A 390-page report by the Inspector General is only a small step for mankind in bringing Karl Rove to justice for what he did to the Justice Department in the firing of the nine US attorneys, but it's a start.
The internal investigation finds political pressure drove the 2006 dismissals but that refusal of major players at the White House and the department to cooperate in the year-long inquiry has left significant “gaps” in understanding what happened.
Investigators' doubts have led Attorney General Michael Mukasey to appoint Acting United States Attorney in Connecticut Nora Dannehy, who led the conviction of a former governor for corruption, to continue the probe and decide if anyone should be prosecuted.
The "anyone" list starts with Bush's White House toadies, Karl Rove and Harriet Miers, and goes on to former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, who was overcome with memory lapses while testifying before Congress, and his cast of ideological helpers, including Monica Goodling and Kyle Sampson, who the report says "abdicated their responsibility" in supervising the firings.
After stonewalling Congress while Bush remains in office, this bunch will be facing possible prosecution in a new atmosphere next year, one in which the criminal politicizing of everything in Washington comes to an end, and Justice reverts to its original mission of discovering and punishing actual crime.
In that event, Karl Rove could be practicing his punditry for Newsweek and Fox News from a new venue that will give him plenty of time to think deep thoughts about the new American political scene.
Showing posts with label Alberto Gonzales. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Alberto Gonzales. Show all posts
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Monday, November 19, 2007
Exit White House Musharraf Critic
With Pakistan imploding, the only top Bush official who has been criticizing President Pervez Musharraf in public for some time now is leaving her position.
In July, Frances Fragos Townsend, the President's homeland security advisor, who resigned today, said that Musharraf's cease-fire with tribal leaders to drain support for Islamic extremism was a failure, acknowledging frustration that Al Qaeda had rebuilt its infrastructure and links to affiliates, while keeping Osama bin Laden and his top lieutenants alive for nearly six years since 9/11.
“It hasn’t worked for Pakistan,” she said. “It hasn’t worked for the United States.”
At the same time, Townsend was suggesting that, if Musharraf wouldn't take action, the US would.
"Just because we don't speak about things publicly doesn't mean we're not doing things you talk about," Townsend told a TV interviewer who asked why the US does not conduct special operations and other measures to cripple Al Qaeda.
"Job No. 1 is to protect the American people. There are no options off the table,’" she said, "...no question that we will use any instrument at our disposal" to deal with Al Qaeda and bin Laden.
Townsend's unexplained departure now to "pursue some private-sector opportunities" comes at a time of crisis with Pakistan.
There is no way of knowing why the one-time official in the Clinton Justice Department, who was mentioned as a possible successor to Alberto Gonzales, is leaving now, but Bush fatigue, disappointment and disagreement over what to do in Pakistan are certainly among the possible reasons.
In July, Frances Fragos Townsend, the President's homeland security advisor, who resigned today, said that Musharraf's cease-fire with tribal leaders to drain support for Islamic extremism was a failure, acknowledging frustration that Al Qaeda had rebuilt its infrastructure and links to affiliates, while keeping Osama bin Laden and his top lieutenants alive for nearly six years since 9/11.
“It hasn’t worked for Pakistan,” she said. “It hasn’t worked for the United States.”
At the same time, Townsend was suggesting that, if Musharraf wouldn't take action, the US would.
"Just because we don't speak about things publicly doesn't mean we're not doing things you talk about," Townsend told a TV interviewer who asked why the US does not conduct special operations and other measures to cripple Al Qaeda.
"Job No. 1 is to protect the American people. There are no options off the table,’" she said, "...no question that we will use any instrument at our disposal" to deal with Al Qaeda and bin Laden.
Townsend's unexplained departure now to "pursue some private-sector opportunities" comes at a time of crisis with Pakistan.
There is no way of knowing why the one-time official in the Clinton Justice Department, who was mentioned as a possible successor to Alberto Gonzales, is leaving now, but Bush fatigue, disappointment and disagreement over what to do in Pakistan are certainly among the possible reasons.
Tuesday, November 06, 2007
Making Do With Mukasey
An old saying, "The perfect is the worst enemy of the good enough," comes to mind in the Senate struggle over the nomination of Michael Mukasey to replace Alberto Gonzales as Attorney General.
As the best choice we are likely to get from the Bush thugs who trashed the Justice Department, his confirmation would make more sense than holding it up with a prolonged debate over the legality of torture. That question can be settled by a Congressional vote to ban it.
Sen. Chuck Schumer, in a New York Times Op Ed today, points out, "There is virtually universal agreement, even from those who oppose Judge Mukasey, that he would do a good job in turning the department around."
Schumer adds: "Judge Mukasey’s refusal to state that waterboarding is illegal was unsatisfactory to me and many other members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. But Congress is now considering--and I hope we will soon pass-- a law that would explicitly ban the use of waterboarding and other abusive interrogation techniques. And I am confident that Judge Mukasey would enforce that law."
As compromises go, this is far from the worst in recent memory. At the risk of re-opening old wounds, we might recall the purists who voted for Ralph Nader over Al Gore in 2000 and gave us George Bush and this mess, among so many others.
As the best choice we are likely to get from the Bush thugs who trashed the Justice Department, his confirmation would make more sense than holding it up with a prolonged debate over the legality of torture. That question can be settled by a Congressional vote to ban it.
Sen. Chuck Schumer, in a New York Times Op Ed today, points out, "There is virtually universal agreement, even from those who oppose Judge Mukasey, that he would do a good job in turning the department around."
Schumer adds: "Judge Mukasey’s refusal to state that waterboarding is illegal was unsatisfactory to me and many other members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. But Congress is now considering--and I hope we will soon pass-- a law that would explicitly ban the use of waterboarding and other abusive interrogation techniques. And I am confident that Judge Mukasey would enforce that law."
As compromises go, this is far from the worst in recent memory. At the risk of re-opening old wounds, we might recall the purists who voted for Ralph Nader over Al Gore in 2000 and gave us George Bush and this mess, among so many others.
Monday, October 01, 2007
Democratic Sleepwalking in Washington
Now that the month of decision about Iraq has come and gone in a Petraeus-MoveOn cloud of dust, the United States government starts October in a worse stupor than ever.
Democrats who took over Congress in a fever to stop the old war and expose Bush-Cheney lawlessness have just opened the door to a new war and, after months of bloviating about Administration scandals, have only the sorry scalp of Alberto Gonzales to show for their efforts.
The Presidential front runners are still wagging fingers at George Bush without promising to be out of Iraq by 2013 while the frontmost runner of all, the new, improved Hillary Clinton of 2007, casts a vote for Kyl/Lieberman aggression against Iran that looks very much like the one for invading Iraq in 2002.
Only a party elder and a Senate newcomer are awake enough to sound an alarm. As Mario Cuomo reminds Congress of its Constitutional power and responsibility, freshman Senator Jim Webb speaks up about last week’s move against Iran:
“This proposal is Dick Cheney’s fondest pipe dream. It’s not a prescription for success. At best, it’s a deliberate attempt to divert attention from a failed diplomatic policy. At worst, it could be read as a back door method of gaining Congressional validation for action without one hearing or without serious debate.”
Whatever Bush and Cheney have put into the Washington water supply, it has most Democrats pushing the snooze button on their 2008 alarm clocks. They may wake up with the worst political hangover ever.
Democrats who took over Congress in a fever to stop the old war and expose Bush-Cheney lawlessness have just opened the door to a new war and, after months of bloviating about Administration scandals, have only the sorry scalp of Alberto Gonzales to show for their efforts.
The Presidential front runners are still wagging fingers at George Bush without promising to be out of Iraq by 2013 while the frontmost runner of all, the new, improved Hillary Clinton of 2007, casts a vote for Kyl/Lieberman aggression against Iran that looks very much like the one for invading Iraq in 2002.
Only a party elder and a Senate newcomer are awake enough to sound an alarm. As Mario Cuomo reminds Congress of its Constitutional power and responsibility, freshman Senator Jim Webb speaks up about last week’s move against Iran:
“This proposal is Dick Cheney’s fondest pipe dream. It’s not a prescription for success. At best, it’s a deliberate attempt to divert attention from a failed diplomatic policy. At worst, it could be read as a back door method of gaining Congressional validation for action without one hearing or without serious debate.”
Whatever Bush and Cheney have put into the Washington water supply, it has most Democrats pushing the snooze button on their 2008 alarm clocks. They may wake up with the worst political hangover ever.
Thursday, September 27, 2007
Too-Easy Answers About Torture
Tim Russert blindsided Hillary Clinton last night, positing “a situation in which we were holding the “number three man in Al Qaeda. We know there's a bomb about to go off, and we have three days, and we know this guy knows where it is. Should there be a presidential exception to allow torture in that kind of situation? Don't we have the right and responsibility to beat it out of him? You could set up a law where the president could make a finding or could guarantee a pardon.”
When Sen. Clinton answered that “torture cannot be American policy period” and “in addition to the values that are so important for our country to exhibit is that there is very little evidence that it works,” Russert told her that the scenario was suggested by Bill Clinton last year.
“Well, he's not standing here right now,” she responded to applause.
As other Democrats more or less agreed, a whiff of sanctimony was in the air, as it always is when politicians talk about the subject.
Only a fool (pace Alberto Gonzales) would advocate torture as policy, but as with so many other issues, it’s not always that simple. One of the less obvious sad results of Bush’s black/white, good/evil view of the world is that it has infected those who oppose him.
Before answering Russert’s “scenario,” Hillary Clinton had observed that “these hypotheticals are very dangerous because they open a great big hole in what should be an attitude that our country and our president takes toward the appropriate treatment of everyone. And I think it's dangerous to go down this path.”
It certainly is. In an era when presidents talk publicly about their underwear, voters expect definite answers about everything. But important issues don’t lend themselves to sound-bite solutions.
Just as there is the yelling-fire-in-a-crowded-theater exception to free speech, there may be situations that override the prohibition against torture or, as Joe Biden suggested, offering pardons to terrorists in exchange for information that would prevent devastation.
Years ago, when he had a TV show, William F. Buckley asked a noted attorney who strongly advocated defendants’ rights what he would do to get information from a suspect who knew where a kidnapped child was buried with a limited supply of air.
The lawyer did not hesitate: “Beat it out of him.”
In failing to acknowledge that there are no doctrinaire answers to everything a la George Bush, Democrats who want to replace him are doing themselves, and us, no service. Republicans will be only too happy to characterize them as lily-livered liberals.
When Sen. Clinton answered that “torture cannot be American policy period” and “in addition to the values that are so important for our country to exhibit is that there is very little evidence that it works,” Russert told her that the scenario was suggested by Bill Clinton last year.
“Well, he's not standing here right now,” she responded to applause.
As other Democrats more or less agreed, a whiff of sanctimony was in the air, as it always is when politicians talk about the subject.
Only a fool (pace Alberto Gonzales) would advocate torture as policy, but as with so many other issues, it’s not always that simple. One of the less obvious sad results of Bush’s black/white, good/evil view of the world is that it has infected those who oppose him.
Before answering Russert’s “scenario,” Hillary Clinton had observed that “these hypotheticals are very dangerous because they open a great big hole in what should be an attitude that our country and our president takes toward the appropriate treatment of everyone. And I think it's dangerous to go down this path.”
It certainly is. In an era when presidents talk publicly about their underwear, voters expect definite answers about everything. But important issues don’t lend themselves to sound-bite solutions.
Just as there is the yelling-fire-in-a-crowded-theater exception to free speech, there may be situations that override the prohibition against torture or, as Joe Biden suggested, offering pardons to terrorists in exchange for information that would prevent devastation.
Years ago, when he had a TV show, William F. Buckley asked a noted attorney who strongly advocated defendants’ rights what he would do to get information from a suspect who knew where a kidnapped child was buried with a limited supply of air.
The lawyer did not hesitate: “Beat it out of him.”
In failing to acknowledge that there are no doctrinaire answers to everything a la George Bush, Democrats who want to replace him are doing themselves, and us, no service. Republicans will be only too happy to characterize them as lily-livered liberals.
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
Gonzales' Father's Best Days
Throughout his ordeals of the past months and again yesterday at the climax, our outgoing Attorney General kept repeating the mantra, “Even my worst days have been better than my father’s best days.”
In clinging so fiercely to his own achievement of the American Dream, Gonzales was unwittingly evoking one of the nightmares of the Administration he served--reversing two centuries of constant upward progress from one generation to the next.
This spring, the “American Mobility Report” showed young men today worse off financially than their fathers were at the same age, a reversal of the generational advances that have made the “Land of Opportunity” a reality from the start.
In March, three out of every four Americans in a Pew Research Center poll said they believed that “the rich just get richer while the poor just get poorer.”
Gonzales’ benefactor George Bush made it possible for him to outdo his immigrant laborer father but, by widening the gap between rich and poor, has been pulling up the drawbridge for new generations still mired in poverty.
It seems to have escaped the Attorney General’s notice that he was faithfully serving a President who has been busy denying the possibilities that were open to him to millions like him who followed.
In clinging so fiercely to his own achievement of the American Dream, Gonzales was unwittingly evoking one of the nightmares of the Administration he served--reversing two centuries of constant upward progress from one generation to the next.
This spring, the “American Mobility Report” showed young men today worse off financially than their fathers were at the same age, a reversal of the generational advances that have made the “Land of Opportunity” a reality from the start.
In March, three out of every four Americans in a Pew Research Center poll said they believed that “the rich just get richer while the poor just get poorer.”
Gonzales’ benefactor George Bush made it possible for him to outdo his immigrant laborer father but, by widening the gap between rich and poor, has been pulling up the drawbridge for new generations still mired in poverty.
It seems to have escaped the Attorney General’s notice that he was faithfully serving a President who has been busy denying the possibilities that were open to him to millions like him who followed.
Monday, August 27, 2007
An Ambivalent Goodbye to Gonzales
For Democrats, the long-awaited resignation of Alberto Gonzales may turn out to be one of those answered prayers that cause more tears than the unanswered.
With the departure of the A.G. and Karl Rove, the Senate Judiciary Committee will keep trying to get to the bottom of the Justice Department firings, but inevitably a plug has been pulled draining some of the urgency that Pat Leahy, Chuck Schumer et al can bring to their quest. As they persist, charges of vindictiveness and evading serious Senate business will gain ground.
In the words of a wise old pol, the punching bag has been taken out of the gym.
Perhaps even worse is the dilemma of confirming Gonzales’ successor, who will certainly not be a lover of civil liberties. But the hazards are similar to those that frustrated Democrats in the case of Bush’s Supreme Court appointments. Reject a plausible candidate and seem obstructionist, confirm one and the Justice Department is free again to carry on, albeit more discreetly, than it did before the Gonzales cloud.
Good as it is to say goodbye to Gonzales, there can be no cause for rejoicing until Bush and Cheney pack their bags to join him a year and a half from now.
With the departure of the A.G. and Karl Rove, the Senate Judiciary Committee will keep trying to get to the bottom of the Justice Department firings, but inevitably a plug has been pulled draining some of the urgency that Pat Leahy, Chuck Schumer et al can bring to their quest. As they persist, charges of vindictiveness and evading serious Senate business will gain ground.
In the words of a wise old pol, the punching bag has been taken out of the gym.
Perhaps even worse is the dilemma of confirming Gonzales’ successor, who will certainly not be a lover of civil liberties. But the hazards are similar to those that frustrated Democrats in the case of Bush’s Supreme Court appointments. Reject a plausible candidate and seem obstructionist, confirm one and the Justice Department is free again to carry on, albeit more discreetly, than it did before the Gonzales cloud.
Good as it is to say goodbye to Gonzales, there can be no cause for rejoicing until Bush and Cheney pack their bags to join him a year and a half from now.
Friday, August 17, 2007
Did You Miss Alberto Gonzales?
The drought is over. With Congress on vacation and the Attorney General in Baghdad, devotees of Justice Department injustices have had a dry August, but the stream of scandal is starting to flow again.
Gonzales has been advising the new Iraq government on how to treat detainees.
“I spoke about the importance,” he explained, “of just making sure...that they're dealt with humanely. That they're treated fairly. These are very, very difficult issues. They're issues that we wrestle with in our own country.”
Sure enough, back home in Washington, lawmakers are wrestling with a number of issues about the Attorney General. In a letter this week, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy asked the Justice Department's Inspector General to probe whether Alberto Gonzales has made false or misleading statements.
At the same time, Director of the FBI Robert Mueller has turned over his notes about the bedside meeting with John Ashcroft to the House Judiciary Committee, and they raise new questions about Gonzales’ credibility.
Meanwhile, one Congressman, Rep. David Obey has stopped wrestling, as Congress Daily indicates: “He’s one sneaky, lying S.O.B., to put it bluntly. He’s the most authoritarian attorney general in the history of the republic. He’s the most dangerous. I never thought I’d long for the days of John Ashcroft.”
For the insatiable, TPM Muckraker has winnowed a thick crop to pick the Attorney General’s “Top Six Fibs.”
Gonzales has been advising the new Iraq government on how to treat detainees.
“I spoke about the importance,” he explained, “of just making sure...that they're dealt with humanely. That they're treated fairly. These are very, very difficult issues. They're issues that we wrestle with in our own country.”
Sure enough, back home in Washington, lawmakers are wrestling with a number of issues about the Attorney General. In a letter this week, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy asked the Justice Department's Inspector General to probe whether Alberto Gonzales has made false or misleading statements.
At the same time, Director of the FBI Robert Mueller has turned over his notes about the bedside meeting with John Ashcroft to the House Judiciary Committee, and they raise new questions about Gonzales’ credibility.
Meanwhile, one Congressman, Rep. David Obey has stopped wrestling, as Congress Daily indicates: “He’s one sneaky, lying S.O.B., to put it bluntly. He’s the most authoritarian attorney general in the history of the republic. He’s the most dangerous. I never thought I’d long for the days of John Ashcroft.”
For the insatiable, TPM Muckraker has winnowed a thick crop to pick the Attorney General’s “Top Six Fibs.”
Thursday, August 09, 2007
Google's Man-Bites-Dog-Bites-Back Move
If the job of news is, in the words of the old saw, to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable, the well-off will soon be able to hit back, thanks to Google.
Starting this week, anyone mentioned on its Google News web site will have a chance to respond. Shrewd move. That should keep Alberto Gonzales too busy to fire more prosecutors, Dick Cheney’s gang too occupied to start new wars and all the ’08 candidates writing e-mails instead of debating.
Interactive news may be our salvation.
Starting this week, anyone mentioned on its Google News web site will have a chance to respond. Shrewd move. That should keep Alberto Gonzales too busy to fire more prosecutors, Dick Cheney’s gang too occupied to start new wars and all the ’08 candidates writing e-mails instead of debating.
Interactive news may be our salvation.
Friday, August 03, 2007
All at Sea in D.C. and Alaska
At the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing yesterday, Karl Rove’s aide, J. Scott Jennings, used a maritime metaphor in declining to answer questions:
"I hope that you can appreciate the difficulty of my situation," he said. "It makes Odysseus' voyage between Scylla and Charybdis seem like a pleasure cruise."
Very literary, but Sen. Pat Leahy, the Committee Chairman, was not charmed. "Mr. Jennings, I am not here to play games," he warned.
Jennings’ reference to a “pleasure cruise” may have been the final straw for Leahy’s frustration over not getting answers from the White House about the firing of the U.S. Attorneys.
But, while he and others in the political mainstream are sweltering in Washington, denizens of the Far Left and Hard Right are on actual pleasure cruises, enjoying temperate weather off the coast of Alaska.
Devotees of the Nation and the National Review are out there this week on separate but equal Holland America luxury ships, attending seminars and demonizing one another in first-class style at a cost topping out at $9489 for NR and $8657 for the Nation’s plebians.
Their schedules have been cunningly arranged to avert a possible Monitor-Merrimac kind of naval engagement, missing each other by a day in ports of calls such as Sitka, Juneau and Ketchikan.
Stars for the left-leaning sailors are Ralph Nader, actor-activist Richard Dreyfuss and former CBS news producer Mary Mapes, who was terminated after a to-do over a segment about George Bush’s National Guard service in 2004. Regaling the right are such charmers as John Bolton, Robert Bork and Dick Morris.
As they bloviate in cool comfort, no wonder that those like Leahy who are laboring in steamy Washington are getting a little testy. Karl Rove, Alberto Gonzales and the whole Bush crew are still sailing along, untouched.
"I hope that you can appreciate the difficulty of my situation," he said. "It makes Odysseus' voyage between Scylla and Charybdis seem like a pleasure cruise."
Very literary, but Sen. Pat Leahy, the Committee Chairman, was not charmed. "Mr. Jennings, I am not here to play games," he warned.
Jennings’ reference to a “pleasure cruise” may have been the final straw for Leahy’s frustration over not getting answers from the White House about the firing of the U.S. Attorneys.
But, while he and others in the political mainstream are sweltering in Washington, denizens of the Far Left and Hard Right are on actual pleasure cruises, enjoying temperate weather off the coast of Alaska.
Devotees of the Nation and the National Review are out there this week on separate but equal Holland America luxury ships, attending seminars and demonizing one another in first-class style at a cost topping out at $9489 for NR and $8657 for the Nation’s plebians.
Their schedules have been cunningly arranged to avert a possible Monitor-Merrimac kind of naval engagement, missing each other by a day in ports of calls such as Sitka, Juneau and Ketchikan.
Stars for the left-leaning sailors are Ralph Nader, actor-activist Richard Dreyfuss and former CBS news producer Mary Mapes, who was terminated after a to-do over a segment about George Bush’s National Guard service in 2004. Regaling the right are such charmers as John Bolton, Robert Bork and Dick Morris.
As they bloviate in cool comfort, no wonder that those like Leahy who are laboring in steamy Washington are getting a little testy. Karl Rove, Alberto Gonzales and the whole Bush crew are still sailing along, untouched.
Wednesday, August 01, 2007
Murdoch to Buy Bush Administration
On the heels of the Dow Jones deal, Rupert Murdoch has made an offer to acquire the assets of the nearly bankrupt Bush Administration, reliable sources reported today.
Insiders speculate that, among other moves, the media baron plans to merge the White House Press Secretary’s Office with Fox News in a 24/7 effort to counter liberal media bias.
The synergy of the proposed merger is intriguing media analysts, who foresee joint efforts by the newly acquired Wall Street Journal and the Treasury Department to ease trade imbalances and stimulate corporate investment as well as initiatives by the State Department to improve relations with the People’s Republic of China where Mr. Murdoch has been making significant progress in advancing U.S interests.
Off the record, Mr. Murdoch has reassured stockholders of continuity of top management in the White House but has not ruled out lower-level changes such as replacing Attorney General Alberto Gonzales with a legal expert of Australian extraction and moving Karl Rove to the New York Post as editor of Page Six, which has lost some of its bite of late.
If negotiations should fail, Mr. Murdoch is prepared to settle for a smaller acquisition, reported to be one or both houses of Congress.
Another possibility is the Supreme Court, where News Corp. has previous ties with a $1 million book advance to Justice Clarence Thomas.
Insiders speculate that, among other moves, the media baron plans to merge the White House Press Secretary’s Office with Fox News in a 24/7 effort to counter liberal media bias.
The synergy of the proposed merger is intriguing media analysts, who foresee joint efforts by the newly acquired Wall Street Journal and the Treasury Department to ease trade imbalances and stimulate corporate investment as well as initiatives by the State Department to improve relations with the People’s Republic of China where Mr. Murdoch has been making significant progress in advancing U.S interests.
Off the record, Mr. Murdoch has reassured stockholders of continuity of top management in the White House but has not ruled out lower-level changes such as replacing Attorney General Alberto Gonzales with a legal expert of Australian extraction and moving Karl Rove to the New York Post as editor of Page Six, which has lost some of its bite of late.
If negotiations should fail, Mr. Murdoch is prepared to settle for a smaller acquisition, reported to be one or both houses of Congress.
Another possibility is the Supreme Court, where News Corp. has previous ties with a $1 million book advance to Justice Clarence Thomas.
Bad Bush Movies
If this Administration were a Hollywood studio, it would have been shut down after the “Heaven’s Gate” of wars in Iraq and the “Ishtar” of disasters in New Orleans.
No one wants to watch, but they still keep grinding them out. Alberto Gonzales is starring in an extravagant remake of “Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia,” with a cast of thousands as the bounty hunters.
This week, the cameras roll on a new version of “Into the Mouth of Madness” with Condoleeza Rice and Robert Gates as the intrepid couple looking for answers in places where reality and fantasy are indistinguishable.
Meanwhile, in the White House, George Bush himself is doing a final cut on “Battlefield Earth,” while Dick Cheney prepares for his close-ups in “Godzilla, the Musical.”
No one wants to watch, but they still keep grinding them out. Alberto Gonzales is starring in an extravagant remake of “Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia,” with a cast of thousands as the bounty hunters.
This week, the cameras roll on a new version of “Into the Mouth of Madness” with Condoleeza Rice and Robert Gates as the intrepid couple looking for answers in places where reality and fantasy are indistinguishable.
Meanwhile, in the White House, George Bush himself is doing a final cut on “Battlefield Earth,” while Dick Cheney prepares for his close-ups in “Godzilla, the Musical.”
Tuesday, July 31, 2007
Audiences with the Imperial Vice-President
Brace yourself, they’re unleashing Dick Cheney this week. He snarled a bit for CBS yesterday. Tonight he should be in full-throated mode on CNN with Larry King.
If Cheney is the Administration’s answer, how desperate must the public relations problem be? From his usual darkness and silence, there are now glimmers and grunts. So far this week we have these emanations:
*He is a “big fan” of Alberto Gonzales: “I think the key is whether or not he has the confidence of the president--and he clearly does."
*Scooter Libby: “I disagreed with the verdict,” but conceded "I thought the president handled it right. I supported his decision."
*Is he part of the Executive branch of government? “Well, I suppose you could argue it either way. The fact is I do work in both branches.”
*Invading Iran: A report in the London Guardian claims Bush, under pressure from Cheney, is agreeing to “carry out military action against Iran before he leaves office.”
How did we get to this Imperial Vice-Presidency from a position that used to involve no more than getting up every morning and asking about the President’s health? In the Washington Post last weekend, Walter Mondale offered a few clues by describing his experience:
“Carter saw the office as an underused asset and set out to make the most of it. He gave me an office in the West Wing, unimpeded access to him and to the flow of information, and specific assignments at home and abroad. He asked me, as the only other nationally elected official, to be his adviser and partner on a range of issues.”
So the Democrats are to blame for Cheney gone wild, kicking over the “bucket of warm piss,” as John Nance Garner described the job, and splattering us all.
If Cheney is the Administration’s answer, how desperate must the public relations problem be? From his usual darkness and silence, there are now glimmers and grunts. So far this week we have these emanations:
*He is a “big fan” of Alberto Gonzales: “I think the key is whether or not he has the confidence of the president--and he clearly does."
*Scooter Libby: “I disagreed with the verdict,” but conceded "I thought the president handled it right. I supported his decision."
*Is he part of the Executive branch of government? “Well, I suppose you could argue it either way. The fact is I do work in both branches.”
*Invading Iran: A report in the London Guardian claims Bush, under pressure from Cheney, is agreeing to “carry out military action against Iran before he leaves office.”
How did we get to this Imperial Vice-Presidency from a position that used to involve no more than getting up every morning and asking about the President’s health? In the Washington Post last weekend, Walter Mondale offered a few clues by describing his experience:
“Carter saw the office as an underused asset and set out to make the most of it. He gave me an office in the West Wing, unimpeded access to him and to the flow of information, and specific assignments at home and abroad. He asked me, as the only other nationally elected official, to be his adviser and partner on a range of issues.”
So the Democrats are to blame for Cheney gone wild, kicking over the “bucket of warm piss,” as John Nance Garner described the job, and splattering us all.
Thursday, July 26, 2007
Alberto Gonzales' Nose
Specialists at Walter Reed Medical Center have been treating the Attorney General, between rounds of Congressional testimony, for an advanced case of Pinocchio Syndrome, it was learned today.
Thus far, non-invasive therapy has controlled the symptoms, but Mr. Gonzales’ condition may require more aggressive measures for the tension produced by relentless questioning.
Meanwhile, at the White House, a spokesperson confirmed the President’s deep concern over the suffering of his long-time friend, especially after learning the Attorney General’s therapy may produce such side effects as the recall of suppressed traumatic memories and uncontrollable logorrhea.
Thus far, doctors have reassured the President that continuing as Attorney General is the best tonic for Mr. Gonzales’ future well-being.
Thus far, non-invasive therapy has controlled the symptoms, but Mr. Gonzales’ condition may require more aggressive measures for the tension produced by relentless questioning.
Meanwhile, at the White House, a spokesperson confirmed the President’s deep concern over the suffering of his long-time friend, especially after learning the Attorney General’s therapy may produce such side effects as the recall of suppressed traumatic memories and uncontrollable logorrhea.
Thus far, doctors have reassured the President that continuing as Attorney General is the best tonic for Mr. Gonzales’ future well-being.
Sunday, July 22, 2007
Bush's "Saturday Night Massacre"
The Nixon parallels keep coming. The latest Bush move to hide what happened in the firing of the U.S. Attorneys is a perfect match for the Watergate “Saturday Night Massacre.”
A New York Times editorial today notes “that if Congress holds White House officials in contempt for withholding important evidence in the United States attorney scandal, the Justice Department simply will not pursue the charges. This stance tears at the fabric of the Constitution and upends the rule of law.”
Just as Bush is now ready to hide his Administration’s wrongdoing with a misuse of the Justice Department, Nixon in 1973 attempted to fire the Special Prosecutor who was getting too close to the truth about Watergate.
On that memorable Saturday night, the Attorney General and his assistant refused and resigned. Nixon reached down to the third in line, Robert Bork, who did the bloody deed. (Bork’s eagerness later helped deny him confirmation for the Supreme Court.)
That was the beginning of the end for Nixon, whose lawlessness was laid bare for the entire country to see. Less than a year later, in the face of impeachment, he left office.
George Bush won’t have to fire faithful Alberto Gonzales, who will never refuse an order, but their political perversion of the Justice Department is becoming clearer with every move they make to hide it.
Bush won’t be impeached or resign, but he is certain to go down in history with the same stain of misusing Executive Power as his role model, Richard Nixon.
A New York Times editorial today notes “that if Congress holds White House officials in contempt for withholding important evidence in the United States attorney scandal, the Justice Department simply will not pursue the charges. This stance tears at the fabric of the Constitution and upends the rule of law.”
Just as Bush is now ready to hide his Administration’s wrongdoing with a misuse of the Justice Department, Nixon in 1973 attempted to fire the Special Prosecutor who was getting too close to the truth about Watergate.
On that memorable Saturday night, the Attorney General and his assistant refused and resigned. Nixon reached down to the third in line, Robert Bork, who did the bloody deed. (Bork’s eagerness later helped deny him confirmation for the Supreme Court.)
That was the beginning of the end for Nixon, whose lawlessness was laid bare for the entire country to see. Less than a year later, in the face of impeachment, he left office.
George Bush won’t have to fire faithful Alberto Gonzales, who will never refuse an order, but their political perversion of the Justice Department is becoming clearer with every move they make to hide it.
Bush won’t be impeached or resign, but he is certain to go down in history with the same stain of misusing Executive Power as his role model, Richard Nixon.
Saturday, July 21, 2007
Waste Removal
CNN reports: Doctors removed five small polyps from President Bush's colon on Saturday, and "none appeared worrisome," a White House spokesman said.
If only there were a medical procedure to excise worrisome growths on the body politic, like Alberto Gonzales and Karl Rove... But the President would have be sedated for that, too, and there's no telling what Cheney would do then.
If only there were a medical procedure to excise worrisome growths on the body politic, like Alberto Gonzales and Karl Rove... But the President would have be sedated for that, too, and there's no telling what Cheney would do then.
Monday, July 02, 2007
Myth of the Washington Outsider
As Republicans run away from George Bush in’ 08, one avenue they will take is that of the “Washington outsider.” Giulani and Romney can legitimately do that, and even Fred Thompson, who started as a Party lawyer during Watergate and went on to years as a lobbyist followed now by a second generation, will try.
But there is a contrarian case to be made that much of the Washington mischief of the past half century goes back to White House outsiders who didn’t know the rules of the game and where the boundary markers were.
Start with Nixon, the insider who always felt like an outsider, and surrounded himself with the likes of Mitchell, Erlichman and Haldeman, who didn’t know enough to worry about being caught doing the dirty tricks that brought them down.
During Reagan’s time, it was Oliver North et al who stepped over the line with Iran-Contra and got caught.
Now, with so much focus on Cheney’s fiefdom, it’s easy to forget that Karl Rove’s overreaching is at the heart of what Pat Leahy, Henry Waxman and other Democrats are trying to lay bare. It isn’t hardened Washington operators, but true-believing amateurs like Alberto Gonzales and his crew who stepped over well-established lines in the Justice Department.
This is not to glorify traditional politicians but, as voters look for answers, they may want to look carefully when candidates promise to change the ways of Washington rather than get the political process back under control. So far, the alternatives to politics as usual have turned out to be politics as nightmare.
But there is a contrarian case to be made that much of the Washington mischief of the past half century goes back to White House outsiders who didn’t know the rules of the game and where the boundary markers were.
Start with Nixon, the insider who always felt like an outsider, and surrounded himself with the likes of Mitchell, Erlichman and Haldeman, who didn’t know enough to worry about being caught doing the dirty tricks that brought them down.
During Reagan’s time, it was Oliver North et al who stepped over the line with Iran-Contra and got caught.
Now, with so much focus on Cheney’s fiefdom, it’s easy to forget that Karl Rove’s overreaching is at the heart of what Pat Leahy, Henry Waxman and other Democrats are trying to lay bare. It isn’t hardened Washington operators, but true-believing amateurs like Alberto Gonzales and his crew who stepped over well-established lines in the Justice Department.
This is not to glorify traditional politicians but, as voters look for answers, they may want to look carefully when candidates promise to change the ways of Washington rather than get the political process back under control. So far, the alternatives to politics as usual have turned out to be politics as nightmare.
Monday, June 11, 2007
Democratic Disarray
It takes a certain kind of brilliance for Senate Democrats to make a big effort to get a non-binding vote on the popularity of Alberto Gonzales, lose it and get plausibly accused of playing partisan politics by the likes of Trent Lott and Mitch McConnell.
If competence is going to be a major issue in ’08, no one will point to today as a shining example for those who want to rescue us from the Bush era. Three of the Senate Democrats running for President did not even bother to show up.
Buried deep in the New York Times account of the fiasco is the real issue involved:
“The Senate-led effort to compel the testimony of Karl Rove, the senior White House adviser, and Harriet Miers, the former White House counsel, about their role in the dismissals has been stalled by disagreements between White House and the Senate judiciary panel. So far, the committee has authorized but has not issued subpoenas to force their appearance.”
Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer and their compatriots had better stop taking victory laps for their election win last fall and get to the real business of stopping the war, exposing corruption instead of playing games over it and, if they have any time left over, passing a little legislation. The '08 clock is ticking for them, too.
If competence is going to be a major issue in ’08, no one will point to today as a shining example for those who want to rescue us from the Bush era. Three of the Senate Democrats running for President did not even bother to show up.
Buried deep in the New York Times account of the fiasco is the real issue involved:
“The Senate-led effort to compel the testimony of Karl Rove, the senior White House adviser, and Harriet Miers, the former White House counsel, about their role in the dismissals has been stalled by disagreements between White House and the Senate judiciary panel. So far, the committee has authorized but has not issued subpoenas to force their appearance.”
Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer and their compatriots had better stop taking victory laps for their election win last fall and get to the real business of stopping the war, exposing corruption instead of playing games over it and, if they have any time left over, passing a little legislation. The '08 clock is ticking for them, too.
Novak's Lost Faith in Bush
Disillusion is always saddening and, in the case of Robert Novak, it’s positively heart-breaking.
His column in today’s Washington Post is filled with wounded rue. Hiding his feelings behind such entities as the Republican “base” and “insiders,” Novak reports,” The White House is not a happy place for the people working there.”
Chief among the complaints is Bush’s failure to consider a pardon for faithful Scooter while standing by Alberto, “an embarrassment to the party.”
What Novak seems to be missing is that “embarrassment” may be a happier option for the President than the alternative--letting him go and having him recover his memory (and maybe even e-mails) about Karl Rove’s role in firing the U.S. Attorneys.
Novak is sounding more and more like a left-leaning blogger these days, but he seems to be holding on to a glimmer of hope that Fred Thompson can make all the pain go away.
His column in today’s Washington Post is filled with wounded rue. Hiding his feelings behind such entities as the Republican “base” and “insiders,” Novak reports,” The White House is not a happy place for the people working there.”
Chief among the complaints is Bush’s failure to consider a pardon for faithful Scooter while standing by Alberto, “an embarrassment to the party.”
What Novak seems to be missing is that “embarrassment” may be a happier option for the President than the alternative--letting him go and having him recover his memory (and maybe even e-mails) about Karl Rove’s role in firing the U.S. Attorneys.
Novak is sounding more and more like a left-leaning blogger these days, but he seems to be holding on to a glimmer of hope that Fred Thompson can make all the pain go away.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)