Immanentize !!!

The Fitz man cometh!

!ztiF

Christy says:

Because if Congress ever got off it’s bloviated Rubber Stamp Republican ass and started doing its job — turning over all the rocks to see what’s been festering in the darkness all this time — there might not be enough sunlight in the whole wide world to take care of what needs disinfecting.

>>>>>
brilliant writing, thank you and good morning!
Now that song is spinning thru my head.

Fitz! Are you busy tonite?

Agree, it’s a game of chicken and Bush’s gang just want to campaign, not manage the country. The perfect metaphor is giving medals to the people who screw up the worst. How long can it work, given all the drip, drip, drip and negative news on corruption, Iraq, Katrina and all the rest? I’m beginning to think, idealistically I know, that whatever dirty deeds they try to play in the campaign are not going to fly the way they did before because even repugs and the christians are getting burnt out on the sordid and ugly that is spewing from the WH and congress.

I wonder how much Fitz enjoys being played or being trivialized, as the WH and RWMSM do him? His statements in the past about public service and ethics lead me to believe he’s the most patiently extremely pissed prosecutor in recent times.

Just stopping by for a few minutes. Can’t keep up with you guys or any blog until the end of next week. 120 essays, 140 quizzes and exams down – 70 essays and 160 finals to go!

Fitz, Jane & Redd!!

I think it should be “rethugs” and “Xtians.”

FIVE everythings five and only I know why………….

re: Cunningham and corruption. I think it was back in the fall, Norm Ornstein was on NewsHour I think (coulda been NOW) saying the Abaramoff scandal/corruption would end up w/30+ congresscritters and STAFFERS in the clink. He also took pains to include ‘…from both sides of the aisle.’. I wasn’t as ‘well-read’ back then. But it stuck in my mind. Now, I see the decomposing onion of corruption being forensically unpeeled, one layer at a time. No, it ain’t pretty, it smells to the rafters and beyond, and is only fit for composting. Alas, these days I’m much more ejumicated. But I need to be ‘medicated.’

They sure will hate it if another Fitzgerald eats their lunch.

From Bark bark woof woof, comes this pic of Rove’s new job:

http://barkbarkwoofwoof.blogsp…..754404.jpg

OT, Gotta love MoDo:

“…The only oil baron who isn’t cashing in these days is Saddam. We pulled up to the pump in Baghdad and plunked down $10 billion a month, and we’re still not getting any oil out of it. Instead of easing our oil dependence paying for Iraq’s reconstruction, the bungled invasion and subsequent nuclear sparring with Iran have left even Republicans looking for Priuses…”

About those Cunningham hookers.. um, they weren’t boys, were they?
I thought it interesting that the gender wasn’t mentioned.
Cunningham has talked about “loving men” in the past, although he’s not gay (of course).

ccmask– a friend sent me that one the other day– hilarious!

Heh.

Yay: hookers & limousines at the Watergate Hotel! Finally, an aspect of these 21st century GOP scandals that ALL the American people can fathom. I knew these greedy suckers would do something everybody could understand.

And at the Watergate Hotel, no less. “Let’s send a Congressman a hooker in a limo and then have them driven to the Watergate Hotel for an afternoon delight…:” oh the irony, how sweet it is. Of course, with mini-cams in the 21st century, I wonder if Duke-stir is gonna have a Paris Hilton moment?

=========
Had enough?
=========

maybe there’s direct a bush/rove quid pro quo: ‘karl, you do whatever it takes to keep both houses of congress in november; if you’re successful, i’ll guarantee you get a pardon.’ hence the so-called demotion to concentrate on the midterms.

Redd — I am flattered! [blushing]

And cbl — thanks so much! As a verb, I have never been a Fitz before.

What I have loved about the discussion over the last day is what Booman notes — the spin is working less and is less linked to facts than ever before. Are the wheels really slipping off? Ask Tony Snow!

Confusion IS the game. It’s all they’ve got.

I’m sorry for OT-
Digby has the fine print of the disgusting right-wing “rope” t shirt. It’s worth looking at as a reminder that we cannot stop for even a minute.

nasty, nasty, nasty

Gov. Jeb Bush is dropping a subtle — or not so subtle — hint to Katherine Harris: GET OUT OF THE SENATE RACE!

Once again undercutting U.S. Senate candidate Katherine Harris, Gov. Jeb Bush said on Wednesday that House Speaker Allan Bense “would be a great United States senator.”
http://barkbarkwoofwoof.blogspot.com/

Don’t know who Allan Bense is….here’s part of his statement wrt Terry Shiavo:

Governor Bush began to champion Terri’s cause very early on, and he used every appropriate power at his disposal to try and save her. He deserves the appreciation of those on both sides of this debate for how he has respected both the sanctity of life as well as Florida’s Constitution throughout this situation.

–LL SPIN ALL THE TIME–

I had the same thought (boys or girls?) regarding the Cunningham hookers. The Washington Blade “loving men” article:
http://tinyurl.com/s2b45
The congressman startled her, Birch said, when he ushered his staff members out of his Capitol Hill office, closed the door, and asked Birch and Daniel Zingale, then HRC’s political director, just how it was that they came to know that they are gay.

“You know, how do you know you’re that way?†Birch quoted the congressman as asking.

In hushed tones, Birch told the audience that the congressman leaned back against his desk and revealed that he was asking the question because he had “loved men†in his past.

“[T]his guy’s got three tours in Vietnam, and there were a lot of guns on the wall,†Birch told the audience, which laughed in response. “Whips and stuff like that. … I looked at Daniel and I went, ‘Oh my God.’â€

Birch described how she and Zingale told the congressman how they and other gay people struggle with their own feelings until they come to terms with who they are and affirm to themselves that they’re gay.

“And finally, he said, ‘Because I’ve loved men,’†Birch recalled the congressman saying. “And I said, ‘Was that in a military setting?’†Again, the audience laughed, acknowledging how awkward the conversation was for Birch and Zingale. “He said yes,†Birch recalled. “He said, ‘Yes indeed, on the field of battle, but I’ve also loved men.’â€

Birch did not identify the congressman but said the meeting took place a short time after the congressman created a controversy in 1995 when he referred to gays as “homos†on the floor of the House of Representatives.

Media reports and other background facts indicate that Congressman Randall “Duke†Cunningham (R-Calif.), an archconservative from San Diego, fits many of the details in Birch’s story.

Pardon me? No, pardon you. Thank you. I beg your pardon? Win the Congress or not, Bush has the power of the pardon and is bound to use it. I think America is sick enough of just having these guys around that no one will be too mad if he pardons them all and they just go away. And of course he will be pardoned after his impeachment. Then we will have a whole new set of crooks to deal with. “I beg your pardon, I didn’t promise you a Rove garden.” If you will pardon the expession.

TeddySanFran — politically, a video plastered all over the news would be a bombshell. But the self-preservation side of me is hoping for a no on that one. Talk about needing a gallon or two of clorox for your eyes and brain after viewing that. BLERGH.

zennurse -

Yeah, ugly, but with all of the actual macho of wingnut Yahoo board GUI Commandos. I’m REALLY scared.

I would Love to see pardons issued. After all, an accepted pardon IS an admission of guilt (Richard Nixon and his lawyers apparently had a lot of angst over accepting Ford’s pardon, for this very reason). So, once all of these jokers get pardoned, then the race needs to be on to ensure that ALL of America realizes that these crooks are admitting their crimes.

After all, this is much bigger than Bush. This is about the future of the country. If we have to let a few sleaze-balls slip through to secure the future, so be it.

Jason Leopold is standing by his last story claiming that Luskin received a target letter from Fitz concerning Turd-Blossom.

The Post is also reporting that Turd tried to save his own ass by claiming that lying about his contacts with Matt Cooper would have been “suicide.”

I agree, the spin is out of control. But this story rolls on and has now overtaken the Tony Snow appointment.

If the Post story is correct, then I think that Rove is in serious danger of being indicted and unless he was able to snow the new grand jury, I think he is going down.

Its almost as if the production of the “lost” emails and the Vivnovka-Luskin conversations gave Rove another “in” to try to spin the new grand jury. Rove better hope that grand jury was packed with Repugs, because otherwise, he is going down.

Good Post!!!

Though I must bbbwwwhaaa that I and others been hammering this point for months here and elsewhere
Their continued rosy glass scenarios along with smoke and mirror lies translates into their hoped for GOP midterm sucess… which will then result in delayal of supoena power and its accountability factors…

…just in time for the pardon window to open and the famous american public attention span to yawn and move on to the next missing white girl

Hey NASCAR Boy!

lyrics by rizbiz

(cue steel guitar and fiddle)

You been lied to and lied to and then cheated on,
Them rats got all your money, don’t that feel wrong?

Boats been a sittin’, can’t handle the price…
Things you been quittin’. Some profit’d be nice.

Oil companies bulging with your hard-earned cash,
How’s your account? You handle a crash?
One check’s a slim margin, but a man’s got to live
It’s not fair what’s been happenin’, the dam’s ’bout to give.

You been lied to and lied to and then cheated on,
Them rats got all your money, don’t that feel wrong?

Be a man and admit that the love is long gone
Protect your family, time to get strong.
There’s rats in the yard, where your children go play,
Be a man and do right:
Vote them rats far, far far away.

You know, I realize that Patrick Fitzgerald is a fairly apolitical person in terms of politics affecting the performance of his duties, but I’ve been thinking about this since I saw this post of Immanentize’s in the other thread.

Regardless of the apparent apolitical nature of the prosecutor, doesn’t it stand to reason that he must be aware of the fact that his ability to successfully carry out his investigation and prosecution is highly dependent upon the outcome of the 2006 midterm election not providing legal cover for the subjects of his investigation in the form of the trump card of the presidential pardon?

Might he be forced to make a move before the election, rather than letting the case unfold naturally in its own time the way he’d clearly prefer? I get the feeling that Fitzgerald is nothing if not a pragmatist, and he’s got to know that his case will basically fold if the Republicans hold the House and Senate, because then Bush has no reason to not just use his power to pardon and make the case go away.

Or am I reading this thing entirely wrong?

Redd at 25: yeah, me too….

Well, I partially agree with this good article by Ms. Smith. I think Rove’s strategy is:
1. avoid indictment at all costs
2. avoid indictment BEFORE Nov. 2006
[I think Rove will either be indicted or cleared well before Nov. 2006]
3. Pardons: I don’t see any pardons coming until december, 2008. We would have already had the Nov. 2008 presidential election, and the results are in. Bush will issue “Christmas pardons” to Libby, Rove, and whomever else. Libby, Rove, et al will never spend a day in jail. Even if they are convicted on “anything”, they’ll delay via appeals process right thru Nov. 2008 presidential election.
4. Finally, I too agree with the suspicion that 3.5 hours did NOT just cover some cocktail conversation with Viveka, and to which Rove wasn’t even present! Pig in lipstick…right on target.
Ghostman

yes, me too, babe, shakin in my boots.

I’m just oversensitive to the whole ugliness-on-teeshirts issue. Don’t like the idea of the F-word on my car, either or the pissing Calvin even.

prude.

WASHINGTON (AP)- Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke told Congress Thursday that rising energy prices jeopardize a currently strong economy and left the door open to the possibility of another interest rate increase to keep inflation in check…
_____

OK, so, let’s further hurt the victims.

OT but FDL’ers from Iowa alert:

Senator Feingold will be traveling to Iowa this weekend to campaign for Democratic Congressional candidates and speak at the University of Iowa.

Russ’s speech at the University will focus on the President’s illegal domestic wiretapping program, and his resolution to censure the President. Attendance is free and open to the public. If you are in the area, we hope you’ll be able to attend this important speech.

more information at
http://www.progressivepatriotsfund.com/

I don’t see how Bush pardons without seriously damaging his Admin and his JAR.

Time for planting, see you later.

zennurse -

Agreed.

[ BTW- BobbyG blushes at his elevation to ‘babe’ status…;) ]

zennurse at 36 — I’m not saying pardons will happen. I still think that this is a political minefield for Bush — and that his instincts for self-preservation above all else will give him a lot of pause on that. (Especially if the question remains just one of Scooter Libby for a while.) I’m certainly not saying this is a good strategy on their part — but simply that I think this may be behind so much of what we’ve been seeing. And Immanentize’s comment on it was the clearest distillation of this I’ve seen. :)

I have been thinking for some time that there should be a call for a constitutional amendment that would specifically exclude Officials, Employees, and Contractors of the Executive Branch from pardons, or at least require that pardons for them would require the assent of the Legislative Branch. This would cover any act commited while an Official, Employee, or Contractor.

It would still provide a check against runaway prosecution, but would do much to restore checks and balances.

(OT)Angie – yesterday you said something about the Red Cross being a day early (for 9/11, I think) but I didn’t know what you meant.

Your comment got my attention, because I was scheduled to speak at Red Cross event in DC on 9/11, a live telecast to the other RC centers. By good fortune, I cancelled, but now I am interested in the scheduling! Can you point me to a link or something?

The WH press corps needs to get Snowjob on record that the Preznit won’t pardon any members of his administration for acts connected with Plamegate. The McClellan/Snow swap is all about getting somebody else on the podium who didn’t make statements about the case. Since the issue of pardons is unrelated to the actual “ongoing investigation,” Snow must be made to comment.

I don’t think this is gonna happen, though, because Snowjob’s gonna get a heckuva honeymoon from the press. They’re gonna let lots slide, since Snowjob’s “one of their own” and “not Scott.”

“I don’t see how Bush pardons without seriously damaging his Admin and his JAR.”

He doesn’t.

But look at the way Fitzgerald builds his cases. Do you honestly think that Fitz is looking at Rove’s indictment as the crest of the wave? I don’t, and I don’t think anyone here does either. Fitz will very likely end up flipping his way up to at least Cheney in this thing, and possibly even end up nailing “The Deciderer” himself as an unindicted co-conspirator. Or at least that’s what BushCo has to be assuming to be the case, simply out of basic self-preservation.

Yes, pardons would seriously chip away at Bush’s approval ratings, but not using pardons to stonewall the investigation will very likely end up snaring even more people in the administration, and that’s one thing that I figure is a bigger deal to them than the job approval ratings.

They have to at least wait till after the midterms, though, because the Republican stranglehold on Congress is the only thing keeping the Democrats from investigating the hell out of the Bush administration, and about more things than merely this Plame ratting deal.

After the Bushies know they’ve got Congress sewn up for the rest of Bush’s presidency, then their next major concern has to be stopping Fitzgerald from getting any further with his investigation than he already has. That’s why I don’t think Bush will wait until after the 2008 elections to issue pardons. This isn’t about the good of the Republican party, this is about covering asses.

I need to go get ready for the CA-Rootster meetings with our Senate aides — wish us luck! Will try to get back here later with a report on how everything went….

I suppose it’s a possibility that Bush could pardon Rove, but it seems quite speculative, and not fully convincing. If Rove is indicted it seems it could very well be before the elections and Rove doesn’t have that much control over the process; it would be really surprising for him to testify again and again before the fall. Also, for Bush, although a lame duck and somewhat insulated from the political fallout, would still face a backlash from a pardon that he would pay some sort of price for.

upper left edge @ 8:54 am (#24) – Maybe yes, maybe no, but at least the “Rose Garden” reference got that awful “you spin me right round” song out of my head. And Lynn Anderson looked pretty good on that tractor …

How could anyone ever believe there were not very many very pricey limos and hooker and hotels? And bartabs. All the fuss about golf vacations with families along for the ride on the golf cart… ha ha ha. That was an obvious feint.

Shocking no one not tuned to FoxNews or listening to Rush, Judge Walton denies Libby’s Motion to Dismiss.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200…..cia_leak_2

You guys saw this right? Walton rules in Fitz’s favor.

http://www.montereyherald.com/…..442989.htm

has Christy done a prosecutor’s take on Luskin qualification about Fitz’ alleged representation that Rover wasn’t a ‘target’ for purposes of yesterday’s testimony? if so, can someone point out where it is?

if not, can you comment on it Christy? It’s a qualification that got overlooked in the MSM (nothing new there, overlooking is an artform), but may be some kind of clue…if so, what?

thanks

Dumb question but …

Can someone be pardoned BEFORE a trial’s completed and a verdict arrived at?

Uh…Clem #30

I don’t know what decisions Fitzgerald might make but I do think that any decision he does or does not make will necessarily be political. It’s a consequence of the people and issues involved. Fitzgerald can not say he is just doing his job and will decide accordingly. That is disingenuous. If he moves before the elections, a Rove indictment will have a further negative effect on Republican chances for retaining control of both Houses. If he waits until after the elections, the Republicans will have dodged a bullet.

I for one think that Fitzgerald could move against Rove pretty much anytime he wants. He was on the point of doing so 6 months ago. It is hard to see how conditions have altered much since then. My bottom line is if he has a case, he should go with it. This is what he did with Libby. He did not wait around for an espionage case. He went for lying and perjury. Why can’t he do this with Rove? If he wishes to add charges later, he has that option.

My fear is that Fitzgerald may follow in the steps of the New York Times and Washington Post that sat on stories before the 2004 election because they might “affect” the election thereby influencing the outcome precisely because of what they did not do.

I would like to proven wrong but at a certain point, it has to be asked: what is Fitzgerald waiting for?

Tune in to C-Span to watch Ron Wyden (D-Oregon) filibustering until the Senate agrees to vote on his amendment which would end all subsidies to the oil industry when oil price is over $55 a barrel.

Attaturk:
Fitz is drunk in that picture. He was caught chugging from a flask behind the bailiff’s chair at the GJ yesterday, but you will never hear it from the liberal media.

Matt

“After the Bushies know they’ve got Congress sewn up for the rest of Bush’s presidency, then their next major concern has to be stopping Fitzgerald from getting any further with his investigation than he already has. That’s why I don’t think Bush will wait until after the 2008 elections to issue pardons.”
42: interesting food for thought. I’ll take a inbetween view….any other “underlings” who get swept up….I’ll stick with my view of Christmas 2008 pardons. If Fitz starts sniffing up Cheney’s rear end, and indictment seems close…Bush WILL issue a “prevent-pardon”, regardless of where we are calendar wise.
Ghostman

does anybody know the story of when/how/where that photo of Cheney snoozing thru some meeting surfaced? is it recent?

i’m not a believer in the ‘rover rolled on Cheney’ theory, but that looked like the kind of photo that might be leaked from the inside to embarass Dick and show he’s over the hill. And if it came out after Bush’ new Chief of Staff arrived wielding the ax…well, i’m just saying…

#50- Yes. I believe Caspar Weinberger was pardoned as soon as charges were filed.

Hugh 51 “what is Fitzgerald waiting for?”

I am a complete idiot when it comes to the processes of the law, but it does seem to me that it would be a good strategy for Fitz to defang Libby first (re the recent filings and judge’s decision) before moving in on anyone else who may be in his sights – which might not just include Rove, but Hadley and Cheney as well?????

Ah, yes, when all else fails there is the “that would have been stupid defenseâ€. It appears that Karl Rove has chosen this to be a piece of his final efforts to avoid indictment. I’ve always found the very notion of this defense flawed. The premise of the defense is that smart people wouldn’t do stupid things or make decisions that could rationally be expected to lead to negative consequences. In Rove’s case, as I understand the issue, the argument is being used to explain an oversight to reveal all the details of his conversation with Matt Cooper (specifically the part about Valerie Plame)…in essence he simply forgot that portion of the conversation but to lie would have been stupid…and Rove knows people don’t think he is stupid.

The unspoken assertion by those who use this defense (Tom DeLay comes to mind) is that they may use their intelligence to walk right up to the line, but they are also smart enough to never cross that line…basically they know the rules so well they can navigate them like a skilled tightrope walker. On the surface it sounds reasonable and plausible.

Unfortunately, history often seems to contradict this defense and the premise upon which it is founded. That’s not to say these individuals are stupid…they are actually quite bright. However, what people may miss is an understanding that whatever these people possess in terms of smarts sometimes pales in comparison to the zeal with which they seek wealth, prestige, or power. In essence, smart people, not unlike others who lie and manipulate, are not above self-deceit in order to augment lofty goals, obtuse egos, and an unbridled hunger for power.

In the end, it’s a mistake to evaluate these situations on the basis of the individual’s intelligence…and historically juries often don’t. It’s not difficult to understand that a jury also evaluates where arrogance, greed and the desire for power sit in relation to intelligence. One’s desire for the former has a direct impact upon the amount of intelligence that is applied to any particular activity to achieve the latter.

The mathematical genius who abandons math for theater is not necessarily stupid. He is simply motivated by other interests and the application of his intellect may or may not be the dominating part of his life equation. Those who know this individual may know that he is smart but they may also know that a passion for theater, despite its failure to be a reasonable and rational calculation, is able to override the application of intelligence. He may well fail in theater while still being a very smart man.

Why would anyone assume the actions of politicians are any different? A better analysis of how these individuals and their scandals unfold is described by the “choose your poison principleâ€â€¦what compels; controls. In looking at Karl Rove there is little doubt he is passionate and motivated. His history is littered with demonstrations of aggressively pursuing his objectives. To presume he would never cross the line, given his obvious intensity, would shift the use of the “that would be stupid defense†to Patrick Fitzgerald and a full Grand Jury. That would likely require a lot of smart people to look stupid. Is Karl Rove smart enough to pull that off? Perhaps.

more observations here:

http://www.thoughttheater.com

zennurse
I don’t see how Bush pardons without seriously damaging his Admin and his JAR

His Administration already is seriously damaged and his JAR could hardly be worse. What’s to lose?

alizaryn # 50

Yes, Bush #41 did it for Cap Weinberger

the fitz thing’s a diversion — what matters to americans is the economy — bush is joining the attack on oil companies because washington needs to keep the public in the dark on what causes inflation

it’s by printing more dollars than we need that the federal reserve system causes inflation — the government overspends, so the fed has to print extra dollars to plug the deficit — beyond that, the fed buys bonds on the open market in order to feed dollars into the financial system — in the late 1990s, the extra dollars went into the nasdaq — since then they’ve been going into housing — but now they’re starting to cause certain consumer goods, like gasoline, to rise in price

politicians like the fed’s strategy because it’s a way of taxing americans on the sly: our dollar keeps dropping in value as the politicians spend & spend, while the fed prints & prints — it won’t stop till americans realize what the game is — had the government kept the deficit close to zero & had the fed not printed more dollars than the economy needed, the price of gasoline wouldn’t have gone up, but neither would the price of housing — americans want to have it both ways but the fed’s magic doesn’t work forever: sooner or later it’s going to bite — the price of gasoline’s only the start

Wow, was I lost in the last thread. So reposted.

I don’t know why they spin. They remind me of very young children who, when they hide under a blanket really think they are invisible. That lasts till what, 3 or 4?

I (really should use We) believe they are delusional in so many ways, so why not have a delusion that the public will believe that Rover is not a subject or target or whatever so long as he is not indicted or not know publicly to be cooperating; take refuge under their blankie of spin; until Fitz speaks or acts, nothing has happened and all is well, and somehow, the vast majority of Americans will believe it.

Silly? Ineffectual? Strange? Dumb? Yeah, since they’ve lost the “Keith Jackson†vote and so many other constituencies. But, it is all they have. Taking a different tack would lead to admissions regarding the phony evidence used to promote the war, the lies, etc. And that just cuts too deep, so really isn’t available to them.

I’m fine with their strategy b/c I believe that most people don’t get past Bush Administration/Criminal Investigation/National Security. The details don’t matter. The big issue themes are a winner so long as they talk about it.

So. Delusion Away.

Self preservation is a natural instinct, there is only one strategy open to them, so that is what we get.

Bobby G–As it’s all roiling down the hill toward us, and as I’m hoping some Republican somewhere is held responsible for something (Cunningham, not so much, but Rove, Rumsfeld, Gonzales,the Pres, the Veep, etc., etc.), just please know that you, your mom, and your stricken pink flamingos give me a smile and a bit of hope that at least we may be able to go out/down loving and laughing. Thank you.

“Fed chief warns high gas prices endanger economy.” How ironic that the Republicans, (and Bush) may finally be brought down by the voters as a result of this president’s big oil hubris, his unrestrained collusion with greed and penchant for, and obsession with, power, lying, cheating and self-righteous piety.

timewarp #57

If that were true, Fitzgerald may still be trying to indict some of these guys 10 years after they’re dead. Nor does it explain why Fitzgerald was willing to indict both Rove and Libby and only at the last minute deferred action on Rove.

How long before Bush starts foaming at the mouth and muttering nonsense syllables in public? Can’t be long, now. It obviously takes a lot of medication to keep him in one piece, psychologically. His meds will be out of whack one day, and he’ll start crazy talk, and his eyese will bug out. Ah so what.. it will just be proof that he’s holy: “He’s speaking in tongues”

A couple of thoughts:

There is no significance to the fact that Rove is not a target (has not been issued a target letter) NONE. As Redd mentioned in the Libby case- the issuing of a target letter usually occurs just before the indictment comes down. It would be silly for Fitz to issue the letter prematurely- so that whole line of media pablum is useless.

If Rove is indicted- there is no way that there will be a trial before the midterm elections- none. It will go the way of the scooter indictment- lawyering up- setting up a defense fund- and then hundreds of clock killing motions about discovery- the color of Fitz’s socks- etc. We’ll be looking at a trial date in 2007 or later.

There is no way that Clusterfuck is going to allow these trials to occur. It’s Rove and Scooter’s job to move the trial date forward as far as possible- it’s Clusterfuck’s job to issue the pardons the day before the trial is to begin.

If he were to allow the trial to happen:

1) there will be public testimony that will totally sink his administration.

2) it would be a signal to the defendants that he may not deliver on pardons- so they would start delivering other defendants to save their own sorry asses.

We will NEVER see a public trial of these perverts.

Redd: Oh yeah, I got yer family values party here.

You mean they don’t really have family values?

We don’t get French benefits?

“I suppose it’s a possibility that Bush could pardon Rove, but it seems quite speculative, and not fully convincing. If Rove is indicted it seems it could very well be before the elections and Rove doesn’t have that much control over the process; it would be really surprising for him to testify again and again before the fall. Also, for Bush, although a lame duck and somewhat insulated from the political fallout, would still face a backlash from a pardon that he would pay some sort of price for.”

What Bush REALLY doesn’t want is to have his VP indicted, or to possibly end up having the “unindicted co-conspirator” label asterisked to his name in the history books.

That’s why I think that if he survives the midterms with the GOP hold on Congress intact, he’ll start pardoning. I honestly feel that he’d rather take the political fallout from doing that, than to risk ending up with Fitzgerald flipping his way right up to Bush himself… which is precisely what Fitzgerald is known for doing.

As for Rove being indicted before the election, given the methodical, tortoise-like manner in which Fitzgerald likes to build his cases, I don’t necessarily think that the natural course of events would have Rove being indicted before the elections. It might, but I wouldn’t necessarily bank on it.

However, as I posted earlier, I wonder if Fitzgerald might not realize how big a tactical hit his investigation would likely take with the Republicans holding Congress in November and Bush being emboldened by the fact that he no longer has to worry about future Congressional investigations, at least not serious ones. This would free Bush up to concentrate on covering the asses of the rest of his administration with regard to the Plame case, and Fitzgerald would be in danger of having Bush pardon away every potential subject and target in the investigation, including those who have already been indicted. (Can’t a president technically pardon people from future indictment in a matter, as well as pardoning those already indicted?)

If Rove does get indicted before the elections, I think it’ll be a tactical move on Fitzgerald’s part rather than it simply being the right time in the investigation for an indictment.

Tortoise # 40:

Long Debunked “Rumor” Validated by Giuliani

FEMA in NYC prior to 9-11 for Project TRIPOD terror drill, scheduled for 9-12

As of this writing, June 2, 2004, the transcript of former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani’s testimony to the 9-11 Commission during the May 18-19, 2004 hearings in New York is the only transcript of that hearing omitted from the Commission website
(http://www.9-11commission.gov).

Did Rudy say something wrong?

“… the reason Pier 92 was selected as a command center was because on the next day, on September 12, Pier 92 was going to have a drill, it had hundreds of people here, from FEMA, from the Federal Government, from the State, from the State Emergency Management Office, and they were getting ready for a drill for biochemical attack. So that was gonna be the place they were going to have the drill. The equipment was already there, so we were able to establish a command center there, within three days, that was two and a half to three times bigger than the command center that we had lost at 7 World Trade Center. And it was from there that the rest of the search and rescue effort was completed.”

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/fematape.html

puzzled # 55 -

that picture of Cheney was taken the day Hu of China was here (thurs ? Fri ?) and apparently snapped during a “security” briefing – still don’t know how it made the wires

I think that the Rove indictment will either come very soon (most likely) or after the elections. Fitz can’t afford an election eve indictment- it would stir up holy hell- and Fitz is described by some as a political conservative.

“Since the issue of pardons is unrelated to the actual “ongoing investigation,†Snow must be made to comment.”

drink every time he says “prejudge” or uses the any form of the word “speculate”

OT Sort of. Perhaps this link has been already posted in another comment thread, but C&L has a clip of an amazing interview between Keith Olberman and a former CIA analyst (who worked under Mary McCarthy, with whom he had his differences). Both continually link this “leak” and the Valerie Plame link. Olberman wonders, at one point, why has it taken the WH and the CIA 3 years to not yet find out who blew Valerie Plame’s cover. Johnson also makes the point that Brewster Jennings was also a valuable intelligence asset, no lost.

Here’s the link.

zennurse @ 8:52 am (#21) – There were a couple of good one-liners on that one T-shirt, but nowhere near enough to make up for the meanness. I can’t imagine the sort of person that would want to be seen in the “some assembly required” T-shirt.

Christy -

In response to your post (38), which of immanentize’s comments were you referring to, please?

As the Bush Administration’s position weakens, it will become harder for the White House to extricate itself from what it has brought upon itself. How much of this would have happened had this administration governed well from the start?

What caused the wheels to fall off? Was it partly because of the thrill that comes from campaigning? Think of the money needed to sustain that thrill. As time goes by, more and more money is needed, not for governing, but for campaigning. As they become more and more beholden to those who financed their campaigns, how do all the attempts to sustain the thrill of campaigning affect the behavior and political acumen of politicians?

So that candidates for political office can concentrate on governing if elected, public financing of all campaigns is one urgently needed electoral reform. In the weeks and months to come, let us discuss other ideas for reforming this country’s political system.

So the judge just dinged Libby’s Hail Mary motion to dismiss. Significant, but not surprising. I say that if the judge rules that Libby can see Karl’s grand jury testimony, Karl will either be (a) indicted immediately or (b) revealed as a cooperating witness. I’d bet on (a). Any word on when the judge will rule on a gag order? That’ll be disaster for Team Libby, since it would likely mean they won’t get to share info with Libby’s co-conspirators.

This Duke Cunningham speculation is pretty interesting. Sounds very greek to me—the wife stays home to care for home and manage the slaves…I mean domestic staff, while the men are free to love each other on the DL, (as well as the military angle). Especially when taken together with the Sanitarium comments about love the gay but hate the behavior. Its like, damnit, don’t you gays know to keep it in the closet!

See, the amazing thing about being out is living your life in the bright sunlight of your community, without that toxic shame and the serious consequences of living a secret life, which is ultimately, a lie.

To paraphrase, the closeted right hates us for our freedom.

I can understand why Libby has been trying to drag out his trial as long as possible. The later his conviction takes place, the better it is for Republicans. If he can drag it out till after the 2008 elections, there won’t be any blowback at all when Bush pardons him.

Rove, on the other hand, doesn’t make sense to me. Doesn’t Fitz control the timing of this entirely? How does the spin delay an indictment?

67 and 69: this seems to be the disagreement….would Bush pardon before or AFTER a trial. You guys make some good points. But I’m not as sure that a trial would worry Bush….he might figure his spin machine could cover any damaging in-trial testimony. But I see your point….an interesting discussion!
Ghostman

wondering 63 -

Thanks.

I hope justice will eventually prevail. It’s overdue.

“If he moves before the elections, a Rove indictment will have a further negative effect on Republican chances for retaining control of both Houses. If he waits until after the elections, the Republicans will have dodged a bullet.”

Exactly, and the only reason Fitzgerald would be concerned with this at all would be that Republican retention of both Houses would make his job a hell of a lot harder.

“I for one think that Fitzgerald could move against Rove pretty much anytime he wants. He was on the point of doing so 6 months ago. It is hard to see how conditions have altered much since then. My bottom line is if he has a case, he should go with it. This is what he did with Libby. He did not wait around for an espionage case. He went for lying and perjury. Why can’t he do this with Rove? If he wishes to add charges later, he has that option.”

Fitzgerald’s main concern in choosing whether or not to indict somebody at a given point in time, rather than down the road, is the strength of his case as it goes to trial. As I understand it, if he’s not virtually 100% sure of a conviction, he won’t ask for an indictment. Instead, he’ll keep working on it until he’s sure he’s got the thing cinched up (and the devil could be in any of a million tiny details there) and THEN he’ll ask for an indictment.

Fitzgerald probably does have an incredibly strong case against Rove at this point, but hasn’t asked for an indictment because the case is not yet strong enough that he’d not be playing the odds when the case went to trial.

In other words, perhaps Fitz hasn’t quite yet seen the whites of Rove’s eyes.

The Crassinator in Chief -

Look at the look on Hu’s face:

http://www.lavozdeasturias.es/…..7424_3.jpg

Better pic:

http://images.washtimes.com/ph…..3-5156.jpg

OT– sorry.

WASHINGTON – Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter said Thursday he is considering legislation to cut off funding for the Bush administration’s secret domestic wiretapping program until he gets satisfactory answers about it from the White House.

“Institutionally, the presidency is walking all over Congress at the moment,” Specter, R-Pa., told the panel. “If we are to maintain our institutional prerogative, that may be the only way we can do it.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200…..pecter_nsa

It has been a very long time since I even thought I knew something about criminal procedure, so I’d appreciate the experts weighing in on this. If Bush pardons Scooter or Rover, wouldn’t they lose their 5th Amendment rights not to testify? If so, then pardons wouldn’t help the higher ups; they would help Fitz. Pardons would save him the trouble of trading testimony for a guilty plea — and they would have to testify truthfully or risk a perjury charge, because I don’t think they can be pardoned for prospective crimes.

If that’s the case, a big “if” given my admitted lack of expertise in this area, then Bush can’t afford to pardon anyone until he’s on his way out the door, and maybe not even then if he thinks he or the Veep might be prosecuted later.

Uh… Clem #82

After 5 GJ appearances for Rove, what seriously is left? Meticulous is one thing but at some point it has to be said that justice delayed is justice denied. No case is 100% even if you have someone blood stained knife in hand yelling, “I did it. I did it.” All this still doesn’t answer the question if Fitzgerald thought he was “100%” set to go against Rove last October, then suddenly wasn’t, will he ever again feel that 100% certainty and should he before going?

“67 and 69: this seems to be the disagreement….would Bush pardon before or AFTER a trial. You guys make some good points. But I’m not as sure that a trial would worry Bush….he might figure his spin machine could cover any damaging in-trial testimony. But I see your point….an interesting discussion!
Ghostman”

Ghostman, for one thing, I’m basically just the political geek equivalent of the quintessential drunken sports fan who loves to make grand predictions, do the armchair coaching bit, etc. I’m no lawyer, and everything I say has to be taken with the understanding that I’m just going on informed instinct, based on what I’ve read about the case and the players in it.

That said, my feeling is that Bush doesn’t want this case to go any further than it already has. Fitzgerald isn’t known for flipping his way downward… he builds his cases from the bottom up. Now, he’s already dangerously close to Cheney and Bush as it is, having gotten an indictment on Libby. If he also gets an indictment on Rove, there’s no more buffer zone… next stop: Cheney. And if Bush is the Great Deciderer that he claims to be, then it’s a cinch that he had his fingers deep enough into the pudding on this one to risk being tagged as an unindicted co-conspirator.

That’s the last thing a narcissist like Bush wants.

So therefore, I tend to think that Bush would pardon before a trial, and possibly even before an indictment as well. He wants this investigation dead in the water.

At least that’s how I see it.

I actually just had this thought about timing. Fitz has undoubtedly read the histories of Watergate and Iran-Contra closely. He knows, especially, about the Cap Weinbuger ploy. And he knows that he has until November to expose the full scale of this scandal before he loses his chance, before the Cap Weinburger ploy goes into effect and his witnesses no longer have to testify.

All of which may explain why you invite Karl to testify a fifth time, rather than indicting. Once Karl gets indicted, then his crimes will (artificially or not) be frozen in time. “You mean we spent 3 years and all we got were two perjury indictments?” Particularly if you indict on just perjury before the election, Cap ploy goes into effect, because it’s easy (as immanentize suggests) to spin the offenses as no big deal.

So what if you can get Karl to give a lot of the evidence you’d get through discovery and trial now, before you finalize the charges? Why not use him–and his expected anxiousness to push this beyond the Mid-terms–to your advantage.

I could be wrong. But I imagine Fitz stands a much better chance of getting to try the larger conspiracy if he delivers those indictments in a tidy little bundle, a bundle that highlights the references to Dick and Bush, before election day.

Re #39 (resophonic):

I think you’re on to something. Since the power to pardon is constitutionally protected (Article 2 Section 2), it would require an amendment to change this.

After this nightmare presidency, I think it would be in the country’s best interests to have a constitutional amendment cooked up that would limit Presidential powers, or at least to codify more congressional oversight responsibilities, including approval of pardons.

BarbaraB says: “…wouldn’t they lose their 5th Amendment rights not to testify?”

April 27th, 2006 at 9:57 am

That’s right. There’s more to consider: it won’t preclude civil suits; furthermore, it would be political suicide, as other FDL posters have mentioned in recent weeks and months.

“After 5 GJ appearances for Rove, what seriously is left? Meticulous is one thing but at some point it has to be said that justice delayed is justice denied. No case is 100% even if you have someone blood stained knife in hand yelling, “I did it. I did it.†All this still doesn’t answer the question if Fitzgerald thought he was “100%†set to go against Rove last October, then suddenly wasn’t, will he ever again feel that 100% certainty and should he before going?”

Well, I said “virtually” 100%. And I imagine the lawyers here could shed some light on the number of little wild card factors that might give pause to a prosecutor asking for an indictment at a given point in time.

Clearly, Fitzgerald isn’t going to see all of his time and effort wasted for having left open a chink in his case’s armor that he could have tamped shut given a little more time, patience, and work. The case against former Governor Ryan took over 8 years to build.

And honestly, I don’t think Fitzgerald did feel that he had Rove’s case nailed up tight enough last October, or he’d have asked for an indictment of Rove in addition to Libby. I think WE all thought he had a case locked up against Rove, but I never got the feeling that Fitzgerald had thought that.

Hugh – You make the assumption that Fitz was in fact “delayed” in indicting Rover. We don’t know that to be true. I think the better assumption is that he acts on his own timetable and Rover had nothing to do with it.

Nothing to do with it other than in a cooperating kind of way.

News Note: Rove did not accompany Bush today to the Gulf Coast as he ordinarily would do…

PS Guess: So is Bushie cuttin’ and runnin’ for the ranch via the Gulf Coast so he won’t be in town when the indictment/s come down?

Just hopin’.

The spin doesn’t faze me. I know Cheney, Rove and Libby are guilty of treason. But your points about the electorate in general are most likely, sadly true.

zennurse #21: I wish I’d never seen that shirt. It was SO easy to replace ‘journalist’ with ‘republican’.

new thread, peoples

Two more comments about my theory at 89.

First, you should know that I strongly suspect the Rove-Cooper conversation is the core of a conspiracy to obstruct justice charge hanging over a number of people. The Vivnovka Hail Mary therefore threatened the whole larger conspiracy case in November, and not just Rove, but a number of these thugs got a reprieve.

Second, the cabal’s joint defense is going to assume that Fitzgerald has one method, the Governor Ryan method. Flip flip flip flip, then 8 years later, goose. So if Fitzgerald can use another method (say, preying on Rove’s willingness to keep taling in the belief that it serves their temporal issues), it is more likely to take the cabal by surprise.

Uh clem, hope you got the word that no one was calling you a tr*ll. It was the comment adjacent to yours, sometimes they get renumbered.

emptywheel says:
April 27th, 2006 at 10:01 am

Excellent analysis!

emptywheel #89

I agree the clock is ticking on Fitzgerald. He either has a case 100% or otherwise or he doesn’t.

I disagree that Rove and Libby even if they are just indicted can ever be spun as no big deal (although the effort will certainly be made). Two senior White House officials indicted has as far as I know has never occurred in our history. Indictment of a single senior WH official has not happened in something like 130 years. These indictments do not occur in a vacuum but would be another nail in the coffin of the Bush Presidency.

On the question of pardons, I just don’t know. I think that Bush is an emotionally dead person and that the idea of pardoning even close advisors would not occur to him because ultimately he just doesn’t care what happens to them. OTOH I could see him pardoning not to help others but simply because he doesn’t care what the American people think.

Barbara B at 86 hits one outta the park!!!!

Nice pickup!

I totally missed that.

I had to post a link to this story about defense contractors providing Duke Cunningham — and potentially other members of Congress and staffers — with limos, hookers and hotel suites.

Wouldn’t it be sweet if Jeff Gannon was involved with this and it turns out this is how he developed his contacts?

“Uh clem, hope you got the word that no one was calling you a tr*ll. It was the comment adjacent to yours, sometimes they get renumbered.”

Egregious, I did see that and I meant to tell you thanks. It’s most cool of you to reiterate that here to make sure I saw it. Thank you, and were we in a bar right now I’d totally buy you a round (as well as Pach, for my having mistakenly thought he’d been aiming that “troll” comment my way.)

;^)

right on “Uh… Clem”! i agree with your view 100%. fitzgerald has a very clear, consistent M.O. we’ll have Fitzmas whenever the building blocks are all wrapped up and santa has placed them under the tree. meanwhile, the pressure just builds and builds and builds……….

FITZ……….FEINGOLD…………and FDL!!!!!!!

Riesz Fischer 68, thank you for that laugh!

Uh clem, sure, wine please unless it’s a state occasion. Then maybe just a wee dram o scotch. Anybody getting indicted today?

Whiskey is gaelic for ‘water of life.’

“I think that Bush is an emotionally dead person and that the idea of pardoning even close advisors would not occur to him because ultimately he just doesn’t care what happens to them.”

You’re absolutely spot-on right. The only factor you’re leaving out is Bush’s instinct to cover his own ass… which is currently flapping in the wind. He won’t pardon his advisors for their sake… he’ll pardon them for his OWN sake, to short-circuit Fitzgerald’s case outright before it gets any closer to him.

Arlen Specter’s got himself in a little jam now back in Philly. Haven’t seen much on it, though.

Hopefully, this particular hooker sex-tainted scandal will gather some momentum and stick on these sanctimonious bastards. Was a shame that the Jimmy Jeff Ganny Guck gay hooker Talon News White House top reporter story peetered out as it did. What a fantastic story it was!

And it went virtually nowhere. Thanks to the SCLM, Joe Nascar never even got a freakin’ whiff of it.
Did see a brief flash of GannyGuck on Olberman the other night. I don’t know if Joe Nascar watches Olberman, though.

Mebbe Keith (Dixiecrat or Konservative?) Jackson does.

I have a question, and three general thoughts about the pardon issue. Question-Bush can’t issue a generic pardon, right? It has to be for specific individuals, doesn’t it? I mean, he couldn’t wave his magic pardon wand and end the investigation as a whole, though he could specifically pardon Rove and Libby or other individuals. So, my first thought–this is diferent than the Watergate or Iran-Contra pardons. Bush has a real risk in pardoning in this instance, because he doesn’t know what other indictments could be coming down the pike. He could end up having to go the pardon route more than once, taking political hits again and again.
Pardon Libby and Rove. Take the hit. Then Fitz indicts somebody else–Hadley, Card, anybody. Does Bush immediately pardon them? Bush can’t pardon til its over, and he won’t know its’ over til it’s over.
Second thought-Pardons make it all about Bush. The Nixon and Weinberger pardons were surgical, one-time events. Bush can’t pardon people in the midst of the thing, because then it turns into an drawn-out process, which becomes more and more about Bush. Bush will be reluctant to go too ga-ga with the pardons, because then he gets irretrievably mired in the criminal goo. Ford was untainted by Watergate until the pardon. Ford’s pardon covered him in scandal stink. I don’t see Bush wanting to take on any more stink. Loyalty isn’t a two-way street for this guy. Look at Katherine Harris’s desparate flailing in Florida. She’s dead to him, and she ain’t even indicted. I don’t see him racing to the side of foul-smelling indictees.
Finally, pardons are something losers do, in the case of Iran-Contra and Watergate. Pardons are what you do at the end game, a last desparate hail mary kind of play. I don’t think Bush likes to think of himself as a cornered, desparate loser, so I think he’d be reluctant to execute a kind of loser’s play.

“Uh clem, sure, wine please unless it’s a state occasion. Then maybe just a wee dram o scotch. Anybody getting indicted today?”

A touch of the grape, it is!

“Whiskey is gaelic for ‘water of life.’ ”

Indeed it is.

“I don’t think Bush likes to think of himself as a cornered, desparate loser, so I think he’d be reluctant to execute a kind of loser’s play.”

You’re right, but I think it all depends on what he knows of a trail leading to his own ass in this case. If you start seeing spin in the press using the words, say, “fishing expedition” to describe Fitzgerald’s investigation, you can bet big money that Bush is preparing to pardon (and pre-emptively pardon, as the case may be) the apparent main subjects/targets of the investigation in an attempt to try and neuter Fitzgerald. I’m talking Hadley and those folks in addition to Rove, Libby, and Cheney.

And it’ll all be about keeping Fitzgerald’s investigation away from Bush himself.

cleter -

From the language in the Constitution and some of the ensuing legal lit, it might well be argued — particularly THIS President would love to argue — that his pardon power is plenary, its scope solely at HIS unitary discretion. Any restraint on his issuing blanket generic pardons, even in advance of any charges, would be political, not Constitutional, I would worry.

BobbyG
That’s an interesting point. But that just feeds into my second point. Pardoning makes it more about Bush. If he does what you say, then there’s some sort of bug ugly constitutional crisis, dragging him down personally. It makes him own more of the scandal.

the boy will do what his momma tells him.

Constitutional Authority for Presidential Pardons
The presidential power to pardon is granted under Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution.

“The President … shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.”

No standards, and only one limitation — no pardons for the impeached.

If the right keeps hold the House or Senate bye a very thin margin this fall, look for some moderate members to jump ship and come to our side. (Remember Jeffords).

Christy, it’s a good thread, but many factors will work against a pardon.

First and worst, for the repubs, will be that, unlike Ford’s pardon of Nixon, which came when Watergate was practically done, the pardon will have to come in mid-and-worsening shitmire.

FirstAnus will be pardoning, as the wheels are unspinnably coming off in Iraq…with a very good chance that the latent civil war will have moved front and center.

By then, we may be holding on to the flaming bag of shit that bushCo has ignited, all by our lonesomes, with the brits et al, having said adios.

(Three Italian troops and a Roumanian killed today, in a road bombing. I don’t think Prodi will feel constrained by Berlusconi’s promise to keep their troops there until the end of 2006.)

Rove may only be available for consultation on an ex-officio basis, and with a bit of luck, and some diligent fishing, or Fitzing, it’s not impossible that junior, himself, may be needing a pardon.

The Ford pardon may have cost him the election against Carter. There’ll be even less pardon-capital for junior, or his successor, to expend.

The “pardon” theory is contingent on bush being there to pardon. I think the Goldwater-style republican firing squad may go see bush sometime after the mid-terms (before?) and ask him if he wants to do the statesmanlike thing, or if he wants to preside over the death of the republican party.

The Turks just moved 40,000 troops withing sniffing distance of their border with Iraq. That’s a mine canary. The canary is singing:

“The EU carrot has mold all over it and we don’t care; eeyi, eeyi, ohhhh…”

All they have to do, to get the loan of another few billion from bushCo, is rev up their tank engines, and figuratively speaking, Condi will be under Recep Erdogan’s desk faster than you can say “Semen stains on a blue dress”.

So many people have got their hands on bush’s ‘nads, that they’re like a pack of clones of Captain Queeg, in “The Caine Mutiny”, with Humphrey Bogart rolling those balls around in his hand.

…The insurgents, Sistani, Sadr, the Iranians, the Chinese, the american voters….they have to take turns squeezing. :o)

If Fitz didn’t have Rove, he wouldn’t bother. He’s got him.

Fitz can read a calendar. And he knows what this bunch did, and what he can prove. Yesterday was Meet The Weasel You’re About to Indict Day.

What impresses me most about Fitz is the silence. Prosecutors (Nifong!) take note—this is a superb tactic. You gain the trust of the judge, you “out” the defense as the spinners, and you frighten the hell out of everyone, including potential witnesses. It’s just plain brilliant, and best of all, it goes by the letter of the law. Hey, how ’bout that!

Note that Ken Starr was not smart enough to know this.

I am not fully versed in the minutiae of traitorgate but have a question from reading today’s Froomkin and Raw Story: did Novak just testify that Rove was his source?

“Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it.
…….when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”

It seems to me our plan is pretty well spelled out by T. Jefferson and Company………………..

“Bushie and Rover and their malignant cabal of mercenary smarm merchants have driven our nation into the ground the last five years”

They trashed the place and emptied the safe, but they’re still inside and need to make their getaway.

This is the point: Didn’t Gannon run an escort service — with employees? Subpoenable, indictable, turnable employees?

Why didn’t we pursue who worked for him, the contacts they had, and how they got paid? We wallowed in Brokeback Mountain shock and tittilation; if those hookers were female, it would have been a cinch to get investigative reporters to see the necessity of investigating them. Now, they’re damn near untraceable, unless someone wants to get busy with the still-available phone records for Gannon, his credit card processor, his webhost, his phone answering service and who else talked to him — one could even get around the ‘reporter’s privacy’ issue, if one could prove he used a separate line for ‘ho business.