Morning Taylor!

Wow.

Bravo Taylor!

What a rethug chickenhawk crum he is and that whiny voice is an added irritant.

Hey Angie, morning all. Wow, indeed, FM.

My Dad was drafted in 1968 (born 1946) and is legally blind without his glasses. He served proudly over in Viet Nam with the 11th Cav and has the scars to prove it (both mentally and physically). The recruiters most definitely would find ways to get guys into service, including those with terrible eyesight. Much like now they were desperate to get bodies on the frontlines, so to say his eyesight was poor tells me that Weldon sure didn’t try very hard to serve his country.

Any polling on that race, Taylor?

Since nobdy else did it:

FITZ!

Taylor -

I remember those days, and was quite happy with my over 300 lottery number. I would not criticize anyone who used any means to avoid the draft in those days, but then to swift boat others who did serve is beneath contempt. The chicken hawks have lead to most of our problems in Iraq, including AWOL himself.

Ooo-wee, is that a real billboard, Taylor? Do you know where? Wish we could cover the country with them! (Now to read your post.)

OT: Drudge says that Novak is about to start a catfight with Armitage. Should be fun to watch.

op99 – I hesitate to offer any polling data without analysis, because I’m not an expert on polling, which I leave to Chris Bowers @ MyDD. However, Weldon is leading at this point. But I thought this article was interesting and very desperate by Weldon’s people. They’re clearly trying to push their polling data, which is suspect, if you ask me.

http://www.delcotimes.com/site…..#038;rfi=6

GOP= Grand Old Prevaricators

aka Shapeshifters “R” Us

Limits to Surveillance Bill Blocked

Filed at 11:30 a.m. ET

WASHINGTON (AP) — Senate Republicans blocked Democratic attempts to rein in President Bush’s domestic wiretapping program Wednesday amid a sustained White House campaign to give the administration broad authority to monitor, interrogate and prosecute terrorism suspects.

While refusing to give the president a blank check to prosecute the war on terrorism, Republicans in the Senate Judiciary Committee kept to the White House’s condition that a bill giving legal status to the surveillance program pass unamended.

By voice vote and roll calls, Republicans defeated Democratic amendments to insert a one-year expiration date into the bill and require the National Security Agency to report more often to Congress on the standards for its domestic surveillance program.

More at http://www.nytimes.com/aponlin…..orism.html

My recollection is that the highest number called (persons with this number were drafted) in the initial lottery was 195, and that is was successively lower for each of the next two years.

Off topic, but:
I was just over at Steve Gilliard’s place, and August Pollak (in comments) said that polls show Lieberman ahead of Lamont.

Anyone have any information on what’s going on over there? I figure this is the place to go for Lamont info…

Spotlight this post to local media in Pennsylvania! Spotlight Spotlight Spotlight!

A bit OT.. again being on different time zone does not help…

Lately it has become harder and harder to read the news about Bush and his cronies and their unbelievable policies and decisions: every time I fire up my browser or I open a newspaper I am flabbergasted by the new low that has been reached and every time I tell myself “that’s the bottom, it cannot get worse that this”. And nevertheless it gets worse no matter what: during the last week I have come across several discussions on different blogs and news sites about the decision of the USA government to disengage itself from the “quaint” constraints of the Geneva conventions… to say it bluntly to legalize and codify torture as a acceptable “tool” to obtain information from prisoners.

There.. I have typed it down and still I do not believe we are now to a point that something like this is the topic of a discussion. I remember when 2 years ago, before Abu Graib become dreadfully known, before the conditions of the persons held in Guantanamo become of public knowledge, before “extraordinary rendition” become such an “ordinary” occurrence, a discussion like this would be beyond the realm of possibility, would never even be considered as a legitimate point to raise or consider. And today we have the president of the USA publicly stating that fear of prosecution for war crimes is one of the restrains that need to be lifted from the head of the Usa Intelligence forces, saying that CIA “black prisons” are a terrible reality (acceptable and according to his rotten idea of the law, absolutely legal), we have officials that when directly questioned about the use of torture can only answer with long awkward silence (I have recently watched again (thanks to C&L) the unbelievable clip of Gonzalez testifying under oath in front of the congress… and I still cannot warp my mind around that!).

It was not long ago, when MCain proposed its anti-torture bill, that all the main players of the USA government (cheney excluded … yes I know I am missing a capital letter here… I am very aware of that) did go on record in front of a camera to say that things like.. “of course the USA did not condone torture and it would never do that… why shall we even discuss this… come on, we have also have a new nice bill by “Maverick” MCain saying that we are not going to that and we never did.. So nothing to see here, let talk about something else”. What really struck my mind was not the rhetoric avalanche coming from TV and newspapers: I was in my early days of blogs exploration (started from Micheal Moore web site after watching F911 and long before I become addicted to Firedoglake :-)) but I still remember a comment to a post about this matters that I found on Huffington Post: “Do we really need a bill to confirm that torture is not something we do? Wasn’t there a time when something like that was a clear point, a point that went without saying because any other alternative would just be crazy and americanized?” **.

The impact of the fact that a discussion like that was even going on had on the western world, on Italy for example from where I am typing, but on all Europe, cannot be easily explained: the first approach was denial (”That’s not true, your rotten leftist (sigh!), the USA would never do that, they are the country who stopped the Nazis!”, “It’s propaganda, look at what’s going on in the middle east, the USA are different”), then when the stories from Cuba and Iraq become public, there was astonishment , scorn and disgust. The damage done to the image of the USA is deep and awfully difficult to cancel: I am afraid that the image of your nation is tarnished forever for lots of people, especially for those who cannot see the sane part of it so well represented by a community like the one of this blog. We had The cultural shock of seeing the “good guys” (as I have stated in other previous post, far from being perfect, the USA still is the leading nation of the western world) morph in front of us in a bizzarro-version of what they used to be. You can be sure no amount of Hollywood movies or rhetorical propaganda is going to make this go away from the minds of the younger people, from the latest generations (at least from the ones who do use their brain, from the smartest of the bunch): I have grown up with the idea of the USA as the country who saved the western world from the Nazis, they are growing up with the idea that the USA is the ruthless nation that tortures and deports out of fear and scorn… That’s a **ll of a difference, isn’t it ???!??

What really bothers and surprises me is the lukewarm reaction of the public opinion in the USA: top government officials fiddling around with the idea of radically altering the basic principles of your nation, allowing torture to happen “within the limits of the law” (… only typing that makes me longing for a shower..) and there is no outrage (outside the circle of sane people I can find here, of course), no pressure to change this course of action, to stop the sliding of the nation towards authoritarianism and, I must say this, fascism. It is really weird to see the similarity in behavior of some many Americans (39% still approve of Bush?! 49% still believes in ties between 911 and Iraq ??!!??) and the Italians of the 1920 when we let our nation become part of the nightmare of fascism and evil (weird and awfully scary). And I cannot believe that the press it is making no effort to counter this folly, to held the people in charge responsible for this mess: God bless people like Keith Obermann for having the guts to do his job when everybody else seems afraid and scared! (by the way I have bought his book as soon as Firedoglake posted about it!). I really need someone to explain me how such apathy become the rule, how the American public become so passive and uncaring…

Working hours are over, I have ranted long enough, gotta go

Peace everybody

** For me it was an epiphany: the blogs were the new medium I was looking for, a medium that cut through the layers of deceive coming out from the traditional media outlets, it was the way to inform myself about was going on without filtering and distortions thanks to the hard work of some strong minded individuals (hi Jane!): guess what? I am still hooked!

Frank Probst @
10

OT: Drudge says that Novak is about to start a catfight with Armitage. Should be fun to watch.

Please look at emptywheel’s current post at The Next Hurrah: http://thenexthurrah.typepad.c……html#more

hmmm, even Ronnie served:

In the Army Now
Reagan joined the Army in 1942, but his poor eyesight prohibited him from battle duty. As a lieutenant and, later, a captain, he oversaw the making of movies that trained soldiers for battle.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/p…..an_dk.html

OT: While people are talking about “dodging” something . . . .

I realize I am late to this, but maybe a few other commenters are also.

Go to 9/11: Press for Truth (at MediaChannel.org) and start watching.

The tears start welling up in my eyes at 17 minutes, maybe earlier. And I have more than an hour remaining to watch. Gotta stop and post this, and go shut the door to my office, and continue.

So far, it’s stuff that we knew over the past few years. Don’t know where it’s going next.

Thanks to Jennifer Nix for highlighting this in her previous post here at FDL. I clicked. I am hooked.

From Taylor’s link @ 11

The Weldon campaign piggybacked on a survey of likely voters in state Sen. Ted Erickson’s 26th District and found the Republican congressman leading Sestak 59-34 when both candidates are identified by name.

-snip-

Erickson’s district covers about one-third of the 451,000 voters in Weldon’s district and includes the large Republican municipalities of Upper Darby, Springfield, Marple and Ridley Township.

The GOP’s registration edge is approximately 2-1 on Erickson’s turf while the entire congressional district is registered 56 Republican, 31 percent Democratic and 11 percent nonpartisan.

Interesting, that shows both candidates adding 3 percent on top of the party registration number. I wonder what’re the affiliation numbers for the entire district?

I appreciate the push to Spotlight this post. It’s the only way we’ll get any answers is if the local Penn. media pick it up and start asking questions.

Thanks for your story, GaryL, which is what I’ve been getting as well. But if Weldon’s eyes were bad, why didn’t he start with that story and stick with it? It smells, if you ask me.

petedownunder – Bingo. Those were bad days and everyone older I knew wanted out of the draft. It’s when you start swiftboating veterans who served honorably that raises my antenna.

Number 153 was borderline; you need to get the selective service draft records for his draft board to ascertain how far they went. I was registered at the Camden, NJ draft board in that era and often the higher numbers were not drafted. The quota was filled first by enlistees and Camden had quite a few. I had friends with lottery numbers in the range of 150 who sweated a lot, but were not drafted.

Weldon is abominable, but he may not have needed to use any special avoidance tactics to avoid being drafted with his number.

See if the records of his board are available and check the numbers to be sure.

Very nicely done.

Now how about Rove? He pulled a relatively low number (read it once in a blog but have forgotten it).

He pullled out of college his junior year to work for the RNC in Maryland with no student or medical deferrment.

For a somewhat comprehensive list of Weldon’s Chickenhawk pals see:

http://www.villagevoice.com/ne…..166,1.html

(Mod, if you haven’t gotten to my unlucky 13 ^ by the time I finish typing this, lhp et al. will want to see it — thanks!)

I can also attest that poor vision was no protection against the Vietnam draft. I was living in Kansas City then, and still dating guys. One of them, a soldier at Ft. Riley, Kansas, who was awaiting deployment, had to wear glasses so thick they were heavy to pick up.

So partly for good ol’ John’s sake, I really hope you/we can nail this bastard Weldon once and for all, Taylor!

Kimba1970 – I have the same disbelief. The United States of America as a state sponsor of torture – open policy, ready to be enshrined by Congress.

Unbelievable.

I don’t know about Weldon’s draft board, but in some areas they’d draft anyone who wasn’t dead. (I’ve heard of at least one person with severe kidney problems being drafted, over the objections of his doctor, and having to be given a medical discharge during basic training.) Other places the boards would give a 1-Y or 4-F to anyone who could plausibly fake a problem. My brother got CO status (and to this day is a CO) after some time corresponding with his board ‘registered, return receipt requested’. It all depended on who was on the draft board locally.

Whoa, Taylor, great post. Investigative journalism is alive and well.

For once, I’d like to hear one of these chickenhawks be honest and say, “Well I didn’t go to Vietnam because I was young and stupid and I was scared shitless of getting my ass shot off”.

But I guess that doesn’t fit with the GOP’s narrative to preserve the myth that Repubs are the party of strong, he-man types.

Read the “Questions and Answers” snippet again, Mudge. Weldon could have said he wasn’t called. Instead he gave one story, then changed it to another.

Also, I learned through a source, whom I cannot name, that Weldon was the Mayor of Deleware Cnty in the late 1970s, when he was around 30. Draft boards were controlled by county back then and the Delaware County War Board was a Republican machine back in those days. Makes you wonder if there was some sort of sweetheart deal made with Weldon. I mean, it’s not George W. Bush’s champagne unit, but making deals with country war boards was not unheard of in those days.

Also, check out this blog post re: Weldon giving his daughter some help through his congressional office. It’s not unheard of, but this blogger isn’t very happy about it:

http://www.totallydelco.com/bl…..ariah.html

PS-Just saw P J Evans’s comment @ 28. Bingo.

More O/T. Seems like we’re getting new optical scan voting machines in CT. I heard of this before but I didn’t realize that the maker is Diebold. Via CT Bob. Personally I like our old machines.

Whoa, Taylor, great post. Investigative journalism is alive and well.

For once, I’d like to hear one of these chickenhawks be honest and say, “Well, I didn’t go to Vietnam because I was young and stupid and I was scared shitless of getting my ass shot off”.

But I guess that doesn’t fit with the GOP’s narrative to preserve the myth that Repubs are the party of strong, he-man types.

Great post.

Weldon, what a weasel that man is.

OT: was watching Bush Monday night and one phrase stood out amongst his usual mish-mash of bullsh*t.

He was talking about a woman O’Dhoul or some such, and how she had told him she was going to ‘cross her fingers, and pray.’

The ‘cross her fingers, and pray’ comment seemed odd, when I thought about it, because most people who pray do not cross their fingers while doing so.

Crossing one’s fingers is a superstition, so where did Bush get this image, what possessed him to say it ? Was it a baleful attempt to gruffly ad-lib his shoot-from-the-hip ’sincerity’ ? Was it a slip from the speechwriter/teleprompter ? Is it a reference to some obscure cultural affectation that commonly has people crossing their fingers when they pray.

My own reaction at the time was that it was another example of the faux-religious-sincerity affected by Bush and his image-handler-speechwriter-consultants.

One of the persistent annoyances I have with Bush is the facade of religious sincerity that he affects, a
faux sincerity that many people are fooled by. This cross-your-fingers-and-pray comment the incongruence of the remark seemed a careless slip of that facade.

Maybe they were using a new speech writer, and were more concerned with focusing on their war-on-terror political haymaking ?

Perhaps it was just a sloppy ad-lib from the Shrub.

Maybe its just me splitting hairs though.

OT– Harry Reid has introduced a very voluminous (570 pages) amendment to the port security bill in the Senate that is making the rethugs– Collins, Patsy Roberts, Stevens so far– insane. It is essentially a protest over the NSA, Military Commission thingy, and failure to implement the 9/11 Commission report recommendations (as far as I can tell).

Taylor, it is perhaps worth repeating: the standard excludes only those whose eyesight cannot be corrected, not those with bad eyesight alone.

I served in the Army with 20/400 eyesight including astigmatism, and I did so without the kind of story that your “Reluctant Soldier” told.

I simply wear glasses, which correct to 20/20 (and that correct the astigmatism). The Army standard allows you to serve if the vision can be corrected by wearing glasses.

Period.

Curt Weldon wears glasses. See http://curtweldon.house.gov/

Taylor Marsh @ 11

op99 – I hesitate to offer any polling data without analysis, because I’m not an expert on polling, which I leave to Chris Bowers @ MyDD. However, Weldon is leading at this point. But I thought this article was interesting and very deseprate by Weldon’s people. They’re clearly trying to push their polling data, which is suspect, if you ask me.

http://www.delcotimes.com/site…..&rfi=6

From the intro paragraph, it sounds like even the reporter could see that the polling was suspect, since it only covered Republican-heavy parts of the district. According to Chris Bowers, PA-07 is “the 8th most Democratic district held by a Republican,” so I think it’s fair to say that polling the Republican parts is meaningless (other than if Weldon was losing there, he’d obviously be doomed.)

One other amusing tidbit:

it was conducted by Republican pollster Neil Newhouse of Public Opinion Strategies.

Neil Newhouse, aka Joe Lieberman’s post-primary pollster.

lisa @
14

Off topic, but:
I was just over at Steve Gilliard’s place, and August Pollak (in comments) said that polls show Lieberman ahead of Lamont.

Anyone have any information on what’s going on over there? I figure this is the place to go for Lamont info…

I just commented at newsblog — the Survey USA poll is a real stinker:

http://www.surveyusa.com/clien…..mp;q=31204

Only 542 “likely voters” included — for WABC New York.

Prof @ 35: Exactly, Weldon wears glasses, and could have while serving in Vietnam. So why didn’t he get drafted? Why the eyesight story?

OT – EXCLUSIVE: Air America To Declare Bankruptcy, But Progressive Radio Remains Strong

Chickenhawks often have vision problems; they just can’t see putting their own butts on the line.

I have grown up with the idea of the USA as the country who saved the western world from the Nazis, they are growing up with the idea that the USA is the ruthless nation that tortures and deports out of fear and scorn… That’s a **ll of a difference, isn’t it ???!??

Kimba, if that breaks your heart, imagine what it does to ours.

angie @ 33

OT– Harry Reid has introduced a very voluminous (570 pages) amendment to the port security bill in the Senate that is making the rethugs– Collins, Patsy Roberts, Stevens so far– insane. It is essentially a protest over the NSA, Military Commission thingy, and failure to implement the 9/11 Commission report recommendations (as far as I can tell).

I’m sure the problem is just that he didn’t follow GOP procedure and introduce it after midnight. *g*

I told my apolitical mother about Weldon’s criticism of Sestak because he sought treatment for his cancer-stricken daughter in DC. We were on the phone, so I couldn’t see her reaction. There was a long pause, and finally she said that the thought of a candidate behaving with such cruelty made her feel ill. Mom asked, “Where does he come from?” When I answered “Pennsylvania,” she had the perfect response: “No, I mean, what universe would you have to come from to think that this is acceptable? On what planet is this okay? He doesn’t sound human.”

She nailed it.

out of the relevant period, but my father was naval reserve in WWII. He was called up, even though he was (a) 5′3″ (under the limit) and (b) about 20/400 and couldn’t read a newspaper without glasses (’Read the top line on the chart? What chart?’ is the way that works). But he had a BSME and experience with aircraft engines, and they found a slot for him.

If the services are in need, they’ll take you, with or with perfect vision. Weldon is a chickenheart.

The key part:” which does not correct to at least one of the following”

Meaning it has to be that bad after glasses.

I don’t have any problem with guys not wanting to serve in the Vietnam War. A very unjust, illegal war, founded and prosecuted upon lies (Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, etc.) by primarily Presidents Johnson and Nixon. What is despicable is when phonies like ‘Nam dodgers Cheney, Rove, Bush and Weldon practically predicate their political careers on support for another immoral and illegal war. And continue to send American soldiers to their deaths. The Vietnam evaders are a cowardly bunch of bottom-feeders. I just don’t see many politicians who support the Iraq War willing to send their children there to serve. The scent of this hypocrisy is absolutely suffocating.

I’m working on a transcript over at HEP, of more of the Strickland/Blackwell debate. The only reason I started doing this is that I read a flippant article in our “alternative” newsweekly. I couldn’t respond coherently to it, but I thought at least if people had the actual text of what was discussed in the debate, maybe cooler heads could write letters to the editor. Mine would most likely be peppered with profanity at this point.

But the reason I am not diarying this is that I am in *no* freaking mood to have some “worldly” Democrat quip something to me about how Blackwell as governor is a done deal because of Diebold. (Happens *every* damn time I do write about this race.) Those remarks do *not* help–WAY too much is at stake here.

Anyway, a heads-up that I’m working on a transcript.

http://howardempowered.blogspot.com

At the beginning of the post is a link to the stupid article in the Other Paper.

Taylor,

I read the rules, but Weldon is a nutcase. It sounds better to lie and say it was his eyes…allowing him to maintain a continuity to his chickenhawk status, rather than admit that he merely was not called (and did not enlist).

He did not serve. The question is why. The eye issue appears to be bogus, but serves his purpose, I merely suggest that he may not have been called. Delaware County includes Chester as well as the main line.

OT– voting on the amendment now which “implements all recommendations of 9/11 Commission and calls for a “new direction” in Iraq.”

lets see what the DINOs do.

Renee in Ohio– any word on Subway Serenade?

OT. AP Texas court to reconsider DeLay charge.Bush ‘assassination’ film to be released in U.S.@CNN. comment from White House, How “UNAMERICAN” hahahahahahahahaha

My lottery number was 28.

Being a music and weed dual-major was a very difficult undertaking, so I dropped what I thought was a 3-credit course, which was, in fact, a 4-credit course. Part-time students did not qualify for the 2S exemption.

Like, WOW, man!

The only explanation of how fast I was notified of my status change to 1-A was that they took my drop-slip, noted that I was under 12 credit-hours, called my local draft board which must have been meeting that afternoon. 3 days to my mailbox.

I was very near reporting to Toronto for duty when I found an ally in my childhood physician, who provided x-rays and from a broken elbow and supporting statements that I had significant damage to the elbow, with limited use of my right arm.

I practiced for about 2 weeks on not using my right hand, lighting cigarettes my left hand, even encouraging my friends to toss objects at me unannounced (a la Cato and Clouseau)to force me to do everything with my left hand.

I failed my physical with flying colors and am proud to have taken on the military and won!!

Renee in Ohio @ 46

I’m working on a transcript over at HEP, of more of the Strickland/Blackwell debate. The only reason I started doing this is that I read a flippant article in our “alternative” newsweekly. I couldn’t respond coherently to it, but I thought at least if people had the actual text of what was discussed in the debate, maybe cooler heads could write letters to the editor. Mine would most likely be peppered with profanity at this point.

But the reason I am not diarying this is that I am in *no* freaking mood to have some “worldly” Democrat quip something to me about how Blackwell as governor is a done deal because of Diebold. (Happens *every* damn time I do write about this race.) Those remarks do *not* help–WAY too much is at stake here.

Anyway, a heads-up that I’m working on a transcript.

http://howardempowered.blogspot.com

At the beginning of the post is a link to the stupid article in the Other Paper.

I hear you. I too think defeatist remarks from “worldly” ones are insensitive to people working hard on campaigns.

@ 45…

“The Vietnam evaders are a cowardly bunch of bottom-feeders”. Should read: ‘This group of Vietnam evaders (Cheney, Rove, Bush and Weldon) are a cowardly bunch of bottom-feeders”.

Taylor Marsh @ 29

Also, I learned through a source, whom I cannot name, that Weldon was the Mayor of Deleware Cnty in the late 1970s, when he was around 30. Draft boards were controlled by county back then and the Delaware County War Board was a Republican machine back in those days. Makes you wonder if there was some sort of sweetheart deal made with Weldon. I mean, it’s not George W. Bush’s champagne unit, but making deals with country war boards was not unheard of in those days.

Is there evidence that he was consistently a Delaware County resident during the draft (not that that would have any impact on the influence question — just where to look for records)? Do we have anyone in the area who could check for Selective Service records? Even if you can’t access those, perhaps the fiches of the local newspapers – I’m almost certain they would have published the name and number of every local draftee.

Got it, Mudge. The question is why lie and why two different stories? Someone in the Pennsylvania media should ask the Weldon campaign.

okay, I am Spotlight challenged wrt adding contacts to my list for this story -

so just sent off e mails of Taylor’s post to these 2 guys

William Bender
Delco Times (Delaware County)
wbender@delcotimes.com

and

Tom Ferrick at Inquirer
tferrick@phillynews.com

go get ‘em

Taylor Marsh @ 38

Prof @ 35: Exactly, Weldon wears glasses, and could have while serving in Vietnam. So why didn’t he get drafted? Why the eyesight story?

Taylor, the Army had positions to fill that were not in Vietnam. I served in Korea during the Vietnam War. Others served in the US, Germany, etc.

And there are so many, many jobs that did not require putting on a helmet or toting a gun (although honor to those who endured that). Cook, accountant, military intelligence, military band.

My brother was in that draft. He was not drafted because of a back problem. I looked up his # and it was 125 the cut off was 195 for the first lottery (see http://www.sss.gov/lotter1.htm to look up other dates). The local draft board had lots of leeway as I recall but it took numerous hearings. I was in the next year. I had one year of student deferment before such deferments were eliminated. I remember the lottery drawing that summer (1970)and sweating it out. Fortunately I got a high # and didn’t have to go the route of CO. I went home and told my mother that I appreciated her long delivery that resulted in my birth in the early hours of March 13 (#241) – March 12 was #24. Thanks again Mom!!!

Great, great post. I so hope this becomes at least background noise now that the hoi polloi will be drawing their attention to the November election. Weldon has some ’splaining to do. As for the Memorial Day parade being a political event, what is their reasoning? Is every action that a candidate takes to be interpreted as a political event? Does this include shaving and using the toilet? Are these political acts as well.

Weldon’s a desperate wacko, and we need to keep flinging his feces back at him in case any of it sticks.

(My usual tiresome request re 41 here and 147 just below, dear patient mod. Thanks as always.)

Agreed, mui and Renee — sometimes the “worldy” pose does no one any good. I usually read it as a coping mechanism of the depressed.

Thanks Taylor, for an, as always, terrific post.
Yeah, it’s “all terror all the time,” but Rummy just somehow forgot to reinstitute the draft.

FYI
Dan Froomkin
White House Briefing Columnist
Wednesday, September 13, 2006; 1:00 ET
What’s going on inside the White House? Ask Dan Froomkin, who writes the White House Briefing column for washingtonpost.com. He’ll answer your questions, take your comments and links, and point you to coverage around the Web on Wednesday, Sept.

Going to Spotlight now.

This reminds me of the story about Mo Udall, who lost an eye in a childhood accident. He supposedly got into the Air Force by covering the same eye twice in the eye exam. The examiner never noticed.

OT, a driveby, and long. I apologize, but his just turned up in my inbox. It’s a blast email from Pat Leahy:

Today, the Republican-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee performed an amazing acrobatic feat: legislating in the dark. And like any other good circus trick, today’s feat would have been entertaining to watch, too, if the issues being debated weren’t so important.

Unfortunately, in a lock-step Republican vote, the Senate Judiciary Committee approved a bill that would grant President Bush permission to continue his warrantless domestic wiretap program, and in addition, immunize officials who have violated federal law by authorizing such illegal activities.

Believe it or not, their bill would even make the Administration’s future compliance with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) entirely optional. It would transform the FISA from a check on abusive Executive authority into a black check to the White House.

At a time when the civil rights of American citizens are already being arrogantly abridged at almost every turn in the name of national security, this new legislation empowering President Bush to circumvent the time-tested FISA court process for authorizing domestic wiretaps is the last thing we need.

And the process that got us here is pure legislating in the dark. For months we have been asking for information about the National Security Agency’s domestic spying activities. But Congress — a co-equal branch of government on par with the Executive Branch — has been stonewalled at every turn.

How many Americans have had their conversations wiretapped? How many terrorists have been identified who would otherwise have escaped detection? Why did the Bush-Cheney Administration choose not to comply with the FISA? Why did officials refuse to come to Congress for authorization? Are there other domestic spying activities being conducted behind Congress’s back, outside of the law and without court approval?

We don’t have the answers to any of these critical questions. So how can this Republican Congress cram legislation through the Judiciary Committee expanding the use of warrantless domestic wiretaps?

This is ludicrous. And it is short-sighted. And it is wrong.

As the elected representatives of the American people, Congress needs to fully understand the supposed problems that this new Republican bill is intended to address, and what the legislation would enable the government to do that it cannot do now. We also need to know the extent to which these changes would sacrifice Americans’ liberties. We should not wait to find out what the legislation means until the President’s inevitable signing statement, after it is passed.

In the absence of any other information, this Republican legislation is a solution in search of a problem. After all, the former presiding judge of the FISA court, Judge Royce Lamberth, said on May 8th that the President’s warrantless wiretapping program would “require some tweaking” to make it comport fully with FISA — the existing process for approving domestic surveillance. And a federal judge last month ruled that the Bush program is unconstitutional and illegal.

So instead of Congress amending FISA to clean up after the President — something that we’re doing completely in the dark — President Bush should “tweak” his own domestic spying program to comply with existing federal law.

That’s what I will continue fighting for in the Judiciary Committee and on the floor of the Senate. I hope you’ll stand with me.

Sincerely,

Patrick Leahy
U.S. Senator

Taylor: FYI, another piece of anecdotal evidence about draft “standards” circa 1970…

I was declared I-A, and despite being legally blind, having chronic asthma, a bad knee, a host of other health problems, being married, and having a draft lottery number in the high 250s, I was shipped with great dispatch to Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri, for basic training.

“Poor eyesight” didn’t seem to be a draft impediment for anyone I knew, in those days.

Prof @56 – Yes, I know they had many other posts to fill, other than in country. Thanks for clarifying that for others, because my comment didn’t.

Re:

My # 61

To quote Natelie Portman’s charcter in one of the Star Wars movies

“This is how democracy dies”

I am just sick over this.

I have to get a brief out, but somebody please make sure MaryForce sees this.

I ‘m gonna go have a little cry and try to get back to work.

Setting aside Weldon’s particular case, my own experience suggests that one could get a medical deferment without getting the induction physical. I had my spleen removed when I was 28 months old; it ruptured due to a blood condition that wasn’t well understood back in the early 1950s (a lot more is known about it now). My family doctor sent an explanatory letter to our local draft board and I was out of the draft. The same medical history also kept me out of the Peace Corps.

Beal (58), thanks for that link to the text that includes this sentence:

The first capsule – drawn by Congressman Alexander Pirnie (R-NY) of the House Armed Services Committee – contained the date September 14, so all men born on September 14 in any year between 1944 and 1950 were assigned lottery number 1.

As I’ve mentioned here before, I’ve never ever EVER felt so lucky to be a woman as when that news came down!

In looking at Weldon’s bio on his campaign site, I see that he was a volunteer firefighter in Marcus Hook in the early 70s and rose to the rank of Chief. Pretty good for a blind guy!

http://www.curtweldon.org/abou……cfm?ID=13

looseheadprop @ 59

OT, a driveby, and long. I apologize, but his just turned up in my inbox. It’s a blast email from Pat Leahy:

Today, the Republican-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee performed an amazing acrobatic feat: legislating in the dark. And like any other good circus trick, today’s feat would have been entertaining to watch, too, if the issues being debated weren’t so important.

Unfortunately, in a lock-step Republican vote, the Senate Judiciary Committee approved a bill that would grant President Bush permission to continue his warrantless domestic wiretap program, and in addition, immunize officials who have violated federal law by authorizing such illegal activities.

[snip]

This is ludicrous. And it is short-sighted. And it is wrong.

As the elected representatives of the American people, Congress needs to fully understand the supposed problems that this new Republican bill is intended to address, and what the legislation would enable the government to do that it cannot do now. We also need to know the extent to which these changes would sacrifice Americans’ liberties. We should not wait to find out what the legislation means until the President’s inevitable signing statement, after it is passed.

[snip]

So instead of Congress amending FISA to clean up after the President — something that we’re doing completely in the dark — President Bush should “tweak” his own domestic spying program to comply with existing federal law.

That’s what I will continue fighting for in the Judiciary Committee and on the floor of the Senate. I hope you’ll stand with me.

Sincerely,

Patrick Leahy
U.S. Senator

Hmmmm . . . does this mean a fillibuster, a concerted effort to swing some Republican votes, or is he just venting? Whatever the answer, I’m glad it has his attention!

If you get any more on this, lhp, pass it along. If Leahy needs some folks to “express their concern” to members of the Senate, I think I know where he could find some . . .

is anyone watching cspan Lieberman voted with dems.

HuffPo is reporting that today Murtha will announce a resolution for the firing of Rummy. Turn up the heat, Jack.

meta @
69

HuffPo is reporting that today Murtha will announce a resolution for the firing of Rummy. Turn up the heat, Jack.

MURTHA TO OFFER RESOLUTION CALLING FOR RUMSFELD’S RESIGNATION…

Karl Rove didn’t exactly leave college during his “junior” year. Rove stayed in college for eight (!) years. He was active for those 8 years in the Young Republicans organization, destroying people even then. He “swiftboated” the president of the organization, destroying his reputation, so he could take the office.

Patrick Leahy!

Nelson NE– votes with the thugs
Pryor AK– ”

Jeffords votes with the dems
gosh, Lieberloser voted with the dems! I think his relationship is hurtin’ with his chairwoman Ms. Collins and I guess a kiss is just a kiss after all. hahaha

lhp @ 64– I am watching the same “lockstep monster” voting on the Reid Amendment– with a little DINO help. It’s incredibly sad and I wish more Americans would even watch a vote like this and really understand what it means to have not one check and balance left. ;(

In 1970 my draft # was 11, I was horrified. My student deferment was over in 1971 and I received my draft notice. My bags were packed for Canada and in desperation I signed every National Guard list I could find, the lists were hundreds of people long. On April 26th 1971 I walked into the armory in Niagara Falls and asked where I could sign the list. There were 11 recruits standing at attention in the anter room and the Captain asked me if I could spare 10 minutes. He said they called 12 men from the list and only 11 showed up. For the next 10 years I proudly served in the army national guard and army reserves. Those were desperate times that pale to today’s problems. Thanks for the opportunity to vent. I respect anyone who is HONEST about those those days no matter what course they chose.

Weldon also claims to have lived his whole life in his PA district, if that helps.

Rove is at it again. The latest hoped for victim, and perhaps his most important victim, is to be Rep. Nancy Pelosi.

Rove’s latest nasty deceit MUST be stopped.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13561823/

“Today, the Senate Judiciary Committee acted as a rubber stamp for the administration’s abuse of power,” said Caroline Fredrickson, Director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office. “Congress has a right and obligation to conduct meaningful oversight on the unlawful actions of the president. But instead of investigating lawbreaking, the Senate Judiciary Committee wants to make it legal. We urge the full Senate to reject any attempts to ratify this illegal program.”

http://www.aclu.org/safefree/n…..60913.html

REPEAT AFTER ME: It’s called swiftboating. Rove is simply going to swiftboat Nancy Pelosi and every other Democrat. It’s what they do best.

*ooabby @ 73

In 1970 my draft # was 11…

I thought you were a girl.

Spotlighted these PA media so far.

Randy Parker : News Editor : York Daily Record
Sue Jones : News Editor : Pittsburgh Tribune-Review
Gloria Ruane : News Editor : Tribune-Review
Brooke Nelson : News Director : WPTS 92.1 FM (Univ. of Pittsburgh)
Nick English : News Director : WPHB 1260 AM
Jim Penna : News Director : WWCP (Fox 8)
Jim DePury : News Director : WPMT (Fox 43)
Greg Zoerb : News Director : WHP (CBS-21)
Brad Rinehart : News Director : WFMZ-TV (Ch. 69)
Pat Maday : News Director : WPXI (NBC-11)

Liz Rogers : Managing Editor – News : Observer-Reporter
James Burchik : Editorial Page Editor : Lancaster New Era
Randy Montgomery : News Editor : Lancaster New Era
Glenn Kranzley : Opinion Page Editor : Morning Call
Chris Satullo : Editor of the Editorial Page : Philadelphia Inquirer
Dale Davenport : Editorial Page Editor : Patriot-News
Jack Kelly : National Security Writer : Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
James O’Toole : Political Editor : Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Tom Waseleski : Editorial Page Editor : Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Roberta Shorrock : Director : National Public Radio (NPR)

Weldon is Ass-Stick-Matic

twolf1 @ 70

meta @
69

HuffPo is reporting that today Murtha will announce a resolution for the firing of Rummy. Turn up the heat, Jack.

MURTHA TO OFFER RESOLUTION CALLING FOR RUMSFELD’S RESIGNATION…

OK, I LOVE LOVE LOVE Jack Murtha. He is a stand up guy. But this is just dombshit stoopid timing.

NO Jack, this is no time to lose focus. The ONLY THINGS Dems should eb doing right now are things diecrtly related toi winning elections and things diretcly related to stopping really evil legislation or other power grabs.

Firing Rummy now diminishes or chances in Nov. because it acts as a saftey valve relieving pressure that has built up.

Also, it wastes politcal capiatal and energy and time that could be spent on the Gutting of the War crimes Act or the nuetering of the FISA courts.

Jack, Let’s take back Congres, then you fire anyboday you want–or impeach them.

Just not now, Jack.

Not now

John Casper, you get a Citizen Hero Award this morning!

Renee in Ohio @ 46

I’m working on a transcript over at HEP, of more of the Strickland/Blackwell debate. The only reason I started doing this is that I read a flippant article in our “alternative” newsweekly. I couldn’t respond coherently to it, but I thought at least if people had the actual text of what was discussed in the debate, maybe cooler heads could write letters to the editor. Mine would most likely be peppered with profanity at this point.

But the reason I am not diarying this is that I am in *no* freaking mood to have some “worldly” Democrat quip something to me about how Blackwell as governor is a done deal because of Diebold. (Happens *every* damn time I do write about this race.) Those remarks do *not* help–WAY too much is at stake here.

Anyway, a heads-up that I’m working on a transcript.

http://howardempowered.blogspot.com

At the beginning of the post is a link to the stupid article in the Other Paper.

Go for it, Renee! Our “The Other Paper” is a truly, truly stupid alternative for those of us in the Columbus, Ohio area. We have The Free Press edited by Bob Fitrakis which would serve us better, were it better distributed. http://www.freepress.org/index2.php

op99 @ 79

*ooabby @ 73

In 1970 my draft # was 11…

I thought you were a girl.

Sorry to disappoint you op *ooabby is the combined name of my 2 best pups *oody and abby.

{{{{{blushing}}}}}

Stev Gilliard has posted a great ad from Sen-Va race. If these types of ads continue, Allen is toast.

Oklahoma kiddo @ 76

Rove is at it again. The latest hoped for victim, and perhaps his most important victim, is to be Rep. Nancy Pelosi.

Rove’s latest nasty deceit MUST be stopped.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13561823/

Maybe Nancy’ll put impeachment back on the table?

By the way, Weldon speaks Russian fluently. He earned a B.A. in Russian Studies in 1969. He could have served as a translator or military intelligence “lingie” (linguist) listening to voice intercepts or a “ditty bopper” (listening to Morse code communications) if he had gone into the military. Or with his language adeptness, he could have been sent to the U.S. Army’s language school in Monterey and then to Vietnam to interrogate prisoners of war.

Maybe it’s just as well for the country’s tattered reputation that he chickened out instead.

OT – High-level Verizon exec. is ex-official who long-argued for more surveillance

One of the highest-level executives at Verizon Communications—one of three major telecommunications firms originally alleged to be providing the National Security Agency with customer phone records under contract and without a warrant—has strong, decades-long ties to Central Intelligence, Congress and the Department of Justice, RAW STORY has learned.

I know his eyesight is fine because I know a woman who worked in an old Fotomat booth in the
Barclay Square Shopping Center in Upper Darby PA where Weldon has an office.

He used to creep her out by sitting in his car across the lot and staring at her. Gave her the willies, and there is no doubt that is what he was doing.

Weldon has also been doing push-polls in Delware County basically slandering the hell of Sestak.
Disgraceful Moony creep.

lhp/Sen. Leahy at 61 How many Americans have had their conversations wiretapped?

ALL OF THEM. They have voice prints, and search the phone conversations of EVERYONE looking for people on The Bad List.

This is why they couldn’t get FISA court approval. Plus wiretapping journalists, members of Congress, and political opponents and dissenters. It’s the American way.

I sure am glad that only criminals get put onto The Bad List.

almost forgot all about the ‘Moon is God’ crap

enjoy!

http://www.swingstateproject.c…..eldo_1.php

OT – Bush to hold talks on Ali G creator after diplomatic row

US President George Bush is to host White House talks on British comedian Sacha Baron Cohen.

Cohen, 35, creator of Ali G, has infuriated the Kazakhstan government with his portrayal of Borat, a bumbling Kazakh TV presenter.

And now a movie of Borat’s adventures in the US has caused a diplomatic incident.

Warning – scary Borat bathing suit picture.

Good to see our tax dollars being put to good use.

lotus says:
September 13th, 2006 at 8:47 am *

Limits to Surveillance Bill Blocked

Filed at 11:30 a.m. ET

WASHINGTON (AP) — Senate Republicans blocked Democratic attempts to rein in President Bush’s domestic wiretapping program Wednesday amid a sustained White House campaign to give the administration broad authority to monitor, interrogate and prosecute terrorism suspects.

While refusing to give the president a blank check to prosecute the war on terrorism, Republicans in the Senate Judiciary Committee kept to the White House’s condition that a bill giving legal status to the surveillance program pass unamended.

By voice vote and roll calls, Republicans defeated Democratic amendments to insert a one-year expiration date into the bill and require the National Security Agency to report more often to Congress on the standards for its domestic surveillance program.

More at http://www.nytimes.com/aponlin…..orism.html

I read the Specter Bill last night. long link

http://64.233.187.104/search?q…..071406.pdf Electronic surveillance bill&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1&client=firefox-a

I haven’t read FISA nor do I read legal stuff. I also caught about thirty minutes of the House Judiciary Committee discussing their version of electronic surveillance bill yesterday and I have questions. It sounds very bad in it’s intent and of course there is a huge rush on all of this in both the House and Senate.
Are these bills not Presidential push for the big CYA on illegal surveillance? Surveillance that should remain illegal and certainly illegal activities the President should be held accountable for? Isn’t this one of the elephants stomping on our constitution? Isn’t this what they want Disney movies to distract us from?

From the Specter Bill
Anyone who is granted authority by the president only needs significant(?)

“(B) that a significant purpose of the surveillance is to obtain foreign intelligence information (pg. 14 line 17)

Establishes or reenforces Presidents authority to designate officials (anyone?) and or AG powers that will supercede the FISA Court. WTF?
Isn’t this where AG can force anyone, telcos , banks and internet providers to become agents of the state without oversight from FISA?
Looks like (on page 13 line 15, 21) One year warrants would be able to be extended for 1 year at a time indefinately by any authorized person and again without FISA.

egregious @ 92

lhp/Sen. Leahy at 61 How many Americans have had their conversations wiretapped?

ALL OF THEM. They have voice prints, and search the phone conversations of EVERYONE looking for people on The Bad List.

This is why they couldn’t get FISA court approval. Plus wiretapping journalists, members of Congress, and political opponents and dissenters. It’s the American way.

I sure am glad that only criminals get put onto The Bad List.

EG

I just cannot believe this is happening. We are turning our backs on the Geneva Conventions and codifying warentless domestic spying. I watched the house hearings last week on CSPAN. ANd the Genral Counsel from NSA kept going ona and on about how EVREYTHING the NSA listens to is REQUIRED BY LAW to be subject to minimization.
He was pressed on this point be several Congressmen, including Reps, and finally when they asked for the name/section number of the “law”, he fianlly admitted it was only be executive order.

The entire committee looked thinderstruck, that this man would mislead them this way. Finally one Congressman (I think he may have been a Rep, too) said, “You mean an executive order that the president can reverse with just the stroke of his pen?”

I had a glimmer of hope then, tha sanity might have seeped onto Capial Hill.

I am sick over this. Sick.

I cannot imagine how MaryForce is gonna feel.

Sorry, I see lhp is on it @ #61, thank goodness!

Oh ye gods, y’all!

High-level Verizon exec. [BILL BARR!] long-argued for more surveillance

Mod, please help me at 41, 60, 68 here and 147 below.

Taylor Marsh @
22

…petedownunder – Bingo. Those were bad days and everyone older I knew wanted out of the draft. It’s when you start swiftboating veterans who served honorably that raises my antenna.

Taylor and petedownunder,

There’s another factor here besides current swiftboating, and that’s hypocrisy, then and now. I came of age in the ’60’s and decided early on that because of my opposition to the Vietnam War (not all wars, this one, on moral grounds) I would go to jail or Canada before taking up arms against Vietnamese. (I got lucky – turning 18 just as the draft ended – but I didn’t say one thing and do another.)

But I have a problem with the aptly named chickenhawks who said, “Ooo good war… but someone else can go fight it.” And who now say, “Oooo, another good war… but someone else can go fight it.” Swiftboating, of course, is yet another reason to hold these men to account, but the heart of the issue for me is that they are hypocritical saber rattlers who won’t join the charge.

My DOB is 9/3/50. My lottery number was 49. I graduated college in spring of ‘72 upon which I immediately lost my student deferment. I took the Army physical, passed and was re-classified 1-A. My eyesight has always been lousy, but it was correctable with glasses. No 4-F (defermennt for physical reasons) for me.

If Weldon was passed over because of poor eyesight, then he should be able to attest to a 4-F classification. There’s no way someone his age would still have had a student deferment in 1970 The full story of Weldon’s draft avoidance is obviously not being told.

BTW, several months after being reclassified 1-A, I applied for and received conscientious objector status. The draft ended in March of ‘73 before I was ever called for alternative service.

lhp at 96– I watched the House hearing yesterday evening and Bruce Fein and Kate Martin were so angry I thought they were gonna jump over the witness table and choke somebod(ies). The boobs from the govt were thoroughly unhelpful and “unprepared” to answer anything.

Eureka Springs, AR @ 95

lotus says:
September 13th, 2006 at 8:47 am *

Limits to Surveillance Bill Blocked

Filed at 11:30 a.m. ET

WASHINGTON (AP) — Senate Republicans blocked Democratic attempts to rein in President Bush’s domestic wiretapping program Wednesday amid a sustained White House campaign to give the administration broad authority to monitor, interrogate and prosecute terrorism suspects.

While refusing to give the president a blank check to prosecute the war on terrorism, Republicans in the Senate Judiciary Committee kept to the White House’s condition that a bill giving legal status to the surveillance program pass unamended.

By voice vote and roll calls, Republicans defeated Democratic amendments to insert a one-year expiration date into the bill and require the National Security Agency to report more often to Congress on the standards for its domestic surveillance program.

More at http://www.nytimes.com/aponlin…..orism.html

I read the Specter Bill last night. long link

http://64.233.187.104/search?q…..071406.pdf Electronic surveillance bill&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1&client=firefox-a

I haven’t read FISA nor do I read legal stuff. I also caught about thirty minutes of the House Judiciary Committee discussing their version of electronic surveillance bill yesterday and I have questions. It sounds very bad in it’s intent and of course there is a huge rush on all of this in both the House and Senate.
Are these bills not Presidential push for the big CYA on illegal surveillance? Surveillance that should remain illegal and certainly illegal activities the President should be held accountable for? Isn’t this one of the elephants stomping on our constitution? Isn’t this what they want Disney movies to distract us from?

From the Specter Bill
Anyone who is granted authority by the president only needs significant(?)

“(B) that a significant purpose of the surveillance is to obtain foreign intelligence information (pg. 14 line 17)

Establishes or reenforces Presidents authority to designate officials (anyone?) and or AG powers that will supercede the FISA Court. WTF?
Isn’t this where AG can force anyone, telcos , banks and internet providers to become agents of the state without oversight from FISA?
Looks like (on page 13 line 15, 21) One year warrants would be able to be extended for 1 year at a time indefinately by any authorized person and again without FISA.

You don’t need a law degree. You hit it roight on the head. I HAVE read FISA and the PAtriot Act. I am passingly, though not sufficently, familiar with th einternal agency rules for FISA warrant applications and National Security Letter authorizations.

YOU ARE CORRECT.

Eureka Springs, AR @ 97

Sorry, I see lhp is on it @ #61, thank goodness!

No, I’m not on it. I am almost paralyzed with disbelief.

ot, I’m sorry

raw is breakng the story, air america is about to declare banckruptcy

I am SO upset, I LOVE randy rhoese, franken, cedar, and man, it’s going to be TOUGH to take the right wing hosts polishing their nails

i feel like I got kicked in the stomach

Percy – Exactly right. I’m getting emails galore on this one. Some say it’s possible that Weldon had deferments. That’s one of the reasons I chose the graphic I did. It still doesn’t answer the question on why he changed his story to having bad eyesight as the reason Uncle Sam wouldn’t take him.

Was Weldon ashamed of his deferments after the furor over the chickenhawks supporting the Iraq war? Or did Weldon come up with the bad eyesight story because Sestak’s veteran status made him feel like a punk?

Either way, the changing story needs to be rectified. Pennsylvania deserves to know the truth.

angie @ 73

Nelson NE– votes with the thugs
Pryor AK– ”

angie – I am not near a television. What bill did Lieberlovin’ Pryor Ark (once again) vote with Republicans? He is about to get a call from me on Elec. Surveillance.

Senator Byrd railing at bushco on cspan if you want to see somebody vent.

Some would argue that the best way to stop the Republicans from “swiftboating” would be, (assuming a Democratic majority will take over the Congress in January), for John Conyers, ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, to commence an impeachment inquiry. It might, among other things force Rove, Cheney and the rest to become too preoccupied to engage so heavily in ’swifting’ and character assassination. Of course an inquiry’s main benefit, in terms of slowing or halting Republican swiftboating, would help Democrats only in the 2008 elections.

Eureka Springs, AR @ 105

angie @ 73

Nelson NE– votes with the thugs
Pryor AK– ”

angie – I am not near a television. What bill did Lieberlovin’ Pryor Ark (once again) vote with Republicans? He is about to get a call from me on Elec. Surveillance.

the Reid amendment cited above in my 48.

Weldon graduated from college in June 69 (as I did). Teaching deferments were huge at the time; I got one here in Baltimore, along with many other recent male college grads. (The first draft lottery was conducted in December 1969. Weldon didn’t have a lottery number at the time that he graduated.) In theory, you were supposed to teach grade school in the inner city, but each draft board made its own judgments. There was no uniform policy.

A Washington Post chart from 10/13/92 seems to say that Weldon had student and teaching deferments. (As rendered by Nexis, it’s a bit hard to decipher.) His congressional bio says that he became a teacher after graduating from college.

I would guess that he may have gotten a teaching deferment in 9/69. It would sound better to say that he tried to sign up, but his eyesight got in the way. I don’t know what’s true here, however. I would only suggest that this be pursued because Weldon played the game in 2004 concerning Kerry’s military history. Again: I don’t know what the truth is.

looseheadprop @ 103

Eureka Springs, AR @ 97

Sorry, I see lhp is on it @ #61, thank goodness!

No, I’m not on it. I am almost paralyzed with disbelief.

I have to calm way down before I call Pryor. Even though this move was certain I am just sick.

I feel like sending a ‘death notice’ to all the Dems in congress, and in particular the DINOs, for the Constitution (survived by the progressives of the country).

Somehow I doubt they’d understand.

angie @ 101

lhp at 96– I watched the House hearing yesterday evening and Bruce Fein and Kate Martin were so angry I thought they were gonna jump over the witness table and choke somebod(ies). The boobs from the govt were thoroughly unhelpful and “unprepared” to answer anything.

The NSA General Counsel, by all accounts a very bright man, just spun like a top and got caught red ahnded in something that looked an awful lot like a lie.

He kept harping on, in fact, it was a centrl theme of all his arguments, that NSA was required by law to do minimization.

It was very plain he wanted them to think he meant “by statute” when he said “by law”, not an Executive Order.

I view of the fact that the President went and issued Ex.Orders. that apparently overturned stautes apssed by Congress with respect to the power to classify and declassify, you can see why this is a huge distinction.

looseheadprop @ 96

EG

I just cannot believe this is happening. We are turning our backs on the Geneva Conventions and codifying warentless domestic spying. I watched the house hearings last week on CSPAN. ANd the Genral Counsel from NSA kept going ona and on about how EVREYTHING the NSA listens to is REQUIRED BY LAW to be subject to minimization.

He was pressed on this point be several Congressmen, including Reps, and finally when they asked for the name/section number of the “law”, he fianlly admitted it was only be executive order.

The entire committee looked thinderstruck, that this man would mislead them this way. Finally one Congressman (I think he may have been a Rep, too) said, “You mean an executive order that the president can reverse with just the stroke of his pen?”

I had a glimmer of hope then, tha sanity might have seeped onto Capial Hill.

I am sick over this. Sick.

I cannot imagine how MaryForce is gonna feel.

Pissed.

Pissed pissed pissed. Angry. I’ve been depressed, I’ve been trying to focus on CW issues, I’ve been this and that – but now I am just damn the consequences angry.

I have work I have to get out too, but between the commissions legislation and this – I am so angry I can’t wait to devote my spare moments to letters to the editors, rants to anyone I can rant to, and calling a spade a spade.

I’ve had some sympathy for the overall situation – how do you address it without putting people who were trying to do the right thing in jeopardy. Now I don’t give a damn. If they are willing to work with this kind of knife to the juglar of America – they damn well deserve to go down with their sodden mass of twisted metal they want to fantasize into a ship of state.

It absolutely shows why Judge Taylor was right in her approach despite the mewlings of the “she shouldn’t have dealt with the Constitutional issues when she had FISA as her slam dunk” spit kittens. Bc, idiots, it was never ever ever ever going to come to anything less than the Constitutional issues.

I would only suggest that this be pursued because Weldon played the game in 2004 concerning Kerry’s military history. Again: I don’t know what the truth is.

Thanks for putting this up here, Bob @ 113. I posted your email to me on my blog as well. We don’t know the truth and we need to get to the bottom of it, because it’s obvious that Weldon isn’t going to come clean without pressure.

Oklahoma kiddo @ 108

Some would argue that the best way to stop the Republicans from “swiftboating” would be, (assuming a Democratic majority will take over the Congress in January), for John Conyers, ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, to commence an impeachment inquiry. It might, among other things force Rove, Cheney and the rest to become too preoccupied to engage so heavily in ’swifting’ and character assassination. Of course an inquiry’s main benefit, in terms of slowing or halting Republican swiftboating, would help Democrats only in the 2008 elections.

The trial starts in January. They will all be preocupied anyway.

I hope Christy is watching she will be soooo proud of Byrd, Clinton also came out swinging.

Steve @ 90

Stev Gilliard has posted a great ad from Sen-Va race. If these types of ads continue, Allen is toast.

Not only that, but Allen has now made the jump Jane explained to in “Damned If You Do, Damned If You Don’t”, according to the Hampton Roads Pilot (via TPM.) He spoke to black voters expressing regret over his infatuation with the Confederate flag. It’ll be interesting to see how his wingnut base divides between those who accept that it was necessary, those who are pissed because he’s trying to distance himself from the neo-confederates, and those who are pissed because he’s being an opportunist at their expense.

(Obviously he’s trying to put and end to “macaca” and save his presidential ambitions, at the expense of yet another round of newspaper articles mentioning how he used to keep a noose hanging from a plant in his office. It’ll be interesting to see how that plays out, too.)

speechless.

I don’t recognize these cowards as my countrymen.

Mary @ 114

looseheadprop @ 96

EG

I just cannot believe this is happening. We are turning our backs on the Geneva Conventions and codifying warentless domestic spying. I watched the house hearings last week on CSPAN. ANd the Genral Counsel from NSA kept going ona and on about how EVREYTHING the NSA listens to is REQUIRED BY LAW to be subject to minimization.

He was pressed on this point be several Congressmen, including Reps, and finally when they asked for the name/section number of the “law”, he fianlly admitted it was only be executive order.

The entire committee looked thinderstruck, that this man would mislead them this way. Finally one Congressman (I think he may have been a Rep, too) said, “You mean an executive order that the president can reverse with just the stroke of his pen?”

I had a glimmer of hope then, tha sanity might have seeped onto Capial Hill.

I am sick over this. Sick.

I cannot imagine how MaryForce is gonna feel.

Pissed.

Pissed pissed pissed. Angry. I’ve been depressed, I’ve been trying to focus on CW issues, I’ve been this and that – but now I am just damn the consequences angry.

I have work I have to get out too, but between the commissions legislation and this – I am so angry I can’t wait to devote my spare moments to letters to the editors, rants to anyone I can rant to, and calling a spade a spade.

I’ve had some sympathy for the overall situation – how do you address it without putting people who were trying to do the right thing in jeopardy. Now I don’t give a damn. If they are willing to work with this kind of knife to the juglar of America – they damn well deserve to go down with their sodden mass of twisted metal they want to fantasize into a ship of state.

It absolutely shows why Judge Taylor was right in her approach despite the mewlings of the “she shouldn’t have dealt with the Constitutional issues when she had FISA as her slam dunk” spit kittens. Bc, idiots, it was never ever ever ever going to come to anything less than the Constitutional issues.

Mary,
Send Redd an email. Ask her to give you the NJ Attorney General’s brief. She’ll know which one.

Maybe it will cheer you up

me to me @ #103 – Bankruptcy doesn’t necessarily mean they would go off-air, they’d just re-organize their finances.

immanentize @ 120

speechless.

I don’t recognize these cowards as my countrymen.

IMM

You know, I try to keep my eye on the ball, which (usually) is the Nov. elections. All the other stuff can wait till afte then.

It’s just there are so many balls. It’s like one of those tennis ball cannons, run amouk. As fast as I swat at one, five more balls come pelting at me.

Why are we always playing DEFENSE!!!!

The last time I called Senator Pryors office about electronic surveillance I quickly found the gentleman on the phone defending the R. party line and told him something along the line of I don’t even agree with most of what I understand about FISA in terms of open oversight and here I am pleading for just that basic illusion. Follow and stand behind current law.

Anne @ 117

test

Anne, hello, we’ve been missing you. OMG. This. Mary, lhp, all, how can I help?

It’s sad to say, but if anyone knows any criminal defense attorneys, preferably, pubic defenders, they maybe a great place to get traction on the castration of the 4th Amendment, per Maryforce in a comment about a month ago. The new defense is “my coke snorting crime boss told me to, it’s not my fault, I was just following orders.”
When the D.A. objects the attorney can point to the Shrub’s executive orders.

FWIW, the FULL text of the 4th Amendment:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

He kept harping on, in fact, it was a centrl theme of all his arguments, that NSA was required by law to do minimization.

It was very plain he wanted them to think he meant “by statute” when he said “by law”, not an Executive Order.

I view of the fact that the President went and issued Ex.Orders. that apparently overturned stautes apssed by Congress with respect to the power to classify and declassify, you can see why this is a huge distinction.

That is exactly what they mean by “law” – Executive Order. IF– IF– IF– they were following FISA and getting warrants, there would be some independent confirmation via the application certifications; with no warrants, no following of statute – how is it the “law” that they minimize and in whose view have the minimized and what is even contemplated by them as minimization?

And IF — IF– IF– they are doing what they say and putting together minimization procedures for every call — just like with FISA — WTF is with saying “FISA hard, we need ez”????

Liars. They should lose their licenses in a heartbeat.

And now you have a President who has covertly engaged in lawbreaking and in commissioning felonies throughout the Executive Branch and Congress is going to say, “well, ok, let’s just give you a pat on the back for that”

Excuse me??

You know, they had a big problem – one that needed to be addressed. Bc the problem does, indeed, become “what do you do”? They are so worried about the political fall out from taking a measured response to that problem, that they have sat back and opted to PLACATE and APPEASE the criminal use of Government against its own citizens.

It’s like playing defense without the protection of any checks and balances and the Democratic leadership most of the time.

Sorta like playing football without shoes, helmet, protective gear or a pigskin in mud during a sleet storm in 36 degree weather.

My God in Heaven, the Congress of the United States is fully loaded with out-and-out traitors.

What we’ve seen before has been bad — awful — outageous — whatever you want to call it. But what we’re seeing today is so abjectly treasonous that I can’t imagine what’s come of their minds.

John Dean, do you see this?

They have piled onto the bus and they’re driving it right over us!

GOD DAMN THESE VILE TRAITORS.

looseheadprop @ 122

immanentize @ 120

speechless.

I don’t recognize these cowards as my countrymen.

IMM

You know, I try to keep my eye on the ball, which (usually) is the Nov. elections. All the other stuff can wait till afte then.

It’s just there are so many balls. It’s like one of those tennis ball cannons, run amouk. As fast as I swat at one, five more balls come pelting at me.

Why are we always playing DEFENSE!!!!

Because we are only beginning to control the ‘means of production’.

The nasty little secret of all men that hit draft age during Vietnam is that everybody had a strategy to deal with the draft. Our current batch of wing-nuts provide the litany of those strategies…’
1) Get a friendly doctor to find a medical problem (Rush Limbaugh, Pat Buchanan). This was the most popular out for the wealthy. Needless to say if your family wasn’t close to a Doctor, it would be hard to convince one to put up with Federal scrutiny for a regular patient.

2) Join a Guard unit. The Vietnam era Guard was not well integrated into the regular service and not likely to be called up. These units all had waiting lists and you generally needed family connections to get in. ( Bush, Quayle)

3) Use the deferment system. This was eliminated for anyone entering college after 1970 but if you were in before that you were under the older rules. You generally limited to 1- 4 year deferment for college but people became experts at gaming the system. This again was an out for the wealthy, you had to be able to stay in grad-school indefinitely. (Cheney)

4)Apply for Conscientious Objector Status. In a time when your draft status was a standard employment application question, this was considered the kiss of death for future employment in the mainstream. The few people that went through this process were generally held in awe by the rest of us. (Clinton)

lhp – isn’t there a problem with Christy’s FDL email?

Is it on Pacer or are they in State court? I’m assuming this is one of the State subpoena cases?

Damn I’m mad.

********
You’re right – we are constantly on defense. And there is so much right now too- appeals in the 9th to the ruling there, appeals in the 6th to the ruling there, slew of District COurt cases for the habeas petitioners where GOV is claiming Hamdan doesn’t mean what it says it meant (and btw – wont’ it be lovely to have Keisler take Robert’s old seat and link little pinkies with Kavanaugh when the GITMO cases work their way up?) legislation seeking to circumvent the Torture Act, War Crimes Act, Uniform Code of Military Justice, Law of War and even the Constitution -

All in a speed up verison before they lose the House.

Jane Harman – who HAS BEEN BRIEFED on the program has a perfectly good bill out there to address what needs to be done going forward. But that means no embrace of prior felonies.

Susan in Iowa @ 60

This reminds me of the story about Mo Udall, who lost an eye in a childhood accident. He supposedly got into the Air Force by covering the same eye twice in the eye exam. The examiner never noticed.

In October, ‘65, I was a student at Oberlin. A good friend from HS was killed in the Mekong Delta when his USMC unit was ambushed. When I found out, I got drunk and sent my 2-S deferment card to my local board back in Seattle. A couple of days later, I wrote to them, asking to send my card back. They didn’t. When I got my call to report for a physical, I went in.

I had rheumatic fever when I was a kid and had suffered significant hearing loss from it. But by the time I reported for the physical, I’d decided to serve. I failed the hearing test. They ordered me to report to Ft. Lewis to re-take the test. When I took the test again, I just kept pressing the “I hear something” button all the time. The guy testing me said afterward, “Boy, you’ve got some good ears!”

I went in and served for two years. After I got out, I helped the Seattle Office of the American Friends’ Service Committee smuggle draft dodgers who were out on bail (after having been arrested for failing to report) into Canada on fishing boats.

Weldon’s a lying sack of shit. There is a record of his physical somewhere, and he should be pressured very hard to allow the release of all information about his actions after his lottery status was determined.

I agree it’s very bad, but it’s not yet as bad as George Washington and the Continental Army starving at Valley Forge, PA in 1776. We owe it to all those who gave their lives for freedom to keep our heads and make good decisions. The first step is to get the facts out. We’re doing that. The second step is to DELAY, DELAY, DELAY until after the midterms, which we also must win, both houses. We have to continue to support people like Leahy, Feingold, Murtha, Conyers, Waters, Boxer,….and others who get it. The third step is to impeach Bush and strike down his Executive Orders and Signing statements…….

here’s a link to the NSA talking points:

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2….._0913.html

HotFlash @ 125

Anne @ 117

test

Anne, hello, we’ve been missing you. OMG. This. Mary, lhp, all, how can I help?

We know the drill. We all know the drill..

Call, write, email, letter to the editor.

I sent Christy an email with the NJ Atty Gen’ls new brief in opposition to DOJ’s attempt to shut down her investigation into whether NJ Telcoms violated NJ consumer law, if they gave the NSA the info.

Creative, no? Instead of trying to move in NJ state court to quash her (the Atty Gen is a her)subpeonas, DOJ sued her in fed court

wait for it

it’s a doozy

For an INJUCTION FORBIDDING HER TO CONTINUE HER CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION.

You just can’t make this stuff up.

I sent it to Christy this AM in case she needed fodder for a post. Should such a post emerge( maybe including the war crimes act stuff and today’s legislation), I’m thinking huge spotlight campaign.

Where the hell is hte defense bar on this????

looseheadprop @ 119

Oklahoma kiddo @ 108

Some would argue that the best way to stop the Republicans from “swiftboating” would be, (assuming a Democratic majority will take over the Congress in January), for John Conyers, ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, to commence an impeachment inquiry. It might, among other things force Rove, Cheney and the rest to become too preoccupied to engage so heavily in ’swifting’ and character assassination. Of course an inquiry’s main benefit, in terms of slowing or halting Republican swiftboating, would help Democrats only in the 2008 elections.

The trial starts in January. They will all be preocupied anyway.

Yes that is a good point. But might not it be a good idea to have spare tire in the tool trunk so to speak, in the form of an impeachment inquiry? And of course, one could perhaps view an inquiry as a possible service to justice. My attitude would be to hit the Republicans as hard as can be. And on as many fronts as possible. The more distractions; the better.

Jane Harmon certainly looks like she embraced her recent wake up call with the right stuff. I will send her a kind note.

I think this is the bill Mary mentioned.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:H.R. 5371:

P J Evans — Wow. You know, that might get their attention.

Wish the Roots Project could do this, hand deliver Sympathy cards with a mock newspaper snipping of an obituary for our democracy.

“So very sorry to share with you the loss of our beloved American Democracy.”

Born: July 4, 1776
Deceased: The day you failed to do your job and stop the Executive Office from pulling the plug and let them spy on every citizen in contravention to the Fourth Amendment.

Send them, one from each one of us, to every gawddamned member of Congress — not just Dems.

For anyone who might Spotlight, include DE in your choices. The listings come up for the Wilmington News Journal. Weldon’s district I believe goes down to DE state line. Wilmington is a short hop over the border.

Delco (Delaware County, PA) and DE are joined in a lot ways business wise. Also, a lot of people drive a short distance from DelCo to DE to save on sales tax.

Have had no time to catch up on anything…spent 17 hours on duty as an election judge in the MD primary yesterday, and woke up at 4:30 with a migraine that felt worse if I sat or lay down, so spent a couple hours just standing up or pacing around the house before finally catching an extra hour or so of sleep befor dragging myself into work today…

Good news is that Cardin got the Democratic Senate nomination, so I think he stands an excellent chance of keeping that seat blue!

Donna Edwards was so close to a win in her race, with only 2,000 votes bewteen herself and Albert Wynn. Hope Al got the message loud and clear.

Will try to get up to speed by tomorrow – migraine permitting!

John Casper # 137,

I agree on delay. House and Senate can be brought to a standstill by procedural votes if the Democrats want to use them. And then there is always the filibuster. I am not in general optimistic about Democrats using aggressive tactics but with them smelling success in the November elections perhaps this is the time.

lhp @135 – Forbidding her to continue her criminal investigation?

WHAT?

I think she should petition for NJ to block their right to practice in the State for interference with a criminal investigation.

Mary @ 127

He kept harping on, in fact, it was a centrl theme of all his arguments, that NSA was required by law to do minimization.

It was very plain he wanted them to think he meant “by statute” when he said “by law”, not an Executive Order.

I view of the fact that the President went and issued Ex.Orders. that apparently overturned stautes apssed by Congress with respect to the power to classify and declassify, you can see why this is a huge distinction.

That is exactly what they mean by “law” – Executive Order. IF– IF– IF– they were following FISA and getting warrants, there would be some independent confirmation via the application certifications; with no warrants, no following of statute – how is it the “law” that they minimize and in whose view have the minimized and what is even contemplated by them as minimization?

And IF — IF– IF– they are doing what they say and putting together minimization procedures for every call — just like with FISA — WTF is with saying “FISA hard, we need ez”????

Liars. They should lose their licenses in a heartbeat.

And now you have a President who has covertly engaged in lawbreaking and in commissioning felonies throughout the Executive Branch and Congress is going to say, “well, ok, let’s just give you a pat on the back for that”

Excuse me??

You know, they had a big problem – one that needed to be addressed. Bc the problem does, indeed, become “what do you do”? They are so worried about the political fall out from taking a measured response to that problem, that they have sat back and opted to PLACATE and APPEASE the criminal use of Government against its own citizens.

I think, but cannot prove, that it’s not just minimization, it has more to do with probable cause.

I know the public thinks that the fact that so few FISA warrant applications have been rejected means that the FISA court is some kind of rubber stamp. It’s all secret, so you could be right and i will never know.

I do know, that because it will never reviewed, that FBI and the USAOs think that they have to do a super better job than normal to make double sure they have probable cause (or at least that’s how it was–I think it still is).

Having a FISA warrant rejected, is virtually a career killer. It takes an agent out of the field, for good. So, they work very hard to make the application bulletproof to even the most sceptical judge.

That’s what Bush is trying to gut. The pushback from career civil servants who just want to do the right thing and obey the law. he is trying to take away their “cover” for obeying the law

Froomkin weighs in on wiretapping bill in his chat today:

Arlington, Va.: Hi Dan, and thanks for taking my question! I’m stunned that with the presidents extremely low approval rating, and the fact that many Republicans seem to have an uphill fight for re-election, that the White House still seems to have so much sway over Congress. I’m referring to the Wire Taping bill that just made it through Senate committee. What happened to Warner’s version? And has Specter completely caved in on this issue (he seemed to fight it at first, then mostly went with the administration, defending it in an op-ed in the Post).

Dan Froomkin: I think the answer lies here:

As Jonathan Weisman wrote in The Post today about wiretaping action on the House side: “Republican leaders, in the midst of an increasingly angry attack on Democrats over defense matters, made it clear that they will not challenge President Bush’s authority in matters of national security as they challenge their opponents’ commitment to fighting terrorism.”

In other words, it’s not so much that they are doing whatever Bush wants, it’s that they’re doing whatever they think will most likely preserve their majority status.

As for Specter, if this isn’t caving, I don’t know what is.

Shorter version: “Protecting the Republican Majority” trumps “Protecting the Republic.” Like that’s a surprise, after the last six years.

(If you follow the link to the chat, Dan links to the Jonathan Weisman piece there.)

Rayne @ 141:
Don’t forget the date. I was going to say, ‘after an illness of several years’ in it, too.

The LA Times had an editorial, ‘Tortured Logic’, today. I wrote them and tried hard to rip it to shreds, ending with Peterr’s ‘We believe’ from yesterday. (There’s a long post on torture over at Making Light and still active.) That one also has me POd. It’s the whole idea of ‘it’s okay when we do it to other people, but not when other people do it to us’.

Mary,
It’s IIIRC 78 pages or I would copy and past it. I got it as a PDF this AM. It might be on PAcer, I don’t know if NJ is fully electronic filing yet.

I didn’t send to Christy’s FDL email. I sent to her personal email. Give me 5 minutes. Maybe I can cobble together some excerpts. It’s a doozy.

Be back in a flash.

http://www.nj.gov/oag/newsrele…..090806.pdf

Try that and see if it comes up. I tried to use the “snap shot tool” on the PDF, but it cut all the words in half horizontially, so it wasn’t readable

The attack from the Dems needs to be crystal clear: the problem is not wiretapping, but the lack of warrants.

If we’re so sure that “only the bad guys” are being tapped, then why not get a warrant?

The only reason – the ONLY reason – for not wanting to get a warrant, is that you aren’t sure that the person in question is a bad guy. Oh, you may have a hunch, you may have an inkling, you may have a hint – but by the Constitution, that’s not enough.

What about someone submitting an amendment to repeal the Fourth Amendment? If that’s what Bush wants – searches without warrants and judicial oversight – let’s put that on the table and debate it. How many republican votes do you think he could get for it?

Peterr @ 151

The attack from the Dems needs to be crystal clear: the problem is not wiretapping, but the lack of warrants.

If we’re so sure that “only the bad guys” are being tapped, then why not get a warrant?

The only reason – the ONLY reason – for not wanting to get a warrant, is that you aren’t sure that the person in question is a bad guy. Oh, you may have a hunch, you may have an inkling, you may have a hint – but by the Constitution, that’s not enough.

What about someone submitting an amendment to repeal the Fourth Amendment? If that’s what Bush wants – searches without warrants and judicial oversight – let’s put that on the table and debate it. How many republican votes do you think he could get for it?

All of them

Getting another tissue.

Another thing I noticed in the Specter bill. Compensation from taxpayers to designated agents (I assume telcos and others) for forced participation in surveillance. Sounds like it pays double to be Orwelian.

Peterr,

Sorry, my bad mood seems to have come back.

Sigh. At the risk of sounding like Chicken Little, I think maybe the sky, or the Constitution, is falling.

There is so much to be alarmed about, that you get numb after a while.

We had this big push for Ned. and everyone got all ginned up. And it was great.

We had this big push for Path to Crap, and eveybody got all ginned up. And we haven’t had a chance to catch our breath from that, and then this happens.

We were supposed to be focused on winning the elections. This is being done to divert us from the elections.But this is really serious.

It’s like being a parent in a burning building and you can only save one of your children and you have to decide which child to save.

It’s that same sort of panicky “I can’t think, can’t choose” feeling.

So, we wore ourselves out trying to safe hsitory from fiction. Now, out of breath and reeling we are confronted with needing to save the Consitution from being gutted (is the a metaphor for burning the Reichstaag?).
How will we catch up in time to make a difference in the elections?

Which child do we save?

Mary @ 11:03 am

Let’s suppose that an executive order is issued in contravention of federal statutes in force when that order was issued. Does the United States Code contain any explicit provision permitting nullification of an executive order issued in an attempt to abrogate, circumvent, or supersede a federal statute?

Should statutory relief be unavailable, can case law suggest some means of countermanding an executive order?

I think, but cannot prove, that it’s not just minimization, it has more to do with probable cause.

I think so too, and I think it goes beyond that to “reasonable”. Bc the whole lineup of ex-FISA judges pretty much said the “we don’t want to have to show ‘probable cause to believe foreign intel is involved’ bc that is so much more onerous than just having to show we were ‘reasonable in thinking foreign intel was involved’” was nonsense; that the standards, in a surveillance warrant setting, between reasonable and probable cause was pretty much nonexistant.

So what they are really saying isn’t the second half of the amendment – we don’t want to show probable cause – it is the first half they want to avoid – they don’t want to show the search is reasonable. WHich means basically – they don’t want to show at all. The only reason for that is that they are NOT listening to just al-Qaeda.

I hope that Judge Taylor takes this into account in making her ruling on whether or not to make her injunction effective immediately. I think it’s call the bluff time. Let the Sixth overrule her if they want – but make DOJ own their role in sacrificing the rule of law.

I do know, that because it will never reviewed, that FBI and the USAOs think that they have to do a super better job than normal to make double sure they have probable cause (or at least that’s how it was–I think it still is).

I don’t buy that is stil how it is. There is no section of govt that has not been thoroughly prostituted. The Oregon case – warrantless wiretaps, unacknowledged to the court and only revealed by mistake (or maybe an FBI agent who had something left in them) in doc production — but still being used. The shut down of the program temporarily (according to the WaPo story – and who knows if that can be believed) by the Chief Judge bc FBI was contaminating their warrant requests with the illegal program info, etc.

I don’t buy for a minute that things, over 6 years, have not irretrievably broken down. Where are all those FBI whistleblowers that were supposed to be the reason Patriot Act was nothing to worry about?

yeah – right.

That’s what Bush is trying to gut. The pushback from career civil servants who just want to do the right thing and obey the law. he is trying to take away their “cover” for obeying the law

Yep – but he’s done that already and for years and without much grumbling.

I’m pretty much done with excuses and worrying about who gets caught in the crossfire.

If CHS will do a post on this, we can Spotlight it everywhere. The fact that the Federal and New Jersey State Attorneys General are in complete disagreement, is extremely NEWSWORTHY. Christy is the best we’ve got at making legal issues understandable to the Traditional Media. Just getting a story out that “all the experts do not agree,” is a plus for us. It also would be a wake up call to the Republican controlled Congress that their chronic failure to hold the Executive Branch in check is locking up the Judicial Branch.

This makes me sick at heart.

The pdf worked fine – thank you lhp.

Peterr – the thing is, for a surveillance warrant, FISA doesn’t require that you have evidence someone is a bad guy. Only that you have some “reason to believe” that they are in touch with a foreign power (which includes terrorist).

So it’s even much more open ended than your description. No probable cause for any kind of illegal activity is needed at all – period. Just probable cause to think they are in contact. And you have the three day freebies anyway.

No court monitoring of warrants also makes it that much easier for the government to disappear its citizens that it has been surveilling – just the way our DOJ in Padilla has said it can. (lhp – I’m sorry, but I can’t imagine ever thinking a kind thought about Comey – otoh, I would have never imagined lining up with ACLU on much of anything 10 years ago, so who knows).

Stephen Parrish, CPA @ 156

Mary @ 11:03 am

Let’s suppose that an executive order is issued in contravention of federal statutes in force when that order was issued. Does the United States Code contain any explicit provision permitting nullification of an executive order issued in an attempt to abrogate, circumvent, or supersede a federal statute?

Should statutory relief be unavailable, can case law suggest some means of countermanding an executive order?

If I understood Mary’s extensive posts on the EOs realting to the classification power (which BTW belong in a law reiview article) That’s exactly what Bush did. Contravene statute by EO. thing is, the only pushback would be in the courts.

Who gets to sue? Who is the party with standing? Sigh

looseheadprop @ 150

Peterr,

Sorry, my bad mood seems to have come back.

Sigh. At the risk of sounding like Chicken Little, I think maybe the sky, or the Constitution, is falling.

There is so much to be alarmed about, that you get numb after a while.

We had this big push for Ned. and everyone got all ginned up. And it was great.

We had this big push for Path to Crap, and eveybody got all ginned up. And we haven’t had a chance to catch our breath from that, and then this happens.

We were supposed to be focused on winning the elections. This is being done to divert us from the elections.But this is really serious.

It’s like being a parent in a burning building and you can only save one of your children and you have to decide which child to save.

It’s that same sort of panicky “I can’t think, can’t choose” feeling.

So, we wore ourselves out trying to safe hsitory from fiction. Now, out of breath and reeling we are confronted with needing to save the Consitution from being gutted (is the a metaphor for burning the Reichstaag?).
How will we catch up in time to make a difference in the elections?

Which child do we save?

The gem in the Weisman piece that Froomkin quotes from is that the Republicans have made these two things one and the same. They think that backing warrantless wiretaps will make the difference in the elections. Our job, should we choose to accept it, is to make them wrong.

I share your bad mood, and between trying to keep up here and watch The Kid (who got his first real bike yesterday and wants to practice with it!) it’s not easy. The key to keeping from getting stuck on the “which child do I save?” mess is to remember that you’re not in this alone. That, IMHO, is the great thing about FDL – it’s a constant reminder that there are others committed to the same vision of the Constitution.

That NJ filing link works just fine, BTW.

So what now? Seeking out allies and pushing a strategy that hits the republicans where they live – in the polls and the ballot box.

Lincoln Chafee got the scare of his life yesterday. He pushed to get the Bolton nomination vote postponed, so he wouldn’t have to deal with it during the primary. Now, will he feel obligated to back the White House for their help in winning his primary, or will he continue to be afraid of losing his seat if he backs this outrageous proposal? The more we scare him, the less likely his vote will be seen as “safe.”

Who else is in a tight race, where being on the wrong side here will make a difference? These are the folks we have to hit hard. These are the districts/states where we have to swamp the media with LTE’s. These are the offices that we have to fax til their machines wear out.

And the Dems opposing them are our best allies in this. Imagine James Webb coming out on this. Don’t know where he stands on this (no mention on his website), but he might be an imposing figure in making this debate more prominent.

Hang tough, and keep pluggin’ away!

Mary @ 155

The pdf worked fine – thank you lhp.

Peterr – the thing is, for a surveillance warrant, FISA doesn’t require that you have evidence someone is a bad guy. Only that you have some “reason to believe” that they are in touch with a foreign power (which includes terrorist).

So it’s even much more open ended than your description. No probable cause for any kind of illegal activity is needed at all – period. Just probable cause to think they are in contact. And you have the three day freebies anyway.

No court monitoring of warrants also makes it that much easier for the government to disappear its citizens that it has been surveilling – just the way our DOJ in Padilla has said it can. (lhp – I’m sorry, but I can’t imagine ever thinking a kind thought about Comey – otoh, I would have never imagined lining up with ACLU on much of anything 10 years ago, so who knows).

Maybe I’m being an idealist here, or maybe I’m trying to be a realist, but at this point I view FISA as at least some kind of judicial oversight of the activities of the Executive Branch. If this is “half a loaf is better than no loaf at all” thinking, well, maybe it is better (at least for today).

And with a Democratic House and/or Senate, maybe we can do better next year.

Stephen Parrish, CPA @ 153

Mary @ 11:03 am

Let’s suppose that an executive order is issued in contravention of federal statutes in force when that order was issued. Does the United States Code contain any explicit provision permitting nullification of an executive order issued in an attempt to abrogate, circumvent, or supersede a federal statute?

Well, apparently this was the intent of the criminal provisions in FISA. So yes, there was, inherent within the statutory sections that have been violated a spelled out punishment for the violation. And seeing as the statute was enacted in response to Presidential, AG and FBI violations, they pretty much had to be assuming that is where the direction to violate would originate.

But – what does a stautory mechanism give you when the prosecution branch of government is the branch which has chosen to participate in breaking the law? Who is there to prosecute? And when you then have Congress, which reacts by saying “shucks, we only meant to provide oversight for blow jobs, not for turning whole branches of DOD against the American public without overisight” – what then?

The first line was the lawyers, the last line is the lawyers, and the institutional barrier was fine – the people were not.

Should statutory relief be unavailable, can case law suggest some means of countermanding an executive order?

Well, there’s Nuremberg. More seriously – there’s the Keith case and there is a case, I’ll have to dig for, where Congress ordered it’s Sergeant at Arms (or whatever he is called) to go arrest someone, outside of its authority. The S.Ct held that, while members of Congress, through the Speech and Debate Clause, may have been exempt from recourse for issuing the legislation/order — that did not get the Sargeant at Arms off the hook for ciminal violations by acting on the legislation/order.

I don’t see much difference.

Mary @ 157

I think, but cannot prove, that it’s not just minimization, it has more to do with probable cause.

I think so too, and I think it goes beyond that to “reasonable”. Bc the whole lineup of ex-FISA judges pretty much said the “we don’t want to have to show ‘probable cause to believe foreign intel is involved’ bc that is so much more onerous than just having to show we were ‘reasonable in thinking foreign intel was involved’” was nonsense; that the standards, in a surveillance warrant setting, between reasonable and probable cause was pretty much nonexistant.

So what they are really saying isn’t the second half of the amendment – we don’t want to show probable cause – it is the first half they want to avoid – they don’t want to show the search is reasonable. WHich means basically – they don’t want to show at all. The only reason for that is that they are NOT listening to just al-Qaeda.

I hope that Judge Taylor takes this into account in making her ruling on whether or not to make her injunction effective immediately. I think it’s call the bluff time. Let the Sixth overrule her if they want – but make DOJ own their role in sacrificing the rule of law.

I do know, that because it will never reviewed, that FBI and the USAOs think that they have to do a super better job than normal to make double sure they have probable cause (or at least that’s how it was–I think it still is).

I don’t buy that is stil how it is. There is no section of govt that has not been thoroughly prostituted. The Oregon case – warrantless wiretaps, unacknowledged to the court and only revealed by mistake (or maybe an FBI agent who had something left in them) in doc production — but still being used. The shut down of the program temporarily (according to the WaPo story – and who knows if that can be believed) by the Chief Judge bc FBI was contaminating their warrant requests with the illegal program info, etc.

I don’t buy for a minute that things, over 6 years, have not irretrievably broken down. Where are all those FBI whistleblowers that were supposed to be the reason Patriot Act was nothing to worry about?

yeah – right.

That’s what Bush is trying to gut. The pushback from career civil servants who just want to do the right thing and obey the law. he is trying to take away their “cover” for obeying the law

Yep – but he’s done that already and for years and without much grumbling.

I’m pretty much done with excuses and worrying about who gets caught in the crossfire.

Mary,
it’s more like a spreading cancer. There are still many good, decent men and women jsust trying to act as a break to at least slow downthe snowball rolling down the hill.

So many have quit, and lost all power to stop the juggernaught. My bigest quarrel with Jim Comey was that he quit. I understand his disgust and his anger. The day he left, he gave a little speech, it’s somewhere on the net.
He talked about all the people that called or came by his house the night before and asked him not to quit. had I been in DC, I would have done so as well.

There are many good decent folks trying to slow down the snowball, and they are tired and angry and disillusioned and often talk about quitting. whenever my opinion is asked, I beg them to stay.

But each year, more of the good uys leave in disgust and are replaced by prostitutes. The weak ones, inclined to do the right things, who would do the right things under ordinary circumstances in a normal climate, are like polar bears on a metling ice flow. The space where it is safe to be a good guy is shrinking every day.

Each argument that good decent career lawyers and agents have used to justify doing he right thing, is being gutted by the rubber stamp.

Bit by bit, the tools needed to resist are being taken away from honest civil servants.

No, Mary, thay are not all prostitutes yet, but the cancer spreads, and the good guys are starving for support

Mary @ 160

The pdf worked fine – thank you lhp.

Peterr – the thing is, for a surveillance warrant, FISA doesn’t require that you have evidence someone is a bad guy. Only that you have some “reason to believe” that they are in touch with a foreign power (which includes terrorist).

So it’s even much more open ended than your description. No probable cause for any kind of illegal activity is needed at all – period. Just probable cause to think they are in contact. And you have the three day freebies anyway.

No court monitoring of warrants also makes it that much easier for the government to disappear its citizens that it has been surveilling – just the way our DOJ in Padilla has said it can. (lhp – I’m sorry, but I can’t imagine ever thinking a kind thought about Comey – otoh, I would have never imagined lining up with ACLU on much of anything 10 years ago, so who knows).

No matter how much you beat up Comey over Padilla, I’m willing to bet money you will never catch up to how much Comey beats up Comey over it

Peterr @ 160

Maybe I’m being an idealist here, or maybe I’m trying to be a realist, but at this point I view FISA as at least some kind of judicial oversight of the activities of the Executive Branch. If this is “half a loaf is better than no loaf at all” thinking, well, maybe it is better (at least for today).

I don’t think you are being an idealist – I think that is exactly right; that there is judicial oversight with the FISA approach. I was just responding to the “hunch someone is a bad guy” part — there are probably people who say, well if you have a hunch someone is a terrorist – maybe we should eavesdrop. And the thing is – FISA pretty much allows for that – it doesn’t necessarily ‘block’ eavesdropping bc all you have is a hunch – it only blocks eavedropping if you don’t even have a reasonable toehold that someone is in touch with a foreign power (which included terrorists) As a matter of fact, you can know for a FACT that someone is NOT a bad guy and still get surveillance, if they are talking to a terrorist.

I don’t really have a problem with that – provided it is done within FISA strictures of minimization, judicial oversight, etc. But FISA is about as far as a free society would want to go IMO, and, more importantly, everything they have claimed (minimization, needing to listen ‘if al-Qaeda’s calling’ etc.) fit smack within FISA and don’t justify committing felonies by violating FISA.

fwiw

I had a strange setup – I graduated in ‘67, and in ‘66 I knew I’d get drafted, So after an intensive physical I got a slot in Pilot School in the AF. Only a few weeks after graduation my draft board started sending me notices about the Army, and I kept saying “I’m already accepted into the AF as a pilot” and they said (back in NJ) “we don’t care, we want grunts”. As I was going to school in Minnesota I wound up actually getting a letter to the Vice President, Hubert Humphery, who wrote back and said “sure looks backwards to me, but nothing I can do”. So I would up enlisting in the AF, going to boot camp, killing time for about 6 weeks, back to OCS, boot camp all over again. I’d spent almost 6 months is the AF and I wasn’t even in Flight School yet… That Draft board just wouldn’t let go, even for three months, and were perfectly willing to cost the Air Force a pilot if they got their number up….

But in the end I didn’t go to Vietnam but to Turkey instead (cold War) and it wasn’t a bad 5 years…

On the Weldon thing, I seem to remember that he was For the Able Danger program, the one that actually had identified Moussawai, and was unhappy it was terminated by the Bush Admin…

I am willing to take that bet lhp. I think he’s a player and manipulates press and people and I don’t have any kind thoughts – not over Padilla, not over the appointment of the Spec Pros, not over Arar, not over what I think was playing the press in the Palace Revolt article, not over the support of Haynes for the 4th – none of it.

I’m sure he can sell an aura, but I’m too broke to buy it.

Mary @ 167

Peterr @ 160

Maybe I’m being an idealist here, or maybe I’m trying to be a realist, but at this point I view FISA as at least some kind of judicial oversight of the activities of the Executive Branch. If this is “half a loaf is better than no loaf at all” thinking, well, maybe it is better (at least for today).

I don’t think you are being an idealist – I think that is exactly right; that there is judicial oversight with the FISA approach. I was just responding to the “hunch someone is a bad guy” part — there are probably people who say, well if you have a hunch someone is a terrorist – maybe we should eavesdrop. And the thing is – FISA pretty much allows for that – it doesn’t necessarily ‘block’ eavesdropping bc all you have is a hunch – it only blocks eavedropping if you don’t even have a reasonable toehold that someone is in touch with a foreign power (which included terrorists) As a matter of fact, you can know for a FACT that someone is NOT a bad guy and still get surveillance, if they are talking to a terrorist.

I don’t really have a problem with that – provided it is done within FISA strictures of minimization, judicial oversight, etc. But FISA is about as far as a free society would want to go IMO, and, more importantly, everything they have claimed (minimization, needing to listen ‘if al-Qaeda’s calling’ etc.) fit smack within FISA and don’t justify committing felonies by violating FISA.

fwiw

The Unitary Executive has taken away all but nominal power from the Rubber Stamp that was once Congress. Because occasionaly, Courts don’t do as they are told, the Unitary Executive is now directing the Rubber Stamp to take all kinds of things out of the court’s jurisdiction.

You may recall, that the primary battles of the first Bush term centered around trying to pack the courts. That effort was not as successful as they hoped, for which I will always be grateful to the much maligned Chuck Schumer, who almost single handedly save an entire branch of government. The judiciary is inthe worst shape it’s been in for a while, but without a really herculean job by Schumer, it would be worse, much worse than the Reps in Congress are now.

For me, Schumer will always be an unsung hero, I don’t think many folks really realize what life would be like under a Chief Justice Estrada. D oyou remember who all they were trying to pack the court with–Priscilla Owens? Hello?

Anyway, when they couldn’t pack all the court houses with hacks and flunkies and when existing life tenured judges caught on and started standing up to them, they realized that they could use the Rubber Stamp to take all the issues away from the court’s jurisdiction.

Judge Weinstein, dear prescient, Judge Weinstein begged lawyers to stand up for the judicairy because they are not allowed to stand up for themselves and he very bluntly said, the “federal judiciary is under attack’.

I used to live in Weldon’s district, and the only reason he keeps getting sent back to Congress is that he’s basically an off-the-books employee of Boeing, which has had a plant in Delaware County for many years. One drive through the unpaved streets of his suburban Philadelphia district will tell you that he’s not bringing home the bacon for the people who send him to Washington. It’s long since past the time when he needs to be held up as a poster boy for everything that’s wrong with incumbency.

*cough* ex post facto *cough*
*cough* lex retro non agit *cough*

Note that annulment of former penalties can be considered non-controversial, but check out why: “…annulling former penalties. But one of law functions is protecting citizens against a state, so that’s usually viewed as a non-controversial and acceptable exception”

This does not exactly fall into that reasoning, now, does it, as they’re trying to protect the state against the citizens this time.

BTW, IANAL.

lhp, thanks for the good words about Schumer. I never knew that about him.

Mary @ 169

I am willing to take that bet lhp. I think he’s a player and manipulates press and people and I don’t have any kind thoughts – not over Padilla, not over the appointment of the Spec Pros, not over Arar, not over what I think was playing the press in the Palace Revolt article, not over the support of Haynes for the 4th – none of it.

I’m sure he can sell an aura, but I’m too broke to buy it.

Maybe, I’m just gullible. But, I have always believed hm to be be an honest man. he explained his reasons in Padilla, and his reasoning made sense. I think the President played him. He was afraid the President was playing him, his gut told him so, but he had no proof.

He saw it as two choices, trust the President or resign in protest. As seriuos person does not pull a drama queen stunt like resigning in protest unless they have the proof to make their case. He did not have the proof at the time, and “I have a bad feeling”, which he fully admitted at the time, doesn’t cut it.

In 1962 after 8th grade football practice I climbed and apple tree to impress some girls, the branch broke and I broke my leg in 18 places. In November 1966 I passed the physical at the induction center in Chicago and joined the US Army. A year in the 7th ID in Korea (67-68) and a year in the 1st Sig Bde in Vietam (68-69). I’m so sick of these punk-ass right wing scumbags who let other people do their fighting. I was in the VVAW when I came home and the swiftboat jerks can kiss my ass.

Mary,

you know I luv ya honey, but we are never gonna agree on big Jim.

And elsewhere in our government . . .

Inspector generals are supposed to be tough on the agencies they oversee. After all millions, even billions of dollars of taxpayer money is at stake. But few can match the toughness of Earl E. Devaney who has been the I.G. for the Department of Interior over the past 7 years. Today he tells Congress all about the Interior Department and his assessment is very blunt and harsh.

Asked to testify about the Interior’s handling of Deepwater OIL LEASES, which he calls an example of “BUREAUCRATIC BUNGLING” that could cost the U.S. Treasury and therefore TAXPAYERS, BILLIONS OF DOLLARS in lost royalties, Devaney goes on to say “SHORT OF A CRIME, ANYTHING GOES AT THE HIGHEST LEVELS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR.” […]

(emphasis ABC’s)

Prof @
57

Taylor Marsh @ 38

Prof @ 35: Exactly, Weldon wears glasses, and could have while serving in Vietnam. So why didn’t he get drafted? Why the eyesight story?

Taylor, the Army had positions to fill that were not in Vietnam. I served in Korea during the Vietnam War. Others served in the US, Germany, etc.

And there are so many, many jobs that did not require putting on a helmet or toting a gun (although honor to those who endured that). Cook, accountant, military intelligence, military band.

Prof, as I’m sure you know, 75% of the troops in the Nam were in the rear. . .they didn’t need some fantastic visions. Besides, a claymore, M-60 or M-79 with a beehive made aiming pretty irrelevant.

Trying to put some of this together. Has anyone read the Specter bill? I understand at least in the Senate it is the bill receiving the most attention. Does it grant immunity from further legal recourse of prior felonious acts?

I was born on June 24, 1947, and graduated from college in June, 1969. My draft board immediately classified me 1A, or eligible to be drafted. I was summoned for my draft physical and was bussed from my draft board office in Bethesda, Maryland to Fort Holabird for my preinduction physical. After passing a multiple choice test, probably because I filled in answers to the questions as opposed to the correct answers, I was placed in a line organized according to height with the shortest person in front and the tallest at the end. The military medic, or whatever the hell he was, sighted his scope at the level of the shortest person’s eyes and walked to the end of the line without raising the scope. Apparently, my right nipple passed for an eye suitable for military service. Not surprisingly, so did my left nipple a few minutes later.

Fortunately, my birthdate was the 358th birthdate chosen in the first lottery a few months later. That’s the only lottery that I ever won and I’ve never regretted winning it because I was terrified about being drafted. I lost some friends who never returned from Vietnam. Those who did bore little resemblance to the person they were before they went to Vietnam. I respected and admired their sacrifice.

I have no respect for anyone who regards members of our military as fodder to be expended in an unnecessary war. King George obviously could care less about the 2,700 men and women whose lives he sacrificed to enrich his friends and he could care less about the 20,000 plus men and women who have been injured in combat. These numbers, of course, do not include Iraqis. King George’s vanity and selfishness know no bounds and his crimes far surpass all crimes committed by all of the serial killers in our nation’s history.

Weldon, King George, and all of the other war mongers who never wore the uniform deserve to rot in hell.

Raw Story acquires NSA wiretap talking points

looseheadprop, if you’re still around . . .

Any chances of some of someone getting these former DOJ types to band forces and speak again, but this time with a single voice? Like the retired generals, when each one leaves individually, there isn’t much notice. But when they started to speak up together, people began to sit up and listen. Not much, but some.

If Comey et al. could do the same – speak up together – against this bill/these practices, I think it would get the attention of some of the more prominent MSM folks who cover legal affairs as well as political affairs.

Here’s a helluva story arc for the evening news: “First it was the retired generals speaking out against Bush, now it’s the former government lawyers, . . . who will it be next week that speaks out against Bush’s overreaching executive practices?”

Here’s another name of someone who could get in front of this and push: former FBI agent Colleen Rowley, running in the MN-2 House race. Here’s the link to the Blue America chat with her.

Yes, I know that there is still a certain lawyer/client relationship that must be respected, and thus they can’t speak out on specifics of cases and conversations they were involved in. They can, however, express in general terms the reasons for their departures, and their growing fears that things are only getting worse with this proposed legisation.

The dual story line in this thread is beyond sci-fi.

I should have included this in my 181:

The National Security Agency has taken the unusual move of sending members of the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee a list of “approved talking points” regarding its warrantless eavesdropping program, RAW STORY has learned.

Some of the talking points urge Senators to imply that they have personal knowledge of plots foiled by the wiretap program, or that the Senators–seven of whom responded by writing the NSA a letter blasting the move–had other personal knowledge that the program was legal or necessary.

“I have personally met the dedicated men and women of the NSA,” one point reads. “The country owes them an enormous debt of gratitude for their superb efforts to keep us all secure.”

“It has detected plots,” reads another, “that could have resulted in death or injury to Americans both at home and abroad.” No examples are given in the document.

The Senate voted earlier today to reject Democratic attempts to limit the use of the controversial wiretaps.

The document, as acquired by RAW STORY, follows:

[…]

Eureka Springs, AR @ 183

The dual story line in this thread is beyond sci-fi.

Gawdalmighty, Eureka, it sure is.

“This can’t be good.”

Glenn Greenwald has been following Specter’s meanderings for some time. IIRC he had a previous piece of legislation that he was pushing before his complete sellout. Feinstein was a cosponsor and when he bailed it became hers. It is more of a compromise. This again is based on what I remember.

looseheadprop @ 176

Mary,

you know I luv ya honey, but we are never gonna agree on big Jim.

Back atcha ;) and no, we aren’t.

The deal he worked with Ashcroft allowed for a no-reports, limited investigation by someone who could be trusted to keep his mouth shut except within his narrow scope. Immediately in connection with the appointment, they made it very clear there would be no report. While Congress sux, at that particular point in time, Congress was actually making noises about an independent prosecutor -even people like Lieberman were dead set on getting one.

So Comey, who has,like the rest of us, been watching the Wilson drama and other items unfold and knows that it sure appears the President has been lying about things – gets in confirmed. Immediately he has FBI & DOJ telling him that it looks like Rove and Libby are lying. Rove – who could not be more the President’s guy, and Libby who could not be more the VP’s guy. Lying. Not like there would be any reason to think their bosses knew something about that.

Ashcroft is tied in, has continued for months to get briefed without recusal even though his old buddy Karl is involved (Ashcroft – who has never really been investigated for HIS Abramoff dealings for that matter and neither Ashcroft or Gonzales recused on Abramoff). But Congress looks like it might get a spine and get an Independent Counsel.

How is it that Ashcroft recuses? I don’t see anything except a deal that is stacked in his favor. If he had recused with no deal, there was no reason not to have an Indep Counsel. Getting Comey lined up let him recuse with the deal in place and that backs off Congress as well as saving his butt. Why hasn’t there been any writing produced re: the discourse that takes things to the second “authorization” -i.e., to pursue obstruction etc.? Well, I have to wonder if it has anything to do with not wanting to put in writing something that may have track back.

So now you have Comey who has watched the Wilson, WMD, etc unfold; has been involved immediately with the situation involving Rove & Libby lying; has a background that would have to make you believe that someone, somewhere, in the leaky world of insider intel has mentioned Zubaydah being nuts and the swinging bucket theory of nuclear fission; has seen the OLC memos on torture and other matters and yet also heard the Presidential disclaimers, etc.; and who was invovled directly with Padilla’s case (wasn’t it his GJ originally?) and yet Golly Gee Whiz – he really truly believed — what, exactly? Take a look at the press conf.

It’s not so much whether or not the “President lied” or that he just had this unverifiable gut he was being lied to (all of which I have to say I find, in the context of all the foregoing instances of being exposed to or asked to participate in Presidential lies and circumvention of US law, pretty hard to believe) – it’s whether he agreed to violate the Constituion for the President and sell it to the American public. What does or does not a lie from the President have to do with that – even if he were such a wide eyed innocent?

http://www.usdoj.gov/dag/speech/2004/dag6104.htm

Because so many important questions have been raised about the detention of Jose Padilla, held after being captured on American soil, all those agencies have worked as hard as they possibly can to declassify as much as they possibly can. And while some information remains classified about Padilla, those efforts of those agencies have resulted in an answer to Senator Hatch’s question that is remarkable for its scope, its clarity and its candor.

. . .

At that border, Padilla met Abu Zubaydah. Abu Zubaydah, one of the most important and powerful members of al Qaeda, was in charge at that border of sorting the fighters into two groups: those who should continue on and be relocated to Pakistan, and those who should be sent back into Afghanistan.

. . .

Much of this information has been uncovered because Jose Padilla has been detained as an enemy combatant and questioned. We have learned many things from Padilla that I’m not going to discuss today and that we did not include in our answer to Senator Hatch. Had we tried to make a case against Jose Padilla through our criminal justice system, something that I as the United States attorney in New York could not do at that time without jeopardizing intelligence sources, he would very likely have followed his lawyer’s advice and said nothing, which would have been his constitutional right. He would likely have ended up a free man, with our only hope being to try to follow him 24 hours a day, seven days a week and hope — pray, really — that we didn’t lose him.

. . .

We now know much of what Jose Padilla knows, and what we have learned confirms that the president of the United States made the right call, and that that call saved lives.

emphasis added.

Take what we do know, and pick your favorite lies. Do you think he never saw any of the classified info? No one talked to him about Hani 1, 2 or 3? Ok – I don’t believe that, but that’s not really the problem with Padilla. The problem is the out and out admission that the heads of the Department of Justice were conspiring to deprive US citizens of Constitutional rights and create the land of “would have been” Constitituional rights.

Admission AND sales job and wrap it with the bow of lauding the President for secret military detentions based on tortured recitations of bucket swinging by a crazy guy— thank goodness for Boeing, Lockheed, Blackwater and academia. Were else do you put lawyers willing to applaud in press conferences that kind of assault on the Constitution?

The Fourth Circuit, I guess. Look at Lederman’s summary of some of the nifty recent answers to Congressional questions from Comey’s pick – Haynes.

And in one of the few other instances of getting Ashcroft to recuse, you have Comey and Arar. Where we ship the Canadian detained at our airport to Syria. I’m sure with Comey’s background he knew that would have nothing to do with torture. Nothing to do with violations of the torture act. He wasn’t necessarily involved with the decision, but I don’t see how you call his participation anything other than choosing to become involved in the cover up.

As soon as the wiretaps issues looks like it might get hot, he manages to be the glowing center of the Palace Revolt plant article. Which IMO is a bit of a mess as to what there is to glow about. Did Comey and Goldsmith shut down an egregious program? I don’t buy that at all and it doesn’t make sense because — and egregious program has pretty much continued. The article, which came out during the warrantless wiretap flap, seems to indicate THAT is the program they addressed. When the USA Today revelations come out, though, Turley seems to say THAT is the program Comey objected to. No one mentions the fact that there was a little side report that at the same described point in time WaPo says the Chief FISA Judge pitched a fit about finding out that illegal program info was being used for FISA warrants and shut the program down.

Two shut downs in the same period from two different source Comey-Goldsmith AND the FISA Judge? Really? Or is it that a judge pitched a fit and all that happened was that they refused to sign off on a program the judge was going to shut down until a better screen got put in place to lesser contaminate the FISA warrants? I’m probably wrong on that too, but that’s the only thing that makes sense of the various stories to me. Especially the “revised the program and went on” aspects of the story.

Moving here from accidental posting in the Blue America thread.

Short background: I posted Taylor’s information about Curt Weldon’s claims to have been rejected by the draft for extremely poor eyesight over at Wikipedia. About 5 hours later, my information was removed, on the ground that there was no verifiable link for the supposed Army Medical Fitness Standards.

Although Taylor didn’t have a web-link for the Army Medical Fitness Standards of 1969, I have found the 1998 Medical Fitness Standards online (see page 6 of Army Regulation 40-501, at page 12 of the PDF file) and their numerical standards are identical to Taylor’s hand-typed repeat of them from the 1969 standards. In addition, there are “near visual acuity” standards that require simply that the better of the two eyes be correctible to 20/40 (leaving it unnecessary for the other eye to be correctible).

There are some additional vision reasons for rejection for military service in the AR (the standards), such as astigmatism over 3 dipoters (damn! I hit 2.75)

It’s possible, of course, that Weldon’s actual physical reason for a 4-F deferment is found closer to his “little eye,” because regulation 2-14(k) excludes from military service men with:

Absence of both testicals, or unexplained absence of a testicle.

That may be taken as the very definition of a chickenhawk — someone who criticizes veterans who served, while themselves hiding from service.

(I exempt those who took principled stands against serving, and then refrain from swiftboating vets.)

But I digress. Anyone want to do a little Wikipedia-editing support work over at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/inde…..;section=1 ?

It’s easy.

Wish that billboard were real! Should be all over the country-especially in areas with concentration of military personnel.

If he wanted to serve, all he had to do was enlist. They would’ve taken him no matter what. The key question was whether his vision could be corrected. Apparently his could, because he’s been such a scholar on defense topics. You’ll notice the requirements for vision were that distant vision could NOT be CORRECTED to 20/20 in one eye and 20/400 in the other. 20/400 vision is so bad you can’t see the E on the chart with glasses on. My brother is blind as a bat but served in the Army for 20 years. He enlisted.

After posting on Wikipedia regarding Weldon’s poor vision excuse, someone edited it out (5 hours later). The “History” there asserts:

Removing info from and link to blog; adding info found on the blog that does have a verifiable, reputable source.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/inde…..on=history

So FDL is not reputable, even when quoting from the Army Medical Fitness Standards.

Here is what I posted there earlier(which was then deleted):

However, the Army’s Medical Fitness Standards used in 1969 provide that the only cause for “medical rejection” is eyesight “which does not correct” to certain standards.[2] Cong. Weldon has not released medical records indicating whether his vision was uncorrectable in 1969. Photographs on his website show that he wears glasses today and apparently is able to function with them.[3]

Someone needs to get back over to Wikipedia and enter “reputable” web links.

Also, I guess linking to Weldon’s own website was not a “reputable” source.

Edting can be done over there at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/inde…..;section=1

Pay attention. “Distant visual acuity of any degree which does not correct”. Almost everyone can be corrected with glasses. Back in the day, when all lenses were glass and strong corrections meant thick ‘coke bottle lenses’, there were plenty of GI’s with said lenses.

RE: Q. Who was affected by the lottery. A. Men born between Jan. 1, 1944, and Dec. 31, 1950. In other words, men who have had their 19th birthday by Jan. 1 but not their 26th.

I was born in June 51 and the lottery affected me. I took a student deferrment at 18, the draft age in June 69, and went off to college that Sept. If I got a low number I was going to be drafted. I got a safe 215.

I’m puzzled by this old FAQ. Must be a misprint.

weldon has spent years trying to expose the able danger program, which is important and good.

unfortunately, he’s been trying to use the angle of “clinton failure” to do it, which is partisan and bad.

otherwise he’s a nutcase, and i hope sestak wins.

test

Taylor Marsh @ 30

Also, check out this blog post re: Weldon giving his daughter some help through his congressional office. It’s not unheard of, but this blogger isn’t very happy about it:

http://www.totallydelco.com/bl…..ariah.html

PS-Just saw P J Evans’s comment @ 28. Bingo.

Hiya Taylor, FYI Curt Weldon was Mayor of Marcus Hook, PA years ago. I posted the “Demigod or Pariah” blog post after reading about this abuse of power for his families gain in the LA Times.

As a registered Republican I am fed up with our so called parties leaders. From Washington to Delaware County, they have abandoned us, but insist on this “War On Terror”. Like the War on Drugs, etc, these things only line the pockets of the Uberwealthy, and cause thousands of deaths needlessly.

Joe Sestak from what I see is an honorable man, who will do good for US, the citizens of Delaware County. NOT go to Russia 30 times and cavort with known terrorists like Weldon had done.

Cheers.

P.S. Where’s Melanie Sloan when you need her?

Eureka Springs, AR @
154

Another thing I noticed in the Specter bill. Compensation from taxpayers to designated agents (I assume telcos and others) for forced participation in surveillance. Sounds like it pays double to be Orwelian.

Getting damn close to “information retrieval charges,” albeit en masse, aren’t we?

OK, I enlisted in 1968 at the ripe old age of 17. In my basic training company we had 1 man who was blind in one eye(he had an artificial eye) one who weighed over 350 pounds(I think that the former gov of MI used his weight as an excuse for not being drafted) I met another combat soldier while I was in Vietnam in 1970 who was totally deaf in one ear. It took almost 4 months to get him off of combat duty(he was our machine gunner) and a job back in the rear.And, I hate to say this, but by 1970 morale was pretty well shot in most combat units because of the fact that in previous years, my tour in 68-69, were mostly volunteers, while by 1970 the combat units that I was in were mostly draftees.
Yes, I had almost 4 years in Vietnam, and a total of 12 years in the Army. I, like lots of people in the years before 1970, not only enlisted, but volunteered for for Vietnam. I liked my job in Vietnam-I was an infantry soldier 11B-no where else would I have been given so much responsibility at such a young age. When I left the Army in 1980(medically retired) I was responsible for the work and well being of 75 men, and over 500 million in equipment. When I was 19, I was personally responsible for the lives, health and well being, of an entire company of ethnic Chinese nung mercenaries, I was in charge of 150 men. A company commander as an E-4, while combat was a rush, just being in charge day to day, was also a rush. That’s why I stayed for 4 years. Going back to the US, and the peacetime Army, was like going from a color movie to one in black and white-washed out.no rush, no fun, no responsibilities. Was I scared? OH Hell yes. Lots of times.Only an idiot is not afraid, that’s how you know you are alive. But that was a different time, and a different world. And the question all young people ask, did I kill anyone. The answer, I don’t know. Mostly everyone was shooting back at people shooting at us in heavy jungle-triple canopy-and we were lucky if we could see even 20-30 feet. Was I trying to kill them? Of course I was, after all they were shooting at me. I would have to be an idiot not to have been shooting at them. Are the people in Iraq any different from those of us in Vietnam 30 years ago. I don’t think so. My oldest son 30, is in his 5th tour of the Iraq/Afghanistan theater-one of my daughters has just returned from her 1 year tour as a nurse in Iraq, my youngest daughter is in medical school(DOD medical school) and will become a Navy Dr. in June of next year, my other daughter hates the entire military, and you might be surprised to learn that all 4 of my kids, my wife, and myself are all against the war in Iraq. Just like I turned against the war in Vietnam in 1970.