I could do this all night…
October 12th, 2005These days, a progressive like myself, could get all giddy watching and reading the news. I swear I could just surf all night and keep linking here, but its LOST night you know.
So just a few more tidbits, then I'm off to enjoy a glass of wine, and my favorite island castaways.
How To Talk To A Conservative about Karl Rove (if you must)
claims and facts...its a goodie!
What Americans Want in a Supreme Court Justice
What Americans Want In A Supreme Court JusticeScott McClellan (10/7/05):
The President has a long record of appointing people to the bench who are strict constructionists. That’s what the American people want.
That’s not true.
53% believe the Supreme Court should base its rulings, in whole or in part, on the Constitution’s current meaning,
rather than on the meaning of the document when it was originally
written. (46% take the original intent view and 1% are unsure.)63% of the public want a new Supreme Court justice who “will keep the court about the same as it is now� or will “make the court more liberal.� (30% want it more conservative.)
59% of the public are uneasy or unsure about Bush’s picks for the Supreme Court. (41% are confident.)
One more: 65% of the American public believe Bush’s priorities for the country are not the same as theirs.
The Nexus Of Politics And Terror via my hero, Keith Olbermann. Please go read it all, its worthwhile. I'm just skimming the surface.
Last Thursday on Countdown, I referred to the
latest terror threat - the reported bomb plot against the New York City
subway system - in terms of its timing. President Bush’s speech about
the war on terror had come earlier the same day, as had the breaking
news of the possible indictment of Karl Rove in the CIA leak
investigation.I
suggested that in the last three years there had been about 13 similar
coincidences - a political downturn for the administration, followed by
a “terror event� - a change in alert status, an arrest, a warning.<snip>
On May 10th of this year, after his
resignation, former Secretary of Homeland Security Ridge looked back on
the terror alert level changes, issued on his watch.Mr.
Ridge said: “More often than not we were the least inclined to raise
it. Sometimes we disagreed with the intelligence assessment. Sometimes
we thought even if the intelligence was good, you don’t necessarily put
the country on (alert)… there were times when some people were really
aggressive about raising it, and we said ‘for that?’�<snip>
To summarize, coincidences are coincidences.
We
could probably construct a similar time line of terror events and
warnings, and their relationship to - the opening of new Walmarts
around the country.Are
these coincidences signs that the government’s approach has worked
because none of the announced threats ever materialized? Are they signs
that the government has not yet mastered how and when to inform the
public?Is there, in addition to the "fog of war" a simple, benign, "fog of intelligence�?
But,
if merely a reasonable case can be made that any of these
juxtapositions of events are more than just coincidences, it
underscores the need for questions to be asked in this country -
questions about what is prudence, and what is fear-mongering; questions
about which is the threat of death by terror, and which is the terror
of threat.
All emphasis is mine 
Around a year ago on this day..
- I'm having a bad day - 2006
October 13th, 2005 at 10:17 am
“…if anyone in this administration was responsible for the leaking of classified information, they would no longer work in this administration.”–Scott McClellan, October 6, 2003
More Bush double speak. 1 - violated the law beyond preponderance of evidence or beyond a reasonable doubt, or perhaps some higher standard?
2 - be taken care off. Does that mean a consulting job for the Carlyle Group or Halliburton; perhaps a cushy government pension or a platinum parachute, administrative leave without pay, perhaps selling some property at 10 time its market value? We may never know. Casper Weinberger and Oliver North and Kathryn Harris were all taken care of weren’t they.
Like OJ, they will not be able to convict Rove at the criminal level but what about a civil level. Perhaps Common Cause, the Taxpayer’s Union, and other groups should file a taxpayer lawsuit alleging abuse, misuse, and malfeasance in office of government paid for information. Mr. And Mrs. Wilson should also join a suit to get a conviction under the Hatch Act (engaging in political activities) or Federal Privacy Act laws. It is a crime to violate any citizen’s Privacy by divulging information to groups or individuals without a need to know or without the appropriate clearances. Whenever any agency . . . fails to comply with any other provision of this section, or any rule promulgated thereunder, in such a way as to have an adverse effect on an individual [the individual may bring a civil action].” 5 U.S.C. § 552a(g)(1)(D).
I do not believe that Mr. Rove was a Federal Government employee at the time he talked to Matt Cooper. He was a political consultant. I assume he did not have the need to know in his official capacity and he did not have the clearance to know about Mr. Wilson’s wife. Whoever provided this information to Mr. Rove should also be investigated. This might be a clue about why Rove was made Deputy Chief of Staff of the United States (COSTUS). It appears that he and others working with him and perhaps the RNC had access to information protected by the Privacy Act and National Security regulations while Rove was still a political operative. And were his staff, office, and travel expenses paid for by government funds before he became COSTUS. Now that he is COStUS, it might be easy for his lawyer to confuse whether the actions were taken before or after he was appointed. Can NBC get a copy of the oath of Office of COSTUS and post it to their web site? Since he is now Deputy Chief of Staff, does the Hatch Act allow him to be involved in political activities? No matter what the final outcome Rove, the COSTUS, will COST US in the long run. Costs including deaths in Iraq, high gas prices, expenses for lawsuits, and the slow weakening of Freedom of the Press. Which is already on life support. Don’t let them pull the plug on you.
As Daniel Schorr explained in his comments on NPR’s ALL Things Considered on 7/13/05:
…the real issue in the Karl Rove controversy is not a leak, but a war, and how America was misled into that war.
Moreover, the real question is not whether Mr. Rove or anyone at the White House has violated any specific laws; they have betrayed our trust by not answering truthfully when the question of Roves’ involvement was originally posed to them. They could have explained then that Rove made a reference to Mr. Wilson’s wife but did not violate any laws. If it walks like a cover-up, talks like a cover-up, and smells like a cover-up, the American public will assume it is a cover-up.
Finally, a similar civil suit might be in line for the Vice-President. What does his oath of office say? It appears that he may also have violated provisions of the Hatch Act and Privacy Act laws. He has assumed powers well beyond his official duties as VP and had access to information protected by the above laws without the official need to know. Please post his Oath and Position Description.
October 13th, 2005 at 10:18 am
Grand Jury testimony of Karl Rove leaked by Rove-ing reporter (humor). Please keep my identity a secret. Double super Secret. I could call in and have my voice disguised and/or my face blocked out. Please send me an email if you plan to use this. Thanks.
Middle-aged, Middle-of-the-road, Mid-Westerner
MnMnM50@hotmail.com
Testimony of Karl Rove, the White House Deputy Chief of Staff (of the United States) [COSTUS]. How much will COSTUS cost us?
It is posted at: http://rovesayswholeakedfirst.blogspot.com/