I know this makes me a total nerd, but lately I just can’t wait to read how the press has been treating White House Spokesperson Scott McClellan at his daily briefings. Ever since Scott got raked over the coals for lying to the press about Karl Rove and Valerie Plame (whose real name is actually Valerie Wilson, but that’s another story), it’s been a regular slugfest between the press and Scott.
Cross posted at Political Porn
Read More.
Important new information has come from Edward Jay Epstein about Mohammed Atta’s contacts with Iraqi intelligence. The Czechs have long maintained that Atta, leader of the 9/11 hijackers in the United States, met with Ahmed al-Ani, an Iraqi intelligence official, posted to the Iraqi embassy in Prague. As Epstein now reports, Czech authorities have discovered that al-Ani’s appointment calendar shows a scheduled meeting on April 8, 2001 with a “Hamburg student.”
<snip>
So Many Errors: the Clinton Years
Opinion polls show that most Americans still believe Iraq had substantial ties to al Qaeda and even that it was involved in 9/11. Yet among the “elite,” there is tremendous opposition to this notion. A simple explanation exists for this dichotomy. The public is not personally vested in this issue, but the elite certainly are.
<snip>
Former White House counter-terrorism czar Richard Clarke is a prime example of this phenomenon. Immediately after the 9/11 attacks, when President Bush asked him to look into the possibility of Iraq’s involvement, Clarke was “incredulous” (his word), treating the idea as if it were one of the most ridiculous things he had ever heard. On September 18, when Deputy National Security Adviser Steven Hadley asked him to take another look for evidence of Iraqi involvement, Clarke responded in a similar fashion.
… Clarke’s adamant refusal to even consider the possibility of an Iraqi role in the 9/11 attacks represents an enormous blunder committed by the Clinton administration.
Becomes still more interesting below the fold »»
Read MoreSo Bill Clinton convened his ‘Clinton Global Initiative’ conference in New York last month. Brought together 1,000 world leaders. Those attending included Kofi Annan, Tony Blair, Condi Rice (oh how she must toss-and-turn questioning why she sold-out to the neo-cons), George Soros, Rupert Murdoch, Paul Wolfowitz,General Electric CEO Jeff Immelt, Al Gore and others. Subjects of discussion: lessening extreme world poverty, eliminating religious conflict, reducing global warming and promoting democracy.
Now, take a moment and think what President Bush might be hosting in 2013, five years after his second term ends
Read MoreThe current battle over Supreme Court appointments reveals more than just partisan bickering. It spotlights basic flaws in the US judicial system. Among the most obvious questions is the lifelong tenure granted to Supreme Court justices. Roberts, for example, may run the court through the terms of the next 10 presidents.
An excellent article by Ronald Brownstein in the LA Times reports that a growing coalition from the left and right is questioning whether lifetime appointments still serve the purposes intended by the founders:
Read MoreJustices today, on average, remain on the high court longer and retire at a more advanced age than ever before. Supreme Court justices now routinely serve a quarter-century or more. No justice has retired at an age younger than 75 since 1981 (when Potter Stewart stepped down at 66).
The Soviet Politburo probably turned over faster.
Which is why an informal band of prominent legal thinkers from left and right is challenging the Constitution’s grant of lifetime tenure to Supreme Court justices. With life spans lengthening, and the court’s members clinging so tenaciously to their robes, these critics want to limit justices to a single fixed term, usually set at 18 years.
So far, no prominent politician has joined them. But the idea seems destined to generate more discussion as frustration in both parties mounts over the process of selecting and confirming Supreme Court nominees.
Sometimes I think too much and parse beyond what’s probably necessary but, as far as the Plame Affair goes and because we have so little information and are waiting so patiently for Fitz to announce his results, I think this is an exercise we have to indulge in in order to stay sane.
Anyway, I’ve been thinking about Miller’s NYT article about her grand jury testimony – most specifically her last two paragraphs describing how, supposedly, she ran into Scooter Libby in Jackson Hole, Wyoming and how she wrote about it:
“Judy,” he said. “It’s Scooter Libby.”
That’s odd and here’s why…
Read More
