Teddy!

Bush and friends have ruined the world.

We need to impeach them all.

Teddy above the fold! Congrats!

Tedddddddy!!!!!

At it again are you? Coool!!

Well, the Kowboy is indeed the ‘uniter’ he claims to be. He has succeeded where everyone else has failed – uniting the entire Middle East…against us!

Bush singing to Abdullah:

I just wanna hold your hand, I wanna your hand..

I’ve been wondering about this whole Saudi business ever since Bandar fled the U.S. months ago. Something very rotten here, and like with all the other rot, we’ve only just begun to get a wiff of it.

Alicia @ 3

Well, the Kowboy is indeed the ‘uniter’ he claims to be. He has succeeded where everyone else has failed – uniting the entire Middle East…against us!

it’s goes beyond the ME…

sadly. ;(

This from tpm:

Not good, not good. The White House Counsel’s Office gave explicit sign off to the DOJ’s letter falsely claiming Rove and Miers played no role in Tim Griffin’s appointment as US Attorney. And the sign off came from Chris Oprison, the guy at the Counsel’s office who Sampson had told about Rove’s and Miers’ role only a couple months earlier.

TSF in da lake!

Well, the Kowboy is indeed the ‘uniter’ he claims to be. He has succeeded where everyone else has failed – uniting the entire Middle East…against us!

Don’t sell him short; half the world.

eCAHNomics @ 8

This from tpm:

Not good, not good. The White House Counsel’s Office gave explicit sign off to the DOJ’s letter falsely claiming Rove and Miers played no role in Tim Griffin’s appointment as US Attorney. And the sign off came from Chris Oprison, the guy at the Counsel’s office who Sampson had told about Rove’s and Miers’ role only a couple months earlier.

RUT ROH

Good evening, all. Anybody have a link to a trustworthy English-language translation of Abdullah’s speech opening the Arab League conference? Calling our Iraq occupation “illegal” is one thing; I’d sure like to know what else he said.

NYT:Link

Saudi King Condemns U.S. Occupation of Iraq

RIYADH, Saudi Arabia — King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia told Arab leaders on Wednesday that the American occupation of Iraq is “illegal,” and he warned that unless Arab governments settle their differences, foreign powers like the United States would continue to dictate the region’s politics.

….

OfT:
Kate O’Bierne tells Tweety there’s no there there in the USAtty scandal. “There might not even be an intentional coverup!”

Teddy!
Good on ya man.

eCAHN, I misunderstood your reply in the previous thread. I thought you meant it had been under discussion prior to being added to the Patriot Act in committee. My question was mostly rhetorical. Just makes me mad to think about what crimes were being committed that required removing USA’s.

Well, at least George has texas bluebells to keep him company while the rest of the world has deciderated to leave him and Mizz Laura alone.

All alone.

Poppy and Babs must be ticked off, bigtime.

From the article TSF mentioned in his update:

‘Turki al-Rasheed, who runs a organization that promotes democracy in Saudi Arabia, said the king was “saying we may be moving on the same track, but our ends are different.”

“Bush wants to make it look like he is solving the problem, the king wants to actually solve the problems,” Mr. Rasheed said.’

Another bulls-eye on the Bushies. This pretty much applies to everything they do, except for making sure they win elections, don’t you think?

Strange bedfellows..

One is trying to keep a theocracy at bay… The other is trying to institute one here..

This is how authoritarians think..

Speaking of I just loved Pelosi’s maternal quote:

“Take a deep breath..” I’ll bet Our Boy Emperor just HATES to be talked to by a woman in this manner!!

Yeppers, GW fucked around and pissed em ALL off.
Wanker.

TeddySanFran @ 14

OfT:
Kate O’Bierne tells Tweety there’s no there there in the USAtty scandal. “There might not even be an intentional coverup!”

My heart is lighter now

Nice post, TSF! The pressure on Bush to resume payments to the Palestinians will also be interesting to watch.

War games end.

This along with all the international buzz about an imminent attack on Iran. Makes you wonder.

Helen @ 11

eCAHNomics @ 8
This from tpm:

Not good, not good. The White House Counsel’s Office gave explicit sign off to the DOJ’s letter falsely claiming Rove and Miers played no role in Tim Griffin’s appointment as US Attorney. And the sign off came from Chris Oprison, the guy at the Counsel’s office who Sampson had told about Rove’s and Miers’ role only a couple months earlier.
—

RUT ROH

indeed.

check out the joint letter released
today by sen. leahy, and rep. conyers,
painting white house counsel fielding
into a corner on his, and others’, having
apparently backed-out on the promise
to cooperate. . . all to avoid the
congressionally-authorized subpoenas. . .

pop the popcorn, ‘cuz tomorrow’s
leahy hearing re sampson will be
interesting, indeed!

Does anyone here think that Abdullah’s speech might break into Dubya’s bubble of non-reality? I’d like to think he’s wetting his pants tonight, after hearing that.

The US/Saudi dance has always been complex; Bandar flying to DeeCee to tell W a state dinner would be “inconvenient” strikes me as the prelude to Abdullah’s speech today calling our occupation “illegal.” If it was a matter of conflicting dates, State would have rearranged the dates with KSA’s Foreign Affairs Minister Bandar. His long friendship with the Bushes, and the flight to deliver the message, and the speech today — what do these add up to?

Wheels within wheels on fire.

Helen @
11

eCAHNomics @ 8
This from tpm:

Not good, not good. The White House Counsel’s Office gave explicit sign off to the DOJ’s letter falsely claiming Rove and Miers played no role in Tim Griffin’s appointment as US Attorney. And the sign off came from Chris Oprison, the guy at the Counsel’s office who Sampson had told about Rove’s and Miers’ role only a couple months earlier.
—

RUT ROH

I wonder if the “prison” part of Chris Oprison’s name may for-tell the future.

angie @ 17

Well, at least George has texas bluebells to keep him company while the rest of the world has deciderated to leave him and Mizz Laura alone.

All alone.

Poppy and Babs must be ticked off, bigtime.

Bluebonnets. The picture must have been taken in the spring because that’s when they bloom here in central Texas. They’re exuberantly blooming everywhere as we speak. They’re my faves. And they smell delicious too!

Puesto @ 19

Strange bedfellows..

One is trying to keep a theocracy at bay… The other is trying to institute one here..

This is how authoritarians think..

Speaking of I just loved Pelosi’s maternal quote:

“Take a deep breath..” I’ll bet Our Boy Emperor just HATES to be talked to by a woman in this manner!!

No actually, their identical twins. Both Saudis and Ws have joined with religious extremists to gain & hold power. The Saudi royal problem is that they’re now at the blowback stage. Not much longer before it happens here. I’ve often said that bad religion outcompetes good religion, on the “my-god-is-holier-than-your-god” line of reasoning.

Monsieur le Prof @
24

This along with all the international buzz about an imminent attack on Iran. Makes you wonder.

But with Qatar and the UAE denying staging rights, the US will have to run the War on Iran out of Kuwait and Diego Garcia.

You know, so many pundits and neocons say that the Palestinian/Israeli issue is just an excuse for anger.

It’s not.

It’s central and so is the ongoing and bloody occupations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

I am glad for this tough talk to begin…it’s way past time. The leaders in that grand part of the world need to stand up for their people and stare down the imperialists (us and the meager coalition) instead of playing footsie. And it’s time for us to stop meddling in their affairs and let them be accountable to their people. Georgie unleashed a ‘crusade’ and said so– stupid, stupid, stupid.

thanks greenwarrior– I love the color and the profusion of them!

O’Bierne defending Sam Fox as well as the Swiftboaters.

I’ve often said that bad religion outcompetes good religion, on the “my-god-is-holier-than-your-god” line of reasoning.

“my milkshake is better than yours”

TeddySanFran @ 12

Good evening, all. Anybody have a link to a trustworthy English-language translation of Abdullah’s speech opening the Arab League conference? Calling our Iraq occupation “illegal” is one thing; I’d sure like to know what else he said.

Here’s an AFP article on the speech:

link

That came from an article Taylor Marsh just published on this topic.

tejanarusa @ 26

Does anyone here think that Abdullah’s speech might break into Dubya’s bubble of non-reality? I’d like to think he’s wetting his pants tonight, after hearing that.

I think the public stance of the House of Saud and the House of Bush are completely different than their private stance. IMHO, I would not make too much of this.. They are likely still on the same page, but can’t be seen kissing in public.

angie @
17

Well, at least George has texas bluebells to keep him company while the rest of the world has deciderated to leave him and Mizz Laura alone.

All alone.

Poppy and Babs must be ticked off, bigtime.

yep. except i think they’re texas bluebonnets. they really are beautiful – one of the things i miss about tx are the wildflowers in april.

TeddySanFran @ 27

The US/Saudi dance has always been complex; Bandar flying to DeeCee to tell W a state dinner would be “inconvenient” strikes me as the prelude to Abdullah’s speech today calling our occupation “illegal.” If it was a matter of conflicting dates, State would have rearranged the dates with KSA’s Foreign Affairs Minister Bandar. His long friendship with the Bushes, and the flight to deliver the message, and the speech today — what do these add up to?

Wheels within wheels on fire.

I think it wasn’t “inconvenient” in the temporal sense.

Nice piece, teddy! Glad your out front!

Lindy @ 23

War games end.

thank goodness. every day we don’t bomb iran is a good day.

TeddySanFran @ 12

Good evening, all. Anybody have a link to a trustworthy English-language translation of Abdullah’s speech opening the Arab League conference? Calling our Iraq occupation “illegal” is one thing; I’d sure like to know what else he said.

Teddy- here it is- (from the Saudi Embassy site)

King Abdullah address to the 19th Summit of the League of Arab States
~In the beloved Iraq, blood is spilled between brothers under an illegitimate foreign occupation and despicable sectarianism that threatens civil war.~

I’ve been waiting since Bush’s boils subsided after the selection for the pressure to get to him and now that time approaches. I think it possible he just might blow up. In what way I can’t say but his competence, meaning his emotional psycological ability to function might be called into question. Not by us hippies mind you but the insiders insiders. The old permanent government hands who gave Bush a pass and tried to bail him out with the Hamilton Baker plan.

Absolute collapse of support for the administration is seemingly at hand. It won’t be pretty and I’ve always imagined some sort of extraconstitutional intervention of some sort to get Buah back on the ranch pre 08.

Saudi leaders have one policy objective: survival. They can see that Bush is toast, and they know you don’t survive backing losers. His Iraq war has gone to hell, and probably would have anyway even if they the Saudis hadn’t been supporting the Iraqi insurgency. And Bush has made the region more unstable, and while the Saudis have no problem destabilizing others they hate when it happens to them.

Worse, his rubber stamp Congress is gone, and if they associate themselves too closely to Bush, someone just might start holding hearings on them and what they have been up to. Increasingly, Bush doesn’t control the agenda either, and there is this accountability notion, so typically naive and American but still foreign and dangerous to the Saudi power structure. Then too there is the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. They wish it would go away but Bush is even more pro-Israeli than most American Presidents and Condoleeza Rice is more ineffective than most American Secretaries of State. It’s all very distressing. Even the silver lining of blaming all their problems on the Americans isn’t much of a consolation this time.

So with the position of Democrats improving and Bush’s days numbered, the Saudis are doing what they do so well they are having a fit of pique.

Great post, TeddySanFran!

…and angie – loved your comment :)

1,468 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND..

Citizen TeddySanFran and the Firepup Patriots:

Things are gettin’ ta look more and more like the last days of Nixonstein so I wanna start beatin’ the drums…we hafta do it right this time. No pardons until after trials. Special prosecutors and investigations at the behest of Congress under the existing special prosecutor provisions in the DOJ that got Fitz installed. Investigations, indictments and trials for ALL of the bastards no matter how long it takes. And, dear friends, we gotta give up Rumsfeld ta the Germans if they indict ‘im for torture and we hafta offer up ANYone named by the International Court at the Hague.

The investigations should include possible applications of RICO including but not limited to Haliburton, Carlyle, large media corporations ( Times Inc., Fox News etc.), televangelists, large mega churches, the Mormon Church and the Bush Family.

This is not only gettin ta LOOK like Nixon’s last days, it’s actually more dangerous when you include the international political instability and the threat of general war in the Middle East.

Let’s play this out thru impeachment and special prosecutors…by the time the whole rotten mess is forced under everyone’s noses, an experienced, clean, intelligent and competent Democratic presidential candidate with no taint of the corruption will be left standing as a very convenient truth.

KEEP THE FAITH AND DON’T LET ‘EM GET AWAY THIS TIME!!

Matthews introduces a Dem consultant, Steve McMahon, and asks if he’s signed with a presidential candidate yet and goes on to say he’s going to assign T-shirts.

Yet goes all warm and fudgy with Ol’ 60 Grit. Hey, word to Chris. O’Beirne’s disclaimer t-shirt foreverafter should read: My husband went to Iraq and hired a bunch of incompetent neocons and all he brought me is this t-shirt…and over 3000 American bodybags.

The House of Saud under their robes these days probably wear t-shirts that say “We’re not with stupid.”

Valley Girl @ 41

TeddySanFran @ 12
Good evening, all. Anybody have a link to a trustworthy English-language translation of Abdullah’s speech opening the Arab League conference? Calling our Iraq occupation “illegal” is one thing; I’d sure like to know what else he said.
—

Teddy- here it is- (from the Saudi Embassy site)

King Abdullah address to the 19th Summit of the League of Arab States
~In the beloved Iraq, blood is spilled between brothers under an illegitimate foreign occupation and despicable sectarianism that threatens civil war.~

OK. That’s an astounding document. Great get!

All that handholding for nothing.

And, Teddy, you’re so right. This is very bad news. So bad, in fact, that even the idiot himself will know it’s bad.

All in all, with what this will mean for all of us in the near future, this is the worst possible news right now.

And there’s a lot of competition for that spot.

Teddy! great post.

did see that darkblack worked you into the Clinton lunchapalooza photo? :~)

wow, selise @ 37– they’re gorgeous! I wish I had a smell-o-puter and a field of them!

Which one kirk, and thanks! I seem to like this post :0

Norske on fire @ 45– agreed, and don’t forget Blackwater!

Shooter must have known this was coming, what with him getting his ass kick on his recent visit to the Kingdom.

Hey, VG!

angie @ 50

wow, selise @ 37– they’re gorgeous! I wish I had a smell-o-puter and a field of them!

Which one kirk, and thanks! I seem to like this post :0

Norske on fire @ 45– agreed, and don’t forget Blackwater!

So far I’ve read your 32 (backing up the thread) but I’m looking forward to the others!

thank you very much, kirk.

NorskeFlamethrower @ 45 –

i’d be ok with a truth and reconciliation process – so long as everything comes out… no backing off ‘cuz some dems might be involved.

Hugh at 43 — I agree with your take. The Saudis have concluded that Bush is toast and they better protect their own interests rather than rely on a sinking regime.

NorskeFlamethrower @ 45

1,468 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND..

Citizen TeddySanFran and the Firepup Patriots:

Things are gettin’ ta look more and more like the last days of Nixonstein so I wanna start beatin’ the drums…we hafta do it right this time. No pardons until after trials. Special prosecutors and investigations at the behest of Congress under the existing special prosecutor provisions in the DOJ that got Fitz installed. Investigations, indictments and trials for ALL of the bastards no matter how long it takes. And, dear friends, we gotta give up Rumsfeld ta the Germans if they indict ‘im for torture and we hafta offer up ANYone named by the International Court at the Hague.

The investigations should include possible applications of RICO including but not limited to Haliburton, Carlyle, large media corporations ( Times Inc., Fox News etc.), televangelists, large mega churches, the Mormon Church and the Bush Family.

This is not only gettin ta LOOK like Nixon’s last days, it’s actually more dangerous when you include the international political instability and the threat of general war in the Middle East.

Let’s play this out thru impeachment and special prosecutors…by the time the whole rotten mess is forced under everyone’s noses, an experienced, clean, intelligent and competent Democratic presidential candidate with no taint of the corruption will be left standing as a very convenient truth.

KEEP THE FAITH AND DON’T LET ‘EM GET AWAY THIS TIME!!

Bravo. Having lived through the Nixon pardon–which is why we’re in the soup again. We never thrashed it all out back when we should have, so we never learned our lesson. This baloney about closure & movin’ on never works. Things take how long they take, and short-circuiting the process does what all short-circuits do.

Pelosi 07.

punaise @ 49

Teddy! great post.

did see that darkblack worked you into the Clinton lunchapalooza photo? :~)

Jeez, it took me a minute to figure out what you were talking about. That’s not TeddySF!

Absolute collapse of support for the administration is seemingly at hand. It won’t be pretty and I’ve always imagined some sort of extraconstitutional intervention of some sort to get Buah back on the ranch pre 08.

Yeah. Escorted back onto the ranch in a straightjacket. Step this way, please, sir.

From the NYT article:
“The administration has urged Saudi Arabia to take a leading role in that realignment, but it is finding itself disappointed by the results.”

Be careful what you wish for Chimpy, as you just might get it…

selise @
40

Lindy @ 23
War games end.
—

thank goodness. every day we don’t bomb iran is a good day.

The stand-down from wargames can be the most dangerous time: dog-tired troops still amped on adrenaline, without having had any real outlet. Misunderstandings could easily escalate, even as the shutdown proceeds apace.

The wheels are coming off at every corner.

Why do presidents get to pardon criminals?

This is off topic, but I want to alert everyone here of a front page blogging opportunity at JindalIsBad.Com, a site dedicated to opposition research on Bobby Jindal (R-Kenner, Louisiana), who desires to run for Governor of Louisiana during the 2007 election cycle. Markos has directed attention to the site, and as a result, the site is the fifth entry in the Google web search for Bobby Jindal. This is an excellent opportunity for a younger blogger or a blogger from Louisiana to gain experience in opposition research and for a blogger to establish a reputation in the progressive blogosphere by being engaged in one of the most heated contests in the 2007 cycle. Although I only post comments at the site, I want everyone to be aware of this opportunity.

Take care.

Thanks, VG.

TeddySanFran @ 61

The stand-down from wargames can be the most dangerous time: dog-tired troops still amped on adrenaline, without having had any real outlet. Misunderstandings could easily escalate, even as the shutdown proceeds apace.

great. (not). i really enjoyed that 2 minutes of relief.

Wonder if the “bloggers in Baghdad” Bush referred to today were actually Iraqi bloggers.

KO notes that Bush failed to cite “an unimpeachable” source. Heh.

Does this mean that Darth Cheney and Eliot Abrams are about to lose their billion dollar slush fund in Saudi Arabia that pays for all their black bag operations?

Bob in HI
Just askin’

Cujo359 @ 35

TeddySanFran @ 12
Good evening, all. Anybody have a link to a trustworthy English-language translation of Abdullah’s speech opening the Arab League conference? Calling our Iraq occupation “illegal” is one thing; I’d sure like to know what else he said.

Here’s an AFP article on the speech:

link

That came from an article Taylor Marsh just published on this topic.

just watched the video of Seymour Hersh talking with Wolf Blitzer on the taylormarsh website. i’d already read the new yorker article, but this video is a MUST SEE. thanks for the link cujo.

I just tried to post a comment. Did it not work?

louisianagirl @
70

I just tried to post a comment. Did it not work?

Refresh your screen and it should be there now.

Could this have anything to do with it?

http://www.inteldaily.com/?c=166&a=1478

I can only add this to all the great comments;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iq3DlUCUUsE

Boohoo for you george

. And, dear friends, we gotta give up Rumsfeld ta the Germans if they indict ‘im for torture and we hafta offer up ANYone named by the International Court at the Hague.

Yes. The entire planet is waiting for us to take care of this Bush cabel. They want us to clean up, otherwise, I’m convinced, we’ll see them stepping in, aggressively.

Betcha Shooter wasn’t surprised by the King’s speech.

Okay, this is off topic, and I apologize for typing the comment above, but the comment I tried to post earlier did not register. If any of you want to serve as a front page blogger for a blog dedicated to conducting opposition research on US House Rep. Bobby Jindal of LA-01, who is running for Governor of Louisiana during the 2007 election cycle, visit JindalISBad-dot-com or write jindalisbad – at – gmail.com. This is an excellent opportunity for a younger blogger or a blogger from Louisiana to gain experience and a reputation while engaging in one of the most heated contests during the 2007 election cycle.

Take care, everyone.

When former Secretary of the Treasury Paul O’Neil (the first 43 administration) starting digging into the Saudi connection with funding some of the 9/11 bombers, O’neil was tanked. READ “PRICE OF LOYALTY” BY RON SUSKIND.

The other tidbit in that book that I found more than interesting was that O’Neil and Greenspan had other plans for the surplus from the Clinton and 41 administrations other than feeding the fat cats their tax cuts that Bush had promised during his campaign. Greenspan and O’Neil wanted to take a sizeable chunk of that surplus and role it over into the upcoming Social Security and Medicare shortfalls. They do not have to worry about that surplus any more they took care of that for the peasants. They want to privatize social security the little devils

TRANSCRIPTS…FOLLOW THE E-MAILS
PHASE II OF THE SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE. Hello Senator Rockerfeller we are still waiting for those responsible for the false WMD intelligence to be held ACCOUNTABLE.

carolyn urban @ 59

Absolute collapse of support for the administration is seemingly at hand. It won’t be pretty and I’ve always imagined some sort of extraconstitutional intervention of some sort to get Buah back on the ranch pre 08.

Yeah. Escorted back onto the ranch in a straightjacket. Step this way, please, sir.

It may take all of them getting b js. for our congress to impeach them. War crimes and lying about WMD’s is just not enough!

The first step on the path of salvation is the restoration of confidence in ourselves and in each other. Once confidence is restored, it will be accompanied by credibility. And if credibility is restored, then the winds of hope will blow. And when that happens, we will never allow any forces from outside the region to design the future of the region. Then no banner other than that of Arabism will hover over Arab land.

I think they have been giving that same speech for 60 years with much the same results. I don’t know how I would feel about it though if I were a Kurd, Turkoman, or Armenian. And then too don’t the Saudis view all Shia as Persians? Lots to feel uncomfortable about there. Strange how unity can be so divisive.

RBG @ 71

louisianagirl @ 70
I just tried to post a comment. Did it not work?
—

Refresh your screen and it should be there now.

Thanks, RBG. The comment I posted is now there. Because I respect everyone here, I want to alert all of you of the opportunity I discuss in my other comments. I apologize for posting twice, but I had a technical problem.

Love.

TeddySanFran @
33

O’Bierne defending Sam Fox as well as the Swiftboaters.

Don’t get me fuckin started again, I went off the deep end during the 5pm Tweeter. Understand that part of throwing medals back at Dewey Canyon was because of the way the were devalued by the government. Can you spell Tillman?

I’d say it’s a perfect time to start a third war. That’ll show ‘em. Pow pow!!

Scarecrow @
67

Wonder if the “bloggers in Baghdad” Bush referred to today were actually Iraqi bloggers.

KO notes that Bush failed to cite “an unimpeachable” source. Heh.

Here it is, check out that blogroll! LOL

http://iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/

King Abdullah’s speech did not get much coverage. Too sensible, too rational. too intelligent.

Maddy @
73

I can only add this to all the great comments;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iq3DlUCUUsE

Boohoo for you george

perfect!

I think it was yesterday that someone posted that we will not win in Iran and I was going to respond that we have not won in Iraq or Afghanistan either.

We cannot “win” because our supposed cause dictated by booshco is completely immoral and unjust. If we or Israel goes after Iran, it is all over.

The end. (and I am not being histrionic, either)

I think that this is what “it” is all about. A warning shot over the bow. Late? Yes. But the House of Saud wants to preserve itself in the neighborhood.

1,468 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND..

Citizen Teddy San Fran and the Firepup Patriots:

Actually, this move by the Saudis may be the best thing that could happen right now. First of all, it gets the major players and neighbors in the region talkin’ to each other. Secondly, in the short run it almost guarantees that Iraq will not be split up and proxied to American corporations. In addition, it puts pressure on the US to get our troops out NOW before they become ritual sacrifices in reconciliation rites between Shia and Sunni. And, finally, it enhances the possibility of an Israeli-Palestinian settlement if we can convince the Arabs that Israel will stay inside her mandated borders.

Of course, it goes without sayin’ that this abandonment of the Chimpenfurer by the Saudis takes away the raison d’etra for any American presence in Iraq. Now we ken transfer 50,000 troops ta Afghanistan and clean up the illegitimate relatives of the Saudi royal family.

KEEP THE FAITH AND WATCH PEOPLE TAKE CARE OF THE MESS WE’VE MADE OF THEIR LIVES!!

Terry Olson @ 63

Why do presidents get to pardon criminals?

I have wondered about this. When did the “presidential pardon” come into being. What purpose does the Libby trial have if Bush just pardons him?

TeddySanFran @
27

The US/Saudi dance has always been complex; Bandar flying to DeeCee to tell W a state dinner would be “inconvenient” strikes me as the prelude to Abdullah’s speech today calling our occupation “illegal.” If it was a matter of conflicting dates, State would have rearranged the dates with KSA’s Foreign Affairs Minister Bandar. His long friendship with the Bushes, and the flight to deliver the message, and the speech today — what do these add up to?

Wheels within wheels on fire.

And the other King Abdullah suggesting a date in 2008 for their dinner, the sly puss. Among other things, they’re shorting Bush political stock, and have probably done so at least since Bandar’s departure (Turki was for reality check purposes, and he reported back, “Oh yeah, baby!”)

Since it seem unlike the Saudis (but Jordan Abdullah not so much) to be both so blunt and abrupt, there indeed has to be a lot behind this. What has Bush not done that he was supposed to have by now? Proven he could stay in office?

Cozumel — Thanks. Rajiv Chandrasekaran put the blog in context on Countdown.

Is it all a ‘fakeout?’
Is it a ’squabble?’
Is it a radical policy difference?
Is it a fear that Bushism has created more support for al queada in saudi arabia?
Have they reached a level of understanding with iran?
Do they believe the shite explosion that will occur in iraq if iran is attacked will affect them adversely?
so many questions.

the horrific saudi royals splitting hairs with the horrific bushies.

kathleen @ 87

Terry Olson @ 63
Why do presidents get to pardon criminals?

I have wondered about this. When did the “presidential pardon” come into being. What purpose does the Libby trial have if Bush just pardons him?

Uh, it’s the principle.

kathleen @ 87

Terry Olson @ 63
Why do presidents get to pardon criminals?
—
I have wondered about this. When did the “presidential pardon” come into being. What purpose does the Libby trial have if Bush just pardons him?

Art.2 Section 2. of the Constitution

The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States; he may require the opinion, in writing, of the principal officer in each of the executive departments, upon any subject relating to the duties of their respective offices, and he shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.

Oh this is ripe. On Raw Story it has a link to a Newsweek article about an e-mail from Domenici thanking Rove.

juicy

Raven @ 91

kathleen @ 87
Terry Olson @ 63
Why do presidents get to pardon criminals?

I have wondered about this. When did the “presidential pardon” come into being. What purpose does the Libby trial have if Bush just pardons him?

Uh, it’s the principle.

Think Chimpy wants to get in the Dems face? Pardon the traitor tomorrow, in the first minute ot Sampson’s testimony.

John Deans latest on the Attorney General scandal over at JohnDeanfindlaw is worth the read.

angie @ 17

Well, at least George has texas bluebells …

I first read that as “Texas Blueballs”.

Worse, my first reaction was, oh, that explains a lot.

kathleen @
87

Terry Olson @ 63

Why do presidents get to pardon criminals?

I have wondered about this. When did the “presidential pardon” come into being. What purpose does the Libby trial have if Bush just pardons him?

Just a guess but it probably does go back to the rights of the King under English Common law…

Hugh @ 92

kathleen @ 87
Terry Olson @ 63
Why do presidents get to pardon criminals?
—
I have wondered about this. When did the “presidential pardon” come into being. What purpose does the Libby trial have if Bush just pardons him?
—

Art.2 Section 2. of the Constitution

The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States; he may require the opinion, in writing, of the principal officer in each of the executive departments, upon any subject relating to the duties of their respective offices, and he shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.

Can Libby still be impeached?

Scarecrow @ 89

Cozumel — Thanks. Rajiv Chandrasekaran put the blog in context on Countdown.

It smells like Cheney saying on Meet the Press, “Hey, did you see that article in the NYT yesterday (Judith Miller)?”

Phony psych ops bullshit at best

JGabriel @ 96

angie @ 17

Well, at least George has texas bluebells …

I first read that as “Texas Blueballs”.

Worse, my first reaction was, oh, that explains a lot.

707!

I can see that.

oooh, belly hurts now.

I’m trying to put the Cheney flying visit to the Saudis together with the Halliburton move to Dubai. Too many chess pieces on the board, but my skin is telling me there is a connection and that, once again, Cheney has “other priorites” (as he did when his time to serve in Vietnam came up), to serve the interests of the United States. This from oth of the Kings Abdullah is moving the next pieces in play. Cheney loyal to Bush! Ha!

Since it seem unlike the Saudis (but Jordan Abdullah not so much) to be both so blunt and abrupt, there indeed has to be a lot behind this. What has Bush not done that he was supposed to have by now? Proven he could stay in office?

One possibility — the Saudis helped broker the Palestinian unity government deal, which upset the Israels and Condi — because Hamas had not agreed to recognize Israel, renounce violence. The Saudis see a united Palestine as a necessary party for genuine negotiations, but Bush/Condi keep trying to drive the Palestinian parties apart — and upsetting Saudi efforts. Note that the King today emphasized the need to end the freeze of funds to the Palestinians, which Bush/condi still oppose.

Or, the Saudi’s don’t want to be in the US, during, or just before (according to the Russian press) the US attacks Iran?

Wouldn’t look v. good to the home crowd?

rxbusa @
93

Oh this is ripe. On Raw Story it has a link to a Newsweek article about an e-mail from Domenici thanking Rove.

juicy

HuffPost also has link

Veritas78 @
82

I’d say it’s a perfect time to start a third war. That’ll show ‘em. Pow pow!!

Yeah, less than two years to go! Shrub still has to lose one more war and one more major American city.

Then he’ll have a record (lost 3 wars & 2 cities) that will be on the record books for a loooooong time.

Doesn’t that beat, like, the worst of the worst of the Roman emperors?

At Raw Story Scheumer says subpoenas for Rove and Meiers ready to go.

Mabel’s Wig Shack @ 90

Is it all a ‘fakeout?’
Is it a ’squabble?’
Is it a radical policy difference?
Is it a fear that Bushism has created more support for al queada in saudi arabia?
Have they reached a level of understanding with iran?
Do they believe the shite explosion that will occur in iraq if iran is attacked will affect them adversely?
so many questions.

the horrific saudi royals splitting hairs with the horrific bushies.

To repeat…Its peak oil.Saudi production is collapseing and they need to position themselfs for the trouble to come

Hugh,
I guess I’m looking for the historical reason for presidential pardons being in the Constitution.
Is this something applicable today?

The thought that an administration can run America the way this one has (and not pay any penalty if everyone is pardoned) just doesn’t groove with me.

Satan luvvs Repugs @
105

Veritas78 @
82

I’d say it’s a perfect time to start a third war. That’ll show ‘em. Pow pow!!

Yeah, less than two years to go! Shrub still has to lose one more war and one more major American city.

Then he’ll have a record (lost 3 wars & 2 cities) that will be on the record books for a loooooong time.

Doesn’t that beat, like, the worst of the worst of the Roman emperors?

Maybe he thinks it’s all like a game of hearts and he’s trying to shoot the moon.

1,468 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND..

Citizen Terry Olson and the Firepup Patriots:

With regard to the pardoning power, the “founding fathers” were not only intellectually brilliant but they understood how messy any kind of democracy or popular politics is…hence, they knew that legitimate laws would be used for specifically political purposes and wanted to provide for the ability to free but not necessarily rehabilitate political prisoners. Remember that the pardon is not without consequence to the pardoner or his/her political faction or party.

Pardon me fer tryin’ ta call up a couple a years of graduate study of the Constitution and early nation…but it surely felt good. Man, those 18th century enlightenment citizens were GIANTS.

KEEP THE FAITH WITH OUR HISTORY AND OUR CHILDREN!!

CheckingIn @ 103

Or, the Saudi’s don’t want to be in the US, during, or just before (according to the Russian press) the US attacks Iran?

Wouldn’t look v. good to the home crowd?

Yes, I wondered if the cancellation of the State Dinner is related to what Shooter’s told them about warplans.

Scarecrow @ 102

Since it seem unlike the Saudis (but Jordan Abdullah not so much) to be both so blunt and abrupt, there indeed has to be a lot behind this. What has Bush not done that he was supposed to have by now? Proven he could stay in office?

One possibility — the Saudis helped broker the Palestinian unity government deal, which upset the Israels and Condi — because Hamas had not agreed to recognize Israel, renounce violence. The Saudis see a united Palestine as a necessary party for genuine negotiations, but Bush/Condi keep trying to drive the Palestinian parties apart — and upsetting Saudi efforts. Note that the King today emphasized the need to end the freeze of funds to the Palestinians, which Bush/condi still oppose.

This makes sense. The bulk of his speech was on this issue, and nothing bushco has done has improved the situation for the Palestinians; in fact, it has made things nearly unbearable for them.

Bushco has said that spreading democracy is their goal, yet when the people of Palestine had a clean and democratic election, Washington thumbed their collective noses at them and held them hostage in an unconscionable way and they continue to do so today even as the sewer broke in a little town of shacks in Gaza killing people and forcing others to flee to an already overpopulated prison.

But Condi and Ban Ki Moon snubbed Hamas just the other day. Bidness as usual.

The stand-down from wargames can be the most dangerous time: dog-tired troops still amped on adrenaline, without having had any real outlet. Misunderstandings could easily escalate, even as the shutdown proceeds apace.

Oh, gee, the one bit of apparent good news; thanks a bunch, Teddy. I’m scared enough today. Alternating between glee at the repub/coverup/meltdowns today, but terrified at the thought of war with Iran.

Terry Olson @
108

Hugh,
I guess I’m looking for the historical reason for presidential pardons being in the Constitution.
Is this something applicable today?

The thought that an administration can run America the way this one has (and not pay any penalty if everyone is pardoned) just doesn’t groove with me.

Found this via teh google:

http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/love2.htm

Didn’t mean to be a downer about the wargames’ end…

Prairie Sunshine @
46

Matthews introduces a Dem consultant, Steve McMahon, and asks if he’s signed with a presidential candidate yet and goes on to say he’s going to assign T-shirts.

Yet goes all warm and fudgy with Ol’ 60 Grit. Hey, word to Chris. O’Beirne’s disclaimer t-shirt foreverafter should read: My husband went to Iraq and hired a bunch of incompetent neocons and all he brought me is this t-shirt…and over 3000 American bodybags.

The House of Saud under their robes these days probably wear t-shirts that say “We’re not with stupid.”

heh

and great post, Teddy

To get a real understanding,and a sleepless night go to http://www.theoildrum.com and look for the artical by stuart staniford.”water in the gas tank”….and ask about the “unused”pipeline taken over by the saudis….the ones with no meters…that go to saudi tanks…to hide the true scale of the collapse of the saudi feilds…

then get scared…

kathleen @
77

When former Secretary of the Treasury Paul O’Neil (the first 43 administration) starting digging into the Saudi connection with funding some of the 9/11 bombers, O’neil was tanked. READ “PRICE OF LOYALTY” BY RON SUSKIND.

The other tidbit in that book that I found more than interesting was that O’Neil and Greenspan had other plans for the surplus from the Clinton and 41 administrations other than feeding the fat cats their tax cuts that Bush had promised during his campaign. Greenspan and O’Neil wanted to take a sizeable chunk of that surplus and role it over into the upcoming Social Security and Medicare shortfalls. They do not have to worry about that surplus any more they took care of that for the peasants. They want to privatize social security the little devils

TRANSCRIPTS…FOLLOW THE E-MAILS
PHASE II OF THE SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE. Hello Senator Rockerfeller we are still waiting for those responsible for the false WMD intelligence to be held ACCOUNTABLE.

You don’t suppose Jay is being held back by Uncle David “New World Order” Rockefeller, founding member of the Bilderberger group, ya think?

Just wonderin’, cuz inquiring minds want to know.

Bob in HI

kathleen @ 98

Can Libby still be impeached?

Libby resigned his position in government so the answer is no.

Art. 2 Section 4.

The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.

So what is a civil officer?

Civil officer applies to any employee of the federal government, including judges, excluding those in the military and legislators. From The Constitution of the United States of America, Analysis and Interpretation 2002 edition, the annotated text put out by our government:

During the debate in the First Congress on the “removal” controversy, it was contended by some members that impeachment was the exclusive way to remove any officer of the Government from his post, but Madison and others contended that this position was destructive of sound governmental practice, and the view did not prevail. Impeachment, said Madison, was to be used to reach a bad officer sheltered by the President and to remove him “even against the will of the President; so that the declaration in the Constitution was intended as a supplementary security for the good behavior of the public officers.” While the language of section 4 covers any “civil officer” in the executive branch, and covers judges as well, it excludes military officers, and the precedent was early established that it does not apply to members of Congress.

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/const…..02/012.pdf (p.608)

watertiger provides a stunning visual of W hearing the news about his BigKing-friend’s speech

Satan luvvs Repugs @ 105

Veritas78 @
82

I’d say it’s a perfect time to start a third war. That’ll show ‘em. Pow pow!!

Yeah, less than two years to go! Shrub still has to lose one more war and one more major American city.

Then he’ll have a record (lost 3 wars & 2 cities) that will be on the record books for a loooooong time.

Doesn’t that beat, like, the worst of the worst of the Roman emperors?

I’d say putting the cradle of civilization into the grave ranks right up there with the worst shit ever.

I suppose, if the US didn’t have two battle carrier groups in the Straits of Hormuz, wargaming right up against Iran’s increasingly twitchy military.

Great job TSF.
This is really getting lost. Why even one battle carrier into the Straits of Hormuz? The Straits are two shallow, one-mile wide channels, through which 25% of the world’s oil flows. Iran has Russian and Chinese made supersonic anti ship missles. Why would you put a battle carrier of all things in that kind of danger, unless you were trying to provoke Iran?

Bob Schacht @ 118

kathleen @
77

When former Secretary of the Treasury Paul O’Neil (the first 43 administration) starting digging into the Saudi connection with funding some of the 9/11 bombers, O’neil was tanked. READ “PRICE OF LOYALTY” BY RON SUSKIND.

The other tidbit in that book that I found more than interesting was that O’Neil and Greenspan had other plans for the surplus from the Clinton and 41 administrations other than feeding the fat cats their tax cuts that Bush had promised during his campaign. Greenspan and O’Neil wanted to take a sizeable chunk of that surplus and role it over into the upcoming Social Security and Medicare shortfalls. They do not have to worry about that surplus any more they took care of that for the peasants. They want to privatize social security the little devils

TRANSCRIPTS…FOLLOW THE E-MAILS
PHASE II OF THE SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE. Hello Senator Rockerfeller we are still waiting for those responsible for the false WMD intelligence to be held ACCOUNTABLE.

You don’t suppose Jay is being held back by Uncle David “New World Order” Rockefeller, founding member of the Bilderberger group, ya think?

Just wonderin’, cuz inquiring minds want to know.

Bob in HI

De-Escalate
Investigate or
Lose in 2008
And Open the door for an Independent candidate

RGJoe gets Countdown’s silver WPITW for his speech on the Senate floor last nite: “For the first time, we can be cautiously optimistic about progress in Iraq….”

“For the first time?!,” KO asks, referencing the many statements in the past, especially those during the 2006 campaign.

Hugh @ 119

kathleen @ 98
Can Libby still be impeached?

Libby resigned his position in government so the answer is no.

Art. 2 Section 4.

The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.
——–

So what is a civil officer?
—————-
Civil officer applies to any employee of the federal government, including judges, excluding those in the military and legislators. From The Constitution of the United States of America, Analysis and Interpretation 2002 edition, the annotated text put out by our government:

During the debate in the First Congress on the “removal” controversy, it was contended by some members that impeachment was the exclusive way to remove any officer of the Government from his post, but Madison and others contended that this position was destructive of sound governmental practice, and the view did not prevail. Impeachment, said Madison, was to be used to reach a bad officer sheltered by the President and to remove him “even against the will of the President; so that the declaration in the Constitution was intended as a supplementary security for the good behavior of the public officers.” While the language of section 4 covers any “civil officer” in the executive branch, and covers judges as well, it excludes military officers, and the precedent was early established that it does not apply to members of Congress.
—————–

PDF link (p.608)

Thanks for the answer.

Can a convicted felon that is pardoned by a President ever serve in a future administration? Please tell me no!

greenwarrior @ 69

link

That came from an article Taylor Marsh just published on this topic.

just watched the video of Seymour Hersh talking with Wolf Blitzer on the taylormarsh website. i’d already read the new yorker article, but this video is a MUST SEE. thanks for the link cujo.

I agree! That is absolutely stunning!

I was trying not to break the margins with a zig…

another gem ….google “downstream ventures” follow the link to “petrolium and energy markets”.the artical is called”peak oil,missing meters,and a unused pipeline.

This is why we are sooo screwed.The saudi princes are getting their visas lined up now I bet

new thread

prostratedragon @ 88

TeddySanFran @ 27

The US/Saudi dance has always been complex; Bandar flying to DeeCee to tell W a state dinner would be “inconvenient” strikes me as the prelude to Abdullah’s speech today calling our occupation “illegal.” If it was a matter of conflicting dates, State would have rearranged the dates with KSA’s Foreign Affairs Minister Bandar. His long friendship with the Bushes, and the flight to deliver the message, and the speech today — what do these add up to?

Wheels within wheels on fire.

And the other King Abdullah suggesting a date in 2008 for their dinner, the sly puss. Among other things, they’re shorting Bush political stock, and have probably done so at least since Bandar’s departure (Turki was for reality check purposes, and he reported back, “Oh yeah, baby!”)

Since it seem unlike the Saudis (but Jordan Abdullah not so much) to be both so blunt and abrupt, there indeed has to be a lot behind this. What has Bush not done that he was supposed to have by now? Proven he could stay in office?

I suspect it has to do with the Russian intelligence rumours that we’ll be attacking Iran in early April.

Whether or not those rumors are true, they’re widespread enough that most governments in the region appear to believe them.

Thus the pullback from the Saudis and Jordan, as well as the rumors about Turkish plans to invade Iraqi Kurdistan. I heard from a diplomat friend back in October that Turkey and Iran had already made strategic plans to attack N. Iraq in the event of an American attack — apparently that was the impetus for the PKK’s announced cease fire last autumn.

Of course, none of this means an attack will actually take place. But it does mean countries in the region *believe* it will, and it may explain why we see so many Middle East countries distancing themselves from us diplomatically now.

kathleen @
125
Hugh @ 119

kathleen @ 98
Can Libby still be impeached?
—

Libby resigned his position in government so the answer is no.

Art. 2 Section 4.

The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.
—
So what is a civil officer?
————————–
Civil officer applies to any employee of the federal government, including judges, excluding those in the military and legislators. From The Constitution of the United States of America, Analysis and Interpretation 2002 edition, the annotated text put out by our government:

During the debate in the First Congress on the “removal” controversy, it was contended by some members that impeachment was the exclusive way to remove any officer of the Government from his post, but Madison and others contended that this position was destructive of sound governmental practice, and the view did not prevail. Impeachment, said Madison, was to be used to reach a bad officer sheltered by the President and to remove him “even against the will of the President; so that the declaration in the Constitution was intended as a supplementary security for the good behavior of the public officers.” While the language of section 4 covers any “civil officer” in the executive branch, and covers judges as well, it excludes military officers, and the precedent was early established that it does not apply to members of Congress.
————————-

PDF link (p.608)
——–
Thanks for the answer.

Can a convicted felon that is pardoned by a President ever serve in a future administration? Please tell me no!

Yes. Eliot Abrams (although believe his conviction overturned

Can a convicted felon that is pardoned by a President ever serve in a future administration? Please tell me no!

Luckily for him, Elliot Abrams pled down to two misdemeanors:

During investigation of the Iran-Contra Affair, the special prosecutor handling the case prepared multiple felony counts against Abrams but never indicted him.[7] Instead, Abrams entered into a plea agreement that ultimately led to a conviction without imprisonment on two misdemeanors of withholding information from Congress.[8] President George H. W. Bush pardoned Abrams along with a number of other Iran-Contra defendants shortly before leaving office in 1992.

.

Elliott Abrams (born January 24, 1948) is an American lawyer who has served in foreign policy positions for a number of Republican U.S. Presidents, most recently George W. Bush.
During Bush’s first term in office, he was appointed the post of Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director on the National Security Council for Near East and North African Affairs. At the start of Bush’s second term, Abrams was promoted to be his Deputy National Security Advisor for Global Democracy Strategy, responsible for advancing Bush’s strategy of advancing democracy abroad. A leading Straussian neoconservative, Abrams’ appointment by Bush was considered highly controversial due to his involvement in the Iran-Contra Affair, over which he subsequently pleaded guilty to two misdemeanor counts of unlawfully withholding information from Congress.

Elliot Abrams does right now, kathleen iirc– he is a felon who pleaded guilty to misdemeanors and got pardoned by Poppy.

TeddySanFran @ 132

Can a convicted felon that is pardoned by a President ever serve in a future administration? Please tell me no!

Luckily for him, Elliot Abrams pled down to two misdemeanors:

During investigation of the Iran-Contra Affair, the special prosecutor handling the case prepared multiple felony counts against Abrams but never indicted him.[7] Instead, Abrams entered into a plea agreement that ultimately led to a conviction without imprisonment on two misdemeanors of withholding information from Congress.[8] President George H. W. Bush pardoned Abrams along with a number of other Iran-Contra defendants shortly before leaving office in 1992.

.

Elliott Abrams (born January 24, 1948) is an American lawyer who has served in foreign policy positions for a number of Republican U.S. Presidents, most recently George W. Bush.
During Bush’s first term in office, he was appointed the post of Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director on the National Security Council for Near East and North African Affairs. At the start of Bush’s second term, Abrams was promoted to be his Deputy National Security Advisor for Global Democracy Strategy, responsible for advancing Bush’s strategy of advancing democracy abroad. A leading Straussian neoconservative, Abrams’ appointment by Bush was considered highly controversial due to his involvement in the Iran-Contra Affair, over which he subsequently pleaded guilty to two misdemeanor counts of unlawfully withholding information from Congress.

Ah, I stand partly corrected. Thanks TSF…

appreciate the FDL blog so much! But often it all seems rather absurd…Americans discussing democracy, investigations, trials, etc. All the while close to a million Iraqi’s are dead who knows how many are injured, 2 million Iraqis are displaced, 3200 American soldiers are dead, 50,ooo injured and most Americans have their pedals to the metal and their heads in the clouds.
“What a world what a world”

dakine01, it’s pretty clear Abrams was a felon, despite his plea. it’s confusing, but not if you’re a neocon!

Scarecrow @
102

“Since it seem unlike the Saudis (but Jordan Abdullah not so much) to be both so blunt and abrupt, there indeed has to be a lot behind this. What has Bush not done that he was supposed to have by now? Proven he could stay in office?”

One possibility — the Saudis helped broker the Palestinian unity government deal, which upset the Israels and Condi — because Hamas had not agreed to recognize Israel, renounce violence. The Saudis see a united Palestine as a necessary party for genuine negotiations, but Bush/Condi keep trying to drive the Palestinian parties apart — and upsetting Saudi efforts. Note that the King today emphasized the need to end the freeze of funds to the Palestinians, which Bush/condi still oppose.

Maybe the Saudis feel they were getting places here they’d never got before, and so are more frustrated than usual with Bush’s obstinacy compared to other Presidents, or maybe they think they can exploit Bush’s obvious vulnerability. But these are still perennial issues between US and Saudi Arabia. King Abdullah’s speech does not sound to me like the kind of incremental departure you might expect in response to more of the same. Even before today’s news—chock full of ominous portent for the Bushies—is digested, I think someone’s decided to give a “stand clear.”

The most interesting aspect of Abdullah’s statement is not the statement itself, but why it took four years to happen. It is not as if he had no idea what was happening to his northern neighbor, Iraq. You would think that if he thinks the war is illegal now, he would have thought that from the very beginning.

So why the change of heart? My own guess is the rising specter of Iran, which was a contained power before Bush put his fist into the hornet’s nest, and now Iran is beginning look like an awakening giant. Uh oh! Bad George!

Inquiring minds…

Scarecrow @
102

One possibility — the Saudis helped broker the Palestinian unity government deal, which upset the Israels and Condi — because Hamas had not agreed to recognize Israel, renounce violence. The Saudis see a united Palestine as a necessary party for genuine negotiations, but Bush/Condi keep trying to drive the Palestinian parties apart — and upsetting Saudi efforts. Note that the King today emphasized the need to end the freeze of funds to the Palestinians, which Bush/condi still oppose.

A couple of questions. I’ve been looking for credible info on these and am having a difficut time:

1. When they say “recognize Israel’s right to exist,” what does that mean? Is there a set of explicit borders the Israelis require the Palestinians to recognize? If so, what is that border?

2. “By the term “renounce violence” does this mean the Palestinian government must disarm all Palestinians, or merely agree to control all organized non-governmental resistance to Israeli policies, including illegal activities of the Israeli settlers around Hebron, for instance?

TeddySanFran @
115

Didn’t mean to be a downer about the wargames’ end…

But it’s a valid point. In ordinary times, one could be sure that the relevant field commanders have that covered …

I can hear Poppa Bush and Jeb on the phone to Shrub, “Now there’s another fine mess you’ve gotten us into. Mmm, mm, mm.”

I suspect Poppa and Jeb have always worked overtime to repair the fractured relationships Shrub keeps leaving in his wake. At this rate, they won’t be getting sleep until Doomsday.

Dru @
121

I’d say putting the cradle of civilization into the grave ranks right up there with the worst shit ever.

Thank you.

kathleen @ 125
Thanks for the answer.

Can a convicted felon that is pardoned by a President ever serve in a future administration? Please tell me no!

Elliot Abrams pled guilty to misdemeanors and was pardoned by Bush 41.

Abrams is a poster child neo-con: morally depraved; ruthlessly ambitious ; utterly dishonest; friend to torturers, murders, and assassins.

A perfect servant for the Bushes and their megacorp masters.

One Abrams specialty was massacre denial. During a Nightline appearance in 1985, he was asked about reports that the US-funded Salvadoran military had slaughtered civilians at two sites the previous summer. Abrams maintained that no such events had occurred. And had the US Embassy and the State Department conducted an investigation? “My memory,” he said, “is that we did, but I don’t want to swear to it, because I’d have to go back and look at the cables.” But there had been no State Department inquiry; Abrams, in his lawyerly fashion, was being disingenuous. Three years earlier, when two American journalists reported that an elite, US-trained military unit had massacred hundreds of villagers in El Mozote, Abrams told Congress that the story was commie propaganda, as he fought for more US aid to El Salvador’s military. The massacre, as has since been confirmed, was real. And in 1993 after a UN truth commission, which examined 22,000 atrocities that occurred during the twelve-year civil war in El Salvador, attributed 85 percent of the abuses to the Reagan-assisted right-wing military and its death-squad allies, Abrams declared, “The Administration’s record on El Salvador is one of fabulous achievement.” Tell that to the survivors of El Mozote.

But it wasn’t his lies about mass murder that got Abrams into trouble. After a contra resupply plane was shot down in 1986, Abrams, one of the coordinators of Reagan’s pro-contra policy (along with the NSC’s Oliver North and the CIA’s Alan Fiers), appeared several times before Congressional committees and withheld information on the Administration’s connection to the secret and private contra-support network. He also hid from Congress the fact that he had flown to London (using the name “Mr. Kenilworth”) to solicit a $10 million contribution for the contras from the Sultan of Brunei. At a subsequent closed-door hearing, Democratic Senator Thomas Eagleton blasted Abrams for having misled legislators, noting that Abrams’s misrepresentations could lead to “slammer time.” Abrams disagreed, saying, “You’ve heard my testimony.” Eagleton cut in: “I’ve heard it, and I want to puke.” On another occasion, Republican Senator Dave Durenberger complained, “I wouldn’t trust Elliott any further thanI could throw Ollie North.” Even after Abrams copped a plea with Independent Counsel Lawrence Walsh, he refused to concede that he’d done anything untoward. Abrams’s Foggy Bottom services were not retained by the First Bush, but he did include Abrams in his lame-duck pardons of several Iran/contra wrongdoers.

Abrams was as nasty a policy warrior as Washington had seen in decades. He called foes “vipers.” He said that lawmakers who blocked contra aid would have “blood on their hands”-while he defended US support for a human-rights-abusing government in Guatemala. When Oliver North was campaigning for the Senate in 1994 and was accused of having ignored contra ties to drug dealers, Abrams backed North and claimed “all of us who ran that program…were absolutely dedicated to keeping it completely clean and free of any involvement by drug traffickers.” Yet in 1998 the CIA’s own inspector general issued a thick report noting that the Reagan Administration had collaborated-with suspected drug traffickers while managing the secret contra war.

Thanks, everyone for your help on the presidential pardons. Can this amendment be amended? For a situation we are having right now? I know you’re off to the next tread. Maybe another time.

Looks to me like the Saudis have realized that the Bush administration is going “down, down, down in a burning ring of fire.”

The unitary executive theory has now become the URINARY executive practice, with Bush and Cheney pissing on everything and everyone within range.

In fact, a URINARY executive INFECTION has now infected everyone in the White House, an infection that has spread throughout what was once an honorable Republican Party.

And apparently the Saudis are trying to put some distance between themselves and the URINARY executive INFECTION throughout the Bush and Cheney White House.

Congress needs to get out the HAZMAT suits and quarantine the Bush and Cheney White House for the good of our nation and the safety of the rest of the world.

JGabriel at 130:

Of course, none of this means an attack will actually take place. But it does mean countries in the region *believe* it will, and it may explain why we see so many Middle East countries distancing themselves from us diplomatically now.

If they do believe it, then you’re right that a lot of hasty backing up would take place. In particular, that might explain the choice of “inconvenient,” of all diplomatisms, for the mid-April state dinner. I’m hoping for something else not yet revealed, though, partly because I’m really hoping there’s “nothing” to the rumor.

Kirk Murphy,
Thank you for such a blatant example of why congress should take a fresh look at presidential pardons.

…and as we’re epu’d, more on Abrams from the excellent independent journalist Terry J. Allen (from In These Times, August 2001.):

In the congressional investigations that followed disclosure of the Iran-contra conspiracies, Abrams was never held accountable for the human rights violations backed, hidden and funded by the Reagan administration. Instead Abrams was accused of withholding information from Congress, a Washington euphemism for bald-face Iying. In 1991, he copped to two counts of withholding information from Congress (and was granted a Christmas Eve pardon a year later by President George Bush).

Abrams was none too pleased, even with this slap on the wrist. According to a May 30, 1994 article in Legal Times, he called his prosecutors “filthy bastards,” the proceedings against him “Kafkaesque,” and members of the Senate Intelligence Committee “pious clowns” whose raison d’etre was to ask him “abysmally stupid” questions. (In the spirit of full disclosure: Abrams once called me a “rotten bitch” after I tactlessly noted that much of the world considers him a war criminal.)

Abrams’ own “full biography,” posted on the Web site of the Ethics and Public Policy Center-an oxymoronic think tank where he wiled away much of the Democratic interregnum awaiting the collective amnesia of the American public-omits his unpleasantness with Congress. In any case, as Fleischer said of Abrams’ transgressions, “the president thinks that’s a matter of the past and was dealt with at the time.”

Loved ones of the thousand unarmed Salvadoran peasants, including 139 children, killed by U.S.-trained contra troops in the 1981 El Mozote massacre may be less inclined to let bygones be bygones. Abrams has been a consistent massacre denier, even calling Washington’s policy in El Salvador a “fabulous achievement.” He told Congress that the reports carried in the New York; Times and Washington Post a month after El Mozote were Communist propaganda.

In 1993, members of a Salvadoran Truth commission testified about the massacre in a congressional hearing of the House Western Hemisphere subcommittee. Chairman Robert G. Torricelli (D-New Jersey) vowed to review for possible perjury “every word uttered by every Reagan administration official” in congressional testimony on El Salvador. Abrams denounced Torricelli’s words as “McCarthyite crap.”

Eventually documentation emerged proving that the Reagan administration had known about El Mozote and other human rights violations all along. Abrams, however, carefully denied knowledge of the assassination of Salvadoran Archbishop Oscar Romero, committed shortly after the cleric denounced government terror. “Anybody who thinks you’re going to find a cable that says that Roberto d’Aubuisson murdered the archbishop is a fool,” Abrams was quoted in a March 21, 1993 article in the Washington Post.

In fact, the Post notes, the U.S. embassy in San Salvador sent at least two such cables to Washington nailing d’Aubuisson, the right-wing politician who was the chief architect of the plot against Romero. The December 21, 1981 cable notes: “A meeting, chaired by Maj. Roberto d’Aubuisson, during which the murder of Archbishop Romero was planned. During the meeting, some of the participants drew lots for the privilege of killing the archbishop.”

[bolding - kjm]

punaise @
49

Teddy! great post.

did see that darkblack worked you into the Clinton lunchapalooza photo? :~)

Someday, TSF…But not that time.

;>)

Jacqrat @ 52

Hey, VG!

Hey jacqrat! Left you a note upstairs. Didn’t see this til just now. Off on day job stuff.

angie @
17

Well, at least George has texas bluebells to keep him company

From what I know, Texas bluebells grow much further south and east from Waco.

They’re getting very difficult to find at all anymore. A prime area is between Austin and Houston. Aficionados jealously guard known locations, to keep others from digging them up or tromping all over them.

The flowers Bush is likely to have as a companion at Crawford is the more abundant (but equally lovely) Bluebonnet, our state flower, and the variety definitely prominent in the picture background above.

great post TSF

sooo chimpy has united the ME – yeah against the US – quel surprise…. and bushco is all over the saudis even being considered family and after doing saudi business… now they have turned on chimpy et al….

I suspect the Saudi refusal to break bread having to do with Bush’s failure to do his part in a handshake deal with the Saudi King and the Arab League with respect to the then Crown Prince’s 2002 peace plan for Israel/Palestine. In essence, that plan was close to the Clinton Plan of 2001 — return of all Palestine land outside the 1967 boundries, a Palestinian Capitol in E. Jerusalem, and joint tenancy of the sacred sites. The 2002 Arab League proposal promised all-Arab recognition of Israel, diplopmatic and economic relations, in exchange for the creation of a Palestinian State along these lines. To accomplish this, Bush had to make an honest effort to bring Israel to the table as an active party to the process. In this respect Bush has totally failed to even try, witness Condi’s statement this week that she was not really trying for a “big Bang.” This was a slap in the face to the Arab League and the Saudi King — thus the “we won’t break bread or suck dates” reaction. The Condi-Bush strategy is to play little games with low level talks between Abbas (Fatah) and Israel that go nowhere, and pretend that they are busy trying to accomplish something. They are up on the car-lift running their wheels for no particular purpose, and the Saudi’s and the Arab League are calling them on it.

Bush’s problem is that he is captive of AIPAC, which really does not represent core opinions in the American Jewish Community, which votes over 80% Democratic, and he is also captive of the Armageddonists, who are his base, and want him to bring on “End Times.” Neither of these commitments or orientations provide him with the freedom to act — create realistic policy, or even take diplomatic advantage of the opening the Arab League 2002 declaration had on offer. Essentially he has backed himself into a narrow corner from which there is no easy exit.

But the Democrats corner can be narrow too — there certainly was not universal approval of the settlement Clinton tabled at Taba or of the informal Geneva agreements. But those do parallel the Arab League Declarations — and they are the starting points from which detailed negotiations are possible.

If we want to unwind the Middle East, we must begin here. It is the core issue.

Hello Everyone,
long time Lurker, first time Poster

there have been some entries on this thread about Presidential Pardons. I read a book a few weeks ago called “31 Days: The Crisis That Gave Us the Government We Have Today” by Barry Werth. This book is about the first 31 days of the Ford Administration. Very interesting book that is suitable for these times. Here is what I took away from this book about Presidential pardons. If you accept a pardon for a specific crime, you automatically accept GUILT for that crime.

So, can a pardon be worded as such that an individual escapes Criminal punishment for a crime, but not Civil punishment? Anyone?

My scenario for BushCo is this: Have Congress tell GW that all pardons have to be worded such that the pardons only absolve the guilty individuals of criminal punishment NOT civil punishment. Once the individuals accept these pardons, they are guilty, period. Then in civil court, the Government bankrupts them of every penny they have ever earned. They have no defense because they have already admitted they are guilty by accepting the pardon.

If you don’t think this is enough punishment, chances are you are not alone. But I don’t feel the need to dwell on Old Testament concepts of punishment here, especially since I am just posting here for the first time, it would be rude.

So, why would GW agree to word pardons as I have mentioned above? Good question. But perhaps out there, there is an answer…..

“Saudi king slams ‘illegitimate occupation’ of Iraq

IRAQ SUPPORT: Saudi King Abdullah (L) greets Iraqi President Jalal Talabani upon his arrival in Riyadh March 27, 2007, ahead of a two-day Arab summit. Abdullah slammed the occupation of Iraq in his opening speech to the summit, Wednesday.
(REUTERS)
RIYADH — Saudi King Abdullah, whose country is a close US ally, slammed Wednesday the “illegitimate foreign occupation” of Iraq in an opening speech to the annual Arab summit in Riyadh.

UPDATE: The White House insisted Wednesday that King Abdullah was wrong to say the US military presence in Iraq is an “illegitimate foreign occupation.”

“The United States is in Iraq at the request of the Iraqis and under a United Nations mandate. Any suggestion to the contrary is wrong,” said National Security Council spokesman Gordon Johndroe.

US State Department spokesman Tom Casey stressed that the Security Council had several times renewed its mandate for the US presence in Iraq. “There is no question in our mind that our forces are there in a legal and legitimate capacity in every sense of the word,” Casey said.

Arab leaders have kicked off the two-day summit in the Saudi capital aiming to revive a dormant plan for peace with Israel and launch a diplomatic offensive to resolve the Middle East conflict.

“In beloved Iraq, blood is being shed among brothers in the shadow of an illegitimate foreign occupation, and ugly sectarianism threatens civil war,” Abdullah said.”………….there’s more

http://www.metimes.com/storyvi…..3228-3225r

Texas Blueballs! I love it!

Gee…I dunno….that “can you do it in 2008″ sounds like a mandate for martial law to me.

But, I’ve not been optimistic since The Little PIssant stole the WH.

NorskeFlamethrower @
110

1,468 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND..

Citizen Terry Olson and the Firepup Patriots:

With regard to the pardoning power, the “founding fathers” were not only intellectually brilliant but they understood how messy any kind of democracy or popular politics is…hence, they knew that legitimate laws would be used for specifically political purposes and wanted to provide for the ability to free but not necessarily rehabilitate political prisoners. Remember that the pardon is not without consequence to the pardoner or his/her political faction or party.

Pardon me fer tryin’ ta call up a couple a years of graduate study of the Constitution and early nation…but it surely felt good. Man, those 18th century enlightenment citizens were GIANTS.

KEEP THE FAITH WITH OUR HISTORY AND OUR CHILDREN!!

Sorry to slightly differ, the power of executive pardon is a multifaceted object; it can be used to extend lieniency and magnaminity towards a conviction at law – an extension of the rights of soverigns transfered to the executive; it is a way to redress a miscarrage of justice; it is a check upon an unbridaled Judiciary; it is a political tool as well; and other and “political” purposes as well (list not exclusive by any means). There is no simple answer to that question.

drat, EPU’d again by timezone, hope this is caught anyway. All the best……

Sara @ 153

I suspect the Saudi refusal to break bread having to do with Bush’s failure to do his part in a handshake deal with the Saudi King and the Arab League with respect to the then Crown Prince’s 2002 peace plan for Israel/Palestine. In essence, that plan was close to the Clinton Plan of 2001 — return of all Palestine land outside the 1967 boundries, a Palestinian Capitol in E. Jerusalem, and joint tenancy of the sacred sites. The 2002 Arab League proposal promised all-Arab recognition of Israel, diplopmatic and economic relations, in exchange for the creation of a Palestinian State along these lines. To accomplish this, Bush had to make an honest effort to bring Israel to the table as an active party to the process. In this respect Bush has totally failed to even try, witness Condi’s statement this week that she was not really trying for a “big Bang.” This was a slap in the face to the Arab League and the Saudi King — thus the “we won’t break bread or suck dates” reaction. The Condi-Bush strategy is to play little games with low level talks between Abbas (Fatah) and Israel that go nowhere, and pretend that they are busy trying to accomplish something. They are up on the car-lift running their wheels for no particular purpose, and the Saudi’s and the Arab League are calling them on it.

Bush’s problem is that he is captive of AIPAC, which really does not represent core opinions in the American Jewish Community, which votes over 80% Democratic, and he is also captive of the Armageddonists, who are his base, and want him to bring on “End Times.” Neither of these commitments or orientations provide him with the freedom to act — create realistic policy, or even take diplomatic advantage of the opening the Arab League 2002 declaration had on offer. Essentially he has backed himself into a narrow corner from which there is no easy exit.

But the Democrats corner can be narrow too — there certainly was not universal approval of the settlement Clinton tabled at Taba or of the informal Geneva agreements. But those do parallel the Arab League Declarations — and they are the starting points from which detailed negotiations are possible.

If we want to unwind the Middle East, we must begin here. It is the core issue.

There is a strong possibility that during and after the Aipac/ Rosen trial Aipac will have less influence over U.S. middle east policies. When Americans realize that Israel continued to spy on the U.s. (after the Pollard case) and that some American Jews (whose first loyalty is to Israel and not to the U.s. (no matter what Israel does) have been actively undermining negotiations with Iran (Powells negotiations with Iran) and creating and dessiminating false intelligence about WMD’s ( Perle,Ledeen, Rubin, Feith, Wurmser) and other right wing radical neo-cons (Cheney, Bolton, Franklin). When Americans have the clear opportunity(if the MSM shows some chutzpah and cover this trial fairly) to wake up about the power of the Israeli lobby and it’s negative effects on U.S. national security. The situation in the middle east may change.

Let’s hope and pray that the Aipac/Rosen trial is not dismissed and the MSM covers this critically important trial honestly and openly.

Oops forgot to write A*I*P*A*C

kirk murphy @ 143

kathleen @ 125
Thanks for the answer.

Can a convicted felon that is pardoned by a President ever serve in a future administration? Please tell me no!

Elliot Abrams pled guilty to misdemeanors and was pardoned by Bush 41.

Abrams is a poster child neo-con: morally depraved; ruthlessly ambitious ; utterly dishonest; friend to torturers, murders, and assassins.

A perfect servant for the Bushes and their megacorp masters.

One Abrams specialty was massacre denial. During a Nightline appearance in 1985, he was asked about reports that the US-funded Salvadoran military had slaughtered civilians at two sites the previous summer. Abrams maintained that no such events had occurred. And had the US Embassy and the State Department conducted an investigation? “My memory,” he said, “is that we did, but I don’t want to swear to it, because I’d have to go back and look at the cables.” But there had been no State Department inquiry; Abrams, in his lawyerly fashion, was being disingenuous. Three years earlier, when two American journalists reported that an elite, US-trained military unit had massacred hundreds of villagers in El Mozote, Abrams told Congress that the story was commie propaganda, as he fought for more US aid to El Salvador’s military. The massacre, as has since been confirmed, was real. And in 1993 after a UN truth commission, which examined 22,000 atrocities that occurred during the twelve-year civil war in El Salvador, attributed 85 percent of the abuses to the Reagan-assisted right-wing military and its death-squad allies, Abrams declared, “The Administration’s record on El Salvador is one of fabulous achievement.” Tell that to the survivors of El Mozote.

But it wasn’t his lies about mass murder that got Abrams into trouble. After a contra resupply plane was shot down in 1986, Abrams, one of the coordinators of Reagan’s pro-contra policy (along with the NSC’s Oliver North and the CIA’s Alan Fiers), appeared several times before Congressional committees and withheld information on the Administration’s connection to the secret and private contra-support network. He also hid from Congress the fact that he had flown to London (using the name “Mr. Kenilworth”) to solicit a $10 million contribution for the contras from the Sultan of Brunei. At a subsequent closed-door hearing, Democratic Senator Thomas Eagleton blasted Abrams for having misled legislators, noting that Abrams’s misrepresentations could lead to “slammer time.” Abrams disagreed, saying, “You’ve heard my testimony.” Eagleton cut in: “I’ve heard it, and I want to puke.” On another occasion, Republican Senator Dave Durenberger complained, “I wouldn’t trust Elliott any further thanI could throw Ollie North.” Even after Abrams copped a plea with Independent Counsel Lawrence Walsh, he refused to concede that he’d done anything untoward. Abrams’s Foggy Bottom services were not retained by the First Bush, but he did include Abrams in his lame-duck pardons of several Iran/contra wrongdoers.

Abrams was as nasty a policy warrior as Washington had seen in decades. He called foes “vipers.” He said that lawmakers who blocked contra aid would have “blood on their hands”-while he defended US support for a human-rights-abusing government in Guatemala. When Oliver North was campaigning for the Senate in 1994 and was accused of having ignored contra ties to drug dealers, Abrams backed North and claimed “all of us who ran that program…were absolutely dedicated to keeping it completely clean and free of any involvement by drug traffickers.” Yet in 1998 the CIA’s own inspector general issued a thick report noting that the Reagan Administration had collaborated-with suspected drug traffickers while managing the secret contra war.

So could Abrams and the rest of the “psychopaths” neck deep in the Iran/Contra scandal be held accountable in civil court? The Hague? Could Abrams be impeached? I really do not want to see these ruthless killers show up in future administrations AGAIN!

The Unholy Alliance

Were the Saudis and Iran to team up against us, they could at least force the withdrawal of the army we now have in Iraq, and probably destroy whatever of our naval forces are trapped in the Gulf. It’s not their weaponry or armed forces that would give them the jump on us, but their geographic location. Working together, they could seal the Gulf against our naval forces, and the Saudis could take out our air bases on the Gulf. We would be hard-pressed to support our army in Iraq through Turkey, the only alternative. If Turkey were to join a combination against, that would take out Incirlik and our army would lack both any line of resupply, and any air support. It would probably be annihilated.