Til John Wakes Up in Paris Open Thread

Crank it up. Read the rest of this post...

AP asks: What did Rove tell Bush?

Looks like the media is slowly starting to clue in to the Rove scandal again. Washington Post earlier today, now the Associated Press. Are they starting to pick up the pace for a reason?

Finally, though, AP is asking about the Bush involvement:

Among the many questions surrounding the investigation into who in the Bush administration leaked the name of an undercover CIA officer is whether President Bush's top political adviser told his boss the truth about his connection to the case.

And here is the conundrum for Bush and his brain:

Whether Rove shaded the truth with Bush two years ago is a potential political problem. The president so far has stood by Rove's side, even raising the bar for dismissing subordinates. Two years ago, Bush pledged to fire any leakers, but now he says he would fire anyone who committed a crime.

If Rove didn't tell Bush the truth, that theoretically could be a legal problem for the presidential aide under the federal false statement statute.

Hmm. So if he lied to Bush, then Bush is not only protecting a treasonous traitor who outed a spy, he is protecting a staffer who lied to his face. Not good.
And then there is this assessment of the current situation at the White House:

Presidential scholars say a White House's refusal to comment can suggest an administration in political trouble.

"When under fire they suddenly hide behind the shield of secrecy as though they have no control over the matter," said Mark J. Rozell, a public policy professor at George Mason University who has written five books on the presidency.

"What we really don't know factually is whether Rove lied to the president or whether the president knew something about Rove's role and dissembled," said Rozell.

Read the rest of this post...

Abramoff Indicted....what's Congressman Ney's involvement?

Citizens for Ethics in Washington (CREW) is on the case:

Earlier today, lobbyist Jack Abramoff was indicted for bank fraud in connection with his 2000 purchase of the SunCruz gambling ships from Greek millionaire Gus Boulis. To finance the purchase, Abramoff and his partner Adam Kidan were required by Foothill Capitol to put up $23 million in cash to secure the loan. Abramoff and Kidan signed sworn documents, provided to Foothill Capitol at closing, attesting that they had paid Boulis the $23 million. In fact, Abramoff and Kidan never paid Boulis and by October 2000, Boulis was threatening to sue. In January 2001, Boulis did file suit, but in February 2001, he was murdered in an unsolved gang-land style homicide.

Rep. Bob Ney (R-OH) also played a role in the deal. On March 30, 2000, Ney inserted a statement into the Congressional Record, criticizing Boulis and his management of SunCruz. On June 30, 2000, Kidan, Abramoff, Abramoff’s wife and Michael Scanlon, a former DeLay aide, each made $1,000 contributions to Ney’s re-election campaign. On October 26, 2000, Ney again inserted remarks about SunCruz into the Congressional record. This time he praised the leadership of the new owners claiming that Kidan had a “renown reputation for honesty and integrity.” In fact, Kidan had been disbarred in New York after misappropriating money in a business deal and he had ties to organized crime figures.

Bob Ney is in this mess really deep. Really deep. He fits right in with the GOP culture of corruption in both DC and his home state of Ohio.

Today should only be the start of the indictments. It should also be the start of some Congressional Ethics complaints, too...finally. Read the rest of this post...

Jonesboro School Shooter Released from Jail

Mitchell Johnson turned 21 today and was released from jail. He was one of the shooters at a Jonesboro, Arkansas school shooting in March of 1998:

The attack was surprisingly cold-blooded: On March 24, 1998, two boys from the Westside Middle School in Jonesboro, Ark., set off the fire alarm, hid outside, and with guns ready, shot their classmates as they streamed out.

Those shots killed four students and a teacher and wounded 10 others.

Several years ago, I got to know the mother and family of one of the young victims, Brithney Varner. I can tell you this...a family never recovers from this kind of tragedy. What's happening today is another extremely painful reminder for them of their loss.

The shooting was cold-blooded and premeditated. Frightening to think kids so young could be so ruthless.

Today, once again, my thoughts are with Suzann, Brandi, Clayton and Regina. Read the rest of this post...

Darkness descends open thread

Man, I just spent the most amazing evening in Paris. Went out for a drink with a friend near Odeon (for those who are familiar), and ended up walking along the Seine after dark, then walking over to the Louvre and sitting in the square where they have the I.M. Pei pyramid and talking for hours. There's a view from that plaza, if you position yourself just right, of an arch through which you can see the Champs Elysees and the Arc de Triomphe framed in the distance. Man, what an amazing city. Read the rest of this post...

Bush to Cindy Sheehan: Oh yeah, sorry

Bush, who has never been to a soldier's funeral, whose Pentagon won't allow pictures of their caskets and who only mentions losses when they are in double digits, that Bush grieves for every loss in Iraq. And he won't see Cindy Sheehan:

President George W. Bush said on Thursday he sympathized with a mother who lost a son in Iraq and has been leading a protest vigil near his ranch, but that he would not pull U.S. troops from Iraq now as she has demanded.

"I grieve for every death," Bush said as Cindy Sheehan remained camped out about five miles away. For six days she has been demanding Bush meet with her about her son, Casey Austin Sheehan, an Army specialist killed in combat in Baghdad in April 2004.

"It breaks my heart to think about a family weeping over the loss of a loved one. I understand the anguish that some feel about the death that takes place," Bush said.

But, he added, "pulling the troops out would send a terrible signal to the enemy."

White House officials said Bush had no plans to meet with Sheehan, saying he met with her in June 2004. National security adviser Stephen Hadley and deputy White House chief of staff Joe Hagin met her on Saturday, the day she started her vigil.

What she wants to know, George, is why her son and the other soldiers were killed in Iraq. For what purpose, she wants to know. You can't answer that question without lying. Read the rest of this post...

Tea Time open thread

Spot of tea, mates? Read the rest of this post...

"New York" Magazine: Of Course We Should Do Racial Profiling

Columnist Kurt Andersen weighs in on racial profiling by saying he gets nervous when a group of young black teens "in cornrows and gangsta jeans" near him on the street (sorry, kids) and that a black man would be crazy not to get nervous in Brooklyn when he sees a pair of "bulky, buzz-cut, swaggering teenagers...maybe one of them carrying a softball bat." See, everyone racially profiles.

Andersen says random subway searches in NYC are stupid and that you have to racially profile. Skip the grandmas, he says, and focus on people more likely to be bad -- ie. Muslim youth.

One of his arguments: when you're going after the mafia, you go after Italians, even if you realize most Italians aren't in the mob. Problem: you'll be ignoring the Russian mob, Latin druglords, and other members of organized crime whose name doesn't end in -ino.

I don't reject racial profiling because it offends my pc sensibilities. I object to racial profiling because it lets security lull into complacency when facing anyone other than young Islamic men. What about the young, clean-cut militia member -- a former Marine -- disgruntled over gov't intrusion into his life? What about the out-of-shape, middle-aged radical abortion foe who once was a security guard and now takes pot shots at doctors' homes and sets off bombs at clinics? What about the Jewish settler who wants to get the world's attention over what he sees as his gov'ts immoral abandonment of its people?

Behavioral profiling is logical and makes more sense than closing your eyes and randomly stopping people for bag searches. But racial profiling is just another way of closing your eyes to the many threats that don't always look the way you expect. Read the rest of this post...

Noontime thread

Ok, so it's 1:30ish. Whatever. What's up? Read the rest of this post...

Tucker Carlson accused of supporting terrorism on MSNBC

Tucker Carlson says on the air, twice, that he thinks it's a good thing the French government blew up the Greenpeace ship and killed some of its crew, unprovoked. He then goes on to call this "vandalism" rather than "terrorism." Greenpeace is, understandably, not pleased.

I've generally liked Carlson in the past, have always thought he played a far-right idiot rather than being one, but this is so far out of line during a time of war. How is this not supporting and endorsing terrorism? Should people go out and blow up other environmental groups and kill their staff? Is that an "okay" form of "vandalism" too? And how is killing people equivalent to blocking entrances to locations with your bodies?

What has happened to the Republican party in our country? They don't want to be compared to Nazis. Ok. How about being compared to Osama bin Laden?

June 22

From the transcript of MSNBC’s “The Situation with Tucker Carson”

Full transcript at: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8331191/

MADDOW: Can I just note that you just made a non-mocking reference to France? That's the first time.

CARLSON: Actually, I am objectively pro-France. You know, France blew up the Rainbow Warrior, that Greenpeace ship in Auckland Harbor in the '80s. And I've always respected them...

(CROSSTALK)

MADDOW: That made you like them?

CARLSON: Yes. Yes. It won me over.

MADDOW: Not steak au poivre?

And this...

July 15

From the transcript of MSNBC’s “The Situation with Tucker Carson”

Full transcript at: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8551916/.

CARLSON: Yes, yes. Third, they blew up the Rainbow Warrior. Twenty years ago on Sunday, they blew up the Greenpeace ship, the Rainbow Warrior, in Auckland Harbor. It was a bold and good thing to do.

And then this...

Carlson Calls Greenpeace

Telephone conversation between Tucker Carlson and Greenpeace Executive Director John Passacantando on 8/03/05 at approximately 4:00 pm to 4:30 pm

TC: Your letter is wrong. It was vandalism, not terrorism… Your point that I support terrorism is wrong. I don’t support terrorism. It was not an act of terrorism, that is an important distinction. Since you are the head of Greenpeace you should do your research. The French Government did not intend to kill anyone, therefore it is not terrorism. This is an important distinction. Vandalizing the ship was impressive on France’s part. I don’t support terror.

JP: Bombing a ship is terrorism. Killing a man is murder.

TC: You should know about vandalism, you guys engage in it all the time.

JP: We are a peaceful organization that engages in no violence to people or property.

TC: Spraying paint on seals is the same kind of vandalism, blocking entrances with your bodies…

JP: So would you call Martin Luther King, Jr. and Mahatma Gandhi vandals?

TC: I don’t want to make a generalization.

JP: Just answer two questions for me: are you proud of what you said and would you say it again?

TC: I have answered all your questions, unlike you, I am a busy man and have things to do but I know if I hang up you are going to send out a fundraising letter saying that I hung up on you…

JP: Just answer my two questions.

TC: I am not hanging up. I am returning the handset to the cradle…

Read the rest of this post...

AUDIO: Cindy Sheehan takes on right wing slime machine

Why do Republicans hate the mothers of our dead soldiers? Read the rest of this post...

Sidney Blumenthal dissects Novak

Fun to read, this is how is starts:

For nearly 50 years, Robert Novak badgered and bullied his way to the top of Washington. His disgrace in the Valerie Plame affair has brought him crashing down -- and he has only himself to blame.

You realize just how much the Washington press corps protected Novak.

It's on Salon, so you have to watch the ad. Read the rest of this post...

Mid-morning Open thread

Be open Read the rest of this post...

ACTION ALERT: NCFR tries to justify anti-gay bigotry in secret internal memo

As you've been reading here, the National Council on Family Relations has decided to ignore its own anti-discrimination policy in order to take almost $5 million in taxpayer funds from the Bushies to build a straights-only Web site on "marriage resources."

The Bushies told NCFR that they'd better dare not mention the homos on this Web site or the Bushies wouldn't give NCFR a dime. To that NCFR said, ok - show me the money!

When several non-bigoted NCFR members (and more than a few AMERICAblog readers) told them they shouldn't throw gay families under the bus, the NCFR executive director and Board sent out a pathetic memo trying to justify their hatred. In part, it says,

Being supporting of diversity does not mean that we cannot choose as an organization from time to time to devote our attention to a specific area of study. Many of us as social science researchers and practitioners concentrate in very specific areas of study. What it means, however, is that where there is a variety of views regarding the social and cultural constructions of family forms, NCFR acknowledges (and in so doing, supports) that reality by providing information to the public that recognizes a broad definition of family forms.

So just because they engage in anti-gay activity from time to time, they're really not bigots. But here's the real problem -- NCFR has already admitted the National Healthy Marriages Resource Center is NOT research or an "area of study." It's a clearinghouse of public information designed to help people have healthy marriages -- because they say married people have healthier lives. So in effect, it's a public health Web site that specifically excludes certain people. So by their own admission, "academic freedom" is not a valid argument.

Imagine putting together a federally-funded clearinghouse on cancer prevention but specifically excluding information that helps, say, Jews. And the reason you exclude Jews is because the guy footing the bill is a Jew-hater. But you say, what the hell, I'll take the cash and do the Jew-hater's bidding - after all, isn't this all just academic?

That's EXACTLY what NCFR is doing.

The sadly spineless man in charge at NCFR is Michael Benjamin. Let him know what you think at mbenjamin@ncfr.org or (763) 231-2891. His Washington DC office number is (202) 659-1190.

Would Michael Benjamin publish Web sites that intentionally excluded blacks because David Duke offered him a cool $5 mil? Might be a good question to ask him. Then again, we already know what Michael Benjamin is - perhaps it's only a question of haggling over his price.

More soon... Read the rest of this post...

Let's not forget to visit our advertisers

One of the good things about BlogAds advertisers is that they tend to have interesting stuff. We thank our current crop:

Xena DVDs - come one ladies (and guys who like strong ladies)

Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee - they've launched a new Web site, trying to take back the Senate, what's more important than that?

Santorum Exposed - Santorum haters unite

United Nations Foundation - the UN, a place much more important than some would have us think.

Jobs and Internships in politics - again a useful link

Pro- Beach Volleyball on NBC all summer: Come on, it's fun.

Edgy anti-Bush bumper stickers.

Now go make them happy, click and have a look :-) Read the rest of this post...

Good morning open thread

Morning morning morning. No screaming Frenchman this morning - I used earplugs last night. Slept like a baby. Yeah. Read the rest of this post...

Insurgents In Iraq Turn To "Dog Bombs"

Now PETA is going to get pissed. Read the rest of this post...

Supreme Court Nominee Roberts: What You Don't Know Can't Hurt Me

Judiciary Chairman Sen. Specter says it's fine by him if Bush wants to hold back documents from when Roberts was working for Bush I. The argument -- attorney client privilege is invoked -- is rather specious. Instead of debating the issue of what and how much should be disclosed from a nominee's career, one can't help wondering, What are they trying to hide? After all, Bush's people admit they're going slow on releasing other documents because they don't know what's in them that might cause controversy. Nonetheless, more and more info is spilling out about Roberts and his career.

The Washington Post details how Roberts helped Sandra Day O'Connor formulate a non-answer on Roe v Wade and his many, many formulations of far right positions during the Reagan administration.

The New York Times describes a meeting between Roberts and Sen. Wyden of Oregon. According to the Senator, Roberts expressed displeasure with Congress interfering in the case of Terri Schiavo (he'd be an awfully poor candidate if he DIDN'T see Congress's cynical grandstanding as terrible), cited a dissent by Brandeis on "the right to be left alone" (an early precursor to the idea of a right to privacy, which the far right wants to believe doesn't exist) and admitted Roe v Wade is "settled law" for an Appeals Court Judge, but that doesn't really apply to SCOTUS.

Those hearings are going to be humdingers. So do you like Roberts more or less or the same as the day he was announced? Read the rest of this post...