Why Does Lurita Doan Still Have a Job?
It has been over 50 days since Scott Bloch, the head of the Office of Special Counsel, sent Bush a letter advising that Lurita Doan be disciplined severely for her violations of the Hatch Act. Yet there she is, still in charge of the government's credit cards as the Administrator of the GSA.
If Doan weren't a Bush appointee, her fate would be clear--she would have been fired fifty days ago.
Scottish Haggis' 18 Hours
What is it with news outlets and the who, what, why, when, where of briefings? The Hill, in its description of Specter's 18 hour deadline for the Administration, names neither all the people who briefed Specter (it reveals Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell was one of the briefers) nor all the people who got briefed ("other Senators," Specter says).
Dick on Libby
Actually, Dick's comments about Libby are actually pretty interesting, so I thought I'd give them their own post. [My transcription.]
CBS: Have you spoken to your former top aide since his verdict?
Dick: I have.
CBS: Can you tell us anything about that conversation?
Dick: No. I've seen him socially on a number of occasions.
CBS:
The Kiss of Death
There's something particularly nice about this timing. First comes the news that Representative Jay Inslee will submit a resolution to start an impeachment investigation against Alberto Gonzales. My favorite part is that the resolution (unlike recent resolutions for censure) calls for an investigation, which would give us enhanced claim on subpoena power and a megaphone to explain Gonzales' crimes to the American people.
RESOLUTION
Directing the Committee on the Judiciaryto investigate whether Alberto
About that Data-Mining...
Actually, my biggest complaint about this letter, from John Conyers, Jerrold Nadler, and Robert Scott, is that they don't use the word "Data-Mining."
We read with interest the disclosures in yesterday’s New York Times and Washington Postthat a 2004 dispute over the NSA’s secret surveillance program whichled to threatened resignations by Department officials involved a“massive electronic database†program.
When an Interview Is Definitely a Blow-Job
Oh, this one merits an entire blogger ethics conference. So you've got the announcement for a rare public interview of a very important person.
Former Federal Reserve Board Chairman Alan Greenspan, who helped shapethe nation’s economic and monetary policy for almost 19 years, talksabout the people he met, the issues he faced and the crises he helpedmanage during five different administrations.
Data-Mining Three
This is just a quick post to register two disagreements with Glenn Greenwald's post claiming the NYT's data-mining story is a shiny object. First, Glenn claims that the stories were floated by "anonymous sources seeking to protect Alberto Gonzales" and "anonymous pro-Bush sources." But then he goes on to point out that the NYT story (unlike the WaPo story) includes a detail--which I pointed out in my post on the story--that
TIA and TSP Timing
Commenter joejoejoe sent me a superb timeline to show the chronology of Congress' building opposition to the Total Information Awareness program as it relates to the NSA's domestic wiretap program (how cool is that? I, the chronology weenie, am getting timelines out of the blue! Better than Christmas!!), which appears at the bottom of this post.
I'd like to pull out just a few salient dates and add four (in bold italics)
They
I'm thrilled by the news that Democrats intend to call Jack Goldsmith to testify on the domestic wiretap program.
Congressional Democrats plan to step up the heat in coming weeks,pressing for Justice memos and other documents. They also plan to calla potentially crucial witness: Jack L. Goldsmith, the former chief ofJustice's Office of Legal Counsel.
Data-Mining Two
Marty Lederman's post on data-mining says what I've been trying to say for two years about the NSA program. Contrary to what the NYT and others suggest, we don't have to look beyond data-mining to find something so horrible that a good conservative like James Comey would object. We just need to get to the point where the US is using data-mining of dubious connections to replace the idea of probable
The Gray Lady Hides the Disagreement
This is kind of creepy. After learning yesterday that the Administration conned the NYT out of publishing details of the domestic wiretap program by telling the NYT that there had been no significant disagreement about the program ...
The first known assertion by administration officials that there hadbeen no serious disagreement within the government about the legalityof the N.S.A.
Data-Mining
I've been arguing for two years that the secret that Bush was hiding about the illegal domestic wiretap program is that they were using crappy data mining programs to pick their targets for wiretaps. In tomorrow's NYT, they're almost done filling out that picture.
A 2004 dispute over the National Security Agency’ssecret surveillance program that led top Justice Department officialsto threaten resignation involved computer searches through massiveelectronic databases, according to current and
Presidential Parsing
Anonymous Liberal has a really important post that shows that--wait for it--Alberto Gonzales is a lying sack of shit. AL shows that, in the same Senate appearance where Gonzales tried to parse the Administration out of trouble for illegally spying on American citizens by claiming the program wasn't the program, Gonzales also admitted that the program was the program.
Ix-Nay on the Onstitution-Cay
This is ripe. Apparently, the conservative blogosphere realized there wasn't a good defense for Harriet's claim of immunity from being subpoenaed, so they called the White House and begged for talking points. And then they published those talking points. Which, first of all, exposes to all the world that conservative bloggers are willing to gobble any kind of shite thrown at them.
If Congress pursues criminal contempt and the DoJ refuses to
Novak, I'll Blog You When You're Gone
I've been trying to ignore Novak's publicity tour while staying on top of his ever changing story on Plame. But (via TP) this is just too inviting.
I’m 76 years old, and pretty soon I’m going to a place where there are no blogs.
Why, why, Novak? Why do you look forward to heading off for your time in the Eighth Circle of Hell, simply because we bloggers aren't there?
The USA Purge, to Date
This is my general review of the interim report on the USA Purge. If you haven't already done so, make sure you read the post on the Iglesias cover-up, which I believe to be the most important aspect of the report.
The report on the findings to date in the USA purge lists the following crimes and violations that may have been committed in the course of the USA firings:Obstruction of justice,
The David Iglesias Cover-Up
Amid the excitement of contempt charges and more lies from Gonzales and Mueller's exposure of those lies, the House Judiciary Committee released a report detailing what the USA Purge investigation has found to date. I'll do a more comprehensive review of what's in it and what's not. The most incendiary thing in there (although it's not presented as such, yet) is the implication that DOJ conducted a seemingly coordinated cover-up of
Have they done this sort of thing? Send an Amb to answer a question?, Part Two
This is the second post in a series. In the prior post, I showed that, when Libby asked David Addington about paperwork relating to a CIA employee's spouse traveling for the CIA, he was interested in identifying all backup documents to Wilson's 2002 trip and/or the paperwork associated with Wilson's 1999 trip to Niger relating to AQ Khan.
The Rove Subpoena
I guess it's my day to be underwhelmed.
I find it really hard to get excited over SJC issuing Rove a subpoena today. That's partly for tactical reasons. Until we get the Sergeant at Arms to arrest Harriet and hold her in contempt, after all, it doesn't make sense to subpoena Rove because we don't have the tactically proven tools to enforce such a subpoena.
But it's also a question of focus.
The Call for a Special Counsel
As Christy has reported, Senators Schumer, DiFi, Feingold, and Whitehouse have called on Paul Clement to appoint a Special Counsel. I'm underwhelmed with the idea, for several reasons. First, Clement is clerkship spawn of Laurence Silberman and Antonin Scalia, both of whom have well-earned reputations for putting their partisan loyalties (and duck hunting hobbies) above their commitment to independent justice.
