Big Mitch @ 93

I seem to recall that he had a problem with a former Police Commish, too. Fella they called “Bernie Kerrick.” Not so big on the family values thing. But that was least of his problemos.

As someone else pointed out, Rudy wanted to have a convicted felon run his PA campaign. Oops!!

And a whoremongering hypocrite run his “Southern Stratergy”

http://wizbangblog.com/content…..uliani.php

AZ Matt @ 82

The House holds the purse strings and if their bill contains the funding then it goes to a joint House/Senate conference that the Dems control. The 2 must reconcile and produce a final bill. It is 50-50 that Cheney gets his money. I don’t Durbin is about to look the other way if someone tries to stick it back into the Senate version. Cheney could be screwed.

Many thanks AZ Matt. 50-50 are still the odds. Hopefully the Dems can muster up the courage to hold together.

All Cheney has to do is turn over the documents that he Classified and Insta-Declassified to the National Archives…along with the dates they were classified/declassified.

That would mean that he no longer considers himself a “Fourth Branch”…at least in this case.

Boy…I wonder what’s in those documents that he doesn’t want the House and Senate Intelligence Committees to see? Or even the heads of the Intelligence Agencies!

if Vitter proclaimes the sanctity of marital fidelity, his hypocracy should have been on view when he because a chairman of the Giuliani campaign in Louisiana.

Not just Louisiana! He was the Chair of the whole Southern States Campaign! He was the first Senator to actually endorse Giuliani!

Clearly this guy was shooting for either a Cabinet level or VP position.

It’s almost sad that his whoring was revealed TOO SOON!

pwrlght @ 29

Not sure, he was slightly incoherent (not unusual for him) but I always keep in mind that Matthews is wrong a lot.

A senate panel had voted on the cutting off of Deadeye’s allowance, since he’s not part of either branch!!! Mere rhetoric, yet a wake up call for the Shooter!!!

It’s not “mere rhetoric”…Cheney’s office has refused to comply with the Archiving requirements for Classification and Declassification. He is concealing documents on the Iraq War, WMD’s, and Wilson/Valerie Plame scandal. Just as every official email from the WHand DOJ was supposed to be preserved the OVP is supposed to send all documents that are Classified or Declassified to the National Archives so that the process of challenge, retrieval, and preservation for future administrations can occur.

Apparently the OVP just puts everything into Cheney’s special safe because he is a “Fourth Branch” and immune from the law!

Chris Matthews just said on MSNBC that the Senate is cutting off funding for the Vice President’s Office!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomb…..8wnBvMWM0F

And the reason is quite interesting!

Apparently the whole rationale for Cheney to assert that the OVP isn’t part of the Executive Branch is to avoid compliance with the record-keeping provisions for CLASSIFICATION by the National Archives.

That is…he refuses to supply the Archive with the dates and contents of material he is classifying…and denies those that are involved in the production of the material the opportunity to challenge the Classification. This allows him to cover-up activities without anyone knowing…or having any preserved record.

It also means that he refuses to comply with the DECLASSIFICATION standards. Remember the whole issue of “Insta-Declassification” of selective parts of the National Intelligence Estimate that occurred without properly obtaining permission from the CIA and other Intelligence Agencies over the propriety of doing that. And the possibility that Bush and Cheney may have declassified the docs that revealed Plame’s identity…without telling anyone.

BTW THIS would explain why Fitz could not prosecute anyone under either the Intelligence Agents Identity Protection Act or the Espionage Act. Quite simply, Bush or Cheney may have declassified Plame’s identity even though she was covert…and despite the fact that the CIA would have opposed such an action. Fitz may have learned this during his interviews with either Cheney or Bush….which are under seal. Thus Fitz could not charge anyone with the “underlying crime” but only with lying to him and “obstructing justice”.

But it may be that the declassification occurred AFTER some of the leaks…which would be one reason that Libby was so intent to conceal the earlier leaks to the media…but less concerned with those that happened later.

But if the DECLASSIFICATION document is being embargoed by Cheney’s office, rather than being available in the National Archives, then no one can check up on the dates OR WHAT WAS DECLASSIFIED.

You see, you can’t declassify something and then make the date and the contents SECRET…particularly from Congress and a Special Prosecutor!

Kathleen @ 251

Just can not find that.

Well, it’s your quote, so I would think you would know what it said, but let’s try it one more time:

“Because of Khalid’s complaints about his treatment by news middle managers, NPR last year… .

Not sure how much more specific I can be. And, FWIW, what difference does it make? Your link is still to an article originally published in 1997.

That is a direct quote from the article.. Not my quote

RBG Note; Yes, it is a direct quote from the article, which you put it in blockquotes in your comments, hence my use of the term “your quote”.

None of which changes the fact it’s still a ten year old article.

RBG @ 250

“NPR last year brought in a team” is included in the blockquote in your comment. I did not use the term “last week”.

Just can not find that.

Well, it’s your quote, so I would think you would know what it said, but let’s try it one more time:

“Because of Khalid’s complaints about his treatment by news middle managers, NPR last year… .

Not sure how much more specific I can be. And, FWIW, what difference does it make? Your link is still to an article originally published in 1997.

Kathleen @ 249

RBG can not find the “last week” that you say I referenced in my quote.

“NPR last year brought in a team” is included in the blockquote in your comment. I did not use the term “last week”.

Just can not find that.

RBG can not find the “last week” that you say I referenced in my quote.

“NPR last year brought in a team” is included in the blockquote in your comment. I did not use the term “last week”.