cheney started agitating for an attack on Iraq immediately, pushing the intelligence community to come up with evidence about a link between Iraq and Al Qaeda that never existed. His team was central to writing the legal briefs justifying the abuse and torture of prisoners, the idea that the president can designate people to be "unlawful enemy combatants" and detain them indefinitely, and a secret program allowing the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on American citizens without warrants. And when Senator John McCain introduced a measure to reinstate the rule of law at American military prisons, Mr. Cheney not only led the effort to stop the amendment, but also tried to revise it to actually legalize torture at C.I.A. prisons.
There are finally signs that the democratic system is trying to rein in the imperial presidency. Republicans in the Senate and House forced Mr. Bush to back the McCain amendment, and Mr. Cheney's plan to legalize torture by intelligence agents was rebuffed. Congress also agreed to extend the Patriot Act for five weeks rather than doing the administration's bidding and rushing to make it permanent.
On Wednesday, a federal appeals court refused to allow the administration to transfer Jose Padilla, an American citizen who has been held by the military for more than three years on suspicion of plotting terrorist attacks, from military to civilian custody. After winning the same court's approval in September to hold Mr. Padilla as an unlawful combatant, the administration abruptly reversed course in November and charged him with civil crimes unrelated to his arrest. That decision was an obvious attempt to avoid having the Supreme Court review the legality of the detention powers that Mr. Bush gave himself, and the appeals judges refused to go along.
Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney have insisted that the secret eavesdropping program is legal, but The Washington Post reported yesterday that the court created to supervise this sort of activity is not so sure. It said the presiding judge was arranging a classified briefing for her fellow judges and that several judges on the court wanted to know why the administration believed eavesdropping on American citizens without warrants was legal when the law specifically requires such warrants.
Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney are tenacious. They still control both houses of Congress and are determined to pack the judiciary with like-minded ideologues. Still, the recent developments are encouraging, especially since the court ruling on Mr. Padilla was written by a staunch conservative considered by President Bush for the Supreme Court.
There was a lot of fall out re Kitty Kelly's book. As Kelly points out, if what she writes is not true, anyone can sue her, but the Bush's did not. Yes, I felt sorry for Neil's ex-wife, as the Bush's always go after the weakest person who isn't able to protect herself.
karen allen |
12.22.05 - 7:59 pm | #
Mack: "Don't forget..."
thnx for the reminder. Neil has been, and continues to be, a very naughty little boy, indeed. Didn't know 'bout the Russian mafia.
goodnight and good luck |
12.22.05 - 8:00 pm | #
karen allen,
"He faces a maximum of five years in prison, a $250,000 fine and repayment of $19.7 million to clients."
He "faces" 5 years but my read on this is as long as he cooperates, fully, and continuously, he skates on the prison time...
"Prosecutors plan to check in with the judge every three months to discuss progress in the investigation and Scanlon's cooperation. The next hearing is set for March 1."
Let me know if I'm reading this wrong.
Cozumel |
Homepage |
12.22.05 - 8:02 pm | #
rwcole--Thanks!
karen allen |
12.22.05 - 8:02 pm | #
Papers probably could better profit from online readers and bloggers if they made their material available in packages clustered with other papers, kind of like a dish network or channel selection package.
Single subscriptions to online news are cumbersome and get deselected by the interactive users of the web. If commonly used sources joined forces for universal access at a relatively small sum, the sheer numbers wanting to swim in that linked and interactive news current would probably more than compensate for the price reduction needed to shed sputtering single subscriptions.
.
Muzzy |
12.22.05 - 8:03 pm | #
Think of the money Scanlon must have stolen to have to pay those kind of amounts!
karen allen |
12.22.05 - 8:04 pm | #
karen->Among all his crimes the guy stole from Native Americans. Evidently Jack thought Wounded Knee (1890) wasn't enough punishment. I am hopeful that this "leak," might be calculated to raise public sentiment so that the prosecutors can say, no. We can't live with 5-7, despite all the help you are giving us with Delay, Ney, and others.
John Casper |
12.22.05 - 8:05 pm | #
I read Bury My Heart At Wounded Knee in increments. I would have to stop when the pain was too much, then go back to it at a later time.
It's going to be such fun when DeLay, Ney, and the others get exposed by Abramoff. Suddenly, those slick politician will be "aghast" and shocked at Abramoff and how he "tricked" them.
karen allen |
12.22.05 - 8:08 pm | #
The Daschle article does make it a bit harder to argue the Congressional authorization, doesn't it? I do think, though, that ideologically the administration goes even a bit further. As I understand it, they believe that 9/11 was in the nature of an invasion or attack and as a result the President "had" war powers upon that occurence, even without the subsequent Congressional authorization. I can't remember how or where I picked that up as their concept, but it made an impact on me.
BTW - don't you think their arguments sound a lot like these?
*************
After war is originated, whether by declaration, invasion, or insurrection, the whole power of conducting it, as to manner, and as to all the means and appliances by which war is carried on by civilized nations, is given to the President. He is the sole judge of the exigencies, necessities, and duties of the occasion, their extent and duration.
During the war his powers must be without limit, because, if defending, the means of offence may be nearly illimitable; or, if acting offensively, his resources must be proportionate to the end in view,-'to conquer a peace.' New difficulties are constantly arising, and new combinations are at once to be thwarted, which the slow movement of legislative action cannot meet.
...
Much of the argument on the side of the petitioner will rest, perhaps, upon certain provisions-not in the Constitution itself, and as originally made, but now seen in the Amendments made in 1789: the fourth, fifth, and sixth amendments.
…
It will be argued that the fourth, fifth, and sixth articles, as above given, are restraints upon the war-making power; but we deny this. "
*******************
While the Youngstown case is a cleaner, easier to read case and much more specifically on point re: executive orders, what I liked about the Milligan case is that they included argument from both parties before the decision with official report and you can see the existence of Fox News in the making, even back then.
The arguments are so similar. I don't know if anyone mentioned to Gonzales that the govt lost that case though?
Mary |
12.22.05 - 8:11 pm | #
Muzzy-> is there any chance the big dailies could force Google to pay them every time someone downloads one of their stories? IMO Google has become the primary editor.
John Casper |
12.22.05 - 8:13 pm | #
Speaking of sentences.. does anyone know what kind of fines and jail time would Clusterfuck if he could ultimately be brought to justice for illegally spying on US persons?
Blub |
12.22.05 - 8:13 pm | #
Re: Daschle
The administration did the same thing with the authorization for the use of force in Iraq.
If they can't get what the authority they want, they just pretend they did.
Dover Bitch |
Homepage |
12.22.05 - 8:14 pm | #
For those of you who haven't enjoyed a Press Baffling recently- this is from a day or two ago--Imagine doing Scottie's job- whew!
Q Scott, would the President veto a three-month extension of the Patriot Act? Is that something you can accept?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, I think we need to talk about what's going on here. What's going on here is pure obstructionist politics. A minority in the Senate, led by Senate Democrats, are putting politics above our nation's security. This bill has been thoroughly debated. It enjoys majority support. They need to give it an up or down vote and quit playing politics with our nation's security.
Q So would the President veto a three-month extension?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, the President has already made his views known on that -- I expressed his views last week -- and nothing has changed in terms of our views. That's why it's important for them to go ahead and get this passed now.
Q So you would veto a three-month extension?
MR. McCLELLAN: I expressed our view last week; nothing has changed.
Q Can you tell me what that was again?
MR. McCLELLAN: You can see what I expressed last week. You know very well what it was.
Q Sounds like you're backing down from that.
MR. McCLELLAN: No, nothing has changed in terms of what I said last week.
Q So just say it. Just say --
Q Will you use the word "veto"? Why are you not using the word "veto"?
MR. McCLELLAN: I expressed our views on that last week --
Q But if you still stand by them, why won't you reiterate it?
MR. McCLELLAN: Well, again, what I said last week still stands.
Q Which is what?
MR. McCLELLAN: I talked about a short-term extension. And Senator Frist has already said that there's not going to be a short-term extension of three months. And Speaker Hastert has already said it would be irresponsible to move with a short-term extension
rwcole |
12.22.05 - 8:14 pm | #
Blub---The criminal penalty is five years in prison- but that's per count- and there have been thousands of counts---so somewhere around 10,000 years in prison I guess.
rwcole |
12.22.05 - 8:16 pm | #
Course- You've actually got a conspiracy here- so maybe the penalties would double- that gets it up to 20,000 years--not to mention the charges for obstructing justice.
rwcole |
12.22.05 - 8:18 pm | #
WHAT THE F*CK???
Wilson, they frickin' buried that article you linked on frickin' page A04 and they can't figure out why WPNI gets all the buzz???
Brick-and-mortar WaPo should be taken out back and drawn and quartered and dragged around Dupont Circle behind a goat cart!!!
For cryin' out loud, I think it would make the front page of any other paper in any other country around the world if their president had requested authority to wage war on their own soil!!! What the hell is wrong with this picture that this kind of news makes A04???
BOYCOTT THEM. CUT THEM OFF. NOT ONE DAMNED DIME. WRITE LETTERS TO THEIR ADVERTISERS AND TELL THEM YOU'RE GOING TO BOYCOTT WAPO UNTIL THEY DITCH THEIR GAWDDAMNED WHITE HOUSE KNEEPADS!!!
And now I want to know exactly how many people in Congress knew about this and failed to see it as an overreach, sat on this information during all of last year's Presidential race. Can a gawddamned media outlet in this country find out and report this, or do we have to outsource our news to the Guardian or Le Monde or Bom Dia or Financial Times Deutschland???
Unionize my *ss -- WaPo wants to blame their editorial and ownership failures and their sycophancy on organized labor. Somebody get a cluestick and beat them with it; I'd say to the point of senselessness, but that would be redundant!!!
Rayne |
Homepage |
12.22.05 - 8:18 pm | #
Cool. I could live with that :) Not all Fed sentencing guidelines are consecutive I thought, though, although I don't know what they are. I guess he could only be looking at 5 years.
Blub |
12.22.05 - 8:19 pm | #
Neil Bush and Marvin Bush have left their own trails of disaster.
http://www.commondreams.org/view...s03/0204-
06.htm
Bush-Linked Company Handled Security for the WTC, Dulles and United (Marvin Bush)
The above link is the most neutral article I could find. Most of the others link Marvin Bush with providing security for the Twin Towers, a gig that he apparently resigned immediately before 9-11. To find these, google "Marvin Bush" + "twin towers"
-
Valley Girl |
12.22.05 - 8:22 pm | #
rwcole,
"Course- You've actually got a conspiracy here- so maybe the penalties would double- that gets it up to 20,000 years--not to mention the charges for obstructing justice."
We say they broke the law, they said they didn't, stalemate.
There's no way (that I know of) to "shoe horn" this to the courts to get a ruling and that's what it would take.
Cozumel |
Homepage |
12.22.05 - 8:26 pm | #
AOL is running a poll on rating Bush's performance in 2005 and predicting his 2006 performance.
karen allen |
12.22.05 - 8:28 pm | #
Since you brought up Scotty Potty
"Patriot Act Extension is Reduced to a Month"
"Yesterday's House vote not only erased the face-saving measure, but it also forced Bush to accept the shortest extension that lawmakers had seriously considered."
Somebody appears to be taking notice of that the MSNBC impeachment poll.
John Casper |
12.22.05 - 8:28 pm | #
Yeah- that's the problem-- there IS however a civil suit provision in the legislation that could lead to some interesting court time--everyone takin the fifth!
rwcole |
12.22.05 - 8:29 pm | #
On right now- the Daily show-
Jon Stewart talks to Ken Auletta about his upcoming New Yorker article about the New York Times. Watch the interview....
ccmask |
12.22.05 - 8:30 pm | #
re: Muzzy-> is there any chance the big dailies could force Google to pay them every time someone downloads one of their stories? IMO Google has become the primary editor.
John Casper | 12.22.05 - 8:13 pm |
I think there are a lot of ways to frame it and right now it's wide open. I give money to a couple websites, one is a monthly donation, and for the other which is subscription, I go days if not weeks without reading. The Ladies of the Lake have something of value here, imo.
The nexus between search engines, papers, and blogs is interesting to contemplate, and it stands to reason that their whole could be greater than sum of its parts - for profit.
.
Muzzy |
12.22.05 - 8:33 pm | #
rwcole,
"Yeah- that's the problem-- there IS however a civil suit provision in the legislation that could lead to some interesting court time--everyone takin the fifth!"
Same problem, you have to have a litigant (defendant) that was directly harmed.
Cozumel |
Homepage |
12.22.05 - 8:33 pm | #
Valley Girl >"...Neil Bush Meets the Messiah..."
Yea, great
Neil hangs out with Satan
"No place is so strongly fortified that money could not capture it." - Marcus Tullius Cicero
daCascadian |
12.22.05 - 8:33 pm | #
Daschle's article reveals an important new episode in the resolution's legislative history.
As drafted, and as finally passed, the resolution authorized the president "to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations or persons" who "planned, authorized, committed or aided" the Sept. 11 attacks.
"Literally minutes before the Senate cast its vote, the administration sought to add the words 'in the United States and' after 'appropriate force' in the agreed-upon text," Daschle wrote. "This last-minute change would have given the president broad authority to exercise expansive powers not just overseas -- where we all understood he wanted authority to act -- but right here in the United States, potentially against American citizens. I could see no justification for Congress to accede to this extraordinary request for additional authority. I refused."
Daschle wrote that Congress also rejected draft language from the White House that would have authorized the use of force to "deter and pre-empt any future acts of terrorism or aggression against the United States," not only against those responsible for the Sept. 11 attacks.
Republican legislators involved in the negotiations could not be reached for comment last night.
(Dashle's torpedo strikes the SS Clusterfuck amidships--
Clusterfuck dead in the water and listing to starboard).
rwcole |
12.22.05 - 8:36 pm | #
Coz- yeah- I know- someone needs to have enough evidence to begin the discovery process- maybe some ACLU lawyers will figure out an angle- class action?
rwcole |
12.22.05 - 8:37 pm | #
Hard for the Traditional Media (lets ditch MSM, it's not really true anymore) to be objective when all the news is one-sided by it's nature. Since the truth is so "biased" they need to bury it to appear equal. Truth as a necessity is long disappeared.
Urban Pirate |
12.22.05 - 8:38 pm | #
Dover-> I really enjoyed the twin Dover poems you have up on your site, Hecht and Arnold.
John Casper |
12.22.05 - 8:39 pm | #
rwcole,
"maybe some ACLU lawyers will figure out an angle- class action?"
I don't see it, not without the possibility of a specific named defendant(s).
The "John Doe" thing you posted about the other day won't work either (see above).
Cozumel |
Homepage |
12.22.05 - 8:46 pm | #
Coz--guess we're screwed--unless someoe "loses"some documents in a public place.
rwcole |
12.22.05 - 8:49 pm | #
From the WaPo article John Casper linked
""The fact is that a six-month extension, in my opinion, would have simply allowed the Senate to duck the issue until the last week in June," said Sensenbrenner, who had largely prevailed in negotiations with the Senate on a new version of the anti-terrorism law, only to see the compromise blocked by a Senate filibuster. "Now they came pretty close to wrecking everybody's Christmas. I didn't want to put the entire Congress in the position of them wrecking everybody's Independence Day.""
I don't know about you all, but in my professional carreer, I have worked through a few holidays when the project was critical.
If the Patriot Act is all that critical (which, I personally doubt - 9/11 was more a failure of policy than legislation) don't you think our representitives should suck it in and get the friggin job done?
Another message for '06 voters
Republicans work ethic is closer to union work rules than professional behavior.
Mack |
Homepage |
12.22.05 - 8:50 pm | #
Mack--This is something the goopers want behind them by election season--clear from their position.
rwcole |
12.22.05 - 8:51 pm | #
John Casper,
Thank you. Those poems were interesting to me back in my school days and became extremely important to me after years of reflection and the highs and lows of life.
Someday I might post something about them... had something on my old blog, but it was lost forever.
Dover Bitch |
Homepage |
12.22.05 - 8:53 pm | #
Clusterfuck is lookin like fascism lite lately-- his heart is in the right place- but he keeps gettin the crap kicked out of him.
rwcole |
12.22.05 - 8:53 pm | #
(Dashle's torpedo strikes the SS Clusterfuck amidships--
Clusterfuck dead in the water and listing to starboard). Great sea battle dialogue.
Ok, but is our Attorney General, Alberto Gonzalez, going to to respond to this and other able questions on national tv up on the Hill? Or is it going to be "settled" secretly (read in the Republican's favor) in closed conference?
I think I am more optimistic than a lot of posters, but I am not emboldened by the fact that we have not heard anything from the bipartisan "Gang of 6?" who were supposed to get back to us about the frequently postponed Phase 2 review of prewar intelligence, otherwise known as "blame the Democrats for the war, because they knew as much as we did."
John Casper |
12.22.05 - 8:55 pm | #
rwcole,
Coz--guess we're screwed--unless someoe "loses"some documents in a public place.
LOL! There's always the unforeseen, but in the meantime, yeah, we're screwed (Bush wins) this one.
On the plus side though...we have
this...on tape...
Bush: “Any Time You Hear The United States Government Talking About Wiretap -- A Wiretap Requires A Court Order”...
I did not have tape relations, with that woman, NSA! LOL ; )
Cozumel |
Homepage |
12.22.05 - 8:56 pm | #
OT to main post, but can we say, altogether now, in the holiday spirit...
John-- Hell- who knows- but keep in mind- there were several people who leaked this story to the NYT. They have an interest in stopping this practice--they're in deep shit- ya don't want to wound the bear- ya want to kill it..
These are intelligence people- think that they might have held some stuff back- in case they need it?
If I were in their spot- I would release enough to get Clusterfuck out in front of the american people lyin his ass off- (easy to do)- and then come in with the death blow.
Did they do that? Don't know- but if I were Clusterfuck- I would tread carefully over this ground until I knew who the enemy is and what they've got!
rwcole |
12.22.05 - 8:59 pm | #
Wonder why the sources of the NYT story didn't go somewhere else with it when they saw that the NYT was going to sit on it?
Wonder if there's more in the book that's scheduled to come out soon?
rwcole |
12.22.05 - 9:01 pm | #
Good overview of the spying on Nightline just now - had someone making the prez case (didn't catch names since I was catching up here) but the primary comments and final word came from a historian (began with a D?) who talked about how dangerous Bush's actions are and the anchor replaying some of his interview with Cheney (where he went after Cheney big time) and talking about how Cheney is trying to max out presidential powers. The definite message was that Bush broke the law and that matters.
siun |
12.22.05 - 9:01 pm | #
Don't forget that Prescott Bush was a grave robber too.
He dug up the bones of the great Indian warrior Geronimo to use as goddamn props in the Tomb that is home to the silly Skull & Bones frat boy circle jerk club.
They are? $100 dollars from me to the charity of your choice if an official investigation is launched. Not gonna happen.
Cozumel |
Homepage |
12.22.05 - 9:03 pm | #
siun, was it professor Robert Dallek?
Dover Bitch |
Homepage |
12.22.05 - 9:03 pm | #
Somebody get a cluestick and beat them with it
Thanks for the laugh, Rayne!
-----------
Wonder what would happen if somebody used a FOIA request to get some names of the spied upon by NSA, although I am currently predicting that someone at NSA is pissed enough to leak some (maybe juicy) names. I am expecting that any day; maybe after Christmas.
Maggie |
Homepage |
12.22.05 - 9:05 pm | #
If we know that several thousand people were tapped (or whatever the new tech version is), and with some NSA staff mad enough to leak the story (they must love the fact that the NYT then sat on the story ... yeow!) I'll bet they also make sure that the story does not die. I'll also bet that the NYT knows of some examples but will argue that they are protecting somebody or other (KGB?) by not naming the targets of the taps.
siun |
12.22.05 - 9:08 pm | #
DB - yes, thank you! Prof Dallek (any relation to Dr. Who?) (sorry) was great - very clear and very accessible info. Thanks for the name since I would like to google more about him.
siun |
12.22.05 - 9:09 pm | #
Maggie,
"Wonder what would happen if somebody used a FOIA request to get some names of the spied upon by NSA"
The ALCU did yesterday. If they get anything it will be so redacted it might as well be black construction paper.
Cozumel |
Homepage |
12.22.05 - 9:11 pm | #
and GSD too - thanks! I was reading too fast and missed yours.
There's a lot of interesting info floating around the MSM about this issue. BushCo's messaging has been off and I suspect KGB's weekly radio performance was a major mistake in terms of controlling the message.
siun |
12.22.05 - 9:12 pm | #
"They are? $100 dollars from me to the charity of your choice if an official investigation is launched. Not gonna happen."
Why in your opinion isn't something going to happen? Are the Democrats simply going to roll over? Are they settling for "pork" in their states?
John Casper |
12.22.05 - 9:14 pm | #
Good info on the origins of the Guantanamo prison camp and Clinton. Note that Clinton also authorized and used renditions though for more limited purposes. This should remind us that any wavering on protection of civil liberties must be fought - excusing Clinton for these human rights abuses opens the door for BushCo's abuses.
siun |
12.22.05 - 9:21 pm | #
"Now I am going to tell you how we are not going to fight communism. We are not going to transform our fine FBI into a Gestapo secret police. That is what some people would like to do. We are not going to try to control what our people read and say and think. We are not going to turn the United States into a right-wing totalitarian country in order to deal with a left-wing totalitarian threat." - April 24, 1950
This guys blog in S. Dakota is unbelievable. What a bunch of lies on all his threads. You have to read this stuff to believe it. And, what's worse, you can't comment!
Anyway, here's his last post:
Progress For America
Advocates for Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito will be visiting South Dakota a few days before the Alito confirmation hearings are set to begin.
The group will send 29 of his former clerks, personal friends, mentors and former colleagues on a 19 state barnstorm during the first week of January to help build up support for the nominee.
South Dakota is being targeted because of Senator Johnson, who may provide a critical vote in the nomination process.
"Why in your opinion isn't something going to happen? Are the Democrats simply going to roll over? Are they settling for "pork" in their states?"
I meant in terms of identifying the leakers to the NYT. The administration isn't going there, bank on it. For one, they can't put the cat back in the bag, it's out. They (the administration) have nothing to gain and everything to lose getting this in a court with an endless stream of discovery and depositions etc
Cozumel |
Homepage |
12.22.05 - 9:25 pm | #
Dover Bitch | Homepage | 12.22.05 - 9:22 pm |
GREAT CATCH
Can you get that to the DNC so that the Dems (and moderate Goopers) drown the media in that quotation. That is what I call a bleeping soundbyte.
John Casper |
12.22.05 - 9:26 pm | #
The WP now has the Daschle story up-- I'll go ahead and drop the whole thing here- to save ya'll from scootin back and forth.
In the face of mounting questions about news stories saying that President Bush approved a program to wiretap American citizens without getting warrants, the White House argues that Congress granted it authority for such surveillance in the 2001 legislation authorizing the use of force against al Qaeda. On Tuesday, Vice President Cheney said the president "was granted authority by the Congress to use all means necessary to take on the terrorists, and that's what we've done."
As Senate majority leader at the time, I helped negotiate that law with the White House counsel's office over two harried days. I can state categorically that the subject of warrantless wiretaps of American citizens never came up. I did not and never would have supported giving authority to the president for such wiretaps. I am also confident that the 98 senators who voted in favor of authorization of force against al Qaeda did not believe that they were also voting for warrantless domestic surveillance.
On the evening of Sept. 12, 2001, the White House proposed that Congress authorize the use of military force to "deter and pre-empt any future acts of terrorism or aggression against the United States." Believing the scope of this language was too broad and ill defined, Congress chose instead, on Sept. 14, to authorize "all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations or persons [the president] determines planned, authorized, committed or aided" the attacks of Sept. 11. With this language, Congress denied the president the more expansive authority he sought and insisted that his authority be used specifically against Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda.
Just before the Senate acted on this compromise resolution, the White House sought one last change. Literally minutes before the Senate cast its vote, the administration sought to add the words "in the United States and" after "appropriate force" in the agreed-upon text. This last-minute change would have given the president broad authority to exercise expansive powers not just overseas -- where we all understood he wanted authority to act -- but right here in the United States, potentially against American citizens. I could see no justification for Congress to accede to this extraordinary request for additional authority. I refused.
The shock and rage we all felt in the hours after the attack were still fresh. America was reeling from the first attack on our soil since Pearl Harbor. We suspected thousands had been killed, and many who worked in the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were not yet accounted for. Even so, a strong bipartisan majority could not agree to the administration's request for an unprecedented grant of
authority.
The Bush administration now argues those powers were inherently contained in the resolution adopted by Congress -- but at the time, the administration clearly felt they weren't or it wouldn't have tried to insert the additional language.
All Americans agree that keeping our nation safe from terrorists demands aggressive and innovative tactics. This unity was reflected in the near-unanimous support for the original resolution and the Patriot Act in those harrowing days after Sept. 11. But there are right and wrong ways to defeat terrorists, and that is a distinction this administration has never seemed to accept. Instead of employing tactics that preserve Americans' freedoms and inspire the faith and confidence of the American people, the White House seems to have chosen methods that can only breed fear and suspicion.
If the stories in the media over the past week are accurate, the president has exercised authority that I do not believe is granted to him in the Constitution, and that I know is not granted to him in the law that I helped negotiate with his counsel and that Congress approved in the days after Sept. 11. For that reason, the president should explain the specific legal justification for his authorization of these actions, Congress should fully investigate these actions and the president's justification for them, and the administration should cooperate fully with that investigation.
In the meantime, if the president believes the current legal architecture of our country is insufficient for the fight against terrorism, he should propose changes to our laws in the light of day.
That is how a great democracy operates. And that is how this great democracy will defeat
Daschle- having blown up Clusterfuck's legal justification on the constitutional and the statutory issues- now asks Clusterfuck to give us his legal justification...
Daschle was also one of the members of congress who Clusterfuck says he "consulted" on the spygate matter--
rwcole |
12.22.05 - 9:33 pm | #
Coz---Hell no Clusterfuck isn't goin there- but things have a strange way of unwinding in unpredictable ways- this thing isn't over- it's barely started!
rwcole |
12.22.05 - 9:34 pm | #
Way late in the thread, I know, and it's gone off-topic, but I wanted to bring up a point about the WaPo's treatment of their online services.
The publishing houses, especially the educational ones, are running into the same problem. People want stuff online, they want it in their homes, their schools, their workplaces.
It's not just that the guys who run these venerable institutions are dismissive of the internet; they truly don't know what to do with it.
I talk to a lot of high-ranking editors in publishing, and I can tell you that most of them were history or rhetoric majors in college, learned their trade at the knee of a grizzled editor, who taught them the traditional methods of publishing. When I try to talk to these folks about what can be done online, they honestly don't see it. They still think of their computers as sort of a big file cabinet that also allows them to play freecell when they get bored.
And when some young whippersnapper comes along and shows them all the wonderful, instantaneous, educational, community-building functionality of the internet, it frightens them.
They don't understand it, they themselves can't make it happen, it's against tradition (cue the music), therefore they use the intellectual's way out--they dismiss it, they make fun of it, they're better than that.
I believe that, tho' print probably won't die completely in our lifetimes, the next generation of publishers and editors will be the ones to make the real transition.
merciless |
12.22.05 - 9:34 pm | #
Merciless- People like to sip coffee and read a newspaper- I read two every day before I ever turn on the machine here..
Print won't die--for one thing- where are they gonna put all them ads?
rwcole |
12.22.05 - 9:35 pm | #
benefits and protections offered by the mother ship Just tuned into this part of the Powell comments in Jane's article. So, WaPo print is "the mother ship".
The mother ship's been taking on a lot of water lately. The able seamen need to sound the alert and toss the likes of VandeHei and sources overboard.
And, reading VandeHei's most recent, http://www.washingtonpost.com/
wp...5122201829.html it looked like he might be struggling to get on board as a real journalist. But then, at the end, he sinks himself, using those anonymous sources:
----Newly Emboldened Congress Has Dogged Bush This Year--- [snip]---Cole echoed what is one of the biggest GOP gripes about the Bush White House: that it lacks seasoned political and policy aides with the experience to work with congressional leaders. But several lawmakers said that after that message was delivered privately to Bush, they have seen the White House pay more attention to congressional concerns.---more at link---
Closing message-- poor Bush WH, it lacks seasoned aides-- but Bush WH IS so responsive to these concerns-- it's/ he's paying more attention to congress-- good Bush-- responsive and paying attention. good Bush.
-
Valley Girl |
12.22.05 - 9:37 pm | #
Valley-- There have been grumbles from goopers in congress for five years that this White House doesn't have a clue about how to work with congress- strange given the fact that congress has heretofor given the White House whatever they ask for- but apparently the hostility is real.
rwcole |
12.22.05 - 9:39 pm | #
Ok... Just so I get this straight. There are 3 branches of government and they are supposed to interact and balance each other out. In this case the Executive has stepped over the line... Then basically came out and said "I dare you to do anything about it"
Now we have a letter on record from the DoJ stating:
The Justice Department acknowledged yesterday, in a letter to Congress, that the president's October 2001 eavesdropping order did not comply with "the 'procedures' of" the law that has regulated domestic espionage since 1978. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, established a secret intelligence court and made it a criminal offense to conduct electronic surveillance without a warrant from that court, "except as authorized by statute."
There is one other statutory authority for wiretapping, which covers conventional criminal cases. That law describes itself, along with FISA, as "the exclusive means by which electronic surveillance . . . may be conducted."
Well known GOP goto mouthpiece John Turly caves in to the letter of the law:
For his part, Bush can legitimately claim that (unlike Nixon and Clinton) he was acting to protect the public rather than committing crimes for his own personal benefit or protection. Yet, this is an argument long rejected in law. Many a bank robber has insisted that he robbed a bank for the best of reasons. Even so, if you rob a bank to feed your family, you are still a bank robber.
The Bush administration requested, and Congress rejected, war-making authority "in the United States" in negotiations over the joint resolution passed days after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, according to an opinion article by former Senate majority leader Thomas A. Daschle (D-S.D.) in today's Washington Post.
I want to see the chair these guys in the WH are standing on. Cause it has no legs.
"Coz---Hell no Clusterfuck isn't going there- but things have a strange way of unwinding in unpredictable ways- this thing isn't over- it's barely started!"
Daschle was MY MAN for prez actually (before Wesley Clark) until he "Pussyfied out" and wrote Bush a blank check with respect to Iraq.
Cozumel |
Homepage |
12.22.05 - 9:44 pm | #
Dover Bitch - great Truman quote. John Casper has the right idea - the Dems should drown the media with it.
blythetdm |
12.22.05 - 9:45 pm | #
Anybody know, roughly, how much more it costs the WaPo to publish a story online over and above the costs it has already incurred to put that story in the print edition?
Linked above is a story by Harry Jaffe saying that most of the WaPo's revenue still comes from the print edition.
John Casper |
12.22.05 - 9:46 pm | #
Strange indeed. I wonder if the hostility has anything to do with their worries about '06. But, hey, hostility is a good thing, if it extends to "entertaining" impeachment. But, I have to wonder why, if there is true hostility from the gooper congress, why they haven't challenged BushCo. KStreet money has been the salve for their hurt feelings, perhaps?
-
Valley Girl |
12.22.05 - 9:49 pm | #
Please, Fitz, indict all the Republicans.
mgm |
12.22.05 - 9:52 pm | #
Any truth to the Bush & Gonzales quotes in this article?
If so, I'm very afraid
Blub |
12.22.05 - 9:53 pm | #
Jane,
I find your posts very entertaining. Trouble is, I agree with you.
Many people read you now. You are coming to represent a certain point of view. A heavy mantle.
Sheldon Kopp wrote a number of books that I enjoyed. One of them had a story that has always spoken to me.
A village found a watermellon patch growing, and were afraid.
A fellow (much like me) came to the village, said "don't be silly," took a knife, carved up a watermellon, and ate it.
The village saw the red gore and were aghast. They drove the fellow from the village.
A second fellow came (a sort largely unknown in Left Blogostan) and recognized the watermelon patch, but spoke in hushed tones to the village. He hid behind trees with them, and slowly crept up to the watermellon patch over a course of days. Over time, the fellow taught the village to cultivate and harvest the watermellons.
jwp |
12.22.05 - 9:58 pm | #
"Daschle was MY MAN for prez actually (before Wesley Clark) until he "Pussyfied out" and wrote Bush a blank check with respect to Iraq."
yeah-- I guess the check wasn't QUITE as blank as Clusterfuck wanted.
rwcole |
12.22.05 - 9:59 pm | #
Blub - Nobody can prove what they print in Capitolhillblue is true. It's all anon sourced.
They don't get sued by the WH however. And this WH does use their attorneys to silence.
Me3 |
Homepage |
12.22.05 - 9:59 pm | #
"But then, at the end, he sinks himself, using those anonymous sources."
Valley Girl, Jim, "pool boy," VandeHei will be taking our questions tomorrow at 11:00est in the WaPo's online political chat. I am not sure if I am going to ask him about Truman's quotation, (the positive, "big tent" thing to do) or ask him how he, a WH reporter, with such a great editor as John Harris, could confuse Scooter Libby with Stephen Hadley last week on HARDBALL (what Jane Hamsher would do). I will probably "do what Jane would do," because they never respond/publish my questions anyway. I can always put the Truman quote in all five days next week.
John Casper |
12.22.05 - 10:03 pm | #
While the difference between the low 40s and high 30s is minimal numerically, in terms of perceptions it is huge, particularly on Capital Hill. Like the difference between a golf shot landing in the deep rough just on the edge of a lake and a shot landing a foot away in the lake -- the first place is a much better place to be.
After Bush nominated Miers, his numbers among Republicans dropped below 80 percent in most polls and, sure enough, his overall approval numbers started dropping into the high and, in some polls, mid-30s.
Importantly, once conservatives and Republicans got the Miers nomination out of their system and mentally moved on to other issues, Bush's approval ratings among Republicans moved back up above 80 percent and, bingo, his overall rating moved back up into the low 40's.
Finally, there is the whole issue of the war in Iraq. While the president's message on the war has become more nuanced and more carefully delivered, it is probably more what Democrats have said than what Bush or other Republicans have said that has made the difference.
While few, if any, would question the right of Rep. John Murtha, R-Pa., to call for a withdrawal of troops from Iraq, or say he was acting for reasons of political expediency rather than principle, in retrospect, his move might have been strategically helpful to the president.
Prior to Murtha's well-publicized speech advocating an early withdrawal, the spotlight had been on the Bush administration's use of intelligence that led to the decision to go to war, with some questioning whether the administration either lied, fabricated or exaggerated evidence used to justify the United States' action.
Murtha's speech changed the debate, away from whether we should have invaded Iraq and whether the use of intelligence to make that decision was flawed toward the more problematic issue of "what do we do now?"
In short, the dialogue changed from one subject that was extremely damaging to Bush to one in which Democrats were all over the map, with opinions ranging from "let's get out of Iraq by sundown tomorrow" to "let's send more troops and finish the job right."
The critical question now is whether this is the beginning of a trend, or just a temporary stabilization and partial recovery. Traditionally there is very little, if any, political polling over the holiday season, so we'll just have to wait until January to discover the answer
Cook Political Report on Clusterfuck's JAR.
rwcole |
12.22.05 - 10:06 pm | #
calling him things like "useless" seem to me to be counterproductive and sad.
-p---
how about 'dud?' can we call him a dud and still be neato coolo?
then let me say it first....Obama is a Dud..a calculating Dud
that's assuming i can say it and still be neato coolo
puzzled |
12.22.05 - 10:07 pm | #
Hopefully some of the worst comments will be deleted from that thread so the Repubs cannot cite them from here.
Extraordinarily informative post, Jane. And of course I worship your boobs, but you probably weren't curious to know.
One more reason to put the New York Times in the shitcan where it belongs. Talk about a meteroric descent into irrelevance and dishonesty.
arbogast |
12.22.05 - 10:18 pm | #
new thread: Victory in the War on Christmas
John Casper |
12.22.05 - 10:18 pm | #
puzzled--you're such a big brave boy and you can't write "piss"?
karen allen |
12.22.05 - 10:53 pm | #
"People like to sip coffee and read a newspaper- I read two every day before I ever turn on the machine here.."
rwcole, I agree with you; I like newspapers myself, and those nifty little paperback books you can stick in your bag and take anywhere.
I'm not saying that print is dead, or will be IN OUR LIFETIMES.
(God I hope not, anyway; I'm a textbook editor and still need my job!)
No no no. I'm just saying that the technologies being developed right now will make print more expensive, more of a boutique item, so to speak, and that when screens are developed so that a person can comfortably read on them for an extended period of time, print will become ever more obsolete.
Traditional publishing hasn't really changed much in hundreds of years. The printing and typesetting mechanisms have improved, but the basic methods are still the same.
The computer will prevail over print eventually, and this frightens publishers. That's why they look so askance at their web outlets.
merciless |
12.23.05 - 12:38 pm | #
