« Tribute | Main | Banana Republic »

September 12, 2007


The plot thickens. Thanks for your insights Kagro X.
The only consolation is that his term as AG will only last a year.....

It would be nice if the Democrats "learned" to obstruct those who keep undermining our government. However, given their previous performance regarding nominees for SCOTUS, I'm not holding my breath.

My guess is, under testimony, the Dems will ask him if he is still mean. He will reply, "No, I'm not mean anymore and as A.G. I won't be mean because I'm a real American." The Dems will then OK him, because he said he would be nice (Of course that isn't true, he only said he wouldn't be mean, he can't help it if the Dems took that to mean he would be nice); But if he changes once in office, who could predict these things...

I won't be holding my breath. The Dems could surprise me, and I hope they do. I'm tired of watching them use all of that dry powder as talc on the places where the Republicans have rubbed them raw while screwing them, and us, over.

Shorter last 6 1/2 years...

Bush: Hey Dems! Look at my thumb.
Dems: Ok, Mr. President. I'll look at your thumb in the spirit of bipart..
Bush: [punches Dems in the face with clenched fist] Gee, you're dumb.

...wake the frack up Dems. You're going to go the way of the Whigs unless you smarten up and stop acting like chumps. Even dogs know not to go near somebody that keeps beating them with a newspaper. You keep going to the President in good faith and then act surprised when you get smacked on the snout, something that strangely enough happens EVERY time you deal with the White House. The ENTIRE point of the President meeting with you is to find just the right time to smack you the hardest.

Here's a great David Neiwart story on this.

Fabulous. The Neiwart link makes is clear that Olson is both a partisan hack AND incompetent -- hmm, I have this nagging feeling that I've run across something like that before... where, I wonder? Hmmm...

Given the Dems are waiting to file obstruction charges against Rove, Miers, Bolton -- is it possible that they are helping Bush run out the clock...because they know the next imperial president will be a democrat?

Dead last,
At a Federal Bar Council panel on the US Attorney scandal, I was rather shocked to hear democrats on the panel teasing Republicans onthe panel about the imprial prseidency and why republicans should not support it because at some point (just out of cyclic change) a Democrat would have all this power.
It was like they thought it was funny and that the republicans were digging their own graves.

INSTEAD of worrying about what this does to the Constitution and hte Rule of Law. I was very dissapointed to hear them behave that way.

Is blackmail involved? Seriously, do we think that Duke Cunningham was the only congressman involved in the Wilkes/Foggo "hospitality suites"? William Casey, Regan's campaign manager turned DCIA, was a gung ho amateur "operations" guy who broke plenty of rules at the dawn of Iran-Contra, when Dusty Foggo was reportedly the go-to guy for whores in Honduras. Yes, this is pure speculation, but how much is there that we don't know that might clarify some principal Dems' mysterious passivity?

LHP -- It sure seems to me given the behavior of Pelosi and Reed that this is likely a widespread view among the Dem leadersheep, and not just on the Federal Bar Council bar. Disappointing doesn't even begin to scratch the surface of how I feel about this. Hmm, that sounds critical of you, I don't mean it that way, I'm just sayin'...

looseheadprop - I seriously think as a country we need to call another Constitutional convention just to reaffirm the Bill of Rights and do some housekeeping (like maybe switching the House to a Parliament and the President subject to a no confidence vote).

It's like the American Civics I learned in public grade school is so much fiction. What point is there of having people like Marty Lederman, Jack Goldsmith, and (I dare say) John Ashcroft in the world if the laws they are upholding have all the binding power of lines in a colorbook. The entire reason people have tolerance for people with dramatically different views is they believe they all get the same shake under the law. If that changes there can be a lot of bad, bad things that happen.

LHP, but thats the thing isn't it? The people in power across the board, Democrats quite included, are simply drunk with their own power, self importance and continuation thereof; and that is more important to them than their oath of office and duties as citizens to the Constitutional foundation of this country.

For some positive news, the three remaining original members of Led Zeppelin are reuniting with Jason Bonham on drums.

Forgive me bmaz, but that is seriously grasping at straws, err, drumsticks ;)

joejoejoe, "all the binding power of lines in a colorbook"

most quotable expression I've seen in ages, thanks!

"Why would any Senator IN HIS OR HER RIGHT MIND vote to confirm . . ." (emphasis mine).

There you have it. While you may have sought to prick a Congressional conscience or two (and maybe you have), the fact is that our zombie Congresspeople are not in their collective or individual right minds.

What we see is a battle for the high ground in the sanity wars. Are "we" in the asylum looking out, as the CW would have it, or are the Congress critters in their firm adherence to orthodoxy, acceptable formulation, and false distinctions in the asylum but with the institutional presumption of respectability and sanity?

Amazing, well, really predictable, how the media keeps up the facade while the majority of the "people" see beyond it on many issues despite the media innundation.

It really is incredible, but understandable that he would be the pick. And of course, the default if they don't approve him is Clement, who stays on as Acting, with the poor President who is trying so hard, but the Dems won't let him fix DOJ.

This is repetitive from my comment on drational's kos thread, but I'd certainly like to see them begin some questioning of the representations made by the Solicitor General's office while he headed it (oral argument handled by Clement) to the Supreme Court during the Padilla/Hamdan oral argument.

At that time, April of 2004, there had been numerous kidnappings, black site prisons established for torture interrogations, renditions for torture, waterboarding, deaths in military custody from torture interrogations, some stories are now indicating that there may have been similar deaths at CIA hands, minor children had been disappeared by the govt, etc. etc. Of particular note, in January of 2004 Arar's lawsuit, reciting his Dept of Justice engineered torture rendition to Syria was on file.

Yet still, with all of that and more in various offices of the DOJ and Executive Branch client of the Sol Gen, the Sol Gen went in and adamantly asserted to the Sup Ct, as truth (with the requisite due diligence duties implicit in those representations) that the US does not torture and does not do "things like" torture even.

How does Olson account for that happening on his watch? Does he know of waterboarding and directives to allow that? Hasn't that been deemed a war crime - a 'thing like' (how assinine) torture? Did his office fail to perform due diligence, was his office lied to and if so what actions has his office taken with respect to those lies, or did his office simply decide to lie to the Sup Ct bc they felt that if the Executive wants to torture, it's nobody else's business?

Love the coloring book analogy joejoejoe, but defending the rule of law isn't something that Goldsmith ideologically favors. He's in print as stating that he pretty much thinks the rule of law shouldn't have binding power on a President of the United States - 'successful' leaders do what they do, without regard to or for the law, under his print theorizations.

Sorry completely off topic..

I wish those, who have no 'real problem' with the possibility of an attack by the US against Iran, using some 'sort' of nuclear weapon, would watch this along with our so-called 'representives'.
When they get to the graphic re, London, they should pause, and think about all the PEOPLE that are in London and the surrounding country who are just 'gone'.... Then they need to think about the PEOPLE in the cities of Iran and the Middle East, during and after, such an attack...
There are NO winners in a nuclear war and the impact on the planet and future generations, means our mutual distruction.
Our Commanders and Leaders seem to be seroiusly considering committing acts of genicide against the rest of the world..
This has to stop before it goes any further.


"Why would any Senator in his or her right mind vote to confirm as the new Attorney General one of the three chief architects of the plan to render them powerless?"

Key words "right mind," which so few of them possess..

Right-leaning maybe, but "right?"

We wouldn't be in this mess if a simple majority of these people were in their right minds...

Never OT: Russia just tsted a non-nuclear super-bomb...

Leahy's obvious approach here should be 'comply with subpoenas and we'll hold nomination hearings'. He can even dress it up all nice: 'the next AG needs to be able to address the fundamental dysfunction of the DOJ, and he can only do that when it becomes clear just what that dysfunction entailed, and that the White House is prepared to allow changes to occur.'

I'm still not convinced that Olson will get the nod. But I think it's time to tighten the screw on Leahy, as politely as possible, to make clear that the investigations do not end with the replacement of AGAG with another Bush lackey.

Of course, if Bush nominates the oleaginous Hatch (or the dumb-as-shit Cornyn) the Senate Dems roll over and piss on themselves to confirm him.

I wonder what Olson's position is on Chemerinski's being fired from his position as the founding dean of the University of California-Irvine Law School less than a month after being hired because of "pressure from conservatives"?

Looks like Harry Reid has thrown down the gauntlet:

"Ted Olson will not be confirmed," Reid, D-Nev., said in a written statement. "I intend to do everything I can to prevent him from being confirmed as the next attorney general."

(h/t TPMMuckraker)

Olson is a submissive courtier to Bush. No doubt he wants the job.

At the time of the Hospital visit, Ted was the Solicitor General:

The Office of the Solicitor General is tasked to conduct all litigation on behalf of the United States in the Supreme Court, and to supervise the handling of litigation in the federal appellate courts.


When Comey went to the White House for the 11pm meeting after Gonzo and Card's failed end-around to manipulate a signature out of Ashcroft, he took Olson with him to be a 'witness.'

Olson - the guy charged with representing the Rule of Law to the highest Court in the land - sold his soul and any credibility he had when he obediently sat outside the oval office, because Card told him to, and didn't witness anything.

Ted Olson, with the Rule of Law in his hand, bowed down to Bush.

And now, golly wolly, Bush wants him to be his AG.

bmaz, nice OT.

when I was 15 I saw the original LZ lineup - Physical Graffiti tour, 1977.

Not a lot of people can say they saw The Zep live.

Hey randiego, I saw the same tour at ASU Activity Center in Tempe in 77. Page almost blew himself up on a pyrotechnic pod he wandered to close to. He literally was a little Dazed and Confused.

For some positive news, the three remaining original members of Led Zeppelin are reuniting with Jason Bonham on drums.
Posted by: bmaz | September 12, 2007 at 12:59

For one show, a benefit in England. You can put your name in for a lottery. http://www.ahmettribute.com/ Ticket price is 125 pounds.

Neil - I have seen them before (when both them and I were young); so I'm not THAT excited. But I got a big ass TV and loud stereo; I am sure it will be on some kind of video, maybe even live.

With Hillary looking like she is more or less in line for the nomination, I think Olson is a thumb in the eye to the Democrats.

Remember, Olson was the connection between the American Spectator, The Arkansas Project and Richard Mellon Scaife's millions. When he was first nominated for Solicitor General he almost didn't make it on a Senate vote. I rather suspect that Hillary has Lieberman more or less in tow now, and the votes would not be there if it ever got out of committee. It should never get out of committee.

People have simply forgotten that Ted Olson was, in the early Clinton Administration, a hired political operative working on behalf of Scaife. It may be we have to review all that history. Assumption probably is on those who think in Roveain terms, that Democrats don't want to revisit all that, but maybe we should so as to avoid having THEM revisit it all a year from now in swift boat fashion.

I am in the midst of reading Bernstein's bio of Hillary, and I really recommend it. First reason, Bernstein can write, and just that is a delight. But much more than that, this is authentic American Literature. If I could compose classical music, I would do it as a grand opera. I would orchestrate many country and western tunes in classical form -- all about the woman who was on the way to the top in the Legal World -- who followed her heart and moved to Arkansas, even though the man she loved could not be trusted with a hot high-schooler with a bee hive.

Anyhow, the Democrats in the Senate actually owe Hillary an absolute no on Ted Olsen. Forget the other stuff, this is a debt needing payment.

It isn't just Hillary; don't forget Big Dog Bill is still prowling aroung too. The last time the Democrats didn't listen to Bill Clinton, we were saddled with seven years (and counting) of Bush as a result. I think Olson is a diversion; but if not, I think some scores will be settled. And rightfully so.

We need impeachment to out the crimes, convict Bushco in the court of public opinion and get govrtnment back on a constitutional track before doing any of the publics business. You may force MSM and get c-span coverage. Because the Impeachment is unsuccessfuloes not strip it's benefits of exposing the scandals. The process needs a cleanup. It is now like cooking with toxic chemicals: the product is not paillitive. Corrupt laws beget corruption. If not now never. Pontificate all you want. The battle lines have to be drawn, after we pick what is most precious to fight for, obviously our form of government a constitutional democracy under the rule of law. machiavellian minds will always challenge and undermine good government and frequent house cleanings must be undertaken as a tune up on your vehicle is scheduled. This hpuld not schock the consciense it is human nature we deal with. Greed and all the other character flaws need TLC in ther form of Congressional oversight made difficult by the purchase of our free speech institutions. The Dem agenda is missing from the dialogue they are only responding to political pressure trying to look patriotic as defenders of the Buchco Homeland.
Talking around the point is a form of sohpistic reasoning. You are in fact hypocritical in practicing what Bushco WH is doing.

Ha ha! Yeah, that's me! Always skirting the issue of impeachment. Yep.

People, with utmost sincerity, I submit that this is the time to re-read the Declaration of Independence (Google it!), perhaps to make it a daily reading.

People, with utmost sincerity, I submit that this is the time to re-read the Declaration of Independence (Google it!), perhaps to make it a daily reading.

I guess my anger towards the elected officials of this country hit it's low point at my realization that it doesn't really matter who you elect to national office. This is shown by the actions of the ones just given the mandate (the democrats) from the people, to STOP the Iraq crime scene that's been going on too long. The chicken bast**ds of the democratic party are not the peoples representatives but live in some sort of bubble that stops them from picking up their brains and conscience before they walk into congress. All of them are a bunch of liars and crooks.

Should this next 'Bushite' nominee be confirmed as Attorney General then very serious thought and discussion should end about all these criminal bast**ds and turn towards other ways of getting what the people want and need BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY! This includes the example of our founders of our great country, a revolution for basically the same reason, NO REPRESENTATION FROM RULERS! Right now you can count me in.

It's quite an incestuous group, the power brokers who've been working in Washington for 30 years or more, making connections, forwarding their own agendas through PACs and think tanks, all for selfish reasons. There seems to be a few dozen people who have all the power, then a few hundred in the second tier who enable them. Some of them might hold elected positions, but our elected reps are pretty much irrelevant to the entire process.

There's this idea in conservative media that you're supposed to fear liberal journalists, college professors, and activists judges, but it's the Ted Olsens and Fred Fieldings, and the Wolfowitzs, Rumsfelds, and Gonzales' who have the power to change America for the worse.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Where We Met

Blog powered by Typepad