Cheap shot. She did not call Iraq deaths a juicy tidbit, you did. She called Bush, et al.'s Iraq misadventure "endless and tragic."

tear down the other side and to hell with the people.

--
Howard

*equal opportunity offense to both extremes*

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" [George Santayana]

they are merely playing a game of tear down the other side and to hell with the people

It only gets better with Bush cutting-and-running to South America.

Let's count how many times Bush tries his new "social justice" act out on them.

I don't usually reply directly to comments made by other readers. That said, TJKING's comments are stupid. There are so many failures of leadership, character and just plain being human on the part of the Bush Administration and the previous Congress lead by so many good Chrisitian people or so they told us, time and time and time again that it boggles the mind. They have stolen & lied with a degree of contempt that is and of itself an accomplishment. I mean, what aspect of governing has escaped their collective stain? What haven't they pooed on? I'm almost too depressed to know all the details . . . almost.

Under this Republican administration, working as a US attorney or CIA covert operative is not what it used to be.

I disagree. The problems are not of an unlucky administration. After 9/11 they could have used their inherited power to do a lot of good and a lot of needed housekeeping. Instead, they chose conservative policies that were disasters and GOP partisan tactics to smear opponents. It's the administration's gross failures, not the lack of luck, that leave us where we are at.

With all this horrible publicity shining a light on the Bush regime's misconduct and mistakes; look out! They usually deal with bad publicity by fomenting a crisis.

There just might be "another 911 ahead."

Mark my words, when a bully like bush gets backed into a wall he'll do ANYTHING to regain his footing.

And TJ - No one in the world has ever had so much "glee" as this sorry excuse for a president whenever he uses it to scare people into doing what he wants. There has been no joy in Democratic circles over this mess.

By lobbing that little turd you just show that --> YOU GOT NOTHIN'

Jan Knaus

I agree with you, it has nothing to do with bad luck. It has to do with the Republican Party, putting it's own self interests above the Public Welfare.

The Republican Party made a grab for all the power, it became despotic. Usurping the Constitution.

Read more about the damage, party loyalty can do to our freedoms.

http://www.law.ou.edu/ushistory/washbye.shtml

Don't just blame the President, blame the Party who failed to reign him in and rubber stamped his usurption.

Time for all true patriots, of our freedoms, to put on trial, (similar to the McCarthy era) those who were complicit in trying to overthrow the Will of WE THE PEOPLE 

Are you alleging that the Vice President broke a law and endangered a CIA operation. Help me know which law you are referring to. Enlighten me.

It's been rather interesting, from the Libby trial, to note how the various internal factions worked to tear one another down and to hell with Republican purpose

Bush and his gang, the whole rotted right wing was always been nothing but a Potemkin Village, just like the "Democracies"
Bush boasts about in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the facade is disappearing, like the curtain in OZ. Pick an issue; homosexuality, fiscal conservativism, marriage, honesty, integrity, responsibility, the Constitution' all the things they trumpet as values, but all the things they're guilty of. Homosexuality in their party, deficits, foreign and domestic, multiple marriages, felonious conduct, deviousness and assaults on the Constitution.

Bush and the born agains should remember their Bible, " He that
troubleth his own house shall inherit the wind."

Note: Before anyone goes there, my opinion of homosexuals is; leave them alone, they deserve all the rights the rest of us have.

To wit: 1. There's a huge difference between canning prior admin appointees, as Clinton did (and Bush II) did, which no one complains about as it's a well-established presidential prerogative. The replacement USAs were vetted by the Senate at the beginnign of the adminstration. Here, they used a provision of the PATRIOT act to avoid senate review, and appear to have used it to defuse embarrassing corruption investigations by inserting people with little or no qualifications for the job. (Does anyone think it's a coincidence that Karl Rove's chief of Oppo Research in the Gore campaign is now the USA in Arkansas?) The conflation of the two is intellectually dishonest.

2. Your comments about Lam are simply bizarre given this letter from the DOJ that vouched for her handling of border cases. The more the DOJ talks, the worse this gets.  Lam doesn't work for Feinstein, and it ain't Feinstien that fired her.

3. The use of an old right-wing rhetorical trick--you oppose Bush, therefore you rejoice when Iraq goes badly and people die b/c it's Bush's war--is nothing but trolling. (Perhaps if they told more stories about the schools we're building...)

This is really the wrong web site to be peddling Fox News talking points.

"...and of course, the endless and tragic war in Iraq.

There are bad news days but this is really something! There is so much scandal and mismanagement that the Dems will have to tread both heavily and softly at the same time to show that they have the nation's interest at heart, that they aren't simply opportunistically beating a White House that is way down...."

Cheap shot?

Look at the title. Is she expressing satisfaction at the bad news for Bush? Is she expressing satisfaction at the number of items on her list?

In her list she referred to some of these items that she is deriving satisfaction from as "Juicy". That sounds like someone who is gleeful. She included in that list, no,....she saved for last for impact, the war and couched it in the context of its tragedy, which is obviously her view of the loss of life.

She is doing two things. One, she is listing the things that she gleefully observes are being used to damage the President to her satisfaction . She is describing the loss of life in the context that it creates a situation that satisfies her need to hurt the President.

Second, she is clearly telling the left to be careful to keep this glee and satisfaction contained in a disciplined message, so they can gain as much power from it and not be exposed as people that are cynically banging a drum on issues that through their negligence can damage American lives.

Cheap shot? You tell me what the theme of the post is? Glee first, warning to fashion the PR second.

Bush should have done like Clinton and wiped out the US attorneys and the travel office and the CIA and every other office he could.

Dissemble, dissemble, dissemble.

In the case of Clinton 'wiping out' all US Attorneys.

U S Attorneys are political appointees (patronage). When Clinton came into office there were 12 years worth of Republican US Attorney appointees. Just as I'm sure Reagan replaced Carter's Democrat appointees with Republicans, because its SOP, most especially when the new President is a member of the opposite party of the one he is replacing....Clinton replaced the 12 years of Republican appointees with Democrats. Did Clinton replace ALL of them? I don't know.

Did Bush "wipe out" any of the Clinton Attorneys General? How many did he allow to keep their jobs?

Look up "patronage" in the dictionary.

You say that as though being gleeful at this Administration's complete failure is a bad thing. This is an Administration who demonized their political enemies in order to get people to vote for them. People believed them and did so. And, despite all this power, they utterly failed.

Politically, I'm LMAO at this Administration, who have been reduced to saying things like "stop acting so gleeful at my, er our, trajedy."

TJKING - I don't give a rats a.. whether Jo-Ann or anyone else expresses glee or not. What counts is what Bush and his administration are doing or not doing. To blame us or anyone else for Bush's mistakes is ridiculous. You can drop the poor me's - the mistakes, judgement errors and mismanagement are neither your fault or ours - put the blame where it belongs - Bush and his cronies.

So just so I understand you....You are laughing your ass off at the illegitimate accusation of you that you are gleeful about the tragic loss of life or laughing your ass off at the legitimate accusation that you are gleeful at the tragic loss of life.

I've already posted over there, Seashell for LJ or someone to get off their butt and post a new thread so we can express our excitement that the appeal will bring more heartburn for NBC and Armitage.

Consider the modern, elevated Governor William J. Le Petomane. Now, is it only coincidence that the earlier one was told where to affix his signature by Hedy Hedley Lamarr, and the Assistant to the Presdident for National Security Affairs is Stephen Hadley?

Coincidence? You decide...

Did Le Petomane know what was taking place over his signature? Ask Sheriff Bart.

-
Howard

*equal opportunity offense to both extremes*

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" [George Santayana]

Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha! Are you alleging that Fitz could not find the leaker or discover a crime because Libby's testimony kept him from discovering what we all know now he found out on day one.

Even Juror Dennis Collins said that the Jurors felt like their hands were tied. He said, Why are we even sitting in judgement of this guy [Libby]. Where are the other leakers? Why haven't they been indicted... He said there was a lot of sympathy for Libby being unfairly charged, but they had their hands tied.

If you really believe the sand in the face blinded Fitz from finding the crime,....please let me sit down first so I don't fall down laughing.

By lobbing that little turd you just show that --> YOU GOT NOTHIN'

She's succinct :)

Wingnut Central has already dispatched agents throughout the land armed with right wing talking points, and like swarms of locusts they will attempt to Spin the Libby verdict. I foresee a run on anti-dizziness pills at the local pahrmacies.

Victoria Toensing, a right wing political apologist was already on CNN with Wolf Blitzer. She was spinning like a Whirling Dervish explaining the Libby verdict. She seemed to be trying to say that the Prosecutors, the numbers of witnesses, and the jury ALL made a big mistake. Toensing is a lawyer, I wonder why Libby didn't hire her? It seems she would have gotten Libby off.
Maybe I should rephrase that last sentence.

Toensing was spinning so rapidly you could hear it; SWOOOSH SWOOOSH SWOOOSH.

Well, any of us could start our own blog under Create Content, but it wouldn't be front-paged like a post from Larry.

Having said that, why should NBC and Armitage have heartburn over an appeal in Scooter's criminal case? Neither one of those entities have anything to do with whether or not Scooter lied to the grand jury and the FBI. Perhaps there may be more of a need for medication under the Wilson's civil trial, but not Scooter's criminal case. At least, that's the way this non-lawyer sees it.

War does not determine who is right - only who is left. Bertrand Russell

This is, or should be, the beginning of a long campaign to re-educate the American People.

The last days of the Bush Administration are going to be one long political storm, and the American People will get a chance to see just what creatures inhabit the Republican Party.

I can't rejoice that we will have to wait 2 long years for real reform to begin, but it may take 2 years of the Truth on Exhibit, before the Democrats have a solid enough political majority to get things done.

More than 60% of the People think Bush a failure and an incompetent. We need that 60% to think of themselves as Democrats, so that any Democrat can count on at least 55% at the polls, and Democrats have solid control the Congress and the Presidency.

Then, Democrats can start turning this country around, taking the plutocracy apart, bring the troops home, establish national health care.

You've got a lot of class, TJ, but it's all low.

Jan Knaus

TJ, grow up!  Your arguments are specious:

She is doing two things. One, she is listing the things that she gleefully observes are being used to damage the President to her satisfaction .

The things she listed are the ways the president has done to damage our country!  Damage?  to the President?  He is indifferent to damage because in his bubble he doesn't see it.  He doesn't even know what damage is, despite the uncalculable amount he has done against our country, our soldiers, and the world.  He Googles Crawford, Texas for fun.  No one can hurt this fool on the hill -- George -- he is clueless. 

 Glee?  Well, I admit to feeling some satisfaction that the truth is finally hitting the fan, but I will only feel glee when this sociopath-in-chief is impeached and in prison for, among many things.  crimes against humanity.  Until then I will just hope. 

She is describing the loss of life in the context that it creates a situation that satisfies her need to hurt the President.  

Make no mistake about it, the loss of life is caused by George Bush himself and his criminal regime in prosecuting this bogus war.  If its ramifications "hurt" this buffoon-in-chief enough that it prevents his next absurd misadventure ( read pre-emtive attack on Iran), then I personally will feel actual glee about that. 

A president who makes it against the law to photograph the coffins of the war-dead shows his contempt for the reality he has created. 

Glee?  Take the Vice President's advice; and while you're at it, take him with you!

BTW, TJ, do you have any comments about your hallowed spokesman, Anne Coulter?  Her suggestions to murder Supreme Court Justices, her voting fraud, her many other pronouncements, which if an equivalent fraction of which had been made here, you would jump all over?  Just askin'.  Surprised if you answer.  Of course if you do, you'll probably just give yourself some cowardly out.  Typical.

I also (painfully) re-read your first paragraph where you were intimating that Dems would use all this bad news politically, and your point was that it was cynical to think it through.  To do anything else would be ridiculous.  It is not wrong to evaluate the ramifications of the news. 

But maybe you're conflating that with manipulation.  Now that is what your henchmen do best.  Remember the Publican secret memo about Terri Sciavo being an issue they could win on?  Now, THAT is manipulation. 

Jan Knaus

TJ? A response? Didn't think so.

Agree with seashell --> a definite 10!

Jan Knaus

C'mon guys that was sarcasm. Didn't the bombastic "long history of the Republic" schtick give it away? It's my best David Broder.

But the point is valid and you're right it does apply to the whole Republican party. I looked it up and it was actually late September when Mark Foley, Woodward's latest book's revelations and the new Iraq NIE they'd hidden since April exploded under them like 2000 lb EFP's all in the same week.

In any other era any one of those late September scandals or these new ones would have sent the media in this country into a paroxysm of outrage that wouldn't have let up until the party in power was driven from office. Our Dem legislators are doing their part. Polls show Americans like Bush as much as they liked Nixon in 1974 so we the people get it. Why doesn't the media?

My only guess is maybe they do. But with the Administration pulling the reins on the FCC they don't dare speak up too much lest they jeopardize their cozy lifestyle.

BTW...

Here's a wiki link listing all 8 fires US Attorneys.

All 8 were Bush appointees.

Sorry - I did try the 'conservapedia' ( I know you all like your own special brand of facts) - but there were no listings for any of them... Or 'US Attorneys' in general... or Department of Justice... I did learn Japan is a group of islands off the Western Coast of Asia, though - so it wasn't a total waste.

"Just what creatures inhabit the Republican Party?"

Right about now Bush needs a low-yield nuke to go off somewhere. Just big enough for the USGS to say it could well be nuclear, in case the people don't believe the administration's proffer of atmospheric samples as proof. My favorite place is a remote valley along the border btw Afghanistan and Pakistan, whence the Pakistani government has conveniently withdrawn its forces.

And once we're told the terrorists have nukes, it's a brand new ball game, with a new rule book and a new pile of Daddy's money.

Collins didn't say that the jury felt that Libby was unfairly charged. He said that the feeling on the jury was that Libby was the fallguy. He implied that the sentiment on the jury was ..'where's Rove,' etc.

I love the way the media tried to spin his remarks as the Jury wishing for more indictments including Bush's indictment, when in reality the comment followed a heartfelt remark from Collins about how several jurors on many occasions had spoken openly about real sympathy for Libby. This was not a remark of bring me the head of the President. It was a remark of bewilderment that Libby was on trial and others were being let off the hook by Fitz for bizarre reasons.

NBC has to hang out to dry for another few months waiting to testify and not knowing if they will be caught in their lies. Fitz succesfully badgered Walton to keep out Andrea Mitchell, because he knew she would testify that Russert already knew hence blowing two of the counts that Libby was convicted of today. That leaves the Cooper count and without that obstruction is dead too. Also David Gregory was not allowed to testify. He was told of Plame the morning of the 11th by Ari. Russert spoke to Libby later that day. He also will testify that Russert knew. Everyone in town wanted this bit of information and Gregory would have scrambled for his cell to call Russert as soon as he knew. The lies and contradictions at NBC will unravel as this thing strings along. They can't be happy about this.

.> NBC has to hang out to dry for another
> few months waiting to testify and not
> knowing if they will be caught in their lies.

Generally speaking there is no additional testimony or fact-finding in an appeal; the appeals court primarily considers issues of law not fact. If they find that a factual mistake is so large as to constitute an issue of law, they can return the case to the lower court with an instruction to re-open it. But after almost a year of hearings, and with the defense stipulating to essentially all of the critical evidence and facts, this non-lawyer has a hard time seeing that happen in the Libby case.

Sorry. He's a felon.

sPh

Does Libby have to turn in his law license automatically, or does a member of the bar in each jurisdiction have to file an ethics complaint concerning the felon status?

CVilleDem

Great counterpunch.

We will see.

A felony is number one on the list for disbarment. I am not sure of his home state or way his licensed to practice but in some cases, his disbarment in one will result in automatic disbarment in others. For instance, upon Bill Clintons admission of Guilt, he was immediately disbarred in Arkansas. His disbarment before the SCOTUS was automatic. It has subsequently been reviewed and his Disbarment was extended. Libby will also get the automatic SCOTUS disbarment.

When it is overturned on appeal or when he is pardoned, it is usually appealed fairly quickly.

The way things are going it's really going to ba an army of one sooner than we think too.

There is, indeed, much turf war among intelligence agencies, and variable levels of skill. While I'm looking for a more specific link to a critique from the Department of Justice Inspector General, this will give some impression of the FBI's continuing struggle to get electronic connectivity, on its TOP SECRET(TS) SENSITIVE COMPARTMENT INFORMATION (SCI) local area network (LAN), to the rest of the intelligence community. This mystified me; when we needed TS/SCI at the Federal Y2K Information center, once we built the SCI vault ("SCIF"), it was a matter of filling out the forms for JWICS network access and getting the connection and crypto box in under a month. I didn't have a current SCI clearance, but I told the colleague that did how to set up the LAN, and it was working in the SCIF within a couple of days.

I'd be very careful about generalizing that the CIA is "doctoring" information. Yes, it's generally agreed Tenet probably went too far in slanting the PDB to say what the Administration wanted to hear. In her 9/11 Commission testimony, however, Rice admitted she had not really read the appendices and footnotes to the more detailed intelligence community reports.

There are enough declassified National Intelligence Estimates (NIE) and other community documents, to allow the public to get a sense that these can be almost Talmudic in the need to read the report conclusion, comments on it, and comments on the comments, and... Especially important are the footnotes, called reclamas, which record the dissent of one or more agencies to a conclusion.

If Rumsfeld didn't like the reporting coming through, OSP and Feith were an inappropriate way to deal with the problem. The Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) definitely reports to the Secretary of Defense, and he has considerable control over the National Security Agency (NSA) and other community components such as the National Reconnaissance Office and National Geospatial & Imagery Agency. If he pressured those agencies about his conclusions, and they pushed back saying they couldn't support them, this should have been a warning to him. Instead, Feith's shop seemed to bypass both the intelligence community, and, if the Libby trial suggestions are accurate, the Office of the VP and possibly the National Security Council staff.

--
Howard

*equal opportunity offense to both extremes*

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" [George Santayana]

"Just what creatures inhabit the Republican Party?"

Right about now Bush needs a low-yield nuke to go off somewhere.

After observing the Bush gang for the last 6 years, its been my position for some time now that I put 'nothing' past this crowd, and I do mean 'nothing', and I have yet to see any evidence to disabuse me of that opinion.

If I recall, that argument about the Demcorats not having a "plan" was used by Repubs in the 2006 mid-terms, to no avail. What makes you think it will fly in 2008? Talk about a lame attempt at spin.

'that satisfies her need to hurt the President'

Why would anyone want to hurt Bush?

Why....Bush wouldn't hurt anyone, he wouldn't even swat that fly that landed on his shoulder.. shweee shweee shweee !