Today's News

In my continuing effort to get my apartment ready to put on the market, I've completely neglected the blog today. I managed to get a couple of Tweets in (follow me!) during the installation of a medicine cabinet, bathroom lighting fixture and a pantry door.

So here's my version of today's news:

Judge Sotomayor's hearing in finally underway. And along the way Senators Sessions and Kyl show how bitchy they are to the world. Senator Hatch also gave us his whiny, wimpy side (as if he has any other) during Hardball. It was nice to see Senator Al Franken in his first Committee hearing as was the last to speak being the most junior senator. Speaking of seniority, the penultimate speaker at the hearing? Alren Specter. ...Heh.

Dick Cheney, in his latest impression of Dr. Evil, is exposed for ordering the CIA to withhold information from Congress for eight years! That would be his whole time in office as Vice President. Hmm... would that mean that Nancy Pelosi wasn't entirely incorrect when she was vilified a few weeks ago for claiming that she was lied to by the CIA? Still waiting on one of those creeps, namely John Boehner to apologize to Pelosi.

The future ex son-in-law of Sarah Palin, Levi Johnston continues his media tour and suggests Palin quit because she couldn't hack it. She couldn't take the pressure. Take it with a grain of salt considering the source, but you have to wonder about someone who quits because, according to her, she was tired of the attacks. And yet, the GOP and 7 in 10 Republicans would vote for her in 2012.

This Is Why Joe Scarborough Sucks

Despite facts, despite history, he knows more than anyone in the room, will proudly announce it and nothing you say, even when the facts fall on your side of the argument, can change the mind of a man who is all-knowing. What a sad, sad fool.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Waterboarding works because Scarborough says so. Case closed.

Rep. David Obey Calls Out CIA As Well

Sam Stein: Yet another Democrat in Congress [Rep. David Obey (D-WI)] is alleging that the CIA included incorrect information in its records about past congressional briefings on interrogation policies.

I can't wait until the first Republican with a backbone comes out and does the same. Then maybe there won't be this partisan distraction of a Pelosi witch hunt and they'll actually look into the shoddiness of which CIA notes were kept. The lack of accuracy in the CIA briefings is both stunning and frightening.

...what he said...

posted by Armadillo Joe

As per usual, Atrios finds a way to say something far more succinctly than I ever could.

Regarding this whole "What-did-Nancy-know-and-when-did-she-know-it" non-scandal scandal, Atrios, in a post titled "Monsters," sez:

We should always remember the morality of Elite Villagers, those who supported the pointless war in Iraq and who mostly are now decidedly not horrified at the fact that the administration tortured the shit out of people in order to justify the atrocity that was the Iraq war. The Villagers loved their little war. It made them feel heroic. They wanted justification for it, too.

Amen, brother.

I don't remember which famous blogger said it first, but Washington D.C. is truly hard-wired for Republican rule. Which makes a certain amount of sense, actually. Money and power accruing in the capital city of the richest, most powerful nation the planet has ever known and perverting its policies and corrupting its priorities with regards to the well-being of that nation's entire population -- not just the wealthy ones -- is intuitively correct.

And, naturally, that money and power will trump whichever regional or religious or ethnic or socio-economic affinities may have driven the voters of any given district to elevate whichever huckster to national office. And it stands to reason that those elected hucksters will attract a great many hangers-on -- whether lobbyists or journalists or assorted wannabe "insiders" and unprincipled deal-makers -- who will all desire reflected glory or power or status and the money and priviledge those things can bestow. Whether pre-Revolutionary Russia or Imperial Rome or Versailles circa 1789, the whole thing eventually devolves into an insulated, closed loop of self-referential circle-jerking on route to unquestioned IMPORTANCE, because running the world is hard work and the rest of us should be more appreciative.

Those people are too IMPORTANT to really care about the little people who, you know, have to live with the policies they enact and lobby for and report about because, to them, being in Washington D.C. is not just a job but a lifestyle and everyone else around them is in that clique, too.

Whether making widgets in a factory or enabling and endorsing a torture-regime, a job's a job and we've all got to eat and pay rent, right?

Drudge rules their world.

Scandal Sells

What is going on with the MSM feeding frenzy on tyring to put Nancy Pelosi smack dab in the middle of the torture scandal because of Intelligence briefings? While the networks all reported that Pelosi accused the CIA of "lying" in her briefing in opposition to the CIA's assertion that she knew the specific interrogation methods had been used, none of the reports noted that in a letter accompanying the documents, CIA Director Leon Panetta suggested the information in the documents may not be "an accurate summary of what actually happened."

I'm not a Pelosi fan, and if she is not being truthful then she should be gone as well. That being said, she's asked the CIA to release the documents that prove them right and her wrong, but they've refused. If they have her nailed to the wall, then why the refusal? She's also suggested for a truth commissin to sort this all out. Would someone who is lying ask for truth commission? If your operation is being called bogus, then it's in the CIA's best interest to release said documents and prove Pelosi wrong, shut her up and save face. Why won't they do that?

It's also come to light that the former head of the Intelligence Committee, Sen. Bob Graham, is siding with Pelosi. His meticulous notes confirm attendance at only one meeting in which they were not told about waterboarding being used while the CIA said he'd been briefed four times.

Graham: "When I asked the CIA when I had been briefed, they gave me four dates, two in April and two in September of '02. On three of the four occasions, when I consulted my schedule and my notes, it was clear that no briefing had taken place on that date and eventually the CIA concurred in that. So their record-keeping is a little bit suspect."

Ultimately, this is a distraction from the fact that waterboarding was used in August of 2002 and the committee wasn't briefed until September of 2002. That's the story.

The media focusing on Nancy Pelosi and the CIA discrepancy over torture techniques and when they were used is the equivalent of dangling a carrot on a stick in front of a mule. "Oooh! Pelosi called the CIA liars!"

It's a distraction from what they should be covering. It also sells. The CIA is a department with no face. Scandal loves a face, and if they can connect a little, grandmotherly type like Pelosi to torture it sells papers. What are they going to do, post a picture of the CIA building entrance next to the type? Have the CIA logo over the talking heads' shoulders while they try to blame torture on a department instead of someone in the former Vice President's office? Doesn't Pelosi's face over that pundit's shoulder look more scandalous?

Strange Segues

I just watched an MSNBC report about the release of the CIA torture memos with expanded analysis on the decision of President Obama and CIA Director Leon Panetta to refrain from prosecuting any agents who carried out the Bush administration orders. The very next story? "Hulk Hogan's Nasty Divorce."

Seriously?

The Leon Panetta Thing (The post where I tell Diane Feinstein and Harry Reid to shut the fuck up.) - UPDATED

It seems that Senator Diane Feinstein (D[INO]-CA) must have been travelling to a different country to get some kind of stem cell procedure done in order to grow the spine she was missing these last few years. Why else would she say something like this about Obama's choice of Leon Panetta to head the CIA?

"My position has consistently been that I believe the agency is best served by having an intelligence professional in charge at this time."

Really, Senator Feinstein? Then why say this back in 2004 after George W. Bush nominated Porter Goss for the same position?

"I believe the President should have the prerogative to appoint who he wants to be the DCI..."

Oh, right. It's because the President was a Republican, wasn't it? And we all know that Democrats in Congress are so used to bending over and taking it in the ass that it was only natural that you say something like that.

And you dared let your ego get the better of you and have a hissy fit. When Bush nominated Porter Goss for the same position you thought Goss' credentials were fine. Then Goss himself said he wasn't qualified for the position. (Why he accepted is another story.) So why should you really be kept in the loop as to who is nominated? You've proven that sometimes credentials don't make someone good at their job.

Jay McDonough: Both Senators Feinstein and Rockefeller had ranking positions on the Senate Intelligence Committee and were completely ineffectual at stemming the abuses of the Bush Administration and, in fact, in most cases sided with the Administration on key policy issues. It was just a week ago that Vice President Cheney confided they had shared information about the Administration's illegal surveillance programs with key Democrats (this, most certainly, included Sen. Rockefeller) and those Democrats advised Mr. Cheney the programs should continue and the Congress needn't be involved.

Well, I'm weally sorry you got your wittle feewings hurt by not being informed initially, but get the fuck over it. Take your hurt feelings, and your Donna Reed motherfuckin' hairdo and your fucking FISA vote and get the fuck outta here. You too Jay Rockefeller, you fat fuck.

We've all been worried about obstructionist Republicans, but it looks like the real problem might actually be Democrats who feel they can't be pushed around anymore... by a new Democratic president who has vowed for more transparency than ever before. Does this make any fucking sense?!

Now Majority Capitulater Harry Reid is all of a sudden become Captain Opposite Man, insisting that there was no way in hell he was going to seat Roland Burris to Obama's vacant Senate seat... unless of course Reid copped out and would seat him if he had the proper credentials; and he didn't bother trying to seat Al Franken for fear of a Republican block. And yet, he says this about his relationship with the President-elect:

Reid stated, "I don't believe in the executive power trumping everything... I believe in our Constitution, three separate but equal branches of government."
"If Obama steps over the bounds, I will tell him. ... I do not work for Barack Obama. I work with him," he said.

'Atta boy, Harry. Good thing you followed you own rules for the last two years when you blocked every move Bush made and called him out when overstepping his bounds; stopped him in his tracks when he thought he was above the law with all those signing statements and.... oh, wait. Nevermind. You didn't do any of that did you? You caved, didn't you? And now we can expect six more years of caving to the Republican minority... well, a minority at least until the Democrats blow it again and Republicans regain control of Congress.

Fuck cloture votes. Until Reid makes the Republicans actually filibuster something they're opposed to and not pee in his pants with just the threat of a filibuster, I'll apologize and take it all back. Until then, Harry Reid can shut the fuck up too, that worthless shit.


UPDATE (1/8/09 10:25am):

Politico: The Majority Leader thinks former Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens shouldn't face jail time for his seven-count federal conviction last year, telling our Manu Raju, who was also in the room, "My personal feeling, you guys, I don't know what good that [would do]... He was a real war hero too, you know. He's been punished enough."

Punished enough? Please explain the punishment, Senator Reid. Please explain how Stevens didn't understand the procedure when he was recorded saying that the worst that can happen to him is a fine and a little jail time. Please explain how he didn't understand the rules changes. He's a goddamn Senator, for fuck's sake! If he doesn't know the rules, then he shouldn't fucking be there. I was always taught that ignorance of the law is not an excuse. I guess that is unless you're a member of the US Congress, of course.

And by the way, I think that it's a pretty big fuck up to get your home renovated for free. He didn't know there was something wrong with that? And what a fucking disgrace that the US Senate thought it appropriate to give a convicted felon a standing ovation on his last day there. That was a goddamn embarrassment.

Yeah, like I said, Reid needs to SHUT. THE. FUCK. UP.

(H/T Bob Cesca)

George "The US Does Not Torture" Bush Will Veto Ban on Waterboarding

We can't get rid of this guy fast enough.

WASHINGTON — The White House says President Bush will veto legislation on Saturday that would have barred the CIA from using waterboarding- a technique that simulates drowning- and other harsh interrogation methods on terror suspects.

..."President Bush's veto will be one of the most shameful acts of his presidency," Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., said in a statement Friday. "Unless Congress overrides the veto, it will go down in history as a flagrant insult to the rule of law and a serious stain on the good name of America in the eyes of the world."

Is Congress going to have the balls to do the right thing and override the Farce-in-Chief? Keep watching.

Mukasey Starts Criminal Investigation Into CIA Torture Tapes

NY TIMES: Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey said Wednesday that the Justice Department had elevated its inquiry into the destruction of Central Intelligence Agency interrogation videotapes to a formal criminal investigation headed by a career federal prosecutor.

...In an Op-Ed article in The New York Times on Wednesday, Thomas H. Kean and Lee H. Hamilton, the chairman and vice chairman of the Sept. 11 commission, said they believed that C.I.A. officials had deliberately withheld the tapes from the commission. They suggested that since the commission received its authority from both Congress and President Bush, any deliberate withholding of evidence might have violated federal law.

“Those who knew about those videotapes — and did not tell us about them — obstructed our investigation,” they wrote.

Well, I don't know what to make of this. Is it legit or is it another case of the fox guarding the hen house?

CIA Obstruction

The destruction of the CIA torture tapes just gets deeper and deeper.

NY TIMES: A review of classified documents by former members of the Sept. 11 commission shows that the panel made repeated and detailed requests to the Central Intelligence Agency in 2003 and 2004 for documents and other information about the interrogation of operatives of Al Qaeda, and were told by a top C.I.A. official that the agency had “produced or made available for review” everything that had been requested.

...In interviews this week, the two chairmen of the commission, Lee H. Hamilton and Thomas H. Kean, said their reading of the [seven-page memorandum prepared by Philip D. Zelikow, the panel’s former executive director] had convinced them that the agency had made a conscious decision to impede the Sept. 11 commission’s inquiry.

CIA Will Release Destroyed Video Documents

In a dramatic turn of events, the CIA is cooperating with Congress and handing over the documents created describing the interrogation in the destroyed videotapes.

WASHINGTON — The CIA said Wednesday it would begin handing over documents to Congress about the destruction of videotapings showing the harsh interrogation of two terror suspects after the House Intelligence Committee threatened to subpoena two agency officials.

Committee Chairman Silvestre Reyes, D-Texas, said Wednesday he had prepared subpoenas for former and current CIA officials and attorneys if they won't appear before the committee voluntarily. The panel rejected a Bush administration request that it defer to an executive branch preliminary inquiry and has launched its own investigation into the videotape destruction.

Read more.

Will Durst - Does Anybody Have WMD?

...Iraq—no weapons of mass destruction. Iran—no nuclear weapons program. Throw in the fact that since our Mideast misadventure began, we’ve misplaced 190,000 of our own rifles and weapons somewhere, who knows where, in Iraq, and I’m thinking maybe we should outsource our weapons location intelligence gathering because it doesn’t seem to be what you’d call our specialty.

Article here.

Robert Scheer - Waterboarding Our Democracy

Robert Scheer writes a great article questioning the destruction of the CIA tapes.

When the CIA destroyed those prisoner interrogation videotapes, was it also destroying the truth about 9/11? After all, according to the 9/11 Commission Report, the basic narrative of what happened on that day—and the definition of the enemy in this war on terror that George W. Bush launched in response to the tragedy—comes from the CIA’s account of what those prisoners told their torturers. The commission was never allowed to interview the prisoners, or speak with those who did, and was instead forced to rely on what the CIA was willing to relay.

Read the rest here.

More Obstruction? Lindsay Graham and the GOP

After Attorney General Michael Mukasey refused congressional demands for information Friday, the Justice Department filed late-night court documents urging a federal judge not to begin his own inquiry.
...Congressional inquiries and criminal investigations frequently overlap and it is not uncommon for the Justice Department to ask lawmakers to ease off. The request for the court to stand down is more unusual. Judges take seriously even the suggestion that evidence was destroyed, but they also are reluctant to wade into political debates.

Kennedy ordered the administration in June 2005 to safeguard "all evidence and information regarding the torture, mistreatment, and abuse of detainees now at the United States Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay."
Five months later, the CIA destroyed the interrogation videos, which involved suspected terrorists Abu Zubaydah and Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri.

...[Assistant Attorney General Jeffrey S.] Bucholtz argued that the tapes were not covered by Kennedy's court order because Zubaydah and al-Nashiri were not at the Guantanamo military prison in Cuba. The men were being held overseas in a network of secret CIA prisons. By the time President Bush acknowledged the existence of those prisons and the prisoners were transferred to Guantanamo, the tapes had been destroyed.

...Even if Kennedy agrees that the government did not violate his order, he still could schedule a hearing. He could raise questions about obstruction or spoliation, a legal term for the destruction of evidence in "pending or reasonably foreseeable litigation."

Speaking of obstruction, Senator Lindsay Graham is becoming the new Arlen Specter. The House passed a bill that bans waterboarding yesterday and Graham blocked it from being voted upon in the Senate. So even though he believes waterboarding violates the Geneva Convention ("I don’t think you have to have a lot of knowledge about the law to understand this technique violates Geneva Convention common article three, the War Crimes statutes...") and plainly was pissed off at Brigadier General Hartmann during a Senate Judiciary Commitee hearing on Guantanamo detainees, he still protects the Worst President Ever and prevents Bush from having to veto a bill banning waterboarding.

Just like Specter, Graham is all talk, talk, talk and then continues to tow the party line. Heckuva job, Grahamy.

Mukasey Rejects Senate

In his first major decision since his confirmation as Attorney General of the United States, Michael Mukasey waved his middle finger at the Senate today as he rejected Congress' demands for details into the Justice Department's inquiry regarding the destruction of CIA interrogation videotapes.

"At my confirmation hearing, I testified that I would act independently, resist political pressure and ensure that politics plays no role in cases brought by the Department of Justice," Mukasey wrote. "Consistent with that testimony, the facts will be followed wherever they lead in this inquiry, and the relevant law applied."

Would that be the same confirmation hearing where you decided not to classify waterboarding as torture and actually tried to give the impression that you didn't even know what waterboarding was, Mr. Mukasey?

The three letters [in response to letters sent by Senators Patrick Leahy, Alren Specter and Dick Durbin] represent an attempt by Mukasey to push back against growing pressure from lawmakers, primarily Democrats, who have showered the Justice Department with demands for investigations or information on topics ranging from the baseball steroids scandal to allegations of rape by a former military contractor employee.

The letters also are an assertive move by the new attorney general, who was confirmed last month with the lowest level of Senate support in the past half century because of his refusal to say whether a form of simulated drowning known as waterboarding amounts to torture under U.S. law.

Mukasey doesn't want to open an investigation into the destruction of the CIA torture tapes that Mukasey himself used in signing a warrant for the detainment of Jose Padilla based on the information gathered from the interrogation of Abu Zubaydah on those videos.

This is sickening.

Same Prez, New Excuse!

Looks like the new Bush excuse is "I didn't know." First he tries to lie out of knowing that Iran had stopped its nuclear weapons program in 2003 by saying he hadn't learned about the NIE report until the week before it was released, even though he told Isreali Prime Minister Ehud Olmert even before then during his fake peace summit. And now Bush is trying to use the same excuse in the destruction of the CIA torture videos.

ABC News' Martha Raddatz Reports: In an exclusive interview with ABC News President Bush said Tuesday he did not know about the destruction of CIA videotapes of detainee interrogations.
The President said he was told just a few days ago.

Is he incompetent or lying? In either case, this loser has to go.

Ex-CIA Agent: White House Authorized Torture

They're finally starting to revolt.

Former CIA agent John Kiriakou, who witnessed the waterboarding of top al-Qaida operative Abu Zubaida, has said that the practice is indeed torture and “a policy made at the White House, with concurrence from the National Security Council and the Justice Department.” Kiriakou added during an interview with NBC that the destruction of video evidence of the technique was “a terrible mistake.”

How many more agents and former agents are going to come out of the woodwork? Perhaps this is a little payback for blaming the intelligence agencies for the failed Iraq occupation and for the outing of Valerie Plame.

Not Since Nixon

Not only did the C.I.A. destroy videotapes containing the interrogation of two suspected terrorists, but they did it despite warnings against it.

White House and Justice Department officials, along with senior members of Congress, advised the Central Intelligence Agency in 2003 against a plan to destroy hundreds of hours of videotapes showing the interrogations of two operatives of Al Qaeda, government officials said Friday.

The chief of the agency’s clandestine service nevertheless ordered their destruction in November 2005, taking the step without notifying even the C.I.A.’s own top lawyer, John A. Rizzo, who was angry at the decision, the officials said.

Democratic Senators are calling for an investigation.

Senator Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts accused the C.I.A. of “a cover-up"... “We haven’t seen anything like this since the 18½ -minute gap on the tapes of Richard Nixon,” Mr. Kennedy said in a speech on the Senate floor, as reaction to the disclosure about the videotapes seemed to intensify minute by minute.

Mr. Durbin, the Democratic whip, said he had written Mr. Mukasey to ask for an inquiry into “whether C.I.A. officials who destroyed these videotapes and withheld information about their existence from official proceedings violated the law.”

Where are the Republicans on this issue?

What About World War III?

Just a little over six weeks ago, our illustrious President Bush stated that he "told people that if you're interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be interested in preventing them (Iran) from having the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon."

Now comes word from US Intelligence Agencies that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003 and that the program remains frozen. Yet Bush and his gang of warmongers were pushing for pre-emptively striking at Iran even though the intelligence clearly showed no nuclear threat.

...the new estimate declares with “high confidence” that a military-run Iranian program intended to transform that raw material into a nuclear weapon has been shut down since 2003, and also says with high confidence that the halt “was directed primarily in response to increasing international scrutiny and pressure.”

...Yet at the same time [US] officials were airing these dire warnings about the Iranian threat, analysts at the Central Intelligence Agency were secretly concluding that Iran’s nuclear weapons work halted years ago and that international pressure on the Islamic regime in Tehran was working.

How soon will Karl Rove spin this one and blame Democrats for pushing to strike Iran? What does Holy Joe Lieberman have to say about the report? What about William "The Bloody" Kristol? Watch for the weasel words from these morons any time now.

UPDATE: Does Stephen Hadley actually expect anyone to believe that since the official report of Iran's frozen nuclear capabilities was completed last Tuesday, that Bush didn't know about it til Wednesday?! It was halted in 2003 - four FUCKING years ago!

Fuck off, Hadley.