It's over. After 22 months, the Justice Department has sent a letter to the House Judiciary Committee stating no criminal charges will be brought as a result of the firing of 9 U.S. Attorneys during the Bush Administration.

Special counsel Nora Dannehy, who conducted the DOJ investigation (not to be confused with the earlier Inspector General and OPR investigation) recommended no charges, and Attorney General Eric Holder has accepted it. In the letter (available here, it takes a few minutes to load):

Associate Attorney General Ronald Weich said Gonzales made "inaccurate and misleading" statements about the firings. The report also said Gonzales' chief of staff, Kyle Sampson, also made misleading statements. But the report by Dannehy concluded there was "insufficient evidence to establish that persons knowingly made material false statements" or tried to obstruct justice.

As Committee Chair Rep. John Conyers points out, this is not an exoneration. The investigation found both Gonzales and Kyle Sampson made misleading and inaccurate statements. [More...]

After serving two years of his sentence, Conrad Black has been freed on $2 million bail.

His attorney Miguel Estrada had said he expected his client to return to his home in Palm Beach.

Is that Miguel Estrada who former President Bush wanted on the U.S. Court of Appeals? Yes.

Black's conviction for honest services fraud was vacated in June following the Supreme Court decision placing limits on the use of the statute. In Black's case, the jury instructions used an improper interpretation of the statute and that the fraud did not involve bribes or kickbacks. [More...]

I think Rod Blagojevich made the right call in taking his lead counsel's advice and deciding not to testify in his own defense.

"Sam Adam Sr.'s most compelling argument and ultimately the one that swayed me was that the government in their case proved my innocence," he said. "They proved I did nothing illegal and that there was nothing further for us to add."

"In the tapes that the government played, they proved as I said all along that I did nothing illegal,” the former governor continued. “In fact they proved that I sought the advice of my lawyers and my advisers. They proved that I was on the phone talking to them, brainstorming about ideas. Yes, they proved some of those ideas were stupid, but they also proved some of the ideas were good."

I discussed the pros and cons as I saw them here. [More...]

Some of you might have noticed that I have not posted as much lately until today. Part of the reason has been a busy work schedule (I have things to do today but have been goofing off.) But the other reason has been I've been engrossed with the Tour de France, which has been a classic battle between Alberto Contador, the defending, and 2-time, champion and Andy Schleck, last year's runner-up. It has been, as they say, epic.

Today is a rest day in the Tour and tomorrow is the Queen Stage (the most difficult stage of a multi-day road race, typically involving multiple low- or beyond-category climbs) culminating in a mountaintop finish on the Col de Tourmalet. The Tour is celebrating the 100th anniversary of the inclusion of Pyrenees finishes - where this famous story adds to the mystique:

In case you missed it, President Obama signed a bill labeled "financial reform." Since I do not think the bill particularly meaningful (not even the consumer agency part), I have chosen not to blog about it.

Open Thread.

Breitbart feels bad that "they" made it about Shirley Sherrod and that "they" misconstrued what Sherrod said:

Ezra Klein:

According to some of [Ben Smith's administration sources], Jim Messina, White House deputy chief of staff, was impressed by the speed with which Tom Vilsack canned Shirley Sherrod. "We could have waited all day," he reportedly said. "We could have had a media circus. But we took decisive action and it’s a good example of how to respond in this atmosphere."

(Emphasis supplied.) You gotta be effing kidding me.

Speaking for me only

Politico:

With a first meeting called for Thursday, House and Senate Democrats are beginning active discussions on when — and for how long — to extend Bush-era middle-class tax cuts due to expire at the end of this year. [. . .] Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) is more bullish on a permanent extension after adjustments are made in the higher rates. “With today’s budget picture, it’s no longer clear that we can afford large tax cuts for the most well-to-do,” he said, opening a Finance Committee hearing on the subject Wednesday. But in wrap-up comments later, Baucus made clear that he will push for a permanent extension of those provisions that affect middle- and working-class families.

[. . .] The House-Senate differences among Democrats appear driven, too, by tactical considerations regarding a second revenue battle left over from the George W. Bush years: the estate tax. [. . .] Baucus would like to use the middle-class tax-cut extensions as a vehicle to resolve this fight, and by promising to make those individual tax cuts permanent, Baucus gains some potential leverage with moderates in his party.

It does not matter if Baucus is embarrassed or gains leverage over "moderates in his party." Progressive Dems have the upper hand here - the Bush tax cuts expire if nothing happens. This is huge leverage, I like the noises Bernie Sanders is making:

David Frum writes:

you’ll never guess who emerged as the villains of the story in this second-day conservative react. Not Andrew Breitbart, the distributor of a falsified tape. No, the villains were President Obama and the NAACP for believing Breitbart's falsehood. Breitbart went almost universally unmentioned.

Of course the irony of the right wing noise machine decrying the Obama Administration and the NAACP treating Breitbart seriously is rich (but who would expect otherwise? Their dishonesty has been manifest forever.) But the question remains, and not only for the Obama Administration and the NAACP - the question is for everyone - who would take Breitbart (and Drudge and Fox) seriously? They are all dishonest hacks. I certainly hope this ends Breitbart's reign of terror, but it never should have needed this event to discredit Breitbaert. He has always been a discredited figure.

Speaking for me only

It is heartening that the disgraceful treatment Shirley Sherrod received from the Obama Administration has been universally panned. But I hope the fact that the problem of Dem cowering transcends the injustice done to Sherrod gets wider exposure. The vast majority of working Americans have suffered from this horribly damaging reflex from the Obama Administration and the Dems. At balloon juice, mistermix writes:

For those of us who admired the temperament of the Obama campaign and hoped the combination of intelligence, patience and confidence exhibited during his 2008 win would become part of their style of governing, this stupid, panicky and insecure response indicates that the right wing noise machine has some of the Obama crew rattled.

But this problem is not new, is not limited to the Obama Administration among Dems, and has had a much more deleterious effect on the country than the isolated issue of Ms. Sherrod. From the inadequate stimulus of 2009, to the deficit "concerns" (see the catfood commission) of today (among many other issues), the flinching and cowering of the Obama Administration and the Dems has damaged the country and, ironically, the political fortunes of the Dems. The reflexive hippie punching, the constant refrain of not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good, the ever present concern of being labeled a gasp, liberal, has led to great suffering in the nation. Simply put, the Dems have not been up to the job. L'Affaire Sherrod has put a face to the cost of this attitude. I hope that the transcendence of this problem is recognized and addressed.

Speaking for me only

AP:

Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said Wednesday he would reconsider the department's decision to oust Sherrod over her comments that she didn't give a white farmer as much help as she could have 24 years ago. [. . .] Vilsack's statement came after the NAACP posted the full video of Sherrod's comments Tuesday night.

"I am of course willing and will conduct a thorough review and consider additional facts to ensure to the American people we are providing services in a fair and equitable manner," Vilsack said. The Obama administration's move to reconsider her employment was an absolute reversal from hours earlier, when a White House official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said President Barack Obama had been briefed on Sherrod's resignation after the fact and stood by the Agriculture Department's handling of it.

But Sherrod may have no interest in coming back:

There seems to be a lot of news today, and even though we posted a lot, we didn't cover everything.

Here's an open thread, all topics welcome.

Lawyers for former Illiniois Governor Rod Blagojevich told the judge today they planned on resting without calling any witnesses, including Rod. The judge told them to think about it overnight.

The reason, according to Sam Adam, Jr,:

"The government hasn't proven anything and by getting up there and answering questions it gives them credence to what they've put on so far," Blagojevich's attorney Sam Adam Jr. told reporters.

Sam Adam, Sr. told the jury in opening Blago would testify. That's usually a problem when you don't keep your promise to the jury. But the prosecution can't mention a defendant's decision not to testify and the jury will be told not to either discuss or consider it. [More...]

This is not a good sign for our jury system. The judge in the upcoming Anna Nicole Smith trial of Drs. Sanjeep Kapoor and Khristine Eroshevich and boyfriend Howard K. Stern has ordered prospective jurors to disclose their medical histories, including listing the prescription drugs they have taken. The three are charged with conspiring to provide Smith with sedatives and opiates. (They are not charged with causing her death.)

While the judge has nixed cameras in the courtroom, he has ordered jurors names be kept secret from the lawyers in the case and is going to have his staff periodically check the jurors' Facebook and social media sites. [More...]

I am so tuned out from the Establishment Media that I just found out about L'Affaire Sherrod (I first thought it was about Sherrod Brown). Digby writes:

When our new overlord Andrew Breitbart says jump, the White House says, "how high?" Kevin Drum:

[. . .] BigGovernment.com "broke" a story yesterday about a speech given a few months ago by Shirley Sherrod, USDA Georgia Director of Rural Development, at an NAACP Freedom Fund dinner. In it, Sherrod tells a story from 24 years ago about not helping a white farmer as much as she could have because she was "struggling with the fact that so many black people had lost their farm land." The point of this story, told in a public venue, was that she quickly realized that she had done wrong. "That's when it was revealed to me that it's about poor versus those who have. It's not so much about white...it is about white and black but it's not, you know...it opened my eyes."

The Secretary of Agriculture explained why he did Breitbart's bidding: