Yes, disbarment is possible and necessary.

I suspect there will be former Justice Department lawyers willing and able to bring the charges. At a minimum, attorneys quite capable of saying this isn't about being for or against their politics, it's about doing politics by rules that are very important for the rule of law. Quite possibly rather tough-minded conservative Republican attorneys ready to say that.

Disbarment would also make these mortifications-to-the-professioninto case studies in legal ethics lectures and practice items on the Multistate Ethics exam.

Posted at July 28, 2008 12:25 PM in response to Inspector General Releases Report on Monica Goodling Hirings

Theda,

I appreciate Democrats and non-Democrats who focus on pointing what's weak in particular proposals. We all learn from the debate.

I also appreciate Democrats who focus on making sure that, among the good things we can imagine, the most important feasible ones actually get done.

Your piece today is an excellent effort on the latter aspect of what the party, the nation, and the planet need now.

Posted at July 14, 2008 12:15 PM in response to Can Progressives Unite, or Will It Be the Same Old Bit-Politics Story?

Cat:

In 1973, earliest viability was 26 weeks, which made Roe v. Wade's line easy to explain. In 1989, there were cases of a baby surviving at 24 weeks,leading to that year's Supreme Court ruling on whether the line stayed at 26 or moved with viability. There may be some small improvements since then, though it may be hard to make it much earlier. The issue is having enough surface area in the lungs to be able transfer oxygen from the air to the blood.

I read that ruling 19 years, while 25 weeks pregnant with my second child. I already knew some of the ways she'd be different from her sister: far more responsive to music, far more inclined to sleep during the day, a different facial shape that shows in high school graduation pictures as clearly as it did in ultrasound.

It seemed to me then and and it seems to me now that one can quite seriously pro-choice and quite seriously against late-term abortions at the same time.

Posted at July 5, 2008 12:43 AM in response to Obama: Mental Distress Shouldn't Qualify As Exception For Late-Term Abortion

Yes, the government is the main and most important threat to our Fourth Amendment rights, but the telecom angle is a good way to roll the threat back because:

1. Suits in civil court are easier against the corporations, because you can skip government immunity issues.

2. The suit will be a giant battle, but you can get lawyers to commit to the battle on the promise of a contingency fee.

3. The companies hate the suits and the publicity, because it will disturb the stockholders even if they win in court.

4. The disturbed stockholders can, if disturbed enough, force corporate policy to say they won't play ball with Big-Brother anymore.

5. The management will hate the idea of disturbed stakeholders so much that they may well enact the policy even if they could win in a full-on stockholder fight.

I'm glad telecom leaders wanted to help fight terrorists, since there are some terrorists out there. But they have a choice of methods:

• the constitutional, lawful, decent, American method that requires lightning-fast warrants.

• the lying, cheating, stealing, scared-of-your-shadow, Rove-Cheney-Addington, stomp-on-the-flag-and-all-it-stands-for method that pretends warrants don't matter.

Suing the corporations gives those leaders a hands-on reason to make the right choice.

Posted at June 26, 2008 5:39 PM in response to Rendell On Bill Clinton's Alleged Hard Feelings Towards Obama: "Get Over It," "Shake It Off"

The LBJ/Katzenbach element was news to me. Cheney and Addington build their argument on a memo to VP Lyndon Johnson, three months into the Kennedy administration, in which Johnson wanted to be somehow bigger than Kennedy's understudy. So once, long ago, there was another Veep who wanted his own power base, on a theory barely heard from then until now?

Posted at June 26, 2008 4:46 PM in response to Quote of the Day: Vice President Is a "Barnacle" on the Legislative Branch

I predict Rove and the Republicans are deadly serious about using that lever this year. We heard it in the Kentucky Senate at length this spring-- and in our Senate, we're only one degree separation from Mitch McConnell's talking points.

We'll hear this stuff again.

In an ideal world, though, Rove's absurd version will let everyone start chuckling now, so that we can reach a crescendo of belly-laughs when it shows up in October television ads.

Posted at June 23, 2008 5:11 PM in response to Rove: Obama Is The Type Of Guy Who Hangs Out At Country Clubs

Um, Franklin Roosevelt?

Um, Lyndon Johnson?

Um, General George Marshall in his role in foreign policy?

Um, Chief Justice Earl Warren?

Um, Edward Kennedy?

Um, Chief Judge Robert Stephens of Kentucky, whose incisive ruling in Rose v. Council for Better Education transformed Kentucky school funding and accountability, and set a precedent that is changing state after state across the country?

Um, President Bill Clinton?

Posted at June 15, 2008 9:57 AM in response to Yeah, Let's Talk About It: It Wasn't Sexism Then or NOW

I shocked my children today by picking up the remote and turning to Fox News.

I did it because I knew what would be happening. People I disagree with early and often would be speaking of a shared loss, sharing memories and and honoring values I respect.

I wanted to see that, as a serious experience of believing that the things that unite us are more important than what divides us.

We belong together. Too often, we need tragedy to remember it, and Tim Russert's clearly is that sort of tragedy for journalists and Washington insiders. We should remember more often, in times when we are happy and strong. It's a good thing to feel.

Posted at June 14, 2008 1:28 AM in response to Tim Russert

I second the motion on "Albion's Seed." It has the wonderous effect of making you see WASP/Anglo/whitebread America as actually four ethnicities, as complex a melting pot in 1800 as anything that ever landed at Ellis Island. See it once, and you see it forever.

Posted at June 11, 2008 8:02 PM in response to Could Webb's Writings On Civil War Hurt Veep Chances?

Exactly. That post-War sensibility resonates in every word of the Pledge. And I mean every word when I say them.

Sometimes, understanding an idea's historical origins undermines one's commitment to that idea.

Not always.

Not for me. And especially not on this issue.

Posted at June 11, 2008 12:54 PM in response to Could Webb's Writings On Civil War Hurt Veep Chances?