"War" on Terror

Today at TPMCafe Senator John Kerry discussed ways our response to extremism and terrorism should be changed.  As so many well informed people have been saying all along about the "War on Terror," everything about the way our government approaches the subject needs to be rethought from the bottom up.  The basic strategy of Communist guerrilla recruiters, which was highly successful in so many places, was always to swell the ranks by winning over the hearts and minds of the local population.  Terrorist organizations have adopted roughly the same strategy.  The militaristic approach our nation has employed during the Bush years plays right into the hands of the recruiters.

More after the flip.

Hypocrisy rarely crystallizes this purely, so be sure to savor it:

Before the House override vote [on the farm bill] Wednesday night, lawmakers discovered that the version sent to the White House last week was missing a part. The discovery raises questions about whether that section of the bill, which dealt with authorized trade and food aid, would become law.

The discovery of the missing section, "Title III," prompted concerns from House Republicans that the override vote was improper.

House Republican Minority Leader John Boehner immediately began sobbing:

"What's happened here raises serious constitutional questions -- very serious," said Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio. "I don't see how we can proceed with the override as it occurred."

Where were the Bronzed Boehner's famed crocodile tears in 2005, when a $2 billion "clerical error" cropped up in the so-called "Deficit Reduction Act?"

I don't recall any rending of garments over those serious constitutional questions by Captain Suntan. Do you?

By the way, if you're wondering what happened with that situation in 2005, John Conyers, then the Judiciary Committee's Ranking Member, filed suit to challenge the law's validity. The case (Conyers v. Bush) was decided in favor of the president by federal judge John D. Bates.

Does Bates' name ring a bell? I mentioned him yesterday. He's the judge (and former Whitewater prosecutor) who dismissed Valerie Plame's lawsuit, dismissed the Cheney Energy Task Force suit, dismissed the DNC's suit seeking to force the FEC to rule on McCain's public financing flip-flop, and yes, he's the judge assigned to Conyers' latest suit against the Bush "administration," seeking to enforce contempt of Congress citations against Harrier Miers and Josh Bolten.

Move along, citizens. And do not stare directly at the "subpoena power."

The good news: Someone's subpoenaed Karl Rove:

(Washington, DC)- Today, House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI) issued a subpoena to former White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove for testimony about the politicization of the Department of Justice (DOJ), including former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman’s case. Yesterday, Rove’s attorney, Robert Luskin, sent a letter to the Committee expressing that Rove would not agree to testify voluntarily, per the Committee’s previous requests.

The bad news comes in two parts:

1. In case you've forgotten, Karl Rove's already been subpoenaed. A year ago. By the Senate Judiciary Committee. Never testified. Never held in contempt. So how scared do you think he is this time?

2. It was also about a year ago that the House Judiciary Committee subpoenaed Harriet Miers and Josh Bolten. Their testimony was demanded and refused over a series of sliding deadlines over July of last year. A year later, neither one has testified, or even shown up at a hearing in person to say why they refuse to testify.

What ever happened with those subpoenas? Well, the full House voted to hold both Miers and Bolten in contempt of Congress, and referred the charges to the U.S. Attorney for prosecution. The U.S. Attorney told the House to go jump in the lake. The House did the next best thing, voting to authorize the Judiciary Committee to file suit to enforce the subpoenas.

But hey, gosh darn it, wouldn't you know it? The case got assigned to former Whitewater Deputy Independent Counsel John D. Bates, the federal judge who dismissed the Plame lawsuit, dismissed the Cheney Energy Task Force lawsuit, upheld the validity of Bush's signature on an a bill not properly passed in the same form by both houses of Congress, and dismissed the DNC's lawsuit seeking to force the FEC to rule on John McCain's attempt to withdraw from his presidential campaign's public financing commitments.

So, yeah, I'm not really feeling it.

It's what you do before your summer recess, you know? You put the hot stuff out there so you can brag on it while you're at home in your district, or doing appearances on progressive talk radio shows.

I mean, you tell me if you think Karl's sweating it.

Following the refusal of the Department of Justice to prosecute contempt of Congress charges against Harriet Miers and Josh Bolten, the House Judiciary Committee has filed suit in federal court, seeking to enforce their subpoenas.

From a committee press release:

The Judiciary Committee, as plaintiff, is asking the Court to find  the following:

   (1) Ms. Miers is not "immune" from the obligation to appear before the Committee in response to a duly authorized, issued and served Committee subpoena;

   (2) Ms. Miers and Mr. Bolten must produce privilege logs identifying all documents withheld on grounds of executive privilege;

   (3)  Executive privilege does not cover documents not involving the President or undertaken directly in preparation for advising the President or whose contents are widely-known, previously released or previously the subject of extensive, authorized testimony, and that Ms. Miers’s and Mr. Bolten’s claims of executive privilege are, in any event, overcome by the Committee’s compelling need for the subpoenaed testimony and documents.

   (4)  that Ms. Miers  is required to appear before the Committee to respond to questions put to her pertinent to the Investigation and to invoke executive privilege only if and when appropriate;

   (5)  that  Ms. Miers and Mr. Bolten  are required to provide, as required by the subpoenas, a detailed privilege log, identifying by author, recipient, date and subject matter those documents responsive to the subpoena that have been withheld on executive privilege grounds;

   (6)  that Ms. Miers and Mr. Bolten  are required to produce all non-privileged documents responsive to the subpoenas.

The case has been assigned D.C. District Court Judge John D. Bates.

Judge Bates, a George W. Bush appointee, was Deputy Independent Counsel for the Whitewater investigation from 1995 to mid-1997, ruled in 2002 to dismiss for lack of standing the GAO's suit seeking access to the Cheney Energy Task Force documents, and in 2006 upheld the validity of Bush's signature on an a bill not properly passed in the same form by both houses of Congress.

So, you know, it's all good. I'm sure it'll all come out in the wash.

As usual, the MSM is tantalizing us with headlines that sizzle, and ledes & soundbites which have lots of drama and conflict... and then move on, after sketchy details and hardly a pretense of analysis, to the next subject.

CNN: Judge tosses out ex-spy's lawsuit against Cheney in CIA leak case

U.S. District Judge John Bates said the lawsuit raises "important questions relating to the propriety of actions undertaken by our highest government officials." But in a 41-page decision, he found Plame and her husband, former U.S. Ambassador Joseph Wilson, failed to show the case belongs in federal court.

Huh?

Well, thankfully, those tubes on the internets can route us around the infotainment spectaculars.

See below for links to the AP story, and the judge's opinion in .pdf
MSNBC site has headline:
Judge dismisses Valerie Plame’s lawsuit against White House over CIA leak

  U.S. District Judge John D. Bates today dismisses a case sueing for Miners Safety. The suit was about oversight of Mine Safety and was filed after all those miners died at the Sago Mines. All they wanted was the goverment to make sure to make sure they had the right Oxygen equip., it worked, and they knew how to use it. Pretty much a no-brainer if you asked me. I would think there would already be a law in place providing just that, if not before Sago and the 12 deaths, then after.

But U.S. District Judge John D. Bates said the lawsuit did not meet the legal requirements for forcing a court order.

"The loss of lives, and the risks miners presently face, weigh heavily in public discourse and are taken seriously by this court," Bates wrote. "But the tragedy of those events, and the need for greater protection described by plaintiff, cannot substitute for the requirements of the law."

You have to be shittin me !