Archive for July, 2006

With Friends Like These…

Posted: July 15, 2006 in 2006 Elections
0

Photo from NBC 30 in Connecticut.

This is the first of what will probably be several writings on the Democratic primary contest happening right now in Connecticut over the course of the next few weeks, or months if Joe Lieberman loses the primary and runs in November as an independent candidate.

This in today’s LA Times:

I feel I have a special obligation to respond to your July 6 editorial, “Lieberman’s run.” I am a liberal activist. I was also Lieberman’s roommate at Yale.

Lieberman is a good and decent man personally, but he has also become a cheerleader for George Bush’s bloody, arrogant and disastrous war on Iraq.

As a friend, I wish for him the best. As a Democratic voter, if I lived in Connecticut, I would be voting for Ned Lamont.

DAVID WYLES

Playa del Rey

While the Iraq war is going to be the big issue in every midterm election race this November, I don’t think it’s the only factor in the challenge to Lieberman, although it certainly hasn’t helped him. Lieberman has annoyed a lot of liberal activists over the years, for his real and perceived closeness to Republicans in the Senate and the White House.

Unfortunately for Lieberman, he represents a liberal New England state where the support of President Bush and the Iraq war is not as unwavering as his, and it is precisely those liberal activists who he has annoyed that go out and vote in primary elections, particularly during off-year congressional elections which are traditionally lower in turnout than presidential election years.. From what I’ve been reading in the Connecticut media and the blogs, it seems to me that everyone who has ever had an axe to grind with Lieberman in the state of Connecticut is now coming out of the woodwork and piling on.

While the “Lieberman’s Former Roommate” endorsement is not going to throw the primary or general election in Ned Lamont’s favor, his campaign will probably get a chuckle out of it.

Update: Former Democratic presidential candidate Wesley Clark was asked about the Connecticut Senate race at Daily Kos and took a swipe at Lieberman. Here’s his response:

I am a proud member of the Democratic Party, and I believe it is our party’s responsibility to support the will of the Democratic primary voters in Connecticut. I personally look forward to supporting the candidate CT voters elect as the Democratic nominee. Though, as an aside, I must say I find it ironic that Senator Lieberman is now planning a potential run as an independent after he continually questioned my loyalty to the Democratic Party during the 2004 presidential primary.

Straight to Hell

Posted: July 14, 2006 in Foreign Policy, National Security
0

Photo from the Sydney Morning Herald.

So the situation in the Middle East is escalating, and the whole region could be at war with itself if local and international leaders don’t play their cards right to defuse this highly volatile situation.

I’ll write more about this later, but in the meantime, (even though I don’t necessarily agree with everything he writes) check out these comments by Steve Gilliard:

Ehud Olmert, like many new leaders, seek to establish his bona fides by using force. The problem is that the use of force has been disproportionate to the issue at hand. Attacking Beirut Airport? Ginning up some claim Iran ordered this?

The Israelis could be setting the stage for the collapse of the Iraqi government with this, and that means Americans die. This is reckless beyond words. Olmert is playing tough guy politics, but this time, he’s got a two front war going and the possiblility of the American Army paying the price.

Israel has gotten widespread support in the US because the cost has been minimal. If the Iraqis decide to up the stakes by going after the US, what does Olmert do then? If Israeli subs take out Iran’s reactor, are they going to accept another oil boycott?

Israel has a right to defend itself. But this is reckless behavior with the US on the hook. The Israeli government has been allowed to treat Bush and Rice like equals, and they are not. We pay for their economy and Army, like we do Egypt. Their actions can directly hurt Americans in Iraq if they don’t ratchet down their actions. A blockade? Bombing the airport? It wasn’t the Lebanese Army attacking Northern Israel.

There is more than a little contempt for Arabs among Israelis and that was transmitted to the US to our detriment. Make no mistake, the Iraqis hate Israel. Israel attacks Syria or Iran and US troops could pay the price.

I know Olmert is trying to show he can’t be bullied, but he’s way out of control here and Bush is sitting on his hands.

The Israelis need to realize that if US troops catch it in the neck because of their actions, the American public will be quite unsympathetic

One of the things that also changed after 9/11 is that Arabs can’t be bullied as they were in the past. Iraq shows that you can fight the west.

This needs to scale down into talks and quickly. Israel could be buying more trouble than they think they are and may well drag the US into it.

This Could Get Messy…

Posted: July 14, 2006 in Beltway Drama
0

Photo from Newsweek.

Former CIA officer sues Cheney, Libby, Rove over leak

Former CIA officer sues Cheney, Libby, Rove over leak
Plame alleges Bush administration officials ruined her career

WASHINGTON (AP) — The CIA officer whose identity was leaked to reporters sued Vice President Dick Cheney, his former top aide and presidential adviser Karl Rove on Thursday, accusing them and other White House officials of conspiring to destroy her career.

In a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court, Valerie Plame and her husband, Joseph Wilson, a former U.S. ambassador, accused Cheney, Rove and I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby of revealing Plame’s CIA identity in seeking revenge against Wilson for criticizing the Bush administration’s motives in Iraq.

…

The lawsuit accuses Cheney, Libby, Rove and 10 unnamed administration officials or political operatives of putting the Wilsons and their children’s lives at risk by exposing Plame.

I’m not sure how the legal argument of their civil suit will hold up once it gets to court, but the prospect of seeing the Vice President, Karl Rove, Scooter Libby, and ten other unnamed defendants has liberals cackling with glee.

You can view a PDF copy of the 23-page complaint.

Some highlights:

1) Plame’s Employment Status

Page 3 of the complaint states

“On January 1, 2002 Mrs. Wilson was working for the CIA as an operations officer in the Directorate of Operations. Her employment status was classified and not publicly known until July 14, 2003, when a press report precipitated by leaks from senior government officials at the White House revealed her status and exposed her.”

For those not familiar with CIA bureaucracy, the Directorate of Operations (DO) is the component which handles its agents in the field – spies, operatives, etc. While the DO is not only limited to spooks out in the field but also to its officers who work at CIA headquarters at Langley, it does provide some definitive evidence of what area of the CIA she was working in recent years before the Novak column.

I’m not sure how this will match up with what Republican critics of the Wilsons have been saying since the beginning of the whole sordid affair. In September 2003, Clifford May described his reaction to the Plame revelation in Novak’s column:

That wasn’t news to me. I had been told that — but not by anyone working in the White House. Rather, I learned it from someone who formerly worked in the government and he mentioned it in an offhand manner, leading me to infer it was something that insiders were well aware of.

During a pre-trial motion hearing before Judge Reggie Walton earlier this year, Scooter Libby’s attorney said that he intended to introduce five witnesses who would testify under oath during Scooter Libby’s trial that Wilson had discussed Plame’s CIA affiliation with them.


2) Ten John Does

Page 4 of the complaint states

“Defendants John Does No. 1-10 are persons whose identities currently are unknown but who are believed to be persons who were either employed by the United States Government in senior positions at all times relevant to this Complaint or who were political operatives with close ties to such persons.”

The big guessing game in Washington from now until if this case ever goes to trial will be trying to figure out the identities of the ten John Does named in the suit. I have my suspicions but will not speculate.

Besides Cheney, Rove, and Libby, the potential witness list is mindboggling from a political perspective, especially if the case goes to court before the November midterm elections. The Washington Post has a good write-up of the suit with some legal and historical analysis on how and why the Wilsons might and might not be able to get Cheney to take the stand. The article doesn’t say, but I get the impression the same protections would not apply to Rove, Libby, or any of the ten John Does.

I think it will be a virtual certainty that Bob Novak will be called to the stand, especially now that he feels he can discuss the case publicly since his role in Patrick Fitzgerald’s investigation is over. If this happens, you can count on the Wilsons’ legal team to ask him under oath how he first found out about Plame’s CIA employment. If Novak doesn’t try going the Judy Miller route, we may finally find out the identity of his original source, now that he’s admitted that Karl Rove and former CIA spokesman Bill Harlow were the other two.

I would also expect Harlow to be called in as well, to try to determine how he did or did not try to protect Plame’s CIA ties from Novak. I will write up a separate post on the Novak vs. Harlow discrepancies later.

The Bottom Line: the decision by the Wilsons to file a civil suit over the leak had been long rumored and does not come as a surprise. However, this choice of action will open up another avenue to get to the bottom of how this whole affair began and played out on both sides, and will likely cause the White House more political headaches in the weeks and months to come.

The real winners? The lawyers in the case. If a judge allows the lawsuit to proceed, they have a whole other case to worry about and in the case of lawyers representing players who were already involved in Fitzgerald’s investigation (i.e. Karl Rove and Scooter Libby) will likely make a killing on a second round of legal fees.

Wish You Were Here

Posted: July 11, 2006 in In Memoriam, Music, Pop Culture
0

“Come on you raver, you seer of visions, come on you painter, you piper, you prisoner, and shine!”

Several news organizations are reporting that Pink Floyd co-founder Syd Barrett has died.

Barrett was the band’s leader and creative force during its early years before he eventually left the band and was replaced by David Gilmour, and Pink Floyd went on to become one of the best selling and most influential bands of all time. More info on Pink Floyd here and Syd Barrett here.

He was also a central theme of the band’s 1975 album Wish You Were Here (hence the title of this entry and the use of the album cover). “Shine On You Crazy Diamond” is about him, and during Pink Floyd’s performance at Live 8 last summer, Roger Waters told the audience,”It’s quite emotional standing up here with these guys… We’re doing this for everyone who’s not here. And particularly, of course, for Syd,” before performing “Wish You Were Here.”

Rolling Stone has reached into its archives and dug up this 1971 interview with Syd Barrett which you should read. According to the MTV News writeup, he hasn’t given an interview since 1971, so this could be the one.

Finally, this bit of information coming in from the Department of Bad Karma: Rolling Stone is reporting that although Barrett died on July 7, it was not announced until today (July 11). Today is also the day that the DVD version of Pink Floyd’s 1995 live album Pulse is released.

LA Culture

Posted: July 11, 2006 in Uncategorized
0

Photo from that other school in Los Angeles.

So with LA being the entertainment mecca of the world and all, I decided to take in some of the local scene the past few days. Last week, I saw two movies – Lost City, about a rich Cuban family in Havana during the times before, during, and after the revolution; and Charade, an old movie starring Audrey Hepburn and Cary Grant. Charade was playing at an art museum, which screens old/classic movies from time to time. I was checking their calendar and they recently did a screening of Gone with the Wind. I thought Lost City was quite good, especially the soundtrack which is a wide range of Cuban music. Speaking of Cuban music, if you haven’t heard it, pick up the soundtrack to Buena Vista Social Club.

While we’re on the subject of music, Pearl Jam played two consecutive nights at the Great Western Forum, formerly the home of the Los Angeles Lakers. I went to both shows, and they were excellent. The first night was an epic 30-song, two and a half hour set. An interesting note – on both nights, Tim Robbins joined them onstage as a guest vocalist during two covers: Phil Ochs’ “Here’s to the State of Mississippi” (which Eddie Vedder recently performed during a taping of VH1’s “Storytellers”) on Sunday and X’s “I Must Not Think Bad Thoughts” on Monday.

The venue itself was surprisingly small, I thought. It seemed to me more like the biggest high school gym in the world than the home court for one of the most famous franchises in professional sports. I haven’t had time to hit any of the clubs on Sunset Strip during this trip, but there will be plenty of time for that after I move here.

Hitting Below the Belt?

Posted: July 6, 2006 in Media, National Security, Talking Heads
0

Last week’s “Meet the Press” featured a roundtable discussion with panelists Dana Priest, Bill Bennett, John Harwood, and William Safire.

You’ll recall that Dana Priest won a Pulitzer Prize for her story in the Washington Post on how the CIA was holding Al Qaeda detainees in secret prisons in Eastern Europe. Bill Bennett is the former Secretary of Education and currently a conservative radio talk show host and CNN commentator who has been very critical of reporters who publish classified information.

From the transcript:

MS. MITCHELL: Dana, let me point out that The Washington Post, your newspaper, was behind the others but also did publish this story. And a story you wrote last year disclosing the secret CIA prisons won the Pulitzer Prize, but it also led to William Bennett, sitting here, saying that three reporters who won the Pulitzer Prize—you for that story and Jim Risen and others for another story—were, “not worthy of an award but rather worthy of jail.” Dana, how do you plead?

MS. PRIEST: Well, it’s not a crime to publish classified information. And this is one of the things Mr. Bennett keeps telling people that it is. But, in fact, there are some narrow categories of information you can’t publish, certain signals, communications, intelligence, the names of covert operatives and nuclear secrets.

Now why isn’t it a crime? I mean, some people would like to make casino gambling a crime, but it is not a crime. Why isn’t it not a crime? Because the framers of the Constitution wanted to protect the press so that they could perform a basic role in government oversight, and you can’t do that. Look at the criticism that the press got after Iraq that we did not do our job on WMD. And that was all in a classified arena. To do a better job—and I believe that we should’ve done a better job—we would’ve again, found ourselves in the arena of…

Isn’t it interesting that Dana Priest managed to work in a reference to gambling when addressing Bennett, her detractor, while he’s sitting right next to her?

Crooks and Liars and You Tube have the clip online. Watch Bennett squirm.

I’ll have more in the days ahead about the controversy over news organizations publishing classified information and the recent political uproar surrounding it.

Update: I would like to add that while I don’t agree with Bennett’s criticism of reporters who obtain or publish classified information, I do think that Priest may have stepped over the line as far as taking a personal swipe at him. I would view gambling as a personal problem, which although it is in direct conflict with the reputation that Bennett has made for himself and the beliefs he has promoted over the years, would it be any different for going after someone’s personal problems like alcoholism or drug addiction or anything else? I certainly don’t think Bill Bennett’s gambling problem was relevant in addressing the point that Andrea Mitchell presented to Dana Priest during the discussion.

Forza Italia!

Posted: July 6, 2006 in Uncategorized
0

Mardi Gras and spring break are for amateurs…
Photo from La Gazzetta dello Sport.

Congratulations to the Italians for a masterful performance in the semifinals against Germany. Speaking from extensive personal experience, the Italians know how to celebrate a soccer victory like no one else.

One thing worth remembering is that in the first two minutes of the first overtime period, the Italians fired off two very close shots, one that went off the goalpost, the other off the top bar. If those two shots had gone in, in addition to the collapse by the German defense in the final two minutes of the second overtime period before the penalty kick shootout, it could potentially have been a 4-0 debacle for the Germans.

One final interesting historical observation, assuming the final two games this weekend go appropriately. During the 1990 World Cup, which was hosted in Italy, Germany won the tournament and Italy came in third place. This year, you could potentially have a reversal of what happened in 1990: the tournament hosted in Germany, with Italy winning the tournament and Germany finishing in third place.

Out in LA for the World Cup and Fourth of July

Posted: July 4, 2006 in Uncategorized
0



You’d never see anybody doing this in DC…
Photo from the Los Angeles County Department of Beaches and Harbors

I’ve been in LA for just over 12 hours now. I’m not going to get a whole lot done today as far as apartment hunting since it’s the Fourth of July.

First on the agenda today is the Germany vs. Italy World Cup semifinal. Go azzurri! Will be hitting a bar to watch the game.

In the late afternoon I will be barbecuing. No plans for this yet, but I’m hoping to go to a decent spot on the beach or up in the hills to catch the fireworks later in the evening.

The back page of the C section of today’s New York Times contains a scan of the Declaration of Independence, which is still an amazing document to read so many generations later. There’s a lot of history, good and bad, to cover in the 230 years since the Founding Fathers told the Brits to get lost. To put it in perspective, take a look at this timeline from the National Museum of American History. For those of you in need of a refresher who may want to discuss the meaning of the day in between hamburgers and beers, here’s a crash course that might come in handy.

My personal favorite Fourth of July was in 2000, when I was visiting Edinburgh, Scotland and went out with a few other Americans at the hostel where I was staying to have drinks on the Royal Mile to celebrate and watch the fireworks over Princes Street Gardens.

Happy Fouth of July.

Under New Management…

Posted: July 2, 2006 in Uncategorized
0

“I’m leaving, on a jet plane…”
Photo from Boeing Blog

“Welcome my son, welcome to the blogosphere…”
(My apologies to Pink Floyd)

I’m off to LA tomorrow, hopefully will find some time to do some blogging from out there over the next week or so when I’m not looking for an apartment or getting to know the town.

I’ve changed a few things since yesterday, and you can expect more in the days and weeks ahead once I’ve really thought this through and have a good idea of what I want for the look and feel of this blog.

In the meantime, I’ve added a few things off to the side to keep you the readers busy for a while, and changed the look of the site a bit from the original template that was set up by Adam, who also authored the piece of prose that precedes this posting, effectively launching this site before I even knew it existed. I’ve also changed the password, so Adam – no more impersonating me online! (Not that you would ever do such a thing, but as Ronald Reagan famously said, “Trust but verify.” I’ve seen enough “Security Watch” and identity theft stories by now to know what can happen when somebody successfully pretends to be you.)

Stay tuned…

PS – Is it wrong for me to quote a John Denver lyric less than 24 hours before I’m about to get on a plane? Or at least bad karma?

Newer Entries