“James B. Comey, the straight-as-an-arrow former No. 2 official at the Justice Department, yesterday offered the Senate Judiciary Committee an account of Bush administration lawlessness so shocking it would have been unbelievable coming from a less reputable source.” By way of Medley, the WP blanches at a ridiculous attempt by then-White House counsel Alberto Gonzales to secure warrantless wiretaps against the will of the Justice Department. “Having failed, they were willing to defy the conclusions of the nation’s chief law enforcement officer and pursue the surveillance without Justice’s authorization. Only in the face of the prospect of mass resignations — Mr. Comey, FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III and most likely Mr. Ashcroft himself — did the president back down.“
Tag: George W. Bush
Wolfowitz’s last hunt?
“‘The staff were absolutely horrified by what seemed to be the Bush administration’s disdain for a clear-cut case of corruption at the bank,’ said one official.” Paul Wolfowitz’s tenure at the World Bank looks to enter its final hours after the Bank’s Board turns down an attempt by the White House to save face and the Dubya administration begins cutting its losses.
The Simi Valley Ten.
Is this it? Is this all you can conjure, Republicans? Perhaps it was because I was feeling mighty under the weather when catching up with it on TiVo, but last Thursday’s GOP debate was more than a little underwhelming. Of the top tier, Mitt Romney probably acquitted himself the best: He seemed a bit blow-dried and canned, sure, but we were at the Reagan library, after all, and he didn’t do anything to hurt his standing as a front-runner with money to burn. Frankly, John McCain‘s act seemed stale to me: The “Gates of Hell” notwithstanding, he seemed to possess little-to-none of the from-the-gut, truth-to-power charisma that propelled him through 2000. (And his pained, convoluted stance on Iraq — everything got screwed up for years but now we’re hunky-dory — doesn’t make a lick of sense.) Rudy Giuliani proved once again that he’s a better candidate in theory than in practice, and I don’t see his half-hearted shrug over Roe V. Wade playing too well to the conservative cheap seats. (Let’s not forget, three of these ten folks — Brownback, Huckabee, Tancredo — wouldn’t even admit to believing in evolution.) Speaking of which, Mike Huckabee and Sam Brownback seemed like the two among the rest with the best shot to jump up a notch, particularly as either could conceivably become the favorite son of the Dobson wing of the party. Ron Paul’s ardent libertarianism was a surprising X-factor in the debate, and I thought it was kinda fun to have him around. (He also came across better, IMO, than the Dem’s official monkey wrench, Mike Gravel.) Jim Gilmore, Tommy Thompson, Tom Tancredo, Duncan Hunter? Meh. If I were Fred Thompson, I wouldn’t be dissuaded from a run by this lot. I mean, the GOP field already looks like one of those WaMu ads with the gang of disgruntled bankers (Indeed, an Obama-and-GOP Youtube remix seems inevitable) — why not add one more to the mix?
Probably the most telling fact of the evening was the dog that didn’t bark: Dubya. Watching these ten prominent Republicans squirm and equivocate every time anyone mentioned the president and his current policies tells you everything you need to know about 2008 — After eight years of GOP mismanagement and corruption, the election is the Dems to lose.
Deconstructing Harvey.
“But reading Mansfield has real value for understanding the dominant right-wing movement in this country. Because he is an academic, and a quite intelligent one, he makes intellectually honest arguments, by which I mean that he does not disguise what he thinks in politically palatable slogans, but instead really describes the actual premises on which political beliefs are based. And that is Mansfield’s value; he is a clear and honest embodiment of what the Bush movement is.” Glenn Greenwald eviscerates Harvard professor Harvey Mansfield after the latter pens an op-ed for the WSJ entitled “The Case for the Strong Executive — Under some circumstances, the Rule of Law must yield to the need for Energy.” See the problem in that title? It kinda jumps out at you.
Veto-Powered | Benchmarks the Benchmark.
“‘Setting a deadline for withdrawal would demoralize the Iraqi people, would encourage killers across the broader Middle East and send a signal that America will not keep its commitments. Setting a deadline for withdrawal is setting a date for failure.'” As expected, Dubya vetoed the recent Iraq spending bill passed in Congress, only the second time he’s exercised his veto power (the first being stem cells.) And, with few options at their disposal and a veto-override failing in the House 222-203, the Dems have already dropped their troop-withdrawal timetable, and now look to fashion a compromise using the language of benchmarks. “‘I believe the president is open to a discussion on benchmarks,’ said Senate Democratic Whip Richard J. Durbin…White House officials are also looking to benchmarks as an area of compromise, but they want them to be tied to rewards for achievement, not penalties for failure.” Um, what achievements would those be, and how would we evaluate them? It’s the soft bigotry of low expectations all over again. Four years after “Mission Accomplished, I don’t see how we can feasibly expect this administration to offer anything other than the same rose-scented lies about the chaos in Baghdad. They have no other setting.
Congress Steps Up.
“‘How many more suicide bombs must kill American soldiers before this president offers a timeline for our troops to come home?’ asked Rep. Patrick J. Murphy (D-Pa.), a freshman Iraq war veteran who lost nine fellow paratroopers this week in one of the deadliest attacks of the war. ‘How many more military leaders must declare the war will not be won militarily before this president demands that the Iraqis stand up and fight for their country? How many more terrorists will President Bush’s foreign policy breed before he focuses a new strategy, a real strategy? This bill says enough is enough.’” By a vote of 218-208 in the House and 51-46 in the Senate, the Democratic Congress — living up to their promise in 2006 — calls for a timetable for withdrawal in Iraq. Dubya has said several times that he’ll veto the bill, and is expected to do so in short order.
Now Dubya has a Monica problem.
Ah, I do love me that oversight. On the persecuted prosecutor front, the House Judiciary votes 32-6 to grant Gonzales aide Monica Gooding limited immunity, so that she may testify with impunity about the shady goings-on in Dubya’s Justice Department. “‘She was apparently involved in crucial discussions over a two-year period with senior White House aides, and with other senior Justice officials, in which the termination list was developed, refined and finalized,’ Conyers said.” Meanwhile, despite Dubya’s reaffirmed support of late, more Republican senators call for Gonzales’ ousting, including Norm Coleman (MN), Lamar Alexander (TN), and Susan Collins (ME).
If you’ll be my bodyguard, I’ll be your long lost pal.
“‘Everybody at the White House…all think he needs to go, but the president doesn’t,’ said a Republican who consulted the Bush team yesterday. Another White House ally said Bush and Gonzales are ignoring reality: ‘They’re the only two people on the planet Earth who don’t see it.’” True to form, Dubya responds to Alberto Gonzales’ flameout on Thursday by declaring he has “full confidence” in the Attorney General and calling his service “fantastic.” (Fantastic? Really? Do you mean that in the “fanciful” sense, perhaps?) In light of this bizarre news, Dahlia Lithwick reevaluates Gonzales’ testimony, arguing that what came across to us in the reality-based community as evasive, misleading, or just plain stammering seemed to Dubya a solid defense of the unitary executive theory. The really scary thing is, she’s probably right.
Imperial Hubris…or Conspiracy?
“How could any pilot shoot a missile into a 2 meter-wide exhaust port, let alone a pilot with no formal training, whose only claim to fame was his ability to ‘bullseye womprats’ on Tatooine? This shot, according to one pilot, would be ‘impossible, even for a computer.’ Yet, according to additional evidence, the pilot who allegedly fired the missile turned off his targeting computer when he was supposedly firing the shot that destroyed the Death Star. Why have these discrepancies never been investigated, let alone explained?” By way of Triptych Cryptic, Uncomfortable Questions: Was the Death Star Attack an Inside Job? True, it’s not as devastatingly on point as The Onion‘s recent Bush Refuses to Set Timetable for Withdrawal of Head from White House Banister (“I am going to finish what I set out to accomplish here, no matter how unpopular my decision may be, or how much my head hurts while stuck between these immovable stairway posts.“) Still, decently amusing nonetheless…I was sold on it by the pic of Palpatine reading My Pet Bantha.
Remember Mogadishu.
“None of those 76 senators, who include the current Republican leader and whip, acted to jeopardize the safety and security of U.S. troops in Somalia. All of them recognized that Congress had the power and the responsibility to bring our military operations in Somalia to a close, by establishing a date after which funds would be terminated.” In an editorial for Salon, Sen. Russ Feingold invokes GOP behavior on Somalia in 1993 to make the case for Congress cutting funding in Iraq. “Since President Bush has made it painfully clear that he has no intention of fixing his failed Iraq policy, it is no longer a question of if Congress will end this war; it is a question of when.”