Rove is still on the hot seat

Despite all the pro-Rove spin in this morning's papers, he's still facing the possibility of prosecution:

Patrick J. Fitzgerald, the special prosecutor in the C.I.A. leak case, is expected to decide in the next two to three weeks whether to bring perjury charges against Karl Rove, the powerful adviser to President Bush, lawyers involved in the case said Thursday.

With the completion of Mr. Rove's fifth appearance before the grand jury on Wednesday, Mr. Fitzgerald is now believed to have assembled all of the facts necessary to determine whether to seek an indictment of Mr. Rove or drop the case.

So, despite what he's wanted us all to believe, Karl is not off the hook. Far from it. And this paragraph says so much:

A lawyer with knowledge of the case said that Mr. Rove had known for more than a month that he was likely to make another appearance before the grand jury, and that he had known since last fall that he would be subject to further questions from Mr. Fitzgerald before the prosecutor completed his inquiry.

Yes, Karl knew a month ago that he'd be back for appearance number 5 before the grand jury. What a coincidence, then, that he was "demoted" just last week.

The White House is clearly worried. Yet, not so worried that they bounced Karl...instead, they changed his portfolio. But you can imagine Karl still has his grubby little paws in everything. And, he still has his security clearance despite outing an undercover operative during war.

It's going to be a long two to three weeks while we wait. Read More......

Condi's laying the groundwork on Iran

That Condi, she's a toughie. She's more than ready to send other people's kids to die again. And it's clear that Condi really knows her role in the Iran script:

"Is the Security Council going to be credible?" Rice asked after meetings with NATO foreign ministers.

Tehran faces a Friday deadline from the Security Council to stop enriching uranium, a process that can lead either to nuclear power for electricity or to development of weapons. "It's pretty clear Iran is not going to meet those requirements," Rice said. "When that happens the international community, represented by the Security Council, is going to have a choice."

Is she challenging the manhood of the Security Council? Read More......

Specter issues threat that's not really a threat

Arlen Specter's acting all tough with the President again. Whatever:

Noting that Congress holds the power of the purse, a frustrated Senate chairman threatened to try to block money for President Bush's domestic wiretapping program.

But as usual, Specter's not going to follow through:

"Institutionally, the presidency is walking all over Congress at the moment," Specter said. "If we are to maintain our institutional prerogative, that may be the only way we can do it."

Specter made clear that, for now, the threat was just that.

"I'm not prepared to call for the withholding of funds," he told reporters later.

Ooooh. He's so tough. The Bush team must be so scared. Or they'll just kick Specter around and he'll cave. Well, cave from the threat that's not really a threat -- he already admitted that.

Instead, this is just another p.r. effort by Specter to make it look like someone in Congress has a spine. Actually, he's confirming -- again -- that the Bush administration does walk all over Congress. Read More......

Support the troops -- or send bill collectors if they're injured

Talk is cheap. And there's a lot of cheap talk about supporting the troops. Instead, the Bush Administration is dunning injured soldiers -- and hounding them for the money:

After suffering paralysis, brain damage, lost limbs and other wounds in war, nearly 900 Army soldiers ran up $1.2 million in debt because of the military's "complex, cumbersome" pay system, congressional investigators said Thursday.

The report from the Government Accountability Office said another 400 who died in the wars had $300,000 in debt but that the Defense Department doesn't pursue collection of people killed in combat.

"We found that hundreds of separated battle-injured soldiers were pursued for collection of military debts incurred through no fault of their own," said the report. It said that included seeking reimbursement for errors in pay or for equipment left on the battlefield.

Read More......

PoliticsTV welcomes Michelle Malkin to the world of online video... a year late

From our good friends at PTV News, and me. Read More......

"Privately," Bush doesn't hate Latinos - he just plays a bigot on TV

Glad we settled that one. Read More......

Open thread

Joe is out and about, no witticisms today. Read More......

BREAKING: House Dems file lawsuit against illegal legislation

UPDATE: AP has an article on the Democrat's lawsuit.

Developing story coming from the top House Democrats. They are filing a lawsuit against Bush and his administration to prevent implementation of the "Budget Deficit Act of 2005." That's the legislation which Bush signed even though the House and Senate passed different versions (basically because the Republican illegally changed the legislation).

This is pretty big news. The lead plaintiff is John Conyers, ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee. He is joined by 10 other ranking members of the other House Committees: Dingell, Rangel, Miller, Oberstar, Frank, Peterson, Thompson, Stark, Brown and Slaughter.

They are seeking to enjoin the budget act because the constitutional process -- you know, from "How a Bill becomes a Law" -- wasn't followed. For all those strict constructionists, here's the actual language:

Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States:

The House and Senate passed different versions. What's more, they knew they passed different versions and instead of re-voting, they just fudged it. Bush, Hastert and Frist decided to overrule established constitutional law, just like they do in so many other areas. Read More......

Guy who created "Gannon Panel" tells City Paper his goal for the Gannon panel was to discuss GannonGate

Well, now I'm really confused.

I got criticized by a Philadelphia gay group for asking why GannonGate was not going to be included as one of the main topics of discussion at the Equality Forum blogging panel next week in Philly - a panel that Republican former male prostitute Jeff Gannon (aka James Guckert), top lesbian political blogger Pam Spaulding, and I were to sit on, but Pam and I have since pulled our participation after the Equality Forum refused to make GannonGate even one of the topics on the agenda.

Mike LaMonaca, the Equality Forum program director, released a rather bitter press release yesterday criticizing me for allegedly attempting to "control the panel" when Pam Spaulding and I both noted that GannonGate really had to be one of the topics on the agenda. (According to the person moderating the panel, GannonGate was NOT going to be one of the main agenda items, period. Which is even more odd since the head of the Equality Forum emailed me 3 days ago saying he agreed with me, GannonGate should be one of the agenda items.)

Now we find out that LaMonaca apparently intended all along that GannonGate be discussed at the panel. From LaMonaca's interview, it sounds like GannonGate was the only issue that interested him at all from the panel, or at least it was the one most on his mind. And LaMonaca is the guy CREATED the panel in the first place. Bizarrely, he's also the guy who publicly criticized me yesterday for trying to edge the panel back to what he apparently intended it to be.

Then why did LaMonaca yesterday criticize me for proposing the same thing he advocated in this week's Philly City Paper - discussing GannonGate as one of the panel topics? Not to mention, this is now clear evidence that the direction of this panel very much changed from where it was only a week or so ago when this article was completed. Why was that? Did Gannon put his foot down? Did a board member or a donor or a Republican in the senior ranks of the Equality Forum flip out? Did the moderator in her ivory tower (she teaches at the Annenberg School) refuse to address that icky sex issue? Growing numbers of questions, and fewer and fewer answers from the Equality Forum on just what the heck is going on here.

LaMonaca had this to say to the City Paper in their current edition:?

City Paper: Are you surprised this came together?

Mike LaMonaca: I'm pleased it came together. ... I know I'm curious to hear Jeff Gannon's side of the story and his thoughts about what transpired.

Obviously not curious enough. Read More......

Bush tells former CIA employees they're no longer permitted to criticize his administration

Jesus Christ. Where are we, the Soviet Union? A week after the Chinese communist dictator is welcomed to the White House we're told that former government officials are no longer allowed to criticize the government?

In America?

Is this what 51% of the American people voted for? Outlawing all dissent? Not to mention, if there's such a crisis of former intelligence experts wanting to criticize George Bush then maybe that ought to tell us something - about George Bush.

Seriously, anyone who is Republican out there and voted for this man, how can you continue to support these bizarre un-American policies? Does America stand for anything anymore?

I studied the Soviet Union in grad school, it was one of my main areas of expertise. I'm a hawk on defense. I hated the Soviets and there was little Ronald Reagan could do wrong vis-a-vis the evil empire, in my eye. And I'm telling you, what is happening in our country today is right out of the Soviet playbook. (It's also right out of the Nazi playbook.) You slowly criminalize dissent so that the public accepts infringements on civil liberties that it would never accept in one fell swoop (and, well, in the Soviet Union there was no slowly to it at all - it was pretty instantaneous).

Has America become the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany? No. Have we started down the path to a more totalitarian government that no longer respects, that no longer fears, its citizenry? Absolutely. Do we tolerate today in America presidential policies that would have been unconscionable under any circumstance just ten years ago. Sadly, yes.

And to hell with this war on terror crap.

America wasn't created in order to throw away everything it stands for in order to survive. That was not the intent of our founding fathers, that we protect and defend our God-given - remember, God-given they told us - rights only when it was convenient. If they're God-given rights, then how can man suspend them, even for a war on terror?

The Republican party no longer represents freedom or democracy or America. They have become the worst historical caricature of what liberals were always supposd to be (but actually weren't). Un-American, loose-spending, wimps who are ultimately terribly dangerous to our freedom in troubled times. Read More......

More signs that Bush deregulation of mines contributed to miners' death

The Republicans said that if they came to power they would get the government out of the way of big business. And they did. They stopped a number of Clinton administration initiatives to provide for more safety at mines. And look what happened.

Trapped deep below ground by poisonous gases, the Sago miners realized at least four of their air packs did not work and were forced to share the devices as they desperately pounded away with a sledgehammer in hopes of letting rescuers know where to find them, the sole survivor says.

Then, resigned to their fate, the men recited a "sinner's prayer," scrawled farewell notes to their loved ones, and succumbed, one after another, some as if drifting off to sleep.

"As my trapped co-workers lost consciousness one by one, the room grew still and I continued to sit and wait, unable to do much else," Randal McCloy Jr. wrote to his co-workers' families in a letter dated Wednesday and obtained by The Associated Press....

The Bush administration is reviewing air packs and other safety equipment used in the nation's mines after previously scrapping similar initiatives started by the Clinton administration.

You vote for Republicans and they give you the smaller government they promised. And it kills people. Any questions? Read More......

Credit Card Republicans

That's what my friend Brett DiResta calls them. Cut taxes and spend, that's all they do. To hell with the budget, to hell with the deficit, to hell with how much it costs, if it feels good, do it. Or maybe Nike Republicans: Just spend it.

To wit: This crazy scheme to give every American taxpayer $100 to help with the gas crisis. Uh, that's nice. It's one tank of gas. What do we do next week?

Not to mention, EVERY American taxpayer? Why do I need $100 to help with gas when I don't have a car? Or my nephew who's 14 and works summer jobs - he's a taxpayer. Sure, he's 2 years away from driving, but they're gonna give him a $100 for gas too? And every college kid, who also doesn't have a car, gets $100? And how about grandma in the nursing home, she pays taxes on her social security benefits. Or even Terri Schiavo, she must have been getting social security disability payments - if Terri Schiavo were alive today (and I use the word "alive" loosely), would she be eligible for the $100 to help her pay for her heavy gasoline burden?

And why does George Bush, Dick Cheney, every member of Congress, and not to mention, any American making over $200,000 a year need a $100 to pay for gas? And I'm assuming the Republicans aren't seriously proposing that we give every ExxonMobil executive $100 from the federal treasury to compensate them for screwing the American people at the gas pump? At least this legislation will exclude all oil and gas industry employees, and anyone who owns or works at a gas station, right?

Then there are convicts, do they get $100 from the Republicans? Murderers, rapists, people who kill small children - do they get a $100 gift from the Republicans, even though they're evil people who are in prison and can't drive anyway?

Hell, for that matter, why not make the $100 available to fetuses too. I mean, let's face it, being a fetus in the 21st century just isn't as easy as it used to be. I know a lot of fetus who are always complaining about the high cost of gasoline (and cigs). Why not make their lives easier and give them the $100 gas voucher too? Or are the Republicans anti-fetus?

And then there are the tens of millions of undocumented Latino immigrants. Do they too get the $100 rebate, or is it just for "real" Americans? Read More......

GOP Senators want to bribe Americans

Just forget about those pesky gas increases because they want to hand out a hundred bucks to everyone so they somehow forget that the price is oil is going through the roof. Hell, how far will $100 get you anyway and how much is it going to cost to actually implement this latest plan? Oh and by the way, accept the $100 at your own risk because of course, strings are attached and they would be opening up drilling in Alaska so they can add in another drop in the bucket.

Nice cheap try at deflecting from the seriousness of the oil problem and their role in the mess. Forget about their failed energy plan. Don't even ask about the campaign contributions from Big Oil and don't even ask about fuel efficiency programs. It's a wonder they even have 22% support with this kind of thinking. Read More......

Thursday Morning Open Thread

Another tidbit from that NBC/Wall Street Journal poll courtesy of pollster Peter Hart:

Hart explains that Bush has now spent nine consecutive months at 40 percent or below in the poll, a feat exceeded only by Richard Nixon (13 months) and Harry Truman (26 months).

He's going to break Nixon's record for sure -- and there's plenty to time to break Truman's too. Read More......

8.4 billion in 1st quarter profit for Exxon Mobil

The thing speaks for itself:

Exxon Mobil Corp., the world's largest publicly traded oil company, on Thursday reported quarterly profit surged, driven by rising oil prices.

Net income in the first quarter was $8.4 billion, or $1.37 a share, up from $7.86 billion, or $1.22 a share, a year earlier.

Revenue jumped to $88.98 billion from $82.05 billion.

Read More......

Bush and Congress hit new lows -- again

This time it's NBC/Wall Street Journal. Approval for Bush is at 36 -- Congress is at 22, yes 22:

According to the poll, just 22 percent approve of the job Congress is doing, a drop of 11 points since March. “That’s a lot of movement in a four- to six-week period,” says McInturff, the GOP pollster, who attributes the drop to a sharp decline in approval by Republican respondents.

Asked to rank the top one or two reasons for their disapproval of Congress, 44 percent say they are tired of Democrats and Republicans fighting with each other, 36 percent say Congress doesn’t seem to get that much done, and 34 percent say members are corrupt and unethical.

These numbers aren't great for the party in power. This latest poll showed voters prefer a Democratic Congress by a 45-39 margin, but those numbers have dropped from earlier polls.

The American people don't love Bush and the GOP-controlled Congress -- only 24% think the country's moving in the right direction. The only real opportunity to change that direction is to change control of Congress. It's the only way to rein in Bush. Read More......

War costs continue to increase - $102 billion in 2006

Who would have guessed that Iraq would be so costly? Certainly not the GOP who so often criticized the Democrats for out of control spending. The Republicans know how to control the budget and costs, right? That's what they always like to tell everyone, at least.

The cost of the war in Iraq will reach $320 billion after the expected passage next month of an emergency spending bill currently before the Senate, and that total is likely to more than double before the war ends, the Congressional Research Service estimated this week.

"The costs are exceeding even the worst-case scenarios," said Rep. John M. Spratt Jr. (S.C.), the ranking Democrat on the House Budget Committee.

Read More......

Sectarian violence claims another in Iraq

Today the sister of Iraqi Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi was murdered in Baghdad. Surely not good news for unity. Read More......

Rising gas prices may help Dems in fall elections

I ask you, whose Vice President ran an energy company only a few years ago and still makes millions off of them?

From the Washington Post:

Anger over gas prices is gaining traction in many midterm races around the nation as Democrats attack Republicans for being too close to oil companies.

Read More......

First new thread of the day

What shall it bring? More lies, I'm guessing. Read More......