Republicans Uncork A Fine Whine Spitzer

And just guess what is being served with the fine whine at Casa de GOP? Thats right, impeachment is on the table! Yep, the news of the foibles of Elliot Spitzer had been public less than 24 hours and the Republicans are seriously threatening impeachment.

State Republicans threatened on Tuesday to impeach New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer if he does not quit over a sex scandal that has raised questions over whether he could face criminal charges.

The threat added to pressure on Spitzer, a Democrat and former state chief prosecutor who made his name fighting white-collar crime on Wall Street, to step down after a report that he hired a high-priced prostitute.

Wow. That was fast. Those Republicans are serious about maintaining the integrity of government. So, what is it that has caused the righteous defenders of honesty, integrity and the rights of the public to throw down impeachment onto the table so quickly?

"If he does not resign within the next 24 to 48 hours, we will prepare articles of impeachment to remove him," said Assembly Republican Minority Leader James Tedisco.

"We need a leader in place that has the support of people on both sides of the aisle," Tedisco told Reuters.

The NYT story indicates that the basis for such an impeachment is found in their, and the Wall Street Journal’s, editorials:

"He betrayed the public and it is hard to see how he will recover from this mess and go on to lead the reformist agenda on which he was elected to office."

The Wall Street Journal said Spitzer had shown his lack of restraint in overly aggressive tactics as attorney general, making "extraordinary threats" to entire firms and to those who criticized his pursuit of high-profile Wall Street figures.

"The stupendously deluded belief that the sitting Governor of New York could purchase the services of prostitutes was merely the last act of a man unable to admit either the existence of, or need for, limits," it said in an editorial.

Almost all who read here have been wondering for a long time "just exactly what in the world does it take to get impeachment on the table"? Well, now we know. If you don’t have "support of people on both sides of the aisle", impeachment is on the table. If you "betray the public", impeachment is on the table. "Overly aggressive tactics as attorney general" place impeachment on the table. When the head of the executive branch is "a man unable to admit either the existence of, or need for, limits", impeachment is on the table.

Take a look at this list (as always, thank you Hugh) and explain to me how in the world that Elliot Spitzer’s impeachment is on the table, but that of George Bush, Dick Cheney, Michael Mukasey, Alberto Gonzales, Michael Chertoff and the rest of the merry band of torture, war and snooping magnates is not.

Marcy is right, you guys like to chat up the Passion of the Spitz a lot. Because the earlier thread is getting awfully long, consider this a forum for all things Spitzer related. By the way, as a parting shot, I just have to ask what the hell was Spitzer thinking? A hooker in the Mayflower Hotel? Crikey, did he jog over to the Watergate for a little third rate office burglary too? Moron.

194 replies
  1. Ishmael says:

    Premature….”impeachment” is common among Republicans. Personally, I think that until there is evidence that Eliot’s Mess involved a blowjob in the Governor’s Mansion, everyone should withhold judgment.

  2. Ishmael says:

    Although, seriously, there does seem to be a concerted effort to force Spitzer to resign quickly, just as there was a maelstrom around Clinton when the Monica news broke – perhaps the legal case against him is not as strong as the leaks would indicate?

    • bmaz says:

      Oh, I think a good criminal defense lawyer is going to go to town on this baloney. The government already appears to have three different stories on the genesis of the case, depending on which “leaked story” you believe. They have a first rate clusterfuck fending off a competent inquiry/discovery by a good lawyer. so far, the only charge i can see that would hold up is a traditional solicitation misdemeanor charge, but that is only available under state law. This looks bad so far, but there isn’t squat that I have seen so far that is going to stick to Spitzer criminally.

      • BooRadley says:

        Completely agree.

        Thugs took their best shot through the newspapers. They’ve got nothing left. NYT’s ran a headline this am that Eliot was going to resign. Either that was a plant or spin to someone that he was close to an agreement with the U.S. attorney. If the GOP is launching impeachment threats, it sounds like the negotiations broke down. Sounds to me like the US Attorney is confirming what you said bmaz, he doesn’t want this going to trial.

        From the timing, my guess is that they bushwacked Eliot with this on Monday morning to exert maximum pressure to get a resignation. Maybe they should have gone to Eliot first, before going public?

        Spitzer’s reputation is gone. The guy was beyond stupid, but he still has some options.

        If he were a Republican, he would hide, pay a treatment center to say that he admitted himself for treatment for alcoholism or prescription pain killers.

        He could say that he admits he has a problem and he’s seeking professional help. That’s the smart play and he should make it. I’m concerned his ego may not allow him to even take that meager step. I’m not sure about the political landscape in New York. I’m interested in what state Democrats want him to do. His wife has to make a decision about staying with him, but I’m not sure that should impact his decision about his job.

        • bmaz says:

          This is just an educated guess, but my bet is that they told Spitzer some time Friday the lowdown on what was happening.

        • BoxTurtle says:

          I agree. He had the weekend to think it over, and was ready to act Monday. Supposedly, he was offered a no-prosecution agreement if he resigned but I haven’t seen any comfirmation about that.

          When he resigns, he should ask Vitter and Craig to “do the right thing” as well.

          Boxturtle (Like that will happen)

  3. phred says:

    “just exactly what in the world does it take to get impeachment on the table”? Well, now we know.

    Republicans.

  4. RickMassimo says:

    But they’re being shrill! And they’re overreaching! They have to be bipartisan! This will cost them dearly at the polls!

    Won’t it?

    That’s what I keep hearing whenever the subject of impeaching Bush comes up, anyway.

    I wonder what could possibly be different about this case?

    • Kerastes says:

      Spitzer fights for ordinary people, against the powerful, protecting the constitutional rights of citizens. Bush is completely the opposite. Big difference.

  5. Neil says:

    great title bmaz. It’s all about the scandal. tell the dumb-masses Spitzer’s behaviour is so egregious he ought to be impeached and they’ll believe ‘em.

    impeachment is a purely political process. and so, why do we not use it?

    if i were Spitzer, i’d make my resignation contingent on the resignation of Vitter and Craig. the rethugs don’t care about Craig. Spitzer would be doing them a favor. it’s political. keep it political.

    Elliot’s stupidity was putting himself in a position to allow the feds to make a federal case out of it.

    • hearthmoon says:

      We’ll only take Spitzer’s resignation if it comes with Joe Bruno’s. That would be a good tidbit to add to an fdl column. How the Republican Senate Leader had been under investigation for over two years for some bona fide public swindles involving oodles of cash and betrayal, and the same Republican Legislature that closed ranks around Bruno is calling for Spitzer’s resignation. Oh the irony! You don’t have to go to Washington to find it.

  6. Petrocelli says:

    The Repugs are hoping to shame him into resigning his seat … winning in a court of law is secondary, they’re aiming to take him down in the court of public opinion …

    • Ishmael says:

      Larry Craig managed to brazen out the shaming – in a much more personally embarrassing fact situation, especially since his scandal involved a de-closeting (de-water-closeting? MUST….STOP…..JOKES!!!)

      bmaz at 4 – yes, I would love to cross-examine the FBI and other law enforcement agents on the grounds for the search warrant and the wiretap authorization. In Canada, where there is an indictable offence, the accused has the right to a preliminary inquiry, where a judge decides if there is enough evidence for trial – is there such a thing in US federal procedure? It’s the best form of criminal discovery in our system, you can get a free crack at the witnesses the Crown puts up. Even if a “clean team” was sent in to do the investigation, the answers from the agents would lead in interesting directions.

      • bmaz says:

        Yeah, that is called a preliminary hearing here; but, since it is a probable cause determination, you are not entitled to one if the charges are handed up by a grand jury, because that is held to be the requisite probable cause determination. I would like to get ahold of the GJ transcript, I bet there is a fair chance they screwed the pooch on the presentation. The real key will be the GJ transcript on Spitzer’s indictment (I still think there is a good chance that, if the Feds are going to charge Spitzer, it has already been done) either now or if/when it is done. This stuff just doesn’t all mesh together legally, they are going to bugger it up somewhere trying to contort a charge that is viable against Spitzer and covering their malicious corrupt tracks. If you punch enough of a hole into the GJ presentation, you can get it remanded and either demand that it be done by a preliminary hearing this time, or, alternatively seek to have defense friendly/exculpatory evidence presented to the GJ.

  7. BoxTurtle says:

    CNN is reporting that transition talks are already going on with the Lt. Gov’s office, so I think impeachment is just noise.

    But it does take both parties to agree on impeachment before it can happen. Bush & Co are safe because neither side of the asle is interested. Spitzer is NOT safe, because the GOP wants him, the dems won’t be seen as soft on morals, and he’s made a lot of well-heeled enemies that nobody else really wants to cross.

    Fwiw, I think criminal stupidity is a very good reason to resign.

    Boxturtle (And he’s CERTAINLY guilty of that)

  8. scooterinbrooklyn says:

    the idea of joe bruno sitting in judgement on anyone’s morality is cosmically ironic.

  9. randiego says:

    nice one Bmaz! assuming a trip to LA is out today, eh?

    sounds as if his wife is urging him to stay in… I think he should at least for now, until the smoke clears…

    • bmaz says:

      Yeah, i pushed a lot of stuff from yesterday morning and afternoon off until last night and I am screwed for today. Is a bummer, because it would be way cool to get you EW and others all together for cocktails. Another time soon I hope….

  10. Mary says:

    OT – bmaz, Horton has up a piece on The President’s Lawyers, starting with the heart of darkness, the OLC (did I mention I really think they should start impeachment asap with Bradbury?) and he ends up reaching the same OPR conclusion we did earlier.

    http://harpers.org/archive/2008/03/hbc-90002595

    Without even dealing with the general lack of teeth and inability to address the issues of the investigation, just on general principles.

  11. bmaz says:

    Gates live on the TeeVee announcing that Fallon is out and Martin Dempsey is in as head of CENTCOM. War mongering bastards.

      • bmaz says:

        Phred, you know me better than that! There is no “OT” with me, I have never met a thread I didn’t bust up one way or another…..

        • phred says:

          BTW, that’s a great title you came up with for this one…

          So, with your kind indulgence then, with Fallon out of the way, Darth gets to pack his big stick in his luggage and tell his little ME chums that if they don’t start to play ball to help out our economy, well then we’ll just have to go secure some new oil fields for our very own, heh heh, we’re sure the Iranians won’t mind). Fallon’s ouster is ominous.

        • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

          Jeezuz, this is one smart group of folks. Didn’t take more than two minutes for phred to connect Cheney’s trip with Fallon’s having his ass finally handed to him on a platter resignation.

          So – unless I missed an earlier comment – might I suggest that the GOP/WH are going to grab onto Spitzer like a dog with a bone and shake the hell out of him. Just to distract from sh*t like, you know… .the sudden f*ck you, Fallon! from WH/OV ‘resignation’, with its implications for Iran.

          Oh, and Dick’s trip this weekend…

          But pay no attention to the sh*t we pull! Focus your gaze on s*x! On impeaching a guy for s*x! Pay no attention to the falling Dow! Pay no attention to the Big Shitpile!

          FauxNewz = Dem s*x, 24/7.
          Iran?
          Never heard of it.

        • phred says:

          rotl — wouldn’t surprise me in the least if DoJ kept the Spitzer thing under wraps until they could use it for cover. That’s typical for this administration. And I think I saw yesterday a comment that the USA in NY was “tearing his hair out” to get main DoJ to sign off on an indictment. My guess is DoJ knew what a useful decoy Spitzer could be for them…

        • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

          Parallel thought process on my end.
          The timing of Spitzer was 100% under contol of the DoJ WH.

          They could have done this on March 4th, but the caucuses would have hidden it.

          Why now?
          What sh*t are these assholes pulling now, that they need cover for?

          Fallon.
          And what else?

        • sailmaker says:

          Maybe there are some other considerations in the fire-Fallon-send-Cheney-to-tell-the-midEast-to-Cheney-themselves-while-giving-us-more-oil ploy?

          Bush went and reportedly asked for more oil. Bushco never, as far as I recall, goes into any conference type of thing without the outcome being known to them. My conjecture is that Bush went so he could say he asked for more production, but that the Saudis blew him off, as was (conjecture) agreed in advance.

          IMO Bushco wants oil to be high to water our debts, and enrich the Saudis so that the Saudis will bail out our banks/shitpiles. The House of Saud also has been going off the reservation by talking to Syria, Jordan, and Palestine, and generally trying to make peace, since I don’t think the Saudis really want war with Shite Iran/Iraq They might let us do a proxy war for them, but the refugee, economic, and the chance of being drawn into the war themselves by bad Bushco planning, make a proxy war dicey.

          I’ve got to laugh because the fact that the Democrats might draw out their primaries until mid June might save us from another optional war. My reasoning: Bushco does not overtly want to be seen as making war to muck with politics (although they did, and do). The primaries were supposed to be settled in March, ramp up for war until June, major war June through August (can’t last longer, no money, no troops, no equipment, and 60 days is all a President gets to do without Congressional approval, unless Kyl-Lieberman is invoked as authorization), draw down and ‘mission accomplished’ with election of John McSame September through December. By the Democrats running out the primary clock, Bushco has lost 3 precious months.

          Too much tinfoil? Thoughts?

        • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

          Insightful.
          I’d not calculated the Dem primaries into the equation.
          However, as we all know, the WH is fighting for time on all requests for info, etc, etc. Sooner or later it’s going to catch up with them if some (most likely diehard, old-school, pissed off Republican judge) tells them to either hand the stuff over, or they’ll be arrested for contempt.

          Bmaz, could that happen… is it legally possible?

          The other problem they face is sheer desperation as the meltdown of their ambitions turns to sh*t, they’ve lost the thoughtful part of the American faithful (see beliefnet.com), and they neocons are turning on one another.

          Time’s running out and they’re being riskier and riskier. Spitzer’s a piker next to these guys.

        • bmaz says:

          Sure that could happen. Without the liberal and theoretically much less obstructable discovery avenues available with impeachment, the current discovery disputes could easily take another three years to wind their way to a final court decision; and Bushco will not give over the material until the supreme Court makes them. Thsi is the insidious thing about impeachment being “off the table” – the alternatives are not as good and take way too long.

        • merkwurdiglieber says:

          Bushco could care less about the primaries, they are all in and more war
          is the only way “forward” for them… besides, the MSM will parrot the
          neocon line because both political parties are infested with the incubus
          of that line of thought. Rubicon +1.

    • AZ Matt says:

      I would worry if I were in Iran. But what the hey! It will get the oil companies profits up higher!

  12. Mary says:

    Fallon is really out?

    DOJ led the way, but the military is starting to lockstep. You will shake your pompoms or else. *sigh*

  13. BooRadley says:

    I think it was this Esquire article that junior didn’t like The Man Between War and Peace

    March 5, 2008, 5:02 PM

    As head of U. S. Central Command, Admiral William “Fox” Fallon is in charge of American military strategy for the most troubled parts of the world. Now, as the White House has been escalating the war of words with Iran, and seeming ever more determined to strike militarily before the end of this presidency, the admiral has urged restraint and diplomacy. Who will prevail, the president or the admiral?

    Emphasis mine.

    • bobschacht says:

      I think it was this Esquire article that junior didn’t like The Man Between War and Peace

      March 5, 2008, 5:02 PM

      As head of U. S. Central Command, Admiral William “Fox” Fallon is in charge of American military strategy for the most troubled parts of the world. Now, as the White House has been escalating the war of words with Iran, and seeming ever more determined to strike militarily before the end of this presidency, the admiral has urged restraint and diplomacy. Who will prevail, the president or the admiral?

      Was the Esquire article a set-up to get rid of Fallon by portraying him as over-reaching?

      Bob in HI

    • masaccio says:

      I think so too. Barnett, the author of the article, wrote the interesting book, The Pentagon’s New Map. He served in the Naval War College, and no doubt met Fallon there. The Esquire article is a real puff piece, just loaded with data about Fallon’s view of his position and the way he practices it. Bush must really hate seeing Fallon out there talking to other countries.

      • bobschacht says:

        “Barnett, the author of the article, wrote the interesting book, The Pentagon’s New Map.”

        Isn’t that basically the Globilization master plan for subjugating Third World countries forever? I saw him on the TeeVee once, doing his presentation, and it all sounded pretty cool until I started to understand what it was all about.

        Bob in HI

  14. bmaz says:

    By the way folks, I want to give a shout out to our own “Mary” Muldaur (not to be confused with Maria Muldaur) and her rendition of “Cheney At The Oasis”

    Bush can don his harem pants and render his falsetto version of Midnight at the Oasis (send your Saudi to bed, derricks squirting out sweet crude, in the mood, a meter at the head … ‘Dullah you don’t have to answer, just let the oil flow speak, I’ll be your belly crawler, detainee mauler, and you can be my sheik…)

    Absolutely outstanding!

    • phred says:

      Mary, if that day job doesn’t pan out, maybe you can write an album with a political bent for Weird Al ; )

  15. bmaz says:

    Pot, meet Kettle, Part 3,492: The US blasts China for torturing

    China, host of the summer Olympics, is an authoritarian nation that denies its people basic human rights and freedoms, harasses journalists and foreign aid workers and tortures prisoners, the United States charged Tuesday.

    • BoxTurtle says:

      I feel like a complete hypocrite whenever our government blasts others for human rights violations. I didn’t use to feel that way. Thanks, W!

      Boxturtle (Why is giving a hooker a spanking illegal when waterboarding isn’t?)

      • Petrocelli says:

        What goes unnoticed is BushCo has undermined the diplomatic efforts of Canada and other European allies as well.

        Now, when we point to equal rights and the rule of law as beacons of strength and prosperity, America’s example is held up to ridicule our beliefs … not so long ago, it used to reinforce our arguments …

        • BoxTurtle says:

          What goes unnoticed is BushCo has undermined the diplomatic efforts of Canada and other European allies as well.

          I hadn’t even thought of that until you typed it. Canada is just too nice to us. If I were Canada, America would LEAD the report of human rights abusers. We may not be the worst, but Bush has done more damage to the cause of Human Rights in his 8 years than all the other countries put together. The only thing we haven’t done yet is summary executions after military trials with secret evidence…but we’re working on that, check back this time next year.

          Boxturtle (Why not just lock ‘em up with the general prison population? That would save a lot of money on trials and executions. Amad, meet Big Bubba. he’s your cellmate)

        • Petrocelli says:

          Canada used to deport refugees that came across the U.S. border, back to America but a Canadian High Court ruling stated that is now inhuman, given America’s policy to deny aliens protection under civil law and even torture/deny habeas corpus to non- citizens.

          Thank you, Bush, Cheney, AbuG, Mukasey … and thank you Schumer, HoJo, Reid & Pelosi for being complicit in the undermining of America’s laws and values …

    • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

      quick correction, bmaz — I think that’s Part 3,492 to the 12th power.

      Yeah, I know, EWs blogger software makes it tough puttin’ in the exponents.

      • bmaz says:

        Heh, I’ve tried to figure out how to do exponents and the little interlocking double s that stands for “section” or “subsection” in legal cites. No clue…..

        • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

          It’s a bug.
          That feature requires a bit more coding than the interfaces can handle at present.

          But (you could try (parens))
          I say this mostly b/c I think we’re gonna be looking at really BIG numbers in coming months, and exponents would be so handy.
          ;-))

        • phred says:

          Use scientific notation, for example 1 trillion is 1E12, or if you prefer 1.E+12. After a trillion, I start to lose track of the zeros, I better brush up, eh?

        • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

          That’d be great if EW put the notation in a sidebar so everyone knows what we’re talking about ;-))

          I find it easier to be accurate with exponents. Once I have to put in the n45u48m7444b34430ers, it’s easy to make an error ;-))

        • PetePierce says:

          Heh, I’ve tried to figure out how to do exponents and the little interlocking double s that stands for “section” or “subsection” in legal cites. No clue…..

          I’m not sure about all the symbols that are referred to here–like to the whatever power but if you want to do § for the section/subsection in a legal cite, and you aren’t in some kind of legal software program that does it, you can do that easily. Just hit the Windows Key+R and type charmap in the run box and copy>paste it from the Character Map of symbols.

          I’m sure (I’m just learning it–I’ve never really needed it) Excel may have several ways to do some of the symbols like power.

        • PetePierce says:

          Heh, I’ve tried to figure out how to do exponents and the little interlocking double s that stands for “section” or “subsection” in legal cites. No clue…..

          I don’t know about every superscript but you can use Character Map (scroll down) to use some superscripts and also you can nail the § symbol by scrolling a little and several other hundreds of symbols.

          For example, now I know what the primary is about. It’s about how many gaffes each campaigns’ surrogates can make to the 10³ power.

          Charmap is your friend. Just type charmap into your run box.

          For other ways Cubed and Squared Symbols

  16. brendanx says:

    Porter’s article on Fallon was in March 2007. It was hardly less of a challenge to Bush/Cheney than the Esquire piece. Why is Fallon going now? Bush/Cheney’s position hardly seems stronger now, after multiple humiliations at the hands of Iran and our intelligence agencies, than it was then.

    • BoxTurtle says:

      Porter’s article on Fallon was in March 2007. It was hardly less of a challenge to Bush/Cheney than the Esquire piece. Why is Fallon going now?

      I’m taking a guess that he knows something that has happened or is about to happen and is morally or practically against it. Likely involving Iran and Cheney’s upcoming trip to the M.E..When a military man reaches that point with the civilian leadership, right or wrong he must resign.

      Boxturtle (I would hope that he speaks out afterward, but most seem not to)

      • Petrocelli says:

        I would hope Fallon gets to have his views aired in the public forum very soon, Cheney is up to no good.

        Perhaps Richard Clarke, Wesley Clark and others will encourage him to do so.

      • brendanx says:

        If these guys are “morally or practically against” something, I wish they would choose less oblique ways of expressing their opposition. What, was the Esquire piece Fallon’s doing, a pretext for getting himself out of the way? Or was it really a “poison pen piece” that created the pretext?

        • BoxTurtle says:

          If these guys are “morally or practically against” something, I wish they would choose less oblique ways of expressing their opposition.

          They are limited by their own honor and oaths. The US military is under CIVILIAN leadership. Ultimately, the generals must obey their civilian leaders. If they cannot, they must resign. By oath and honor, they cannot refuse a direct order in any other way.

          Boxturtle (And that’s as it should be.)

    • Minnesotachuck says:

      Why is Fallon going now?

      This puts Cheney’s trip to the Middle East in a whole new light.

      • phred says:

        A few weeks ago, I remember reading somewhere (no idea where, anyone else remember this?) that BushCo was trying to get Fallon out of the way before the summer. That if they were successful, they would have time to start something with Iran, in time for McCain to be elected as the next War President. If I had a better memory or was handier with teh Google, I would find it, but alas, neither is the case.

        • ProfessorFoland says:

          I’m in exactly the same boat as you, phred. Rumors about Fallon going have been going about for several weeks, but damned if I can put my hands on it right now.

        • phred says:

          I’ll admit, this defective memory of mine makes me crazy… So I just did a bit of hunting around. I still haven’t found the piece I saw, but ThinkProgress had this up on March 5th, based on a preview of the Esquire piece. I would guess that the piece I saw was like that, based on Esquire, but explicitly tied to both a BushCo last gasp and a booster shot to the McCain campaign… I’ll keep looking…

      • brendanx says:

        He goes every spring now.

        I’ve stopped counting carriers, too. I just can resuscitate the feeling of alarm I felt two years ago, or wrap my mind around the possibility of an attack on Iran after the NIE and the denouement after our anti-Ahmedinejad campaign. Tell me I’m right.

    • masaccio says:

      The Esquire article says that indications were that they were going to push Fallon aside. Shades of Shinseki.

  17. earlofhuntingdon says:

    Sex and power are mutually dependent. Like food and warfare, guns and oil, can’t have one without the other; the more of one, the more there is of the other. “Power” of course is relative; the opiate-effect comes from having a lot more of it than you used to have.

    But the Mayflower? Apart from being half a block from the offices of K Street lobbyists who would like nothing more than to obliterate the careers of every senior Democrat in America, it’s reputation is as the virtual Prostitutes’ Hilton. (Despite the GOP’s having attempted to move “the business” out to the ‘burbs, so as to pretend that they had cleaned up DC.) Meeting up at the Mayflower is like joining the proverbial Japanese guided tour of Bangkok’s sexiest nightspots. It could not be more obvious or stupid. The arrogance of power, perhaps.

    The “impeachment” argument, apart from giving us the best guffaw since the GOP claimed that the Terminator would give California a fiscally sound governator, should remind Democrats of how well-oiled is the GOP spin machine. It is ethic-less, ruthless, tireless, and apparently has endless funds with which to make mischief.

    Here’s an idea. Now that the writers’ strike is over, the Dems should hire the best wordsmiths they can find. Pay them whatever they want. And flood the airwaves with well-turned phrases and evidence of GOP hypocrisy and lies and destruction – about, oh, Iraq, the budget deficit, defense spending, domestic spying and corrupt lobbying clout. Remind the voters what real crimes are all about, and why the Dems deserve to take the helm of the ship of state.

    • skdadl says:

      How far away from the Mayflower is the St Regis (where he could have gone for an interesting cup of coffee)? (Sometimes I think I’m losing my marbles, sitting here at my computer learning all about what goes on in DC hotels.)

      Kind of worrisome news about Fallon. Must look up Dempsey. Why would they be doing this now, however discredited? Because they work according to the logic of pushing back hard, maximally, all the time, no matter what, even as things get worse — always the maximum push, never any self-doubt.

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        If memory serves, the St. Regis is near 15th & M, near the WaPo building; the locale is reputedly a hangout for those whose draft numbers are too low to charge $5000/hr. The Mayflower is 4-5 streets away, near Connecticut and K, where the rates on and off the street are considerably higher.

  18. chisholm1 says:

    Sweet and sour Jesus, Bush and Cheney are going to launch a third war? This is complete madness.

    They’re intentionally starting as many fires as possible for the next administration. God only knows what an attack on Iran would do to oil prices (as just one spoke on their spectacular swan song clusterf*ck) and the death-spiraling economy.

    • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

      Watch Bush’s body language since that NIE was released, to undercut him and Cheney, back in Oct. The man looks unbalanced… I’m not a clinician, just a citizen. I’m not diagnosing; just sayin’ the guy doesn’t look well at all.

      Now, what happens to people when they back themselves into corners?

      Like old, hungry, wounded timber rattlers, they get ever more dangerous, and act in strangely risky ways.

  19. Mary says:

    Thanks phred – people named Weird Al tend to seek me out.

    31 – next thing you know, they’ll also be holding Congressional hearings on email and internet providers collaborating on the destruction of free speech and democracy by giving Govt access to …

    Never mind.

  20. maryo2 says:

    Admiral Fallon, the lone voice against invading Iran, resigns on Tuesday before Cheney goes to Saudi Arabia on Sunday. That pretty much tells us what Cheney is going to say.

    Note that Bush and Cheney told Saudi Arabia they were going to invade Iraq before they told Sec of State Colin Powell (or Congress, I think).

    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories…..2067.shtml
    “But, it turns out, two days before the president told Powell, Cheney and Rumsfeld had already briefed Prince Bandar, the Saudi ambassador.

    ”Saturday, Jan. 11, with the president’s permission, Cheney and Rumsfeld call Bandar to Cheney’s West Wing office, and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Gen. Myers, is there with a top-secret map of the war plan. And it says, ‘Top secret. No foreign.’ No foreign means no foreigners are supposed to see this,” says Woodward.

    “They describe in detail the war plan for Bandar. And so Bandar, who’s skeptical because he knows in the first Gulf War we didn’t get Saddam out, so he says to Cheney and Rumsfeld, ‘So Saddam this time is gonna be out, period?’ And Cheney – who has said nothing – says the following: ‘Prince Bandar, once we start, Saddam is toast.’”

    After Bandar left, according to Woodward, Cheney said, “I wanted him to know that this is for real. We’re really doing it.”

    But this wasn’t enough for Prince Bandar, who Woodward says wanted confirmation from the president. “Then, two days later, Bandar is called to meet with the president and the president says, ‘Their message is my message,’” says Woodward.

    Prince Bandar enjoys easy access to the Oval Office. His family and the Bush family are close. And Woodward told 60 Minutes that Bandar has promised the president that Saudi Arabia will lower oil prices in the months before the election – to ensure the U.S. economy is strong on election day.

    Woodward says that Bandar understood that economic conditions were key before a presidential election: “They’re [oil prices] high. And they could go down very quickly. That’s the Saudi pledge. Certainly over the summer, or as we get closer to the election, they could increase production several million barrels a day and the price would drop significantly.”


    Beyond not asking his father about going to war, Woodward was startled to learn that the president did not ask key cabinet members either.

    ”The president, in making the decision to go to war, did not ask his secretary of defense for an overall recommendation, did not ask his secretary of state, Colin Powell, for his recommendation,” says Woodward.

    But the president did ask Rice, his national security adviser, and Karen Hughes, his political communications adviser. Woodward says both supported going to war. “

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      ”The president, in making the decision to go to war, did not ask his secretary of defense for an overall recommendation, did not ask his secretary of state, Colin Powell, for his recommendation,” says Woodward.

      But the president did ask Rice, his national security adviser, and Karen Hughes, his political communications adviser. Woodward says both supported going to war.“

      The real question is probably who did Cheney ask? And who did he task with coming up with the plan anyway.

      Fallon’s resignation needs to hit the airwaves big time. It signals that Big Dick and Little George are playing in the dry woods with a big box of matches – and a gallon of gasoline. They’re going to give Congress a reason it can’t refuse about why US troops need to be stationed permanently in the Middle East. The world be damned.

      • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

        Yes, Fallon needs to hit the airwaves.
        Which means the GOP needs to fling a lot of sh*t, and conveniently, they’ve got Eliot Spitzer as their Bright, Shiny Object.

        We’ll be told Spitzer’s sexcapades are more urgent than hearing Fallon.

        Innertoobz outta start working with VoteVets to ensure Fallon is heard.

  21. Mary says:

    Bandar, who blocked the BAE investigation.

    Do you think Cheney had a payload loosed over the UK as a present to the Saudis?

    Just a bad joke, like pretty much everything this administration does.

    A United States Air Force jet has mistakenly dropped an anti-missile device over the British countryside, setting off a hunt for a device that could be dangerous to civilians who may stumble across it.

  22. Minnesotachuck says:

    If the Congressional Dems have any gonads, they’ll bring Adm. Fallon in to testify as to the reasons for and maneuvering behind his premature resignation. In closed session if necessary. I’m not holding my breath.

  23. Gerald says:

    I try never to expect people to act like they aren’t human, and usually I am not disappointed.

    We can knock the Republicans for their corruption and misdeeds, and that is fair enough, but we really look stupid when we expect the Democrats to all be as pure as Snow White.

    I look at it like I look at boats.

    A boat might look fine when you inspect it on the water, and then you pull it out the water or dive under it, and then if it is
    a wooden craft, you might find rot, or swollen and falling out knots, etc.
    A steel craft will rust.
    An aluminum one will corrode.
    Copper clad bottoms have their own problems as well.

    It seems that the parts generally out of public view are the ones you have to worry about.

    The only craft you can be reasonably sure not to be surprised at are fiberglass boats.

    So where are the fiberglass politicians? In any party?

    Where is Jesus?

  24. earlofhuntingdon says:

    When Fallon said, “Not on my watch,” would we invade Iran, he meant it. His watch is about to expire.

    Fallon is the most visible and credible critic opposing more wars in the Middle East. He knows that war with Iran would make the occupation of Iraq look like the invasion of Grenada. Which means doing just that is likely to be a main topic Cheney wants to chat about.

    Unlike Powell and Myers and their ilk, Fallon knows that there’s a limit to doing whatever the boss tells you, especially if it would stretch US armed forces – and America – beyond endurance.

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        I’d say the crazies burned the box and got out. This is big news. He’s the first top commander to cry bullshit and resign before doing the dirty work. Congress needs to get his testimony on record NOW, before Cheney comes back from the Middle East.

        Cheney won’t ask permission to go to war, he’ll start it first and tell Congress to Cheney itself or lose the election in November. Congress may still fall for that one; I don’t think the voters will. I think they’ll be looking for tar and feathers.

        • earlofhuntingdon says:

          Nor do I think it a coinkydink that the Cheney/Fallon fiasco is happening just before the Easter break, when minds and news coverage (about, oh, sex and a progressive Democratic governor) are elsewhere.

  25. wavpeac says:

    Well, regardless, much of this “powering up” could have been avoided with impeachment hearings against Bush and Cheney for violations of FISA, and violating the geneva convention laws on torture. The fact that we did not do this, makes me oh, feel, pretty hopeless. Hearings would have continually put the focus on the wrongdoings of this administration. Winning or losing would not have been as important as having them as a background for the “war mongers”. We are very vulnerable to their manipulations now.

    • bmaz says:

      That is exactly right. There is a whole lot of good that would emanate from an impeachment proceeding, of any top administration official; it does not depend on or require an ultimate conviction. Merely having the process would strengthen our democracy immeasurably.

    • bobschacht says:

      Well, regardless, much of this “powering up” could have been avoided with impeachment hearings against Bush and Cheney for violations of FISA, and violating the geneva convention laws on torture. The fact that we did not do this, makes me oh, feel, pretty hopeless. Hearings would have continually put the focus on the wrongdoings of this administration. Winning or losing would not have been as important as having them as a background for the “war mongers”. We are very vulnerable to their manipulations now.

      If the Democrats really do allow this to happen, what the heck are they good for? Nothing? Maybe Ralph Nader is right.

      Disgusted,
      Bob in HI

  26. PetePierce says:

    There is a piece of good news from this. If David Paterson is governor of NY, besides being legally blind–probably an asset in Albany, and the 4th African American governor, he will be an Obama SuperDeeeee instead of one supporting Mizzzzz 3AM Redphone–Yo Burkle Where the Hell is Bill on that plane?”

    I hope Spitzer fights this by aggressively going after the source of the information DOJ used to go after him–bank account mining by the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication.

    The serious story that is going to emerge but is slow is the continued vibrant corruption in DOJ using illeggal data mining of bank accounts via SWIFT in Brussels to gather information on potential targets where they set up what ammounts to an RSS feeed of any info on names they have listed to target from satellite wiretaps and banking data bases accessed on US citizens.

    Aside from my firm belief that Spitzer’s dilemma is the fruit of the poisonous SWIFT Brussels bank database operated by CIA and commandeered by Cheney-Rove-Addington-Gillespie to target political opponents, perhaps Vitter’s more economical hookers from the DC Madam coupled with his indeminty as a Rethuglican protected him from any talk of sanctions or removal.

    Data from the Brussels-based banking consortium, formally known as the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication, has allowed officials from the C.I.A., the Federal Bureau of Investigation and other agencies to examine “tens of thousands” of financial transactions, Mr. Levey said.

    But at the outset of the operation, Treasury and Justice Department lawyers debated whether the program had to comply with such laws before concluding that it did not, people with knowledge of the debate said. Several outside banking experts, however, say that financial privacy laws are murky and sometimes contradictory and that the program raises difficult legal and public policy questions.

    Bill Keller, the newspaper’s executive editor, said: “We have listened closely to the administration’s arguments for withholding this information, and given them the most serious and respectful consideration. We remain convinced that the administration’s extraordinary access to this vast repository of international financial data, however carefully targeted use of it may be, is a matter of public interest.”

    Swift’s database provides a rich hunting ground for government investigators. Swift is a crucial gatekeeper, providing electronic instructions on how to transfer money among 7,800 financial institutions worldwide. The cooperative is owned by more than 2,200 organizations, and virtually every major commercial bank, as well as brokerage houses, fund managers and stock exchanges, uses its services. Swift routes more than 11 million transactions each day, most of them across borders.

    The cooperative’s message traffic allows investigators, for example, to track money from the Saudi bank account of a suspected terrorist to a mosque in New York. Starting with tips from intelligence reports about specific targets, agents search the database in what one official described as a “24-7″ operation. Customers’ names, bank account numbers and other identifying information can be retrieved, the officials said.

    One person involved in the Swift program estimated that analysts had reviewed international transfers involving “many thousands” of people or groups in the United States. Two other officials placed the figure in the thousands. Mr. Levey said he could not estimate the number.

    Intelligence officials were so eager to use the Swift data that they discussed having the C.I.A. covertly gain access to the system, several officials involved in the talks said. But Treasury officials resisted, the officials said, and favored going to Swift directly.

    In 2003, administration officials asked Swift executives and some board members to come to Washington. They met with Mr. Greenspan, Robert S. Mueller III, the F.B.I. director, and Treasury officials, among others, in what one official described as “a full-court press.” Aides to Mr. Greenspan and Mr. Mueller declined to comment on the meetings.

    Andrea Mitchell ought to ask Mr. Andrea Mitchell about the use of SWIFT to start this investigation, since Greenspan was in on it from the beginning.

    I wonder if Spitzer’s attorneys could leverge a threat to DOJ that they will move to discover DOJ’s use of CIA data bases through SWIFT to trigger the facade of an IRS investigation the media can’t see through. I’d advise Spitzer to tell the Republicans in Albany to go screw themselves and hang on.

    The press, classy as always has been Spitzin out some classy and informative headlines though.

    A History of Hookers and HO NO He Diunnnt!

    Predict Which Pun the NY Post Will Choose for Tomorrow’s Spitzer Cover

    NAILED
    SCREWED
    SPENT
    RING STING
    HOOK, LINE & SPITZER
    STEAMROLLED
    BLOWING OFF STEAM
    LOVE POTION #9
    A NIGHT AT THE SPITZ
    AN EL’ OF A GOOD TIME
    SPITZER SWALLOWS

    I don’t understand what the outrage is of the MSNBC talkie head ladies that Spitzer would have been soliciting hookers (actually I think they solicited him) while busting him. They sure don’t understand the diverse benefits of CLE and OJT do they?

  27. pdaly says:

    [E]xplain to me how in the world that Elliot Spitzer’s impeachment is on the table, but that of George Bush, Dick Cheney, Michael Mukasey, Alberto Gonzales, Michael Chertoff and the rest of the merry band of torture, war and snooping magnates is not.

    My hope is that, if the NY State Republicans pursue an impeachment of Spitzer, the NY legislature then performs a last minute bait and switch with the motion, substituting any of the latter names in place of Spitzer’s name.

  28. maryo2 says:

    Oh, THOSE carriers. The floating ones with planes on them. Yep.

    We need color coded Cheney alerts in shades of shit brown starting from baby poop and going to bleeding colon.

    • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

      As long at the convention is agreeable to others, that works like a dream.

      Thought others might think I was getting a little too heavy into the smileys < @8^}</p>

  29. phred says:

    FWIW, last week EW mentioned Bush trying to oust Fallon so he could go into Iran (March 6th, Viktor Bout comment thread). Still can’t find the bit about McCain though…

  30. phred says:

    HERE IT IS!!! Thank goodness C&L linked to their earlier post. Here’s where I saw the bit about McCain. Whew! I can now have a good night’s sleep tonight (well, sort of ; )

  31. Loo Hoo. says:

    From MSNBC:

    Gates said that until a permanent replacement is nominated and confirmed by the Senate, Fallon’s place will be taken by his top deputy, Army Lt. Gen. Martin Dempsey.

    I didn’t know that commanders needed to be approved by the Senate. Guess that doesn’t help much, though, does it?

    • Minnesotachuck says:

      IIRC, the Senate has to sign off on promotion to 4 star, and CENTCOM is a 4 Star command. So if it’s Dempsey, as has been intimated, they’d need to punch that ticket. Usually this is pretty routine, but in this case the Dems should make it considerably less so. But, again, I’m not holding my breath.

    • PJEvans says:

      I believe that all ‘flag rank’ or general officers have to be confirmed by the Senate. (They used to confirm postmasters too, back when the USPS was a government department.)

      • CTuttle says:

        I believe that all ‘flag rank’ or general officers have to be confirmed by the Senate.

        That would be correct, each and every ’star’ is approved by the Senate, however, the Senate has no say so on CinC appointments within all the various commands…

  32. readerOfTeaLeaves says:

    Just read Josh Marshall’s Big Picture and the summary is: “Fallon’s Too Sane for the WH.”

    Fallon is acting like a patriot.
    That much, at least, is clear.

  33. PJEvans says:

    exponents – use the old Fortran trick of two stars: **
    Works for me.

    And jeebus, please, can someone get a viable impeachment movement going? (I understand from TPM that Nancy’s not at all happy about Clinton’s campaign continuing to badmouth Obama, especially the stuff from Ferraro, who should know better.)

      • phred says:

        FORTRAN?!
        eeeeekkk!

        I’m averting my eyes!
        (fingers shaking on the keyboard….)

        Now now rOTL, one must respect one’s elders ; )

        (full disclosure, I am a FORTRAN dinosaur myself ; )

        • bmaz says:

          Jeebus, why don’t you two just start talking in binary code or something? There was actually a Star Trek Next Generation episode where there was a race of aliens known as Binars that did just that.

        • earlofhuntingdon says:

          I was just thinking of the “Llandro” episode. The GOP and Rove’s shock troops are “of the body”.

          The Dems can’t figure out whether to join in the “festival” and vote for more war, all the time, or beam up and away. The progressives want them to phaser the computer and make people think for themselves. Pelosi and Reid just seem to want whichever is easier.

        • phred says:

          Well you know bmaz there are 10 types of people in the world — those who understand binary and those who don’t ; )

          sailmaker @124 — LOL! I once had to stay up all night at an observatory (as a grad student) when the post-doc I was traveling with forget to bring the magnetic tapes we needed to point the telescope for our observing run. It was the one and only time I had to use punch cards and was deeply grateful I hadn’t been born sooner ; )

        • ProfessorFoland says:

          “^” is also used in Excel.

          Speaking of Fortran, I know I may end up as “the last surviving confederate widows”. When I got to grad school, it had already long been abandoned. But I got “volunteered” to maintain (and then improve/upgrade) the collaboration’s ancient legacy code for tracking particles through our ionization chamber. That ended up being the sole reason Bloomberg offered me a job when I graduated, as they also had such legacy Fortran code, and even in 2000 it was hard to find such people. (I met the man himself during the job offer, and he said, “I’m the vindictive sort. If you turn down this job offer, I’ll never make you another.” So count me out of Unity ‘08…)

          I have to say phred, there’s a tiny flaw in your joke (which I love and will use); but the flaw is so nerdly that if I publicly revealed that level of nerdliness in public I would need years of therapy to recover

        • phred says:

          Cool story Professor (you young pup — last of the Civil War Widows indeed ; ) Glad you liked the joke, but I must confess I didn’t make it up. Still makes me laugh though… I’ll confess I don’t see the flaw, but then I only have a passing acquaintance with binary. I have friends though who not only have binary clocks, but they can read them
          ; )

        • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

          Wow. Great story.
          A few years back, I happened to be talking with a group of people who were working for a bank, and they were **desperate** to find a COBAL programmer, because their core code was written in COBAL. They were bemoaning the fact that ‘no one teaches COBAL anymore’, and trying to persuade the local community college to offer a strand in COBAL.

          The talents of commenters here never cease to amaze me.
          I’m clearly in wayyyyy over my head!

        • PJEvans says:

          They probably needed those programmers to fix their dinosaur code for Y2K.

          The joys of computer science classes in the dark ages: you learned all those weird and wonderful languages. Well, not COBOL, because that was IT’s baby. I usually describe it as ‘they hand you your account and your password and the basic instructions you need to use the system; after that, you’re on your own.’

        • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

          Oh, my gawd…. yeah. Now I remember why I dropped out of college (well, one of the times…)… computer languages, badly taught 8(

          I think the COBOL guys were saying that their company legacy code still works, and they weren’t authorized to reinvent the wheel, so they needed to keep the old system running as best they could. Sounded like they figured it was job security for them. Hehehe…

          ————–
          Mary @142, that’s confirmation of things that have been said on earlier threads, but it’s interesting that it ties in with today’s TechNews at the NYTimes, which reported that the EU has approved Google’s purchase of DoubleClick. Among the EU’s concerns were the privacy issues involved in the online ad technology; EU wasn’t satisfied with the level of privacy allowed under the US version of the buyout. That ties in with some of the points that you make — we look like a TechnologyBananaRepublic, and business is going to leave the US for more sane realms.

          ———————
          bmaz @173, remember, I’m often completely full of sh*t ;-))
          But the translation is roughly this: binary is ‘base 2′, and it has only two possible digits: 0 and 1. That’s it.
          You can combine em, and combine em, and combine em, but you are still limited to only two possible digits: 0, 1.

          You can express ‘eight’, but you have to do it using combos of 0 and 1. But computers are electronic, and electronic things are either ‘on’ (1) or ‘off’ (0). So in computerWorld, writing code that the computer reads as binary works just fine…. (As ever, brighter minds than mine are welcome to correct any inaccuracies I might introduce into the conversation).

          When you realize that biological systems are base 4 (guanine, cytosine, adenine, thymine, or 0123), and you start to see the complexity that’s possible in the natural world… which is why you need to be able to write exponents, because you end up with really big numbers in a very short time. (I assume that as an atty you don’t often fret about whether you’ve correctly written an exponential, but pardon me if I’m boring you to death here ;-0

          Looks like PetePierce offers great instructions for how you can get that [legalCodeDoubleSs] into a comment. But I’ve not yet mastered his process on my Mac keyboard

          Wow, is this the OT Comment of the Month, or what…?

        • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

          Okay, at the risk of totally humiliating myself, I’m wondering whether my pseudo nerdiness are close to your ‘real nerdiness’.

          There are two people who speak binary: [01]
          Although three would like to try it [010]
          But four would have more to say [0101]
          And five would be engaging [01010
          And six would delight in sharing their opinions [010101]
          And seven would be chatty [0101010]
          But eight would take a byte out of the issue under discussion [01010101]

          And then, of course, we could go on… 11010101…
          Did I spot the same item that you did?

          Or not?

        • ProfessorFoland says:

          Since everyone’s moved on to the next thread, the therapy needed seems manageable and I’ll pipe up. When you code in a strongly bit-oriented language, enumeration usually starts at 0, not at 1. So in binary C++ there would be 1 types of people.

          But the joke is much better as it stands. I wouldn’t want to let nerd technicalities get in the way of nerd humor. And strictly speaking the joke is about binary, not bits, so the flaw is only there in the current context of the FORTRAN/C++ commentary–whose relevance to Spitzer escapes me but I think bmaz started it.

        • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

          Well, I’m fine blaming bmaz ;-}

          Here’s the deal with Spitzer, however, it’s just so very odd that given the amounts of money involved — compared with the Big Shitpile, the costs of Iraq, etc, etc, etc… it’s so odd that numbers as seemingly paltry as those he spent on ‘entertainment’ caught the eyes of the feds. I just find myself thinking they must have been reading his emails, his text messages, his voice messages, his browser behavior… it’s all very, very creepy to think about. (Stupid on his part; but the creepiness is what bothers me even more.)

          I’m just stunned that on this thread it turns out that at least 5 people fess up to knowing FORTRAN. I’m agog.

        • Minnesotachuck says:

          Make that 6, although is probably much less deep and much further in the past than any of the rest of you.

        • bmaz says:

          Heh, now nucleic acids and their component bases I understand. As to exponents, I am constantly wanting one for AGsquared; other than that not so much use…

          Professor – Yeah, I am an equal opportunity thread buster; I don’t just bust EW’s, I bust my own as well. Nothing if not consistent I suppose.

        • phred says:

          Thanks! I don’t speak C++, so I didn’t see what you meant. I’m a sucker for nerd humor ; )

        • pdaly says:

          I have an off topic thought based on this OT comment, which may almost bring us back on topic.

          In a book on Pathagoras I read the ancient Greeks believed ‘3′ was the first real number, and that One and Two were not numbers but rather “number creators.” Pathagoras regarded “the One” as good and the source of the finite, and ‘two’ as the dyad or evil demon and source of the infinite. (I think zero was evil, too, or somehow against the gods so zero was not discussed in polite conversation.)

          So to summarize, I guess two is evil and three is a good starting point… for whatever that’s worth. Now back to Spitzer and the politicization of the DoJ.

          Did anyone else think the two Club professionals were needlessly talkative on the phone regarding client 9’s arrangements? For a prostitution ring that billed itself as discrete, they seemed to be going out of their way to mention crossing state lines, paying for service, etc–almost as if reading from a script.

          Another thought: when the news first broke, I thought from the wording of the headlines that Spitzer was accused of running an international prostitution ring. It was a while before I heard any mention that he was a possible john in the whole scenario. Wondering now if that first impression was the intent by the media–or just their way of avoiding blurting out the fact that someone close to investigation leaked client 9’s identity.

        • bmaz says:

          No idea on the last thought; maybe, but probably just the usual press sloppiness when it comes to the criminal justice process. As to the part about using Emperor’s Club personnel in the final sting on Spitzer, I think there is a fair chance that is correct. A real fair chance. I am going to do another post on Spitzer, I’ll try to remember to address that a little. Here is the lovely kicker to that thought though; if true, the Feds probably gave said Emperor’s personnel a walk on charges, far more serious than anything they could possibly charge Spitzer on, in order to get their cooperation.

        • bobschacht says:

          In response to phred @ 119

          Nothing wrong with Fortran. Just . don’t . drop . your . card . tray . eom.

          Been there, done that, but didn’t get the T-shirt. I was also a late-shift mainframe operator back when the main mass storage device was 10″ magnetic tapes, and we had to feed card trays with thousands of cards into high-speed card readers. Oy.

          Sorry for the OT.

          Bob in HI

        • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

          Oh, jeez… that was mean!!
          I’m gonna have nightmares tonight… do.not.say.card.[enterEvilWordHere]

          Nightmares!
          May visions of Ataris and Commodores haunt you in your dreams tonight ;-))

        • sailmaker says:

          My nightmare is having to do assembler language on a DEC VAX with an evil ‘editor’ called TECO, where each character was a macro command. While waiting for _____ (something, coffee, lunch, 1/0 on some other machine, something) we would do stupid stuff like type our names in just to see what TECO would do with them. Made one want to go sailing.

        • PJEvans says:

          That’s what those last six columns are for – not that I ever dropped a large deck myself. (Actually, they don’t use real cards much any more. It’s usually done on a keyboard just like all the other computer stuff. The last time I had real cards in my hands they were mark-sense, not punched, anyway.)

          TPM was saying that the numbers for Spitzer are pretty small, the sort of thing that would just about be pocket money his level of fortune. They’re saying maybe $80,000 total, and usually his rent-a-female was about $2500. So they picked on him why?

        • PetePierce says:

          Because he was a Democrat and they have all the control of the wiretapping and financial data mining and biometric data bases, and supplicant Democratic slaves aka your Congress People with rare exceptions have rolled over for them the way they’re doing with FISA this week. And because this is a systemically politicized DOJ who uses their AUSAs and USAs as tools and the putzes who are AG, DAG, and DAA are Bush lapdogs like the idiot MuKasey.

        • bobschacht says:

          In response to readerOfTeaLeaves @ 103

          FORTRAN?!
          eeeeekkk!

          I’m averting my eyes!
          (fingers shaking on the keyboard….)

          Now now rOTL, one must respect one’s elders ; )

          (full disclosure, I am a FORTRAN dinosaur myself ; )

          Phred! Who knew?

          Dino Bob in HI

      • bobschacht says:

        In response to PJEvans @ 95

        FORTRAN?!
        eeeeekkk!

        I’m averting my eyes!
        (fingers shaking on the keyboard….)

        Ha! Looks like there’s more than one old FORTRAN user on this list (raises hand). I guess that’s why the smart folks hang out here. . . . heh.

        Bob in HI

    • hearthmoon says:

      Fortran–that’s a trip down memory lane. I took that in college, where it met–I kid you not–the second foreign language requirement. Now it’s as dead as Latin.

      • MadDog says:

        Fortran–that’s a trip down memory lane. I took that in college, where it met–I kid you not–the second foreign language requirement. Now it’s as dead as Latin.

        Hah! Fortran is for wussies. *g*

        Try RPG and if that isn’t old/bad enough for you, try Assembler. And yes, I do know what a NOP is. *g*

        Punched cards? Hah! Try plug-feckin’ boards!

        And yes, I did also take Latin. Veni, vidi, vici!

        • phred says:

          Fortran–that’s a trip down memory lane. I took that in college, where it met–I kid you not–the second foreign language requirement. Now it’s as dead as Latin.

          hearthmoon, I beg to differ, FORTRAN is alive and well and in the most unexpected places. Legacy code, as our friend Professor Foland pointed out, is everywhere. It is too expensive to replace, so dinosaurs like me will linger on for some while yet, much to the consternation of our more highly evolved programming brethren.

          Hah! Fortran is for wussies. *g*

          Got me there MadDog. I took Assembler in college… what was it the Professor said about needing therapy earlier? ; ) I’ll take my wussy, warm and fuzzy FORTRAN any day of the week and twice on Sunday over Assembler. Now that’s a language only a satellite could love ; )

  34. maryo2 says:

    I didn’t make it up. ^ appears on calculators and is used in mathematics software like MAPLE.

    • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

      I know, I just figured it would confuse other commenters
      Sorry to confuse.

      (Musta still been addled by PJEvans FORTRAN comment.)

  35. readerOfTeaLeaves says:

    Geez… since this thread does say something about ‘whining‘, may I take another turn?

    From Commander Rejects Article of Praise, by Thomas Ricks (generally credible), IIRC.
    at http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..03059.html

    …Fallon, a career naval aviator and one of the last Vietnam War veterans on active duty, took over as chief of the Central Command in March 2007, becoming the first Navy officer ever to hold that post. Conservatives have been critical of him for years, faulting him for taking what they considered a dovish stance on China in his previous position of U.S. military commander in the Pacific. Their antagonism has deepened over the past year….”

    Ricks fails to enlighten his readers as to whether any of those WH ‘conservatives’ have any military experience. IIRC, there’s a guy who went AWOL, another guy with 5 deferrments, and … that’s about it for the WH.

    But hey, who am I to wonder why Fallon, with his years of experience in the military, would be more ‘expert’ than the ‘conservative’ think-tankers in the WH?

    Silly me.

  36. Minnesotachuck says:

    Apologies for being not only OT, but also so yesterday. Nevertheless I can’t help myself and pass this up.

    Wired.com has a (ahem) piece up about the “tech-savvy” Empire Club that quotes the FBI affidavit thusly:

    The web site offered the Emperors Club’s most valued clients ‘membership’ in the ‘Icon Club,’ a status which allowed the clients to . . .

    Which leads me to ask, how could they have passed up such an alliterative name as “Frequent F**kers Club?”

    • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

      Perhaps the likelihood that too many might mistake the FFC acronym for something like… “Federal Communications Commission”?

      Besides, thou knowest not what ‘icon’ was in mind?
      Something phallic, perhaps, or…?
      Hmmmm… ‘iconic’ possibilities abound ;-0

      • Minnesotachuck says:

        Actually, it may not be a sure thing yet. The other candidate, Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer, is a sharp, articulate guy who’s running somewhat to the left of Franken. He started far less known than either Franken or Ciresi, and is far less wealthy then either (Ciresi made megabucks as the lead plaintiff lawyer in one of the big tobacco suits). But he has steadily climbed in both recognition and positives. I’m neutral between them, but I suspect Franken will have a better chance in the general.

        The race I’m involved in is the contest for the DFL endorsement for the 3rd CD seat being vacated by moderate Republican Jim Ramstad. The establishment favorite was Terri Bonoff who became my district’s first DFL State Senator in memory in a special election in 2005 when her predecessor became Pawlenty’s COS. She was reelected in 2006. However, she seems to be losing out to an Indian American, Ashwin Madia, who just turned 30 and has galvanized an awesome campaign that’s aroused a lot of young people, but also quite a few old farts such as yours truly. The DFL has a good shot of picking up at least one US House seat this cycle, and perhaps as many as three.

        • PetePierce says:

          Good luck in your race. I heard on MSNBC that Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer dropped out today. I need to confirm it I guess, but you have access to all the Minnesota news so maybe you can help me there.

        • Minnesotachuck says:

          Ciresi dropped out yesterday, but I just checked the a couple of local news sites, as well as JPM’s website and see nothing about him bailing out. I’ll keep checking, though.

        • PetePierce says:

          Yep–I had a learning curve on the Minnesota races (and most other things). Your detail helps.

        • Minnesotachuck says:

          Corrections: “checked a couple of . . “

          and “JNP’s website . .”

          Preview is our friend, as I recall some other blog commenter write.

    • LS says:

      Mark Bremer…is an ex-(maybe)IRS agent.

      This was a major sting. The “Icon club” is a way to ensnare the egoists.

      More shoes to drop.

      Somebody probably recommended the Emperor’s Club to Spitzer. There is no accident there…

      Who revealed his name as being “Client #9″? Only someone familiar with the two name designations could have known that they were one and the same. Who did that?? This stinks like a sting and a hit job.

      JMHO

      • PetePierce says:

        IRS is a front for mining his bank account via CIA’s link to SWIFT data base. This is just a symptom of the platform of harnassing huge banking data bases and illegal wiretapping to target enemies of the Bush administration.

        There are probably scores of potential Spitzer stories out there. The US Attorney scandle is vibrant, alive, and thriving to do serial takedowns of dems who are high profile using the data mining tools at their disposal.

        Hoover would have been so excited he would have gone out and bought a new set of big black cocktail dresses (as opposed to little black cocktail dresses he could not wear).

  37. LS says:

    You are right about the ”Mayflower”…a rose by another name…long been the haven for politicians….probably the most ”bugged” hotel in the country. What a dumb*ss.

    How can someone be so brilliant and simultaneously so incredibly stupid?

    • PetePierce says:

      There are hundreds of politicians and government agency principals who purchase the services of hookers. This is a marker for how the Bush administration is using bank account mining in Brussels.

        • PetePierce says:

          These articles will context what I’m talking about. It’s just my theory but I think we all have the sense this wasn’t an accidental pickup. I really believe there is an elaborate watch mechanism analagous to an RSS feed that the Bush political machine uses to sack Democrats or interfere in elections the way you’ve been reading about the Siegelman prosecution (and there are others–EW has blogged about them all–another targeted prosecution in my perception is the prosecution of Geoffrey Fieger, Dr. Kevorkian’s attorney.

          Here’s what I mean when I’m referring to SWIFT (the acronym for the program– and it’s located in Brussels, Belgium. This will context it for you:

          Bank Data Is Sifted by U.S. in Secret to Block Terror

          There are so many secret data mining operations now, I know I can’t find them all.

          Remember in June 2006 when the NYT broke a blockbuster on the data base of every American’s banking transaction that the CIA was using? It was allegedly for terror but many people involved in it admitted it was tracking everyone.

      • LS says:

        Clearly, someone was tracking his little brain. They are tracking other little brains too. You can be sure of it. I’ll bet they’ve amassed quite a collection of little Dem brains.

        • PetePierce says:

          If you listen to this Bush song laughing at Iraq, New Orleans and the outing of Plame you can get into the spirit and tone of this administration.

        • skdadl says:

          Ye gods and little fishes. I just watched that. Did I really see and hear what I think I saw and heard?!?

          Down the lane I look, and here comes Scooter
          Finally free of the prosecutor

          And that’s just one of the “jokes.” Good God. Was that really Bush? How can he get away with that? I thought I was beyond being shocked, but … that is a president? I am shocked.

        • bmaz says:

          And then the fucking press monkeys gave him a standing ovation. They should have pelted the prick with rubber chicken.

        • PetePierce says:

          It really was Bush and I’ll put up his introduction of the “Busharoos.”–cutting edge name for his band. This press dinner (Gridiron) was not televised this year. This isn’t the one Craig Ferguson will host later.

          I think the song displays a remarkable synthesis of arrogance and stupidity.

          This contexts the dinner.

  38. rosalind says:

    just home from ew’s talk at claremont. fav moment: walking into the room to find students and teachers eating at round tables seating nine, and spotting ew at a front table surrounded by eight young men hanging onto her every word.

      • randiego says:

        Sounds like she don’t need us , bmaz…

        Hope she scores some good Mex, and a decent afternoon at the beach. It’s a gorgeous day here.

      • emptywheel says:

        Nah, they were all smarties.

        I’ll have to tell the story sometime about running a gatorade promotion for a summer in SF with the SFSU men’s track team. Me and 5, 6 foot plus pole vaulters.

  39. sailmaker says:

    The Mighty Wurlitzer at work???

    Iranian nuclear engineer Mohsen Fakhrizadeh lectures weekly on physics at Tehran’s Imam Hossein University. Yet for more than a decade, according to documents attracting interest among Western governments, he also ran secret programs aimed at acquiring sensitive nuclear technology for his government.

    Experts at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) have repeatedly invited Fakhrizadeh to tea and a chat about Iran’s nuclear work. But for two years, the government in Tehran has barred any contact with the scientist, who U.S. officials say recently moved to a new lab in a heavily guarded compound also off-limits to U.N. inspectors.

  40. bigbrother says:

    The Bushco neocon corporate combine has one goal period.

    Polarise the Judea-christians against the Muslims…if it doesn’t fit aquit.

    All goes back to history professor Bernard Lewis Princeton University, “Islam and the West”. If you haven’t read this it explains the Neocon foriegn policy. Rumsfeld, Cheney, Addington, Rove, Bush, Rice et al are a team. He also says there was no Armenian holocaust and was convicted in a French court for the lies.

  41. Mary says:

    65 et seq on SWIFT

    One of the never discussed side effects of the SWIFT debacle is that, in addition to almost making the consortium incur civil/criminal penalties for violations of EU law, the Bush administration efforts basically drove SWIFT out of the US.

    So we had the Belgian determination that the banking consortium broke the law when they let the US have unchecked, unsupervised access to all transaction information on the US based “mirror servers” The banking group argued that they were only doing what they thought they had to, since the US was serving Treasury issued “administrative subpoenas” on them and they felt forced to comply. Belgium’s privacy commission said, “tough” and this is one of the things that kind of amazes me on the lack of concern about all the rest of the data invasions that AT&T and others are engaging in. I guess international law on intercepts must be incredibly loose or AT&T et al must consider that they are not “doing business” in those countries?

    In any event, the finding was that:

    Under European law, companies are forbidden from transferring confidential personal data to another country unless that country offers adequate protections. The European Union does not consider the United States to be a country that offers sufficient legal protection of individual data.

    Isn’t that lovely? The US has less than adequate base, bare minimal, data protections. And how much hay did we put on the pile when searching for that needle? (hay that any corrupt gov employee – which, given what it means to be a torture administration employee means pretty much everyone, can get at, whenever, however)

    The Belgian investigation found that, at least at the outset of the operation, the American agencies obtained “massive” amounts of information in what it described as a “carpet-sweeping technique” to gather financial transactions from particular countries. The Americans used “a very wide definition of terrorism” in their demands …

    While Swift did not provide a precise number for the financial transactions that it turned over to American officials, the Belgian investigation said that 2.5 billion records last year alone “could have been the subject of subpoenas.”

    (emph added)

    The article is from 9-29- 2006, so 2005 would have been the “last year” referenced. Several YEARS after 9/11.

    Anyway, there were then other EU attacks on the SWIFT consortium, all ruling that the bank had violated privacy and data laws; then there was a Swiss investigation that found Swiss banks violated Swiss law by failing to warn their clients of the breaches by the SWIFT consortium on privacy protection.

    So SWIFT and the EU and Belgium and the US attempted to work out a plan whereby the integrity filled Bush administration would agree not to violate the European laws so much (an accomodation they are unwilling to make to American laws, but what the heck).
    Because there was so much faith in the respect for law here in the US, the accomodations included requirements that SWIFT change its computer data base systems to insure that in five years, transactions between European countries will not pass through the US based server. [A “get of Dodge because the Sherrif’s crooked provision] and they also have to appoint someone to audit whether or not the US Treasury is lying, “respecting its commitments” to not be a lawbreaker.

    So in June of 07, it looked like that’s where things stood. Except that, you see, the Banks couldn’t wait to leave the US in their dust after years of wallowing in crime with the Bush Dept. of Justice.

    So in Oct of 07, the very quiet, almost ignored, announcements of a move came to light.
    http://www.privacylawyer.ca/blog/labels/swift.html

    It appears that SWIFT is going to move its global data centre from the United States to Switzerland, to avoid having to deal with US fishing expeditions.

    So in the future, in a real emergency, we get to be supplicants to the Swiss. That future looks like it will be 2009.

    By engaging in the restructuring effort that is scheduled to be completed by the end of 2009 the financial messaging network based in Belgium is trying to accomplish a score of targets aimed at satisfying the desires of customers. Thus by preventing immediate access by US authorities to international transfer data — as is currently the case via the network’s computing center in the United States – data privacy concerns are to be dispelled.

    (emph added)

    So the greedy boys and girls with no shreds of integrity at DOJ are happily making sure that when we do need access, it is going to be much harder to get it. Thank you for making us safer. Or not.

    As an aside, in googling to find this info I knew was out there(I need to keep files like EW) I came across this interesting little Q & A that took place in May, 07, in Brussels, with Jane Horvath, Chief Privacy Officer at the U.S. Department of Justice, and Hugo Teufel, Chief Privacy Officer at the Department of Homeland Security

    http://useu.usmission.gov/Doss…..Teufel.asp

    It is a pretty funny read. After Chertoff’s admission that DHS just runs amok through vast streams of unfiltered intel, gathered any ol way, it’s a fun thing to find out that DHS even has such a thing as a Chief Privacy Officer, much less speculate on what he does. But the duo does a really fun Vaudeville act on how Europe should be comfortable with US privacy protections because of the Privacy Act of 1974.

    uh huh.

    They then refuse to answer questions about SWIFT (and how it did or did not comply with that Act) bc they say that the Treasury Dept was in charge – not either of their Depts. That’s really funny from DOJ – their inability to figure out if another agency complied with the law that they are saying makes everyone’s data safe.

    They later, though, have no problem with saying that EVERYONE complies with the Privacy Act and gosh golly, it’s been around forever.

    Question: Can I ask a really broad question? I had the impression it was really post September 11th legislation that created sort of a wider gulf between Europe and the United States’ perception of we’re at war and Europe’s not. You’re going back to an act from 1974. Do you think that can overcome the policy changes that we’ve had more recently that seem to be the basis of those mindsets?
    Mr. Teufel: We’re asking what the issue is here. We’ve had the Privacy Act for 33 years.
    Ms. Horvath: Nothing’s changed.
    Mr. Teufel: Nothing’s changed other than the United States was attacked and realized that it had to do a better job of sharing information and obtaining information on persons who might be threats to the United States. But doing so within the law.

    See – nothing’s changed since 9/11 (despite Bush’s commentaries to the contrary) and everything is being done within the law, which now means “whatever W wants” Easy peasy.

    Then they both try to say that the EU is much more invasive of personal privacy data because they were required to fill out information when they checked into their hotel and there was no detailed disclosure of how the info could and would be used. This cracks me up – yes, if the EU was planning on, oh, say, using the info to disappear us into torture detentions from which quite a few bodies have never been accounted for, we should know about it – – like we do in the US – oh, what’s that Jane? We don’t put that on our disclosure sheets? Never mind.

    Anyway, I know I trust everything they say bc the DOJ pro, Jane explains subpoenas, vis a vis the SWIFT subpoenas.

    Jane explains subpoenas:

    Ms. Horvath: A subpoena is a law, it’s controlled by a body of law, when you can subpoena data. There is judicial oversight of a subpoena. So that is a very established body of law. The company that owns the data is subpoenaed for the data. I would argue that whether the subpoena is secret or not, that’s whether the contents of the subpoena could be disclosed to the customers or not by the person who’s subpoenaed. It’s governed by the content of the subpoena itself and the rules that are issued in the subpoena. So that would not be something we would be addressing as a high-level contact group because that’s a matter of law in the United States. And settled law.

    Except, of course, that all the SWIFT subpoenas were administrative subpoenas, which are not subject to judicial oversight, and in particular being secret administrative subpoenas where no one is even allowed to go to a court to challenge them, that much more so.

    A subpoena is a settled law and when its a secret administrative subpoena it is magically subject to judicial oversight. I can almost understand how Bush comes off sounding like such an idiot if this is the kind of briefing he gets.

    • MadDog says:

      Mary, another excellent catch! Those minders of our privacy sure remind me of Monica Goodling and the boy-hero, Kyle Sampson.

      Loyal empty-headed Bushies defining and living in their own realities!

    • PetePierce says:

      Except, of course, that all the SWIFT subpoenas were administrative subpoenas, which are not subject to judicial oversight, and in particular being secret administrative subpoenas where no one is even allowed to go to a court to challenge them, that much more so.

      A subpoena is a settled law and when its a secret administrative subpoena it is magically subject to judicial oversight. I can almost understand how Bush comes off sounding like such an idiot if this is the kind of briefing he gets.

      Absolutely.

    • prostratedragon says:

      Kerystemighty! And the campaigns are not getting anywhere near where matters like this could be raised with the candidates and put before the public. There has to be a way to get out there issues like this that are more detailed than say, “Bush & Cheney Have Damaged the U.S. International Prestige,” somewhere that a Frontline-sized audience might hear about it maybe, and quiz the candidates on it so they’d have to say something more than “But I Will Restore it.”

      Maybe something like “5 Ways Bush-Cheney Have Damaged the U.S. International Prestige,” with examples like SWIFT, the human rights problems, etc. Certainly if there’s ever another call for debate questions we should be ready to barrage the site with them. Might lead somewhere, and anyway the eye-glaze index alone would be worth it.

  42. bobschacht says:

    121
    In response to phred @ 119

    Jeebus, why don’t you two just start talking in binary code or something? There was actually a Star Trek Next Generation episode where there was a race of aliens known as Binars that did just that.

    Shows what you know about FORTRAN. Binary code is for the proles in machine language programming. Not that I have anything against them, having done some of that myself back in the day.

    FORTRAN is more like a natural language algebra (FORTRAN = FORmula TRANslation).

    Bob in HI

    • phred says:

      (FORTRAN = FORmula TRANslation)

      I doff my prehistoric cap to you Bob, I had long since forgotten what FORTRAN actually stands for ; )

  43. bobschacht says:

    Ah, here we go:

    THE PENTAGON’S NEW MAP

    Watch Thomas P.M. Barnett interviewed by Rep. Tom Feeney (R-FL)
    on “After Words”

    IT EXPLAINS WHY WE’RE GOING TO WAR,
    AND WHY WE’LL KEEP GOING TO WAR.

    Follow this link, folks, especially in the context of ditching Fallon and Cheney’s trip to the Middle East.

    Bob in HI

  44. orionATL says:

    posted first at ssci below.

    i read this post this am

    all day long this sentence has been nagging at me:

    “Boy, you guys sure like to talk about smutty governors, don’t you?”

    why?

    because that was the whole point of having the spitzer news show up on this monday, wasn’t it?

    for the bush administration

    the spitzer “affair” is just like

    – the arrest of the “dirty bomber”

    – or that of the miami voodoo cult of haitians,

    – or that of the “we’ll cut up the brooklyn bridge with propane torches” gang,

    – or the admin flashing “code orange” every time there was a lesser political embarrassment looming.

    that’s what the release of spitzer “affair” info at this time is all about –

    turning heads

    misdirecting.

    while the defense department publishes a report that says that a central underpinning of the invasion of iraq had not a smidgen of info to validate it,

    the nation is focusing on where and when gov spitzer pulled out his dick.

    if i were spitzer’s defense attorney

    i would make some claims right now,

    and i would make them publicly, loudly, and repeatedly

    – that the news story of the gov’s behavior was released to the news media around monday mar 10

    by the bush justice department

    for the specific purpose of drawing media attention away from

    the far more important story that the bush administration,

    and v.p. dick cheney in particular

    had knowingly, and repeatedly, lied to the american people

    about a collusion between saddam husein and the saudi al quaeda in pre-invasion iraq.

    – and that the bush administration,

    deliberately targeted a democratic governor

    using its self-ordained, and illegal, powers of eavesdropping on phone conversations, e-mails exchanges, and bank accounts

    which that admin had claimed were to be used solely for the purpose of fighting terrorism,

    for political purposes.

    if i were spitzer i would not resign without a fight.

    and in addition to the above arguments,

    i would publicly offer to resign,

    only in the company of

    sen david vitter and sen larry craig,

    en masse.

    let’s see how the bush admin likes them apples –

    and how much more damage to the justice dept/fbi this administration will engage in

    or how much more damage doj shepard mukasey will allow.

    • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

      Wow, oATL.

      I think this is the money quote: while the defense department publishes a report that says that a central underpinning of the invasion of iraq had not a smidgen of info to validate it,

      I suspect you nailed it.
      So now… how to get traction…?

  45. Minnesotachuck says:

    Darn. Hit “Submit” instead of making a correction. Meant to write:

    Make that 6, although my knowledge of Fortran is probably much less deep and much further in the past than any of the rest of you.

  46. bmaz says:

    There sure are a lot of “law enforcement sources” flapping their lips on Spitzer’s case. Freaking Mike Nifong didn’t even chat this much. This is total BS, and borders on malicious prosecution if they really are prosecuting him. If they are not, this is one of the slimiest political hatchet jobs I have ever seen. Either way, this reeks to high heaven. I wonder if the DOJ used a direct complaint in this case instead of an indictment simply to avoid grand jury secrecy criminal penalties (although they are certainly must be violating their agency guidelines)?

  47. realworld says:

    Has anyone identified the statutes that leaking the Spitzer information violated? Are any of them NY statutes? Would the NY AG have jurisdiction to begin an investigation of the relevant DOJ offices?

    • PetePierce says:

      You’d have to look at the US Attorney’s Manual or perhaps EOUSA Resource Manual for possible guideline violations. No NY or federal statute per se was violaged, unless of course it could be proved that the source of the investigation were an illegal wiretap or use of the SWIFT data base which is a very gray area that Mary analyzed well above.

      The government got what they wanted. The media is following Spitzer’s limo to his resignation the way they followed OJ, Martha Stewart, and Britney. They have officially Britenyized the Democratic Governor of New York.

      Ethically this reeks and this was obviously done in a way to bring Spitzer down. They used a direct complaint instead of an indictment, so no Rule 6(e) Grand Jury secrecy rules (often broken by the government who leaks all the time anyway when it’s to their advantage). DOJ personnel aren’t and have never been worried about punishment. Contrary to what their alumna at FDL will say, the fact is that they fought vigorously for any adherence to local bar rules, and got a huge modification buried in of all things the 450 pages of the Patriot Act in 2001. I documented that at FDL and it got ignored, of course by the two former AUSAs there when I did it. They clucked that of course they are under the rules of the local bar. The fact is they have to be members of the local bar and pass the exam, but they are exempted from all but the most basic dicipline for say not paying dues regularly thanks to a provision they fought to get into the Patriot Act that Leahy agreed to back then. I documented this a couple weeks ago at FDL.

      The government would defend any attempt at discovering how they actually got the information in the first place with a State Secrets argument. They have a front story that is extremely shaky along the lines of a standard IT interception as outlined below:

      Eliot Spitzer’s Software Nightmare

      How an information system helped nail Eliot Spitzer and a prostitution ring


      Financial Crimes Enforcement Network

      SAR Activity Review By the Numbers

      • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

        Pete, can’t wait to check those links out later.

        Meanwhile, I found some interesting facts related to orionATL’s comment last night, from a copy of “Fall of the House of Bush” by Craig Unger. Will hope to toss the relevant info up, but much later today…. perhaps this pm.

        sailmaker – sailing sounds infinitely more sane than anything related to DEC VAX (which I think that I can envision what you reference, though not sure I’m accurate… sounds vacuum-toobish
        Sailing definitely trumps the long waits…

  48. DefendOurConstitution says:

    Spitzer screwed up. ROYALLY! I think by resigning he would be doing the right thing. Yet it amazes me that Republican calls for resignation and impeachment came so soon – unlike with Larry Craig, David Vitter et al.

    There is a lesson in this, Democrats think that it’s good to let the Rs sort these things out yet the minute it is a D the clamor from Rs is huge. Democrats can’t just sit there next time, and must demand resignations any time Rs are involved in scandal; otherwise they risk letting them off the hook like Vitter and Craig) so that when the shoe is on the other foot the same Rs they let off the hook will screw them.

    Related to this, isn’t it great that Larry Craig is appealing to the Minnesota Court of Appeals? Hopefully he will do so from now to the election. There have to be pictures of McCain with Craig. Yes we have to fight fire with fire.

    • bmaz says:

      Well, as scummy as Craig is, I firmly maintain that the arrest and prosecution of him was totally bogus and unconstitutional. It deserves to be overturned on appeal.

Comments are closed.