More of the same: McCain surrogate's blog calls Obama a "fraud" backed by a "pack of goons"

By GottaLaff

Here I am, back again, although a little late in the game. I did manage to infuriate myself with this (Please note his spelling and punctuation. This guy's a genius):

Joe Repya, the retired Lieutenant Colonel who attacked Obama on behalf of the McCain campaign in a statement, maintains a blog, where he has launched harsher, unedited riffs on a theme that McCain has made the centerpiece of his anti-Obama message: Obama is an inexperienced smooth-talker who cares more about politics than patriotism.

For example, on July 9, Repya wrote:

Is it any wonder that Barack Obama continues to look like the light wieght he is? How can American's seriously consider this fraud and his pack of goons as people competent to lead America at time of war? Please give me someone who actually knows what the US military is and is capable of doing. Not some illetist that wouldn't know and Army uniform from a Chicagop hotel doormans uniform.

And a week later:

I've seen some snake oil salesmen in my day, but the latest from Barack Obama has me stymied. Are there any educated, racial, thoughtful people out there that really believe that Barack Obama can eliminate the world of nuclear weapons?

Find me something to throw. Now.

McAwkward

Time to just point towards Cindy's favs- the brie and caviar aisle.

Saturday Night Distraction

I'm really, really pissed right now, and as a woman, when I think pissed, I think Joan Jett. Enjoy both clips. Watch the top one first, then let go with the bottom one. I'll probably get back after a trizillion cocktails.

McCain Can't Keep His Story Straight on Iraq Timetables

Jed rules.

If they can't win fair

They make shit up.

Sorry, I'm really mad. Background here and here and here.

UPDATE- Go read Bob Herbert's column and then email it to friends (it gets ranked) and digg or whatever you do to it. Let's get it around.

'Nother Update Via Open Left-

It is a very small ad buy, only in Denver, D.C., and Harrisburg.

The question here is why these areas? Could it be that they're just looking to hit the DC media area (so it gets discussed by the talking heads) and Colorado as a freebie?

UPDATE AGAIN- McCain Won. From my feed just now, the top links.

McCain camp criticizes Obama not seeing wounded troops

Republican John McCain's campaign on Saturday sharply criticized Democratic rival Barack Obama for canceling a visit to wounded ... [More]

USATODAY.com News - Top Stories|Today 7:32 PM|

McCain camp: Obama shortchanged injured troops (AP)

AP - Republican John McCain's campaign on Saturday sharply criticized Democratic rival Barack Obama for canceling a visit to wounded troops in Germany, contending Obam...[More]

Yahoo! News: Top Stories|Today 7:32 PM|

McCain camp: Obama shortchanged injured troops

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Republican John McCain's campaign on Saturday sharply criticized Democratic rival Barack Obama for canceling a visit to wounded troops in Germany, contending Obama chose foreign leaders and cheering Europeans over "injured American heroes."...

AP Top Headlines At 2:52 p.m. EDT|Today 7:28 PM|

McCain Blasts Obama on Troop Visit

McCain's campaign sharply criticized Obama for canceling a visit to wounded troops in Germany, contending Obama chose foreign leaders and cheering Europeans over "injured American heroes." [More]

WSJ.com: What's News US|Today 7:18 PM|

UPDATE AGAIN- Yeah, GWB shure respects the troops.

These Are Horrible

Um, couldn't they have gotten some competent artists to do those? The John McCain one looks like the Captain from "The Love Boat".

Video: Jane Mayer, David Letterman, and The Dark Side

By GottaLaff



I'm putting this up without having seen it. Why would I do that, you ask? Because my server is lethargic and will only load some sites, and won't let me play videos. So let me know how this is. Jane Mayer wrote the book The Dark Side: The Inside Story of How the War on Terror Turned Into a War on American Ideals.

Trying to post today has been an exercise in frustration. In fact, anything computer-related this month has been torture, which makes this post even more relevant. Waterboarding might even seem like recreation after my little misadventures.

So please tell me in comments what the video was like. I don't have a clue.

Chris Matthews Serious About Running For Senate

If he wasn't running as a Dem, I'd be all for it. Media Matters has pages of Tweety's sexist/racial/stupid remarks. And who could ever forget the video apology that went on and on and on? No thanks, I don't want him representing my party in any state.

Hardball host Chris Matthews is still serious about running against Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter in 2010. While allies once thought Matthews was just floating a Senate bid to help in his contract talks with MSNBC, they now tell us that he's eager to reach out to important Pennsylvania voting groups and leaders and has even won the backing of his wife. One big concern: his nasty hit on Sen. Hillary Clinton as a "she-devil," for which he was slammed as sexist. "He is concerned he ruined it with the women vote," says an associate. So he's drawn up a list of feminists to contact. Even so, we're told, there's one woman who won't go to bat for the Democrat: Clinton.

Caroline Kennedy for Obama's Vice President?

Wowee wow wow. This took me from left field. What do you think?

Former GOP foe Mitt Romney is the rage in Sen. John McCain's circles as the Republican moves to pick a running mate with good business and economic creds—and moderately youthful good looks. But if you want a really juicy rumor, consider who some key Democrats want for Sen. Barack Obama's No. 2: his veep search aide, Caroline Kennedy. While many Democrats we talked to dissed the idea of a two-minority ticket, others feel it would boost the generational shift Obama represents. And, adds one fan of the idea: "Caroline is the good Kennedy." There's recent precedent. President Bush picked his vice presidential search team leader, Dick Cheney.

Obama Still "Bouncing" Along

Another quickie- forgive me.

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Saturday shows that the bounce is continuing for Barack Obama. The presumptive Democratic nominee attracts 46% of the vote while John McCain earns 40%. When "leaners" are included, it’s Obama 49% and McCain 43%. Just four days ago, the candidates were tied at 46% (with leaners). Obama is viewed favorably by 57% of voters, McCain by 55%. Tracking Polls are released at 9:30 a.m. Eastern Time each day. Rasmussen Markets data gives Obama a 63.3 % chance of winning the White House.

Poll-itics: McCain way ahead in South Carolina

By GottaLaff

Key finding alert:

A new Research 2000 poll in South Carolina finds Sen. John McCain with a healthy lead over Sen. Barack Obama, 53% to 40%.

Key finding: Obama gets just 15% of the white vote.

McNeedy feels "a little left out"

By GottaLaff

::ring!ring!::

J Sid: Hello?
Obama: Hey John, just touching base.
J Sid: I... I... was beginning to think you didn't care.
Obama: Of course I care, John, but you know how hectic things are these days.
J Sid: You didn't call, you didn't bring me any souvenirs, you... you... cheated on me with world leaders...
Obama: Now, now. We agreed to take a break until after November. It's time to grow up a little, J Sid. We've been distant for awhile now. Europe beckoned, voters beckon, America yearns for me.
J Sid: I'm not good at rejection. I need another nap.
Obama: You'll be fine. In fact, go find yourself a nice, aromatic cheese aisle. That'll perk you right up.
J Sid: You always know just what to say. But, Barack...?
Obama: Yes, John.
J Sid: Do you miss me when you're gone?
Obama: Not really.

John McCain's is using a weekly radio address to take some jabs at his Democratic rival's trip abroad.

He says the presidential contest became "a long-distance affair" this week, as Barack Obama made speeches abroad to "the people of the world." McCain says he began to feel "a little left out" and wonders if the American people did, too.

Sometimes global relationships require a little attention, flexibility and honesty, McNeedy. Communication is everything. The rest of the world has figured that out, now it's your turn.

Shallow Thoughts: Details, details edition

By GottaLaff

Today a SpokesRightie on MSNBC said that Obama doesn't provide enough details.

This is fodder for much snark, so please feel free to comment.

Passersby get a shock as Brown and Obama take a turn in the park

Just a quickie 'cause I thought it was funny. Imagine just being at the park with your kids and seeing that.

Passersby got a shock today when Gordon Brown and Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama took a stroll through the park - complete with secret service agents in tow.

Mr Obama, who was in London meeting with UK political leaders took a walk along Horse Guard's parade with the PM during a two-hour meeting.

Saturday Morning Linkage

I'm attempting the dreaded "yard sale" again today so posting will be light until Gotta drags herself out of her silk sheeted boudoir.

Iran has up to 6,000 enrichment centrifuges: Ahmadinejad

Slumping economy brings boom in garage sales

Redlasso Goes Dark

Judge tosses Michael Savage's suit against Islamic group

24 Mind-Blowing Conspiracy Flicks

Obama Western Wall prayer note is filched

4,000 U.S. Combat Deaths, and Just a Handful of Images

Ron Paul's Minnesota rally proves to be a hot ticket

Fox News Has A Time Machine

But apparently it only works for John McCain. Wonder if it was a direct request from the McCain campaign.

Joe Scarborough On "The Cheeto Brigade"

Sooooo 2004 Joe. Everyone knows we try to stay away from trans fats.

Whatever You Do, Do NOT Miss This

Holy jeebus on a cracker with whipped crundymudgeon sprinkles.

Good lord, one quick google shows they aren't even trying. The GANDY BAUGH they mention was on the supposed Clinton "Death List" back in '98.

Fox News A Propaganda Outlet For Bush's White House?

Never you say!!! Wonder how many threatening calls McClellan got tonight?

Deep Thought

It is a joy to see Rachel Maddow more than once a day on MSNBC. What a refreshing woman.

Obama's v.p. team floats female Republican name

By GottaLaff

clipped from www.politico.com

Obama's vice presidential search team has floated the name of a former member of President Bush's first-term cabinet, Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman, as Obama's running mate. Photo: AP

Are they leaking this to test the waters? Of course they are:

Barack Obama's vice presidential search team has floated the name of a member of President Bush's first-term Cabinet, Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman, as Obama's running mate.

The search committee, now led by Caroline Kennedy and Eric Holder, raised Veneman's name — among others — in discussions with members of Congress, two Democrats familiar with the conversations said.

The mention of Veneman's name surprised Democratic lawmakers. The low-profile Republican was close to food and agriculture industries but clashed with farm-state Democrats and environmentalists during her tenure, which lasted from 2001 to 2004.

The positives:

But Veneman, 59, has a biography that could be suited to Obama's unifying message. A Republican raised on a California peach farm, she rose to become the nation’s first female agriculture secretary. In 2002 she was diagnosed with breast cancer, which was treated successfully. Today she serves as executive director of the United Nations children's agency, UNICEF.

The selection of a Republican could bolster Obama's unifying message, a Capitol Hill Democrat familiar with the discussion said.

"You select a strong independent woman who appeals to Republicans and independents, and so that's hard to beat," the Hill source said, explaining the logic of the possible choice. "Choosing someone like [Veneman] doesn't hurt you with the Democrats. It just doesn't hurt you. But it helps you with Independents and Republicans. [...] She's not a hot-button conservative."

The negatives:

Venemen was criticized by some Democrats and environmentalists, and praised by agriculture and food interests, for lightly regulating the industries and for encouraging trade and biotechnology during her tenure. [...] She also clashed with Democrats — including then-Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle, who is now an Obama confidant — over subsidies for small farmers, which they sought to expand.

Hmm. Not big on regulation, Republican, clashed with environmentalists, blahblah. Next!

Well Heylo Dalai!!!

John- "Step, kick, pivot?"
Lindsay- "How many times do I have to tell you? It's step, pivot, kick!!!!
Then, jazz hands!!"

John Sidney McCain on Obama's 16-month timetable: "I think it's a pretty good timetable"

By GottaLaff


McFlipFloppy can't go one day without changing his story:

Following Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s declaration of support for a 16-month withdrawal timeline from Iraq, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) has been struggling to respond. He spent most of this week railing against any “artificial timetable” for withdrawal from Iraq, vaguely insisting that the U.S. will withdraw only “with victory”...

But today he spoke to Wolf Blitzer:

When asked if Maliki would “persist” in requesting a 16-month withdrawal timetable from Iraq, McCain responded, “He won’t. … I know him.” McCain then praised Maliki’s 16-month timetable:

BLITZER: So why do you think he said that 16 months is basically a pretty good timetable?

McCAIN: He said it’s a pretty good timetable based on conditions on the ground. I think it’s a pretty good timetable, as we should — or horizons for withdrawal. But they have to be based on conditions on the ground.

The preceding Scooby Doo "Wha-a?" Moment was brought to you by the letters W, T, and F.

Update: Obama's Landstuhl non-visit

By GottaLaff

Paddy posted about this earlier. Now here's an update:

From NBC's Jim Miklaszewski
In his official capacity as a sitting US senator, Obama has every right to stay in touch with America's men and women in uniform. According to Pentagon officials, the problem was that Obama's request to visit Landstuhl included two members of his campaign staff -- retired Major General Jonathan S. Gration and Jeff Kiernan. US military officials in Germany informed the campaign the two political operatives would not be permitted on base.

Pentagon officials say Gration was the campaign's point of contact at Landstuhl in arranging Obama's visit and "got torqued" when he was told he would not be permitted to join Obama. It was Gration who later suggested to reporters that the Pentagon short-circuited Obama's visit.

Are there some in the Pentagon or military resentful because Gration has climbed on board the Obama campaign? Did Gration overreact? As a former policy director for the US European Command, he would surely be disappointed -- if not offended -- by being excluded from the visit. It's also been my experience that even retired generals do not want to hear the word "no."

Whatever the reason, Obama and the troops he would have visited have both missed a unique and historic opportunity. According to one Army lieutenant colonel, "Everyone was excited about Obama's visit. It's a shame."

It sure is. This story still doesn't feel right.

Take this with a gain of salt

By GottaLaff

I wonder if those .5 and .8 candidates are really short or just have low self esteem:

According to the National Journal's Congressional Insiders Poll, Democrats think their party will pick up an average of 16.5 seats in the House of Representatives and 5.8 seats in the Senate this fall.

Don't we need more for a filibuster-proof Senate?

By contrast, GOP insiders think the Democrats will gain an average of 6.6 seats in the House and 3.9 seats in the Senate.

Those pessimistic GOPers. They're always seeing the Houses half-empty.

Republican Senate Candidates Skipping Convention

By GottaLaff

Whatever happened to good old Republican pomp and/or jubilation? Oh yeah... McLame:

According to Congress Daily, 9 of 12 targeted Republicans running in the most competitive U.S. Senate races this fall "are either skipping the Republican convention in St. Paul, Minn., or have not decided whether to attend."

Among those who will not attend: Ted Stevens of Alaska, Susan Collins of Maine and Bob Schaffer of Colorado.

I wouldn't show my face either, if I were one of them.

Six others have not yet decided: Roger Wicker of Mississippi, John Sununu of New Hampshire, Elizabeth Dole of North Carolina, Gordon Smith of Oregon, John Kennedy of Louisiana and Steve Pearce of New Mexico.

What a festive event that will be! I wonder if they'll have a balloon drop... and by "a balloon", I meant one.

Quote-O'-The-Day: Monsieur Sarkozy et Monsieur Obama edition

By GottaLaff

"Obviously one is interested in a candidate looking towards the future rather than the past."

-- French President Nicolas Sarkozy, quoted by ABC News, all but endorsing Sen. Barack Obama for president.

Merci, et a bientot.

Meet the Press Alert: Obama

By GottaLaff

Barack Obama will be on Meet the Press this Sunday, per MSNBC:

Exclusive!
Barack Obama

Barack Obama will be Tom Brokaw's exclusive Sunday morning guest on Meet the Press -- for the full hour.

Just impeach already

By GottaLaff

Brad Sherman: Is non-feasance an impeachable offense?

Fein: Yes.

Tammy Baldwin: Eerie and disturbing similarities between lead up to Iraq, and now Iran. Would an impeachment inquiry have an impact?

Anderson: Nothing short of criminal sanctions would stop them if they wanted to attack.

Fein: You have the power of oversight of EVERY power: judicial, executive... checking EVERY power.

Dennis Kucinich: I examined both Iraq resolutions and they weren't backed up by fact. We were told Iraq was a security threat. It wasn't true, and there was intel at the time to suggest the White House knew it wasn't true. We were told Iraq possessed and was developing WMD. We learned that was not true, and there's evidence to suggest the WH knew at that time it wasn't true. [He goes on to read more about the Iraq "threats"] This came from the resolutions that Congress was presented. Start with post-war analysis that prove that the assertions weren't fact based. The intel said to be acted upon was selective, even though there were contradictions from CIA and State. Then look at which intel was right, and not used or acted upon. Then go into who was it that shaped the wrong intel and caused it to be acted upon. That would lead to people in high positions in this government.

Ellison: So shouldn't we weigh the facts? To see if this were true? If these were proved, wouldn't that be a basis for an inquiry?

Presser: Sure, they could form the basis for an inquiry.

Rabkin: I'm not sure what we're talking about now. If he says they knowingly deceived Congress, that's a basis for an inquiry.

Kucinich: It's the role of Judiciary, that if this was false, then it's appropriate to make an inquiry to get the truth. Then the committee could decide, send a report to the full House. I'm here to get to the truth. Was Congress presented a case for war not based on truth?

Ejections at hearing

By GottaLaff

Protesters just got kicked out, loud exchanges, photos snapped, what looked like a veteran (wearing camouflage) leaving, shouting. A Republican wants to recess.

The hearings continue... And will re-air at 8 pm Eastern.

Bruce Fein says Bush's cherry-picking evidence, selling it to us and to Congress, to invade Iraq is an impeachable offense, all partisanship aside.

Bugliosi is showing evidence that the dissent by U.S. agencies, saying Hussein was not an imminent threat, was withheld. And a Republican is saying Bugliosi is giving him an aneurysm.

Robert Wexler: These are not policy differences as Pence said. These are Constitutional issues. Ignoring Congressional subpoenas, spying on Americans, and illegal torture are not "policy issues". That's abuse of executive power. No other administration in history has done this, ignoring Congressional subpoenas, abusing executive privilege. Doesn't that meet the standard for impeachment? What justification could there possibly be to do that?

Anderson: It's Constitutional, not policy. It's up to Congress whether they'll let their power slip through it's fingers. This abuse of power goes far beyond the Nixon articles of impeachment, and it's being downplayed! It's not a matter of whether you like it or not, or of policy! It's violation of laws.

Fein: Congressional subpoena issue is an impeachable offense. Simply by refusing to appear is contempt of court. You don't need a long period of time to decide if it's impeachable. You just have to know what the Constitution means.

Holtzman: Subverting the Constitution here means Bush obstructed the work of Congress. If you commence an impeachment inquiry, and asked him to provide the info again, and he didn't, it would be impeachable, as established in the Nixon precedent. You were asking whether the DoJ undermined the rule of law... by firing, or improper prosecution!

Cohen: Would Cheney be part of this? [he's not allowed to say "Cheney"]

Holtzman: You could do a twofer. Even if he claims to be a member of the Congressional branch. [meaning, the Nation of Dick is vulnerable]

Fein: Cheney said he was immune, saying he was part of executive branch. And when Waxman requested documentation of statements, he claimed executive privilege. Re: Gonzales, need more investigation.

Cohen: Watt feels impeachment isn't a good idea, do you?

Fein: There are bad impeachments and good ones. Nixon's was a good one. If it's interrupted because of time, that presents problems. But these are open and notorious floutings of the law (FISA, for example). You don't have to dig too deep. ("If the president does it, it's not illegal")... Same with endless detentions of "enemy combatants". These would go very quickly, a healthy debate.

Hank Johnson is getting Presser to agree that an inquiry would be justified, to examine the differences of opinion and the facts. Presser says there's no probably cause. Johnson is saying hearings would help determine whether that's true or not, that it's the responsible thing for Congress to do. Presser agrees that it would be responsible.

Holtzman says it's shirking duty to fail to hold the administration accountable Constitutionally. A short, careful inquiry with Bush and Cheney called to respond. Then proceed from there.

She also added: The process itself educated the members of Congress about the facts, the Constitution, and most important educated the American public. The process made it work.

McCain needs cue card to remember milk prices

The indispensable Jed.

Karl Rove Has Obama In Desicive Electoral Map Lead

No wonder McWhiner sounded testy just now in his speech to what sounded like 12 people.

According to Karl Rove's new electoral map, Obama is leading McCain, 272-183 -- with 83 electoral votes in the toss-up category.

Note that the map is as of July 23, so it doesn't take into account the recent Quinnipiac polling** in Colorado, Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin. But per this map -- right now -- Obama could lose every toss-up state (Ohio, New Hampshire, Florida, Nevada) and still win the presidential election.

**Or the new Rasmussen.

The endless Bush Administration Misconduct Hearings

By GottaLaff

Trent Franks: Be scared. The terrorists want to kill us. And Baghdad is the hub of terrorism. The Democrats are irresponsible. The greatest failure of the administration was allowing 9/11 to occur, and Bush tried to respond by doing everything he could to protect us. I'm getting overwrought.

Rabkin: Bush is trying to keep us safe. We should just try to factor that into our understanding. Bush wasn't the worst president, Buchanan was.

Franks: We're going after the president for trying to protect us.

Schwarz: His tactics made us less safe. Using torture...[gets cut off]

Gohmert: The witnesses can't dictate the procedure.

Mel Watt: Re: Franks: If Bush and Ashcroft, then the next AG, is protecting me against terrorism, who's protecting me against them? [applause] Impeachment can distract... It can't be routinely used... We wouldn't have the votes we need... blahblah... Maybe there's another way. If someone brings a resolution, I'll be here every step of the way, but I won't lead the parade right now. Impeach him by voting in November 2008.

Gohmert: If misleading Congress is impeachable, how can people testifying say what they say? [paraphrased] I support the signing statement idea. I was for the sunset clause in the Patriot Act. But these statements here are brash. "They lied, they lied about WMD"... it's time to forgive Clinton and Madeline Albright for their lies. And Bush was too naive for believing Clinton and Albright. Valerie Plame lied. Joe Wilson wrote the op-ed saying he was worried about WMD. I don't even know what this guy is talking about... Something about France stealing the headlines about Food for Oil corruption... The Supreme Court pulled a bait and switch on detainees....

Zoe Lofgren: Assuming we're not in impeachment mode, how do we set things right? "I told you so" isn't satisfying. Suspension of habeaus corpus, we don't have the authority to do that. Being right does me no good... Commissions to dig in, to find out the things we don't know?

Schwarz: I recommend a 9/11 type commission, people who understand the Constititution. That would free the Congress to work on secrecy, legislative matters.

Q & A at Bush Administration Misconduct Hearings

By GottaLaff

Steve King: It's too partisan. Reckless. Oy, he's still defending the SOTU 16 words uttered by the Liar in Chief. He's parsing the 16 words. He's saying Iraq requested transfer of yellowcake to Canada. He's frothing. It all depends on what the word "significant" means. He's concluded Bush was justified. Case closed.

He's quoting Al Gore now. And Kennedy, and Kerry, and Hillary. And said Obama agreed with Bush in 2004.

Bobby Scott: What, short of impeachment, can we do? How do we get around redefining torture, going to war under false pretenses, the politics of hiring and firing DoJ personnel?

Fein: Criminal prosecution while in office: No. But, short of impeachment, there's nothing you can do about abuse of power. Misleading Congress: The founding fathers got it, and they called it impeachable.

Bob Barr: Congress can do things legislatively, but at a minimum, they can't make matters worse, which they did by passing the FISA act.

Holtzman: The problem is that Bush ignores Congress. Torture, resulting in death, has no statute of limitations. Anyone engaged in torture can be prosecuted any time. But Congress could work on the Military Commissions Act... restore the law pertaining to torture. Aside from prosecution and commissions, the real remedy is impeachment. There's no running away from that. The American people want to see Congress act.

Bugliosi: Bush has temporary immunity from criminal prosecution...until he leaves office.

Bush Administration Misconduct Hearings liveblog, continued

By GottaLaff

It's Q and A time now.

Professor Jeremy Rabkin (George Mason U. law professor) keeps saying the idea of impeachment is demented. The people making these charges are "bitter" and "demented". He's very "animated" himself. One might even call him demented. We're just "construing everything in the worst possible light."

Nadler: Wrong. It's an abuse of power. If the president lied to Congress, and I think he did, to get us to war, and he may have had motivations that he didn't put forth, that's impeachable. Next, we're in a dangerous situation. Bush claims power to point a finger at anyone IN THIS ROOM, and say you're an enemy combatant and you can go to prison. Finally, they've made it impossible to remedy any of this, because of privilege, etc. So we have to figure out a way around all of this. If the admin. has gone so far beyond any interpretation of executive privilege, how does an impeachment inquiry get beyond this?

Fein: Have the inquiry, vote to impeach, do what we did with Nixon. [I hope I got that right] He can't get around that.

Nadler: Should we amend the Constitution about pardon power?

Schwarz: If it's being abused, yes.

But Fein says there are statutes that deter the power, if Bush used it to pardon his administration. Make him exercise the power early, like now, so he can't pardon someone last minute. Congress has power to... [Sound went out]

Nadler: It took the Nixon tape to make impeachment a possibility. What about now? How can we make it a viable option?

Holtzman: We had bipartisan support. It started with the American people, nobody knew what the head count would be in Judiciary. The process had to be fair, so the Dems picked a Republican... no polls, no head count... totally uncharted waters. Ultimately, the fairness of the process persuaded both sides of the aisle. Fairness to the president, too. Allow witnesses for him. Impeachment inquiry, handled fairly, with the full participation of the minority, with the evidence there, can work. Maybe I'm a cockeyed optimist. It worked in 1973. The Clinton impeachment didn't work because it was partisan.

The Berlin Bounce Arrives

I really, really like the fact that 50% have heard or seen the coverage. That means people are paying attention.

55% Rate Obama’s Berlin Speech Good or Excellent

Over half of Americans (55%) rate Barack Obama’s historic speech in Berlin yesterday good or excellent, and the Democratic presidential candidate is experiencing a modest bounce over John McCain nationally in the latest Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll.

In a new Rassmussen Reports national survey, 26% grade the speech, delivered before an enthusiastic crowd of more than 200,000, as Excellent. Twenty-nine percent (29%) say it was good. Nearly as many (23%) feel it was only Fair, and 18% rate it as Poor. These results are based upon the 50% of voters who had heard or seen coverage of the speech last night.

(snip)

Exactly half (50%) acknowledge having read, seen or heard news about the Berlin speech, while 67% have followed at least somewhat news reports of Obama’s overseas trip that began nearly a week ago and has included stops in Afghanistan and Iraq. He now moves on to Paris and London before coming home. The Berlin speech is the only major address Obama planned to deliver on the trip.

(snip)

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday morning shows a bounce for Obama. He now leads his GOP opponent 46% to 41%. This is the first time the Democrat has enjoyed a five-point advantage since July 8.

Bush administration misconduct hearings: Liveblog Part 194194

By GottaLaff

Holtzman: What now? Prosecution is unrealistic. Truth commission? It will be stonewalled. So what's left? The framers gave us the remedy of impeachment, because NOONE can interfere with it. There is no executive privilege. If they don't answer, that, too, impeachable. You may not be able to finish the task, but you can start. This can only be a floor, and god help us if that's the case.

Barr: We had a nuclear clock that counted down to nuclear Armegeddon. We're facing a Constitutional Clock. Disappearing Bill of Rights. [he shows a redacted Bill of Rights left with one Right left]. It's not an impeachment inquiry, but this committee has to decide whether to conduct one later. I choose inquiry over silence.

Anderson: Pence and Presser said impeachment is limited to the impeached person exercising own personal interest over country's... that's atrocious law. [He goes on to show otherwise] Affecting public welfare is included, as well as abuses of trust, negligence of duty... And fraud by the administration (can't name names) ... lied about case for war. October NIE said there's nothing to back up aluminum tubes assertions... nothing to uranium claim, right there in the NIE. The president told us the opposite... failed to disclose dissenting opinions. That is fraud.

Pressser: Each branch needs to do its job. That's laudable. But, Rabkin is right: The real question is, did the admin. proceed in good faith. There's no evidence of other motives. Contempt hearings against Miers and Bolten shows they cooperated to a great extent. (!!!) There is no absence of good faith. They (admin.) did the best they could.

Fein: The executive has no power that we don't give it. This war is different than others because it is permanent, it never ends... terrorism. Nobody has even conceived of a benchmark that says the war is over... And others have spied, true, but that's why we have FISA. They can't say, We don't care what Congress has said. Impeachment: If you have a precedent that goes unrebuked, it will lie around like a loaded weapon. This president has claimed more power than George III. Caligula comment of earlier: We've had testimony that shows this admin.'s secrecy addresses that.

Bugliosi: Presser feels that Clinton's sex is worse than Bush's war based on lies. What logic would allow such a conclusion? Bush said, Jan. 2003, before invasion, meeting with Blair: Was so worried about inspectors that he came up with 3 ways to provoke confrontation: fly U2 s over Iraq painted with UN colors, and if he fired on them, he justifies war. So behind closed doors, he's talking provocation. Inference: If Bush believed that Husssein was an imminent threat, the main reason for war, the thought of provocation wouldn't have entered his mind. So these are murders.
[Conyers just kicked out a vocal onlooker]

Rabkin: Saying calm down won't help. So I won't.

Schwarz: If you have secrecy and lack of oversight, you get abuse, and mistakes. Also, what's unique about this admin., for the first time, they take the position that like the British monarchs, the pres. has the right to break the law if he believes it gets in the way of our national security objectives, and do it secretly. Enormously dangerous. The OLC still holds that position. Needs to be exposed and squashed and never accepted again.

Pentagon Confirms That It Told Obama He Couldn't Visit Army Base With Campaign Staff

Ta da!!! (I also updated the previous post)

But it turns out that the Pentagon did in fact tell Obama that in this case, it was not only "inappropriate," but against DOD rules, for him to conduct the visit with campaign staff.

"We have longstanding Department of Defense policy in regards to political campaigns and elections," Pentagon spokesperson Elizabeth Hibner told me. "We informed the Obama staff that he was more than welcome to visit as Senator Obama, with Senate staff. However, he could not conduct the visit with campaign staff."

After being told this, the Obama campaign announced yesterday that it had decided it was "inappropriate" to make the visit as part of a campaign trip.

It's unclear how Obama could have made the visit at all, given the Pentagon's directives. No Senate staff was on the trip, and the Obama camp says they received the Pentagon's directives on Wednesday, after they were already abroad.

UPDATE- Staying classy.

From NBC's Jim Miklaszewski
Obama made phone calls to wounded soldiers at Landstuhl Germany this morning, in lieu of a personal visit to the forces that was canceled by the Obama campaign**.

Obama was expected to speak to a number of soldiers individually.

**Not quite dumasses.

Bush administration misconduct hearings: Liveblog Part 8

By GottaLaff

Frederick A.O. Schwarz (NYU, fmr. Chief Counsel, Church Committee): In our efforts to protect ourselves, we've adopted tactics of the enemy: torture. We've abandoned the rule of law. Cheney has said he wants monarchical powers for the presidency. He still does. We've gotten resistance from our closest allies now... Britain, for example (because of rendition). I recommend that Congress and new president sign a bill to set up an indep. and bipartisan commission. I don't recommend impeachment, too late. We need to know the full truth. That restores moral luster, which is a great part of our strength. It might be embarrassing, but our strength is to confront our mistakes and resolve not to repeat them. ... This should bring Americans together. ... the U.S. must not adopt the tactics of the enemy, means are as important as ends, crisis makes it tempting to ignore wise restraints, but if we do so, our inner strength is lessened, the strength that makes us free.

Elliot Adams, President of Vets for Peace: Republic or monarchy? Impeach. There's no question of criminal offenses. But what will Congress do? It's about maintaining the structure of our government. To let this go unanswered is an assault to the institution of the law. Torture is illegal, but it also ruins the integrity of intel. Any torture victim will say whatever they want him to say. [refutes arguments against impeachment, mocks a little] It's your time to stand up. Politics can't get in the way.

Bush administration misconduct hearings: Liveblog Part 7

By GottaLaff

Vincent Bugliosi: I can quote Bush, but I can't accuse him of a crime. I have to use the words "Bush administration" according to the rules today. They took us to war on a lie, so under the law, they are guilty of the deaths of over 4000 soldiers and the innocent Iraqis. I know this is a serious charge, but I don't have time for fanciful reveries. I believe there's more than enough evidence to convict them. One piece: Documented, when Bush said Saddam was an imminent threat, he was saying the opposite of what he was told privately. It gets worse: They put out a summary version of unclassified paper, the White Paper, that US intel said Saddam was not a threat, and that part was completely deleted. Congress, U.S. never saw it. What could be more criminal than keeping this from America and Congress? If Clinton can be impeached for what he did, there should be no difficulty making a criminal referral to the DoJ for first degree murder charges. Americans should be outraged. How dare they do what they've done? How dare they? [applause] [now there's an R request to clear the room because of the outburst, denied by Conyers] It would deny the dead if the case isn't referred to DoJ.

Professor Jeremy Rabkin (international law prof., U.S. Institute of Peace): People are angry at the Bush administration. I'm not here to defend them, but I was asked by the minority to add perspective. Charges ofconspiracy to take nation into war for no reason, knowingly: If you believe that, you shouldn't take time on FISA. This is more important (he's being facetious). The secondary things don't add credibility to this explosive charge. It's understandable how people can do things that in retrospect we think of differently. I'm astonished at the tone in this room: it's slightly demented. The president isn't Caligula. We don't need to reach for the most extreme interpretation. Congress has a legislative process... it doesn't have to be "somebody must pay!", "impeach"! Our enemies aren't D's and R's, it's terrorists who want to kill us.

Bush administration misconduct hearings: Liveblog Part 6

By GottaLaff

Bob Barr: Dep't. of Justice has lost trust. There appeared to be use of executive power harming checks and balances. Secret Office of Legal Counsel opinions, to the degree and depth of secrecy, is troubling. Undermines separation of powers and Congress's oversight. What is the admin. talking about: "Domestic military operations" and that the 4th Amendment doesn't apply? Every administration takes the power from its predecessor and uses it as a floor, not a ceiling. Nothing is more important than this.

Rocky Anderson (Former Mayor of Salt Lake City, Utah; founded The High Road for Human Rights for grassroots advocacy re: torture, etc....): Disclosing the truth is vital in order to restore the rule of law. Checks and balances have been eviscerated... wiretapping, illegal spying. We don't know if we, our messages, have been intercepted. Torture of those with no connection to terrorism. We don't know how the program operated, if it's continuing. Monstrous human rights abuses. Indefinite detention without charges, or hearings. War crimes. Misleading Congress about threats to our security. There has never been a more compelling case for impeachment. No one, no court, should rely on signing statements as a defense for violating the law. Congress act on possibility of attacking Iran: forbid any attack, must have authorization by Congress. Special prosecutors should be considered. Punish any gov't. agent who engaged in torture, anywhere, without exception.

Stephen Presser (legal commentator, Constitutional law, Northwestern U.): Impeachment must be about grave offenses. Clinton v. Bush, different. Bush's allegataions: Dismissal of US Attorneys, he had discretion over this. No grounds here, no indication that he was involved in politicization. Unitary theory: not impeachable. He needs the freedom to act effectively in national interest. Signing statements: Practiced by other presidents. A better solution is to pass legislation. Detentions: Sought to prevent another attack. Not impeachable. Manipulation of intel and war powers: They believed what they did was necessary, not impeachable. Improper retaliation, obstruction of justice: If there was evidence, maybe, but no evidence. Misuse of authority in denying Congress to oversee conduct: Too general. Impeachment is a radical remedy.

Bruce Fein (deputy AG under Reagan): Executive branch vandalized the Constitution. There are no serfs in the Constitution's landscape. The rule of law is the nation's civic religion. Bush's claims of war power: Every square inch of the world is an active battlefield, and if he has a suspicion that there is a terrorist anywhere, he can impose military law, force in his view. That's alarming. We all have a sword of Damacles over our heads. He can kidnap, arrest, kill anyone he thinks is a terrorist without probable cause. He hasn't done this yet in the U.S. but we shouldn't have to wait around for a coup. You don't wait for the tyranny to come. Rule of law, foreign intel: He flouted FISA. He also said any limitation was unconstitutional: he could detain, kidnap, open mail, burglarize in the name of foreign intel. He is shielded from review, he claims. Miers, Bolten... His privilege assertions prevents oversight.

Bush administration misconduct hearings: Liveblog Part 5

By GottaLaff

PANEL 2: Elizabeth Holtzman, Bob Barr, Rocky Anderson, Prof. Steven Presser, Bruce Fein, Vincent Bugliosi, Prof. Jeremy Rabkin, Elliot Adams (Veterans for Peace), missed the last one.

Holtzman, former Rep. D-NY (former Congresswoman, served on Nixon impeachment, only elected woman D.A. in Brooklyn, only woman ever elected as NY City comptroller): The framers developed the power of impeachment to protect the democracy. Unpleasant, but it can't be ignored. The buck stops here, in this room, in Congress, to protect against executive officials who run amok. There's no avoiding that. There are grounds for impeachment. Prima facea, and I mean that. They should be able to defend themselves. Grounds: Systematic refusal to obey the law... Take care and be faithful in the execution of the law... Substantial evidence that they repeatedly failed and refused to obey the requirements of FISA which was enacted because of Watergate... prevent abuse of wiretapping... but FISA court was not sought for approval as law required.

Next: Geneva Conventions, laws against torture... 2 of the laws make it a federal crime, death penalty if death occurs, no statute of limitations... There has been admitted waterboarding (cruel and inhuman, if not torture, against 1996 War Crimes Act). All were systematically ignored.

Next: Signing statments.

Next: Misuse of executive privilege. That was a basis for impeachment against Nixon. It was used to shield improper or illegal executive branch activity, like refusal to provide the FBI statements of Cheney's statements.

Next: Deceptions with respect to Iraq War. Subverts the Constitution. Congress plays an essential role in war making decisions. Congress was deceived, so they couldn't make a reasoned decision.

What is to be done? Congress can't shirk Constitutional responsibilities. It's late, but there are options: Impeachment Inquiry. It would send signal on the limits of presidential power and educate the public. And it would give the administration an appropriate forum in which to respond.

Bush administration misconduct hearings: Liveblog Part 4

By GottaLaff

Rep. Brad Miller (D-N. Carolina): Bush administration's secrecy is sinister, not just a claim to powers. It eliminates challenge. Informed criticism is democracy. Democracy dies behind closed doors. The many disputes between Congress and the president, every committee has been stiffed by him, won't be resolved by January, but we must continue our effort and restore balance of power regardless of who's president, which party is in office. HR 6508 bill would allow House to appoint a special prosecutor for criminal contempt of Congress, which is cosponsored by me, Conyers, others. Bolten, Miers: Mukasey argued executive privilege. I'm working with Feingold to remedy this [paraphrased]...

Walter Jones (R-North Carolina): Signing statements. This hearing is about trust. Americans should have access to signing statements that could affect how laws are executed. Congress should be able to call for explanation and justification of signing statements. Bush has issued at least 152 of them, with over 800 Constitutional challenges/objections. Congress should act now. I've introduced the Presidential Signing Statetments Act [reads it].

Bush administration misconduct hearings: Liveblog Part 3

By GottaLaff

Tammy Baldwin: The next president and v.p. take an oath. That oath is not taken in a vacuum. Past presidents establish precedents. This hearing will impact future presidents. It is not frivolous. There is no task more important than seeing if our leaders violated their oaths of office.

Keith Ellison: Powers unused are lost. We could end up with an imperial presidency, no matter whether Dem or Republican.

DENNIS KUCINICH: Our country has been at war in Iraq for 5 years... 4, 127 American deaths, and as many as 1 million Iraqis. Costs billions, destroying our economy. Ask for consent to enter resolutions into the record... articles of impeachment. Iraq was not a threat... [paraphrasing]... or seeking nukes capability... or attack US... could not launch a surprise attack on us... so no extreme harm to US. That did not justify force by US to defend itself. No connection to 9/11, no WMD, no capability to attach us or provide WMD to terrorists... BUT... many in Congress relied on White House representations. And said if they knew then what they know now, they wouldn't have authorized. The question is: What responsibility does the president have for unjustified war? We can put 2 and 2 together. Read my 3 bills. I am confident you'll reach the same conclusions I have. So what to do about it?

Stand up for checks and balances to prevent excessive power grabs by any branch... restore faith in gov't., justice... endorse with silence these methods, or demand accountability? Tell future presidents that we've seen the last of this, not the first... Think, and then act, NOW, to right a wrong.. hold them accountable. Thank you.

Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-NY): Sitting here listening has been interesting. We need checks and balances... check power... We've seen corruption and incompetence, and this govt. has been dominated by those 2 words. Must address that, for future presidents. Iraq, terrorist operation: 2 mos. before 2000 elections, there was a meeting with Bush and director of intel about Bin Laden/Al Qaeda were going to attack. And there were briefings about their determination to attack (pdb, August 6), so obvious. Warnings were consistent and should have promoted actions, but they didn't. Why they didn't is a major question. Richard Clarke sent consistent warnings to Condi Rice during that same time. After 9/11, we attacked the Taliban and Al Qaeda, successful in Afghanistan. But it also failed to follow up on Bin Laden, allowing him to escape... Rumsfeld's decision. Why? They didn't want to capture him, because if we had, they couldn't justify an attack on Iraq. They manipulated the intel. They claimed WMD in Iraq were threatening us and that we had to act against that. But there was no clear evidence. All of that was ignored. Then, there were warnings that stated that the uranium claim was baseless. All claims were designed to get authority to invade. All this needs to be examined, so much damage has been done here at home. This opens the door for future presidents to do the same, eliminating basic Constitutional provisions. This situation is difficult. Impeachment has been mentioned over and over again, and based on all these things, it's the most impeachable administration in the history of America. In the SOTU, Bush knew what he was saying... This committee needs to focus on this.

Bush administration misconduct hearings: Liveblog Part 2Bush administration misconduct hearings: Liveblog

By GottaLaff

Note: I don't know what happened to this post title. It won't change... so if there are typos, sorry. Blogger is also having "saving" issues, so it might affect what you see. Grr.

Bobby Scott: Politicization of US justice... Iraq War... torture... DoJ not enforcing subpoenas... So this hearing helps define the limitations, but recommend ways to enforce them.

Steve King: These are impeachment hearings, I'm amazed I'm sitting here. We've had a parade of all these hearings, 45, including David Addington. Pretty rare to find someone to say what Scooter Libby ever did. Scott McClellan came here 3 years after the fact. And Joe Wilson was the least impressive in terms of integrity. ... He met with Niger P.M. who met with Iraq, who were looking for yellowcake. I'll produce a public document today about that. There's no value to the evidence we're hearing today. WMD? Every intel in the world agreed.

Conyers: These are not impeachment hearings.

Zoe Lofgren: This is different from Clinton hearings. Bush is the worst president ever.

Dan Lungren: "Nixon" is now being used as an epithet. Friday morning show trial. I'm perplexed... "removal of the president", yet these are not impeachment hearings? Maybe we're here for "impeachment light", make allegations without impeaching. Leave the press with the opportunity to print impeachable accusations, but no steps towards impeachment... impugns him, but doesn't impeach him... same effect in court of public opinion. High crimes and misdemeanors are acts inconsistent with duties in office, unfitness of man to the office... Seldom been sought because it's a high bar. Tragedy that we're criminalizing differences of political opinion... when we loosely throw terms around like these... references to disagreements in context of high crimes and misdemeanors. This is months before he leaves office... There is no expectation that we'll impeach, so why?

Jerry Nadler: R's are saying that the hearings are a waste of time. I was here for Clinton's impeachment who at worst had an affair. A circus. In this case, we have serious allegations of anti-torture laws, FISA laws, illegal detentions, political interference of prosecutions, etc. that are high crimes and misdemeanors. Anyone who thinks inquiring into these excesses and what appears to be destruction of power of congress and judiciary are a waste of time, rethink what they're doing here.

Mike Pence: Bush is a man of integrity. He has put the American people's needs before his own.

Sheila Jackson Lee: This is not personal, it's an institutional discussion. Yes, there are gas, economy concerns, but we can't abdicate our responsibility to protect the Constitution. [reads from preamble to the Constitution] We are being deliberative, not accusatory... and responsible. We have every right to be fact-finders, make judgment how to protect the Constitution. We had made no declaration of war, so did this administration violate...? There are questions of torture, contravened international law, and therefore the Constitution. Same with Valerie Plame matter, Rove's refusal to appear: Institutional questions. Same with firing of US Attorneys... We've watched for years, the Congress passing laws and the laws being contravened by signing statements. These are institutional, Constitutional questions.

Trent Franks: Witnesses shouldn't mention the word "impeachment". Congress has an abysmal record, the Dem majority sucks. Dems weak on terrorism. Dems don't care about terrorists. Dems let terrorists use our lawyers, give them litigation rights. Dems give terrorists rights, more than domestic criminals. Dems don't want to bring terrorists to justice. TERRORISM. Iran. Nukes. FEAR. Reorder our priorities! Appreciate this president who is protecting us!

Steve Cohen: This is about abuse of power and contempt of Congress, checks and balances. We were working to impeach Gonzales, but then he resigned. Goodling sought immunity... why? There must have been criminal conduct by an agency of this administration. That alone makes these hearings relevant. Hopefully, this will restore the faith of the American people.

Hank Johnson: We have one boss: the American people. When that bond is broken, then action must be taken. People ask, what's the point of impeachment with only 6 months left? I ask, would it be to restore checks and balances that this administration has shattered? If lying about sex fits the bill for impeachment, then lying to Americans about invading Iraq, resulting in death, qualifies as an impeachable offense [applause]. Plus, wiretaps, torturing, detaining, abusing the Patriot Act under the cloak of gov't. secrecy, political spying, attacks on academic freedom, politicizing DoJ, selective prosecutions... so many areas fertile for inquiry... We have Constitutional responsibility. It's not an impeachment hearing, but if this administration continues with its secrecy... during the last 6 months decides to attack Iran.. then Americans will look back and rethink whether it was worth pursuing impeachment to deter any further misdoings.

Quick Hit

Someone came to this site after googling "what the hell is going on with this country?" Hope we helped.

Bush administration misconduct hearings: Liveblog

By GottaLaff

Live on CSPAN:

Dennis Kucinich just got loud applause as he (and his wife) entered the hearing room in the Rayburn House Office Building. Bob Barr will be on a later panel. Vincent Bugliosi set to be on a panel, too.

I predict there will be some spectators who get ejected, they're pretty rowdy.

John Conyers: Separation of powers is of ultimate importance [paraphrased]. Congress has oversight powers... [lists them]. ... Judicial system, too... This committee has spent time investigating all the misuse of authority [lists the misuse... extensively]... Secrecy, Valerie Plame matter, Iraq war, etc... The evidence is credible and substantial and warrants direct answers from the most senior members of the administration under oath if at all possible.

Some say we've done too little too late. But during the prior Congress, I held forums, the Downing Street Minutes hearings, wiretapping hearings, etc, and reports have been made. In this Congress, the Judiciary Committee has held more than 45 hearings on these matters, with major witnesses...[lists them, like former AGs, Patrick Fitzgerald, Monica Goodling, Kenneth Blackwell, Doug Feith, Scott MacLellan, etc.). We pursued criminal contempt against Miers and Bolten.. and we expect to take action against Rove for ignoring the subpoena. We opposed wiretapping. We opposed portions of the FISA bill.... We're not done yet. We will achieve accountablity. We must work together to rein in excesses of executive branch. Whether it's suspension of habeas corpus, internment of Japanese Americans, etc. the Exec Branch often overreaches during times of war. I was on Nixon's enemy list, I get the risks... It's worse today... So, our challenge is to find a way to work together to protect these rights and develop a record, a process that will stand the test of time. I hope today will be a beginning.

Lamar Smith: This is an anger management class. Nothing will come of this, re: impeachment. There's no intention to bring impeachment. Why? Because they know it won't pass. There's no evidence to support it. Congress can't do that simply because they dislike the president. Bush committed no crimes. After all these hearings, no evidence of criminal wrongdoing. Congress reeks of partisanship. We should be working on the price of gas, securing borders, etc. Pelosi promised bipartisanship, but this is not bipartisan. This is maligning the president and serves to impeach Congress's own credibility. [reads excerpt from House Rules... no use of language that ridicules the president].

Robert Wexler: I applaud your tenacity in calling for this hearing. We should begin impeachment hearings. The WH: serious abuses, high crimes, lying to Congress, WMD, illegal torture, firing US attorneys, ignoring subpoenas, etc. Never before in history has an admin. diminished the Constitutional powers of the legislative branch like this. Obstructs oversight. Rove, Mier, Bolten, etc. ignored Congress... didn't even appear, unprecedented... Distorted executive privelege... I'm convinced... we should hold hearings for impeachment. I don't come to this lightly... but when high crimes are committed, we have no other option. One branch checks the other's dangerous consolidation of power. This is not D or R issue, it is an American issue. They can run roughshod over ANY law with impunity. ... Only option left is impeachment hearings. ...