TM Connect


Use "My TM" for log in & register.

Taylor Marsh has been writing on line since 1996, with the archives provided here a representation of that work.

Tag Archives | investigations

Bartiromo: ‘I blame the government’

By on 18 March 2009

So do I, and you can’t be a partisan to unravel this one, because there is plenty of blame for both sides, including the Obama administration, who has decided to throw Sen. Chris Dodd under a bus. Part of all this is due to the fact that I’m not sure Congress is smart enough to sort this out, which should be obvious to everyone by now. But also that Geithner and Summers are too invested with their friends to do their jobs, with the Obama administration covering for both of these guys.

So anyone interested in the A.I.G. bonus debacle needs to watch the clip of Maria Bartiromo on “Morning Joe” yesterday morning. (I know, she gets things wrong, but trust me on this one.) Do yourself a favor and watch it all. Bartiromo starts with “a contract is a contract,” then goes to strings should have been attached and “some kind of a deadline in place,” and ends with saying the people in the financial products division should be “paying for the mess that they got (A.I.G.) into,” and that their bonuses “should not be paid out.”

Ms. Bartiromo also talks about the “counter parties,” like Goldman Sachs who got the largest amount of the latest A.I.G. money paid out. Do some homework and answer this question: What group came from GS? It got a lot of coverage when it was all going down.

The systemic risk is how we got into this, allowing A.I.G. to get “too big to fail,” as the talking point goes, because too many counter parties would be taken down with them, which would in turn take everything else down as well. Sounds like an anti-trust issue to me, but no one has the spine for it.

But the other issue is that this notion that nobody knew what was going on is a lie being passed along because no one wants to be held accountable or hold anyone accountable. But more importantly because few people, especially in Congress, understand it all. That’s what the people at Treasury are counting on. If this sounds familiar it should. Financial ignorance is how Madoff got away with his fraud for so long.

Oh, and by the way, the lie that it’s all Chris Dodd’s fault is a product of the wingnuts finding a vulnerable politician and going after him. See Jane Hamsher’s post, as well as Glenn Greenwald’s on this issue, because right-wing radio is going to go nuts over Dodd, who has become the sacrificial pol, because the Obama administration is hanging Dodd out to dry to cover for Treasury.

And again, the other reality is that Congress doesn’t know what they’re doing now and doesn’t understand what happened, partly because the financial whizzes that came up with these schemes are smarter than the people regulating them, as well as the people crafting the laws they have to live by. Not so Geithner, who is really in trouble at this point, which is going to make things very sticky for President Obama.

Harold Meyerson:

… But Geithner’s indulgence of bankers’ indulgences is fast becoming the Obama administration’s Achilles’ heel. The AIG debacle is the latest in a series of bewildering Geithner decisions that threaten to undermine the administration’s efforts to restart the economy. So long as it’s Be Kind to Bankers Week at Treasury — and we’ve had eight straight such weeks since the president was inaugurated — American banking, and the economy it is supposed to serve, will remain paralyzed. The Geithner plan to restart the banks provides huge taxpayer subsidies to hedge funds, investment banks and private equity companies to buy the banks’ toxic assets without really having to assume the risk. That’s right — the same Wall Street wizards who got us into this mess, using the same securitization techniques that built mountains of debt within a shadow financial system that remains unregulated, are the saviors whom Geithner has anointed to extricate us — with our capital, not theirs — from the mess that they created. [...]

The Obama administration better get up to speed on this and do a much better job at figuring a way through it, because as this whole story unfolds further they’re going to have no cover at all.

Read full story · Comments { 17 }

Cuomo: ‘A.I.G. made more than 73 millionaires’

By on 17 March 2009



Goolsbee delivered terrific soundbite TV yesterday on “Hardball.”

Andrew Ross Sorkin was on “Morning Joe” where he was just an incoherent as he is here.

Cue the Santelli tape.

A.G. Cuomo makes his case. (I’ll put Cuomo’s deadline letter up if you all haven’t seen it yet.)

“A.I.G. made more than 73 millionaires in the unit which lost so much money that it brought the firm to its knees, forcing a taxpayer bailout,” Mr. Cuomo wrote in the letter. “Something is deeply wrong with this outcome.”

Huffington Post has more.

Politico’s Vanderhei:

Here’s something neither Obama nor Grassley answered in their bellicose remarks Monday: Why did it take so long for the president and senior lawmakers to get so worked up? More troubling, why did it take so long for them to discover AIG planned to give huge bonuses in the first place?

Oh, and Fox apologizes for screwing up the Biden economy clip time line.

But it was today during the White House briefing that Jake Tapper really tried to nail Robert Gibbs on the A.I.G. bonus issue and the time line of when they knew about them. It was close to painful to watch Gibbs as he tried to offer Tim Geithner some cover, while clearly not being prepared to answer something the White House hasn’t worked out yet. Expect much more on this one.

Read full story · Comments { 51 }

Bibi’s NSA Barred From U.S. – Will it Stick?

By on 17 March 2009

Well, well, well, yet another report about Uzi Arad being denied entry into the United States, which is really going to throw a wrench into Mr. Netanyahu’s plans if it sticks, though I doubt it will, frankly.

Uzi Arad, who is expected to serve as national security adviser in the next Israeli government, has been barred from entering the United States for nearly two years on the grounds that he is an intelligence risk.

Jeff Stein reported on this earlier in March, when Clinton was in the Middle East, which, as far as I’m aware, was one of the first times Uzi Arad was seen by Bibi’s side after the election.

Arad is a former Mossad director, and is wound up in the Lawrence Franklin espionage case that involved AIPAC, which is the foundation for the U.S. position.

That is, as it stands now. Let’s call this one developing, because I really don’t think it will stick.

Read full story · Comments { 0 }

U.S. Military Confirms Iranian Drone Downed

By on 16 March 2009

First reported by Danger Room, the story has been confirmed.

Multi-national Forces – Iraq spokesman Col. Scott Maw tells Danger Room that coalition fighters intercepted an Iranian unmanned aerial vehicle over Iraqi airspace on Feb. 25. The UAV, an Ababil-3 (pictured here), was “tracked as it crossed the border.” Coalition aircraft were sent up to visually I.D. the drone. Finally, after an “hour and ten minutes,” they did, and then shot it down “over 25 miles from the Iraq-Iran border.” All told, the UAV was tracked “for an hour and ten minutes before it was shot down.”

Maj. Gen. Abdul Aziz Mohammed Jassim, head of military operations at the Iraqi Defense Ministry, also confirmed the incident, telling Reuters: “An unmanned Iranian plane crossed the border and it was discovered by multi-national forces’ radar. They intercepted it and brought it down … an American plane brought it down.” According to Jassim, the incursion was most likely a “mistake.”

No doubt this will give Netanyahu another point to his Iran threat platform; something to wave in front of the U.S., as he did with Secretary Clinton on her visit to the Middle East.

An Israeli diplomat apprised of Clinton’s recent Jerusalem meeting said that Netanyahu was forthright in telling her that Iran is his top priority.

“Netanyahu brought up Iran,” the Israeli diplomat told Foreign Policy. “He told her it was the be all and end all. And [he said] that there is a reverse link: If [Washington] wants anything to move on the Palestinian front, we need to take head on the Iranian threat, diplomatically, with sanctions, and beyond that.”

Clinton responded, “I am aware of that,” the Israeli diplomat relayed.

Iran is simply not the issue for the U.S. it is for Israel, at least not in the way Israel sees it. Who’s going to tell Bibi?

Read full story · Comments { 4 }

In the News

By on 16 March 2009

A.I.G. is big, but this is bigger:

Government spending on most domestic programs is growing at its fastest pace in nearly 30 years, and a lot of worried Democrats are seeking ways to rewrite and reduce the size of President Barack Obama’s budget proposals.

[...] The Senate is likely to consider the budget the same week, and Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad, D-N.D., is also voicing reservations about the package’s size. “When I look at this budget, I see the debt doubling again, and that gives me great concern,” he said. Obama’s budget projects that by 2019, debt held by the public will reach $15.3 trillion, roughly double the current level.

What did anyone expect? The headline about moderate Democrats being Obama’s problem in passing legislation is absurd. Anyone not disgusted isn’t reading the fine print; either that or they can’t add.

At least the so called Blue Dogs aren’t demanding pay-go for health care. That’s because it’s not possible if you want reform.

More on AIG:

The Fed chairman, Ben S. Bernanke, appearing on “60 Minutes” on CBS on Sunday night, said: “Of all the events and all of the things we’ve done in the last 18 months, the single one that makes me the angriest, that gives me the most angst, is the intervention with A.I.G.”

He went on: “Here was a company that made all kinds of unconscionable bets. Then, when those bets went wrong, they had a — we had a situation where the failure of that company would have brought down the financial system.”

In deciding to rescue A.I.G., the government worried that if it did not bail out the company, its collapse could lead to a cascading chain reaction of losses, jeopardizing the stability of the worldwide financial system. …

We’ve got a lot of very smart lawyers who need to immediately start working on recovering the bonuses paid out by A.I.G. There’s got to be a way.

Netanyahu and Lieberman together at last:

The deal with Mr. Lieberman’s Yisrael Beitenu Party, which placed third in February’s parliamentary election, was concluded Monday morning, according to spokeswoman Irena Etinger, and is a critical first step in Mr. Netanyahu’s bid to form a governing coalition.

An aide to Mr. Netanyahu confirmed that a deal had been reached between the two men.

Pakistan takes a breath as judges are reinstated.

WJC parts with another source of big bucks, Yucaipa Partnerships.

Iran and Russian, together on energy.

Simply grotesque.

Khatami out? Reports saying he will not run against Ahmadinejad.

Roger Cohen on Israel and Iran.

God’s speed, Mr. Silver.

…and El Salvador elects a leftie.

Read full story · Comments { 15 }

Dick Cheney Ignores that 9/11 Happened on Their Watch

By on 15 March 2009

Mr. Cheney’s “stuff happens” economic glibness is getting a lot of attention today, but it’s not what caught my ear.

The man who brought us Ahmed Chalabi and Paul Wolfowitz, as well as “Curveball,” with Judy Miller’s greatest hits on WMD pushing the way at the NY Times, thinks Scooter Libby was left “hanging in the wind” by Bush, and that Scooter deserved a pardon. Having the pleasure of interviewing Mrs. Plame and Mr. Wilson, the drivel from Mr. Cheney today is especially reprehensible. The lack of respect Dick Cheney has for independent intelligence professionals ends with Valeria Plame (and her colleagues) being dispensable. Never mind that later in the interview he lauds the intelligence community, but only when they validate the political agenda of Bush-Cheney. That tells you how we got into Iraq from the man who helped concoct the invasion. Accurate intelligence was never solicited or even required, but just got in their way. So when Joe Wilson outed the White House for manufacturing their primary avenue of proof against Saddam, it was nothing to Cheney that a career C.I.A. officer was burned in the process to send a message. Oh! But the hit man sent to do the dirty deed is worthy of a pass.

From there it was an easy jump to torture, illegal wiretapping, Justice department tampering, etc., etc., which resulted in America’s image and trust across the globe damaged in a way that will require Obama’s entire administration, especially Secretary Clinton, to begin from scratch to try and tape back together what Bush and Cheney destroyed.

However, the interview clincher came when John King asked Mr. Cheney if President Obama “has made Americans less safe.” The reply was blunt and short: “I do.” It’s Mr. Cheney’s evaluation of President Obama’s adherence to the U.S. Constitution that is so startling even today, as he applauds the illegalities that had George W. Bush circumventing the rule of law during his terms in office.

I urge you to read “Tales From Torture’s Dark World,” by Mark Danner, which appears today in the Times. It will prove why President Obama’s commitment to distancing the U.S. from their national security policies is one of the most important things he can do if we are to bring terrorists who target Americans to justice. You simply cannot do it without adhering to the rules and tenets of American justice.

[...] From everything we know, many or all of these men deserve to be tried and punished — to be “brought to justice,” as President Bush vowed they would be. The fact that judges, military or civilian, throw out cases of prisoners who have been tortured — and have already done so at Guantánamo — means it is highly unlikely that they will be brought to justice anytime soon.

For the men who have committed great crimes, this seems to mark perhaps the most important and consequential sense in which “torture doesn’t work.” The use of torture deprives the society whose laws have been so egregiously violated of the possibility of rendering justice. Torture destroys justice. Torture in effect relinquishes this sacred right in exchange for speculative benefits whose value is, at the least, much disputed. [...]

Mr. Cheney scoffs at the notion that “the rule of law” is important in fighting radical Islamic jihad. It’s obvious that his idea of justice, and those of his former boss George W. Bush, is a 21st lynch mob mentality. I remain stunned that Congress never did anything about it and that President Obama seems sanguine to “look forward” without reconciling what happened in the past, at least so far. This sort of moral cowardice and squeamishness about the importance of law inforcement is how we got here in the first place.

Read full story · Comments { 12 }

In Our World, and Cato Institute Event

By on 15 March 2009
Photobucket

Don’t look now, but Nawaz Sharif has been arrested in Pakistan.

It seems fitting that Pakistanis have begun to worry about extremism. While Osama’s popularity softens from around 50% to 34% thinking he will “do the right thing in world affairs:

Overwhelmingly, Pakistanis are worried about the impact of extremism on their country and people, says a new survey conducted by PEW (IRI) global research.

In 2008 72 per cent said they were concerned about Islamic extremism in their country, and over half — 54 per cent — said they were very concerned, the highest per centage among the eight countries on the survey where the question was asked (the others were Egypt, Jordan, Indonesia, Lebanon, Nigeria, Tanzania, and Turkey). [...]

Meanwhile, “the long march” continues, as does the crackdown in Pakistan, with opposition party leaders and other activists going into hiding to keep from being arrested.

A story floated about Russia, Venezuela and Cuba have the wingnuts spinning Cuban missile crisis theories, because “if” and “could” equals action to jumpy Republicans. Memeorandum has the roundup.

Secretary Clinton to Mexico later this month.

Clinton’s talks in Mexico would cover the global financial crisis, trade and the war against drugs, as well as the explosion of narcotics-related violence, Duguid said.

[...] The State Department last month warned U.S. citizens of the recent surge in violence, particularly near the border, and advised traveling only on main roads during daylight, sticking to well-known tourist spots and avoiding areas frequented by prostitutes or drug dealers.

With due respect to the State Department, there should be an all out travel advisory regarding Mexico that should read like this: You’re thinking about traveling where? Are you nuts?

That brings me to the forum on Friday at the Cato Institute, Can the Pentagon be Fixed? One of the people on the panel was Col. Douglas Macgregor. One specific point Col. Macgregor (retired) made I’ve come to the conclusion is unassailable. The Caribbean basin will likely become an increasing challenge for the U.S., though Macgregor’s assessment is much more dire. He believes firmly that homeland security is more urgent than the troubles we are facing in the Af-Pak region, something that is sobering in the extreme. However, that’s looking forward, because for my money, right now nothing is more urgent than the situation in Pakistan.

Macgregor believes “high impact, low footprint” missions will be more important going forward, because the era of the U.S. being “indispensable is over.” Macgregor: We are not going to garrison the world. The world doesn’t want it and we can’t afford it. That’s as close to a quote as I can get, but you catch the drift.

But it was on the Mexico cartel question from the audience that Macgregor hit on something very rarely covered. It’s not the drug cartels, in his opinion, that are so dangerous. “The transportation structure is enormous,” but also deadly lethal to the United States. The people in charge of the transportation system only want to be paid and they don’t care what they’re transporting. The drug cartels have one product they’re interested in pushing and selling, so they’re focused on it. The transportation structure, vast and unlimited, is different. In Macgregor’s judgment, though he’s not alone, the Coast Guard is vastly underfunded and underequipped, but he also believes the U.S. Navy should have a larger presence in the Caribbean basin.

Oh, and by the way, Macgregor thinks we should be out of Iraq yesterday. Containment worked before and can again. I remember the first time I wrote something along those lines, pushing for this tried form of strategy to be utilized again. I was pilloried with mail. Let’s hope colonels have clout.

But one question from a reporter from Military.com was very interesting: If you had 2 minutes with Robert Gates what would you tell him?

Winslow Wheeler: Tear up the phony stuff like the Levin-McCain legislation. Do what you talked about in your Foreign Affairs article. (–Notes via tweets on Twitter.–)

Col. Macgregor: “Persistent warfare” needs to end; develop containment policies.

Danielle Brian: Stop saying top guy at Raytheon is the right guy. Learn to say no.

Tom Ricks: Ten percent (10%) of new brigadier generals should be people who have been blackballed.

Let me just say that Tom Ricks is priceless. (See my tweets during the forum for more.)

Oh, and as for the F-22, Winslow Wheeler was blunt: “It’s a dog.” Danielle Brian thinks it’s part of a larger test for President Obama. “This is going to be a real test of Obama’s administration” says Danielle Brian, which she’s said before, as a staunch critic of the F-22, but also someone pushing for real change at the Pentagon. If Obama yields to Congress it will be the same old stuff all over again. Taxpayers paying for a military force structure that used to protect us, but in its current form isn’t ready for the 21st century threats we face.

How about we at least test the weapons we purchase before we order dozens of them? …and while we’re at it, Congress needs to quit thinking and saying that defense budget cutting is not supporting the troops. The Pentagon’s bloated budget hides behind that lie.

Read full story · Comments { 36 }

Can the Pentagon be Fixed?

By on 13 March 2009
Photobucket

I’ll be working this afternoon outside my office, including attending a defense policy forum at the CATO Institute. The forum, “Can the Pentagon be fixed?”, begins at noon and will be streamed live.

The speakers are Winslow T. Wheeler, Director, Straus Military Reform Project at CDI; Col. Douglas Macgregor, U.S. Army (ret.); Advisor, Straus Military Reform Project; Danielle Brian, Executive Director, Project on Government Oversight; Thomas Ricks, Senior Fellow, Center for a New American Security; Special Military Correspondent, The Washington Post; Benjamin Friedman, Research Fellow in Defense and Homeland Security Studies, Cato Institute.

The U.S. defense budget is higher than at any point since the end of World War II, but the size of the combat formations of the Army, Navy and Air Force are the smallest since 1946. …

Obviously, the reality of the sentence above is a tall order for Obama and his administration. It’s another part of the Bush-Cheney inheritance.

I’ll tweet the event if connection permits, as I will be doing with all of the national security forums I’m now attending since landing in D.C.

UPDATE: Post on this event is here.

Read full story · Comments { 3 }

Madoff: ‘I am deeply sorry and ashamed’

By on 12 March 2009

He didn’t buy any stocks.

He didn’t buy any securities.

It was nothing but a ponzi scheme. The largest fraud in U.S. history. He’s now plead guilty to 11 felony counts, including money laundering. When he gets sentenced, he could end up in a maximum security prison. He’s now “deeply sorry and ashamed”.

“I am actually grateful for this opportunity to publicly comment about my crimes, for which I am deeply sorry and ashamed,” he said.

“As the years went by, I realized my risk, and this day would inevitably come. I cannot adequately express how sorry I am for my crimes.”

What about the rest of the Madoffs, specifically, his sons? Mrs. Madoff is a subject of further investigation. To be continued.

Read full story · Comments { 11 }

Saudi Court Sentences 75-year-old Woman to 40 Lashes

By on 10 March 2009

People who are talking about Afghanistan and how we shouldn’t expand our military involvement in that country are ignorant of what women in many of these countries across the Middle East, but also into Central Asia experience. Hell of a deal the Taliban made in the Swat region of Pakistan that imposed Sharia.

Meanwhile, the Saudis continue their brutal 15th century treatment of women.

A 75-year-old widow in Saudi Arabia has been sentenced to 40 lashes and four months in jail for mingling with two young men who are not close relatives, drawing new criticism for the kingdom’s ultraconservative religious police and judiciary. …

State spokesperson Robert Wood was asked over and over again in yesterday’s briefing about the issue of possible Taliban negotiations and how the Obama administration will reconcile this with Clinton’s commitment to women’s civil rights. Wood wouldn’t answer the question in any meaningful way, stating simply that the policy is under review and that Clinton’s passions towards Afghanistan women is steadfast.

That’s undeniable, but it’s a real issue as people review our Afghanistan policy and the reality of having to negotiate with the Taliban. It’s what got Steve Clemons and I into a debate recently, when he agreed with an article Dana Priest had written, agreeing that tunneling out women from Afghanistan may be our reality. I took him to serious task for his statements made in an interview with Rachel Maddow. Steve and I talked about this at the Middle East forum I covered recently, as he mentioned my criticism several times that day, agreeing that it’s not only a difficult subject but one worth discussing. The door is open for more debate between Steve and myself in the future. But others against a stronger military presence in Afghanistan, even as we negotiate with the Taliban, don’t seem to get the price that will be paid by the women. I also wonder how anyone expects to keep that country from becoming a failed state, as is Obama’s goal, without addressing the issue of women’s rights. You can’t have a stable country without them.

It will be interesting to see if Secretary Clinton weighs in on the 75-year-old woman whom the Saudis have decided to punish in a manner (I’ve got a call in) that is as barbaric as it is flagrantly against Clinton’s core belief in women’s rights being human rights.

Read full story · Comments { 8 }

Five Chinese Vessels Harass US Ship in International Waters

By on 09 March 2009
Photobucket

According to AP reporting, Chinese ships, five according to the DoD, “shadowed and maneuvered dangerously close” to the USNS Intrepid (pictured here). The U.S. government intends to deliver a protest to the military attache in Beijing on Monday, but has already protested to the Foreign Ministry in China, and the Chinese embassy.

From the Defense Department:

The incident began as the ships surrounded the Impeccable and two craft closed to within 50 feet, Whitman said. The Chinese ships included a Chinese navy intelligence collection ship, a Bureau of Maritime Fisheries patrol vessel, a State Oceanographic Administration patrol vessel and two small Chinese-flagged trawlers.

Crewmen aboard the Impeccable used fire hoses to spray one of the vessels as a protective measure. The Chinese crewmembers disrobed to their underwear and continued closing to within 25 feet.

The Chinese vessels dropped pieces of wood in the water directly in the Impeccable’s path, and two of the ships stopped directly in the U.S. vessel’s path, forcing it to stop.

Whitman said the Chinese used poles in an attempt to snag the Impeccable’s towed acoustic array sonars. Impeccable’s master used bridge-to-bridge radio circuits to inform the Chinese ships in a friendly manner that it was leaving the area and requested a safe path to navigate.

“These are dangerous close maneuvers that these vessels engaged in,” Whitman said.

It’s not the first time the Chinese have got aggressive in international waters:

The incident Sunday followed a series of provocatives manuevers by Chinese ships and planes aimed at two U.S. Navy surveiilance ships:

- March 7: A PRC intelligence collection ship made a bridge to bridge call to the USNS Impeccable, calling their operations illegal and telling them to leave the area or “suffer the consequences”
- March 5: a Chinese frigate approached the USNS Impeccable, crossing its bow within about 100 yards; about 2 hours later, a Chinese Y-12 aircraft conducted 11 fly-bys at a low altitude (about 600 yards)
- March 4: a Chinese Bureau of Fisheries Patrol vessel used a high intensity spotlight to harass an ocean surveillance ship, the USNS Victorious, shining it on the ship and at the crew (the ship was operating about 125 nautical miles off the coast of China); the ship then crossed the Victorious’ bow in darkness without warning; finally, a Chinese Y-12 surveillance aircraft conducted 12 fly-bys at a low altitude (about 400 feet).

Robert Gibbs was asked about the incident in today’s press briefing and had a prepared response ready:

Q: Mr. Gibbs, two questions. First, Chinese vessels have been harassing U.S. ships with increasing aggressiveness. I know that the Chinese defense attaché went to the Pentagon, or is at the Pentagon right now, to review a complaint, but is the President taking any other action regarding the Chinese government, to tell them to stop doing this?

MR. GIBBS: I know that our embassy in both Beijing and here protested the actions of the Chinese ships that have been reported. Our ships obviously operate fairly regularly in international waters where these incidents took place. We’re going to continue to operate in those international waters, and we expect the Chinese to observe international law around them.

Read full story · Comments { 3 }

The Swiftboating of Chas Freeman

By on 07 March 2009

Boy, was this predictable. Anyone who isn’t sufficiently sycophantic to the Israel first-er crowd gets put on the target list, otherwise known as swiftboating. Led by people like Steve Rosen, Marty Peretz and others who long ago equated Israel’s interests equal with our own. It’s why Bibi Netanyahu had the unmitigated gall to put down a list of demands on how the U.S. should conduct our diplomacy going forward. Getting out of this cycle is what Chas Freeman’s appointment is all about. But Mr. Freeman’s Saudi relationships has freaked some Republicans, with a review now being conducted of those ties. That’s fine, prudent even. But I wonder if the same outrage would have come from Congress, or a review would have happened if Mr. Freeman had similar ties with Israel?

Chas’ son gets into it today, going straight at his dad’s critics in a way that reveals just how sordid critics of his father have become. From a post on Steve Clemons’ blog:

My father, Chas Freeman, was recently appointed to chair the National Intelligence Council, an important but not political position that operates as editor-in-chief of “big think” analysis of foreign policy for the President.

A cabal of ideological hardliners has orchestrated a remarkable, self-referential smear campaign against my Dad’s appointment, dragging Congress and the political process into this non-political sphere. They are wrong to do it, and not just because my Dad is involved.

[...]The problem with – and the great virtue of – my Dad is that he has no political sensibility at all.

His appointment is being challenged these days by a small cabal of folks that believe first and foremost in the importance of allegiance to Israel as a core U.S. priority. …

The next line about Steve Rosen is a hoot. That is if this weren’t so deadly serious and Freeman wasn’t in danger of being swiftboated out of a job. Really, just read what Freeman’s son has written.

Then read Jonathan Chait, though this sentence is all you need: But Freeman isn’t a contrarian so much as a man with extremely rigid views that run contrary to what most people believe. Those bells you hear is an irony alert. “What most people believe” isn’t the way to run foreign policy, but this is what we’ve gotten due to the cowardice we’ve seen from Bush and his supporters, a cycle President Obama is trying to break because what they did hasn’t worked.

Jeffrey Goldberg steps in it as well: Freeman blames Israel, and American support for Israel, for provoking 9/11. Citing the Lawrence Wright and his “Looming Tower” as the proof, which blames troops in Saudi Arabia as the catalyst for 9/11, which is hardly the point considering where we are today. Using 9/11 as their panic button does, however, illustrate their commitment to the cause as well as their desperation. Just look at the wingnuts wailing on Memeorandum. The goal to swiftboat Chas Freeman so Obama doesn’t get an honest broker sitting in the room when Middle East policy is discussed. Also Richard Clarke is used as evidence that Israel didn’t play a major role in 9/11. Who can argue with such esteemed experts? But the fact remains that among many Arabs, can anyone deny that what is perceived as our tilted policies towards Israel is the catalyst for Arab ire against the U.S.? Of course, that’s not a reason to alter policy, unless the underlying reality is that we are losing America’s best interest in the mix. Everyone arguing about what caused 9/11 also acts as if it can be simply explained. I’d contend that the people we saw dancing in the streets after 9/11, though a minority, weren’t dancing because our troops were in Saudi Arabia.

That doesn’t mean fair criticism and investigation isn’t worthy when the situation arises, including for Chas Freeman. However, when it’s moored in the belief that anyone having an equal footing with Arabs is bad, what is revealed is the myopic foreign policy that has helped lead us all to this sorry mess in the Middle East.

Using 9/11 to swiftboat Chas Freeman is nakedly despicable. But Republicans use our national tragedy to their own ends all the time.

If we are ever going to change the dynamics in the Middle East and get to equilibrium people like President Obama, with the help of Secretary of State Clinton (one of the strongest pro Israel people you will ever find) and the entire diplomatic team will have to summon the courage to get apolitical realists like Chas Freeman in the room when issues are discussed. A contrarian view is not only important, it could save us from repeating what hasn’t worked so many times before.

Read full story · Comments { 9 }

Top Story from Military.com Churns World Net Daily Tale

By on 06 March 2009
Photobucket

So, at the crack of dawn I open my email box to find my usual email from Military.com. The top story is of the active-duty Army officer who joined a California lawsuit meant to force President Obama to prove he’s a legal citizen. In essence, these soldiers are questioning whether Barack Obama is legally their commander in chief. It’s a story that gained traction from World Net Daily.

“We are taking a look at that ourselves right now,” Lt. Col. Christopher Garver said. “We are always trying to balance our … military requirements under the Uniform Code of Military Justice versus critical freedoms that all Americans enjoy.”

California dentist turned attorney Orly Taitz, who has brought the lawsuit, told Military.com Tuesday that it is her “understanding that there will not be a serious consequence to his career [for his statements], but I don’t know for sure.”

“I told him ‘you’re doing something very brave for this country, and that you can call me any time, 24/7 [for advice],’ ” she said. “If you’re investigated by [the judge advocate general] and if there are any hearings … and if an officer is defending you, I will provide documents totally proving it’s illegitimate for [Obama] to be president.” [...]

Let’s hope Lt. Easterling runs into a career wall for this stunt.

Under Article 138, he said, any person can bring an allegation of misconduct by a commander through the chain of command, “though I don’t think [it] has ever been used to allege misconduct by the president.”

He may also have tried reporting his allegations under the whistleblower protection act, Tully said. But the Defense Department directive on that spells out the inspector general and the Congress as the places to take allegations, he added.

“People in the military … have rights protecting them for reporting [alleged] misconduct, but there are strict procedures,” Tully explained. “And joining a civil lawsuit and calling the president of the United States an imposter is not one of those avenues.”

Why Military.com is even covering this story, especially in the way they did today, is another issue. Stars and Stripes showed better judgment.

Read full story · Comments { 12 }

ICC Issues Warrant for Sudan’s al-Bashir

By on 04 March 2009

–updated–

Photobucket

Amidst the arrival of my husband driving the truck with everything we own (call it a blue collar cross country moving reality; we move ourselves), the world turns. Today, a tiny move forward towards justice.

But first a note on what’s going on. While Mark was packing our house up back west, I’ve been working and living here with just the basics: computer and flat screen TV (with cable and screaming internet connection), gym clothes (a must for me, as I’m a work out rat), one business jacket and shirt (and tie), one pair of jeans (and laundry detergent), and winter coat and gloves, basic toiletries. Unloading begins soon, but having not seen my husband in days, we had to hire workers, etc. for the final move in.

Today on news, let’s start off with a monumental action from the International Court, which issued an arrest warrant for Sudanese president, the first ever issued for a sitting head of state, and boy did he earn it. Via CNN:

The International Criminal Court at the Hague issued an arrest warrant Wednesday for Sudanese President Omar Hassan al-Bashir for a five-year campaign of violence in Darfur.

Al-Bashir is the first sitting head of state to be charged by the permanent war crimes court. It is the first arrest warrant ever issued for a sitting head of state by the world’s only permanent war crimes tribunal.

Bashir is charged with seven counts of crimes against humanity and war crimes. The warrant does not mention genocide, but the court may issue an amended warrant to include that charge later, ICC spokeswoman Laurence Blairon said. [...]

Nic Robertson offers hair raising reporting not for the faint of heart, telling the tale of all the government’s institutionally led child rapes under al-Bashir’s orders.

Photobucket

[...] There were other people in the room, the translator, a cameraman, our producer Jonathan Wald, but I had forgotten they were there. My thoughts were entirely locked on Adam.

What more could I ask? I was emotionally drained. There was no way of knowing whether he was telling me the truth. Only in the measure of his voice was there a clue.

Here, sitting on an office chair, thousands of miles away from Darfur, the memories come flooding back. The many, traumatized women and children we’ve interviewed, distraught families, unable to protect themselves. The pain we put them through, to recount, to relive, their nightmares. [...]

There is a special place in hell reserved for al-Bashir, which is actually an address in reality when he finally faces the world to answer for these crimes.

Save Darfur has an action alert asking President Obama to appoint an emissary to the Sudan. Scott Paul has more.

However, the pictures drawn by children say it all.

Read full story · Comments { 9 }

Why is Obama Talking about ‘Clean Coal’?

By on 28 February 2009

–updated–

Psssst… Hey, Mr. President, there is no such thing as “clean coal.”

It makes the Reality Coalition‘s new ad hilarious, but then it would be. It’s done by the famous Coen brothers. The message is not, but it’s hard to permeate the deniers’ world. Even Obama mentioned “clean coal” in his Tuesday speech. Silly for a man so smart, also a bit embarrassing. It’s not like Al Gore, who is part of the Reality Coalition, doesn’t know what he’s talking about.

… Let’s be clear: there are no US homes, factories, shopping centers or churches powered by coal plants that capture and store their global warming pollution.

Today, coal power plants emit carbon dioxide (CO2), the pollutant causing the climate crisis. A third of the America’s carbon pollution now comes from about 600 coal-fired power plants. And of the more than 70 proposed new coal power plants, barely a handful have plans to capture and store their CO2 emissions. If these dirty plants are allowed to be built, this will mean an additional 200 million tons of global warming pollution will be emitted in America each year. Until coal power plants no longer release CO2 to the atmosphere, coal will remain a major contributor to the climate crisis.

So what’s the deal with President Obama saddling up to “clean coal”?

Sometimes confrontation is required.

Oh, and I almost forgot, on the climate change issue alone we’ve got quite a brouhaha that has bubbled up between environmentalists and George Will. Because of the work of Media Matters and others, including readers, the Post is feeling the heat. Even the ombudsman of the Post was pressured on Will’s latest climate change denier rant, responding in a column which will run tomorrow (but is now online). Senator Kerry’s got a fantastic post up taking on George Will. Like I said, sometimes confrontation is required.

Disclosure: The Reality Coalition is an advertiser on this blog, though no agreement to cover the issue comes with that placement.

Read full story · Comments { 23 }

Standing Against Holder on Resurrecting ‘Assault Weapons Ban’

By on 27 February 2009

I’m beginning to wonder about A.G. Eric Holder’s priorities, not to mention his knowledge base of weaponry. Senator Reid and Speaker Pelosi have this one exactly right. Any attempt to resurrect the “assault weapons ban” should be opposed, because it’s absolutely ludicrous.

… “Senator Reid would oppose an effort (to) reinstate the ban if the Senate were to vote on it in the future,” Manley told The Hill in an e-mail late Thursday night.

It was not immediately clear whether Reid would block the bill from the Senate, but his opposition casts serious doubt on its chances. Also, Manley noted that Reid voted against the ban in 1994 and again when it expired in 2004.

Reid’s stance joins him with Pelosi, who told reporters Thursday that the administration had not checked with her before Attorney General Eric Holder told reporters the administration would attempt to reinstate the ban. Pelosi gave a flat “no” when asked if she had spoken to Holder or any other administration officials about the issue.

“On that score, I think we need to enforce the laws we have right now,” Pelosi said at her weekly news conference. “I think it’s clear the Bush administration didn’t do that.” [...]

First, there is no way to “ban assault weapons.” I’m not the gun expert in my family, but “ban” an assault weapon, and the gun manufacturers still provide ways around the “ban” so people can have their assault weapons, one part at a time.

Besides, there is no reason in the world a law abiding American shouldn’t be allowed to own whatever he or she wants, including an assault weapon. My husband used to have one (which I had the pleasure of firing), though I won’t get into the special license etc., because it’s in the weeds for most people. He’s a gun expert and someone who appreciates the craftsmanship of firearms. So I’d like someone to tell me why he shouldn’t be able to own whatever he wants, especially if all he’s going to do is case it or collect it. But even if he wants to fire it, why should anyone else care?

A.G. Holder is involving himself in the sort of activism that is mindlessly political and stupid amidst the real issues Justice should be tackling. Go after the gun shows, encourage more study on “microstamping” (something California will require by 2010 on all semiautomatic pistols), “encoded ammunition”, enforce the laws on the books, among other things, but resurrecting the “assault weapons ban” is a monumental waste of time.

Read full story · Comments { 18 }

Pelosi Marsh Mouse Story ‘Total Fabrication’

By on 13 February 2009
marsh mouse

GOP staffers have too much time on their hands. They’ve pulled $30 million out of the stimulus to aim at Speaker Pelosi. I guess if you have no chance of dimming the new president’s popularity you might as well go after the Speaker of the House. No doubt setting up 2010 early. It all started when the Washington Times wrote it up: Pelosi’s mouse slated for $30M slice of cheese.

Greg Sargent:

But I just contacted the House GOP staffer who wrote the initial email laying out this talking point, and he conceded that the claim by conservative media that the mouse money is currently in the bill is a misstatement. “There is not specific language in the legislation for this project,” he said.

The staffer held to the claim that the mouse money would ultimately be spent, however, arguing that the bill’s passage would ensure that money would ultimately go to the unnamed agency. “If the bill passes, the project will be funded according to what the relevant agency told our staff,” he said. “The bottom line is, if this bill becomes law, taxpayers will spend 30 million on the mouse.”

Not quite, according to Pelosi’s office:

“There are no federal wetland restoration projects in line to get funded in San Francisco,” Pelosi spkesperson Drew Hammill said. “Neither the Speaker nor her staff have had any involvement in this initiative. The idea that $30 million will be spent to save mice is a total fabrication.”

Someone needs to tell the crew at “Morning Joe,” especially Joe, who was all over it yesterday. As for Mike Barnicle, as much as he bitches about the blogs maybe he should read them instead of the Washington Times, which has now updated their original article that helped spread the story in the first place.

Sean Hannity hit it on his radio show as well. But for Mr. Hannity the facts never matter.

This is how they do it. Create urban myths to attack Democrats, but since Obama is currently Mr. Popularity they simply had to find another target. Congress is always good for a whack, with Republicans putting Speaker Pelosi in the bull’s eye. Do a Google search on the subject and you’ll see how fast it spread.

Read full story · Comments { 20 }

To Investigate Bush Or Not?

By on 12 February 2009

“I went over some of the parameters of it and they were well aware at the White House of what I’m talking about,” Leahy told the Huffington Post. “And we just agreed to talk further.”

The dialogue between the Vermont Democrat and the president’s office is a new phase in a delicate process concerning how best to handle potential crimes in the previous White House. (source: Huffington Post)

Gallup has the numbers, though they slant their analysis against what seems to be obvious. That people want something done, if only to know how far off course we went under Bush-Cheney.

Earlier this week, Sen. Patrick Leahy called for a special commission to investigate possible government wrongdoing by the Bush administration in its anti-terror policies, as well as possible attempts to politicize the Justice Department through the firing of U.S. attorneys who were viewed as potentially disloyal to the administration. While Americans appear to support some kind of investigation into these matters, no more than 41% favor criminal probes.

This is where I ignore polling. You have to do what’s right, what’s in the best interest of our democratic republic, as well as what will re-invigorate the Constitution and the foundation of the rule of law in this country. Knowing what happened and how far Bush-Cheney went has nothing to do with polling the American pulse. President Obama and his team should remember they’re just passing through, but the impact of the Bush-Cheney years can leave a lasting legacy.

See Ford’s pardon of Nixon, which did this country no good at all, though his crimes spawned Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld’s passion for broadening the executive branch. Lessons learned?

Read full story · Comments { 56 }

A.Q. Khan: ‘I don’t care about the rest of the world’

By on 07 February 2009

Khan only cares “about his country.” Well, that’s obvious.

A.Q. Khan was released from house arrest on Friday.

A Pakistani court today freed nuclear scientist A.Q. Khan from unofficial house arrest, capping a rehabilitation that began almost from the moment he confessed in 2004 to providing sensitive nuclear technology to rogue regimes around the world. [...]

Clinton voiced “concern,” with the promise that more will be said on the issue at some point. But someone at State who wants to remain anonymous told AFP that there is also belief some of Khan’s network may still be active.

Yet another steaming remnant of the Bush-Cheney Musharaff policy in Pakistan.

Read full story · Comments { 0 }

Wind Down

By on 04 February 2009
httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwUH9iA0GcM

Topic free for all time. I’ll start with a combo. Maddoff’s “Penthouse” arrest, and Michael Phelps’ bong crime.

For the former, Rep. Grayson out of Florida (great video at the site) recently questioned whistleblower Harry Markopolis, who wrote letters to the SEC about Maddoff several years ago and testified in front of the Financial Services Committee. Grayson is demanding Maddoff go to jail pending trail.

And yet, even now after the revelations of his criminality emerge, Jim Hightower reports that Madoff is living in a $7 million penthouse paid for by his victims, and was “even allowed to hire his own private guard detail to watch ever so gently over him.” “What other criminal in this country gets to hire their jailer?” asked Grayson.

Hire your own jailer? Seriously. Rep. Grayson is absolutely correct. How many in the public even know this fact?

The link of the day goes to Kathleen Parker about Michael Phelps’ pot smoking:

This we know: Were Phelps to run for public office someday and admit to having smoked pot in his youth, he would be forgiven. Yet, in the present, we impose monstrous expectations on our heroes. Several hand-wringing commentaries have surfaced the past few days, lamenting the tragic loss for disappointed moms, dads and, yes, The Children.

Understandably, parents worry that their kids will emulate their idol, but the problem isn’t Phelps, who is, in fact, an adult. The problem is our laws — and our lies.

Of course our marijuana laws are ridiculous. Even as the point of her column, especially for a conservative, is dead on, equally ridiculous is Parker talking about how marijuana becomes a gateway drug. If marijuana is a person’s “gateway,” it’s quite likely the person involved would have found a different gateway anyway. The problem for Phelps is the rules for competing as an Olympian. You can become president after smoking pot, even doing a little cocaine. What would cause a ruckus is if the president was caught doing either while campaigning for the presidency. But the amount of insanity over Phelps’ bong sucking is absurd. The obligatory athlete’s apology the height of hypocrisy. Like most marijuana smokers, Phelps is likely not sorry about smoking, just incredibly sorry he got caught.

Read full story · Comments { 29 }