John Dean: Release the Nixon grand jury testimony

Via Rick Perlstein on Facebook, we're alerted to this from John Dean:

"A key piece of Watergate history that remains shrouded in secrecy -- former President Richard Nixon's grand jury testimony of 1975 -- should be made public, historical experts have told a court," the press release from Public Citizen stated earlier this week. Public Citizen's Litigation Group, representing a number of prominent American historians and archivists, is seeking this information under a developing body of law that has led to the release of historically-important information, freeing the material from the bonds of traditional grand-jury secrecy when its significance outweighs the reasons for secrecy.

It seems that the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia has been requested, by what Dean calls a "Who's Who" of Nixon historians, to order the release of the transcript of Nixon's two-day grand jury testimony in 1975. That's a lot of testimony, and none of it has been seen.

Says Dean about what he expects to find, should the release be ordered:

While the content of the testimony is not known precisely, news reports from that time suggested the general areas explored: what was said during the infamous 18.5 minute gap in the first recorded conversation Nixon had with his chief of staff following the arrests at the Watergate and whether Nixon was involved in erasing the material; Nixon's role, if any, in the alterations of the White House transcripts of the recorded conversations that were submitted to the House Judiciary Committee during its impeachment inquiry; the extent to which Nixon used the IRS to harass his political enemies; and the $100,000 campaign contribution from Howard Hughes to Nixon's friend Bebe Rebozo, which was never received by the campaign, but purportedly instead went to Nixon's brothers and his secretary Rose Mary Woods.

As Dean points out, Nixon's key role in the nation's history warrants this release, as does the age of the testimony itself. Let's hope the executive branch freaks don't win this one. It's bad to have a king.

GP Read the rest of this post...

'The religious right is a fund-raising operation, not a political operation'

A nice Rachel Maddow segment on the religious right (including our new favorite, the Handmaiden Christine O'Donnell).

Midway through, she interviews Frank Schaeffer, son of one of the founders of the religious right. He knows whereof he speaks. I've included the whole segment; Mr. Schaeffer's interview starts at 6:30.



Flim-flam artists. Or, as CREW points out, "clearly criminal." We're in Barnum territory, folks.

GP Read the rest of this post...

As thousands rally in Maine for DADT repeal, Snowe spews anti-repeal talking points

Posted earlier at AMERICAblog Gay. (That link has video and photos from the rally in Portland.)

These Republicans do stick to their talking points. Of course, Obama's Secretary of Defense gave them this talking point about waiting for the Pentagon study:

Without explicitly saying how she'll vote tomorrow on whether to start debate on a bill which includes the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell (DADT), Republican Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine seemed to echo a point many other Republicans against the bill have raised: a military review of the issue should be completed before the law is repealed.

"We should all have the opportunity to review that report which is to be completed on December 1, as we reevaluate this policy and the implementation of any new changes," Snowe said in a written statement this afternoon.

Remember, Defense Secretary Robert Gates wrote a "strongly worded" letter to Capitol Hill on April 30, 2010, stating that he did not want any repeal legislation passed until the Pentagon study was finished. Now, that's part of the GOP's standard talking points even though it's not valid. The Pentagon study is about how to repeal, not whether to repeal.

Snowe's statement was made while thousands of Mainers were attending the DADT repeal rally with Lady Gaga. At least people in Maine know what this vote is about. Snowe can use the bogus excuse about the study, but she's siding with the homophobes. And, she's throwing gay and lesbian servicemembers under the bus. Snowe and Collins know their party will never push a repeal bill. Ever. Tomorrow marks the best chance we have.

Collins already voted for the Defense Authorization bill. She'll be flip-flopping.

Neither party is without blame here. Maybe if the Obama administration had done its job to push for repeal -- as promised -- we wouldn't be down to the last minute scrounging for one vote on a bill that doesn't even end the ban. It sets up a process to eventually, hopefully, end the ban. But, it's the best we've got. Read the rest of this post...

Nicholas Kristoff: Muslims, I'm sorry

Nicholas Kristoff has written a very nice column this week in the Times. He takes the theme of journalistic balance and twists it like a pretzel to show its ugly side. I can only quote part, so I'll do the Muslim–Christian opening. But do click through; his cleverness and insight will delight.

Many Americans have suggested that more moderate Muslims should stand up to extremists, speak out for tolerance, and apologize for sins committed by their brethren.

That’s reasonable advice, and as a moderate myself, I’m going to take it. (Throat clearing.) I hereby apologize to Muslims for the wave of bigotry and simple nuttiness that has lately been directed at you. The venom on the airwaves, equating Muslims with terrorists, should embarrass us more than you. Muslims are one of the last minorities in the United States that it is still possible to demean openly, and I apologize for the slurs.

He then goes on to tell about his interaction with the editor of the the story of the Portland (Maine) Press Herald. Seems they published a "good Muslim" story on the front page, and all hell broke loose (so to speak); oops, the date was last Sept 11. Balance; gotta add more balance.

He ends with a serious point, one I share. Yes, there are horrid Muslims in the world — "theocratic mullahs oppressing people in Iran; girls kept out of school in Afghanistan in the name of religion," etc. — but there are millions of gentle Muslims as well, literally millions.

It's in fact a gentle religion; more about practice than orthodoxy (how refreshing). And that practice is prayer, five times a day, every day of your life, in which you acknowledge the primacy of an Other and humble yourself before it, again literally.

Kristoff appreciates this as well:

I’m sickened when I hear such gentle souls lumped in with Qaeda terrorists, and when I hear the faith they hold sacred excoriated and mocked. To them and to others smeared, I apologize.

As should we all, sir. Thank you.

GP Read the rest of this post...

Inner-GOP sniping increases in wake of Tea Party successes

CNN:

Tea Party euphoria confronted reality Sunday, with Delaware Senate primary winner Christine O'Donnell backing out of scheduled talk show appearances amid talk of possible civil war among Republicans over the conservative movement.

Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski accused the Tea Party Express of infusing money and lies into her Republican primary to swing it against her.

Now waging a write-in campaign to retain her seat, against the wishes of mainstream Republicans, Murkowski told CNN that fellow party members were inciting inner-GOP conflict.

Read the rest of this post...

The NYT just figured out that Republicans are behind the Teabagger movement

Sigh. Read the rest of this post...

Colin Powell critical of Obama

Powell's criticism is a bit unclear, in my view. He seems to be saying Obama bit off too much, or at least so much that the American public is uneasy with him now. That's true and untrue. First, Powell:

“The president also has to ... shift the way in which he has been doing things,” Powell said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “The American people feel that too many programs have come down. There are so many rocks in our knapsack now that we’re having trouble carrying it.”

Powell, a retired Army general, who was national security adviser and chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under President George H.W. Bush and who ran the State Department for President George W. Bush, said Obama must focus “like a razor blade” on employment, giving the same level of attention to creating jobs — and bringing down the 9.6 percent unemployment rate — as he did to passing bills overhauling health care and reforming education.

“I understand the importance of all of that,” Powell said, referring to Obama’s signature legislative accomplishments. “But as far as the American people are concerned, the main attack is employment.”

Obama didn't bit off too much - we wish he bit off too much. But the GOP did an expert job at selling the American people on the notion that Obama was insane, out of control, and quickly turning the country into the next incarnation of the Soviet Union.

Second, they sold the nation on the notion that the stimulus package was all pork and didn't accomplish a thing. That's utter bs. CBO already proved that the stimulus worked. It just didn't work enough - it was far too small, by about half. But the GOP lied, the Dems didn't find back nearly hard enough, and the public bought the lie.

Obama can focus "more" on employment if he wants, but good luck. First, he already lost the chance at passing a bigger stimulus. The GOP and the public won't accept it now, nor will Dems worried about re-election, and Obama himself started touting the importance of reducing the deficit, so it's pretty much toast. Second, what's to stop the GOP from painting Obama's next jobs program as being just as porky and just as useless? We're not losing a substance war with the GOP, we're losing a message war. And have been from day one. Until we turn that around, until we figure out why our guys suck so badly at messaging, no good program is going to win folks over - at least not until the economy turns around. Read the rest of this post...

Krugman: The rise of the Angry Rich

It looks like it's coming. The rich are pushing back against the demise of their Big Boy tax cuts — with a vengeance. The Professor:

Anger is sweeping America. True, this white-hot rage is a minority phenomenon, not something that characterizes most of our fellow citizens. But the angry minority is angry indeed, consisting of people who feel that things to which they are entitled are being taken away. And they’re out for revenge.

Entitlement — it's not just for poor people any more. Meet the Angry Rich.

The tales of self-pity are numerous; Mr. Krugman points to this Forbes cover story as one instance. According to its author, well-compensated Movement Activist Dinesh D'Souza:

Barack Obama is the most antibusiness president in a generation, perhaps in American history.

And that's just the first sentence. How can we even comprehend Obama's "bizarre" actions? D'Souza knows; as the sub-head suggests, we have to "look to his roots."

D'Souza then consults Obama's autobiography, Dreams of My Father, and concludes that Barack Obama is thrusting his father's dreams — the dreams of a "Luo tribesman who grew up in Kenya" — on a presumably unsuspecting America. (The irony writes itself; I wonder what D'Souza of Mumbai dreams of.)

A Forbes cover story, ladies and gentlemen, not the throw-up pages of the Weekly Standard. Not your daddy's Forbes, I guess. But back to the Angry Rich. What will be the consequences of their anger? Krugman again (my emphasis):

The spectacle of high-income Americans, the world’s luckiest people, wallowing in self-pity and self-righteousness would be funny, except for one thing: they may well get their way. Never mind the $700 billion price tag for extending the high-end tax breaks: virtually all Republicans and some Democrats are rushing to the aid of the oppressed affluent.

You see, the rich are different from you and me: they have more influence.

As a footnote, he adds:

And when the tax fight is over, one way or another, you can be sure that the people currently defending the incomes of the elite will go back to demanding cuts in Social Security and aid to the unemployed. America must make hard choices, they’ll say; we all have to be willing to make sacrifices.

But when they say “we,” they mean “you.”

Wow. Looks like now we really need someone to stand in the way of that bipartisan Congressional charge. Someone with real courage. Someone who has engineered:

the most productive, progressive legislative session in at least a generation

Exactly. Yes. Someone like that. I hope we can find that person, and soon — because if that person is just a figment, if that person is just the product of a marketing campaign, then the Angry Rich will definitely get their way.

In the lame duck session, of course.

GP

(For more, click through to this Krugman blog post, and then to this, from Brad DeLong. If you want to cut to the juicy bits, click here.) Read the rest of this post...

See the ad FOX News is suing Robin Carnahan over, which she's keeping on the air.

A couple days ago, FOX News contributor Sarah Palin told GOP/Teabagger/Anti-masturbation crusader Christine O'Donnell "speak through FOX News." That's what most GOPers do. FOX is GOP TV.

That same FOX is suing Democratic Senate candidate Robin Carnahan for running this ad. FOX claims Robin has hurt poor, delicate Chris Wallace's feelings. And, even better, in its complaint, FOX claims Robin "compromis[ed] its apparent objectivity." Um, as if.

Today, Robin sent out this statement:

"We're not backing down. We're fighting this lawsuit. And nobody - not Fox News, and certainly not Congressman Blunt - is going to stop my campaign from telling the truth and holding Congressman Blunt accountable for his record. We're going to keep showing this ad on TV and online because we believe Missourians deserve to hear the truth."

The campaign's press release included this, too:

The use of news clips is nothing new in campaign ads. In fact, even Congressman Blunt uses campaign videos that include footage from a variety of cable news networks including Fox News. Fox's unprecedented move, and its past support for Congressman Blunt, has already raised questions about the motives behind the lawsuit. Fox's parent company, News Corp, has given nearly $10,000 to Congressman Blunt's campaign committee.

FOX really upped the ante and made gave this ad even more attention -- so here it is:

Robin isn't backing down. She kept this air on the ad, has it on her site and provided an embed code.

We have an ActBlue page for Robin here. She's fighting Roy Blunt, Karl Rove, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and, now, FOX News. Read the rest of this post...

GOP anti-masturbation activist US Senate candidate: Who hasn't dabbled in witchcraft?

I don't know anyone who's dabbled in witchcraft. The fact that she thinks it's something everyone's done is simply bizarre, and rather telling. Oh, and gotta love the FOX headline.

And before all you wiccans freak out, she spoke of blood on an altar. That's just f'd up. Read the rest of this post...

Gulf oil leak payments increased substantially after BP moved out of control

Golly, who ever could have imagined? So many of us always thought BP was like a good friend who was always there to help. Even their Beyond Petroleum adverts convinced us that they were there as a force for good, helping the energy industry move forward with a green vision of the world. My whole world has been turned upside down by this news.

BP said payouts to people affected by its Gulf of Mexico oil spill had dramatically increased since it surrendered authority for dispensing funds to an independent administrator.

BP said the Gulf Coast Claims Facility (GCCF), the $20 billion fund it set up to compensate fishermen, hoteliers and retailers whose business was hit by the spill, had paid out 19,000 claims totaling over $240 million.

The total cost of the spill response has hit $9.5 billion, Europe's second-largest oil company by market value said in a statement late on Sunday.

Read the rest of this post...

Monday Morning Open Thread

Good morning.

This is going to be a busy week. And, it gets off with a bang tonight in Portland, Maine. That's where Lady Gaga and SLDN will be holding a rally,“For the 14,000”: A Rally for the 14,000+ Discharged," which targets Maine's Senators Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe. Both of them are key to ending the filibuster of the Defense bill tomorrow. And, both purport to be supporters of LGBT equality. I think this rally is a really smart idea -- taking the fight right to those Senators and elevating the issue in a huge way. This event is already causing a huge buzz in Portland. And, it's not doing business the same old failed way in DC.

As of today, our side does not have the votes to end the filibuster. All of the Republicans are voting as a bloc -- again. Senators Susan Collins and Scott Brown already voted for the exact bill in the Senate Armed Services Committee. Now, they're just playing partisan procedural games. But, SLDN and Lady Gaga are shining a light on the Senate, especially Senators Collins and Snowe.

Obama, who hasn't been lobbying to end the filibuster of the Defense bill, will participate a live townhall on CNBC today. It's on the economy and jobs. Then, he's flying to Philadelphia to do events for Senate candidate Joe Sestak.

Going to be interesting... Read the rest of this post...

Media continues to be blocked on oil stained beaches

Sounds like BP has everything under control. Read the rest of this post...

UK troops hand over troubled Sangin region to US

This region is where a third of all UK casualties have occurred in the last few years. The Guardian:

British troops today formally ended their mission in Afghanistan's deadly Sangin area by passing control of the district to US forces.

Responsibility for security was switched from 40 Commando Royal Marines to the US Marine Corps just after 6.30am (BST), the defence secretary, Liam Fox, announced.

"British forces have served in Sangin over the last four years and should be very proud of the achievements they have made in one of the most challenging areas of Afghanistan," he said.

Read the rest of this post...

FDA won't require Frankenfood labels

So in other words, unless you buy certified organic, you could be eating anything. Big mistake by the FDA.

Despite a growing public demand for more information about how food is produced, that won't happen with the salmon because of idiosyncracies embedded in federal regulations.

The FDA says it cannot require a label on the genetically modified food once it determines that the altered fish is not "materially" different from other salmon - something agency scientists have said is true.

Perhaps more surprising, conventional food makers say the FDA has made it difficult for them to boast that their products do not contain genetically modified ingredients.

Read the rest of this post...