FireDogLake is again doing great work following the Jose Padilla trial. Go give this post a read for what's up to date. The short version is, as usual, the government case looks like crap and is trumped up. Perhaps there'll be more evidence later, but for now it's looking like a joke.
Just a reminder. Jose Padilla is an American citizen.
“I’d rather trade places with Jose Padilla.”
– Viet Dinh, a former senior Justice official under then-Attorney General John Ashcroft, on whether he would replace Paul McNulty as deputy to Alberto Gonzales. Padilla is currently charged with aiding Islamic extremists and is facing life in prison.
Josh Marshall has the report of a Democratic House staffer on the state of negotiations on the Iraq war funding bill. It's a good read and gives a flavor of just how spineless careful the Democrats are being.
I know it's easy to sit at my keyboard command center and be bold. But I would think that a simple look at the polls would give Dems more backbone. I particularly agree with one point made by the staffer: the Dems have not done a good enough job laying the stalemate at Bush's doorstep. He vetoed a funding bill. He's refusing to negotiate. Every single Democrat interviewed for anything should be singing that song with a megaphone.
Bottom line is that it appears touch and go at this point. Not a bad time to let Congresscritters know how you feel ..... again.
A news report on the Bush/Blair new conference:
"It was a grayer Blair and a silver-maned Bush who walked from the Oval Office yesterday. Even the Rose Garden appeared uncharacteristically worn: Paint was chipping and peeling above the colonnade, and a couple of the shrubs had turned brown. Even the normal protocol was lacking. Several American reporters wore sunglasses -- a no-no in Bush world. The front row of British reporters didn't even rise with the crowd when the two leaders approached."
Thanks to reader Thom Thori who reminds us of this image as we say farewell to Wolfie:
Word is that World Bank staff were dancing and cheering in the hallways when he announced his departure. Maybe with that severance package, Wolfie can go get some new socks? Better yet, I'm sure some happy staffers would gladly pitch in for some.
Blog reader priscianus jr. points us to a post at FireDogLake on the importance of a no-confidence vote on Abu Gonzales. I encourage you to give it a read.
I'm not sure I completely agree with the post. Yes, a vote will be a "dry run" for on-the-record support for confronting the President. It certainly gives some kind of indication of the ability of the Senate to get rid of Abu. To the degree that it forces everyone to go on the record, perhaps it has some use. But the vote is non-binding on any real action and to think it will influence Bush to dump Abu is naive. If anything, it would simply make Bush support Abu even more. I predict Abu only goes if forced out through legal action by Congress, i.e impeaching him and convicting him. Abu is too important to protect the Bush family right now.
Where I disagree with the FireDogLake post is that a no-confidence vote is a dry-run at impeaching the President. Going after a disgraced attorney-general is one thing. Going after a the President is another. I suspect that many Republicans willing to vote to have no confidence in Abu certainly would not vote to impeach/convict the President. It's apples and oranges.
Finally, I frankly don't think anything significant (barring a dramatic change in Iraq either way) is going to change on the political landscape until fall at the earliest. At that time, Republicans who face re-election will feel genuine urgency to take a look at their prospects given the polls, the war, and the Preznit's approval. I'm not convinced that Republicans (and conservative Democrats for that matter) still won't be willing to go over the cliff with the Bush administration. But until then, the tribal loyalties are too strong, the investment in protecting a losing position too strong, to see any real change in the landscape.
You’re forgetting it’s not about the two parties. Vote theft is mainly a racial issue in America, and it’s a class issue. The white caucus is a lot bigger than the black caucus. They don’t call the Congress a millionaire’s club for nothing. There aren’t many guys in there -- or women -- who are not millionaires. So it’s the millionaires versus us. It’s the white caucus versus the black caucus, which is of great concern. So the vote is along racial class and economic lines, not along party lines. Party lines are pretty much meaningless. There’s pretty much one party -- the party of the cash. But I’m not one of these people that says there’s no difference between the Democratic and Republican Party. The question is: is the difference meaningful? That’s all. When it comes down to voter issues, remember that the Democrats in power there were elected under the racist, broken, classist system. If you fix the voting system, a third of those Democrats could never win a primary. The last thing that they want is poor people to vote.
Greg Palast, author of Armed Madhouse
Yesterday I put a post up indicating that (out of his own mouth) Senator Reid was caving in on negotiations with the White House over the Iraq war spending bill.
Today we get this:
The meeting between Dem Congressional leaders and the White House over how to resolve the Iraq war spending standoff has just ended, and it looks like things are at a serious impasse.It appears as if the Dems are trying to cave-in (at least from my viewpoint) and Bush will have none of it. I agree with Atrios:
Dem leaders just said at their post-meeting press availability that the White House's negotiators rejected everything that Dems offered. A Dem offer of a war timetable that the President could actually waive -- that is, not follow? Rejected. A Dem offer to get rid of the pork in the supplemental? Also rejected.
Since the decider guy will not engage in any genuine negotiation or compromise, it's time for Democrats to flip things around. I don't know why they let Bush get away with claiming that the Democrats refused to fund the troops after he vetoed the bill with those funds. Just keep sending him the same bill over and over again.Yep, lather, rinse, repeat. The Preznit is the one on the hot seat despite the feeling among conservative Dems that they are.
I'm often critical of the voting public. I think that a Republic gets the politicians it deserves. But in order for voters to do their jobs, they need information. I have the time and inclination to seek out information. But most people are busy leading lives and just don't have as much time to devote to citizenship. That's why stories like this one are so disturbing:
Media Matters notes, “ABC and CBS still have not reported — on either their evening news or morning news broadcasts — former deputy attorney general James B. Comey’s account of what NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams May 15 called a rare glimpse of a high-level, late-night power struggle over the National Security Agency’s warrantless domestic wiretapping program.”The Comey testimony is likely the biggest story of the week if not the year. It's a direct eyewitness testimony of the committing of a felony by the President of the United States. And where is ABC and CBS? Probably covering heavyweight subjects like a reunification of Joey Buttafuco and Amy Fisher (I kid you not, check the link). The media will say that they give viewers what they want, which may be true. I say the airwaves are owned by the public and granted to broadcasters based on the agreement that they would use some portion of those airwaves for public good. Beside, I'd like large media outlets like ABC, CBS and large newspapers to show me how their movement towards tabloidism has improved their ratings.
I've read several blogs today about gas gouging. Apparently consumers are beginning to put the wood to legislators to do something about gasoline prices. The blogs I've read are essentially saying that charges of price gouging are nonsense. Read the link above for an example.
I don't believe that there is much price gouging, meaning that those in the supply chain are increasing prices faster than wholesale costs to them. Sure, there are some examples, but I'm not a believer in a conspiracy of gouging in this way, on the upside.
Where I believe gouging occurs is on the downside. When wholesale prices go up, prices throughout the supply chain go up immediately. When wholesale prices go down, it can take weeks or months for those changes to be reflected in the retail price. That is price gouging and I think it does occur on a widespread basis, thus the huge profit increases for oil companies when prices rise. But I also think it's human nature and I'm not sure that regulation can do much about it.
Whenever we go through another adaptation process of higher gasoline prices due to the fundamental depletion of the resource, we have legislators who want to investigate and legislate. Then nothing happens. That's not all bad except I would be in favor of a windfall profits tax. This way incentives to maintain excessive pricing in the system are diminished, and if those profits do arise the wealth is shared with taxpayers.
Another legislative change I've been in favor of for some time is increasing gasoline taxes. I'd propose a $.20 per gal increase in gasoline prices every six months until prices begin to reflect reality (ask Europe about real gasoline prices). I would also propose that any tax collected be used to develop non-petroleum alternative energy sources. By taxing, we as a people take a proactive stance in reducing petroleum use and encouraging innovation, rather than allowing the inevitable market disruptions to "encourage us" to change. But alas, I've been speaking into a void on this issue for years and suspect the same will continue into the future.
The Chinese central bankers are making some moves to stop the Chinese bubble. Their stock market is up a whopping 55% this year and is showing all the signs of a gold rush.
The Chinese economy and stock market have been booming, going up in a virtual straight-up fashion. Investment money is pouring into their markets at a breakneck pace and inflation is at unacceptably high rates. The above link outlines some significant steps they've taken today to slow things down.
Why should we care?
Because to a large extent the Chinese boom is powering the international economic boom. It was a Chinese "correction" in February that was blamed for tanking the U.S. stock market. As I write this, our markets are not showing any signs of distress. But today is an expiration day (nevermind) which tends to create a lot of "noise" in the stock market. Next week should be very interesting.
One of the big news stories yesterday was the "compromise" on the immigration bill. It didn't look like too much of a compromise to me.
As Republican nutbar Tom Tancredo said (paraphrasing), you can put lipstick on a pig but it's still a pig, and this compromise is amnesty no matter what else you call it.
For one of the rare occasion, I agree with him.
Bush has cooperated with the Dems to rename and repackage an illegal immigrant amnesty bill. And the Republican right is squealing like pigs (which proves it must be a good thing, eh?). Dems are saying things like "oh well, it's the best we could get" and such statements as that ... lukewarm displeasure. But the Republican right is screaming bloody murder. This looks like a clear victory for Dems to me.
You can read details of the compromise here. I see little to be displeased with. Illegals can get legal by jumping through a few hoops and paying a fine over a reasonable amount of time. And the security measures like building a longer bigger wall, will fail like they always do. The new border security measures will please the minute men for a few minutes but will not be effective due to the miles of economic disparities between the few miles separating Tijuana and San Diego. And in ten years, it'll be time for another amnesty bill!
I'm not positive the bill will easily pass the House. We shall see. Bush is doing what he can to try and have a "signature legacy" other than Iraq. Few people will remember or care about this portion of Bush's legacy in the long run as Iraq will dominate any ink spilled over the boy king (along side of loss of civil liberties). So, good job Dems. You've played this one well and the country will benefit.
USA Today leads with an analysis of federal highway data showing that, for the first time in 26 years, drivers in America have started clocking "substantially fewer miles." The price of gas is one reason, but there are also other factors, such as an aging population and a growing trend that has resulted in many people moving out of suburbs and into cities.I wonder if this is the start of reverse suburbanization? As the petroleum economy becomes less viable, and as technology improves things like telecommuting, you've got to wonder.
An excerpt from The Assault on Reason:
It is too easy—and too partisan—to simply place the blame on the policies of President George W. Bush. We are all responsible for the decisions our country makes. We have a Congress. We have an independent judiciary. We have checks and balances. We are a nation of laws. We have free speech. We have a free press. Have they all failed us? Why has America's public discourse become less focused and clear, less reasoned? Faith in the power of reason—the belief that free citizens can govern themselves wisely and fairly by resorting to logical debate on the basis of the best evidence available, instead of raw power—remains the central premise of American democracy. This premise is now under assault.
Isn't Rudy Guiliani one of the most reptilian types guys you've ever seen?
The more I learn about him the less I like him. And I never liked him much. He's more cunning than Bush and likely not as stupid. And now we know his feelings on torturing suspects:
Do whatever you want.
Nice thing for an American leader to be saying, particularly when U.S. soldiers are being held hostage somewhere.
It's conniving wacko's like Guiliani that only gather a following during the times of dictators.
So the Senate is going to hold a "no confidence" vote on Abu Gonzales?
So?
It's great optics and perhaps good politics. But does anyone actually believe it will have an effect on tearing down the biggest firewall between Senate investigators and Rove/Bush? I, for one, will be shocked if it has any impact.
There is but one conclusion you can draw from the astonishing (albeit fitful, bittersweet) pro-environment sea change now happening in the culture and (reluctantly, nervously) in the halls of power in D.C., one thing we must all acknowledge in our wary, jaded, globally warmed universe: The hippies had it right all along. Oh yes they did. You know it's true. All this hot enthusiasm for healing the planet and eating whole foods and avoiding chemicals and working with nature and developing the self? Came from the hippies. Alternative health? Hippies. Green cotton? Hippies. Reclaimed wood? Recycling? Humane treatment of animals? Medical pot? Alternative energy? Natural childbirth? Non-GMO seeds? It came from the granola types (who, of course, absorbed much of it from ancient cultures), from the alternative worldviews, from the underground and the sidelines and from far off the goddamn grid and it's about time the media, the politicians, the culture as a whole sent out a big, wet, hemp-covered apology.
Purloined from Blondesense:
source
Heh
Digby continues the speculation today. It's a good read. Personally, I'm still astounded by it and reading the transcripts just doesn't do it justice.
The Frontline on the governments wiretapping programs the other night hit on the same point. Abu's testimony in front of the Senate in 2006 is so obviously parsed that you'd have to be deaf, dumb and blind not to see it. Equally obvious, Senators couldn't call him on it due to security considerations. So we have this odd Abu testimony that's like a (yet another) kabuki dance going on around the truth.
I agree with Digby's comment made in 2006 and today. I think Comey, Ashcroft and the entire DOJ leadership was prepared to resign because there were political elements involved in the illegal wiretapping. Remember, the events that Comey describe take place before the 2004 election.
When the truth finally comes out, I think it'll make Nixon look like a civil libertarian. What's really interesting is that you know that many Senate Republicans know the truth, having been briefed, and yet they continue to support Bush. That, alone, ought to give you some insight into the values, norms, and practices of the GOP these days as compared to the days of Nixon when the GOP still had some semblance of a soul.
Bush twice today ducked an important question:
During a press conference today, President Bush was confronted about recent accusations made by former Deputy Attorney General James Comey regarding the White House’s shocking efforts to seek legal sanction for its warrantless wiretapping program. According to Comey, Bush personally directed a White House effort to bypass Comey’s authority and seek approval from John Ashcroft, who was then hospitalized and in intensive care.Bush's response to the questions? The short versions:
TERRORIST!, TERRORISTS!, TERRORISTS!I think we can safely assume that his response is a confirmation of Comey's testimony. That puts Bush directly in the felony loop.
