Fitz! You make me proud to be a lawyer.

Lawyers Rock

..and roll

Ahh brave Harry Taylor, say goodbye to air travel and your credit score.

Great pic Jane! Oh and I heard Harry Taylor and chimpy on NPR– the whole thing was much, much better than the condensed version in print. I hope c&l will get the video or at least the audio and that KO features it prominently tonite.

‘…Bush defended the National Security Adminsitration’s surveillance program, saying he authorized the program to protect the country.

“You said would I apologize for that?†Bush told him. “The answer is absolutely not.‒

—-

Bush does not fucking care. His has been a lifetime of evading accountability for his litany of failures. He’s not about to change his M.O. now.

“When America speaks, we ought to mean what we said,” Bush said. “I meant what we said when we embraced that resolution that said ‘Disclose. Disarm. Or face serious consequences.’ Words mean something in this world if you’re trying to protect the American people.”

“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said in a rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.
Through the Looking Glass

Speaking of anger, I think ‘liberal realist’ is a Dem staffer who is getting sick of all the angry emails and letters pouring in from constituents. To this staff person I would like to say, it’s all about petitioning for the redress of grievances: First Amendment.

Schumer is my favorite piñata these days.

Firedoglake=the home of the two goddesses.

Ladies, in all my frantic typing this morning, I forgot to thank you for keeping this story alive, for providing an information resource (where would I be without those links?), and for creating an atmosphere where information and analysis can be exchanged.

I was a lurker here almost from the beginning and I cannot tell you how valuable all the information has been.

Today is a really specail day in the community called Firedoglake. We understood the signifigance of what were reading from the moment we read because we had the background knowledge to grasp what was in those papers.

Most of the corporate media had to take a while to get up to speed because they are so easily distracted by other things.

Thank you, and everyone else who visits here, for keeping your eyes on the ball.

AS Mrs. Laningham on West Wing used to say “I’m proud to know you”

Why has the question,is the president guilty
of an obstruction of justice,not been asked?

a wise politician always works to maximize the impression that the constituent/voter is being listened to …

moe99,
you don’t mean to imply that the chimp is heading for a great fall, do you?

We need about 250 more Harry Taylors’….
in Congress.

Mr. Taylor,

I tip my hat to you. You are a hero.

Tiger finishes his day at even par- wasting a birdie and an eagle- but staying in the hunt.

Dramatic tournament- may be the last one he will play with his dad still alive.

I had adopted the battle cry of “Fitz – Spitz – FEINGOLD.” Now I shall add “Harry Taylor!”

And oh how proud I am that this occurred in the midst of Cornwallis’ “hornets nest” and in the state that refused to ratify a federal constitution until a bill of rights was assured!

ooh re Harry Taylor Think Progress has the full script and video up now!
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/…..ff-script/

Schumer is on TV right now hollering about Cheney/Bush leaking …

Off topic but….

the Dixie Chicks preorder link is up.

Follow the Atrios link.

http://atrios.blogspot.com/200…..0175819426

From the NYT’s:
“The disclosure prompted Democrats to demand that the White House be forthcoming about Mr. Bush’s role. Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic leader, released a statement saying: “In light of today’s shocking revelation, President Bush must fully disclose his participation in the selective leaking of classified information. The American people must know the truth.”
OT: ditto what looseheadprop said at 10.

Does anyone know where I can donate to the Harry Taylor legal defense fund?

Leading Democrats immediately seized on the disclosures today to accuse Bush of hypocrisy and demand that he explain his role in the Plame leak case.

“In light of today’s shocking revelation, President Bush must fully disclose his participation in the selective leaking of classified information,” Senate minority leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) said in a statement. “The American people must know the truth.”

Howard Dean, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, said, “The fact that the president was willing to reveal classified information for political gain and put the interests of his political party ahead of America’s security shows that he can no longer be trusted to keep America safe.”

(Washington Post)

ThinkProgress has the full text of Harry Taylor’s comments:

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/…..ff-script/

*ilson46201 says:
April 6th, 2006 at 12:38 pm

cbl says:
April 6th, 2006 at 12:32 pm

this is a kid who scared us at Age 9 by saying he had a nightmare he was a prime number that couldn’t be divided

at that age, I wouldn’t have worried… at 11 or 13, the kid’s got issues!

I know this is from the last entry, but things are FLYING around here today…
I’m I the only math major who got this joke ??

very funny *ilson46201….

Does no one else know that 11 and 13 are prime numbers ???

good one..

angie says:
April 6th, 2006 at 12:55 pm

Your post wasn’t up when I was typing mine.

Stephen Parrish, CPA says:
April 6th, 2006 at 12:59 pm

Can’t get too much of that good thing ;)

shooogarp — that made me laugh out loud.

By the way: Not one, not two, but THREE DHS agents turned out to be pedophiles!

Remember DHS was supposed to be Bush’s showcase agency to demonstrate that we didn’t need the oversight provided by the Civil Service System.

fran (11) — I don’t think it’s for the lack of asking out here in the blogosphere; we know the OVP and the WH have been working diligently to snow us all, including Fitzgerald (i.e., the once-missing 250 emails). The challenge for Fitz is making an air-tight case, without tipping his hand and setting off more sand-throwing, without getting caught up in an avalanche of greymail. Look at the sand Libby’s team has thrown up in his defense, in spite of Fitz’ tightly wound case around obstruction and perjury; can you imagine what Deadeye Dick would do in the same position (will do, I should ask)? can you imagine what kind of new obsfucation Dubya would launch if/when he makes Fitz’ sights? We know the POTUS and OVP have/will obstruct justice; the question is, how do we prosecute without setting off a nuclear winter of a snowstorm?

Check this out over at DKos:

 Is Fitzgerald ’saying’ what he’s not saying
(1+ / 0-)
Recommended by:Phoenix Woman

Wingers are all apoplectic about the fact that original reports about this include the line:

There was no indication in the filing that either Bush or Cheney authorized Libby to disclose Valerie Plame’s CIA identity.

But is that true?  I’m looking through Fitz’ filing and this passage jumps out:

Defendant’s participation in a critical conversation with Judith Miller on July 8 (discussed further below) occurred only after the Vice President advised defendant that the President specifically had authorized defendant to disclose certain information in the NIE. Defendant testified that the circumstances of his conversation with reporter Miller – getting approval from the President through the Vice President to discuss material that would be classified but for that approval – were unique in his recollection. Defendant further testified that on July 12, 2003, he was specifically directed by the Vice President to speak to the press in place of Cathie Martin (then the communications person for the Vice President) regarding the NIE and Wilson. Defendant was instructed to provide what was for him an extremely rare “on the record†statement, and to provide “background†and “deep background†statements, and to provide information contained in a document defendant understood to be the cable authored by Mr. Wilson. During the conversations that followed on July 12, defendant discussed Ms. Wilson’s employment with both Matthew Cooper (for the first time) and Judith Miller (for the third time).

Is it just me or couldn’t the “certain information” be “Ms. Wilson’s employment”?

Yeah, I’m trying out this blogging thing, too.

by MLDB on Thu Apr 06, 2006 at 12:46:19 PM PDT

emptywheel asks some questions:

http://thenexthurrah.typepad.c……html#more

“very funny *ilson46201….

Does no one else know that 11 and 13 are prime numbers ??? good one..”

Oddly, *ilson46201 is a prime number.

CNN is reporting NOBODY at the WH and Cheneys Office is talking. Cheney’s office is referring questioners to Fitzy!

egregious says:
April 6th, 2006 at 12:46 pm

Speaking of anger, I think ‘liberal realist’ is a Dem staffer who is getting sick of all the angry emails and letters pouring in from constituents. To this staff person I would like to say, it’s all about petitioning for the redress of grievances: First Amendment.

Thank you.

Mojo says:
April 6th, 2006 at 12:58 pm

I got it. How soon after that nightmare did he find that the number of primes is infinite?

Angie -

ooh re Harry Taylor Think Progress has the full script and video up now!
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/…..ff-script/

Did you get a look at the woman next Harry. She is aghast! Aghast! I say!

46201 is prime? that’s useful to know! Thanks…

gonna be some fun tonight. I gotta get cable for my computer. DSL and a laptop will have to do for now.

You can bet that the ’staffer’ that let Harry Taylor inside Bush’s rose-tinted hamster ball is going to have a hard time sitting down for awhile!

It is vitally important that *leak* be the defining description of what Bush did. A leak means that you want to hide your identity and that you are attempting to sway public opinion. That a leak contained previously classified information (assuming Bush technically declassified the information before leaking it) can only be more shocking to the public. It doesn’t make sense to declassify secret information for the good of the public, and then want to hide the fact that you were trying to help the public. All that makes sense is that an evil motive was behind the leaking. The public will buy that view.

Re Jane: “Any support that people have for Bush’s ability to wiretap is largely based on the internalization of this phony notion, that Bush uses these powers to keep them safe. We all know that this is utter bullshit, and as revelations like the one today come out people start to realize the truth and those numbers begin to shift. And you wind up looking like you didn’t have the courage to act on your convictions when the time was right because you were too busy playing a cynical political game.”

You’ve harnessed the interpretive power of the prism. Thank goodness your cause is just !
.

Reid’s comment “President Bush must fully disclose his participation in the selective leaking of classified information,†was fairly tepid, considering the circumstances.

I wanted to hear “obstruction of justice,” “leaking classified information for political purposes.”

Alternatively, the Senator could adopt a comment from the last thread….”since the President promised to fire anyone involved in this leak, when can we expect his resignation?”

The Dems must show more outrage….even if this revelation is not a surprise to them.

Jane, I’ve long suspected Douglas Feith of feeding Valerie Plame’s identity to the “get Joe Wilson” crowd. I haven’t followed every detail of what’s known’ perhaps we already know who offered her up on a platter. If not, here’s a new (to me) connection to reinforce the possibile link: In her interview on C-Span’s Q&A Sunday, Karen Kwiatkowski (Feith’s Office of Special Plans) revealed that, shortly after the creation of OSP, the Iran desk was moved into the fold (Iraq had been absorbed when the OSP was created) from the Office of Near East Asia.

Now, if it’s true that Valerie worked on the issue of WMD & Iran for the CIA, Douglas Feith may have had ready access to the information. Perhaps nobody even had to look for it.

Of course, I rather suspect Joe was among the first subjects of NSA surveillance too. Perhaps the nice guys at the NSA alerted Condi when they submitted his phone number and the system immediately identified it as belonging to a CIA operative?

*ilson46201 at 34

No one is talking? That is huge. For the past few months, I think Bush and Cheney have been the proverbial frog in a pot.

Fitz is turning up the temperature so gradually that the frog will be boiled without even realizing it.

shooogarp says:
April 6th, 2006 at 1:04 pm

I love all the looks on those faces– LOL! no make that ROTFLMAO!!

“46201 is prime? that’s useful to know! Thanks…

Actually, I was bluffing…it’s not. LOL.
http://www.prime-numbers.org/

Fitzgerald and Libby should be careful not to get on any flights with Paul Wellstone.

“2300 plus who have died in Iraq”

The occasional acknowledgement that hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians have died at the hands of the current and previous US governments.- Not to mention the ones who rose at the US’ government’s urging only to be stabbed in the back and left to Saddam’s tender mercies. Would give considerable force to your arguments.

Particularly as the current racist illegal and brutal occupiers of the country are doing their not inconsiderable best to drag the country into full scale civil war.

Sounds like a Rockwell painting!

if only I lived out in Irvington in Indianapolis! their zipcode is prime: 46219 ! oh well …

I gotta invite this guy to my next party!

Jane – get Harry on the Plame panel for YearlyKos!

Fran (5) — Don’t you mean “looks like a Rockwell painting”? Or is tab starting to kick in? :)

If you mean “looks” I agree – in fact the name of the painting you’re thinking of is “Freedom of Speech” from Rockwell’s Four Freedoms series.

http://www.normanrockwellvt.co…..speech.jpg

Kitsch he may have been, but much of his work is liberal kitsch.

Bob Schieffer of CBS-News on CNN says the LibbyLeaker story is fine political fodder for the Democrats!

markfromireland — you are right of course but I was referring to Bush’s mindset, which has never seemed to take these individuals into account.

I can hear Scotty now: “It’s well within the President’s executive powers to declassify documents, turn lead into gold, cure cancer, and to fly above tall buildings”

watertiger comments:

Dependable Renegade: Bush’s sentiments on the Merkin People

mfi, right. and i think perhaps that is why there is much glee (albeit sort of a horrid fascination) to see the cabal take another hit. ultimately, this is the core issue here– an illegal and grotesque war and chronic abuse of power by this bunch who leaked classified information with the goal of destroying someone(s)in order to sell this war. the wars are never far from my mind.

From the NY Times:

Mr. Libby testified that he first told Mr. Cheney that he could not have such a conversation with Ms. Miller because the intelligence estimate on Iraq was classified. Mr. Libby testified that Mr. Cheney later told him that Mr. Bush had authorized the release of “relevant portions.”

In addition, Mr. Libby told the grand jury that he also spoke with David Addington, then a lawyer for Mr. Cheney whom Mr. Libby regarded as an expert on national security law. “Mr. Addington opined that Presidential authorization to publicly disclose a document amounted to declassification of the document.”

Mr. Libby testified that at the meeting he did not discuss Mr. Wilson’s wife, Valerie Plame Wilson, the C.I.A. officer at the center of the leak inquiry, because “he had forgotten by that time that he learned about Ms. Wilson’s C.I.A. employment a month earlier from the Vice President.” [my emphasis]

Is this an attempt at an “I got a little mixed up about what I was supposed to say” defence? That the relevation of Plame’s identity was unintentional?

Roses for Harry Taylor.

from War and Piece http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/003977.html

The NPR reporter covering the Senate Judiciary committee hearing today on the NSA warrantless domestic eavesdropping program just reported that Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez indicated pretty clearly that the program the president has described as the “terrorist surveillance system” is not the only program and specifically, is not the program that caused such consternation inside the Justice Department. Then he said he couldn’t tell them any more.

OT Reminder:

The FDL YearlyKos Breakfast Survey closes in half an hour. Scroll down the main page for last night’s diary with the link.

Mojo #25 – I got *ilson46201’s joke – LMAO intermittent lightening strikes are wreaking havoc with our connection

btw, who is this woman sitting in for Dan Abrams ? – she keeps asking pertinent questions – Re: Libby, Duke, McKinney

Re: declassification. Prof Foland has given the link to the current Exec Order. http://fas.org/sgp/bush/eoamend.html

It is not the best organized of orders, but as to who can declassify, a part of the info on this is hidden down at the end of the Order in the Definitions.

l) “Declassification authority” means:
(1) the official who authorized the original classification, if that official is still serving in the same position;
(2) the originators current successor in function;
(3) a supervisory official of either; or
(4) officials delegated declassification authority in writing by the agency head or the senior agency official.

This is one reason Tenet’s name keeps coming up. The NIE is, I believe, deemed a CIA generated doc (although it can have parts in it that are from other agencies as well)

So here’s the sequencing.

1. Did the President “declassify” (actually – there are different rules for sharing and dissemination than for declassifying, but those would have required Judy to have signed a confidentiality etc. so they can’t squeeze the disclosure under those dissemination very well) the NIE (the CIA info is diff IMO, even if it was included in the NIE and I don’t know if we know that).

A. Was the VP telling Libby the truth and/or did Libby tell the truth about what the VP told him?

B. Is selectively leaking bits and pieces to a hand picked reporter “declassifying”? IOW, whether or not the President had the authority to *declassify* is it correct to call what was done “declassification?” Or is it perhaps more correct to call it misuse of classified information? ;-) While I do think (imo) the President can override any agency head and declassify, I’m not sure that cherrypicking misleading bits of classified info and selectively leaking is actually declassifying, is it? fwiw So if he “did” direct the action, was it declassification?

2. If the President directed the action and it is properly classified as declassification, then does the PRes have the authority to declassify THE NIE? IMO, the President probably can declassify the NIE, in general. He is “the” supervisor.

3. Could the President declassify the CIA agent’s status (although nothing in the Prosecutor’s filing states this was done)? I don’t think so. At least under the “once upon a time” government we used to have where Presidential fiat did NOT supercede Congressional Statutes. IOW, where there is a set of laws passed by Congress on what can and can’t be made public, I think it is not necessarily clear that the Pres can declassify in contravention of that statute, absent some overwhelming exigent circumstance.

JMO, fwiw.

So I think we have Libby saying,

[His]Defendant’s participation in a critical conversation with Judith Miller on July 8 (discussed further below) occurred only after the Vice President advised defendant that the President specifically had authorized defendant to disclose certain information in the NIE. Defendant testified that the circumstances of his conversation with reporter Miller – getting approval from the President through the Vice President to discuss material that would be classified but for that approval – were unique in his recollection. Defendant further testified that on July 12, 2003, he was specifically directed by the Vice President to speak to the press in place of Cathie Martin (then the communications person for the Vice President) regarding the NIE and Wilson. Defendant was instructed to provide what was for him an extremely rare “on the record†statement, and to provide “background†and “deep background†statements, and to provide information contained in a document defendant understood to be the cable authored by Mr. Wilson.

BTW – what was the cable?

We also know that when the VP first asked Libby to make the disclosures (NIE) the VP did NOT mention the Pres and IMO that is important. Only after Libby objected did Presidential authorization come up.

Defendant further testified that he at first advised the Vice President that he could not have this conversation with reporter Miller because of the classified nature of the NIE. Defendant testified that the Vice President later advised him that the President had authorized defendant to disclose the relevant portions of the NIE.

And then we have the “go to” guy who seems central to all things illegal, unconsitutional and immoral in the WH and OVP’s decision making process give the final blessing. Or did he?

Defendant testified that he also spoke to David Addington, then Counsel to the Vice President, whom defendant considered to be an expert in national security law, and Mr. Addington opined that Presidential authorization to publicly disclose a document amounted to a declassification of the document.

Is that was was authorized? In my hypertechnical mindset, I have to wonder if it more a matter of privately disclosing to a select person bits and pieces of a doc NOT being made public and if that is the “same”?
Who knows.

Fran & NickM – Absolutely amazing connection; I just looked at Rockwell’s painting and the still from ThinkProgress side-by-side. If I didn’t know better, I’d think somebody had staged a sitting for an updated painting of the same scene.

What are the chances he gets a warm welcome?

WASHINGTON (AP) — Vice President Dick Cheney will throw out the ceremonial first pitch at the Washington Nationals’ Major League Baseball home opener next week, the team said Wednesday.

The Nationals’ first home game of the season is Tuesday afternoon against the New York Mets.

Wilson … WHOA! What the hell is going on with the NSA stuff.

So, if the matter is as simple as “The president has a right to desclassify anything and every thing”…

Why didn’t Bush say this from the outset to avoid a big investigation?

Hmmm..
-GSD

I cannot let #66 pass without offering, Let’s Go, Mets!

Mojo says:
April 6th, 2006 at 12:58 pm
*ilson46201 says:
April 6th, 2006 at 12:38 pm
cbl says:
April 6th, 2006 at 12:32 pm

I giggled at it myself.

And I really enjoy, on this story, the “Cheney said that Bush said it was OK” line. I know that Libby worked for Cheney, but you’d think he might want to check that information before, you know, *relying* on it, given that Shrub couldn’t even talk to the 9/11 Commission without Dick there to cue him on the answers. I’d certainly want better authorization than that before letting something as clearly secret as that loose! (Something like a piece of paper saying ‘Everything the bearer has done has been done for the good of the state’ would be nice.)

so Dick didn’t have the declassification power on his own but he simply was the errand boy for the Preznit? I thought declassification power was given to the Veep (March 2003?)

Some comments from Arianna:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..18615.html

(snip)

Expert Addington told Libby not to worry, explaining that Bush’s “authorization to publicly disclose a document amounted to a declassification of the document.” Call it Addington’s Theory of Presidential Magic: Take a classified document. Wave the president’s wand over it. Say the secret word (”WHIG-y, WHIG-y”). And, presto-chango, the super secret info is now a Judy Miller exclusive!

(snip)

Oh happy day! An FDL glee club moment. Even Schumer and Kerry are speaking up. The fact Bush is not providing any statement at all, especially a denial speaks volumes. Go Harry Taylor!

Sadly, Jane, you’re right about Chuck Schumer and the rest. We see what he’s doing now as political opportunism, and I think most people in this country will as well. If there had been more than a handful of Democrats saying this all along, then Schumer would now have cover even if he wasn’t one of them. Unfortunately, very few said what they believed all along, including many who would not have been affected by speaking out.

Harry Taylor is Batman!!

“Absolutely not.” Bush’s disrespectful body language in that clip makes him look like some kind of hyped-up highschool bully who would rather physically attack.Check out the mugging. In other words, it’s yet another disaster for the administration. That “no I’m not sorry, absolutely not” should be regarded as an open challenge by Congress Democrats. Good for you, Harry Taylor!
#61. What bastards! Gonzalez.

Mary:

1. Did the President “declassify†(actually – there are different rules for sharing and dissemination than for declassifying, but those would have required Judy to have signed a confidentiality etc. so they can’t squeeze the disclosure under those dissemination very well) the NIE (the CIA info is diff IMO, even if it was included in the NIE and I don’t know if we know that).

Remember that weirdness with Judy Miller and how she talked about having “clearance” when she was in Iraq? She brought it up in her Norma Desmond post-Fitz NYT article, and Jay Rosen was on that. I wonder if they jobbed up some rationalization based on that and tried to fob it off on Fitz.

How’s that Libby firewall working out?

*ilson46201

47 X 983 = ?

I liked the part when Harry says “tap our phones” and Bush says, “Yeah”.

GSD – well, at the time the issue was the CIA info. As I said, I don’t think that the President COULD “declassify that – or I guess to say it more clearly, whether he declassified or not under his Executive Order, the COngressional Statutes would still apply – so it would still be illegal. For example, if a Federal and State law BOTH make something illegal, and the State repeals its law, it is still “illegal” bc it is still illegal under federal law. So an okunder the Exec order (for Plame’s identity, which is what was being openly discussed) is not an ok under the Identites Act.

At the time, no one knew Libby was also passing along NIE info to Miller, so that did not come up. However, I think Jane had a piece up awhile back indicating that Durbin had wanted th NIE to be declassified prior to the Iraq auth. so there could be more discussion about the “alternative views” info, but hte Pres and committee chair refused and also refused to even make the info available to just members of Congress for purposes of making their vote evaluation. IIRC.

The moral core of American Constitutional government is one explicitly disavowing an Ends-Justify-the-Means ethos. Our Constitution in fact clearly embodies the opposite cardinal value, i.e., that good ends cannot, in the aggregate, accrue from bad means, hence the focus on assiduous due process and checks-and-balances processes for the restraint of the reckless exercise of power. Sadly (and dangerously), we are now governed by a group of men for whom They-Know-Better Ends-Justify-the-Means thinking drives their every action, men who would condescendingly pat us on our heads to keep reminding us that their Noble End of “Protecting the American People†warrants and justifies an unlimited range of authority, including authority for:

- secret warrantless spying on whomever they deem necessary (and, of course, the details simply must be kept classified for The Protection of the American People);

- torture, abuse, and indefinite detention of anyone they deem a terror suspect;
- selective leaking of the nation’s most closely held intelligence secrets when convenient, while at the same time, of course, railing angrily against (and hunting down) others who leak inconvenient secrets the Administration wants kept under wraps;

- selectively disavowing by executive fiat inconvenient provisions of signed legislation;

- selectively disavowing the necessity of adhering to inconvenient international laws, conventions, and treaties (all while lecturing other nations about their responsibility to observe the rule of law as expressed through democratic process and structure).

Nothing good can, nothing good will ever come of this self-defeating Messianic Executive Delusion. These people must be reined in and brought to account. Nothing less than the survival of our free nation is at stake. The ends do not justify these means. Neither in a moral nor in a utilitarian sense. These men have not and will not make us “safer.” What they are doing is nothing more than horribly soiling the American ideal before the eyes of the world.

Keep our Eyes on Prize, people.

oh well

If only this “Bush authorized leak” story had come out yesterday! I went to hear Joe Wilson speak last night in Salem, OR. He was great, the audience (mostly students) was very enthusiastic and informed on the story, and it was a packed house. It would have been good to hear his take on these new revelations.

He said “If you aren’t reading 10-12 blogs a day, you don’t really know what’s going on.” He listed a few blogs he reads, and of course, mentioned FDL.

Usually when he’s in the media, he has to be very direct and to the point. Last night he had plenty of time, and let me tell you, he’s snarky. And quite funny.

Yes, I took pictures, but my camera has serious problems so none are worth a damn.

libopinion #67

last thread Stephen Parrish,CPA #71

think it was televised on CSpan this morning, but no re broadcast schedule up on their website yet

gsd#68 – money

*ilson46201 says:
April 6th, 2006 at 1:23 pm

The NPR reporter covering the Senate Judiciary committee hearing today on the NSA warrantless domestic eavesdropping program just reported that Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez indicated pretty clearly that the program the president has described as the “terrorist surveillance system†is not the only program and specifically, is not the program that caused such consternation inside the Justice Department. Then he said he couldn’t tell them any more.

Didn’t he express similar comments when he testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee several weeks ago? When was the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing that the NPR reporter was covering?

Jane 77 – I wondered a bit about that too. I think Arianna and I have the same gut reaction to terming the NIE selective leaks “declassification” except that I make it technical and belabor it, she makes it prose and brings it to life. Does “decalssify” =
And, presto-chango, the super secret info is now a Judy Miller exclusive!

Doesn’t pass the smell test – maybe Addington had a sinus problem that day?

Jane / Mary – repost from earlier:
Why the subsequent declassification after Libby had “verbally†selectively declassified?

An unclassified version of that estimate had been made public before my interviews with Mr. Libby. I told Mr. Fitzgerald that I had pressed Mr. Libby to discuss additional information that was in the more detailed, classified version of the estimate. I said I had told Mr. Libby that if The Times was going to do an article, the newspaper needed more than a recap of the administration’s weapons arguments. According to my interview notes, though, it appears that Mr. Libby said little more than that the assessments of the classified estimate were even stronger than those in the unclassified version.

(emphasis mine)
Libby’s (verbal) selective declassification wasn’t enough for Judy.

If Addington, Gonzalez, Yoo et.al. are correct in their assessment of the “magic unitarian” theory, Dubya theoretically can out one American spy per day. And it’s OKAY. For reasons of “security”, or “politics”? Doesn’t matter… it’s LEGAL.

I love the graphic because it was, I swear, my very first thought on all this: isn’t this where we threw out fucking Nixon?

“WASHINGTON (AP) — Vice President Dick Cheney will throw out the ceremonial first pitch at the Washington Nationals’ Major League Baseball home opener next week, the team said Wednesday.”

Yeah, but it’ll probably be a wild pitch and hit a 78 year-old lawyer in the face!

I’m telling you, when very few in Texas will stand up and affirmatively defend Bush and his cronies, the worm has turned, and the Democratic “braintrust” is just too damned stupid or scared, or both, to realize it. Hardcore Republicans have gone quiet. Independents and moderates are speaking out against the administration. True lefties are ready to take up arms. When the hell are Democrats going to realize that blasting Bush and the Republicans every minute of every day is a political winner?

guys #86

this was a House committee hearing this morning – with Sensenbrenner and Conyers doubleteaming Abu

I suspect the WH will be glued to Hardball. They will be trying out several trial balloons and they want to see if any will float. Based on what they learn, they will put out whatever the spin is for tonite on the network news casts. It will be interesting to see if the networks push back.
IMO, this is also huge, because it lessens the likelihood that Bush can pre-emptively attack Iran’s nuclear facilities.

Heard it on NPR, to their credit, they played the entire thing. I give Bush credit for his explanation. It was honest for a change and unscripted. If Bush talked like that more often his poll numbers might not be in the toilet. The point Bush made is that its a legal arguement he thought made sense, prepared by his lawyers regarding the NSA stuff. OK, let the courts figure it out. But he also made clear that he wan’t going to sit around while that happened if he had an opportunity to tap into some of these suspect calls. I think every one here at FDL would agree that its the legality of the taps that is bothersome, not doing what is necessary to fight terrorists.

Personally, I can’t stand Bush for a single moment, obviously didn’t vote for him either, but in this case, his explanation made me feel like Bush wants to protect the country and doesn’t want to get caught with his pants down again.

And for once (gulp), I agree with him. The NSA can tap away and let the courts fight it out. In the meantime, Bush won’t be caught not using an important tool becasue he’s afraid the legal intrepretation won’t go his way. Presidents have to make that call all the time. Imagine if there was an attack and Bush didn’t use the NSA taps?

Look, there is no doubt he did the bare mimimum he had to to justify the NSA taps, notifying some members of congress, shakey legal reasonimg, etc. But after hearing him speak about it today, I believe his motives were sound.

Isn’t there a place in the Const. that says the Prez can do what he deems necessary to defend the country, then throw himself at the mercy of the public. Well, that is what Bush did today, in his cowboy way.

it looks like the planned Judy Miller story was to be a major leakage by the Administration but the NYTimes refused to let her write it. Then they had to try other ways of getting the desired info out into general circulation…

281.343.1333 tom delay’s campaign office.
call him and ask him how mr. delay looks in pin stripes and tell him you hope the presiding judge is a woman and a know it all.

After 5.5 years of GWB……Its pretty sad when a person who challenges Bush at a tax payer funded speech is the exception and not the rule…..

I will give it one day before the Right Wing hit piece will be completed on Mr Taylor…..

I hope the media will pick up on it and tie it together with the Libby revelations…but we all know they cant focus on more than one thing at time…….

Mary,

I agree. If the case were as simple as they , Bushco, it is…then early on they would have said…If the president does it, it’s not illegal.

So, it appears there was knowledge as to how questionable this whole thing was…hence the …”if someone leaked, I want to know”…bullshit cover story.

Twist in the wind some more Bushie.

-GSD

Insert finger in socket.

Repeat.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/4/6/164045/2189

It’s like some great movie scene:
when Harry met slappy…
The trouble with Harry…is that he should have had a bigger audience.
Harry and the Hinder-sons

Time for a shipment of Texas catheters to our incontinent preznit? Wheee….!

Unitarian’s are wonderful people, thank you very much. I think you meant “Magical Unitary Executive theory”.

OT Condoleezza Rice said that thousands of tactical mistakes were made in Iraq but that strategically it was the right thing to do. Later she backtracked saying she was speaking “figuratively”.

Donald Rumsfeld in a bid to show that he is even more divorced from reality than the Secretary of State couldn’t agree to even that.

snip

Speaking during a radio interview on WDAY in Fargo, N.D., on Tuesday, Rumsfeld said calling changes in military tactics during the war “errors” reflects a lack of understanding of warfare.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..69_pf.html

Back on NSA –

DANG! Isn’t it about time to use that old subpeona power now? If Gonzales is saying there are “other” undisclosed programs and THEY are the ones that caused trouble, while the current program “disclosed†program that has been thoroughly condemned by the ABA task force and has caused consternation by even the old FISA judges and top ex-DOJ national sec lawyer did NOT cause those troubles and was considered OK (at least by comparison) *insert VERY WIDE EYES*?!?

THEN

Isn’t it about time they found out what the heck it is? And isn’t this an admission that this portion was not “briefed to the gang of 8?†Surely even Roberts and Sensenbrenner and Specter can realize it’s time to subpoena, let the gov claim what it wants to for privilege, and then take it up?

Mary @ 1:25 pm (#64) – For the most part, I understand the declassification document the way you do. The one thing I differ on is that it appears to me that the President has the power to declassify anything for any reason. The only thing that could make this illegal is, as you suggest, that some act of Congress makes it illegal to declassify some kind of information without further consultation or whatever. So the Pres. certainly has the right to declassify an NIE, but if there’s some law about CIA NOCs, then that would complicate the declassification of Plame’s identity.

Either way, it’s scandalous that Bush would play these games. Plame’s identity and some of the information in the NIEs are among the most important secrets we have as a nation, as they involve the identities of people who provide us intelligence and demonstrate how effective we are (or aren’t) at gathering that intelligence. I’d say that even if it was all legal it’s worth looking into as grounds for impeachment.

RE : 95 I certainly am not a constitutional scholar. But the president does not have the right to go outside the law. No one is above the law.

Teak111 “Isn’t there a place in the Const. that says the Prez can do what he deems necessary to defend the country, then throw himself at the mercy of the public.”

No.

I know Jane – and this is primarily an American political site so I’m not “getting” at you. But I think it’d be helpful to draw the parallel from time to time.

looseheadprop (12:48 pm) says:

Firedoglake=the home of the two goddesses.

I think of them as the Delphic Oracle.

Sorry *ilson, re was to 94

Not to mention the 3,000 who died on 9/11/2001.

teak111

Youmay remember the part in Bush’s reply wherein he said that their was ongoing oversight over the NSA wiretapping program.

He was lying. No one outside the Admin has been fully briefed re the details of the domestic spying program…furthermore,

I suggest you read what Digby has to say on this.

OT Delay’s campaign sent thugs to disrupt Lampson pressy this am. Woman injured.

Good on Dems to seize the moment. Feingold’s looking pretty good now, huh?

Sweet irony that WH gets Chimpy out of bubble only to be called out by a patriot. How’s that working out? Is Karl too busy?

What a day. What a week! Big drunk tonight. First one goes out to y’all. Cheers!

I meant “there” instead of “their.” Typing too fast and sounding out my words.

“WASHINGTON (AP) — Vice President Dick Cheney will throw out the ceremonial first pitch at the Washington Nationals’ Major League Baseball home opener next week, the team said Wednesday. “

I figure the pitch will go into the dugout and hit Frank Robinson in the face, but you won’t see it on “Sports Center” until 18 hours later.

I.e., with the prophetic power, but minus any hint of ambiguity

Lampson Calls For DeLay To Immediately Resign

Supporters of U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay were not happy Thursday with Democratic candidate Nick Lampson’s call for the congressman to immediately resign, KPRC Local 2 reported.

A group of DeLay supporters rallied outside Sugar Land City Hall at a 10 a.m. news conference called by Lampson, who demanded the outgoing congressman formally resign so that voters can chose their new representation during a special election on May 13.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/kprc/2…..rc/3380759

the presiding judge is a woman and a know it all
That’s a hoot. Pray to the G**ess that it is.

I don’t know about the National’s, but it looks like the Aspens are about to suffer a shut-out.

Sounds so good!

Somebody finally said it to his face. The emperor has no clothes.

This will reverberate.

Kerry’s going to be on with Tweety to talk about withdrawal from Iraq…

Kerry will also be on CNN this hour.

What’s most interesting about the Bush apologists is their ability to play fast and loose with an individuals right to free speech…if you say good things, you’re applauded…if you say negative things, you’re booed…if you wear the wrong t-shirt you’re arrested…if you talk on your phone to a friend in France, you’re wiretapped. Seems to be a bit twisted. I guess we should be thankful the guy wasn’t denied access…but maybe that was just a vetting mishap? I seem to recall a book by some hooligan named Orwell that talks about this kind of society…hmmmm.

More observations at http://www.thoughttheater.com

This was not a shock and surprise. Bush was prepared for it and had been prepared for it.

It is time to defend the Constitution.

teak111, Bush is a liar.

Also see this at CNN

Which contains athe following excerpt of an exchange between Congressman Nadler and Attorney General Gonzalas today re the same NSA spying that Harry Taylor spoke about.

REP. JERROLD NADLER (D), NEW YORK: So he could do it for political reasons and that would be — and no one can second-guess that if he wanted to?

ALBERTO GONZALES, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL: This president could make the decision to declassify information based upon national security reasons. NADLER: He could do it for political reasons if he wanted to and no one could second guess that because he’s the commander in chief, right?

GONZALES: The president is going to make the determination as to what’s in the best interest of the country.

NADLER: Yes, he might, but he could — I’m asking you a theoretical question about the authority of the president, not necessarily this president. A president could declassify something for political reasons and no one has the authority to second-guess him because he’s the commander in chief, that’s what you’re saying?

new thread

The exchange between Harry Taylor and Bush remind me of a story in which a tyrannical despot, who happened to be a puppet to an older sinister man, was allowed to maintain his illusions about ‘domains’ in which he was in control. When he felt ‘in his domain’, he would range from magnanimous posturing, to petulant bursts of temper.

Bush seems to be that, when he is on the public stage, delivering his truthiness, and passing out canned speechifying, he is in ‘his domain’ (not that he is a master of it). His emotive range certainly seems to vacilate between glib magnanimity and petulant animosity. Stories of him being a ’simple charismatic’ would seem to bear this up, he has a small role to play, so he puts a lot of emotion (not thought) into it.
He felt free to respond magnanimously to Taylor, because Taylor isn’t someone Bush fears, or feels threatened by, especially amongst a hand-picked audience of ‘favorites’.

This commentary is however, just an analogy based on watching the exchange between Taylor and Bush.

Hello. Ummm….I think I’m getting paranoid, HOWEVER, has anyone done any follow-up on these sole individuals at recent presidential speeches who ask the ONE embarrassing question? How is it that the president “just happens” to call upon the ONE sole person who asks a sharp question? How is it that the president seems so “presidential” as he “even-handedly” accepts the question, then gives such a full and dramatic response, to rousing cheers?
Would it be beyond this group to “plant” a sole “tough questioner” in an effort to make the president seem “fair and balanced” (cough), able “to field the tough questions by Americans”, etc etc etc.? Well?
I’ll admit, I have NO evidence to support my thesis. But something….something…just seems too “pat” about these recent “sole tough questioners”. Something doesn’t wash. Or maybe I AM paranoid??? Good luck, Ghostman

GSD @ 1:50 pm – I’m not so sure. See my previous post. This stinks to high heaven even if it is, somehow, legal. If I were Bushco’s PR person, I’d hate to see this come out. What’s worse, it might be grounds for impeachment, anyway. The President can cover himself in the law, especially if he’s the one writing it, but that doesn’t mean he hasn’t been criminally negligent in running the country.

*ilson47×983 says:
April 6th, 2006 at 1:41 pm

oh well

ROTFLMAO OAOA (over and over again)

I am going out on the limb on this, but perhaps originally Libby was given the go ahead to LEAK certain portions of the NIE. At this point the NIE was still CLASSIFIED. Later on, when it looked like trouble brewing on the horizon, to cover his ass, the president may have started the declassification process. So if the information Libby leaked was “clean” it became so only retroactively, and even then there are questions.

Just a technicality, you might say (if you were a gooper). Maybe so, but it does reveal that the WH was using originally classified information for political purposes. After all, how did it help national security to leak the information? And more germane, how can it hurt national security if the president at his whimsy can leak sensitive information to silence political opponents? At what point does it become treason?

If all this makes you want to do something, Harkin emailed me a petition for censure today. I don’t know if it’s just going out in Iowa, and/or whether Boxer and Feingold are doing it too, but if you want to weigh in, go here:
http://www.tomharkin.com/nl/CensurePetition.htm

Durbin on C-Span re pres/vp

OT According to NPR, the Senate has agreed on an immigration bill. It resembles most immigration legislation that comes along every 5 years or so in that there is some kind of limited amnesty. The Senate bill is substantially different from a punitive House version reflecting the fact that Representatives are in general more comfortable with the weather in La La land. The upshot is likely to be that no action will be taken on immigration this year. Color me surprised.

Um. So does Scooter’s implication of Georgie mean that Scoot’s not getting a pardon, even if Georgie remains in a position to pardon him (now getting increasingly doubtful).

UPDATE on Tweety:

David Gregory has just accepted as FACT the theory that “the moment the president leaked it it was declassified”.

There’s more.

The reason the administration apprently is now giving for doing so was that the NIE information about Iraq’s “seeking uranium in Niger” was “so important” for “the American people” to hear, that it trumped the mere outing of a spy.

Dear sweet Jesus. This is so heinous and wrong. Someone. PLEASE tell me the Dems are not just going to shrug and go, “Oh, okayyy…”!

Ghostman @ 2:08 pm (#129) Or maybe I AM paranoid?

Not paranoid so much as just making unspoken assumptions.

You assumed there was just one person there to ask embarrassing questions. Why not two, or a dozen? Only a small number get called on, I suspect.

Who says it’s the President’s allies who are placing these people? It could be some opposition that’s just clever enough to get past the filters.

They haven’t been at every speech lately, just the ones you hear about because some disturbance happened.

Ghostman 129. Agree. It was too neat. Skepticism is not paranoia. Ignore kool-aid aficionados who can’t distinguish.

Teak111 Isn’t there a place in the Const. that says the Prez can do what he deems necessary to defend the country, then throw himself at the mercy of the public.

No. I think every citizen should read it all the way through once in a while. The number of provisions that Bush has violated really adds up, but I digress.

I have heard it suggested that if the President, in a time of great emergency, felt that he had to break the law and did so in order to save the country, then he should immediately go to the Congress, admit what he did, and accept the full consequences. Our President did none of that. He lied about what he was doing, and tried to conceal it. When it was finally, partially, revealed he defied Congress to do anything about it, and announced his intention to continue.

Compare and contrast.

Slightly OT. What I found extremely interesting about the whole situation was the person who followed Taylor basically just wanted to tell Bush that “my heroes have always been cowboys.” Funny, my heroes have always been male prep school cheerleaders. I guess the two of us have something in common.

Ghostman, 129

The idea that Taylor was a plant occured to me too. But even if it was, it spoke for millions, and had and will have, a highly beneficial effect. Good enough?

If Taylor was a plant he would have been an inarticulate, fat, strident, know-it-all woman.

Cujo – 105
I’m not sure I understand from your post where we differ? Are you saying that you think possibly the declassification powers are broad enough to extend to declassifying matters that Statutes and laws specifically require to be kept secret? I think that he can declassify most things – but things like covert identities for which Congress has established requirements – I think this becomes pretty much the NSA situation. Does the Congressionally enacted statute override Executive Fiat? IMO – in almost all cases – absent some overriding and compelling, exigent interest.

Future Mrs Feingold:aren’t you the lucky babe! Meanwhile, should we all create a fund to guard Harry Taylor against a “sudden unexpained accident”?

Teak111 – I’m going to actas if your question is not a kind of “planted to sound aw shucks but not†question and really answer in detail. It may take two posts. But -nNo way, no shape, no how do I buy any of it AT ALL. First off, he authorized the program before the AUMF was even in place – so that is bull about “thinking his lawyers arguments made sense†and it is also bull to have him relying on his handpicked yes men for that anyway – show where he got some competing input to evaluate. Finally – the incompetence of his officers is his burden and if he chooses, as he has repeatedly, to select for loyalty over competence, he is bound to his choices. Hayden could not even REMEMBER the WARRANT CLAUSE in his presser. !?!?!
As to OK, let the courts figure it out. But he also made clear that he wan’t going to sit around while that happened if he had an opportunity to tap into some of these suspect calls. I think that is complete bull again. Where was there any indication he was going to do anything to let the courts figure it out? He had every opportunity with EACH Patriot Act round to include provisions to authorize – he did not. He knew that he was not complying with FISA. He knew that he and Gonzales were both making misleading and incorrect statements over and over to the American public about warrants, not for a day, a week, a month – but what is now going on FIVE YEARS!!!!!!!
his explanation made me feel like Bush wants to protect the country and doesn’t want to get caught with his pants down again. Nope. Not me at all. If he wants to protect the country, he would have gone with competence right out of the gate. Why is Gonzales AG? Bc he is best suited to handling the counterterrorism threats (as opposed to someone, like – for all my gripes about him – say Comey, who was in line to be AG?) No- he’s there bc he’ll do and say ANYTHING THE PRESIDENT WANTS. Since when is that how you “make the country safe?’ Is he networking to bring in competent outside influences and sources to address the issue?
NO – he took us into Iraq and completely diverted from terrorists and people like Scheuer who have boatloads of expertise on bin Laden are not networked. People like Gary Bernstsen who had bin Laden “in their sights†at Tora Bora are forced out of the agency. Bush sends Goss in to take over CIA and IMMEDIATELY crank down with the “we are here to support the President, not to question him†baloney. Lots of good people left. People like the CIA agent who gave him good, correct info on Iraq – that was not what he wanted to hear, are brought home and yes men are promoted. Where is the interest in “keeping us safe†over “having my cronies who won’t deny me anything?†What makes you think it applies within his NSA programs? You don’t know, do you? That’s why we have the Fourth Amendment – so you do know, so there is a judicial check that says — let’s do this in a way that makes sense and isn’t a big cronyfest screw up.
The NSA can tap away and let the courts fight it out. In the meantime, Bush won’t be caught not using an important tool becasue he’s afraid the legal intrepretation won’t go his way. I have no idea what you are talking about here. Bush absolutely CAN tap away – he could under FISA – for any suspicious and problematic calls. He had 3 days of tap away without warrant time for each tap – away-er. He was OFFERED MORE than 3 days of “freebie†time in connection with Patriot Act revisions and turned it down. He has NO requirement to EVER get a warrant on a foreign citizen outside the US under FISA.
All he has to do to be legal is to put the info about what he is doing before the judiciary branch via the secret FISA court and have them give him a warrant, even the “after we’ve already been wiretapping for 3 days†warrant that FISA allows. He REFUSED to do even that. Why? If you watched the ex-FISA judges, too, you’d know – it’s not hard to get a FISA warrant. They made that very clear – it is a much different standard that they use than is required for a criminal wiretap. So WHY NOT GET THE WARRANT? Especially when you can tap away ASAP from the get-go, without a warrant, for up to 3 days and you can tap any foreign citizen pretty much as much as you want without ever having a warrant?
The only thing that makes any sense is that he was tapping people for longer than 3 days who he felt certain he could not get a FISA warrant for – WOW!!! That is big. That is incredibly big. And it means that he was tapping for reasons other than “protecting the country†bc FISA would give him those warrants. Isn’t there a place in the Const. that says the Prez can do what he deems necessary to defend the country, then throw himself at the mercy of the public.
Couple of things First, he never threw himself on the mercy of the public. He lied to us. Over and over and with the political purpose of being re-elected. He directed others to lie to us. He had Hayden lie to the Joint 9/11 Joint investigation. That is flat awful and completely contrary to defending the country. The purpose of the 9/11 joint investigation was to come up with ways to make us more safe – lies from NSA and the President don’t do that. Nest thing – you are really doing kind of a poor job on the “hoke this up†front, IMO. There is the “necessary and proper†clause and I’m thinking you are working this like a stripper works a pole, but fwiw, here goes.
The President can not suspend the Bill of Rights as an incident of what he deems “necessary and proper†in defense of the country. This has already been decided by the Supreme Court in the Civil war. Habeas can be suspended, the Bill of Rights can not AS LONG AS COURTS ARE OPEN AND OPERATING. Look around. They are open, they are operating, and we even have special private ones just for this kind of thing. So the judicial supervision requirement of the warrant clause is in effect and has remained in effect.
Now, let’s say that there was something really time sensitive that had to be addressed (although with the existing 3 day freebie in FISA, it’s hard to even imagine what it would be) that caused the President to feel he had to act in the interests of national security. Well, that is very similar to the situation of the cop who hears screams from a house and doesn’t have time to go get a warrant – it’s called exigent circumstances and it can authorize action without a warrant in those kind of pressing circumstances. So, in such a specialized case, the President’s “necessary and proper†authority could kick in. However, a five year underground, illegal program that has never been sought to be brought within the bounds of the law – — – that’s not “exigent’ in anyone’s book. It is not “necessary†to have a five year lawbreaking program that you never seek to get authorized. It is not “necessary†to break FISA to wiretap, even to begin “immediate†wiretaps (bc of the 3 day freebie) Similary, those actions are not only NOT “proper†they are contrary to the President’s constitutional obligations.
Whatever he may have done for a day, a week or a month in good faith – the good faith period has been over for a long long time. YEARS worth of a long long time. And it is hard to ever claim “good faith†in the face of a pattern of lies and cover up. Who knows what has been wiretapped? We don’t. We have to rely on the President’s representations (you may remember, for example, his representation that “no one†expected the levees might top or that “everyone†thought Hussein had WMDs) and that is EXPRESSLY what the Fourth Amendment tells us we should not have to do – in exigent circumstances (and you do throw yourself on the court for this – they may not see the exigencies) there may be an issue, but a five year illegal program does not even begin to fall into that category. When the President is going to engage in a systematic program for years of spying on American citizens, on American soil, using and American agency — he needs a warranted and judicially supervised program. He never tried to “throw himself†on the mercy of the people and the courts. Instead, he lied, evaded, covered up, and went after those who were not loyalists. And never gave up the Bolton intercepts for that matter.

Kerry is just weak. Sieze the moment. At least he would now support Fiengolds censure hearings. Just a little late there Sen.

Bush constantly reinforces the lie that he must have unlimited powers in order to fight terrorists, but in fact he uses this unchecked authority to fight journalists. To wage PR campaigns.

Great observation Jane.

The media spotlight is on… for the usual fifteen minutes. Don’t waste time debating the Presidential Powers to Declassify thing… it’s a red herring.

Ask Bush WHY he declassified the NIE, and/or authorized Libby to discuss it with the press. While the spotlight is on him, make him explain how THIS USE of his extraorinary wartime powers was part of “protecting the American people”.

The WHY is the question he doesn’t want to be asked…

Eddy

Harry seemed like less of a plant than a screened questioner that might ask some real questions (Mr. President, how do you manage to RAWK so hard?), but one whom Bush could dominate and deride, even while magnaminously listening and responding.
Watch the clip, Bush sneers and struts like a middle-school bully.

Thanks for pointing this out. I’m so proud of Harry.

I saw comparisons of this image of Harry with Rockwell’s “Freedom of Speech”, and I thought they would go perfect together:

R2 says
good for harry taylor.
no fun getting booed,and keeping your head and pressing on.
made the preznit look like the frat-boy ass he is.
pretty neat that it happened here in n.carolina-hope springs eternal.
FITZ!!

Way to go Harry … speaking truth to power.
All this reminds me of sitting in a coffee house way back in the 60’s. Arlo was making an appearance and he sang a song he’d “just written” he said … it went on to become famous but there are some lyrics that apply to this particular case with Harry. Harry said what he had to say …. one lone man up against power. Others probably feel the same – and they should do the same. Like Arlo wrote in that song he sung that night, must’ve been over 40 years ago… it was “Alice’s Restaurant” – he sang this at the end:

“….. the only reason I’m singing you this song now is cause you may know somebody in a similar
situation, or you may be in a similar situation, and if your in a situation like that there’s only one thing you can do and that’s walk into
the shrink wherever you are,just walk in say “Shrink, You can get anything you want, at Alice’s restaurant.”. And walk out. You know, if one person, just one person does it they may think he’s really sick and they won’t take him. And if two people, two people do it,in harmony,
they may think they’re both faggots and they won’t take either of them. And three people do it, three, can you imagine, three people walking in singin a bar of Alice’s Restaurant and walking out. They may think it’s an organization. And can you, can you imagine fifty people a day,I said fifty people a day walking in singin a bar of Alice’s Restaurant and walking out. And friends they may thinks it’s a movement.” (credit to Arlo Guthrie for the above lyrics)

Let what Harry said become a movement … imagine 50 folks a day telling the President, “I feel like despite your rhetoric, that compassion and common sense have been left far behind during your administration,†or words to that effect, and then walking out. Folks, it could become a movement.

I’m a Canuck lurker, coming out of the shadows, but ya know, you Yanks, it seems to me there are a bunch of folks (not readers here, those are definitely NOT the ones I’m thinking of) who’ve somehow lost the ability to speak up to power and get heard. But you can do it, I feel so much that you can.

And ya know, if enough of ya do it, at every opportunity, out there in front of the American public, maybe they WILL think it’s a movement – and if they do — maybe they’ll get scared and maybe, one day, you’ll get that glorious country of yours back to where it belongs, in the right hands… god, I do so wish that for you all — you got a lot of folks up here, north of the 49th rooting for you. But right now, we’re just watching, dumbfounded, but wishing you all well.

Kudos to FDL writers – you have something special here and I love the writing skills even though I think ya oughta knock off the fellatio references … I just get the feeling you know how say it wittier, you’re just lacking in time to think it up. Maybe I’ll be lucky and be the last person posting to this post of yours — so if I am … well “Go FITZ!”. Hugs to all of ya.
Keep up the incredibly excellent work.

Hi,

There is a matter that people are missing about the legitimacy of the AUMF of 2002 against Iraq.

I’ve made my complete case over at POAC Forums
http://oldamericancentury.org/…..mp;p=50681

And with the revelation of yesterdays speech at Central Piedmont Community College, Charlotte, North Carolina, the president admitted the fact that the information that was used to plead his case to go to war to the UN, US Congress, and the US peoples was based on false Intel.

In his speech,
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news…..406-3.html
the President gives his reasoning as to why the US needed to act and then admits, in a nonchalant, matter of fact way, that the Intel was wrong.

“I also told you earlier that when America speaks, we got to mean what we said. I meant what we said when we embraced that resolution that said disclose, disarm, or face serious consequences. Words mean something in this world if you’re trying to protect the American people.

I fully understand that the intelligence was wrong, and I’m just as disappointed as everybody else is. But what wasn’t wrong was Saddam Hussein had invaded a country. He had used weapons of mass destruction. He had the capability of making weapons of mass destruction. He was firing at our pilots. He was a state sponsor of terror. Removing Saddam Hussein was the right thing for world peace and the security of our country.”

The reason this is important is because the case to use a military force was based on false information and passed off as correct. Now that this revelation has been proved to be factual and admitted by the president as false information, the AUMF of 2002, created and voted by both halves of Congress, and signed by the Vice President and President of the United States of America, it would be up to Congress to recognize the illegitimacy of a resolution based of false facts. And by their failure to act accordingly so, Congress would be implicit to the falsification of the AUMF of 2002 against Iraq through their failing to correct their vote and right this egregious illegality, both to the Constitutional and International laws that guide war.

Thank you,
~ MAX 1 ~

Max-1, a congressional resolution condemning the falsehoods sounds like a move in the right direction.
Other topic. Re: Plant. Watching the clip, I just don’t get that. I think Harry Taylor is the real thing. Bush looked so awkward too.