J'accuse!
 

Newdow: Right but irritating? Wrong and irritating?

Clarke: Partisan hack inflating his book sales? The man with the goods?

Kerry: Whatever happened to him, anyway?

Surely we were discussing something else, too.

J'accuse!
 

So you're a romantic. My own vision of the future is Soylent Green crossed with Brazil. In your world, will there be rocket cars?

edit- last post on old thread is critically important to read.

J'accuse!
 

I understand from someone who has met him that Chada, of INS v. Chada,* is actually quite nice.

*You know, the legislative veto case.

J'accuse!
 

If you're going to talk about plastic surgery, take it to the FB.

Didn't see that you got that post in before I locked the thread -- sorry.

J'accuse!
 

Potentially outing myself, but a law professor of mine told a story about standing in line for a movie in New Haven. The person behind em heard em talking about the law and said, excuse me, are you a law professor? I'm Chadha.

J'accuse!
 

Mr. Lawrence, of Lawrence and Garner v. Texas enthusiastically waved at me (and several thousand other people) during the Pride parade last summer. He seemed nice enough.

J'accuse!
 

Ollie's Bar-B-Que is really good, Detroit Edison lightbulbs- less so.

J'accuse!
 

I've thought this for a long time. I first gave some thought to this just before Texas came out with its state pledge, which is remarkable in its consideration of just that:

"Honor the Texas flag; I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one and indivisible."

I remember thinking at the time that it was an interesting contrast.

Note that there is no mention of liberty and justice for all. It is Texas, after all.

J'accuse!
 

W?

J'accuse!
 

Not accurate, is it? I think Texas entered the Union with the right to subdivide into five states:

"New states, of convenient size, not exceeding four in number, in addition to said state of Texas, and having sufficient population, may hereafter, by the consent of said state, be formed out of the territory thereof, which shall be entitled to admission under the provisions of the federal constitution."

Joint Resolution of the Congress of the United States, March 1, 1845

J'accuse!
 

Why has Texas never acted on this right? You'd think the prospect of 8 additional senators would garner sizable support in the state legislature, at least a few of whom surely aspire to greater things than scurrying across state lines to prevent a quorum.

And if Texas won't act on it, can we give transfer it to California?

J'accuse!
 

No offense, but Ollie's BBQ kinda falls in the "bad plaintiff" column where I'm from.

I'll give you Lawrence and Chadha, but it's not a numerosity analysis. At the end of the day you're going to have to beat Miranda.

J'accuse!
 

Talk about a redistricting nightmare...

Of course, this is a good opportunity to divest ourselves of Dallas.

J'accuse!
 

More importantly, the rest of Texas can divest itself of Austin, rather than just splitting us into f-o-u-r congressional districts.

Bill Frist, off the deep end
 

• It is awesomely self-serving for Mr. Clarke to assert that the United States could have stopped terrorism if only the three Presidents he served had better listened to his advice....The only common denominator throughout these 10 years of unanswered attacks was Mr. Clarke himself, a consideration that is clearly driving his effort to point fingers and shift blame.
  
  ....Mr. President, I do not know if Mr. Clarke's motive for theses charges is partisan gain, personal profit, self promotion, or animus because of his failure to win a promotion in the Bush Administration....Mr. Clarke was clearly consumed by the desire to dodge any blame for the 9-11 attacks while at that same moment rescuers were still searching the rubble of the World Trade Center for survivors....A loyal Administration official?....If, in the summer of 2001, he saw the threat from al Qaeda as grave as he now says it was, and if he found the response of the Administration as inadequate as he now says it was, why did he wait until Sunday, March 21, 2004 to make his concerns known?
  
  ....Mr. President, if Mr. Clarke held his tongue because he was loyal, then shame on him for putting politics above principle. But if he has manufactured these charges for profit and political gain, he is a shame to this government.
  
  ....Mr. President, it is one thing for Mr. Clarke to dissemble in front of the media. But if he lied under oath to the United States Congress it is a far more serious matter....it is also clear that Mr. Clarke and his publishers adjusted the release date of his book in order to make maximum gain from the publicity around the 9-11 hearings....I find this to be an appalling act of profiteering, trading on his insider access to highly classified information and capitalizing upon the tragedy that befell this nation on September 11, 2001. Mr. Clarke must renounce any plan to personally profit from this book.
  
  ....In his appearance before the 9-11 Commission, Mr. Clarke's theatrical apology on behalf of the nation was not his right, his privilege or his responsibility. In my view it was not an act of humility, but an act of supreme arrogance and manipulation. Mr Clarke can and will answer for his own conduct but that is all.

This is so nauseating that I'm really just at a loss to respond.

eta: I'm quoting from this. Perhaps someone can explain to me how Clarke's comments in the off-the-record briefing are contradicted by what he's said more recently. As I read it, he's describing the same things. Decisions were being made, but slowly, and farther down the totem pole than he would have liked. When he briefed the press, he emphasized that something was being done. Now he's angry that it wasn't done faster.

That is all Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know.
 

Your guide to the 9/11 hearings, past, present and future:

http://www.wonkette.com/images/9_11_hearings.jpg

Courtesy Wonkette, of course.

That is all Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know.
 

Oddly enough, it's not really working for Clarke, who voted in the GOP primary in 2000. Back to the drawing board.

That is all Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know.
 

But he was a Clinton guy.

If anything [and as if we needed more backup], it speaks volumes about Al Gore

That is all Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know.
 

Ty's right, its incomplete. What about the Dems like SAM who admit its Clinton's fault, but only because he was getting impeached. I want more nuance in my flowcharts.

J'accuse!
 

You're right at the appeallate level. But just imagine the lunches that came with the witness interviews at trial prep. That's what I was talking about.

Oh shit, I forgot you're on Atkins, aren't you.

That is all Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know.
 

Please don't tell me you believe this stuff. Troy Hambrick got a lot of carries for the Cowboys last year, but he is not a Parcells guy. Clarke's worked for four presidents, and only one of them was a Democrat.

Frist tries to slither back under that rock
 

• “Mr. Clarke has told two entirely different stories under oath,” Frist said in a speech from the Senate floor, alleging that Clarke said in 2002 that the Bush administration actively sought to address the threat posed by al-Qaida before the attacks.
  
  Frist later retreated from directly accusing Clarke of perjury, telling reporters that he personally had no knowledge that there were any discrepancies between Clarke’s two appearances. But he said, “Until you have him under oath both times, you don’t know.”

MSNBC


The Senate majority leader ought to take a tip from bilmore, and decline to accuse a senior government official of perjuring himself unless he's actually got something to go on.

what will they think of next
 

Those sneaky bastards in Hamas have been caught in a dastardly plot to terrorize the nation's capital by driving up real estate prices in Maryland suburbs of D.C. What's next?!?!

It's a smart move. Tessio was always smarter
 

And just like Bill swapping out Galloway for his guy Keyshawn. and Hillary Rodham badmouthing and firing the entire White House travel office for her boys back in Ar-kansas, don't think for a minute
ole' black Bill wouldn't have shoved Clarke out the door lest he tow the line.

Just recall that after 40 some odd years, Tessio switched teams too. Or did you not see that film either?

It's a smart move. Tessio was always smarter
 

So is it Bill who's using some kind of Vulcan mind control to get Clarke to turn on W now, or is that Hillary? What is it with you guys and the Clintons?

That is all Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know.
 

I think Clarke's only allegience is to Clarke.

Shrewd guy. No matter what the outcome, he's now sold enough books to be set for life.

That is all Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know.
 

Hindsight is 20/20 -- I just don't think you can plan to sell books like that. And he got lucky on the timing with the commission. He's been ready to come out with the book for three months, but the White House got to review it because of his security clearance, and they've been sitting on it. The timing was their doing, not his.

That is all Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know.
 

Agreed. He's a careerer. Ty, on your question in a prior post, my understanding is that Clarke testified behind close doors to a joint committee of congress and this testimony was under oath. I understand this to be the basis for the perjury.

It's a smart move. Tessio was always smarter
 

The Stanford of mind controls. Way overrated.

But WE'LL always have Paris
 

It's the conservative Ying to your "Bush lied" Yang

Bill Frist, off the deep end
 

Frist sez:

I've never heard or read him saying that. Frist must have better sources than we do.

If not, Frist is a lying whore -- to combine two of BB's favorite words. I suppose its a prerequisite for the job.


That is a stupid thing to say -- as if a deputy level government beaurocrat is THE key to government policy. If that's the case just admit that Wolfowitz runs the Bush administration's defense policy. If not, shut the fuck up you pathetic whore.

P.S. Talk about pointing fingers? How is Clarke shifting any blame?

God forbid that Bill Frist ever start putting politics above principle. Tom Delay too.

You think his testimony to Congress was not pre-cleared with at least Rice? May well have gone higher.

In any event -- the issue if much more one of emphasis and interpretation, not "lying" -- right Bilmore? That's partly why this is so damn bad, it won't and can't go anywhere legally, but it is an effort to destroy someone who dared to criticize the Administration.

This from the party of Admiral John Poindexter. I guess that Clarke should have just kept repeating "I do not recall" when he testified.

Hmmm. He resigned in January 2003 -- finished the book by late 2003. The WH held the book in security "review" for three months. Then acted shocked by its claims. Sounds right. You got us there Bill -- now why don't you go dissect some more live cats?

Well, if Clarke was solely responsible for the U.S. counter-terrorism for the past 10 years -- who else should apologize? God knows no one else looks like they are planning to do so.

Ok. You got me. Every dime I can contribute, to the limits, for the first time ever.

Frist tries to slither back under that rock
 

Sounds to me like we need to get that bitch under oath. He's a joke as "Majority Leader" anyway (i.e. can't push his hand through a paper bag)-- the GOP should be glad to see him go.

S_A_M

That is all Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know.
 

If he contradicted himself. I'm asking for the basis for that assertion. All I see is a lot of people slinging mud at his name.

Because he has no heart - ironic, don't you think
 

He's too nice a guy. You need a real douchebag to keep your party in line (e.g. Tip O'Neill, Newt Gingrich, Trent Lott)

Which, should the Dems take back the House, you've got it made. That Pelosi is a real shrew.

Because he has no heart - ironic, don't you think
 

He's douchebag enough for the job. His guys get angry at him because he can't make the ten most moderate Democrats vote like conservative Republicans.

That is all Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know.
 

Hence the request to declassify.

My suspicion is that Frist knows some non-public information and this is why he has come out the way he did. He does not exactly have a record of a gloves-off, fist flying partisan.

And SAM, save it with your rightous indignation. These are the same tactics we saw with the Clinton Administration (see eg, the attacks on Paula Jones, Ken Starr, Juanita Broderick, Linda Tripp, Newt, etc.). Anybody that went after WJC or the administration. I'm not saying any of this is right on either side, but it is part of the game these days in DC.

That is all Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know.
 

You are so trusting of him that you think he knows something else even when he says he doesn't.

He has Karl Rove to thank for his job.

Because he has no heart - ironic, don't you think
 

Actually, I agree. I've always thought that Lott and Delay were real bastards, but you've got to admit they got/get things done.

As for Pelosi, she _might_ be tough and mean enough to fight the House GOP leadership toe to toe (talk about a collection of hard cases) but she's starting from a position of relative weakness.

S_A_M

That is all Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know.
 

Started working as an analyst in the OSD in the Nixon administration (1973). Depty Asst. Sec'y of State for Intelligence during the Reagan Administration. Asst Sec'y of State for Politico-Military Affairs during the Bush I Administration.

Left federal service in March, 2003.

P.S. to Bilmore: I'd be surprised if it were about money for Clarke. Greedy people don't make careers working for the Feds (although he could have a bunch of kids in college now, who knows?). if his book does misrepresent or misinterpret the situation, I'd wager its ego. All accounts say he is/was a very aggressive, abrasive, (and very smart) guy.

That is all Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know.
 

But then he says that he doesn't _know_ of any discrepancies (which suggests that he doesn't have specfics in mind -- just coming out to attack).

This may not have been Frist's idea. He wouldn't be doing this unless it was approved by or coordinated with either the WH or the RNC.

So, why does that mean we should not feel or express righteous indignation? Bill Clinton is hardly a good role model. I've already said that I didn't vote for him in 1996 because I knew by then that he'd do or say anything to get/keep power. I'm surprised that you hold your own side to a similar low standard.

I don't accept that this is how it should be in DC. However, I couldn't get elected dogcatcher.

S_A_M

P.S. Ken Starr earned what he got.