Scandals Archive:


Tuesday, October 03, 2006

The Republican Playbook on Foley: "Let's Find One Lie and Stick to It"

Posted by James L.

Hotline On Call had a couple of very good pieces on the Democratic and Republican political playbooks in the wake of the House Republican Sexual Predator Scandal (and yes, when House Republican leaders are involved in turning a blind eye to keeping a child sex predator in charge of the Congressional Caucus on Missing & Exploited Children, you're damn right I'm calling this an institutional Republican scandal). One thing that really stuck out from the Hotline's Republican playbook is this action item:

Fourth, they'll try to tamp down on internal disagreements about the timeline. This will be hard.

Translation: We better find one lie and stick to it. But isn't it telling, when caught off guard by the initial media scrums last Friday, that Alexander fingered Reynolds, then Boehner fingered Hastert (and then promptly recanted), followed by Reynolds throwing the blame, again, to Hastert? It's classic game theory: if you don't give the criminals a chance to get their "story" straight with each other, they'll throw around all kinds of bombshells when backed into a corner, isolated. Whichever lies the House Republican Leadership concocts to minimize the damage to their careers as politicians, they'll have to deal with the fact that their original media statements were very, very incongruent. They worked all weekend to iron out the edges, but that boulder is already rolling off the cliff. Good luck surviving November, fellas.

Posted at 12:26 AM in 2006 Elections, Scandals | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati

Thursday, September 14, 2006

OH-18: The Next CA-50?

Posted by James L.

In the 50th Congressional District of California, an entrenched Republican incumbent (Duke Cunningham) pled guilty to corruption charges.

In the 18th Congressional District of Ohio, it appears that another entrenched Republican incumbent is about to do the same:

Ohio Republican Rep. Bob Ney has agreed with the Justice Department to plead guilty to at least one criminal charge in a deal that could be announced as early as Friday, Capitol Hill sources said Thursday.

Charlie Cook ranks CA-50 as having a Partisan Voting Index of R+4.6 (that is, the district voted an average of 4.6% more Republican in the last two presidential contests than the national average).

Charlie Cook ranks OH-18 as having a PVI of R+6.1

In CA-50, Duke Cunningham's "early retirement" (ie. prison term) allowed another experienced Republican politician to assume his place on the ballot against a Democratic challenger with a thin-to-minimal political resume (Francine Busby).

In OH-18, Bob Ney's announcement that he would not seek another term allowed another experienced Republican politician (State Sen. Joy Padgett) to assume his place on the ballot against a Democratic challenger with a thin-to-minimal political resume, Dover Law Director Zack Space.

In CA-50 special election, Busby ran a campaign entirely focused against the Republican culture of corruption, and emphasized that she would take no 'gifts, trips or secret meetings' with lobbyists.

In OH-18, Space is running a campaign primarily focused on rooting out corruption, promising to accept "no gifts, meals or trips" from lobbyists. (For an example, check out this almost laughably boisterous ad.)

In the CA-50 special election, Busby fell short of Bilbray by less than 4 points (49.3-45.5).

Will Zack Space fare any better in a district that leans even more to the Republicans? At first glance, one would have to be pretty skeptical of such a scenario. But there are a number of factors that should complicate an easy victory for Republicans in this district. First off, Padgett was Ney's handpicked candidate, a line of attack that Space has already opened on her. Bilbray did not have the curse of being associated with Cunningham. Secondly, Padgett endorsed Ney's re-election bid even after his ethical "lapses" came to the fore. Thirdly, her political career has evolved from her close relationship with Gov. Bob Taft (the least popular Governor in the nation with a whopping 79% disapproval rating). If Space can consistently tie Padgett with the Bobs (Taft and Ney, that is), he may be able to succeed where Busby failed.

Posted at 10:55 PM in 2006 Elections - House, Ohio, Scandals | Comments (8) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati

Monday, November 07, 2005

VA-Gov: Republican Governor's Association Misleads for Jerry Kilgore

Posted by Bob Brigham

UPDATE (David): An MP3 of the call is available here. (Thanks for hosting it, Markos.) The sound quality isn't exactly great, so make sure you check out the transcript while you listen.

UPDATE (David): Folks, do NOT contact VPAP (the site we link to which has the Honest Leadership/RGA information). VPAP is just a campaign info database, like Tray.com or OpenSecrets.org. They have nothing to do with this.


In the final days of the Virginia gubernatorial campaign, the Republican Governor's Association is resorting to disgusting tactics in their support of Jerry Kilgore, even going so far as use robo-calls pretending to come from Tim Kaine.

These Republican Governors' Association prerecorded telephone calls are misleading and violate Federal law intended to prevent such political dirty tricks. Consider that "The Honest Leadership for Virginia PAC" is not just a front group, it is the Republican Governors Association's Virginia political committee. The "Honest" Leadership for Virginia PAC received just three contributions totaling $1,860,000 in 2005 – all from one donor, the Republican Governors Association.

RGA's Pre-Recorded Telephone call misleads recipients by implying that it is sponsored by Tim Kaine and fails to disclose the actual entity paying for the call – the Republican Governors Association. Using Tim Kaine's voice implies that he sponsored the call. Using a misleading name, like Honest Leadership for Virginia PAC, for their Virginia political committee, the RGA further misleads recipients that this entity is something other than what it is – an arm of the RGA. In fact, just check the contact info, the Treasurer's email ends in @rga.org.

Here is a transcript of the ad:

[Voice of Tim Kaine] I am running for Governor and I am not afraid to tell you where I stand.

I am conservative on issues of personal responsibility. As a former Christian missionary, faith is central to my life. I oppose gay marriage. I support restrictions on abortion: No public funding and parental consent. And I've worked to pass a state law banning partial birth abortion.

Paid for and authorized by Honest Leadership for Virginia PAC.

Registration number 05-034.

Now I'm no big city lawyer, but a former Hill staffer sent me an email that lays out a convincing case against the RGA:

Federal law requires disclosure of the entity that is responsible for initiating a pre-recorded telephone call to disclose its true identify at the beginning of the message. 47 CFR Sec. 64.1200(b)(1).

• The Federal regulation states: "All artificial or prerecorded telephone messages shall:

(1) At the beginning of the message, state clearly the identity of the business, individual, or other entity that is responsible for the call. 47 CFR Sec. 64.1200(b)(1).

• Neither the RGA, nor its shadow organization, Honest Leadership for Virginia PAC, is identified at the beginning of the prerecorded message.

• RGA violated Federal Communication Commission regulations by failing to identify the entity responsible for initiating the prerecorded message.

4. Federal law requires the entity making prerecorded telephone calls to provide a telephone number in the message. 47 CFR Sec. 64.1200(b)(2).

• The FCC regulation states: "All artificial or prerecorded telephone messages shall:

(2) During or after the message, state clearly the telephone number (other than that of the autodialer or prerecorded message player that placed the call) of such business, other entity, or individual. The telephone number provided may not be a 900 number or any other number for which charges exceed local or long distance transmission charges. For telemarketing messages to residential telephone subscribers, such telephone number must permit any individual to make a don-not-call request during regular business hours for the duration of the telemarketing campaign. 47 CFR Sec. 64.1200(b)(2).

• No telephone number is provided in the RGA's prerecorded message for the RGA or its shadow organization, Honest Leadership for Virginia PAC.

• RGA violated Federal Communication Commission regulations by failing to clearly state telephone number during or after the prerecorded message.

Lies and distortion, the Kilgore campaign is clearly desperate.

Posted at 04:45 PM in 2005 Elections, Culture of Corruption, Republicans, Scandals, Virginia | Comments (13) | TrackBack (2) | Technorati

Thursday, November 03, 2005

2006: NRSC Chair Elizabeth Dole's FEC Scandal

Posted by Bob Brigham

Last month:

We already know that Schumer and the DSCC is kicking Liddy Dole's ass in candidate recruitment. Now, for the second straight quarter, Schumer has kicked her ass in fundraising.
That response followed the DSCC have a 2:1 cash on hand advantage over the NRSC for most of the cycle. But now we learn that National Republican Senate Committee Chair, Senator Elizabeth Dole, has more problems with the money she has raised:
On Monday, the Federal Election Commission issued its audit of the Dole North Carolina Victory Committee Inc. (DNCVC), a campaign committee that served as a joint fundraising arm affiliated with Senator Elizabeth Dole’s 2002 Senate campaign. As a result of the audit, Dole has once again been told to refund more than $81,000 in illegal corporate contributions. This report comes six years after Dole, then an underfunded presidential candidate, decided she cared about campaign finance reform. Of course, the better funded Dole became, the more campaign finance reform became a “frivolous” issue. And now, any respect for the law seems to have just flown the coop altogether.
History after the jump...

FIRST: AS AN UNDERFUNDED PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE, DOLE WAS AGAINST CORPORATE CONTRIBUTIONS. In July 1999, then-presidential candidate Elizabeth Dole said, “I would say let's rule out all soft money for corporations, unions and individuals.” [NPR, “All Things Considered,” 7/19/99]

THEN: AS A SENATE CANDIDATE, DOLE CARED LESS AND LESS ABOUT CAMAPAIGN FINANCE REFORM. During her 2002 U.S. Senate bid, Dole was asked about an FEC complaint alleging she violated the corporate contribution ban by having a photo and quote from her distributed to millions of families in a publication printed by Wal-Mart. At the time, Dole referred to the complaint as just one of the “frivolous issues” Democrats were involved in. [AP, 9/6/02]

NOW: DOLE’S TURNAROUND IS COMPLETE, AS SHE REFUSES TO RETURN MORE THAN $81,000 IN ILLEGAL CORPORATE CONTRIBUTIONS

BACKGROUND: DOLE AIDE EMBEZZLED FUNDS, DOLE’S COMMITTEE LACKED OVERSIGHT TO PREVENT IT. The FEC found that the committee’s assistant treasurer, Earl Allen Haywood, “wrote unauthorized checks from the committee’s account” which were either not reported or wrongly reported on the original reports filed by DNCVC. The audit further found that “the lack of basic internal controls…and oversight” by Dole’s committee “created an environment that contributed to the misappropriation of funds.” In all, a review found a total of $70,750 in misappropriated funds from 2002 and an additional $104,001 from 2003. [FEC Memo, 10/31/05]

PROBLEM: DOLE’S COMMITTEE ACCEPTED CORPORATE CHECKS. Dole’s Committee received 55 contribution checks totaling $104,720, including $81,320 from corporations, in 2002 that were not deposited into the account until 2003. [FEC Memo, 10/31/05]

VIOLATION: CORPORATE CHECKS ARE ILLEGAL. Federal political committees are barred from accepting campaign contributions from corporations. If a corporate check is delivered to a campaign committee, the committee must return it or, if deposited, refund the contribution. [FEC Memo, 10/31/05]

PROBLEM: DOLE’S COMMITTEE DEPOSITED MORE THAN $600,000 WITHOUT PROPER INFORMATION. Dole’s Committee accepted at least 421 contributions totaling $634,743 from individuals without disclosing the donor’s occupation or employer. [FEC Memo, 10/31/05]

VIOLATION: CONTRIBUTIONS OVER $200 REQUIRE EMPLOYER/OCCUPATION DISCLOSURE. According to the audit, the Committee “was unable to demonstrate that it had made any follow-up requests for the missing information.” [FEC Memo, 10/31/05]

FEC RULING: THREE YEARS LATER, DOLE COMMITTEE STILL NEEDS TO RETURN ILLEGAL CORPORATE CONTRIBUTIONS. “The Audit staff concludes that DNCVC still bears the responsibility for the return of the prohibited contributions.” [FEC Memo, 10/31/05]

AND DOLE ISN’T THE ONLY REPUBLICAN WITH THESE PROBLEMS…

AFTER MORE THAN A YEAR, AND 15 LETTERS FROM THE FEC, MARTINEZ FINALLY ACKNOWLEDGES FLAWED FINANCE REPORTING. This week, a lawyer for Sen. Mel Martinez acknowledged that the Senator’s 2004 campaign reports filed with the FEC were “not done with the precision that was required.” The lawyer blamed the erroneous reporting on campaign stress, saying, “They got overwhelmed… If you've not been through it [a campaign] before, the deluge can cause great problems.” But since January 2004, Martinez’s campaign committee “has received 15 letters from the FEC requesting additional information, corrections or revisions in the reporting of contributions, expenditures and debt.” As one independent expert explained, “At the very least, this is sloppiness that is very unusual for a Senate campaign.” [Tampa Tribune, 11/1/05]

DELAY’S INDICTMENT WAS TRIGGERED BY ILLEGAL CORPORATE CONTRIBUTIONS. Former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay was recently indicted “on felony criminal charges of money-laundering and conspiracy related to the allegedly illegal use of corporate funds in the 2002 state election.” [Washington Post, 10/20/05]

Click Here to View the Complete Dole Audit Report from the FEC.

Ouch, Senator Dole is going out of her way to look pathetic compared with Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Chair, Senator Chuck Schumer.

Posted at 06:23 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Culture of Corruption, North Carolina, Scandals | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati

Tuesday, November 01, 2005

The Day Democrats Said Enough

Posted by Bob Brigham

Every Republican Senator should be on notice, today isn't like yesterday. Tomorrow won't be either. We have new rules, Democrats with spine, and enough is enough. Today, Harry Reid attempted to end the cover-up surrounding how the Administration lied to the American people while fabricating a case for a needless war. Kos says:

Reid asked the Senate to go into special session on intelligence -- that is, a closed session -- to discuss prewar intelligence. This mostion, along with a second (provided by Durbin), requires all Senators to report to the Senate floor. It is a non-debatable motion.

Cue in lots of hystrionics from Frist and company. Republicans whined that this was a violation of Senate tradition. This coming from the gang that wants to eliminate the judicial filibuster. Frist whined that he wasn't consulted. As though Democrats have had a seat at the table in this Congress. They want to play hardball? Fine. Reid sent notice that he can play that game as well.

Frist whined, "Senator Daschle never did anything like this." Damn right. A new sheriff is in town.

Now, this is more than a temporary stunt. The Democratic leadership has promised to call a special session in the Senate every single day until Republicans alllow for a real investigation.

So let's see what we have here --

Democrats showing leadership and fight. Very nice. Democrats creating a media narrative around Republican stonewalling of a real investigation into pre-war intelligence. Also very nice. Republicans getting a taste of things to come if they initiate the nuclear option? Very crafty.

Here are some quick facts on Rule 21:

KEY FACTS ON SECRET SESSIONS OF THE SENATE

* Since 1929, the Senate has held 53 secret sessions, generally for reasons of national security.
* For example, in 1997 the Senate held a secret session to consider the Chemical Weapons Convention (treaty).
* In 1992, the Senate met in secret session to consider “most favored nation” trade status for China.
* In 1988, a session was held to consider the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces Treaty and in 1983 a session was held on Nicaragua.
* In 1942, a secret session was held on navy plans to build battleships and aircraft carriers, and in 1943 a secret session was held on reports from the war fronts.
* Six of the most recent secret sessions, however, were held during the impeachment trial of President Bill Clinton.


SENATE RULES ON SECRET SESSIONS

* During a secret session, the doors of the chamber are closed, and the chamber and its galleries are cleared of all individuals except Members and those officers and employees specified in the rules or essential to the session.

* Standing Senate Rules 21, 29, and 31 cover secret sessions for legislative and executive business. Rule 21 calls for the Senate to close its doors once a motion is made and seconded. The motion is not debatable, and its disposition is made behind closed doors.

Reid's full statement in the extended entry.

Reid ask to go into special session on intelligence to discuss intelligence failures and the war in Iraq. Statement below

Statement by Senator Reid
Troops and Security First

This past weekend, we witnessed the indictment of the I. Lewis Libby, the Vice President's Chief of Staff and a senior Advisor to President Bush. Libby is the first sitting White House staffer to be indicted in 135 years. This indictment raises very serious charges. It asserts this Administration engaged in actions that both harmed our national security and are morally repugnant.

The decision to place U.S. soldiers in harm's way is the most significant responsibility the Constitution invests in the Congress. The Libby indictment provides a window into what this is really about: how the Administration manufactured and manipulated intelligence in order to sell the war in Iraq and attempted to destroy those who dared to challenge its actions.

As a result of its improper conduct, a cloud now hangs over this Administration. This cloud is further darkened by the Administration's mistakes in prisoner abuse scandal, Hurricane Katrina, and the cronyism and corruption in numerous agencies.

And, unfortunately, it must be said that a cloud also hangs over this Republican-controlled Congress for its unwillingness to hold this Republican Administration accountable for its misdeeds on all of these issues.

Let's take a look back at how we got here with respect to Iraq Mr. President. The record will show that within hours of the terrorist attacks on 9/11, senior officials in this Administration recognized these attacks could be used as a pretext to invade Iraq.

The record will also show that in the months and years after 9/11, the Administration engaged in a pattern of manipulation of the facts and retribution against anyone who got in its way as it made the case for attacking Iraq.

There are numerous examples of how the Administration misstated and manipulated the facts as it made the case for war. Administration statements on Saddam's alleged nuclear weapons capabilities and ties with Al Qaeda represent the best examples of how it consistently and repeatedly manipulated the facts.

The American people were warned time and again by the President, the Vice President, and the current Secretary of State about Saddam's nuclear weapons capabilities. The Vice President said Iraq "has reconstituted its nuclear weapons." Playing upon the fears of Americans after September 11, these officials and others raised the specter that, left unchecked, Saddam could soon attack America with nuclear weapons.

Obviously we know now their nuclear claims were wholly inaccurate. But more troubling is the fact that a lot of intelligence experts were telling the Administration then that its claims about Saddam's nuclear capabilities were false.
The situation was very similar with respect to Saddam's links to Al Qaeda. The Vice President told the American people, "We know he's out trying once again to produce nuclear weapons and we know he has a longstanding relationship with various terrorist groups including the Al Qaeda organization."

The Administration's assertions on this score have been totally discredited. But again, the Administration went ahead with these assertions in spite of the fact that the government's top experts did not agree with these claims.

What has been the response of this Republican-controlled Congress to the Administration's manipulation of intelligence that led to this protracted war in Iraq? Basically nothing. Did the Republican-controlled Congress carry out its constitutional obligations to conduct oversight? No. Did it support our troops and their families by providing them the answers to many important questions? No. Did it even attempt to force this Administration to answer the most basic questions about its behavior? No.

Unfortunately the unwillingness of the Republican-controlled Congress to exercise its oversight responsibilities is not limited to just Iraq. We see it with respect to the prisoner abuse scandal. We see it with respect to Katrina. And we see it with respect to the cronyism and corruption that permeates this Administration.

Time and time again, this Republican-controlled Congress has consistently chosen to put its political interests ahead of our national security. They have repeatedly chosen to protect the Republican Administration rather than get to the bottom of what happened and why.

There is also another disturbing pattern here, namely about how the Administration responded to those who challenged its assertions. Time and again this Administration has actively sought to attack and undercut those who dared to raise questions about its preferred course.

For example, when General Shinseki indicated several hundred thousand troops would be needed in Iraq, his military career came to an end. When then OMB Director Larry Lindsay suggested the cost of this war would approach $200 billion, his career in the Administration came to an end. When U.N. Chief Weapons Inspector Hans Blix challenged conclusions about Saddam's WMD capabilities, the Administration pulled out his inspectors. When Nobel Prize winner and IAEA head Mohammed el-Baridei raised questions about the Administration's claims of Saddam's nuclear capabilities, the Administration attempted to remove him from his post. When Joe Wilson stated that there was no attempt by Saddam to acquire uranium from Niger, the Administration launched a vicious and coordinated campaign to demean and discredit him, going so far as to expose the fact that his wife worked as a CIA agent.

Given this Administration's pattern of squashing those who challenge its misstatements, what has been the response of this Republican-controlled Congress? Again, absolutely nothing. And with their inactions, they provide political cover for this Administration at the same time they keep the truth from our troops who continue to make large sacrifices in Iraq.

This behavior is unacceptable. The toll in Iraq is as staggering as it is solemn. More than 2,000 Americans have lost their lives. Over 90 Americans have paid the ultimate sacrifice this month alone - the fourth deadliest month since the war began. More than 15,000 have been wounded. More than 150,000 remain in harm's way. Enormous sacrifices have been and continue to be made.

The troops and the American people have a right to expect answers and accountability worthy of that sacrifice. For example, 40 Senate Democrats wrote a substantive and detailed letter to the President asking four basic questions about the Administration's Iraq policy and received a four sentence answer in response. These Senators and the American people deserve better.

They also deserve a searching and comprehensive investigation about how the Bush Administration brought this country to war. Key questions that need to be answered include:

o How did the Bush Administration assemble its case for war against Iraq?
o Who did Bush Administration officials listen to and who did they ignore?
o How did senior Administration officials manipulate or manufacture intelligence presented to the Congress and the American people?
o What was the role of the White House Iraq Group or WHIG, a group of senior White House officials tasked with marketing the war and taking down its critics?
o How did the Administration coordinate its efforts to attack individuals who dared to challenge the Administration's assertions?
o Why has the Administration failed to provide Congress with the documents that will shed light on their misconduct and misstatements?

Unfortunately the Senate committee that should be taking the lead in providing these answers is not. Despite the fact that the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee publicly committed to examine many of these questions more than 1 and ½ years ago, he has chosen not to keep this commitment. Despite the fact that he restated that commitment earlier this year on national television, he has still done nothing.

At this point, we can only conclude he will continue to put politics ahead of our national security. If he does anything at this point, I suspect he will play political games by producing an analysis that fails to answer any of these important questions. Instead, if history is any guide, this analysis will attempt to disperse and deflect blame away from the Administration.

We demand that the Intelligence Committee and other committees in this body with jurisdiction over these matters carry out a full and complete investigation immediately as called for by Democrats in the committee's annual intelligence authorization report. Our troops and the American people have sacrificed too much. It is time this Republican-controlled Congress put the interests of the American people ahead of their own political interests.

Indeed. In terms of the 2006 mid-term elections, it is important to note that Democrats have the high-ground:

Democratic Efforts to Address Misuse of Intelligence Have Been Repeatedly Blocked by Republicans


For more than two years, Senate Democrats have pressed Republicans to address the misuse of intelligence. At every turn, Republicans have blocked efforts to investigate how intelligence was used in the run-up to the war in Iraq. Below details the long record established by Democrats to investigate this matter.

March 14, 2003 – Senator Rockefeller sent a letter to Director Mueller requesting an investigation into the origin of the Niger documents.

May 23, 2003 – Senators Roberts and Rockefeller sent a letter to the CIA and State Department Inspectors General to review issues related to the Niger documents.

June 2, 2003 – Senator Rockefeller issued a press release endorsing a statement made of the previous weekend by Senator Warner calling for a joint SSCI/SASC investigation.

June 4, 2003 – Senator Rockefeller issued a press release saying he would push for an investigation. Senator Roberts issued a press release saying calls for an investigation are premature.

June 10, 2003 – Senator Rockefeller sent a letter to Senator Roberts asking for an investigation.

June 11, 2003 – All Committee Democrats signed a letter to Senator Roberts asking for a meeting of the Committee to discuss the question of authorizing an inquiry into the intelligence that formed the basis for going to war.

June 11, 2003 – Senator Roberts issued a press release saying this is routine committee oversight, and that criticism of the intelligence community is unwarranted. Senator Rockefeller issued a press release calling the ongoing review inadequate.

June 20, 2003 – Senators Roberts and Rockefeller issued a joint press release laying out the scope of the inquiry.

August 13, 2003 – Senator Rockefeller sent a letter to Senator Roberts making 14 points about the investigation, asking to expand the inquiry to address the “use of intelligence by policy makers” and asking for several other actions.

September 9, 2003 – After press reports quoting Senator Roberts as saying the investigation was almost over, Senator Rockefeller sent a letter to Senator Roberts urging him not to rush to complete the investigation prematurely.
October 29, 2003 – Senators Roberts and Rockefeller sent a letter to Director Tenet expressing in strong terms that he should provide documents that have been requested and make individuals available.

October 30, 2003 – Senators Roberts and Rockefeller sent letters to Secretaries Rumsfeld and Powell, and National Security Advisor Rice expressing in strong terms that they should provide documents that have been requested and make individuals available.

October 31, 2003 – Senator Rockefeller sent a letter to Director Tenet asking for documents related to the interaction between intelligence and policy makers, including the documents from the Vice President’s office related to the Powell speech.

November 2, 2003 – Senator Roberts made statements during a joint television appearance with Senator Rockefeller claiming that the White house would provide all documents they jointly requested.

December 5, 2003 – Senator Rockefeller sent a letter to National Security Advisor Rice asking for her help getting documents and access to individuals.

January 22, 2004 – Senator Rockefeller sent a letter to Director Tenet asking for compliance with the Oct. 31 request for documents.

February 12, 2004 – Senators Roberts and Rockefeller issued a joint press release announcing the Committee’s unanimous approval of the expansion of the Iraq review, to include use of intelligence in the form of public statements, and listing other aspects of what became Phase II.

March 23, 2004 – Senator Rockefeller sent yet another letter to Director Tenet asking for compliance with the Oct. 31 request for documents.

June 17, 2004 – Senators Roberts and Rockefeller joint press release announcing the unanimous approval of the report.

July 16, 2004 – Committee Democrats sent a letter to Bush asking for the one page summary of the NIE prepared for Bush. The Committee staff had been allowed to review it but could not take notes and the Committee was never given a copy.

February 3, 2005 – Senator Rockefeller sent a letter to Senator Roberts outlining Committee priorities for the coming year and encouraging completion of Phase II.

August 5, 2005 – Senator Rockefeller sent a letter to Senator Roberts expressing concern over the lack of progress on Phase II and calling for a draft to be presented to the Committee at a business meeting in September.

September 29, 2005 – All Committee Democrats joined in additional views to the annual Intelligence Authorization Bill criticizing the lack of progress on Phase II.

With actions like this, I think we will soon be hearing the title Majority Leader Harry Reid.

Posted at 04:14 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Culture of Corruption, Nuclear Option, Republicans, Scandals, Supreme Court | TrackBack (0) | Technorati

Saturday, October 29, 2005

MT-Sen: Conrad Burns Declares Bush's Record 'Isn't That Bad'

Posted by Bob Brigham

The Montana Senate race is going to be a great race for the netroots to follow. Conrad Burns has the most exposure of any senator in the Jack Abramoff scandals. Montana is a red state with a vulnerable three-term incumbent. Even Karl Rove is worried about this race amidst all of his other problems.

That, and we have an inspiring challenger in Jon Tester (who is on the Swing State Project Actblue page).

Today, the Montana press headlined, Burns facing tough re-election bid which included the type of quote you don't expect from a GOP Senator:

"The president is having his problems but that could straighten out," Burns said, adding that Bush's record "isn't that bad."

Not that bad, eh? Remember, this is a state where Bush enjoys an approval rating 11% pts. better than the national average -- yet a three term incumbent who has already raised 80% of what he need in 2000 is still running scared from Bush. And Burns sounds worried, here is the story's lede:

In the staid halls of the U.S. Senate, Montana Republican Conrad Burns is known for his booming voice and his cheery, back-slapping confidence. But when it comes to talking about his upcoming bid for re-election, his demeanor turns more serious.

Burns' is up to his cowboy hat in Jack Abramoff's scandals, so he should be worried about coming off as cocky because of how much money he has in the bank:

Democrats plan to make up for their financial disadvantage by leveling ethics charges at Burns. Strategists have already signaled that they plan to exploit Burns' ties to GOP lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who has been indicted on fraud charges.

The Montana Democratic Party aired a television ad in August that criticized Burns for what it said was his vote to give one of the nation's wealthiest American Indian tribes $3 million from a federal program intended for cash-strapped tribal schools.

Abramoff was a lobbyist for the Michigan tribe, and also donated to Burns' political action committee along with some of his associates. Abramoff is now under a wide-ranging investigation, accused of bilking his Indian clients.

The Democratic ad said the financial arrangements add up to an "improper relationship" between Burns, chairman of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee that wrote the bill, and Abramoff.

Sketchy. Here's another great quote from Burns, not as good as his defense of Bush, but still desperate:

"I'm here and they're not," he said, sitting in his Senate office. "I've got the seniority and they don't. And I'm in the majority and they're not."

My response: Not for long, give Tester time, not for long.

Speaking of which, it is Tester Time.

Posted at 12:38 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Culture of Corruption, Montana, Scandals | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati

Friday, October 28, 2005

MD-Sen: Michael Steele Blasted as Traitor

Posted by Bob Brigham

I'm glad to see this battle playing out back in Maryland, instead of Virginia. Here's today's Baltimore Sun:

In an e-mail interview with The Sun, Gilliard said he considers Steele a traitor to his race because he initially dismissed news that his political partner, Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr., held a golfing fund-raiser this year at the Elkridge Club of Baltimore, which at the time had never admitted a black member in its 127-year history.

"Generally, it is an accurate depiction of Steele's groveling, lackey behavior," Gilliard said of the image. "It is 2005, and such an institution [as the Elkridge Club] should not exist, nor should a governor with as many black people as the state of Maryland attend a function at such a place.

"My point is that politicians like Michael Steele insult us, use us as whipping boys and then run to their white supporters to show how loyal they are. The suffering and problems of black Americans are beyond their concern," said Gilliard, who lives in New York City. "I find it wildly humorous that Lt. Gov. Steele calls me, a black man, racist, but then refuses to condemn the governor attending an event at an all-white country club."

The Maryland Senate race dynamics have changed radically following Katrina, especially considering Bush is polling at 2% with African Americans. The dynamic between identity politics and interest politics will be on center stage in Maryland. Steele may have found himself on the wrong side of a very powerful trend of blacks near universal agreement that Republicans don't care for black people.

Steve says:

You know, I've gotten far more support than comdemnation, and you know where a lot of that support came from? Black people. It's a wonderful feeling to have the community appreciate your words.

If Steve's sample is representative, then Gilliard may be writing what far more African Americans are thinking. In a post-Katrina world, does Mike Steele stand a chance?

Posted at 12:54 PM in 2006 Elections - Senate, Maryland, Scandals | Comments (6) | Technorati

Thursday, October 27, 2005

VA-Gov: Tim Kaine Ad Controversy

Posted by Bob Brigham

Virginia gubernatorial candidate Tim Kaine has found himself at the center of a scandal for bowing to right-wing racists and cancelling ads on an African American blog:

So now the Kaine campaign is in the silly position of responding to a racist while withdrawing support from an African-American. Which could have been avoided if they had talked before running scared. [...]

But what really and truly bothers me is not the ad pull. You play football, you wake up sore. But the responsiveness to the opposition.

The Kaine campaign has never been responsible for the content on this site. They just buy space. They have probably disagreed with my stands. But they respond to people who will not vote for them, want them to lose and uses anything to pressure them.

And in the end, hurts them more than if they blew it off. The campaign didn't need me to go after them, but I am, because they are cowards. [...]

Cowardice should not be rewarded.

Tim Kaine is running a cowardly campaign, from the get-go he has been running scared, trying to offend as few people as possible.

But this scandal highlights a larger misconception about blogs, blogads, and netroots support.

It is important for people to realize that advertising on a blog doesn't mean the advertiser endorses the content of the site, all it means is that a decision has been made that the advertiser is interested in individuals who may read a particular blog.

Likewise, a blog running an ad doesn't mean that the blogger(s) endorse the product being advertised.

This shouldn't be a hard concept to grasp.

For example, Tim Kaine is advertising on the Swing State Project right now, yet here I am calling him a coward. Earlier in the year, Tim Tagaris didn't hold back his thoughts on Bob Casey, Jr. when Casey advertised here. In fact, if memory serves me right, both Tim and I wrote some hard hitting posts while the ad was running.

Look at the other two ads running. One is for Steve Westly, who is running against Phil Angelides in California's Democratic gubernatorial primary. As the lone SSP writer who votes in California, I'll still be voting for Angelides and plan on devoting a good deal of posts next year to why Angelides inspires me with his campaign. As for the final ad, you all know it is a long story but we still approved the ad and it hasn't changed any of our thoughts on the issue.

When you see an ad in a newspaper, you don't assume that the editorial board supports the advertiser so don't make the same mistake with blogs. Likewise, you don't assume that advertisers support the view of the editorial page.

Politicians who think they can buy support by running ads are just as misguided as politicians who pull ads for what the blog posts.

UPDATE: (Bob) Now this is on the front page of Daily Kos. Kaine is going to lose a great deal of support and volunteers because of this fuckup. Even more, now he won't have blogosphere support for rapid response during the home stretch of the campaign. Tim Kaine's cowardice may have just cost him the election.

Posted at 01:56 PM in 2005 Elections, Netroots, Scandals, Virginia | Comments (10) | Technorati

Wednesday, October 26, 2005

Republican Electoral Liability on Karl Rove

Posted by Bob Brigham

OK, this is funny. In the last post, I pointed out how the Swing State Project would be focusing on the electoral fallout of the White House Indictments. As always, I made a point of mentioning that our readers are our eyes and ears to what is going on race-by-race. However, the Republican National Committee decided to pull all of this information together for us:

Republican Senators Defend Karl Rove:

NRSC Chairwoman Elizabeth Dole (R-NC): “The Partisan Attacks Against Karl Rove Are Out Of Control And Entirely Inappropriate. He Is A Distinguished Member Of The White House And He Is My Friend.” (National Republican Senatorial Committee, “Elizabeth Dole Statement On Karl Rove,” Press Release, 7/13/05)


  • Dole: “It Is Incredibly Irresponsible For Individuals And Organizations To Make Accusations Based On Rumor And Innuendo. It Is Unfair To The Investigation And Even More Unfair To Karl Rove.” (National Republican Senatorial Committee, “Elizabeth Dole Statement On Karl Rove,” Press Release, 7/13/05)

Sen. Norm Coleman (R-MN): “My Democratic Friends Would Be Doing The Nation A Great Service If They Spent Half As Much Time Getting Legislation Passed That Will Benefit The Country As They Do In Attacking Karl Rove.” (Sen. Norm Coleman, Press Release, 7/13/05)


  • Coleman: “We Have Enough To Do In The Senate In Minding Our Own Business Than To Be Sticking Our Noses Into Someone Else’s Business. Everyone Needs To Cool The Rhetoric, Focus On The Business Of The People, And Allow The Investigation To Run Its Course.” (Sen. Norm Coleman, Press Release, 7/13/05)

Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA): “I Don’t See Any Evidence Out There That He Violated The Law.’’ (Richard Keil and Holly Rosenkrantz, “Rove’s Role In Spy Inquiry Reverberates Throughout Capital,” Bloomberg, 7/12/05)

Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-UT): “In All Honesty, The Facts Thus Far – And The E-Mail Involved – Indicate To Me That There Is Not A Problem Here…” (Jim VandeHei, “GOP On Offense In Defense Of Rove,” The Washington Post, 7/13/05)

Hatch: “I Have Always Thought This Is A Tempest In A Teapot." (Jim VandeHei, “GOP On Offense In Defense Of Rove,” The Washington Post, 7/13/05)

Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX): “If Anyone Thought The Anger And Political Sniping That Infested The Capital During The Campaign Would End After The Election, They Were Flat Wrong. Partisan Attacks In Lieu Of The Facts Have Replaced Ideas, Action And Cooperation.” (Sen. John Cornyn, “Attacks On Rove ‘More Anger And Political Sniping,’” Press Release, 7/13/05)

  • Cornyn: “Sadly, These Attacks Are More Of The Same Kind Of Anger And Lashing Out That Has Become The Substitute For Bipartisan Action And Progress. While Republicans Focus On Accomplishing An Ambitious Agenda For The American People, Some Democrats And Their Allies In The Hyper-Partisan Interest Groups Continue On Their Path Of Smear And Distract.” (Sen. John Cornyn, “Attacks On Rove ‘More Anger And Political Sniping,’” Press Release, 7/13/05)

Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA): “I Support Karl Rove.” (Tom Raum, “Newsview: CIA Leak Probe Focuses On Rove,” The Associated Press, 7/13/05)

Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL): “Karl Rove Is A Friend Who, By All Accounts, Is Fully Cooperating With The Investigation. He Has Been A Most Valuable Member Of President Bush’s Team And Has Always Conducted Himself According To High Standards. It’s Disappointing That Some Democrats Are Using An Ongoing Investigation To Try And Score Political Points. Instead Of Focusing On The People’s Business, Democrats Are Prejudging An Incomplete Investigation And Doing Nothing More Than Mounting Partisan Political Attacks.” (Sen. Jeff Sessions, “Statement Of U.S. Sen. Jeff Sessions On Karl Rove,” 7/13/05)

Republican Congressmen Defend Karl Rove:

House Majority Whip Roy Blunt (R-MO): “I Think We See Too Many Efforts Now Where People Quickly Rush To Judgment, Rush To Call For The Most Bizarre Solutions To Problems That Are Problems That Are Often Just Created In Their Own Minds.” (Rep. Roy Blunt, Floor Statement, U.S. House Of Representatives, 7/13/05)

Blunt: “Karl Rove Has Fully Cooperated In Any Investigation, And For More Than A Year Now Has Permitted Investigators To Talk To Him.” (Rep. Roy Blunt, Floor Statement, U.S. House Of Representatives, 7/13/05)

House Republican Conference Chair Deborah Pryce (R-OH):” I Think What The Democrats Are Doing With Karl Rove Is Just Another Politically Motivated Part Of Their Agenda.” (CNN’s “Wolf Blitzer Reports,” 7/13/05)

NRCC Chairman Tom Reynolds (R-NY): “The Extreme Left Is Once Again Attempting To Define The Modern Democrat Party By Rabid Partisan Attacks, Character Assassination And Endless Negativity. And As Has Become Their Custom, The Rest Of The Democrat Party Is Standing By Silently.” (National Republican Congressional Committee, “NRCC Chairman Tom Reynolds Statement On Karl Rove, Democrat Partisan Attacks,” Press Release, 7/13/05)


  • Reynolds: “Democrats Are Bitter About Losing In 2004. And They Will Stop At Nothing To Accomplish Through Character Assassination What They Could Not Accomplish At The Ballot Box.” (National Republican Congressional Committee, “NRCC Chairman Tom Reynolds Statement On Karl Rove, Democrat Partisan Attacks,” Press Release, 7/13/05)

Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA): “Karl Rove Is Just The Latest In A Long Line Of Targets For The Democrats Vitriol And Political Games. The American People Want To Know How Congress Is Going To Keep The Economy Growing, Lower Energy Prices And Keep Them Secure At Home.” (Rep. Eric Cantor, “Cantor Statement on Democrat Attacks On Karl Rove,” Press Release, 7/13/05)

Rep. Jack Kingston (R-GA): “Karl Rove Who Did Not Even Know This Woman’s Name Did Not Have Any Information Of Her Acting In Any Covert Manner. It Is Just Silly.” (“Fox News’, “Fox News Live,” 7/13/05)


  • Kingston: “The Democrats Are Absent On Issues Such As Social Security, They Are Ambivalent About Iraq To Begin With And They’re Throwing Up One More Smoke Screen Aimed At Karl Rove Who They’re Mad At.” (“Fox News’, “Fox News Live,” 7/13/05)

House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX): “I Support Karl Rove …” (Tom Raum, “Newsview: CIA Leak Probe Focuses on Rove,” The Associated Press, 7/13/05)

DeLay: “This Is Typical Of The Democrats. They Smell Blood And They Act Like Sharks. Karl Rove Is A Good Man. He Was Doing His Job. He Was Trying To Talk A Reporter Out Of Filing A False Story Based Upon False Premise. I Don’t See That He Has Done Anything Wrong.” (Fox News’ “Studio B,” 7/13/05)

Rep. Kay Granger (R-TX): “The President And Karl Rove Are Doing Exactly What They Should. They Are Cooperating Fully With The Pending Investigation.” (Rep. Kay Granger, “Congresswoman Granger Calls Democrat Attacks On Rove Partisan Gamesmanship,” Press Release, 7/13/05)


  • Granger: “He Knew Then That Much Of What Joe Wilson Was Saying Was Untrue. The Calls For Mr. Rove’s Resignation Are Simply Partisan Gamesmanship.” (Rep. Kay Granger, “Congresswoman Granger Calls Democrat Attacks On Rove Partisan Gamesmanship,” Press Release, 7/13/05)

Rep. Peter T. King (R-NY): “Republicans Should Stop Holding Back And Go On The Offense: Fire Enough Bullets The Other Way Until The Supreme Court Overtakes.” (Jim VandeHei, “GOP On Offense In Defense Of Rove,” The Washington Post, 7/13/05)


Thank you to the RNC for pulling all of the quotes together on which Republicans are defending the treasonous outing of undercover CIA agent Valerie Plame.

Posted at 06:01 PM in 2006 Elections, 2006 Elections - House, 2006 Elections - Senate, Culture of Corruption, Plamegate, Republicans, Scandals | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0) | Technorati

Indictments of White House Staff

Posted by Bob Brigham

The Swing State Project has devoted a good deal of time to the Karl Rove Scandal. As the indictments come down, we will be looking for information on how this is influencing specific races, please feel free to use the contact info to keep us in the loop.

This is a story that the netroots have been all over from day one and I'm sure there will be plenty of electoral fallout for SSP to cover.

Strategically, I prefer to devote my time blogging to issues at their beginning or end. I have said that I don't believe blogs are the best vehicle for sustained engagement. However, I am questioning that after viewing the coverage to date from Talk Left:

October 26, 2005 - Fitzgerald Meets With Judge, No Announcement Today
October 26, 2005 - Report: Indictments May be Announced Today
October 26, 2005 - Indictment Watch
October 26, 2005 - Hutchison's Spokesman Deflects Criticism With a Lie
October 26, 2005 - How Karl Rove Could Walk
October 25, 2005 - Reviewing Cheney
October 25, 2005 - Report: Fitzgerald Visited Rove's Lawyer Today
October 25, 2005 - Report: Fitz Talked to Wilsons' Neighbors Today
October 25, 2005 - Clemons: Other Shoe Drops Tomorrow
October 25, 2005 - The Crime in Outing a CIA Agent
October 24, 2005 - NYT: Tenet Told Cheney Who Told Libby
October 24, 2005 - Report: Wurmser Told Libby and Hadley
October 24, 2005 - Pre-Indictment Spin Planning
October 24, 2005 - The Cover Up Statutes
October 23, 2005 - Report: Novak Cooperated
October 23, 2005 - Fitzgerald to Decide and Tell Lawyers Monday
October 23, 2005 - Hannah's Lawyer Denies Target Status
October 22, 2005 - A Kinder, Gentler Libby
October 21, 2005 - Plame Grand Jury Met With Prosecutors Today
October 21, 2005 - Launchdate for Campaign to Discredit Wilson
October 21, 2005 - Pow-Wow at Camp David This Weekend
October 21, 2005 - Fitzgerald Launches Website
October 21, 2005 - Libby: As the Worms Turn
October 21, 2005 - PlameGate and Bush's Pardon Power
October 20, 2005 - Report: White House Charges Will Relate to Cover-up
October 20, 2005 - The Valerie Flame Name Game
October 20, 2005 - Miller Asked About June Meeting During First Grand Jury Visit
October 20, 2005 - Stalking Russert in PlameGate
October 20, 2005 - RoveGate Update
October 19, 2005 - Ex-Intel Officers: Miller a Charter Member of White House Iraq Group
October 19, 2005 - Report on Fitzgerald and A Final Report Is Misleading
October 19, 2005 - Is Rove Cooperating?
October 19, 2005 - Raw Story: Wurmser Cooperating
October 19, 2005 - PlameGate: Powell and Flesicher
October 19, 2005 - Myths About PlameGate
October 18, 2005 - Murray Waas: It's Libby vs. Miller Time
October 18, 2005 - Plame Grand Jury Still Meeting
October 18, 2005 - No Passes for Judy Miller
October 18, 2005 - The Latest Rumor: Cheney Might Resign
October 18, 2005 - Raw Story: John Hannah Is Cooperating
October 18, 2005 - Let's Make a Deal : The Legalese of PlameGate
October 17, 2005 - Report: White House Official May Have Flipped
October 17, 2005 - Fitzgerald Speaks: Decision to be Announced in D.C.
October 17, 2005 - Was the AP Snookered on WINPAC story?
October 17, 2005 - List of Reporter Contacts Subpoenaed by Fitzgerald
October 17, 2005 - Conyers and Skelton Demand Info on Miller's Security Clearance
October 17, 2005 - The Leaks Probe: Andrea Mitchell, Cheney and Ari
October 17, 2005 - On Cheney's Role in Leaks Probe
October 17, 2005 - Bennett's Role in Judith's Tell-All
October 17, 2005 - Bloomberg: Wilsons May Sue Bush, Cheney
October 16, 2005 - Judith Miller Talks on Belatedly Discovered Notes
October 16, 2005 - Federal Grand Jury Witnesses & Secrecy Laws
October 16, 2005 - Was Novak's Source in the CIA or White House?
October 16, 2005 - Time: Rove, Libby Will Resign if Indicted
October 16, 2005 - Miller's Lawyer Turns on Libby
October 15, 2005 - NY Times Uncorks on Judith Miller
October 14, 2005 - Rove Testifies for FourthTime
October 14, 2005 - Questions About Miller and The Times
October 13, 2005 - Cheney, The White House and Wilson: Part One
October 12, 2005 - Report: Fitzgerald Examining Cheney's Role
October 12, 2005 - Judith Miller Released From Contempt Order
October 12, 2005 - Miller's Source(s)
October 12, 2005 - Fitzgerald Widening His Probe
October 11, 2005 - Miller to Testify Again Before Grand Jury
October 11, 2005 - Bushies: Special Prosecutor "a Bully"
October 11, 2005 - New From Waas: Libby in Cross-Hairs Over Miller
October 9, 2005 - Judy Miller and Her June Notes
October 8, 2005 - Weekend RoveGate Reading
October 7, 2005 - Waas: Rove, Novak and Bush
October 7, 2005 - Judith Miller Finds Earlier Notes on Libby
October 6, 2005 - Karl Rove Will Testify Friday Morning
October 6, 2005 - More on Target Notices and Rove
October 6, 2005 - AP: Rove to Testify Again in Leaks Probe
October 6, 2005 - Target Letters: Terminology
October 5, 2005 - Rumor: 22 Plame Indictments Imminent
October 5, 2005 - Judith Miller Talks to Lou Dobbs
October 4, 2005 - Fitzgerald's Letter to Scooter Libby's Lawyer
October 2, 2005 - Newsweek: Libby Did Not Talk to Novak
October 2, 2005 - Stephanopoulos: Source Says Bush, Cheney Directly Involved
October 2, 2005 - Judith Miller and Fitzgerald's Agreement
October 1, 2005 - A Crucial Time Period in PlameGate
October 1, 2005 - Cheney, Libby and Miller Leads Where?
September 30, 2005 - Judith Miller Grand Jury Day
September 29, 2005 - Judith Miller Released, Will Testify Tomorrow
September 20, 2005 - PlameGate: Moving Towards John Bolton?
September 15, 2005 - Justice Department Balks at Turning Over Plame Records
September 14, 2005 - House Committees Reject Plame Resolution of Inquiry
September 9, 2005 - Is Judith Miller Getting Ready to Fold?
September 7, 2005 - RoveGate: What Statute Would Fitzgerald Use?
August 25, 2005 - New Plame Leak Analysis
August 20, 2005 - RoveGate Tidbit: Look for Fitzgerald to Go for the Top Dog
August 18, 2005 - RoveGate, Watergate and Lessons for the White House
August 18, 2005 - Miller, Sulzberger and Kovac
August 17, 2005 - Is Rove Facing an Obstruction of Justice Charge?
August 16, 2005 - New Murray Waas Exclusive: Dems to Demand Investigation of Ashcroft in Plame Leak
August 16, 2005 - Is a Criminal Contempt Charge Looming for Judith Miller?
August 15, 2005 - Report: Bolton Visits Judy Miller in Jail
August 15, 2005 - Ashcroft, Fitzgerald and Rove: New From Murray Waas
August 12, 2005 - Fitzgerald Gets New Boss in Leaks Probe
August 12, 2005 - A Who's Who in RoveGate
August 10, 2005 - Pincus on Plame: Who Really Sent Joseph Wilson to Niger?
August 8, 2005 - Judy, Jehl and the New York Times
August 8, 2005 - Dems Demand Libby Give Personalized Waiver to Judith Miller
August 7, 2005 - Newsweek: Fitzgerald Could Thwarted by Comey's Replacement
August 7, 2005 - Sunday RoveGate Roundup
August 7, 2005 - Judith Miller and Lewis Libby
August 4, 2005 - Waas and Wilson Discuss Fitzgerald
August 4, 2005 - Fitzgerald, Cooper, Sauber, Rove , Luskin and Ginsberg
August 3, 2005 - Beware Immunity for Rove and Company
August 2, 2005 - Rove Aides Queried About Matt Cooper Testimony
August 2, 2005 - Was Tenet a Source for Novak?
August 2, 2005 - RoveGate Debates
August 2, 2005 - Rove Pals Called to Grand Jury
August 2, 2005 - Novak and the Plame Name
August 1, 2005 - Novak Breaks His Silence
July 31, 2005 - Time: Rove May Have Learned of Plame From White House
July 29, 2005 - RoveGate: Where Does Condi Rice Fit In
July 29, 2005 - Back to Connecting Judith Miller Dots
July 29, 2005 - Fitzgerald Knew It Was Rove All Along
July 28, 2005 - NYT Late to the Pincus Party
July 27, 2005 - Was Judith Miller the Leaker or Leakee?
July 27, 2005 - Karen Hughes Declines to Answer Plame Questions At Confirmation Hearing
July 27, 2005 - Judith Miller's Husband Goes on Cruise
July 27, 2005 - Beware Congressional Immunity for Rove and Others
July 27, 2005 - House Judiciary Documents
July 27, 2005 - Who Was Novak's Second Source?
July 26, 2005 - Judiciary Dems Seek 12-Hour Gap Investigation
July 26, 2005 - Rove-Plame-Miller Primer
July 25, 2005 - Will Fitzgerald Extend the Grand Jury?
July 25, 2005 - Senators Call for Congressional Plame Investigation
July 24, 2005 - Alberto Gonzales Told Card Immediately About Preservation Order
July 23, 2005 - Who Was On Air Force One?
July 22, 2005 - Statements of Witnesses at CIA Leak Hearing
July 22, 2005 - Report: Bolton Was a Frequent Source for Judy Miller
July 22, 2005 - Testimony: Bush Jeopardizes National Security
July 22, 2005 - O'Donnell's Latest on Luskin
July 22, 2005 - Who is Leaking the Grand Jury Testimony
July 22, 2005 - Bloomberg's Latest: Back to Ari Fleischer
July 22, 2005 - Karl Rove's Newest Version: George Tenet
July 21, 2005 - Bloomberg Scoops New Rove Story
July 21, 2005 - Memo Marked Plame's Identity as Secret
July 20, 2005 - Sports Book Odds on Karl Rove's Departure : 1-6
July 20, 2005 - Hearing Set on Disclosure of Covert Officers' Identities
July 19, 2005 - New Damaging Information About Karl Rove
July 19, 2005 - Ex-CIA Agents Send Letter on Valerie Plame
July 18, 2005 - Judith Miller's Life Behind Bars
July 18, 2005 - News Report: Ari Saw the Memo on Air Force One
July 18, 2005 - Bush Speaks: Will Fire Anyone 'Who Committed a Crime'
July 18, 2005 - Open Thread on Judith Miller
July 17, 2005 - Question About Cheney and Wilson
July 17, 2005 - From the Vanity Fair Article on Joseph Wilson
July 17, 2005 - Is Rove Now Implicating Judith Miller?
July 17, 2005 - Cooper and Libby Old News: Miller and Libby is the Question
July 17, 2005 - Matthew Cooper: Rove Said, ' I' ve Already Said Too Much'
July 17, 2005 - Who Really Sent Wilson to Africa?
July 16, 2005 - Judith Miller: Why is She Protecting Lewis Libby
July 16, 2005 - Frank Rich: Rove Resignation Is a Certainty
July 16, 2005 - The Mechanics of the Rove-Cooper Waiver
July 16, 2005 - Criminal vs. Civil Contempt
July 16, 2005 - John Hannah and Lewis Libby: Still Key in Plame Probe
July 15, 2005 - Classified Memo Naming Wilson's Wife Was on Air Force One
July 15, 2005 - Rove Didn't Go to Africa, Not On Air Force One
July 15, 2005 - Rove E-Mailed Hadley About Conversation With Cooper
July 15, 2005 - Keeping an Eye on Fitzgerald's Big Picture
July 15, 2005 - Dean on Rove
July 15, 2005 - Fact Sheet on Karl Rove's Non-Disclosure Agreement
July 15, 2005 - Karl Rove's Latest Version: Reporters Told Me
July 14, 2005 - What Fitzgerald's Indictment Might Look Like
July 14, 2005 - Bloomberg: Joseph Wilson's Accusations Hold Up
July 14, 2005 - What Novak Said Then About Import of Disclosure
July 14, 2005 - Where Does Ari Fleischer Fit In?
July 13, 2005 - House Dems to Call for Karl Rove Inquiry Tomorrow
July 13, 2005 - Text of Karl Rove's Waiver to Cooper
July 13, 2005 - Cooper Testifies, Names Karl Rove as Source
July 13, 2005 - Bush Answers (Not) Questions on Rove
July 13, 2005 - Midnight Plame Gate Roundup
July 12, 2005 - Walter Pincus' Source: Was it Karl Rove?
July 12, 2005 - Murray Waas Exclusive: Novak Cooperated
July 12, 2005 - Luskin Speaks on Rove and Cooper
July 12, 2005 - Where Did Karl Rove Get the Information on Valerie Plame?
July 12, 2005 - White House Breaks Silence: Has Confidence In Rove
July 12, 2005 - Say Hello: Fire Him Now
July 12, 2005 - Update on Judith Miller: How Did They Know
July 12, 2005 - Judith Miller: How Did They Know?
July 12, 2005 - Will Karl Rove Resign?
July 12, 2005 - Watergate Deja Vu
July 11, 2005 - President Bush Called Leak 'A Criminal Action'
July 11, 2005 - Don't call Rove at the Congressional Hearings
July 11, 2005 - Calls for Rove's Resignation
July 11, 2005 - Ethics Group Asks Bush to Revoke Rove's Security Clearance
July 11, 2005 - Former President Bush's Comments on Leakers
July 11, 2005 - Cat and Mouse With McClellan
July 11, 2005 - The Name Game : Rove and Plame
July 11, 2005 - Rove's Lawyer's Admission: Nothing New Here
July 10, 2005 - Reactions to Newsweek's Latest on Karl Rove
July 10, 2005 - Robert Novak's Version Of the Plame Leak
July 10, 2005 - Newsweek to Name Rove as Cooper Source
July 9, 2005 - Lewis Libby and the Valerie Plame Investigation
July 7, 2005 - Rove-Plame Speculation Update
July 7, 2005 - O'Donnell Says 'Good Reason' Rove Might Be Indicted
July 7, 2005 - Wapo and NYT Differ on Karl Rove as Source
July 6, 2005 - White House Press Corps Blackout on Rove
July 6, 2005 - Judith Miller Placed in Alexandria Detention Center
July 6, 2005 - Who is Judith Miller Protecting?
July 6, 2005 - Judith Miller Jailed, Cooper Agrees to Testify
July 5, 2005 - Joe Wilson on What Rove Didn't Know
July 5, 2005 - Joe Wilson on Leakers: Elliot Abrams, Libby & Rove
July 5, 2005 - Prosecutor Addresses Jail Requests for Judith Miller
July 5, 2005 - O'Donnell Has Questions Re: Rove
July 5, 2005 - Cooper and Miller: The Subpoenas
July 5, 2005 - Fitzgerald Plays Hardball in Leaks Probe
July 5, 2005 - When Can DOJ Subpoena Reporters?
July 4, 2005 - Valerie Plame Returns to Work at CIA
July 3, 2005 - O'Donnell Snaps Back at Rove's Lawyer
July 3, 2005 - Rove's Lawyer Denies Rove Leaked to Cooper
July 3, 2005 - The Bush Administration's War Against Open Government
July 3, 2005 - Time's Decision: The Rule of Law Trumps Confidentiality
July 2, 2005 - The Plame Leak InvestigationTime Line
July 2, 2005 - Rove Update
July 2, 2005 - Could the Perjury Investigation Evolve Into Obstruction of Justice?
July 2, 2005 - O'Donnell Says Rove as Leak Source is Confirmed
July 2, 2005 - What Does the Government Really Want from Miller and Cooper?
July 2, 2005 - Miller and Cooper Submit Jail Preferences
July 2, 2005 - Was Karl Rove The Leaker?
June 30, 2005 - Time Magazine to Turn Over Matthew Cooper's Notes
June 28, 2005 - Hearing Weds. for Reporters Miller and Cooper
June 27, 2005 - Why the Support for Only One Reporter?
June 27, 2005 - Reporters Lose in Leaks Case
May 26, 2005 - Judge Rules Against DeLay Pac Member
April 28, 2005 - Reporter Switches Lawyers in Plame Appeal
April 17, 2005 - Gonzales Speaks to Plame Investigation
April 7, 2005 - Valerie Plame Investigation May Be Over
February 16, 2005 - A Shield Law For Reporters
February 15, 2005 - Appeals Court Rules Against Reporters in Plame Case
December 31, 2004 - Valerie Plame Investigation Review
October 15, 2004 - Karl Rove Testifies Before Grand Jury Re: Plame
October 7, 2004 - NYT Reporter Judith Miller Ordered Jailed, Stayed
September 16, 2004 - Court Orders NYTimes Reporter to Testify in PlameGate
August 13, 2004 - NY Times Reporter Judith Miller Subpoenaed in Plame Investigation
August 9, 2004 - Reporter Held in Contempt in CIA-Plame Leak Probe
June 24, 2004 - Bush Interviewed in Plame Leak Probe
June 5, 2004 - Cheney Interviewed in Plame Investigation
June 4, 2004 - Cheney May Have Consulted Outside Counsel Over Plame Investigation
June 3, 2004 - Report: Bush Knew of Leak of Valerie Plame's Identity
June 3, 2004 - CIA Director George Tenet Resigns
June 2, 2004 - Bush Seeks Legal Advice over Plame Leak
May 22, 2004 - Reporters Subpoenaed in Plame Investigation
May 3, 2004 - Joseph Wilson Names Possible Plame Leakers
April 29, 2004 - Wilson's Book Points to Cheney
April 2, 2004 - Plame Leak Investigation Widened
March 9, 2004 - Details of Karl Rove's Plame Testimony Revealed
March 9, 2004 - Karl Rove Profile
March 5, 2004 - Subpoenas Issued in Plame Investigation
February 9, 2004 - Bush's Press Secretary Testfies in Leaks Probe
February 5, 2004 - Cheney Employees Implicated in Valerie Plame Scandal
January 22, 2004 - Grand Jury Begins Hearing Valerie Plame Case
January 6, 2004 - 'I Got a Witness': Plame Investigation
January 2, 2004 - Plame: It's Still Bush Investigating Bush
January 2, 2004 - Will Reporters Talk in the Plame Case?
January 1, 2004 - Plame Leak Not a Crime?
December 30, 2003 - Joseph Wilson Interview
December 30, 2003 - Ashcroft Recuses Himself from Valerie Plame Investigation
December 25, 2003 - Movement in the Valerie Plame Investigation
December 10, 2003 - Whatever Happened to the Valerie Plame Investigation?
October 27, 2003 - CIA Leak May Violate Patriot Act
October 23, 2003 - FBI Interviews Rove and McClellan in Leaks Probe
October 16, 2003 - Alterman on Abrams, Novak and Plame
October 16, 2003 - Ashcroft Takes Heat from Within in Leaks Probe
October 12, 2003 - Leaks Probe: FBI Focusing on Month Before the Leak
October 11, 2003 - White House E-Mails Mention Wilson and Plame
October 10, 2003 - More Agents Added to CIA Leaks Probe
October 9, 2003 - Executive Privilege in the CIA-Plame Affair
October 8, 2003 - Bush is Downplaying Leaks Investigation
October 7, 2003 - Bush Now Uncertain Leaker of CIA Information Will Be Found
October 7, 2003 - Bush Calls CIA Leak a 'Criminal Action'
October 4, 2003 - What the Wilson-Plame Affair Reveals About Bush
October 3, 2003 - David Corn Interview on 'Treason Gate'
October 1, 2003 - News Descriptions of Plame and Wilson
October 1, 2003 - What the Meaning of CIA Operative Is
September 30, 2003 - Can Novak Be Ordered to Divulge Source?
September 30, 2003 - Guardian's Borger Names Rove
September 30, 2003 - New: On the CIA's Request for Justice Department Investigation of Plame Leak
September 30, 2003 - Petition for Independent Investigation of Plame Leak
September 30, 2003 - Justice Opens Full-Blown Investigation in Valerie Plame Affair
September 30, 2003 - Robert Novak's Column on Valerie Plame
September 29, 2003 - White House: No Independent Counsel For CIA Leak
September 29, 2003 - CIA Leak Investigation: Who Goes Down First
September 29, 2003 - Reaction to Report of Justice Dept. Intelligence Probe
September 28, 2003 - Schumer's FBI Request for Investigation of Plame Leak
September 28, 2003 - White House Leaks in Plame Affair
September 27, 2003 - CIA Asks for Probe of Valerie Plame Leaks
July 25, 2003 - Valerie Plame Update
July 22, 2003 - Valerie Plame: Some Call it Treason

Posted at 05:42 PM in Culture of Corruption, Netroots, Plamegate, Republicans, Scandals | TrackBack (0) | Technorati

NJ-Gov: Doug Forrester Loses Election Over Stem Cells

Posted by Bob Brigham

In two weeks, the armchair quarterbacks are going to look back on the New Jersey Governor's race and I predict a good deal of the talk on why Doug Forrester lost will be focused on Jon Corzine's new Stem Cell ad. The ad features Karl Riccio bodyslamming Doug Forrester.

Scott Shields has a lot more on the ad and Forrester's chickenshit attack on the young man in the ad.

Posted at 04:32 PM in 2005 Elections, New Jersey, Scandals | TrackBack (0) | Technorati

Wednesday, October 19, 2005

TX-22: Texas Command to Arrest Tom DeLay

Posted by Bob Brigham

From the Arrest Warrant:

THE STATE OF TEXAS
TO ANY SHERIFF OR PEACE OFFICER OF THE STATE OF TEXAS; GREETINGS: YOU ARE HEREBY COMMANDED TO ARREST:

THOMAS DALE DELAY

Greetings to Tom DeLay, enjoy your attempt at re-election.

Posted at 09:41 PM in 2006 Elections - House, Culture of Corruption, Scandals, Texas | Comments (3) | TrackBack (1) | Technorati

TX-22: Warrant Issued for Tom Delay

Posted by Bob Brigham

Republican Congressman and de-throned Republican Majority Leader Tom DeLay is facing a perp walk in Texas:

AUSTIN, Texas — A Texas court issued a warrant Wednesday for former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay to appear for booking, where he is likely to face the fingerprinting and photo mug shot he had hoped to avoid.

Bail was initially set at $10,000 as a routine step before his first court appearance on conspiracy and money laundering charges. Travis County court officials said DeLay was ordered to appear at the Fort Bend County jail for booking.

The warrant was "a matter of routine and bond will be posted," DeLay attorney Dick DeGuerin said.

The lawyer declined to say when DeLay would surrender to authorities but said the lawmaker would make his first court appearance Friday morning.

Tom "The Hammer" DeLay is facing life in prison for his role in the Republican Party culture of corruption.

The smart money is being contributed to Nick Lampson, who is on track to beat Representative DeLa