Advice and Consent

September 11, 2001

2008-09-11T09:37:00.000-07:00

08:24:38 --- the following transmission came from American Airlines Flight 11:

AA 11: We have some planes. Just stay quiet, and you'll be okay. We are returning to the airport.

The controller only heard something unintelligible; he did not hear the specific words "we have some planes."

The next transmission came seconds later:

AA 11: Nobody move. Everything will be okay. If you try to make any moves, you'll endanger yourself and the airplane. Just stay quiet.

08:37:52 --- Boston Center reaches NORAD's Northeast Air Defense Sector and notifies of possible hijack of American Airlines Flight 11

08:46 --- F-15 fighters are scrambled from Otis Air Force Base.

08:46:40 --- Hijacked AA 11 flies into the upper portion of the North Tower, cutting through floors 93 to 99. Eighty-one passengers and eleven crew are killed.

08:55 --- Before entering the classroom at E. Booker Elementary School, Bush spoke to National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, who was at the White House.

There was no live coverage of the first attack on the Twin Towers. Rice recalled first telling the President it was a twin-engine aircraft-and then a commercial aircraft-that had struck the World Trade Center, adding "that's all we know right now, Mr. President.

09:00 --- FAA and airline officials began to comprehend that attackers were going after multiple aircraft.

Cheney said he was wondering "how the hell could a plane hit the World Trade Center" when he saw the second aircraft strike the South Tower on CNN.

09:03:11 --- Hijacked United Airlines Flight 175 hit 2 WTC (the South Tower) from the south, crashing through the 77th to 85th floors. Fifty-six passengers and nine crew members are killed.

Bush was watching a reading drill when, just after 9 a.m., United Flight 175 exploded into the second tower. [60 Minutes II]

09:05 --- Chief of Staff Andrew Card whispers to Bush: "A second plane hit the second tower. America is under attack."

09:05 and 9:10 --- American Airlines' nationwide ground stop was followed by a United Airlines ground stop. FAA controllers at Boston Center, which had tracked the first two hijackings, requested at 9:07 that Herndon Command Center "get messages to airborne aircraft to increase security for the cockpit."

When they learned a second plane had struck the World Trade Center, nearly everyone in the White House [said], they immediately knew it was not an accident. The Secret Service initiated a number of security enhancements around the White House complex.

09:05 to 09:10/09:12 --- The President remains in the classroom for another five to seven minutes, while the children continued reading. He then returned to a holding room shortly before 09:15.

09:17 --- The Federal Aviation Administration shuts down all New York City area airports. [CNN]

09:21 --- The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey orders all bridges and tunnels in the New York area closed. [CNN}

09:30 --- President Bush, speaking in Sarasota, Florida, says the country has suffered an "apparent terrorist attack." [CNN/Salon]

09:34 --- NORAD's Northeast Air Defense Sector is notified that American Airlines Flight 77 was lost. Then, minutes later, NEADS was told that an unknown plane was 6 miles southwest of the White House. Only then did the already scrambled airplanes start moving directly toward Washington, D.C.

09:37 --- The west wall of the Pentagon is hit by hijacked American Airlines Flight 77. Fifty-eight passengers and six crew were killed.

09:40 --- The FAA halts all flight operations at U.S. airports, the first time in U.S. history that air traffic nationwide has been halted. [CNN]

09:45 --- The White House evacuates. [CNN]

09:57 --- The passenger assault begins on United Flight 93. Several passengers had terminated phone calls with loved ones in order to join the revolt. One of the callers ended her message as follows: "Everyone's running up to first class. I've got to go. Bye."

09:57 --- Air Force One thundered down the runway, blasting smoke and dust in a full-thrust take off. [ 60 Minutes II]

09:58:59 --- the South Tower collapses in ten seconds.

10:02:23 --- The United 93 passengers continued their assault, a hijacker is heard saying, "Pull it down! Pull it down!" (meaning to crash the plane into the ground)

10:03:11 --- Flight 93 crashes in field in Shanksville, PA. Thirty-seven passengers and seven crew are killed.

10:18 --- The Vice President was logged calling the President for a two-minute conversation that obtained the confirmation. On Air Force One, the President's press secretary was taking notes; Ari Fleischer recorded that at 10:20, the President told him that he had authorized a shootdown of aircraft if necessary, [*Although documentary evidence of this is dicey]

10:28:25 --- The North Tower collapses.

2,603 people were killed in New York City in the planes, towers and on the ground. 125 people were killed at the Pentagon. As many as 200 more people may have died due to exposure to toxins created by the Twine Tower debris.

[All information culled from the 911 Commission unless otherwise noted.]

Gonzo Update

2007-05-25T13:44:00.000-07:00

Day 21 28 35 49 (see below) of FAUX NEWS Embargo of the Gonzales Story.

So last week, we all got treated to a cute story by former DAG James Comey about how then White House Counsel Gonzales and COS Andy Card tried to strong-arm (See 5/15/07 posting)a barely conscious AG Ashcroft into signing an order Ashcroft already said was illegal and unconstitutional. (Atlantic Constitution, May 22 2007)

So far the only White House response so far has been, "Ummm, we didn't know that we shouldn't have gone to Ashcroft since DAG Comey was the Acting Attorney General." (Newsweek, May 28, 2007)

Update: 33 year old Pat Robertson law school graduate and king maker, Monica Goodling (GOP version 2.0) has been testifying before the House Judiciary Committee (HJC) these past two days. here are some highlights.

Highlight: Monica (GOP version 2.0)say AG Gonzales is a liar.

This is how Monica (GOP Version 2.) described Gonzales's Obstruction of Justice:

One March 14th or 15th, a week after the HJC requested that Monica (GOP Version 2.) testify before the committee, she and Gonzales meet in his office. She asked to be transfer and he said he would think about it. Then he started telling Goodling what he remembered about the firing process.

He just said that he thought that everybody that was on the list was on the list for a performance-related reason. He proceeded to say, 'Let me tell you what I can remember,' and he laid out for me his general recollection of some of the process regarding the replacement of U.S. attorneys.

He then asked her if she had "any reaction" to his memory. " Her reaction? Discomfort.

I remember thinking at that point that this was something that we were all going to have to talk about, and I didn’t know that it was — I just — I didn’t know that it was maybe appropriate for us to talk about that at that point.

Recall that AG Gonzales testified twice before the Senate

On April 19th he said not spoken with "witnesses" to the U.S. attorneys scandal because he did not want to give the appearance of influencing their testimony.

"I'm here to provide what I know, what I recall as to the truth in order to help the Congress help to complete the record. ...But there are clearly some things that I don't know about what happened, and it's frustrating to me, as head of the department, to know that -- to not know that still today. But I haven't done -- I haven't talked to witnesses because of the fact that I haven't wanted to interfere with this investigation and department investigations.

And on May 10th:

I have not gone back and spoken directly with Mr. [Kyle] Sampson and others who were involved in this process. .. In order to protect the integrity of this investigation and of the investigation of the Office of Professional Responsibility and the Office of Inspector General -- I am a fact witness, they are fact witnesses, and in order to preserve the integrity of those investigations, I have not asked these specific questions.

Through a spokesman, Gonzales explains this meeting:

The statements made by the attorney general during this meeting were intended only to comfort her in a very difficult period of her life.

As pointed out by Jon Stewart, who comforts someone by recalling events that are the subject of an investigation?

Highlight: Monica (GOP version 2.0) says DAG McNulty lied to the Senate.

"During her testimony today, Monica Goodling pointed the finger squarely at Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty, saying that he had not been ‘fully candid’ in his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee about his knowledge of White House involvement in the U.S. attorney firings (McNulty had earlier pointed the finger at Sampson and Goodling for not informing him of the White House’s role).” McNulty released a statement this afternoon, saying Goodling is wrong:

I testified truthfully at the Feb. 6, 2007, hearing based on what I knew at that time. Ms. Goodling’s characterization of my testimony is wrong and not supported by the extensive record of documents and testimony already provided to Congress.

Highlight: After Monica's (GOP version 2.0) testimony, we still don't know who put the USA names on the list or why they were fired.

“I was not the primary White House contact for purposes of the development or approval of the US Attorney replacement plan.”

So far, Gonzales, McNulty, Sampson, or Goodling can not explain how the USAs made the list (or didn't) or why they were put on the list.

“It is curious that yet another senior Justice Department official claims to have limited involvement in compiling the list that led to the firings of several well-performing federal prosecutors. What we have heard today seems to reinforce the mounting evidence that the White House was pulling the strings on this project to target certain prosecutors in different parts of the country. Sen Pat Leahy (D-Vt)

Highlight: Monica (GOP version 2.0) says she violated Civil Service laws.

Monica (GOP version 2.0) “repeatedly declined to estimate how many times she had considered political affiliations in career hiring decisions.: “I don’t think that I could have done it more than 50 times, but I don’t know,” she said. She “further admitted that she ‘occasionally‘ researched career applicants’ political affiliations and checked their political donations.”

Recall, she received this power via a secret memo signed by Gonzales back in March 2006..

Update: "The Justice Department has broadened an internal investigation into whether Monica Goodling and other department aides “improperly took into account political considerations in hiring employees.” The new issue? Whether Goodling used her admittedly illegal selection process to hire 49 immigration judges. (NYT, May 25th, 2007)

Update: Well, it's too long and complicated but if your interested, Google 'caging" and "Griffin" to find out why Rove's friend Tim Griffin was going to by-pass Senate approval. Also, why is he still a USA? His term (120 days) is up.

Addendum: FAUX News has ignored all of this for over a month but on May 16th, Greta V. finally dusted off her bar card and did a little piece on Comey's testimony regarding the late night antics of Gonzales and Card.

Gonzo Update

2007-05-11T14:04:00.000-07:00

Day 21 28 35 of FAUX NEWS Embargo of the Gonzales Story.

Yesterday, AG Gonzlaes testified before the House Judiciary Committee. Like his previous testimony, AG Gonzales did his best Sgt. Schultz impersonation. As Joe Conason for Salon wrote:

What the six-hour hearing established most clearly is that most Republicans remain united behind Gonzales despite the clear evidence of his incompetence, dishonesty and contempt for Congress as an institution. Unlike their counterparts in the Senate, none of the Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee even posed a sharp question to him, let alone urged his resignation. Instead they acted in partisan lockstep, expressing sympathy for the poor attorney general's ordeal, pretending that there is no scandal and no stonewall, and insisting that the investigation should end.

So despite the events of the last week (and last few weeks), AG Gonzales still can't answer the most simple of question, not to mention questions of a more probing nature. For example:

Update: Mr. Gonzales, why are you only hiring pro-Republicans in the DOJ?

CNN: Congressional investigators are looking into new allegations a top official at the Justice Department illegally hired career lawyers based on their political affiliations. Investigators are focusing on Bradley Schlozman, a former top official in the department's Civil Rights Division, who recently returned to Washington after serving as interim U.S. attorney in Kansas City, Missouri. Richard Ugelow, a former Justice lawyer, said the department has been hiring "people who have certain political persuasion and only a certain political persuasion" in recent years."That's not healthy for enforcement of the nation's civil rights laws," said Ugelow, who now teaches law at Washington's American University.

According to the Boston Globe, "Half of the 14 career lawyers hired under Schlozman were members of the conservative Federalist Society or the Republican National Lawyers Association, up from none among the eight career hires in the previous two years, according to a review of resumes. The average US News & World Report ranking of the law school attended by new career lawyers plunged from 15 to 65."

"Critics said candidates were being hired more for their political views than legal credentials. David Becker , a former voting rights division trial attorney, said that Schlozman's hiring of politically driven conservatives to protect minority voting rights created a "wolf guarding the henhouse situation."

Bradley Schlozman is scheduled to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee next Tuesday, May 15.

Update: Mr. Gonazles, you turned over power in a secret memo to Monica Goodling (Along with Kyle Sampson) to hire and fire DOJ employees, was that so she would only hire Pro-Republicans?

Newsweek: Two government officials (not ID'd when talking about an ongoing probe) told NEWSWEEK the inquiry began after Jeff Taylor, the interim U.S. attorney in D.C., complained that [Monica] Goodling tried to block the hiring of a prosecutor in his office for being a "liberal Democratic type."

Update: Mr. Gonzales, is the reason that in the secret memo you chose Monica, the White Liaison, was to allow Karl Rove direct say in who would be hired and fired?

According to the National Journal, "The Bush administration has withheld a series of e-mails from Congress showing that senior White House and Justice Department officials worked together to conceal the role of Karl Rove in installing Timothy Griffin, a protégé of Rove's, as U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Arkansas. "

Update: Mr. Gonzales, was former U.S. Attorney Todd Graves the Ninth USA to be purged?

Former Missouri USA Todd Graves fired and quickly replaced by Bradley Schlozman in March 2006. Schlozman had no prosecutorial experience and bypassed Senate confirmation.

"Bradley Schlozman moved aggressively where Graves had not, announcing felony indictments of four workers for a liberal activist group (ACORN) on voter registration fraud charges less than a week before the 2006 election.

Critics said Schlozman violated a department policy to wait until after an election to bring voter fraud indictments if the case could affect the outcome, either by becoming a campaign issue or by scaring legitimate voters into staying home.

A 1995 Justice election crime manual says "federal prosecutors . . . should be extremely careful not to conduct overt investigations during the preelection period" to avoid "chilling legitimate voting and campaign activities" and causing "the investigation itself to become a campaign issue."

"Schlozman was reshaping the Civil Rights Division," said Joe Rich , who was chief of the voting rights section until taking a buyout in 2005, in an interview. "Schlozman didn't know anything about voting law. . . .All he knew is he wanted to be sure that the Republicans were going to win."

Interesting because, "Only weeks before last year’s pivotal midterm elections, the White House (Karl Rove) urged the Justice Department to pursue voter-fraud allegations against Democrats in three battleground states, a high-ranking Justice official has told congressional investigators."

Update: Mr. Gonzlaes, was former U.S. Attorney for Minnesota Thomas Heffelfinger the tenth USA to be purged?

Heffelfinger abruptly resigned in February 2006 of last year, one month after he'd appeared on a draft of Kyle Sampson's list of U.S. attorneys to be fired. He was replaced by 33 year-old Federalist Society member and former senior aide in the Justice Department, Rachel Paulose.

As I wrote on April 6th, four of Rachel Paulose's top staff voluntarily demoted themselves, fed up with her, who, after just months on the job, has earned a reputation for quoting Bible verses and dressing down underlings.

Gonzo Update

2007-05-03T10:06:00.000-07:00

Day 21 28 of FAUX NEWS Embargo of the Gonzales Story.

Who made the decision to fire the USA's and why? According to AG Gonzales, not he and he's not sure why. The same is true for Michael Battle, the former Director of the Executive Office of United States Attorneys, Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty, Kyle Sampson, and William E. Moschella, the principal associate deputy attorney general, who have all told Congress that they did not put any names on the list.

So, how likely is it that the White House directed these firings as an attempt to stack not only the USA's but the entirety of the DOJ with "loyal Bushies"? I think to answer lies in the first four updates.

Update: The National Journal reported this week that AG Gonzales signed a secret order giving his Chief of Staff, Kyle Sampson and the DOJ's White House liaison "authority over the hiring and firing of most non-civil-service employees of the Justice Department." That liaison later turned out to be 33 year old Pat Robertson Law School graduate and King maker, Monica Goodling.

Under the authority of this delegation, any proposed appointments or removals of personnel who are 'inferior officers' within the meaning of [the] Excepting Clause of the Constitution shall be presented to the Attorney General... and each appointment or removal shall be made in the name of the Attorney General --- March 1, 2006

This order was not only hidden from the public --- as it was specifically to be keep from the Federal Register --- but it was also hidden from most of the DOJ brass as it was being drafted.

This secret order was not turned over to either the Senate or House as part of their records requests.

Why would the White House liaison be involved not only in the hiring and firing of DOJ personnel but also as an integral part of making up the "purge lost" along with Kyle Sampson?
Answer: The existence of the order suggests that a broad effort was under way by the White House to place politically and ideologically loyal appointees throughout the Justice Department, not just at the U.S.-attorney level.

Update: After "allegations from an anonymous group of Justice employees that most of those cut from the application lists had worked for Democrats or liberal causes and that Michael Elston, chief of staff for Deputy Attorney General Paul J. McNulty, removed people for spurious reasons that included "inappropriate information about them on the Internet." (i.e they Googled applicants' names to see if they what political ties they had.)

Of course, if true, this would be illegal.

So, the DOJ is now is "removing political appointees from the hiring process for rookie lawyers and summer interns." As "outlined in an internal memo distributed Thursday, (April 26th) returns control of the Attorney General's Honors Program and the Summer Law Intern Program to career lawyers in the department after four years during which political appointees directed the process."

Update: The Office of Special Counsel is investigating Karl Rove and others for violations of the Hatch Act. Monica Goodling, and her efforts to stack the DOJ with "loyal Bushies" is one of those "others.

What is the Hatch Act? Simply it prohibits politicking on government time or using government resources. Scott J. Bloch, head of the Office of Special Counsel, announced that he is investigating three areas: "whether Bush administration personnel violated civil statutes by inserting GOP electoral politics into Cabinet agency meetings, firing at least one U.S. Attorney, and discussing some of the activities in private e-mails that are missing."

For the last several weeks, a little covered House committee investigation has been going on concerning Hatch Act violations over a January meeting where General Services Administration (GSA) Administrator Lurita Doan asked those present at a GSA briefing to consider how the GSA could help Republican candidates in the next round of elections. Karl Roves' deputy, J. Scott Jennings, ran that January meeting.

The White House has since admitted to holding about 20 briefings throughout 2006 and 2007 for federal agency employees to discuss the electability of Republican candidates.

Update: In written accounts submitted to the House Judiciary Committee, some of the fired USA's stated that they were threatened by Michael Elston, chief of staff for Deputy Attorney General Paul J. McNulty that if they did not resign quietly, they would be smeared. McNulty later testified that the USA's were fired for "performance" reasons.

"I believe that Elston was offering me a quid pro quo agreement: my silence in exchange for the Attorney General's." --- former U.S. Attorney for Arizona Paul Charlton

You can read their entire responses at the House's website.

Update: Former Deputy Attorney General James Comey testified Thursday before the Senate. Here are some highlights:

--- Kyle Sampson seems to have intentionally ignored all of Comey's recommendations as to who were the weak U.S. attorneys -- and kept Comey, the #2 at the DoJ, ignorant that Sampson and the White House were targeting certain U.S. attorneys with the goal of firing them.
--- With the exception of USA Kevin Ryan, Comey found no performance problems with any of the fired USAs: "My experience with those [fired] Attorneys was very positive. The names that I have read in the newspaper have not been consistent with my experience."

--- Comey “ had heard rumors" that Justice Department White House Liaison Monica Goodling was using political criteria in making personnel decisions among non-political, career staff.

Today's chance of a Gonzales departure: 77 percent

Morales' PI Pleds Guilty

2007-05-03T10:03:00.000-07:00

Former criminal defense investigator accused of forging statements from jurors, witnesses and others in death penalty cases pleaded guilty to four charges Monday and accepted a five-year prison sentence.

Kathleen Culhane, 40, said outside a Sacramento courtroom that she filed incorrect documents on behalf of five condemned inmates because she believes that capital punishment is wrong.

"I believe that the death penalty is illegal," she said. "It is barbaric and an atrocity. Any acts I committed are out of a firm belief against the state killing these people."

Culhane, who had worked on death penalty appeals since 1999, will likely go to prison in August when she is formally sentenced.

A prosecutor said Culhane's feelings on capital punishment were irrelevant and said filing false documents is "about as serious as it gets."

"It doesn't matter whether you're for or against the death penalty, you have to play by the rules," said Michael Farrell, senior assistant attorney general in state Attorney General Jerry Brown's office.

Culhane was charged in February with 45 criminal charges involving 23 declarations she filed with courts and the governor's office from 2002 to 2006. In the plea bargain with Brown's office, she admitted to one count of perjury, two counts of forgery and one count of filing a false document. Authorities say Culhane made up stories and forged the signatures of witnesses and jurors to benefit clients' appeals.

The first allegations against her came to light in February 2006 when lawyers for Death Row inmate Michael Morales of Stockton withdrew declarations from five jurors and a witness supporting his petition for clemency from Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

The statements quoted the witness as saying police had browbeaten her into testifying falsely against Morales, and quoted the jurors as saying they favored clemency or would not object to it. An attorney general's investigator said all of them denied signing the documents or ever being contacted by anyone working on Morales' behalf.

Morales lost his bid for clemency from the governor but later won a stay of execution from a federal judge in a lawsuit over the state's lethal injection procedures. That case is ongoing.

Culhane worked as an investigator for the state-funded Habeas Corpus Resource Center in San Francisco and later in private practice. As an investigator, Culhane's job was to locate and interview witnesses and jurors who participated in death penalty cases, and obtain signed declarations favorable to the inmates' legal defense and pleas for clemency.

The center withdrew about 100 declarations she submitted and cooperated with prosecutors.

In addition to Morales, the condemned inmates Culhane worked for and submitted false documents for are Vicente Figueroa Benavides, Christian Monterroso, Jose Guerra and Richard Clark, according to Farrell.

Farrell said attorneys for the condemned inmates are redoing Culhane's work, which will add considerable time to the appeals process.

Culhane's attorney, Stuart Hanlon, called the five-year sentence -- she could get out in 2 years and 8 months if she behaves in prison and earns good-time credits -- a "very stiff consequence."

Hanlon noted that Culhane has always worked to help others, spending seven years in El Salvador helping war refugees before beginning her work on death penalty cases.

"She has taken responsibility for what she did," he said.

Gonzo Update

2007-04-27T08:53:00.000-07:00

Day 21 of FAUX NEWS Embargo of the Gonzales Story.

Update: The House Judiciary Committee voted this week to grant "use" immunity to 33 year old Pat Robertson Law School graduate and King maker, Monica Goodling. The vote was 32-6, with 17 Republicans voting, "Yea!" The 6 "Nay" votes were all Republicans. (Washington Post, April 26, 2007)

Why vote a "No" to immunity?

"Immunity can very easily be the get-out-of-jail card for someone who's committed a crime." --- Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-Wisc.)

That is an accurate statement but I thought the Republican Talking Point here was that USAs serve at the pleasure of the President and that no crime occurred.

Maybe the Wisconsin Congressman is a little sensitive about uncovering the reason why "his" USA, Steven M. Biskupic, was on the purge list and then suddenly, was not. (McClatchy, April 14th, 2007.)

Update: It's being reported that Rep Rick Renzi, (R-Ariz) might resign today after the FBI raided his wife's business last week as part of an investigation into a land swap deal. (Phoenix Business Journal, April 27, 2007)

Wait, who is the USA of Arizona? That's right, they don't have one since Paul Charlton was fired on December 7th, 2007.

Why was Charlton fired? That right, his boss doesn't remember. Maybe this will help:

Congressman Rick Renzi, an Arizona Republican, was locked in a close re-election battle last fall when the local United States attorney, Paul Charlton, was investigating him for corruption. The investigation appears to have been slowed before Election Day, Mr. Renzi retained his seat, and Mr. Charlton ended up out of a job — one of eight prosecutors purged by the White House and the Justice Department.

Mr. Renzi was fighting for his political life when the local press reported that he was facing indictment for a suspect land deal. According to The Wall Street Journal, federal investigators met unexpected resistance from the Justice Department in getting approval to proceed and, perhaps as a result, the investigation was pushed past the election.
Mr. Renzi’s top aide, Brian Murray, admitted this week that when reports surfaced that his boss was being investigated, he had called Mr. Charlton’s office asking for information. Mr. Charlton’s office did the right thing, according to Mr. Murray’s account: it refused to comment. Weeks later, Mr. Charlton was fired. (NYT, April 26, 2007)

Sound familiar? That's because this is the third fired USA to report similar conduct:

The former U.S. attorney for New Mexico, David C. Iglesias, has told Congress he felt pressured to speed up an indictment of Democrats during phone calls last October from Sen. Pete V. Domenici (R-N.M.) and Rep. Heather A. Wilson (R-N.M.). And former U.S. attorney John McKay of Seattle has said he was called by the chief of staff to Rep. Doc Hastings (R-Wash.) about a preliminary inquiry into voter fraud in Washington state. (Washington Post, April 26, 2007)

Update: Speaking of Arizona, Sen. John McCain became the latest in a growing number of Republicans to call for Gonzales to resign.

"I am very disappointed in his performance. I think loyalty to the president should enter into his calculations. ... I think that out of loyalty to the president that [resigning] would probably be the best thing that he could do." ( CNN's Larry King, April 26, 2007)

Update: "You're Doing a Heckuv a Job Brownie."

President Bush, while not watching any of the Gonzales' five hour testimony, nevertheless expressed confidence in him.

And, while Gonzales claimed not to recall 60 times or more,

Bush thought his answers, although he didn't hear them, were very honest.

The Attorney General went up and gave a very candid assessment, and answered every question he could possibly answer, honestly answer, in a way that increased my confidence in his ability to do the job. (Press Conference, April 23, 2007)

Today's chance of a Gonzales departure: 76 percent

How's Your Week Going Mr. President

2007-04-20T12:08:00.000-07:00

Judging by his speech on Thursday, not too well.

1) Bush in Ohio to Talk About Terrorism

"My attitude is, if they're still writing about (number) one, 43 doesn't need to worry about it. ..." A good marriage is really good after serving together in Washington, D.C. ... "Politics comes and goes, but your principles don't. And everybody wants to be loved _ not everybody. ... You never heard anybody say, `I want to be despised, I'm running for office. ... The best thing about my family is my wife. She is a great first lady. I know that sounds not very objective, but that's how I feel. And she's also patient. Putting up with me requires a lot of patience. ... There are jobs Americans aren't doing. ... If you've got a chicken factory, a chicken-plucking factory, or whatever you call them, you know what I'm talking about. ... There are some similarities, of course" between Iraq and Vietnam. ... Death is terrible. ... I've been in politics long enough to know that polls just go poof at times."

2) Mass Carnage on the 18th of April.

32 students at Virgina Tech were shot to death by a loner with some major mental problems. The only good thing is that he shot his own face off. Unfortunately, it was two hours too late.

Also on the 18th,

At least ~~130~~ ~~172~~ ~~183~~ 230 people, including women and children, were killed today in a spate of bombings in Baghdad, making it the single bloodiest day since US troops increased their numbers in the city.

The U.S. announced three more troop deaths - two soldiers killed Wednesday by a roadside bomb north of the capital, and another soldier killed the same day in a small arms fire attack in southwest Baghdad. These latest American deaths bring the total to 3,315 since March of 2003.

3) FBI Raid Two Republican Congressmen

Rep. John T. Doolittle's (R-CA) home was raided by the FBI . He was removed from the from the Appropriations Committee the next day.

That would be the same appropriations seat which he used to help steer $37 million to Brent Wilkes (who's accused of bribing Duke Cunningham), and another $400,000 to Jack Abramoff's client, the government of the Marianas Islands.

Rep. Rick Renzi (R-Ariz) had his wife's business raided by the FBI. Renzi has since stepped down from the Intelligence Committee.

You can get all the information you need on FAUX NEWS tonight. Just kidding . They haven't covered this and never will.

4) Rosemary Woods Ain't Got Nothing on Us.

Karl Rove's emails can't be found along with Five Million Other E-mails. Rove said he accidentally deleted them ... four years worth. That shouldn't be a problem since he only used his Republican National Committee (RNC) account for 95% of all e-mails he wrote. [National Journal]

Why use the White House E-mail, Bush doesn't:

“I tend not to email or — not only tend not to email, I don’t email, because of the different record requests that can happen to a president. I don’t want to receive emails because, you know, there’s no telling what somebody’s email may — it would show up as, you know, a part of some kind of a story, and I wouldn’t be able to say, `Well, I didn’t read the email.’ `But I sent it to your address, how can you say you didn’t?’ So, in other words, I’m very cautious about emailing.” CNBC, October 23, 2006

Over Fifty White House staffers used RNC email accounts. Some missing emails involved not only the Gonzales 8 but also Plame and Ambramoff.

See, you need to use separate email accounts to conduct campaigning (Hatch Act) but official government business must be conducted on official servers or be saved (Presidential Records Act.)

5) Gonzo on the Hot seat

The week started out well enough for Gonzales with The American Freedom Agenda, a group of powerful conservatives, calling for Gonzales to resign.

He has brought the rule of law into disrepute, and debased honesty as the coin of the realm. He has engendered the suspicion that partisan politics trumps evenhanded law enforcement in the Department of Justice. ... In sum, Attorney General Gonzales has proven an unsuitable steward of the law and should resign for the good of the country.

Then, on the eve of his testimony, Gonzales leaked his statement. 25 pages long and best he could come up with was: "To my knowledge, I did not make decisions about who should or should not be asked to resign."

His testimony on Thursday didn't go much better. After 47 plus "I don't recalls," and "I don't remember," and at least one "I don't recall remembering," we know three things (which is two more than Gonzales):

1) Gonzales doesn't know who put together the purge list or why any USA was on that list.
2) He knows that he made the decision to fire the USA's but doesn't know why or when.
3) What he does know is whoever made up the list and whatever reason's were used, it was all very proper.

This stellar performance caused Committee member Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK), to immediatel asking for Gonzlaes resignation. "I believe that you ought to suffer the consequences. ... The best way to put this behind us is your resignation."

Today's Chance of Resignation: 93%
(From Slate)

Gonzo Update

2007-04-16T12:21:00.000-07:00

So on the eve of his testimony, Gonzales leaked his statement. I'd link the 25 page statement but there are no specifics or details in it and only half of it covers the resignations so I won't bother. But here's a gem for you to remember: "To my knowledge, I did not make decisions about who should or should not be asked to resign."

UPDATE:Rove's emails can't be found along with Five Million Other E-mails. 50 WH Staffer's used RNC email accounts and some missing emails involved not only the Gonzales 8 but also Plame

UPDATE: Did Bush and Sen. Pete lie about a conversation that they said they never had?

"I specifically remember one time I went up to the Senate and senators were talking about the U.S. attorneys. I don't remember specific names being mentioned, but I did say to Al last year -- you're right, last fall -- I said, have you heard complaints about AGs, I have -- I mean, U.S. attorneys, excuse me -- and he said, I have. But I never brought up a specific case nor gave him specific instructions." --- President Bush, March 14th, 2007

To recap, neither The Attorney General or The President had anything to do with the firings.

UPDATE: During the March 29 hearing, Kyle Sampson testified that, "I personally did not ... [O]n December 7th, I did not have in mind any replacements for any of the seven who were asked to resign."

But, prior to December 7th he did have four replacements in mind (and writing.)

See? There's no ~~lie~~ contradiction there, is there?

UPDATE: "67 percent in a ABC News/Washington Post poll think the prosecutors were fired mainly for political reasons. , not on the basis of their performance. [But] 45 percent of Americans overall, think Gonzales should lose his job, while 39 percent think he should remain."

So basically, the majority think he's a liar but not that he should lose his job.

UPDATE: And list continues to grow. The American Freedom Agenda call for Gonzales to resign.

Dear Mr. President and Attorney General:
We, the undersigned co-founders of the American Freedom Agenda, urge the Attorney General to submit his resignation and the President to accept.
Mr. Gonzales has presided over an unprecedented crippling of the Constitution's time-honored checks and balances. He has brought the rule of law into disrepute, and debased honesty as the coin of the realm. He has engendered the suspicion that partisan politics trumps evenhanded law enforcement in the Department of Justice. ... In sum, Attorney General Gonzales has proven an unsuitable steward of the law and should resign for the good of the country.
Sincerely,
Bruce Fein, Chairman Richard Viguerie David Keene Bob Barr John Whitehead

UPDATE: (For Brook) Before he successfully prosecuted a democrat (which was immediately overturned, see last update), the Wisconsin US Attorney was on the "purge list." And then, he wasn't.
(From Slate)

Gonzales Update

2007-04-10T13:15:00.000-07:00

Update: Gonzales cramming for his test and he can't keep his stories straight.

Update: Faith-based Justice. Pat Robertson's law school is recruiting ground for Jeustice.

Update: Wisconsin federal case is getting attention:

"We are concerned whether or not politics may have played a role in a case brought by Stephen Biskupic, the United States Attorney based in Milwaukee, against Georgia Thompson, formerly an official in the administration of Wisconsin’s Democratic governor. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals was reportedly so troubled by the insufficiency of the evidence against Ms. Thompson that it made the unusual decision to issue an order reversing Ms. Thompson’s conviction and releasing her from custody immediately after oral arguments in her appeal." --- Senate Judiciary Committee

Today's Chance of a Gonzales Departure: 83 percent

[from Slate]

The Firing of the Pearl Habor 8

2007-03-16T15:22:00.000-07:00

An acquaintance of mine recently asked about the Congressional Hearings being conducted over the firings of ,

Daniel Bogden, U.S. attorney for Nevada
David Iglesias , U.S. attorney for New Mexico
John McKay , U.S. attorney for Western Washington
Margaret Chiara, U.S. attorney for Western Michigan
Daniel Bogden, U.S. attorney for Nevada
Paul Charlton, U.S. attorney for Arizona
H.E. "Bud" Cummins III, U.S. attorney for Eastern Arkansas (1st to be fired)
Carol Lam, U.S. attorney for Southern California (San Diego)
Kevin Ryan , U.S. attorney for Northern California

or, because 7 were fired on December 7th, as I like to call them, the Pearl Harbor 8 (or the PH8.).

He asked, "Why is this such a big deal?"

So, in effort to educate him, as well as anticipate the distortions from the likes of Rush and Hannity, I answered him this.

First, The Office of the Attorney General gave false and misleading reasons to the public why the the PH8 were fired. Because of these false statements, the normally silent US Attorneys spoke up. Before the statements, the PH8 had tendered their resignations in silence.

Second, Office of the Attorney General gave false and misleading reasons to Congress why the the PH8 were fired.

Lying and misleading Congress is a crime. While it is not common for people to be prosecuted for this, people have. For example, Oliver North was convicted of, among other charges, aiding and abetting in the obstruction of a congressional inquiry. (That conviction was over turned on a technicality; what is usually referred to as a call a Kastigar or "Chinese Wall" violation.)

It was because of this that Attorney General Alberto Gonzales’s chief of staff Kyle Sampson was asked to resign this week.

Third, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales’s recent press conference indicated that he was too busy to know what was going on:

"I accept responsibility for everything that happens here within this department, but when you have 110,000 people working in the department, obviously there are going to be decisions made that I am not aware of in real time."

This, on top of recent developments, would seem to indicate that. at best,Mr. Gonzales is unaware of high level decisions. At worst, Mr. Gonzales is lying.

This mismanagement and public mendacity has caused these public statements:

"It is ultimately the president's decision, but perhaps it would benefit this administration if the attorney general was replaced with someone with a more professional focus rather than personal loyalty." --- Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif.

"I think the president should replace him. ... I think the attorney general should be fired." ---Sen. John Sununu, R- New Hampshire

Fourth, US Attorneys are political but not partisan appointees normally confirmed by the Senate. The Patriot Act gave the AG the power to circumvent that confirmation process. Nonetheless, federal prosecutors are by and large apolitical. They, like all prosecutors, must adhere (by law) to a code of ethics that exceed that of regular lawyers. That code envisions an independent and fair process without regard to partisanship.

The fact that Harriet E. Miers and Mr. Sampson rated US Attorneys on "loyalty" to the President undermines the traditional need for independence. While it is perfectly legitimate for Clinton to redirect focus away from pornography prosecutions (which he did) or for Bush to direct focus on terrorism prosecutions (which he did), it would be improper to redirect focus away from or direct focus to a person or persons based on their political identification.

The fact that White House advisor Karl Rove and Counsel Harriet Meirs were involved in the decision-making process would indicate partisanship.

Fifth, US Attorney David Iglesias received complaints by two Republican Congresspeople over the speed at which he was investigating a state Democratic case. The complaint reached the head of the New Mexico GOP who then complained to Karl Rove. According to his testimony, Mr. Rove promised that, "He's gone."

Former Deputy AG James Comey under John Ashcroft said recently of Mr.Iglesias, "[He] was one of our finest and someone I had a lot of confidence in as deputy attorney general."

Sixth, in addition, U.S. Attorney John McKay says he was pressured by Republicans to bring voter fraud charges after the 2004 Washington governor’s race, which a Democrat, Christine Gregoire, won after two recounts. Republicans were trying to overturn an election result they did not like, but Mr. McKay refused to go along. “There was no evidence,” he said, “and I am not going to drag innocent people in front of a grand jury.”

Seventh, on the reverse side, US Attorney Carol Lam (San Diego) has just secured indictments against former 3rd in command of the CIA in the same defense bribery scandal that fell Randy "Duke" Cunnigham; her doing as well.

Also, Lam had announced that she had expanded that investigation to include Representative Jerry Lewis (R-CA). Later that same day, Mr. Sampson wrote to White House Deputy Counsel William Kelley, "The real problem we have right now is Carol Lam,"

Eighth, it can be argued that the same mind set that gave us a horse judge to run FEMA and Ms. Meirs to sit on the Supreme Court is also the same that appointed Karl Rove's friend, J. Timothy Griffin, an attorney with limited criminal prosecutorial experience.

The sole reason, according to the of Paul J. McNulty, the deputy attorney general, testimony, for the firing of the Arkansas US Attorney Bud Cummins was to appoint Mr. Griffin. This is also evidenced by an email from Mr. Sampson “I’m not 100 percent sure that Tim was the guy on which to test drive this authority [of the Attorney General to appoint interim U.S. attorneys], but know that getting him appointed was important to Harriet, Karl, etc. "

Why The Reno/Clinton Firing's of 93 US Attorneys in 1993 are Irrelevant

Mr. Clinton's presidency began in 1993. As you probably already know, US Attorney's serve four year terms at the pleasure of the President. As you also know, it is customary for US Attorneys' to submit their resignations at the beginning of a new administration.

In March of 1993, AG Janet Reno, of whom I am no fan, was expediting the inevitable resignations of all 93 US Attorneys. The controversy over this at the time surrounded the speed at which the transition would happen but not that it's occurrence.

In addition, the US Attorney for D.C. was concerned that his replacement would not continue his good work involving the prosecution of Dan Rostenkowski. Fortunately, Mr. Clinton's appointment of Eric H. Holder Jr., continued the good work resulting in the and indictment of Mr. Rostenkowski on 17 counts of corruption. Rostenkowski eventually plead guilty and served 17 months in prison. Clinton pardoned him just before he left office.

The resignation of US Attorneys in 1993 offers little insight as to why 8 US Attorney's have been fired now, why Gonzales mislead the Congress, and why the White House was involved.

As an aside, in an email to Harriet Miers, Gonzales’s chief of staff Kyle Sampson (who resigned) wrote that: “In recent memory, during the Reagan and Clinton Administrations, Presidents Reagan* and Clinton did not seek to remove and replace U.S. Attorneys to serve indefinitely under the holdover provision”

*On May 9, 1981, according to the Washington Post, the Reagan administration was well on its way to replacing all of the U.S. attorneys. Reagan kept most of the US Attorneys after he was elected to a second term.

How's Your Week Going Mr. President?

2007-03-07T13:31:00.000-08:00

5. Bush Sr. to Press: I did Not Grope That Real & Spectacular Ass.

Bush's dad had to go on television and deny that he groped Terri Hatcher's ass.

Obviously, Papa Bush is unaware that when you're over 80 years old, you pretty much can do what you damn well please; no apologies required.

4. Venezuela: "Gringo, Go Home!" Argentina: Gringo, Go Home! And send back Jenna!"

How is Bush loseing the hearts and minds of South Americans to Calypso fan and general Looney Tune Hugo Chavez, is beyond me.

--- Chavez is scheduled to speak to tens of thousands of anti-Bush protesters in the Argentine capital of Buenos Aires, and he'll do it with the blessing of Argentine President Nestor Kirchner. In fact, Kirchner's aides are helping to organize the rally.

--- As President Bush flew to San Paulo, Brazil, here Thursday on Air Force One, thousands of protesters shouting "Out, Bush!" marched down this city's main drag, Avenida Paulista. Hundreds of riot police flanked at least 6,000 demonstrators near the city's financial center, and the scent of tear gas hovered along the march route.

3. Walter Reed Scandal Big Enough that FAUX HAs to Cover it.

Here's a random sampling :

Disclosures of substandard conditions for wounded veterans at Walter Reed Army Medical Center represent more than another case of Bush administration incompetence.

They show how its mishandling of the management and financing of the Iraq war has created a series of devastating side effects that go far beyond questions about its military and diplomatic policies in the Middle East.

Since President Bush sent U.S. troops to Iraq, his administration has constantly sought to minimize war costs, protect its tax cuts and avoid the government's looming long-term fiscal problems.

2. Six of the Eight fired US Attorneys testify on Capitol Hill.

In back-to-back hearings in the Senate and House, former U.S. Attorney David C. Iglesias of New Mexico and five other former prosecutors recounted specific instances in which some said they felt pressured by Republicans on corruption cases and one said a Justice Department official warned him to keep quiet or face retaliation.

But now in the face of further testimony in both chambers, the White House is backing down.

1. VP Cheney's Chief of Staff Convicted of 4 counts of Lying in Plame Leak.

On the heels of Libby's conviction, and conservative demands for Libby's pardon, comes hearings in Congress, where, among others, Valerie Plame will be testifying.

This shouldn't be a problem. All it it will show is that the outing of Plame was part of a systematic and widespread attempt to intimidate and discredit a critic of pre-war intelligence that the Administration was forced to admit was wrong. Cheney, Rove, Libby, Armitage, Fliescher, and other knew about it and participated in it. And either Bush knew about it and lied to the American public or he was lied to by these people.

By the way, when are you going to make good on your promise and fire Dick Cheney & Karl Rove?

" ... There are anonymous reports all the time in the media. The President has set high standards, the highest of standards for people in his administration. He's made it very clear to people in his administration that he expects them to adhere to the highest standards of conduct. If anyone in this administration was involved in it, they would no longer be in this administration. --- White House Spokesman Scott McClelan, 9/23/03

"Q And, and, do you stand by your pledge to fire anyone found to have [who leaked the agent's name]?

A : Yes. And that's up to the U.S. Attorney to find the facts." --- President G.W. Bush, June 10, 2004.

Update: One Year Later

2007-02-25T09:44:00.000-08:00

A year after San Joaquin County prosecutors accused the investigator in the Morales case of falsifying 6 declarations, she's been charged with that and a whole lot more.

(For background, see my blog, Who Is Responsible for the Forged Morales Declarations?, of 2/17/06)

Fraud in death row cases is alleged

Los Angeles Times

February 22, 2007

State prosecutors on Wednesday charged a San Joaquin, Calif., private investigator with forging and falsifying documents to help four death row inmates in what authorities called one of the largest frauds on the justice system in California history.

The 17-page criminal complaint filed against Kathleen Culhane in Sacramento County Superior Court capped a one-year investigation triggered by suspicious declarations submitted by Culhane in the clemency bid of death row inmate Michael Morales.

In all, Culhane allegedly filed questionable declarations on behalf of 11 jurors, two witnesses, two court interpreters and one police officer while working as a private investigator for the state-funded Habeas Corpus Resource Center in San Francisco and in private practice between November 2002 and February 2006, Senior Assistant Atty. Gen. Mike Farrell said.

The documents were filed in the cases of death row inmates Morales; Vicente Figueroa Benavides, convicted by a Kern County jury of the 1991 murder, rape and sodomy of a 21-month-old; Christian Monterroso, convicted by an Orange County jury of the 1991 murders of Tarsem Singh and Ashokkumar Patel; and Jose Guerra, convicted by a Los Angeles County jury of the 1990 rape and murder of Kathleen Powell.

The case against Culhane began when San Joaquin prosecutors, in arguments submitted to Schwarzenegger, named her as the Morales investigator who "supposedly interviewed five of the six jurors" and discovered they had a change of heart.

D'oh! I pulled a Haggard .

2007-02-24T19:36:00.000-08:00

So, what's worse?

A. Getting arrested for public lewdness?

"Authorities allege that Latham asked the undercover policeman to come up to his hotel for oral sex."

B. Getting arrested for public gay lewdness?

"Latham’s attorney [said] the Supreme Court ruled in the 2003 decision Lawrence v. Texas that it was not illegal for consenting adults to engage in private homosexual acts."

C. Getting arrested for public gay lewdness when you're a minister?

"He has since resigned as pastor of the South Tulsa Baptist Church and stepped down from the executive committee of the Southern Baptist Convention"

D. Getting arrested for public gay lewdness when you're a minister who had spoken out against homosexuality?

"The Rev. Lonnie W. Latham had supported a resolution calling on gays and lesbians to reject their “sinful, destructive lifestyle” before his Jan. 3, 2006, arrest outside the Habana Inn in Oklahoma City."

E. Getting arrested public gay lewdness when you're a minister who had spoken out against homosexuality and having the ACLU argue on your side?

"The American Civil Liberties Union of Oklahoma has filed a brief alleging that Latham’s arrest also violated his right to free speech."

D'oh!

Big plane, big load, big tits

2007-02-16T19:29:00.000-08:00

Falling all over themselves over a false demand for a large plane, a crazy astronaut in diapers and Anna Nicole Smith, the press in general and FAUX in particular have decided these stories are unimportant.

Five News Stories FAUX will Not Cover.

1) 2) The Libby trial shows that, among other things, Vice President Dick Cheney was fixated on finding ways to debunk a former diplomat's claims that Bush misled the U.S. people in going to war going so far as to order Libby to leak "classified" material as well as Plame's identity.

A variety of White House officials, including Rove Libby, told over 1/2 dozen journalist of the CIA operatives' identity.

2) $12 billion sent to Iraq is unaccounted for as US ships 363 ton of cash ($4 billion) on wood pallets. - Reuters

In addition, $10 billion dollars has been lost to waste (i.e. fraud), and overcharges (i.e. fraud) by contractors. $2.7 billion dollars of the waste (i.e. fraud)is a attributable to VP Cheney's old pals, Halliburton. --- AP

3) Former No. 3 CIA boss Kyle Foggo and Duke Cunningham buddy/contractor Brent Wilkes have been indicted by a federal jury in San Diego for multiple federal crimes including conspiracy, wire fraud, and money laundering. --- NYT

4) The above indictment comes on the heels of the forced resignation of the US Attorney for San Diego. In fact, over 1/2 dozen United States Attorney's have been fired in a Alberto Gonzales power-grab.

5) The FBI is investigating whether Nevada Gov. Jim Gibbons failed to properly report gifts or payments from a software company, eTreppid Technologies, that was awarded secret military contracts when he was in Congress.

We remember Gibbons, or not, from the "Five Election Stories FAUX Won't Cover," when he was accused of drunkenly group a waitress.

In a March 22, 2005, e-mail days before Trepp and his wife, Jale, embarked on the Caribbean cruise with Jim Gibbons and his wife, Dawn, a former Nevada state assemblywoman.

Jale: "Please don't forget to bring the money you promised Jim and Dawn."
Trepp: "Don't you ever send this kind of message to me! Erase this message from your computer right now!"

Mr. President, How's This Week Going?

2006-12-19T17:10:00.000-08:00

So, two weeks ago, it was a bad week for you but, Mr. President, how's this week going?

1) SMU this.

1st, Bush is ranked the 5th Worst President in US History and now this:

A letter, dated December 16, from "Faculty, Administrators, & Staff" of the Perkins School of Theology to R. Gerald Turner, president of the Board of Trustees, is now circulating not only on the SMU campus but also among a wider academic community, urging the board to "reconsider and to rescind SMU's pursuit of the presidential library."

2) FAUX & Friends Kill Highest Ranking Female Officer

Marine Maj. Megan McClung, a public affairs officer who became the highest-ranking woman killed in Iraq when she died two weeks ago, had been escorting Oliver North and a FOX News crew through Ramadi just moments before a roadside bomb took her life.

3) America: You Suck, Mission Not Even Close ot being Accomplished

Support for President Bush's management of the Iraq war has dropped to an all-time low even as his overall approval remains tepid but steady, according to a CNN poll released Monday.

The survey, conducted Friday through Sunday by Opinion Research Corp., found support for Bush's handling of the Iraq conflict has decreased to 28 percent from 34 percent in a poll taken October 13-15.

And a record 70 percent of respondents said they disapproved of Bush's war management, up from 64 percent in the October poll.

Meanwhile, Bush's overall job approval was 36 percent -- down only 1 percentage point from the previous CNN poll to pose that question December 5-7. Sixty-two percent said they disapproved of his performance in office, up from 57 percent in the early December poll.

4) Last Throes? Violence Surges in Iraq

A Pentagon report, which covers the period from early August to early November, found an average of almost 960 attacks against Americans and Iraqis every week, the highest level recorded since the Pentagon began issuing the quarterly reports in 2005, with the biggest surge in attacks against American-led forces.

5) Joint Chiefs say Bush Has No Mission to Accomplish in Iraq

The Joint Chiefs think the White House, after a month of talks, still does not have a defined mission and is latching on to the surge idea in part because of limited alternatives, despite warnings about the potential disadvantages for the military, said the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the White House review is not public.

Five Election Stories FAUX News (haven't) won't Cover.

2006-11-03T09:59:00.000-08:00

Here are Five Election Stories FAUX News have not and will not cover:

1) Katherine "Mary Kay Anonymous" Harris (R-Flordia) is running for US Senate.

Once a FAUX favorite, she's oddly MIA. Maybe because over the last several months the wheels have come off her campaign wagon largely due to her unstable personality;

Perhaps the worst blow to Harris's campaign has been the stories that have emerged from former staffers. They describe a Jekyll-and-Hyde candidate who can be seductively charming at one moment and pitch a temper tantrum the next, throwing a cellphone at a wall or a sheaf of papers at a campaign manager. Former chief adviser Ed Rollins, who managed Ronald Reagan's reelection to the White House in 1984, said working for Harris was like "being in insanity camp." He likened her staff to dogs that have been kicked. Before he became the first of three campaign managers to quit, Jim Dornan programmed his cellphone to play the theme song from "The Exorcist" when Harris called.

But more importantly, Harris is neck deep in shit and that shit's name is Mitchell Wade.

Mitchell J. Wade admitted yesterday in federal court that he attempted to illegally influence Defense Department contracting officials and tried to curry favor with two House members, in addition to lavishing more than $1 million in cash, cars, a boat, antiques and other bribes on convicted Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-Calif.). Washington Post, 2/25/06

Harris is one of those members. So it came no surprise to her when trick or treaters came early.

Dan Berger and Ben McKay, who both worked for Harris in her first term and are now lobbyists in Washington, confirmed the interviews this week and said it was their understanding all congressional staff would likely be questioned. The two spoke separately to three investigators from the FBI and the Defense Department in Washington several weeks ago.
Federal authorities have subpoenaed records from Harris' U.S. Senate campaign office and have interviewed several former staffers, including senior campaign consultant Ed Rollins, campaign manager Jim Dornan and Mona Tate Yost, a congressional aide who later went to work for Wade.

2) Rep. Don "Wayne Brady" Sherwood (Pa.) is running for reelection to the House.

Is Don Sherwood gonna have to choke a bitch? Apparently the answer is yes and it will cost about $500,000 to do it.

While Sherwood acknowledged the woman was his mistress, he denied abusing her and said that he had settled her $5.5 million lawsuit on confidential terms.

The settlement, reached in November 2005, called for Cynthia Ore to be paid in installments, according to a person who spoke on condition of anonymity because the deal is confidential. She has received less than half the money so far, and will not get the rest until after the Nov. 7 election, the person said Thursday.

A confidentiality clause requires Ore to forfeit some of the money if she talks publicly about the case, according to this person and two other people familiar with elements of the case.

Sherwood, a 65-year-old married father of three who is considered a family-values conservative, had one of the safest seats in Congress until Ore sued him in June 2005, alleging he physically abused her throughout their five-year affair

On a humorous note, Bush was stumping for Sherwood on (drum roll please) ... National Character Counts Week, 2006.

You may now begin to mourn irony.

3) Rep. Bob "New Meat" Ney (R-Ohio) was running for reelection to the House.

Ney isn't actively campaigning this year but despite his conviction for bribery he has yet to resign, unlike Mark Foley.

Rep Bob Ney, first member of Congress to confess to crimes involving corrupt lobbyist Jack Abramoff, has defied House leaders by refusing to step down for now, even though he is headed to prison early next year; his Congressional office is open for business; Ney has said he would resign within 'few weeks' but wants to remain in Congress for sake of his staff; Ney, despite criminal record, will be able to begin collecting Congressional pension when he turns 62

Sen Conrad Burns (R-Montana) will soon occupy this spot since he took $150,000 from Abramoff.

4) Jim "Stumblin', bumblin', rumblin'" Gibbons (R-Nev) is running for Governor.

District Attorney David Roger said in Las Vegas that authorities have reopened their investigation into a cocktail waitress' claim that a Republican congressman running for governor assaulted her in a parking garage after a night of drinking.

Roger said the case involving Rep. Jim Gibbons — which had been closed after the waitress, Chrissy Mazzeo, dropped her complaint — is under investigation again. Mazzeo, a Las Vegas Strip casino waitress, accused Gibbons, 61, of pushing her up against a wall Oct. 13 and propositioning her.

Mazzeo said police told her several times during their investigation that they would get custody of the surveillance videos, which Mazzeo urged them to do in one of her three 911 calls to police.

The next day, she said, police told her no tapes existed. At that point, she said she decided not to file charges against Gibbons because of his powerful status. Police halted their investigation.

But the mystery surrounding what occurred continued. The parking garage is owned and managed by Crescent Real Estate Equities. Despite intense media coverage over the next two weeks and repeated phone calls from the Sun and trips to the Crescent security office, the tapes were nowhere to be found and Crescent officials refused to comment.

Then, last weekend, law enforcement sources said Crescent did in fact have the tapes and had turned them over to Metro.

The timing of the discovery of the tapes and the circumstances by which their existence became public have raised a new round of questions - which none of the principals would answer on Monday.

Have the tapes been tampered with?: Rogich Communications Group, whose chief executive, Sig Rogich, is a campaign consultant to Gibbons, has been a lobbyist for Crescent Real Estate Equities. The Rogich-Crescent link is part of a web of connections among Rogich, Gibbons, Crescent and Jones Vargas, the law firm that represents Crescent. Also, Rogich Communications is a tenant of Crescent at Hughes Center

5) Rep. Ralph Arza (R-Fla) was running for reelection for the State House.

Yes, running until he left a drunken, obscenity laced voice mail on Representative Gus Barreiro’s machine. Not content to call his colleague a bitch, Arza decide to drop the big N-bomb.

Message #1: Hey, bitch. You're nothing but a bitch. You're a bitch. You're nothing but a bitch. God Bless you, bitch.

Message #2: Hey, bitch. You ain't nothing but a bitch. You ain't nothing but a bitch, brother, my nigger.

Oh, yeah, so he got some guy to follow up with a threaten phone call and now they both been charged witness tampering and retaliation.

Go here for audio-goodness. Miami-Herald -- Arza Voice Mail Messages

Coulter's Voting Fraud Investigation

2006-06-02T17:12:00.000-07:00

Coulter Lines Up Heavy Hitter

What? Ted Olson wasn't available?

Conservative pundit and best-selling political writer Ann Coulter has hired a white-glove, White House-connected law firm to fight allegations she voted illegally in February's Town of Palm Beach election.

And the attorney from the Miami-based Kenny Nachwalter firm is no stranger to Palm Beach voting. Marcos Jimenez — who was, along with the more famous Olson, one of the lead attorneys who fought for George W. Bush's side in the 2000 presidential election snafu here — was assigned to Coulter.

Jimenez, by the way, also knows a thing or two about criminals. Appointed by Bush as U.S. attorney for the southern district of Florida in 2002, Jimenez was charged with going after terrorists, drug dealers and wayward union bosses.

Jimenez returned to private practice last year.

"Mr. Jimenez asked us to send him all the correspondence we sent Ms. Coulter," deputy dlections chief Charmaine Kelly said.

A poll worker reported to his supervisors that he saw Coulter try to vote in the precinct closest to her Palm Beach home. But when she was told the address on her voter's registration was elsewhere, Coulter ran out instead of correcting it and ended up voting in a precinct that wasn't hers. Knowingly voting in the wrong precinct in Florida is a felony.

Elections Supervisor Arthur Anderson gave Coulter until April 30 to explain what happened, but she has yet to answer his registered letters. Now with Jimenez, Kelly said, officials will wait "a few more weeks" before starting a procedure that could strip Coulter of her right to vote here and refer the case to State Attorney Barry Krischer for possible prosecution.

Coulter couldn't be reached and Jimenez didn't return calls.

Schadenfreude Update: The Ferrai Enzo Mys

2006-03-28T14:09:00.000-08:00

A D'oh! update that really is it's own D'oh!

As I noted earlier, it looked like Fat Steven was looking at a nice insurance fraud charge. He's now one step closer. Anyone have chnage for the bus?

Ferrari Owner Is Minus His Second Car

Stefan Eriksson's famous exotic car collection keeps shrinking.

First, the former European videogame executive's rare Enzo Ferrari was destroyed in a mysterious crash Feb. 21 on Pacific Coast Highway in Malibu.

Then, on Sunday, he lost his 2005 Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren, valued at more than $400,000. Beverly Hills police confiscated the vehicle after Scotland Yard said the car might have been stolen.

The officers stopped Eriksson's wife, Nicole Persson, 33, about 2:30 p.m. on the corner of Beverly Drive and Wilshire Boulevard because an officer found the car's European license plate suspicious.

The officer then discovered that Persson lacked a driver's license and that the car was not registered in the United States.

"We contacted Scotland Yard and subsequently learned that the car was perhaps stolen" out of the United Kingdom, Lt. Mitch McCann said.

The entire incident was caught on tape by a 13-year-old exotic car buff who has filmed Eriksson's vehicles in the past.

Beverly Hills authorities said they didn't have details of the British police case.

But Los Angeles County Sheriff's Sgt. Phil Brooks said that an unidentified financial institution says it owns the Mercedes and that a financial institution in Scotland says it was the owner of the Enzo.

This leaves Eriksson with only one of the three exotic cars he imported to the United States late last year, Brooks said.

"He brought in through San Diego two Ferraris and the Mercedes and said they were show cars and that he was not going to drive them on the streets," Brooks said.

Last month's crash prompted both an accident investigation and a probe by the Sheriff's Department's Homeland Security Division.

Eriksson also told deputies that he was a deputy commissioner of the police department of a tiny transit agency in the San Gabriel Valley.

A few minutes after the crash, two men arrived at the crash scene, identified themselves as homeland security officers and spoke to Eriksson at length before leaving.

According to Car & Driver magazine, the Mercedes SLR McLaren is capable to going 200 mph and can go from 0 to 60 mph in 3.8 seconds.

The car didn't just capture the eye of Beverly Hills police.

Spyder Dobrofsky, a 13-year-old car enthusiast, happened to be at the scene of Sunday's traffic stop and switched on his camera.

The teenager has photographed cars in Eriksson's collection before and knew immediately that the McLaren was his.

"The car really stands out because of the British plate," Spyder said.

Spyder said Eriksson's wife was with a young child when she was pulled over.

On the tape, Spyder asks the tow truck operator called to remove the Mercedes where he's taking it.

The man jokes: "To my house."

Big Brother D'oh!

2006-03-24T11:30:00.000-08:00

Sex pair caught by spy camera

A rare night out with friends landed a Wollaston couple in trouble when they were caught by CCTV cameras indulging in a lewd sex act in Stourbridge High Street.

Derek Miller and Sharon Little, both aged 33, pleaded guilty to outraging public indecency in the incident, on February 25, when they appeared before Halesowen Magistrates.

The couple, who live at Hodge Hill Avenue, were spotted committing the sex act in full view of the High Street at 12.40pm, while leaning against a shop window opposite the former Toad pub.

CCTV operators on the lookout for trouble in the town centre saw the pair and notified the police.

Mr Joseph Keating, prosecuting, said Little had been seen sticking her fingers up at passers by during the incident.

Miss Sabhia Pathan, defending, said the couple had been "extremely inebriated" at the time of the incident. "This is a classic case of 'when the drink is in, the sense is very much out'," she said.
Miss Pathan said she was also concerned by the number of police who had turned up at the scene after counting around 10 officers and two riot vans on the CCTV footage.

They were given a 12-month conditional discharge and ordered to pay £60 each costs.

Another Felon on Bush's Watch

2006-03-10T23:18:00.000-08:00

It keeps getting better and better:

Claude A. Allen, who resigned last month as deputy secretary in the Department of Health and Human Services, was nominated in 2003 to a federal appeals court seat. He was appointed the president's top domestic policy adviser last year at the start of Bush's second term. That made him the highest-ranking African American on the White House staff.

Working out of a small office on the second floor of the West Wing, Allen shaped administration policy on such issues as health care, space exploration, housing and education.

But according to the Washington Post (March 11, 2006),
Allen, was arrested this week in Montgomery County for allegedly swindling Target and Hecht's stores out of more than $5,000 in a refund scheme, police said.

This is what police said happened Jan. 2:

Employees at the Target store at 25 Grand Corner Ave. in Gaithersburg spotted Allen putting merchandise in a shopping bag. He then walked over to the guest services desk, produced a receipt and received a refund for the items. After getting the refund, Allen left the store without paying for additional merchandise in his shopping cart.

Investigators were able to document 25 fraudulent refunds for items including a Bose home theater system, stereo equipment, clothes, a photo printer and items worth as little as $2.50.

This is a common variation of shoplifting but given the repeated acts, which were done while working for Bush, make the shoplifting felonious. This type of activity is charged as second degree burglary in California.

Allen resigned in February but this activity was taking place while he worked in the White House. It's "unclear" exactly why he resigned.

"At the time of his resignation, Allen denied reports that he was leaving to protest military guidelines that required chaplains to perform only nondenominational services."

Of course, soon after his citation, according to the New York Times (March 11, 2006) he spoke to Andy Card and Harriet Miers.

"Within a few days of the incident, Mr. McClellan said, Mr. Allen told Mr. Card and Ms. Miers that he was thinking of leaving the White House to spend time with his family. But Mr. Allen decided to stay for a while because he was working on domestic initiatives for the State of the Union address, which Mr. Bush delivered on Jan. 31."

Funny thing, Bush wanted him on the 4th COA.
Democrats in Congress blocked his nomination to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit in 2003, citing his relative lack of legal experience. The court, based in Richmond, covers Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina and South Carolina.
What, being a practicing attorney for seven years isn't enough?

One more tidbit which is just priceless.
Allen worked for the Virginia state attorney general's office and as state health and human resources secretary. In that job, he earned a reputation as a staunch conservative; once he kept Medicaid funds from an impoverished rape victim who wanted an abortion.
Bingo! Conservative and anti-abortion. What other qualifications do you need to be a federal judge?

Motion Denied for Incomprehensibility

2006-03-08T17:05:00.000-08:00

It's unfortunate that more judges don't come down like this on bad motions; which usually come from the defense.

In denying Defendant's motion, Judge Leif Clark (Texas) ruled that the motion was denied for being "incomprehensible" and then quoted this line from the movie, Billy Madison, in a footnote.

Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

From The Smoking Gun.

Sloppy on the bench. Sloppy in the Court

2006-03-05T18:07:00.000-08:00

I can't imagine filing anything, much less an appeal, without reading it a few times.

Solo's Errant Spell-Check Causes 'Sea Sponge' Invasion

In an opening brief to San Francisco's 1st District Court of Appeal, a search-and-replace command by Santa Cruz solo practitioner Arthur Dudley inexplicably inserted the words "sea sponge" instead of the legal term "sua sponte," which is Latin for "on its own motion."

That left the justices reading -- and probably laughing at -- such classic statements as: "An appropriate instruction limiting the judge's criminal liability in such a prosecution must be given sea sponge explaining that certain acts or omissions by themselves are not sufficient to support a conviction."

And: "It is well settled that a trial court must instruct sea sponge on any defense, including a mistake of fact defense."

The sneaky "sea sponge" popped up at least five times.

Dudley said he didn't notice the mistake in People v. Danser, A107853, until his client -- William Danser, a former Santa Clara County Superior Court judge seeking reversal of his conviction for fixing traffic tickets -- called for an explanation.

Dudley corrected the error in his reply brief, telling the court that a "glitch" caused the weird wording and instructing that "where the phrase 'sea sponge' is found, this court should insert the phrase 'sua sponte.'"

But who is Willaim Dansler?

Dansler was a Superior Court Judge of California's Santa Clara County who was convicted in 2004 of one count of felony conspiracy to obstruct justice, plus eight misdemeanor counts of obstruction, attempted obstruction and conflict of interest.

Danser was accused along with a friend, former Los Gatos police Detective Randy Bishop, of fixing cases for members and associates of the San Jose Sharks hockey and San Jose Earthquakes soccer teams. They did similar favors for "friends of friends," authorities said.

Prosecutors said Bishop, who was moonlighting as a security official for Sharks and Earthquakes, steered 20 people who had two dozen traffic tickets and two DUIs to Danser. They included Sharks players and executives — among them goalie Evgeni Nabokov and team president Greg Jamison — and an Earthquakes player, a team trainer and an equipment manager along with players' girlfriends and wives.

Others were a personal trainer for Danser and his sons, a former private school teacher for the judge's children, and members of the Los Gatos Little League, for which Danser served as president.

Danser dismissed the cases "in the interest of justice" without the traffic violators or their attorneys appearing in court and with no notification to the law enforcement officials who issued the citation or to prosecutors, authorities said. San Francisco Chronicle

Danser was sentenced to 90 days of house arrest with electronic monitoring and three years' probation. Last month, the Court of Appeals rejected his "sea sponge" appeal:

Justice Patricia Sepulveda wrote that "ample evidence supported the charge" that Danser "became involved in the cases in order to grant special treatment."

The "judge" is now appealing to the Supreme Court.

D'oh!

2006-03-01T18:54:00.000-08:00

There are stories in the world that are hard to characterize. They are part gallows humor, part slapstick, part poetic justice, part irony, and part Schadenfreude.

Some of the stories are strange, or candidates for someone's Darwin Achievement Award, Oberman's Worst Person in the World or, my favorite, Stupid Criminal Tricks, but the common thread is that someone gets owned.

I can think of no better description that is both vague and yet says it all than from one of our most astute social commentators, Homer Simpson. Today's D'oh! goes to:

Today's D'oh! goes to: Willie Herman

Court Allows DNA Evidence Against Donor

In 1999, Willie Herman gave a DNA sample after being charged with robbery. He voluntarily submitted the sample through his public defender, and the evidence led to his acquittal on the robbery charge.

After the trial, the district court directed that all of Herman's property be made available for pickup. Herman could not collect his belongings because he was serving time in prison on a different charge. His attorney made no effort to collect Herman's property.

Herman's DNA results were then entered into a criminal database without his knowledge or permission.

In 2000, law enforcement officials retested the blood evidence found at Leslie Carter's murder scene and matched it to Herman's DNA. ---D'oh!

Carter was found dead in a bathroom in a park along the Truckee River. Blood that was not Carter's was found in the bathroom, but no DNA match could be made in the database in 1997.

On appeal, Herman said the DNA evidence obtained at his robbery trial was inadmissible at his murder trial. The Nevada Supreme Court found that prosecutors correctly argued that Herman consented to the use of his DNA sample and so waived any potential privacy interests.

Herman was sentenced to life without the chance for parole for the murder of Leslie Carter in a Reno park in 1997.

Legal Pundits: Nancy Grace

2006-03-01T18:28:00.000-08:00

I have a real problem with most attorneys being regular contributors on the cable news networks discussing ongoing criminal investigations or trials. Not because they shouldn't offer their opinions as legal commentators but because they're so wrong most of the the time.

Some are of them are "former prosecutors (I can understand why) like Kimberly Guilfoyle (recently hired by Fox), and Marsha Clark. Some have no experience in criminal law like Gloria Allred. And some have become hosts like Greta Van Susteren (whose show I have appeared) and Nancy Grace.

I don't include attorney's like Laura Ingram and Ann Coulter because not only do they not provide legal analysis but they general stay away from the crime beat (unless it's defending Libby and all those associated with Abramoff.)

There are really only three media attorneys I think are entertaining and astute: Dan Abrams, Jeffrey Toobin, and Geoffrey Fieger.

Nancy Grace

Nancy Grace joined Court TV from the Atlanta Fulton County District Attorney's Office where she served for a decade as Special Prosecutor of major felony cases involving serial murder, serial rape, serial child molestation and arson. Grace compiled a perfect record of nearly 100 felony convictions at trial and no losses.

I've watched Grace for a number of years after catching her on her Court TV show. Even back then, she was more of a populist victim's rights advocate rather than an objective legal commentator. Despite her rhetoric, I always got a kick out of her odd vocal inflections and eye-popping expressions.

Now, on CNN, her mannerisms and speech has only gotten more shrill. She falls in line with the old adage, "Give the people what they want." The only problem with that is that requires the news media to abdicate its responsibility to educate and inform.

Recently, the New York Observer has written a piece that gives some insight to Grace's punditry.

In it, the NYO finds that Grace plays fast and loose with the facts her fiancee's murder, the inspiration for her legal and media profession.

But [the official records from the Georgia Bureau of Investigations, newspaper articles from the time of the murder, and interviews with many of those involved in the case], contradict Ms. Grace when it comes to other salient facts of the crime and the trial—the facts that form the basis of Ms. Grace’s crusade against an impotent, criminal-coddling legal system.

• Griffin was shot not by a random robber, but by a former co-worker.

• The killer, Tommy McCoy, was 19, not 24, and had no prior convictions.

• Mr. McCoy confessed to the crime the evening he was arrested.

• The jury convicted in a matter of hours, not days.

• Prosecutors asked for the death penalty, but didn't get it, because Mr. McCoy was mildly retarded.

• Mr. McCoy never had an appeal; he filed a habeas application five years ago, and after a hearing it was rejected.

Playing "fast and loose" isn't something she just does on her TV show but something she did as a prosecutor as well.

But in 2005, the 11th Circuit Court in Georgia declared that Ms. Grace had “played fast and loose” with facts in her 1990 triple-murder prosecution of Herbert Connell Stephens. In 1997, the Georgia Supreme Court overturned an arson-murder verdict, finding Ms. Grace had withheld evidence from the defense; in 1994, the same court had overturned her conviction of a heroin trafficker, finding problems with her closing argument.

What's troubling is not only does she misstate the facts in interviews and in her book, but she admits not having done any background on the case and then justifies these falsehoods for what can only be called a personal crusade.

She does a disservice to her viewers and to the law by slanting criminal cases in away that can only engender distrust with the criminal justice system.

Schadenfreude Update: The Ferrai Enzo Mystery

2006-02-28T13:08:00.000-08:00

Fat Steven's Million D'oh! keeps getting louder. As previously blogged here, former disgraced gaming executive and Swedish felon, Fat Steven crashed his Enzo in Malibu while posting a %0.09 BAC (and you know he was driving despite he's claims to the contrary).

As today's Los Angles Times reports, things just keep getting better for him.

The crash has also garnered the attention of a leading Scottish bank, which has informed sheriff's investigators that it may own the destroyed car. At the same time, detectives are trying to figure out why another exotic car in Eriksson's extensive collection, a Mercedes SLR, was listed as stolen by Scotland Yard in London, said Sheriff's Sgt. Phil Brooks.

The totaled Ferrari was one of two Enzos that Eriksson brought into the United States from England along with the Mercedes SLR, Brooks said. But detectives concluded that the totaled vehicle did not have appropriate papers and was not "street legal" for driving in California, he said.

I smell an insurance fraud charge being tacked on the growing list of possible charges.

Katherine Harris for Senate

2006-02-27T14:14:00.000-08:00

It looks like former co-chair of Bush's Florida campaign/Fla. Secretary of State now Congresswoman, Kathy Harris is in a bit of political hot water over some campaign issues.

No, not her 1994 campaign for state office where she received more than $20,000 in illegal campaign contributions from an insurance company she subsequently helped by introducing legislation that would have hurt one of its competitors.

"Federal prosecutors say nearly $400,000 of Riscorp contributions to Harris and dozens of other politicians were illegal. Five Riscorp executives have pleaded guilty to felony and misdemeanor charges. Riscorp's founder, Bill Griffin, was sentenced to five months in federal custody earlier this month in connection with the scheme to reimburse his employees for the illegal contributions.

Harris got $20,292 in illegal contributions from Riscorp during her 1994 state Senate campaign -- more than any other legislative candidate. She also has put that amount into the special elections trust fund. Harris also received $13,000 in legal corporate contributions from various Riscorp companies, more than any other candidate in any race, federal records show.

Federal prosecutors described her 1994 campaign manager as one of the "co-conspirators" or "co-schemers" in an effort to hide the true identity of campaign contributors on campaign finance reports." St. Petersburg Times, 8/25/98

No, not Election 2000. That's old news which has been thoroughly documented.

Mitchell Wade

We're talking about fresh new problems of corruption. This Congressional corruption, however, isn't connected to Jack Abramoff. This round is connected to Mitchell Wade.

If you don't know Wade, he's the generous founder of the defense contracting firm MZM. Wade, who took a $700,000 loss on the purchase of former Congressman now felon Randy “Duke” Cunningham's Del Mar home, allowed the Congressman to stay on his yacht while in Washington, and just outright bribed him, plead guilty last Friday.

"Mitchell J. Wade admitted yesterday in federal court that he attempted to illegally influence Defense Department contracting officials and tried to curry favor with two House members, in addition to lavishing more than $1 million in cash, cars, a boat, antiques and other bribes on convicted Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-Calif.)." Washington Post, 2/25/06

Harris' problem lies in the fact that she's one those unnamed House members.

"Wade also pleaded guilty to election law fraud for making nearly $80,000 in illegal campaign contributions to "Representatives A and B," who are identifiable as [U.S. Rep. Virgil Goode, R-Va.]and Harris.

The member identifiable as Harris received $32,000 in illegal donations from Wade and his employees in 2004. Documents filed with Wade's plea say that he took Harris to dinner early last year, where they discussed the possibility of another fundraiser and the possibility of getting funding for a Navy counterintelligence program in the member's district. One source familiar with the inquiry said Harris made such a request for funding, but it was not granted.

Harris said in a statement that Wade had "discussed opening a defense plant in Sarasota that would create numerous high-skilled, high-wage jobs in my district." She said [she] had donated all her MZM donations to charity. "This case demonstrates the perils of a process in which candidates are sometimes asked to determine the intent of a contributor.'" Washington Post, 2/25/06

The good news for Harris is that she's not immediately the target of an impending prosecution:

"[P]prosecutors said yesterday that there was no sign they knew the contributions were illegal. Prosecutors said the investigation is continuing but wouldn't say whether Goode and Harris or the MZM employees who made the illegal donations for Wade are subjects of the investigation."

I'm sure it was all a big misunderstanding and Ms. Harris had no idea that something was amiss despite running afoul of similar campaign laws earlier.

"Wade also admitted that much of the campaign money he sent Harris and U.S. Rep. Virgil Goode, R-Va., was raised illegally by a method called straw contributing. Straw contributing, considered a felony, is done by giving employees money, then having them make a contribution to a candidate.

On one day alone, Harris collected 18 checks for $2,000 each from MZM employees and spouses." Herald Tribune, 2/26/06

The bad news is, this can't help her second attempt at the Senate.

Senate 2006

Trailing her Democratic opponent 53 percent to 31 percent, Harris has had to shake her prior campaign issues, as well as her cosmetically challenged image,

and well publicized gaffes. All these liabilities seem to have scared away the powers that be.

"In 2002, Harris ran for the U.S. House of Representatives in a heavily Republican district and won. Two years later, she considered making a run for Bob Graham's Senate seat. But the White House wanted a different candidate in the race—Mel Martinez, then the secretary of Housing and Urban Development. In an effort to keep Harris out of the primary, Republicans approached her with a backroom deal, according to Florida media reports: Stay out of the 2004 race and the party will support your Senate run in 2006. Harris agreed, and Martinez ascended to the Senate.

Earlier this month, Harris announced, right on time, that she would indeed make a 2006 run for Florida's second Senate seat, now held by Democrat Bill Nelson. But the Republicans she counted on haven't lined up behind her." Slate, 6/30/05

Without strong Republican backing and now being associated with the "culture of corruption" in Washington, Harris might flounder like another abandoned fawn of the Republicans, Jeanine Pirro

"Even Republicans would say she had her warning and apparently didn't learn anything from it. It's one thing to be fooled once but to be fooled twice says more about you than the foolers." Larry Sabato, political science professor at the University of Virginia. Herald Tribune, 2/26/06

Schadenfreude

2006-02-25T09:09:00.000-08:00

There are stories in the world that are hard to characterize. They are part gallows humor, part slapstick, part poetic justice, part irony, and part Schadenfreude.

Some of the stories are strange, or candidates for someone's Darwin Achievement Award, Oberman's Worst Person in the World or, my favorite, Stupid Criminal Tricks, but the common thread is that someone gets owned.

I can think of no better description that is both vague and yet says it all than from one of our most astute social commentators, Homer Simpson. Today's D'oh! goes to:

Stefan Erikssen aka Fat Steven.

Police Search For Ferrari Driver

(CBS) MALIBU, Calif. A Ferrari that crashed Tuesday on Pacific Coast Highway in Malibu and nearly split in half is suspected of racing, authorities said.

One person was treated at the scene for a minor injury just after 6:15 a.m. ... Stefan Erikssen, 44, of Los Angeles, and a Swedish national, told authorities he was the owner of the destroyed Ferrari Enzo.

Erikssen in happier times with happier car.

Erikssen, whose blood-alcohol level was .09, claims he was the passenger at the time of the crash, and that the driver ran off after the crash, Sheriff’s Sgt. Philip Brooks said.

Erikssen told police that a German named Dietrich was driving the car. Police say the Ferrari may have been involved in a race with a Mercedes.

Have you seen this man?

A common on-scene defense for criminals, especially in DUI cases, is the "phantom driver." Somehow, I don't think it'll work this time.

The Ferrari was driving in excess of 120 mph when the accident happened. It skidded up the side of the hill and most likely went airborne, Brooks said, where the Ferrari hit an electrical pole and was sheared in half, with the front section separated from the rest of the vehicle.The race was allegedly staged following a late-night party in Beverly Hills.

The Malibu Times is reporting that the 2003 Enzo was going a tad faster than initially thought.

Los Angeles County Sheriff's Deputies Thursday released their findings that the car was going an estimated 162 miles per hour when it began swerving on the highway at 6:06 a.m.

Blood was found on the driver's airbag but not on the passenger side and Erikssen has a cut lip. Anyone want to bet that the law enforcement agencies might all kick in for the couple of grand it'll take to do DNA testing?

On top of the reckless driving, drag racing and DUI charges Erikssen faces, it looks like that's not the end of his problems.

First, it looks like the car isn't his.

Police said the car was the property of the Bank of Scotland and was in the process of being repossessed. However, Mr Eriksson is still the proud owner of three Mercedes-Benz McLaren SLRs, police said.

Second, former senior executive at handheld console firm Gizmondo and member of the so-called "Swedish mafia," has had previous legal problems.

Swedish daily newspaper Aftonbladet has revealed that in two trials in 1993 and 1994, Eriksson was convicted of a number of mobster-related charges, including financial fraud related to counterfeit money and an attempted $3m scam on a financial institution, and sentenced to over ten years in prison.

Eriksson was an executive officer of Gizmondo Europe, and earned over $3 million in salary and bonuses from the company (along with a generous $100,000 vehicle allowance) before his resignation on October 20th, 2006.

Here's the kicker, he may have "forgot" to tell US Immigration about the convictions. How do you say "deportation proceedings" in Swedish?

The Ferrari Enzo is a limited-edition vehicle worth between $600,000 and $1 million. It has 650 horsepower and a published top speed of 225 mph.

Is Talon News Hiring?

2006-02-24T22:52:00.000-08:00

Tom Malin, who is seeking the Democratic nomination for the House District 108 seat held by Republican Dan Branch, was outed last week as a former gay prostitute.

"I've made mistakes in my life, and I've stood before my creator and I've accepted responsibility for my behavior," Malin said in Friday's Dallas Morning News.

Malin, or ‘Todd Sharpe’ as his clients knew him, used to work in the New York and Los Angeles areas and charged anywhere from $200-$600 for his “hot uninhibited” services.

Now the heat was on him not just from the usual sources but from the local gay community as well.

Stonewall Democrats of Dallas on Tuesday rescinded its endorsement of Tom Malin, a gay Democratic candidate for the Texas House who formerly worked as a male escort.

The gay political group voted unanimously on Tuesday night to rescind the endorsement after Malin admitted last week he had worked in the sex industry. The candidate acknowledged his work as an escort after nude photographs of him were found on a defunct website.

It's bad enough that he's a former prostitute but what's really going to sink him is his other revelation: He was also a Mary Kay salesman for 13 years, becoming one of the few men ever to win the use of a pink Cadillac.

The primary is March 7 but it's unlikely that his resume is one the Texas voters will flock to. No worries, if he loses the election, I'm sure he can get a White House Press Pass.

Who Is Responible for the Forged Morales Declarations?

2006-02-17T14:26:00.000-08:00

Who is Kathleen Culhane?

Well, we know that her name appears on five false juror declarations submitted by Ken Starr and David Senior on behalf of rapist and murderer Michael Morales.

We know that her name appears on at least one false witness declarations submitted by Ken Starr and David Senior on behalf of rapist and murderer Michael Morales.

We know that she submitted her own declaration that is false.

We know that Starr and Senior where notified on February 6th that at least one declaration was false.

We know that Starr and Senior stood by her declarations until they were all withdrawn on Monday the 13th. (See Michael Morales' Clemency for links.)

But who is Kathleen Culhane?

According to an investigation by the San Francisco Chronicle she:

was employed by the Habeas Corpus Resource Center between 2001 and 2005, the agency said Thursday.

The California Department of Consumer Affairs said she was not a licensed investigator.

And that's about it.

The Associated Press tried to talk to her but "Culhane declined to speak with them last week and her San Francisco phone was disconnected Thursday. The address listed on a business card she left with one juror led to a San Francisco business that rents post office boxes."

She has hired an attorney though.

Her attorney, Stuart Hanlon, said Culhane committed no wrongdoing and that there was no discrepancy with the signatures she submitted and the ones obtained by state investigators.

"We're comfortable that she didn't do anything wrong and we want to investigate the case," Hanlon said. San Francisco Chronicle

We'll see if he eats these words much like Senior did when he accused the prosecutors of intimidating the jurors whose names were on forged declarations submitted by Culhane.

It will also remain to be seen what if anything happens to Starr, Senior and Ben Weston, another Morales attorney.

Some experts with third hand information believe they are off the hook:

Gerald Uelmen, a Santa Clara School of law professor, said there was no ethical breach by either lawyer because they trusted an investigator who signed sworn declarations that she was telling the truth. In addition, Culhane worked four years at the Habeas Corpus Resource Center, which gave her work high marks. San Francisco Chronicle

Once Starr and Senior were on notice of problems with the declarations, "they acted apparently immediately and exactly appropriately,'' said Monroe Freedman, a law professor at Hofstra University in New York and a national authority on legal ethics. San Francisco Chronicle

But Mr. Freedman, they did NOT do that. They were put on notice on Monday the 6th and their response was to accuse the DA's office of coercion of a witness and then they submitted 5 more forged declarations by Culhane.

While currently there is no evidence that any of them has anything to do with the forgeries, I and others believe that ultimately, as attorneys, they bear an ethical obligation not present documents with out a good faith belief in them.

One who disagreed was Walnut Creek attorney Carol Langford, who teaches at UC Hastings College of the Law and is co-author of the textbook "Legal Ethics in the Practice of Law.'' She said Starr and Senior should have known something was amiss when prosecutors first presented evidence that the prosecution witness' recantation was forged.

"My view is that these lawyers were trying so zealously for their client that they crossed the line,'' she said. San Francisco Chronicle

San Francisco attorney Richard Zitrin, who has written three books on legal ethics and teaches a course on the subject at Hastings and the University of San Francisco, said the defense lawyers were obliged to "sit down with the investigator and give her the third degree'' after the first hint that she might have forged a document.

Besides a lawyer's duty not to mislead a court or a governor, Zitrin said, "you also have an obligation to your client not to present false testimony, because it's going to come out and your client is going to get slammed.'' San Francisco Chronicle

Deputy District Attorney Robert Himelblau said Starr and Senior, the lawyers who prepared the clemency papers, may not have known of the alleged fabrications but were responsible for the documents they filed.

"The buck stops here,'' Himelblau said. After accusing the prosecutors of dishonesty in the exchange over Felix, he said, the lawyers now "owe an explanation to the district attorney's office, to the governor, to the jurors who (they) lied about, to the witnesses who (they) lied about, and finally to the people.'' San Francisco Chronicle

Morales Denied Despite Starr Power

2006-02-17T11:58:00.000-08:00

Today, Ken Starr and David Senior held a press conference to discuss, among other things, their submission of forged documents in their Writ of Habeas Corpus and Petitions for Clemency. (Michael Morales Case)

Earlier this weeek, Starr, alone, held a smaller "closed" conference but it's not being reported what he actually said.

Starr held a question and answer session at the School of Law Wednesday, where he explained the case to law school students, professors and administrators. Pepperdine University Graphic, 2/16/06

I would love to hear from any Pepperdine students in attendance.

At today's press conference, Starr and Senior attempted to deflect the issue of fraudulent declarations and tried to focus the press on the value of sparing the life of of a rapist-murder because he said he's sorry. It didn't work very well.

As Starr was about to give his conference, word came down that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger denied Morales clemency:

"Nothing in the record or the materials before me compels a grant of clemency. The pain Ms. Winchell's loved ones have been forced to endure at the hands of Morales is unfathomable as is the brutality of the acts he perpetrated."

Starr, expressed his disappointment and then bowed out. He was only there for the clemency and nothing else so he bailed.

Starr already has told the press that:

"Society is not equipped to handle death penalty cases because of resources. ... Large law firms are not willing at this stage to take these cases on, at a cost of many thousands of dollars, in order to make sure that if the public wants the death penalty, it is not administered with arbitrariness and caprice.

[I support capital punishment but it should be] reserved for the most heinous crimes but enshrouded with the most exquisite safeguards. ... This is not frontier justice.

It will be an act of illegality for this execution to go forward next week, and people should be upset about that." San Francisco Chronicle, 2/17/06

Sounds like he's anti-death penalty to me. Being for capital punishment in the abstract and requiring Platonic perfection, is the same as being against it. What are these "exquisite safeguards" he refers to?

In the Morales case, Morales confessed to raping and murdering 17 year old Terri Winchell. The murder weapons with her blood on them were found in his apartment. Guilt doesn't seem to be an issue.

What does Starr require, a unanimous verdict by 12 unbiased adults of the community watched over by a neutral judge constrained by rules of evidence in a public trial argued by state licensed lawyers reviewed by state and federal appellate courts? Well, we have that.

What Starr and Senior insist is the issue is the alleged false testimony of jail house informant Bruce Samuelson.

The issue of Samuelson’s testimony has been briefed, argued and resolved in multiple courts and remains to be an non-issue resurrected only by fallacious arguments made by Mr. Morales’ defense team. So desperate to make Samuelson a key part of their argument, forged documents were submitted by the defense in order to bolster their claims. Those documents, as well as other false documents, have now been withdrawn by the defense.

There is a mountain of evidence corroborating Mr. Samuelson’s testimony, including all the testimony received in the separate trial of Ricky Ortega, Mr. Morlaes’ co-defendant. Both Mr. Ortega’s statement and Mr. Morales’ own confession, where he admitted to raping and murdering Terri, corroborate Mr. Samuelson’s testimony.

Starr and Senior also falsely claim that Samuelson's testimony was "key" to the jury's decision to recommend death for Morales.

In fact, that was the whole impetus for submitting the forged juror declarations; to have the jurors claim that Samuelson's testimony was the deciding factor.

Fortunately, the prosecutors found these declarations to be fake. What's more, the jurors interviewed denied that Samuelson was key and said they voted for death based on the facts of the crime; a decision that they stand by. (Authentic Juror Declarations)

As "Juror Anita" said on February 9th (aired February 11th) on the John and Ken Show, "He was a jail house informant and we took what he said with a grain of salt." (paraphrased)

In a second to last gasp, Starr and Senior filed a Writ of Habeas Corpus in the California Supreme Court on Friday, February 10th. In it they argued the Samuleson issue yet again. (Also in the Writ was a claim of more false testimony but since that was based on a forged declaration, it was withdrawn by Senior.) On Wednesday, the Court again rejected the claim. San Francisco Chronicle 2/15/06.

Now Senior is left alone, abandoned by Starr, sputtering beating the same drum beat that has been ignored by every court that has heard the Morales case. Desperate to distance themselves from the over half-dozen false or forged declarations in their clemency papers, Senior and the rest of what is left of hus team, will continue to erroneously point to testimony that was neither false or key.

It's time for Starr to be honest and admit he's just against the death penalty. It's also time that Morales' sentence be carried out.

Cheney: "My Bad," Part 2 --- Plame Status Declassified in 2003?

2006-02-16T12:52:00.000-08:00

Apparently, for the last 2 1/2 years during DOJ investigating, Ashcroft feet-dragging, Special Prosecutor appointing, grand jury impaneling, reporter subpoenaing and jailing, Supreme Court arguing, and Chief of Staff perjuring, it's all been one big fucking mistake.

Is it possible that Cheney declassified Plame's identity as a CIA agent but was so concerned with how Joe Wilson felt, he forget to mention it to anybody?

Vice President Dick Cheney said Wednesday [February 15th, 2006] that an executive order gives him the authority to declassify secret documents, but he would not say whether he authorized an indicted former aide to release classified information. Associated Press

Now, is he just saying that to deflect stories about his bad aim, flex his muscles or did he actually declassify Plame's status?

Did he declassify the Plame Memo memo as well?

A classified State Department memorandum central to a federal leak investigation contained information about CIA officer Valerie Plame in a paragraph marked "(S)" for secret, a clear indication that any Bush administration official who read it should have been aware the information was classified, according to current and former government officials.

If he actually declassified this information "to defend the Bush administration's use of prewar intelligence in making the case to go to war with Iraq", it is clear why he did so.

The implication from the disclosure that Mr. Libby had authority to discuss sensitive intelligence matters with the press "is that the White House -- the vice president -- has been using his declassification authority as a way to advance the administration's political agenda," said Steven Aftergood, director of the project on government secrecy at the Federation of American Scientists. "In other words, information that supports the administration's position on Iraq or whatever is selectively declassified and other information is not. That's not a criminal offense, but it's kind of sleazy." WSJ, 2/11/06

But if the information was declassified, why would Libby lie about a "non-leak" to the grand jury? (National Journal) A simple matter of habit?

If Cheney didn't declassify Plame's status or the memo, what did he declassify, if anything?

This question looks like it maybe answered in the Libby trial in 2007 because right now, it appears to be part of Libby's defense.

I. Lewis Libby Jr., the former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, told a grand jury that he was authorized by his "superiors" to disclose classified information to reporters about Iraq's weapons capability in June and July 2003, according to a document filed by a federal prosecutor. NYT, 2/10/06

How many "superiors does Libby have? Bush and Cheney seem to be it. Cheney has already indicated that he believes he will be called to testify at Libby's trial. It would be astounding if Cheney admits that late in the game that the Plame information was declassified and all of the legal proceeding were for naught.

Something about all of this smells worse than it did before and it's not the rotting carcass of a dead quail.

Ann Coulter: Slandering and Plagarizing Media Whore but Voter Fraud Too?

2006-02-15T14:20:00.000-08:00

Ann, my sweet Ann.

Her rhetoric is infammatory.

"Liberals hate America. They hate all religions except Islam. Liberals love Islam, hate all other religions."

"We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. We weren't punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That's war. And this is war."

"[I]t's far preferable to fight [terrorists] in the streets of Baghdad than in the streets of New York (where the residents would immediately surrender)."

"I think there should be a literacy test and a poll tax for people to vote."

And sometimes homicidial.

"My only regret with McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building."

"We need somebody to put rat poisoning in Justice Stevens' creme brulee," Coulter said. "That's just a joke, for you in the media."

"If we find out someone [referring to a terrorist] is going to attack the Supreme Court next week, can't we tell Roberts, Alito, Thomas and Scalito?"

(Responding to a question from a Catholic University student about her biggest moral or ethical dilemna) "There was one time I had a shot at Clinton. I thought 'Ann, that's not going to help your career.'"

Her thoughts not so original.

Much of Coulter's Jun. 29, 2005 column, “Thou Shall Not Commit Religion,” bears a striking resemblance to pieces in magazines dating as far back as 1985—and a column written for the Boston Globe in 1995.

Between July 6th and November 3rd, 12 of the 16 columns Ann wrote were on Justice O'Connor's retirement and her potential replacement on the Supreme Court.

November 3, 2005 DEMOCRATS STICK FORK IN OWN HEADS
October 26, 2005 IT’S MORNING IN AMERICA!
October 19, 2005 WHO WAS THE SECOND CHOICE?
October 12, 2005 DOES THIS LAW DEGREE MAKE MY RESUME LOOK FAT?
October 5, 2005 THIS IS WHAT 'ADVICE AND CONSENT' MEANS
September 28, 2005 BOB SHRUM WITH A GOOD CAUSE
September 21, 2005 WHAT WOULD REAGAN DO?
September 14, 2005 ACTUALLY, 'JUDICIAL ACTIVISM' MEANS 'E=mc2'
August 3, 2005 READ MY LIPS: NO NEW LIBERALS
July 27, 2005 FOOL ME EIGHT TIMES, SHAME ON ME
July 20, 2005 SOUTER IN ROBERTS' CLOTHING
July 6, 2005 REAGAN'S BIGGEST MISTAKE FINALLY RETIRES

Her character a bit vindictive and mean-spirited.

Republican bootlicking extremist Ann Coulter has posted a personal phone number and email address of BRAD BLOG Guest Blogger Lydia Cornell on the front page of her website with a link to the post again on her "Questions from Chairman Ann" page.

And clearly The Worst Person in the World.

Now you can add, "Felonious Voter Fraud Media Whore" to her resume

Ballot Beeotch: Coulter votes in wrong precinct

Palm Beach Post Columnist --- Wednesday, February 15, 2006

She may be smart enough to earn millions from her acidic political barbs, but when it comes to something as simple as voting in her tiny hometown, hard-core conservative pundit Ann Coulter is a tad confused.

Palm Beach County Supervisor of Elections records show Coulter voted last week in Palm Beach's council election. Problem is: She cast her ballot in a precinct 4 miles north of the precinct where she owns a home — and that could be a big no-no.

Coulter, who owns a $1.8 million crib on Seabreeze Avenue, should have voted in Precinct 1198. It covers most homes on her street. Instead, records show, she voted in Precinct 1196, at the northern tip of the island.

Here's the sticky part for The Right's Lady Macbeth: She wrote down an Indian Road address instead of Seabreeze on her voter's registration application. And she signed to certify the information as true.

"She never lived here," said Suzanne Frisbie, owner of the Indian Road home. "I'm Ann's Realtor, and she used this address to forward mail when she moved from New York."

No matter, Florida statutes make it a third-degree felony to vote knowingly in the wrong precinct. Lying on a voter's registration can cost up to $5,000 and five years behind bars.

UPDATE February 17th, 2006

It just keeps getting better as this poll worker describes his run in with Ann.

Jim Whited says, Coulter dashed out of the polling place when he told her she needed to file a change of address.

"I even ran out after her," he says. "But she was fast. ... Ms. Coulter came to me, and the address we had for her in the computer didn't match the address I know she lives at," Whited says.

"I just told her she had come to the right place, but we needed to fill out a change of address," says Whited, a staunch Republican who says he "likes the girl."

"What am I going to report?" Whited said. "That Ann Coulter came in and left when I tried to have her fill out a change of address? I didn't know where she went afterwards." Palm Beach Post

I thought Ann running away from Al-Pieda was a funny but this beats that by a 100 meter dash.

Who Ya Going to Call? Karl Rove!

2006-02-15T10:49:00.000-08:00

In a statement released Monday by the White House said. "[Bush] did not know the vice president was involved at that time. Subsequent to the call, Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove spoke with Mrs. Armstrong. He then called the president shortly before 8 p.m. to update him and let him know the vice president had accidentally shot Mr. Whittington."

Why Rove and not Andy Card or David Addington?

Well, for one, the Armstrong's have long standing ties with the Republican Party.

Anne Armstrong, the matriarch of the family that owns the ranch, is a Republican Party stalwart who served in the Nixon and Ford administrations and also as ambassador to Great Britain. When her husband, Tobin Armstrong, died in October, Mr. Cheney and James A. Baker III, the former secretary of state, spoke at the funeral.

New York Times 2/13/06

In addition, Rove also is an old family friend of the Armstrong's as the New Yorker chronicled in 2003.

"Rove had the imprimatur of Texas’s Republican aristocracy from the beginning, through his connection to the Bush family and to Clements. An early financier of Karl Rove + Company [a direct mail business] was Tobin Armstrong, the owner of a Texas ranch (it was on land leased from Armstrong Rove and Bill Frist were planning to go hunting) and the husband of Anne Armstrong, a former Republican Cabinet officer."

Katharine Armstrong's influence in the White House is apparently lucrative as well. In 2004, Katharine Armstrong was paid $160,000 by the powerful legal firm Baker Botts to lobby the White House, according to records she filed with the U.S. Senate as required by lobbying disclosure rules, reported MSNBC.

In a phone interview, she told NBC News that in return for the money in one case, she set up a meeting at the White House for a Baker Botts client, although she said she felt she could not release the client’s name.

"A meeting for doing something with one of their clients," she said, describing the event. "I’m not at liberty to say which." She says she cannot remember which White House official the meeting was with. She also said that during the inauguration proceedings, she got Karl Rove to speak at a Baker Botts function. ""I got them Karl Rove," she said.

It is these ties that allowed Cheney to trust Armstrong to agree with his strategy "in which she was to call a trusted reporter at the local paper, the Corpus Christi Caller-Times, to disclose the news" many hours after the incident occurred. Time

It is these ties which place into question her credibility of the version of events. As the former Chair of Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission (appointed to the commission by then Gov. Bush in 1999) it would seem that she would have better understanding of the importance of getting an immediate and thorough investigation.

As a property-owner and friend, she apparently thought that wasn't the course to take; call it "Pioneer judgment"

Where is Whittington's statement or Pamela Willeford's, former Texas education official and the U.S. Ambassador to Switzerland, statement. Not that I expect much from them; a lot of "I didn't see"s and "It happened so fast"'s.

Apparently, we'll hear from Cheney tonight but it will be on FAUX NEWS. In a preview, Cheney took the "blame" ("my bad") but hasn't been exactly detailed:

"THE VICE PRESIDENT: I turned and shot at the bird, and at that second, saw Harry standing there. Didn't know he was there --
HUME: You had pulled the trigger and you saw him?
THE VICE PRESIDENT: Well, I saw him fall, basically. It had happened so fast.
...
THE VICE PRESIDENT: Ran over to him and --
Q And what did you see? He's lying there --
THE VICE PRESIDENT: He was laying there on his back, obviously bleeding. You could see where the shot had struck him. And one of the fortunate things was that I've always got a medical team, in effect, covering me wherever I go. I had a physician's assistant with me that day. Within a minute or two he was on the scene administering first-aid. And --
Q And Mr. Whittington was conscious, unconscious, what?
THE VICE PRESIDENT: He was conscious --
Q What did you say?
THE VICE PRESIDENT: Well, I said, "Harry, I had no idea you were there." And --
Q What did he say?
THE VICE PRESIDENT: He didn't respond. ...

Salon reported that O'Reilly had the interview but it's Brit Hume doing the questioning.

"The truth is, this is much ado about not really much. The VP might be able to dispel this a little bit if he came out and said something, but there's no other reason for him to do so, but he may anyway."

"Changing the tone in Washington has been the goal, for example, of this president since he was first elected. It has not changed, its worsened. One might have thought that the sense of national unity that occurred after the September 11th attacks would have lasted a while. It didn't. It lasted about a year, and now the partisan atmosphere is more fierce than ever and the acrimony between the body politic nation-wide is the worst I've ever seen."

Brit Hume, FAUX NEWS, 2/14/06

So we have four people with close ties to Bush, Rove, and the Republican party, none of which were interviewed by competent law enforcement officials at the scene.

It never sounded like it was any more than an accident with maybe some civil liability. The issue is, we'll never know if it would rise to the level of criminal negligence.

When Gary Condit appeared on Connie Chung to explain the circumstances surrounding Chandry Levy's disappearance, I thought: "If this is how he acts when he's innocent, I'd love to see how he acts when he's guilty."

The shooting of an old man by the Vice President has been handled like a cover-up; even if there's nothing to cover-up.

Starr --- Worst Person in the World

2006-02-14T22:00:00.000-08:00

On Countdown, Kieth Olberman named Ken Starr "Worst Person in the World" for his filing of the forged documents.

Hopefully, Crooks and Liars will put up a video link.

FAUX and Friends Ignores Starr Forgery Flap

2006-02-14T13:22:00.000-08:00

When I read that Ken Starr to represent Death Row Inmate, I was confident that this would be ignored by FAUX NEWS (or WSJ, Washington Times, Radio Factor, Limbaugh, Shuanitty.)

Former Whitewater independent counsel Starr released a statement through the American Civil Liberties Union that he would help draft the clemency petition.

Starr, who is currently the dean at Pepperdine University law school, will urge Schwarzenegger, who has never granted clemency, to commute Morales' term to life without parole. because Morales has taken responsibility for the murder, expressed remorse, and tried to atone for his crime while on death row.

Starr, author of a tale too lurid to read out loud on public airwaves, was set to represent death row inmate, Michael Morales, who is to be executed on February 21st. This on the heels of his successful representation of another death row inmate..

Would FAUX and Friends "savage" Starr, darling of the right, for trying to save a vicious murderer?

I thought not and I was right. Not a peep has been uttered or written.

Why? Some might claim that it's not a national story. After all it's a California issue. In California, it's important because after executing less than one person a year (with over 650 inmates on California death row.) But nationally?

The same could be said for Tookie Williams though. The introduction national names like Jessie Jackson brought the wolves out.

Now the Morales case has a national name, Ken Starr.

Despite the allegations that Morales' attorneys, as detailed yesterday by myself, submitted multiple forged and fabricated declarations, there has been no coverage by FAUX & Friends.

The print media has covered it well. Since last Friday almost every major paper has run the story written by the Associated Press. The LA Times, SF Chronicle, and Lodi Sentinel News are doing their own coverage.

Hannity and O'Reilly are on the air four hours a day. You think they could spend 10 minutes on the story?

Hannity is in San Francisco and mentions nothing. He seems busy being a couple's therapist for the past hour.

O'Reilly yesterday covered the asinine San Francisco impeachment resolution but nothing on Starr or Morales.

Look at The Drudge Report today. It's primarily a site that links other stories, so how hard would it be to link an Associated Press Story

Instead of linking the Starr/Morales Forgery story, Drudge decided today that these stories are more important:

George Lucas To Appear With House Democrats...
'Shock' at new James Bond plot...
Detectives got sex services as part of prostitution probe...
BATMAN TO TRACK DOWN BIN LADEN...

Drudge has never linked the Morales story in his site.

So far, the only conservative columnist I know who has written on this is Debra Saunders. But she's pro-death penalty and won't allow partisan politics to interfere with that position.

You have to respect that. It would be nice if FAUX & Friends wasn't so transparent in their lack of integrity.

Michael Morales' Clemency

2006-02-13T08:00:00.000-08:00

The Crime

In 1981 Michael Morales and his cousin, Ricky Ortega, lured 17 year old Terri Winchell to the grape fields of Lodi. Once at the vineyard and still in the car, Morales, in the backseat, wrapped a belt around Terri's neck while she sat in the front seat. Morales pulled so hard on her neck that the belt broke.

When he failed to strangle her, he grabbed a hammer he had brought for this event, and hit her in the head twenty-three times. That didn't kill her so he dragged her out of the car and across the road. Her head wound left a long trail of blood in the road. Once in the vineyards, Morales raped Terri. After he was finished, he stabbed her in the chest four times and left her, naked in the dirt.

Victim Services Packet

The Trial

Because of the pretrial publicity, the defense got the judge to move the case from San Joaquin County to Ventura County.

There was a mountain of evidence. The bloody hammer was found in the refrigerator crisper. A kitchen knife with a broken tip was also found. A broken belt was found hidden beneath a mattress. In another room, police found Winchell's purse. The car had Terri's blood all over it.

Morales confessed to his girlfriend and his housemate, Patty Felix. On the stand, Morales admitted to the murder but claimed it was comitted in a drug induced fog.

In addition, a jail house informant, Bruce Samuelson, made a deal in his own case and testified to a confession Morales made to him. The testimony added nothing other than Morales's comment as he walked away from Terri's body, "You fucking bitch."

Opposition to Clemency (pdf) (page 9.)

In 1983, the jury voted to convict Morales of murder with the special circumstances of rape and lying-in-wait and recommended he be sentenced to death. A separate jury convicted Ricky Ortega and he received life without the possibility of parole.

The Appeals

Three execution dates have been set since Morales was sentenced to death. Morales has exhausted his appeals arguing a number of issues before state and federal courts, including the validity of the Bruce Samuelson testimony.

All appeals have been denied.

A last ditch appeal is before the federal court challenging the method of execution. San Jose Mercury News

The Clemecy

According to press reports, Kenneth Starr joined the Morales defense team on January 26th, 2006. David Senior has been Morales' main appellate attorney since 1992. San Francsico Chronicle, 1/27/06

On the 27th, the Morales defense team filed a "Petition for Executive Clemency".

In it they argued that (1) Morales was remorseful and; (2) his penalty trial was tainted by Samuelson's false testimony.

Among the exhibits they filed, they included a Declaration for Morales' roommate, Patty Felix, recanting her entire trial testimony. (Defense Exhibit 30.) Despite the fact that she accused the police and district attorney of threatening her with jail unless she testified to certain facts, the defense never argued this in the body of their "Petition for Executive Clemency".

On February 6th, the District Attorney filed their Opposition to Clemency

Contained in the People's Opposition was a Declaration Patty Felix prepared by the prosecution. In it, she claims that Defense Exhibit 30 is a fake and forgery. This interview was taped recorded and transcribed, both were submitted to the Governor. San Francisco Chronicle, 2/8/06

The Defense denies this claim.

"The declaration they provide from Patricia Felix is further evidence that they go out and muscle witnesses under oath," [Ben] Weston [a Morales attorney] said. "We have a plethora of witnesses and documents and records to establish that (Felix) did talk to us and did give us a declaration." Lodi Sentinel News, 2/7/06

The Reply

On February 7th, Defense filed their Reply to Opposition to Petition for Executive Clemency. (Reply) In it, they once again repeat the same attack on the testimony of Bruce Sameulson.

Forged Declaration of Witness Patricia Felix

In addition, the Reply argues that the Felix Declaration they submitted was genuine and submitted a Declaration from the defense investigator Kathleen Culhane, who interviewed Ms. Felix (Exhibit 56).

On February 10th, the District Attorney submitted another Declaration from Ms. Felix (2/9/06, page 15) where she stood by her claim that she had never met Kathleen Culhane, never signed a declaration for the defense. She stands by her trial testimony. This interview was also taped and transcribed. DA Press Release, 2/10/06

The defense has provided no similar taped interview.

Forged Juror Declarations

Also included in the Reply submitted by Starr and Senior are six juror declarations. Five of the declaration were witnessed by defense investigator Kathleen Culhane. In these five declarations, all say that 1) Samuelson was key in their decision for death and 2) they support Morales' bid for clemency.

In reading the Juror Declarations submitted by the People on February 10th, it's clear that declarations submitted by Starr and Senior are forged.

Juror Number 1 was on John and Ken Show the afternoon of February 9th. She was on the show to voice her opposition for Morales' clemency. She said that she stood by her verdict and that the jail house informant was barely considered in the decision for death.

Also on the show was Ben Weston, a Morales' attorney. He read a juror declaration to contest Juror #1's recollection of the jury deliberations; that declaration turns out to be forged.

It was only after the show, that Juror #1 found out she was supposed to be one of the jurors who submitted a declaration for clemency.

Juror Number 2 was interviewed by phone. He hasn't lived in California for twenty years. The Defense declaration misspelled his name.

Juror Number 3 called the District Attorney's office after she read newspaper accounts of the other jurors request for clemency. It appears that this juror is the one that clued the D.A. into the fact that the declarations are forgeries. Her name on the defense declaration is also incorrect.

Juror Number 4's name on the defense declaration is also incorrect. She hasn't used that name for 15 years and it's still misspelled.

Juror Number 6's name on the defense declaration is also incorrect.

All five jurors state that they never met defense investigator Kathleen Culhane, that they never gave a declaration for the defense, and that they support the execution of Mr. Morales.

Also, they deny that Samuelson's testimony was "key"; a claim advanced by the defense because it supports their legal argument.

The only legitimate declaration was witnessed by someone other than Kathleen Culhane and merely states she supports the decision of the Governor no matter what it is.

D.A. Press Release

Another Appeal

On February 10th, Mr. Starr and Mr. Senior filed a third
Writ of Habeas Corpus. (The first two were denied in 1992 and 1993)

In it, they reiterate the already litigated claim of Samuelson's testimony. In addition, they argue that the police and district attorney in coerced Patricia Felix to testify falsely during the trials of Mr. Morales (and by extension, Mr. Ortega.) They also accuse the prosecutors of now coercing Ms. Felix during the two separate interviews where she stood by her trial testimony and her insistence that the Defense Declaration is a fabrication.

The Writ of Habeas Corpus was filed before Starr and Senior learned of the discovery of forged juror documents. Now that Kathleen Culhane's credibilty is in issue, Starr and Senior, despite their accusations of prosecutorial misconduct of witness intimidation, have withdrawn all declarations involving Culhane including the five forged juror declarations.

"In a letter to Attorney General Bill Lockyer, attorney David Senior said he and Starr were “withdrawing any and all reliance on any exhibits generated” by one of their investigators.

Another statement purportedly taken from Morales' former Stockton roommate [Patrica Felix] and submitted to the California Supreme Court, requires “further investigation,” Senior wrote.

“The disparity between the signatures on those declarations and the declarations presented to us by our investigator raises substantial issues that we are continuing to investigate,” Senior wrote the governor.

Associated Press, 2/13/06

Who is Responsible for the Forgies?

It appears that Kathleen Culhane, who submitted her own declaration about the false Felix declaration, is the most likely suspect.

Ben Weston, a Morales attorney and vocal with the press, also appears to have some responsibility. Why didn't he say something when he was on the show with a juror who was contradicting a declaration that he had in his possession? He read one declaration on the air so he must have had access to them?

"Ben Weston, one of Morales’ attorneys, said the defense team spoke to nine of the 10 living jurors. Three refused to be interviewed, he said, and another could not be located." Associated Press, 2/8/06

Whether Ken Starr or David Senior knew anything about the forgeries is not known. Nevertheless, they bear some responsibility.

"Deputy District Attorney Robert Himelblau said Starr and Senior, the lawyers who prepared the clemency papers, may not have known of the alleged fabrications but were responsible for the documents they filed.

"The buck stops here,'' Himelblau said. After accusing the prosecutors of dishonesty in the exchange over Felix, he said, the lawyers now "owe an explanation to the district attorney's office, to the governor, to the jurors who (they) lied about, to the witnesses who (they) lied about, and finally to the people.''" San Francisco Chronicle, 2/11/06

NSA Domestic Spying Program

2006-02-12T12:20:00.000-08:00

Regardless where you stand on warrantless electronic eavesdropping by Government intelligence agencies, such wiretapping of citizens is illegal. Necessary or not, it's unconstitutional.

The current legal argument put forth by the White House and AG Gonzales for warrantless domestic wiretaps and dispensing with FISA/FISC has been 1) his authority as commander in chief (The Imperial Presidency) and 2) that Congress implicitly gave him that power when it authorized the use of force (AUMF) against those who attacked the United States on 9/11; a statement without any legal or principled authority.

The argument that the President has plenary powers as the President was an oft cited claim under Nixon. A claim that has been rejected in a variety of different ways in different cases.

Article II of the US Constitution states in relevant part: Section 1. The executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. Section 2. The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States. (It is also where the power to impeach the president lies.)

An Imperial Presidency argument will not fly legally under either Youngstown (Truman’s seizure of steel mills) or Hamdi (unanimous requirement of due process for enemy combatants.)

At issue here is the Separation of Powers: Presidential Authority vs Congressional Law. Youngstown Co. v. Sawyer, 343 US 937 (1952), the controlling case in this issue, requires the President to act within Congressional and Constitutional parameters.

Later, in a case closer to the issue at hand, the Court in US v. US District Court (Keith) 407 U.S. 297 (1972), unanimously held that the President could not circumvent the 4th Amendment's warrant clause in domestic national security surveillance.

Still, more recently the Court has held that, "We have long since made clear that a state of war is not a blank check for the President when it comes to the rights of the Nation’s citizens. Youngstown Sheet & Tube, 343 U.S., at 587. Whatever power the United States Constitution envisions for the Executive in its exchanges with other nations or with enemy organizations in times of conflict, it most assuredly envisions a role for all three branches when individual liberties are at stake. (Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 542 U.S. 507 (2004)

Under current US Constitutional law, the President does not have the inherent power to violate the Bill of Rights.

The second justification is the one being sold by AG Alberto Gonzales; that the AUMF gave the President implicit powers to ignore FISA.

There are two problems with this justification. First, FISA does not do away with the 4th Amendment but rather incorporates it into it's language.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

FISA set up a special court (FISC) to review warrants for national security purposes. This method has worked well for close to thirty years.

Despite the claims made by this Administration, Congress can not simply overwrite the 4th Amendment either by statute or by resolution. (And please don't cite United States v. Truong Dinh Hung, 629 F.2d 908 (4th Cir. 1980), a pre-FISA ruling rejected in FISC 02-001.)

But Congress did no such thing. The Administration claims that the language in the AUMF allows the President to do anything and everything necessary, including ignoring the Constitution: "That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001."

This reminds me of the scene in the Untouchables where Ness (Cosner) can't arrest Frank Nitti for carrying a gun in court because Nitti has a note from the Chicago mayor: Please afford all due consideration for Mr. Nitti.

The law clearly states that the criminal wiretap statute and FISA are “the exclusive means by which electronic surveillance . . . and the interception of domestic wire, oral, and electronic communications may be conducted.” If these authorities are exclusive, there is no other legal authority that can authorize warrantless surveillance.

Courts generally will not view such a clear statutory statement as having been overruled by a later congressional action unless there is an equally clear indication that Congress intended to do that.

This justification is a fiction.

The second problem is that the Administration just invented it. Last spring, Gonzales didn't use that justification:

“Can the CIA spy on the American—” Sen. Barbara A. Mikulski (D-Md.) tried again.

“No,” answered Attorney General Gonzales, only to be amended later by FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III. “Surveillance of American citizens for national security matters is in the hands, generally, of the FBI,” Mueller told Mikulski and members of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. “The investigation or development of intelligence overseas is in the hands of the CIA and NSA [National Security Agency]. And generally, I would say generally, they are not allowed to spy or to gather information on American citizens. But there are limited exceptions to that.” Washington Post April 28, 2005

The White House knew FISA didn't authorize warrantless wiretapping otherwise why would Gonzales admit that the White House had considered asking Congress to pass new legislation that would explicitly permit those activities and that the Administration had abandoned the idea of new legislation because getting a bill through (a Republican) Congress “would be difficult if not impossible.”

"He claims he can ignore the law because Congress granted permission when it authorized him to use force against Al Qaeda. But we know that can’t be true. Atty. Gen. Alberto Gonzales says the administration didn't ask for a revision of the law to give the president explicit power to order such wiretaps because Congress—a Republican Congress, mind you—wouldn't have agreed. So the administration decided: Who needs Congress?" Chicago Tribune

This justification has been recently undermined further with the news of the proposed legislation a few years ago by Sen. Mike DeWine to ease FISA requirements and its subsequent rejection by this Administration.

“We have been aggressive in seeking FISA warrants, and thanks to Congress’ passage of the [Patriot Act] we have been able to use our expanded FISA tools more effectively to combat terrorist activities. It may not be the case that the probable cause standard has caused any difficulties in our ability to seek FISA warrants we require.”
James A. Baker, the Justice Department’s counsel for intelligence policy, July 2002.

Without justifying “exigent circumstances” or it’s progeny on each case of wire-tapping of an American citizen, then it’s a violation of the 4th Amendment. The term now being employed, “hot pursuit”, is a literal term and not a metaphor.

Bush and his administration has always known that they needed to get a warrant.

“Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires—a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we’re talking about chasing down terrorists, we’re talking about getting a court order before we do so. It’s important for our fellow citizens to understand, when you think ‘Patriot Act,’ constitutional guarantees are in place when it comes to doing what is necessary to protect our homeland, because we value the Constitution.” George W. Bush, April 20th, 2004

Don't let then tell you otherwise.

The Fourth Amendment was placed in our Constitution to protect the innocent, not the guilty. That's why it so simple to get a warrant; all the request has to be is reasonable and supported by probable cause.

The argument that spying shouldn't matter to those who have nothing to hide ignores the past.

Pick your point in history: Christ's crucifixion, The Spanish Inquisition, The Salem Witch Trials, Robespierre and the Reign of Terror, McCarthy's Red Scare & HUAC, Nixon's Enemies List. During these periods (and others) all "innocents" had something to fear.