Taylor Shows

about one of our long time bloggers. Reefer Jello has taken a job with a film production company in Los Angeles as an audio editor. He is heading out there today and starts work Monday. We had a little going away shebang out on the farm yesterday. RJ said to tell Sunshine Jim and Toni so long. He hopes to report in here again after he's settled out in SoCal.

The Battle Between Good And Evil

Today we can expect "I don't recall" AND "Executive privilege"

Standard Plausible Deniability answers

1. I don't recall

2. I don't believe I did

3. In my view

4. bla bla bla

I've already seen this one slip up a little and say no and then correct with "I don't recall"

She's an idiot and I love her questions to her lawyer "Is that a fact-based question?" Ha ha! That one's going to be spread around good!

I don't know RJ, but *raising my glass*

Best wishes in L.A.!

Hadley goes to Capitol Hill. “Stephen Hadley was to visit Capitol Hill on Wednesday - one of many such forays in recent days — as the White House finalized a 23-page progress report on Iraq that concludes the government in Baghdad has made little progress in meeting reform goals laid down by Bush and Congress.” Robert Novak noted that last week, Hadley’s visits “failed” to “extinguish fires set by Sen. Richard Lugar’s unexpected break from President Bush’s Iraq policy.”

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19705236/

you all to never forget May 4th, 1970.

Four Kent State students died as a result of the firing by the Guard. The closest student was Jeffrey Miller, who was shot in the mouth while standing in an access road leading into the Prentice Hall parking lot, a distance of approximately 270 feet from the Guard. Allison Krause was in the Prentice Hall parking lot; she was 330 feet from the Guardsmen and was shot in the left side of her body. William Schroeder was 390 feet from the Guard in the Prentice Hall parking lot when he was shot in the left side of his back. Sandra Scheuer was also about 390 feet from the Guard in the Prentice Hall parking lot when a bullet pierced the left front side of her neck.

Engagement. I had to take Personal Time Off to watch instead of listen.

If anyone wants to provide input for what to YouTube.

Taylor's body language, tone and arrogance. Being Rove's imp is not without its side effects.

For Reefer, Peter.

I bet he's excited about it. Get his mind off Kent state and the depression every year.

Good for him!

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Larry Flynt's Hustler magazine claimed credit for exposing Sen. David Vitter's connection to the "D.C. Madam" Tuesday, saying Vitter confessed after a journalist reported finding the senator's number in the escort service's phone records.

Sen. David Vitter apologized after his telephone number appeared among those linked to an escort service.

"Larry Flynt's ongoing investigation into the dirty secrets of prominent elected officials has exposed another hypocrite," Hustler said.

Vitter, R-Louisiana, admitted Monday that his telephone number turned up in the phone records of an escort service run by Deborah Jeane Palfrey, though he did not say he had sex with a prostitute. The records date from before he won his Senate seat in 2004.

"This was a very serious sin in my past for which I am, of course, completely responsible," Vitter said in a statement given to reporters Monday night. "Several years ago, I asked for and received forgiveness from God and from my wife in confession and marriage counseling."

Vitter, 46, represented New Orleans suburbs in the House of Representatives from 1999 to 2004, when he ran for the Senate. He is married and has four children. Watch what some in Vitter's state say about the admission »

Vitter was one of the top backers of a failed constitutional amendment that would have banned same-sex marriage and serves as the Southern regional chairman of former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani's presidential campaign. In his Monday statement, he offered his "deep and sincere apologies to all I have disappointed and let down in any way."

Palfrey was indicted in March on charges of money laundering and racketeering stemming from her business, Pamela Martin & Associates, which prosecutors allege was involved in prostitution. Palfrey has denied the charges, saying she operated a legitimate escort service.

In an effort to raise money for her legal defense, Palfrey tried to sell a telephone list containing names of more than 10,000 clients. A judge blocked her from selling the information, but she provided some of the documents to media outlets.

Dan Moldea, an investigative journalist working with Palfrey on a book, told CNN that he discovered Vitter's number in Palfrey's phone records and passed the information to Flynt.

"I had no idea who he was prior to then, although I'm sure he was a client and he's stated accordingly, but I don't remember this man," Palfrey said.

Hustler said an editor at the magazine called Vitter's office for a response Monday evening, spurring Vitter to issue his statement to The Associated Press.

Paul Colford, a spokesman for the wire service, said Vitter's statement "came into the AP's New Orleans bureau without prior contact from the AP."

Flynt took out a full-page ad in The Washington Post in June to offer $1 million for "documented evidence of illicit sexual or intimate relations with a congressman or senator."

Flynt launched a similar campaign in 1998 in an effort to counter the drive to impeach then-President Bill Clinton over allegations that he had lied about his relationship with former White House intern Monica Lewinsky. Moldea worked with Flynt in that effort as well.

Moldea told CNN that he is a paid consultant for Flynt and Hustler and is not eligible for the $1 million prize.

Hustler's search led to the resignation of House Speaker-designate Robert Livingston -- whose congressional seat Vitter won the next year.

"Flynt's team is currently continuing its investigation into improprieties by other high-ranking elected officials," Hustler announced.

Another former madam on Tuesday said Vitter had also used her service.

"David Vitter has visited with my girls, and he has to be one of the nicest men and most honorable men I have ever met," Jeanette Maier, known as the Canal Street madam of New Orleans, told CNN affiliate WDSU.

Maier's business, the Canal Street Brothel, was shut down by federal indictments in 2002 and Maier took a plea deal.

Maier's attorney, Vinnie Mosca, told WDSU that he has "absolutely no recollection of David Vitter's name ever appearing on any document, book, or list, or having any association with the Canal Street Brothel or Jeanette."

Mosca also told WDSU that "Miss Maier misspoke," but later told CNN that he was referring to a claim that Vitter's name appears in Maier's "black book."

Vitter is the first lawmaker known to be linked to Palfrey's business, though State Department official Randall Tobias -- who promoted abstinence education as head of the Bush administration's effort to curb the spread of AIDS -- resigned in May after confirming he patronized Palfrey's business.

You are right about that. He is going to busy out there just
trying to drive around! LOL!

I got back from there two weeks ago and I was relieved to get home. Too much gridlock in L.A. I don't know how those
folks can stand it but they all love it out there. My kids
love it and would never come back to Ohio.

But....that place ain't for me. I'll pass along what you said to the old fart when he calls me.

Petraeus Adviser: ‘Middle-Ground Options’ In Iraq Debate Are ‘Neither Safe Nor Productive’
In recent weeks, conservatives have begun distancing themselves from Bush’s failing policy in Iraq. Many of them — senators such as Richard Lugar, Pete Domenici, Lamar Alexander, and Elizabeth Dole — are finding political comfort in embracing the Iraq Study Group’s call to “change the mission” of U.S. troops in Iraq. Even the White House is considering support for the plan.

Speaking in favor of the ISG recommendations, co-chairman Lee Hamilton told NPR:

[O]ne of its merits surely was that it was bipartisan, and so far as I know, it’s the only bipartisan proposal out there. And I think it still does have a reasonable chance of bringing about a unity of effort which is required for the success of our policy in Iraq.

Stephen Biddle, a senior defense policy analyst at the Council on Foreign Relations, cautions against adopting “a politically moderate ‘Plan B’ that would split the difference between surge and withdrawal.” Biddle, an adviser to Gen. Petraeus who has cautioned that escalation is “likelier to fail than succeed,” says the Iraq debate should put aside “popular centrist options” embodied in the Iraq Study Group recommendations.

Biddle writes that the ISG’s call to “shift the mission” of U.S. troops while maintaining an occupation of Iraq would cause even greater problems. “Without a major U.S. combat effort to keep the violence down, the American training effort would face challenges even bigger than those our troops are confronting today. … It is unrealistic to expect that we can pull back to some safe yet productive mission of training but not fighting — this would be neither safe nor productive.” he writes. Biddle continues:

If the surge is unacceptable, the better option is to cut our losses and withdraw altogether. In fact, the substantive case for either extreme — surge or outright withdrawal — is stronger than for any policy between. The surge is a long-shot gamble. But middle-ground options leave us with the worst of both worlds: continuing casualties but even less chance of stability in exchange.

Moderation and centrism are normally the right instincts in American politics, and many lawmakers in both parties desperately want to find a workable middle ground on Iraq. But while the politics are right, the military logic is not.

Biddle is right — the Iraq debate must focus on what to do about the current U.S. occupation of Iraq. The question is whether to reinforce the escalation or begin the full redeployment out of Iraq. “Centrist” options do not provide a solution, but rather political cover to maintain the status quo.

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/07/11/biddle-no-middle-ground/

Sen. Snowe to co-sponsor Iraq withdrawal bill. According to CNN, Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME) has officially signed on as a co-sponsor to legislation withdrawing troops from Iraq by April 30, 2008. CNN’s Dana Bash reports:

Now this is significant because it makes it now just Olympia Snowe, but Sen. Gordon Smith of Oregon, two Republicans who are now going to vote with the Democrats on this. It is significant in terms of the symbolism of it, in terms of the fact it is indicative of what we have been seeing, the growing opposition to the President and to his war strategy. Prior there have been many, many votes on Iraq, many votes on the Democrats’ plans to bring troops home, but Republicans simply haven’t voted that way. … Olympia Snowe is saying she will.

Video here:

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/07/11/sen-snowe-to-support-iraq-withdrawal...

sara doing non stop weaseling.

Was on various maintenance plans it seems.

David Vitter, R-Louisiana, has allegedly used the services of a well known DC Madam in New Orleans, reports CNN. Jeanette Maier, known as the Canal Street madam of New Orleans. She says she knew Vitter to be one of the "nicest and most honorable men that I ever met." RAW

to answer what her name is. And what's up with that hair?

like she hasn't slept in a couple of months.

and looks down a lot. That tells me she's hiding facts.

look up when she said her opinion was nobody did anything wrong.

She can't lie with a straight face.

She is using the I don't recall answer.

She's getting Haughty now.

How can she admire Bush.

Sara:

i'm ignorant

i can't remember

"W" is a great man and would'nt do anything wrong.

so is Karl Rove.

if i tell you anything you can use they'll turn me into a grease spot.

i'm JUST a poor working stiff,

JUST a cog in the machine like EVERYBODY else.

Today's Must Read
Richard Carmona, the very angry former Surgeon General, testified before a House committee yesterday. Marvel at the Bush administration's ability to thoroughly politicize a largely symbolic position.

--Paul Kiel

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/003647.php

Busy Guy
You say you got paid to have sex with Sen. Vitter (R-LA)? Well, lady, get in line ... (just out from the Times-Picayune)

U.S. Senator David Vitter visited a Canal Street brothel several times beginning in the mid-1990s, paying $300 per hour for services at the bordello after he met the madam at a fishing rodeo that included prostitutes and other politicians, according to Jeanette Maier, the "Canal Street Madam" whose operation was shut down by a federal investigators in 2001.
Late Update: Ahhh yet more fun. David Corn digs up a 1998 column Vitter wrote insisting that Clinton's moral depravity was an impeachable offense.

Pretty Friggin' Late Update: Quite apart from the prostitution, several TPM Readers note, even more disturbing is the question: what's a fish rodeo?

Yep, Even Later Update: "He seemed to be one of the nicest men and most honorable men I've ever met." Character reference from Jeanette Maier, former New Orleans brothel owner, on her alleged former client, Sen. Vitter.

--Josh Marshall

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/015233.php

voting on limiting debate on Webb's amendment implements a scheduled time between deployments for members of the armed forces.

He Wants his Parade
According to Secretary Chertoff, we're entering a new period of lurking terrorist danger this summer. In other words, a period of danger similar to every other summer since 2001 and like most periods of low popularity for the president and before elections as well. But perhaps it is a period of increased danger. It really well might be. We've known for some time a mix of sagging tide of the war in Afghanistan and the mounting impotence of the Musharraf regime in Pakistan has allowed jihadist groups a relative safe-haven in the lawless Pakistani borderlands like they have not had since prior to 9/11. And if they can train they can act.

It all brings into a rather fierce relief the question of what the hell we are doing in Iraq, a conflict that has made the war we are fighting against jihadism vastly more intractable and dangerous. We can't leave Iraq apparently because al Qaeda will be emboldened and will do much better at fundraising -- a revealing perspective on the part of the White House. But al Qaeda is vastly emboldened in as much as they are actively regrouping in the Afghan-Pakistani border, where all the trouble came from the in the first place. And groups all over the Middle East, who have little if any actual connection to al Qaeda, are adopting the name al Qaeda in vicarious support or sympathy or, perhaps mostly and most damningly, because we've managed to make it a strong brand.

And here we are, again, with the president introducing yet another new new direction in Iraq. Yes, the stakes of 'defeat' in Iraq are very high. And that's why so many people are so upset with this president because the whole thing is quite obviously a disaster and we are going to pay a very big price for it on many levels. And it's his fault. But let's not pretend that these are grave hypotheticals off in the future. They're here. It's a disaster. And we have to deal with it. Not pretend.

People ask what we're doing in Iraq. And you can answer in a hundred ways and in a thousand shades of literalism to metaphor. But at some level we're in Iraq because President Bush wanted a parade. It's not hard to imagine how he must have imagined it. A withdrawal of most American troops from a staunchly allied pro-American Iraq. Waving flags. Heartfelt thanks and vindication for the president who had the guts and character to see it through.

And that's why we stay. Because somehow if he just keeps at it someday he might get his parade. Or rather if he just keeps us there forever he doesn't have to really deal wtih what a disaster he's created and fundamentally what a failure he is.

He wants the parade.

--Josh Marshall

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/015231.php

Waaa can't we move on? I already told you my opinion. Waaaaa! Senator Leahy is doing right looking at her like someone else's spoiled child. I say they follow his lead.

Usually when kids act like that their petulence will usually unearth some fabrication or wrongdoing. Either way, her ridiculous comments are going to further erode the credibility of the WH. I still can't get over her asking "Is that a fact-based question?" I hope she keeps saying that. Nothing shows the WH's contempt more than refusing to answer "fact-based questions, " and relegating themselves to answering only "opinion-based questions."

I like that even better than "perjury-trap!"

Taylor Used Off-The-Record Email to Be "Efficient"
By Paul Kiel - July 11, 2007, 11:20 AM
Karl Rove and his aides at the White House have regularly used email accounts provided by the Republican National Committee to send and receive emails that should have been sent and received on the official White House system under the Presidential Records Act. When Sen. Leahy asked Taylor about this, she said that the email system had been created in order to avoid violations of the Hatch Act, which prohibits the use of government resources for political means.

That's true, of course, except that Rove and his aides seem to have used the RNC emails for just about everything, regardless of whether it was a political matter. When Leahy pressed Taylor as to why she'd emailed Justice Department aide Kyle Sampson about the replacement of U.S. attorneys using her RNC account, Taylor answered that she'd done it as "someone trying to be efficient with their time." If so, Rove's shop must have been very efficient.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Our Quarrel is Not with You"
By Paul Kiel - July 11, 2007, 10:28 AM
That's from Sen. Chuck Schumer's (D-NY) opening statement at the hearing, as he made a point of saying that the Senate Judiciary Committee's fight is not with Sara Taylor, but "with the White House," which, he said, had issued a "gag order" in the form of an assertion of executive privilege.

Ranking Member Arlen Specter (R-PA) said that he hoped that the committee would not seek to cite Taylor with contempt for refusing to answer questions that the president claimed was protected by privilege.

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/003651.php

56-41

So the 41 are supporting the troops?

So the 41 are supporting the troops?

»
I was being facetious!

Scooter Libby Commutation Hearing Begins at Noon ET
By Jeralyn, Section Lewis Libby Trial Coverage
Posted on Wed Jul 11, 2007 at 10:34:32 AM EST

The House Judiciary Committee's hearing on the use and abuse of presidential dlemency authority for executive branch officials, to include the Scooter Libby sentence commutation, begins at 12:00 pm ET.

You can watch the live webcast here.

I've already expressed my opinion on the witness list, and how I don't think it will shed any light on Bush's motives in granting the commutation.

I think it is worthwhile to listen to the testimony of Joe Wilson and law professor Doug Berman.

Unless the President waives executive privilege on the Libby commutation as Rep. Conyers asked him to do in this letter (pdf), and as President Clinton did in similar hearings into his exercise of clemency, I don't think we get very far today.

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2007/7/11/113432/699

"So the 41 are supporting the troops?"

Both Coleman and Snowe crossed over and voted with the Democrats, Obama and Hillary showed up, Lie-berman with the thugs, so, no, Webb was 4 votes short of the 60 he needed. The 41 republicans (assuming) voted against allowing the troops adequate time off before redeployment.

Warner and Hagel voted with the Dems too. That means some Dems voted against.

What Atrios Said
By Big Tent Democrat, Section Media
Posted on Wed Jul 11, 2007 at 12:20:59 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
I was watching the Larry King thing with Moore/Gupta and Atrios' reaction is my own:

I haven't gone into the full details, but from what I could tell from the Larry King joint appearance tonight what happened was fairly typical. Basically, to "fact check" Moore, the kind of scrutiny which rarely happens to, say, hacks from AEI or the Preznit of Amurka, Gupta pulled up some nitpickery alternative numbers. One could determine whether Gupta's chosen numbers were more or less correct than Moore's, but nothing supported the idea that Moore "fudged the facts" as was claimed. . . . [w]hat is clear is that "fact checking Moore" means one can throw up something, anything, and use it to cast doubt on his integrity. I welcome fact-checking. I just wish CNN would subject more of their guests to it.
In the spirit of fact checking, I would point to pieces of shoddy factual work by Gupta that I am personally familiar with. One was his fact-checking a few months ago of Bush's claim on stem cell research where Gupta was not willing to call out the flat out falsehoods of the bush Administration on this. Would that he held the President of the United States to the same standards as he appears to want to hold Michael Moore.

But the other was tonight.

More here:

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2007/7/11/12059/3252

A great big cover-up from the White House!

toniD. The question is how does it get broken open.

They need to investigate the criminal activity of Caging and remove executive privilege.

I've been looking, but I didn't see that that happened. Maybe some no-shows

Webb Measure Goes Down -- But Six GOP Senators Defect

Olbermann should be able to sink his teeth into this and hopefully Webb will be all over the media with this to ge them to continue what Reid said in his opening statement.

"But to block this amendment, to not even give it an up or down vote, shows that some of my Republican colleagues would rather protect the president than protect the troops."

Republicans are filibustering Webb's bill that actually supports the troops
by Joe Sudbay (DC) · 7/11/2007 10:49:00 AM ET

Republicans DO NOT support the troops. If you need more proof, read Jim Webb's statement about today's Republican filibuster of his troop readiness bill. The vote will occur today at around 11:30 a.m. We're posting Senator Webb's full statement because people need to understand that the GOP Senators -- and Lieberman -- are FILIBUSTERING a bill that actually does support the troops:

“Today the Republicans decided to filibuster an amendment that goes straight to the well-being of our troops. I deeply regret this move, which makes it necessary for the amendment to be passed with a minimum of 60 votes instead of 51.

“I would remind my colleagues on the Republican side of the aisle that the American people are watching us closely today. They expect us to finally take the sort of positive action that might stabilize the operational environment in which our troops are being sent again and again.

“Americans are tired of the posturing that is giving Congress such a bad reputation. They are tired of the procedural strategies designed to protect politicians from accountability, and to protect this Administration from judgment. They are looking for concrete actions that will protect the well-being of our men and women in uniform.

“The question on this amendment is not whether you support this war or whether you do not. It is not whether you want to wait until July or September to see where one particular set of benchmarks or summaries might be taking us. The question is this: more than four years into ground operations in Iraq, we owe stability, and a reasonable cycle of deployment, to the men and women who are carrying our nation’s burden. That is the question. And that is the purpose of this amendment.”

http://www.americablog.com/2007/07/republicans-are-filibustering-webbs.h...

Among those joining Senate Democrats in supporting the Webb measure, were Republicans Norm Coleman, Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, John Sununu, Chuck Hagel, Gordon Smith and John Warner -- all but Snowe are up for reelection next year.

http://bobgeiger.blogspot.com/2007/07/republicans-kill-webbs-troop-prote...

Guest: TJ www.orblogs.com/blog/1186 Topic: TJ is filling us in on how Senator Gordon Smith and Dick Cheney's caused the largest Salmon kill in Oregon and the Northwest in the history of United States - just to get Gordon Smith elected.

The power claimed by the President of the United States and other members of the executive branch to resist certain search warrants and other interventions by the legislative and judicial branches of government.

send emails, letters, or call all the Senators that voted against this amendment and tell them:

So your assertion that you are supporting the troops is only a talking point. Had you really supported the troops, you would have voted yea for Webb's amendment!

And that is one of the reasons why 2/3's of the country is against this war and that is why the poll numbers are so low for the congress!

Executive privilege - The trump card

do you mean $$$$

Claims for executive privilege are based upon the separation of powers set forth in the Constitution. As a separate but equal branch of government, it is argued, the executive can resist efforts by the legislative and judicial branches to encroach on its authority. Presidents have argued against releasing some documents to Congress and against forcing administration officials to testify about private discussions, contending that such disclosures could damage the executive branch's ability to function independently.

Homeland Security chair: 'What color code is Chertoff's gut?'

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Homeland_security_chair_responds_to_Cherto...

He said COVER UP!

GOP Sen. Gordon Smith calls war in Iraq 'insane'
David Edwards and Muriel Kane
Published: Tuesday July 10, 2007

Fox News, reporting Tuesday on the increasing number of Republicans in Congress criticizing the Iraq War, interviewed Senator Gordon Smith (R-OR), cosponsor of a resolution for withdrawal.

Smith is known for a speech last December in which he stated, "I, for one, am at the end of my rope when it comes to supporting a policy that has our soldiers patrolling the same streets in the same way, being blown up by the same bombs day after day. That is absurd. It may even be criminal."

Smith told Fox, "If I could do anything over, I would – in that speech I gave – I would replace the word 'criminal' with the word 'insane.'" He suggested that the "surge" might have had a chance of working four years ago, but said, "On my numerous visits to Iraq ... each time I go, the government seems more and more dysfunctional. And all we're doing is depending on them to step up and govern."

Smith went on to explain the legislation he is sponsoring, saying, "There's nothing in this amendment that says we withdraw from the war on terror." When Fox host Shepard Smith pressed him on whether there might be a civil war in Iraq that is indistinguishable from the war on terror, the senator denied both points. "It may become a full-blown civil war," he acknowledged, "but the point is, it's not ours, it's theirs. It's not something we can win. ... I'm just tired of American kids dying for that."

The following video is from Fox's Studio B, broadcast on July 10

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/GOP_Senator_Gordon_Smith_calls_Iraq_0710.h...

this is hands down the craziest circus show I've ever heard.

And over here, Sarah Taylor balancing on the high wire.

And in this ring, the Man Eating Tigers. Let's hope she doesn't fall in one of their mouths.

Woops, too late.

There is no such thing...

Read your constitution recently?

Executive privilege has no more legal standing than signing statements.

came from Specter?

So he knew they were going to push for it and he would have to fold huh?

Maybe Clinton Got Away with It?
By Paul Kiel - July 11, 2007, 12:35 PM
A couple revealing moments from the hearing:

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) asked Taylor whether any other administrations had fired 10% of the U.S. attorneys in the middle of a term. The answer is no. But Taylor wasn't sure -- maybe Clinton or Reagan had done it in a "more artful" way?

Later, Sen. Ben Cardin (D-MD) wanted to know whether Taylor had ever gotten specific complaints from Republicans around the country about certain U.S. attorneys. Taylor said she couldn't remember, because she'd gotten so many complaints about so many things. In fact, Taylor said, “I can’t remember what I had for breakfast last week.”

Video at link

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/003655.php

will be quite entertaining.

Taylor: Sorry for Calling Fired USA "Lazy"
By Paul Kiel - July 11, 2007, 12:22 PM
The former U.S. Attorney for Little Rock Bud Cummins was going to step down, and Karl Rove's former aide Timothy Griffin was just the logical one to replace him -- that's the story Sara Taylor told today, under questioning from Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA).

You can see her lay it out here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FEHNEVeBn4

It all sounds so harmless. But there's a number of problems with that. First, if Bud Cummins had long planned to step down, no one told him that. Taylor cited press accounts that Cummins was looking to retire as U.S. attorney, but Cummins had not informed his superiors at the Justice Department that he was leaving and had not requested to be replaced. And when Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee last February, he said that Cummins had fired in order to replace him with Griffin.

Taylor couldn't account for that discrepancy, only saying that everything would gone better (it was "awkwardly handled") if there had been "better communication."

But there's another problem with that, which Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) pointed out in her questioning.

Taylor had written in an email to Kyle Sampson after the firings that Cummins was "lazy," which was "why we got rid of him in the first place."

Taylor apologized to Feinstein for that "unnecessary comment" and said that she'd "heard that," but that it was not a fair comment.

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/003654.php

and keep hearing a creaky door.

Did Lindsey Graham walk in?

Per Jonathan Turley, this is a tenable argument in cases of criminal investigations. This should be a criminal investigation.

Taylor: "I Took An Oath to The President"
By Paul Kiel - July 11, 2007, 12:57 PM
"I took an oath the president, and I take that oath very seriously," Sara Taylor said in answer to a question early in the hearing.

And right after a break, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) asked her if she was sure about that. "Did you mean, perhaps, you took an oath to the Constitution?" Leahy asked. It was a telling exchange.

"I know that the president refers to the government being his government -- it's not," Leahy reminded her.

Executive Privilege, RNC Style
by emptywheel

The NYT reports that Sara Taylor will come before the SJC today and testify about some things.

Sara Taylor, the former White House political director, has agreed to answer some questions as a “willing and cooperative private citizen,” during testimony about the United States attorney firings last year when she appears before the Senate Judiciary Committee later today.

But, as a former presidential adviser, she will also honor the president’s invocation of executive privilege to keep quiet about “White House consideration, deliberations, or communications, whether internal or external, relating to the possible dismissal or appointment of United States attorneys,” according to a written copy of her opening statement provided by her lawyer’s office. Those parameters were set forth in a letter to Ms. Taylor’s attorney, W. Neil Eggleston, from the White House counsel, Fred F. Fielding.

Now, seeing as how the defining character of human beings is our ability to communicate, I don't see how, if Sara Taylor refuses to testify about "communications, whether internal or external," we're going to get much information. This news seems to support Kagro X's argument--that they're trying to muddy the waters about where contempt of Congress starts.

Though the power of the various subspecies of executive privilege to prevent witnesses -- especially former White House officials -- from testifying is highly questionable, it's worth noting that the speculation about whether or not they'll be held in contempt of Congress if they cite the privilege in refusing to answer certain questions (or even testify at all) has so far bypassed the question of what, exactly, constitutes contempt in the first place.

But we might not even have to answer that question directly -- if there really is an answer at all. Instead, ask yourself what happens if these witnesses and others similarly situated come to the committees with the intent of making them actually prove they were in contempt. Though contempt (for all its faults, at least under the statutory contempt process) is the obvious threat here, what if the witnesses simply show up, say words when they're asked questions, and then deny that they were talking gibberish?

And speaking of muddying the waters--based on a pretty muddy letter from the White House, the RNC says that Congress can't have its emails on the USA firings, either. I'll return to this letter later--but I think BushCO is layering unsupportable claim on top of unsupportable claim. But heck, since the Dems in Congress didn't try to knock the first false claims down, I'm not surprised the WH continues to get away with it.

I have a feeling it's going to be a frustrating day, all around.

http://thenexthurrah.typepad.com/the_next_hurrah/2007/07/executive-privi...

as opposed to Goodling's. 1.8.

She could have done better if she looked more like Valerie Plame.

Her performance was greatly helped because of the Fielding prop and her constant need to refer to council. I think that added much drama.

She was penalized, however, for using the informal use of "yeah" like some toothless inbred teen in front of Senator Leahy.

as opposed to the previously reported six

Webb Measure Goes Down -- But Seven GOP Senators Defect"

Chuck Hagel (co-sponsor)
Olympia Snowe
Susan Collins
Gordon Smith
John Sununu
John Warner
Norm Coleman

bourbon, urine and a dollar bill umbrella on ice

looks like she hasn't slept in a month.

does that come with a nice big helping of big pharma?

""yeah" like some toothless inbred teen in front of Senator Leahy."

--priceless, and unfortunately accurate.

when you swear an oath to W, do you think he makes you 'kiss it'?

President Bush makes little girls cry. Yesterday at his town hall event in Cleveland, Jessica Hackerd, a “13-year old blonde-headed girl,” asked Bush what his “next step with the immigration bill” will be. “Mr. Bush’s sarcastic reply — a wry ‘yeah, thanks’ — drew laughter from the crowd of 400. But the attention caused young Jessica…to immediately tear up. ‘No, it’s a great question. No, I appreciate that,’ Mr. Bush said, as he saw Jessica’s reaction.”

http://video1.washingtontimes.com/fishwrap/2007/07/a_question_for_presid...

whadda prick.

and those are his SUPPORTERS!

dan;

hella yep! how else do you forget to get up 2 pee?

also - Foley's new hot summer look.

when you swear an oath to W, do you think he makes you 'kiss it'?

Do you mind. I'm trying to stop smoking with Chantix, I'm already nauseous.

that's a drink for loonies...or wild animals on holiday

Echoing Gonzales, Taylor’s Testimony Rife With ‘I Don’t Know’ And ‘I Don’t Recall’
This morning, former White House political director Sara Taylor appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee to testify about her involvement in the firing of nine U.S. attorneys last year. Due to the President’s assertion of executive privilege, Taylor was blocked from speaking about internal White House deliberations over the firing, and could only “respond to other questions from senators that do not breach White House confidentiality.”

Yet even under these restrictions, Taylor repeatedly avoided answering questions by claiming a faulty memory.

When Sen. Herb Kohl (D-WI) asked Taylor if she and Rove ever had a conversation about whether to remove a Wisconsin U.S. attorney, she answered, “I don’t know.” When Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) asked what criteria was used to remove U.S. attorneys, she said, “I don’t know the answer to that.” When Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) asked her to “describe” a political briefing she “gave at the Environmental Protection Agency”, Taylor responded, “I don’t recall that briefing.”

ThinkProgress created a compilation of Taylor’s many “I don’t recall” moments. Watch it:

In her testimony, Taylor is demonstrating a memory worthy of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, who “uttered the phrase ‘I don’t recall’ and its variants (’I have no recollection,’ ‘I have no memory’) 64 times” while testifying before Congress about the attorney scandal. She has joined the long list of administration officials with supposedly faulty memories when called to testify about their actions in office.

In March, Gonzales’s former chief of staff, Kyle Sampson, said “I don’t remember” 122 times when asked about the scandal. When Government Services Administration chief Lurita Doan testified about possible illegal behavior under her watch, the only thing she could remember about her tenure was that “there were cookies on the table” at one of her meetings. DoJ official Bradley Schlozman nearly broke Gonzales’ “record of saying ‘I don’t recall.’”

Unfortunately, the spate of amnesia that has taken hold over Bush administration appointees has elicited more questions about the U.S. attorney scandal than it has resolved.

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/07/11/sara-taylor-cant-recall/

It's lovely.

Another stop smoking drug?

F'do;

high apologies and best wishes on your purge of the demon of freebased nicotine!

The way she said someting about allegiance to the man shows just how deep this shit runs, tho'.

http://dogsagainstromney.blogspot.com/

Seems to work. I don't have cravings. But it makes me want to hurl sometimes.

i don't wanna go there accidentally

make sure Zoe see's your link tonight Bibimimi. I know she was aghast when she heard of Romney the cager.

like any good addiction worth it's salt, the body revolts

Stephanie Miller mentioned that and the jaegerbombs this morning.

Give Zoe a big ScoobyDoo 'Hmmmph??!' 4 me

she likes that a lot.

What are the possible side effects of CHANTIX?
The most common side effects of CHANTIX include:

nausea
constipation
vomiting
changes in dreaming
gas
Tell your doctor about side effects that bother you or that do not go away. These are not all the side effects of CHANTIX. Ask your doctor or pharmacist for more information.

http://www.chantix.com/content/Chantix_Branded_Homepage.jsp?setShowOn=.....

Excursion Into Fantasy

The very serious Senator Lieberman.

COOPER: Michael, I want to play something that Senator Lieberman said about the war in Iraq. Let's -- let's listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JOSEPH LIEBERMAN (D), CONNECTICUT: The war is not lost in Iraq. In fact, now American Iraqi security forces are winning. The enemy is on the run in Iraq. But, here in -- in Congress, in Washington, we seem to be, or some -- some members seem to be on the run, chased, I fear, by public opinion polls.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Is the enemy on the run in Iraq, Michael?

WARE: No, certainly not.

And I think we need to be aware that it's enemies. I mean, America doesn't face just one opponent in this country, but a whole multitude, many of whom are becoming stronger, the longer the U.S. occupation here, or presence here, in Iraq continues. So, unfortunately, I'm afraid that Senator Lieberman has taken an excursion into fantasy.

-Atrios 13:29

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2007_07_08_archive.html#8120961069848505239

*go figure*

trash and wine everywhere on both his house and the Dukester, his illegally begotten boat.

on Presidential Clemency Power

Judiciary Hearing on Presidential Clemency Power
Wednesday, July 11th, 2007 by Jesse Lee
As noted when it was announced, the Judiciary Committee is holding a hearing, “The Use and Misuse of Presidential Clemency Power for Executive Branch Officials.” Witnesses will include Ambassador Joseph Wilson; Roger Adams, US Department of Justice Pardon Attorney; Douglas A. Berman, William B. Saxbe Designated Professor of Law, Moritz College of Law, The Ohio State University; Tom Cochran, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Middle District of North Carolina (Attorney for Vincent Rita, Rita v. US); David Rifkin, partner, Baker & Hostetler LLP, former Justice Department official during the Reagan and Bush Sr. administrations.

Watch the hearing live >>

http://www.speaker.gov/blog/?cat=4

Northwestern DC. Adams Morgan is considered the heart of Washington's Latino community, and is a major night life area with many bars... I guess they were just picking someone for the night.

Jager Bomb

1/2 can Red Bull® energy drink
1 - 2 oz Jagermeister® herbal liqueur

Pour red bull into a medium sized glass. Add a shot glass of jagermeister, and chug.

Serve in: Old-Fashioned Glass

visit to cleveland yesterday?

i think the first thing we need to do is to pass a law prohibiting town hall meetings where you need a ticket from the local politburo to attend. talk about political theatre.

DC Madam Calls For Senator Vitter To Be Prosecuted
By: Logan Murphy @ 10:12 AM - PDT Via Time:

When Sen. David Vitter of Louisiana confessed to “a very serious sin” on Monday night, Debra Jean Palfrey was not about to forgive him. Sin is one thing; but Palfrey believes Vitter — a proponent of the “sanctity of marriage” — should fess up if that sin was a crime as well. [..]”Why am I the only person being prosecuted?” she told TIME over the phone. “Sen. Vitter should be prosecuted [if he broke the law]” Read more…

Apparently, Vitter has a thing for ladies of the night. It’s ok though, he’s received forgiveness from his wife and God and claims he’s not going to discuss the matter publicly. The problem is, he doesn’t work for his wife or God, he works for the citizens of Louisiana and the entire country in the U.S. Senate…you know, the public? Howie asks when Vitter will resign, and I think it’s time for Patrick Leahy and Harry Reid to look into the Senator’s behavior…

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/07/11/dc-madam-calls-for-senator-vitt...

Cops hunt identity of chopped-up woman

Police want the public's help in identifying a chopped-up, headless body found in a foreclosed Brooklyn house.

Construction workers refurbishing the basement of the two-family home on Lexington Ave. in Bedford-Stuyvesant made the gruesome discovery Tuesday.

Parts of the body, believed to be that of a middle-aged Hispanic or white woman, were found in five plastic bags, cops said. She had a tattoo of an angel blowing a horn on her right shoulder.

Neighbors said the house has been vacant for about three years.

Taylor Shows
Submitted by SEDER on Wed, 07/11/2007 - 10:56am.
Watch Senate Judiciary on the Atty purge hearing here

UPDATE: understand she is trying to walk a tightrope here. She doesn't want to be held in contempt but she won't answer question she feels falls under "executive privilege".

UPDATE II: I'm a couple of minutes behind but Spector obviously feels that Leahy is going to seek a contempt charge. He's trying to quash that effort. Taylor didn't help herself when she admitted that she's trying to use Exec privilege both for questions she wants to answer and doesn't want to answer- to be fair. That will cause her problems.

UPDATE III: Leahy wraps up by saying that Taylor's testimony that Bush was not involved will damage Bush's Exec Privilege claim.

FDL has the live blog

EWWWW
Submitted by Fernando on Wed, 07/11/2007 - 1:39pm.
when you swear an oath to W, do you think he makes you 'kiss it'?

Do you mind. I'm trying to stop smoking with Chantix, I'm already nauseous

I'm thinking of trying it.(Chantix)Does it work.Any info ya have.I'd
be interested in.Thanks. :)

Got her in trouble...contempt charges for this:

Taylor didn't help herself when she admitted that she's trying to use Exec privilege both for questions she wants to answer and doesn't want to answer- to be fair.

And the president will maybe lose his Exec Priv. because of this:

Leahy wraps up by saying that Taylor's testimony that Bush was not involved will damage Bush's Exec Privilege claim.

After Recess:

Taylor and Specter now having a cozy conversation away from the microphones after her testimony has concluded. She finishes by patting him on the arm as he smiles.

is the reason specter was the only rethuglican there to provide a platform for avoiding a contempt charge?

New CREW Report Details Members' Use of Campaign Funds to Benefit Family

In light of several well-publicized cases of members of Congress using their positions to enrich their family members (i.e. John Doolittle (R-CA)), CREW undertook a study to uncover which House of Representatives committee and subcommittee chairmen and ranking members, as well as members of the leadership, have used their positions to financially benefit family members. The resulting report, Family Affair, includes 96 members from 33 states.

CREW discovered that 64 members have paid family members through their campaign committees or PACs, 24 have family members who are registered lobbyists, and 19 have used their campaign funds to pay a family business or a business that employs a family member. Even more egregious, 7 members used such funds to pay their college-age or younger children.

Based on the report, editorial writers across the country have condemned the practice of using campaign funds to pay family members. Click here to read editorials from The Indianapolis Star, The Dallas Morning News, The Orlando Sentinel and The San Diego Union-Tribune.

Read more

Read USA Today's exclusive release of Family Link

Watch Melanie Sloan discuss Family Affair on Link

CREW RELEASES "CROSSING THE LINE: THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION'S EFFORTS TO EXPAND ITS POWERFUL REACH"

2 Jul 2007 // Washington, DC – Today, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) released a report entitled Crossing the Line: The Bush Administration's Efforts to Expand Its Powerful Reach, which details the Bush administration’s repeated constitutional overreaching and abuse of executive power and prerogative.
Crossing the Line demonstrates that Vice President Dick Cheney is quietly, but diligently, working to establish case law that equates the power of the vice presidency with the power of the presidency; and that the Bush administration is intent on expanding the power of executive privilege well beyond constitutional bounds

Recently it was revealed that the vice president has unilaterally exempted himself and his office from the executive order that governs the safeguarding of classified national security information.
In response to a suit filed by Valerie and Joseph Wilson against Vice President Cheney and other top administration officials, Mr. Cheney argued that as vice president he is entitled to absolute immunity from suit.
In response to a CREW suit over visitor logs, the administration is attempting to reclassify Secret Service documents as presidential documents under the exclusive control of the White House. The vice president has argued that the constitutional protections afforded the presidency apply with equal force to his office.
In a suit filed by CREW over a FOIA request of the Federal Emergency Management Agency for Hurricane Katrina-related documents, the government invoked the presidential communications privilege, suggesting an attempt to cover-up what President Bush actually knew before, during and after the hurricane devastated the Gulf Coast.
During the course of CREW’s FOIA lawsuit against the White House Office of Administration (OA) for documents relating to five million missing White House emails, the OA claimed that it was responding “as a matter of administrative discretion,” not because the OA is an “agency” bound by the FOIA
Con't

covers my Chantix so I only copay. I understand it's like $130/month.

But worth it even if it makes you nauseous. Anything to quit is worth it.

Car Stop Leaves 2 Officers Wounded, One Gravely

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/10/nyregion/10cops.html?_r=1&n=Top%2fRefe...

I don't think my medicare will pay anything,But,I have to stop smoking!
Nothing else has worked.How many months do they recommend yo take it??
Thanks. :)

Ed Schultz was pumping the impeachment card hard today.

When Ed Schultz requests impeachment, you that it's bad.

-M the a-c

Car Stop Leaves 2 Officers Wounded, One Gravely

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/10/nyregion/10cops.html?_r=1&n=Top%2fRefe...

I've gone to a pack at least to maybe two cigarettes. I don't smoke out of cravings but many of my friends just keep pushing me to have just one with them. I don't know how to break that part of the habit.

At least that's not an addiction thou. I'm confident I'll be down to two cigs per week within the month. You can take it for as long as a year if you want.