MotherJones.com | MoJoBlog - Social Issues and Political Commentary: July 15, 2007

« July 8, 2007 - July 14, 2007 | Main | July 22, 2007 - July 28, 2007 »

July 21, 2007

Bribery Charges for KBR

Buried at the bottom of page A-6 in today's Times is news that Halliburton spin-off KBR and its subcontractor Eagle Global Logistics built bribery charges into the cost of delivering basic supplies to U.S. troops in Baghdad. An Eagle executive pleaded guilty yesterday to bribing KBR employees to continue to hand Eagle the lucrative subcontract. Eagle then took 50 cents in overcharges per pound of food, fuel, and other necessities it delivered to troops. KBR is officially claiming ignorance, but it takes two to commit bribery, and five KBR employees are included in the indictment.

Question is, how is this not also treason? After all, the well-placed companies refused to deliver basic necessities to American troops on the ground in Baghdad without first lining their pockets with taxpayer money, even as the taxpayers and their congressional representatives searched for a way to end the war without stranding the troops in dangerous territory.

July 20, 2007

Intel Committee Chair: What Does the Executive Order Mean?

Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, reacts to the news posted by Jonathan Stein below, that Bush has signed an executive order governing CIA interrogation techniques that supposedly bans cruel, degrading and inhuman treatment.

Rockefeller:

I just received the news this morning from General Hayden. We now need to determine what the Executive Order really means and how it will translate into actual conduct by the CIA. The only way to do that is to have the CIA come before the Committee and explain in detail how it intends to apply the Executive Order. It is also absolutely essential that the Department of Justice provide the Committee with its full legal analysis.

The stakes are too high and the issue too important to provide any comment until the Committee has been given the opportunity to fully evaluate the President’s action.

Rockefeller's skepticism is fully warranted, says former Justice Department official Marty Lederman: "It is, in a word, worthless. ... As I've explained in several posts, however ... non-criminal does not equal legal." Lederman's post is worth a close read.

BREAKING: Bush Administration to No Longer Break Domestic and International Law

WHOA! Talk about a Friday afternoon news dump! Caught this in the Post right before I left the office.

President Bush today signed an executive order governing the interrogation of terrorism suspects by the CIA and barring torture, degrading treatment and serious acts of violence, the White House announced.

Friday afternoon announcements are reserved for things the administration wants to hide; I love that they want to hide the fact that they are now following the law.

Only one explanation here: Bush had to take drastic action so Cheney didn't torture like a million dudes when Bush goes under the knife tomorrow.

Chief Justice Gets Reinstated, Victory for Democratic Forces in Pakistan

Last month, the New York Times asked if Pakistan "can mix well with democracy." U.S. officials, often conflating the small number of Islamic radicals with the entire Pakistani population, fear that fair, free, and democratic elections in Pakistan might put the Islamic radicals in power. Would it not be ridiculous if we sought to dismantle democracy in America for fear that the powerful Christian fundamentalist movement might influence the elections? The media seems to confuse the two, case in point, the recent heavy coverage of the Lal Masjid (Red Mosque) event and its ensuing violence: ubiquitious coverage of the actions, messages, and movements of a small fraction of Pakistan's population gives the impression that Pakistan is full of crazed mullahs, self detonating martyrs, and anti-democracy elements.

But to answer the question, can Pakistan mix well with democracy, I would say yes. In fact, democratic forces had a resounding victory today: Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry has been reinstated by Pakistan's Supreme Court after months of political turmoil. With a 10-3 vote, Judge Khalil-ur-Rehman Ramday declared Musharraf's suspension of the Chief Justice as illegal. Chaudhry was suspended, many think, so that the president could put in place someone more likely to bend to Musharraf's authority. This victory marks the first serious challenge to Musharraf's power during his reign. But the judicial victory did not come without cost. Amidst numerous and vigorous protests by lawyers, activists, and ordinary Pakistani citizens, when the Chief Justice was initially suspended in May, more than 40 people were killed in Karachi, the largest city in Pakistan. This prompted opposition senators to demand that Musharraf step down.

Chief Justice Chaudhry, the judges, the lawyers, opposition members, activists, journalists, and civil society groups should be applauded for their courage. In addition, this is definitely a victory for the democratic movement in the country and raises the question as to whether Musharraf can continue his rule, but democracy in Pakistan still has a long way to go. Although the same can be said for us as well these days.

—Neha Inamdar

King for a Day

Bush to name Cheney president while he undergoes a medical procedure Saturday. Atrios' thoughts: pray. Everybody else, guard your copy of the Constitution.

Romney Not Even President Yet, Already Abusing Power

It's a slow news day today, with the exception of the White House's unsurprising-if-you-know-this-crowd assertion that the Justice Department will never take up contempt charges filed by Congress against members of the White House unwilling to testify before Congress.

So let's go with this, shall we:

In an apparent violation of the law, a controversial aide to ex-Gov. Mitt Romney created phony law enforcement badges that he and other staffers used on the campaign trail to strong-arm reporters, avoid paying tolls and trick security guards into giving them immediate access to campaign venues, sources told the Herald.

The bogus badges were part of the bizarre security tactics allegedly employed by Jay Garrity, the director of operations for Romney who is under investigation for impersonating a law enforcement officer in two states. Garrity is on a leave of absence from the campaign while the probe is ongoing....

"They (the aides) knew the badges were fake and probably illegal," said a presidential campaign source...

Spotted on The Plank.

All the King's Horses and All the King's Men

Can Defense Secretary Gates bring his undersecretary of defense for policy Eric Edelman to heel?

Update: Go read Slate's Fred Kaplan's take.

Here's Gate's reaction, via David Kurtz.

Oh No They Didn't!

In case you missed yesterday's post, I dropped a tease about some big news in the works for Mother Jones. As fans of quality journalism and strong, independent voices in the press, you won't be disappointed. Back to you on Monday!

Jay Harris
President & Publisher

Morning Political Trivia, July 20th Edition

This morning's question comes courtesy of my friend Dave Olsen:

Which president has a statue erected to him in the classical municipal style (full figure, bronze) declaring him to be our "least memorable president"?

And where is that statue?

Remember, no Googling, just guessing.

Most Recent Update:

"Retraction, Retraction!" that was the phone message I got from last night, but not before Jonathan had updated the post with the "answer" below, which we now know to be entirely subjective.

Here's what happened: Dave emails me the picture, no comment provided. I reply, "Can't make it out, what does it say below Chester Alan Arthur?" He emails back "least memorable president." I ask: "Where is it." And he replies: "Madison Square Park."

Did my friend Dave intentionally mislead me? No, this comes from a long line of trivia/philosophical questions passed around an extended group of friends, ranging from those that divide into bitterly divided camps—Which kind of bacon is better, floppy or crispy? (IMO: crispy).—to those to which there's an answer to which almost everyone can agree upon—such as: What's the worst album title of all time (Reo Speedwagon's "You Can Tune a Piano But You Can't Tune a Fish").

So "most obscure/least known" president was one such question some time back, the mostly agreed upon answer was Chester Alan Arthur (though all the presidents the commentors named were also bandied about). The next day, Dave spots the statue, takes a cell phone pic, and forgets about it until yesterday morning.

So a bad misunderstanding, and mea culpa for not triple checking with Dave. And special apologies to President Arthur, for obscure though he might be, it sounds like he acquitted himself pretty well in office (see below).

Jonathan's Original Update:
The answer is Chester A. Arthur, as commentor Mark guessed. Before moving to the White House as James Garfield's vice president, Arthur was a deputy to New York City political boss Roscoe Conkling. Arthur was an active participant in the world of graft, spoils, and the like, both while in New York and while the vice president, a fact that so angered the president that he at times refused Arthur entry to the White House. Garfield was shot by a supporter of Conkling's — leading to speculation that Arthur had engineered the situation to assume the presidency, a claim that is now generally thought to be false. Upon taking over for Garfield, Arthur, a native of the tiny town of Fairfield, VT, become a champion for civil service reform and largely acquitted himself in the eyes of history.

Said one historian, "No man ever entered the Presidency so profoundly and widely distrusted, and no one ever retired… more generally respected." But clearly someone dislikes him. Here's a picture of that statue we mentioned, which is located in New York City:

Bonus trivia: Arthur served as president from 1881-1885, during which time he never had a VP.

"La Loi, C'est Moi," Part XIV

A few months ago, Seymour Hersh reported that a White House official and Iran Contra alum, Elliot Abrams, had recently led a "lessons learned" discussion about Iran Contra:

Iran-Contra was the subject of an informal “lessons learned” discussion two years ago among veterans of the scandal. Abrams led the discussion. One conclusion was that even though the program was eventually exposed, it had been possible to execute it without telling Congress. As to what the experience taught them, in terms of future covert operations, the participants found: “One, you can’t trust our friends. Two, the C.I.A. has got to be totally out of it. Three, you can’t trust the uniformed military, and four, it’s got to be run out of the Vice-President’s office”—a reference to Cheney’s role, the former senior intelligence official said.

Today the Washington Post reports that the White House may have taken that lesson to heart. It has determined, the Post reports, that in legal disputes between the Congress and the White House over executive privilege, game over, because the White House has decided no US attorney can uphold a contempt of Congress decree:

Bush administration officials unveiled a bold new assertion of executive authority yesterday in the dispute over the firing of nine U.S. attorneys, saying that the Justice Department will never be allowed to pursue contempt charges initiated by Congress against White House officials once the president has invoked executive privilege.

The position presents serious legal and political obstacles for congressional Democrats, who have begun laying the groundwork for contempt proceedings against current and former White House officials in order to pry loose information about the dismissals.

Under federal law, a statutory contempt citation by the House or Senate must be submitted to the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, "whose duty it shall be to bring the matter before the grand jury for its action."

But administration officials argued yesterday that Congress has no power to force a U.S. attorney to pursue contempt charges in cases, such as the prosecutor firings, in which the president has declared that testimony or documents are protected from release by executive privilege. Officials pointed to a Justice Department legal opinion during the Reagan administration, which made the same argument in a case that was never resolved by the courts.

Perhaps that is the take-away that Abrams' Iran Contra lessons learned exercise derived: with a closed circle feedback loop in which Congress's authority is consistently subjugated to the executive, the White House can get away with anything, and is indeed not subject to the rule of law. Under the Bush administration's definition, there are no checks on the executive branch, the very foundation of our democracy.

More from Marty Lederman who predicted this would happen.

July 19, 2007

Plame Lawsuit Dismissed

The civil suit filed by Valerie and Joseph Wilson against Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, Scooter Libby, and Richard Armitage was dismissed by a federal judge today. Ruling that the court lacked the jurisdiction to award damages for the disclosure of Valerie Wilson's covert identity, Judge John Bates made the curious argument that blowing the cover of an undercover CIA officer could be considered to fall within the job duties of an administration official. "The alleged means by which defendants chose to rebut Mr. Wilson's comments and attack his credibility may have been highly unsavory," he wrote. "But there can be no serious dispute that the act of rebutting public criticism... by speaking with members of the press is within the scope of defendants' duties."

The Wilson's counsel, Melanie Sloan, the executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, is currently reviewing the decision and anticipates filing an appeal. After four years, Joe Wilson isn't about to back down. Here's what he had to say about the setback in a statement: "This case is not just about what top government officials did to Valerie and me. We brought this suit because we strongly believe that politicizing intelligence ultimately serves only to undermine the security of our nation. Today's decision is just the first step in what we have always known would be a long legal battle and we are committed to seeing this case through."

Mother Jones is Going to do What? When?

After 31 years of path-breaking independent investigative journalism, Mother Jones has decided to really shake things up, and you're part of it. We're launching something bold, something big, and something brand new. Check back with us on July 23rd to find out more.

Jay Harris
President & Publisher

Daughter of Jailed Iranian American Writes About "Brutal Men Going About Their Brutal Business"

Yesterday Iran's new 24 hour TV channel broadcast a "documentary" featuring two jailed Iranian Americans, Haleh Esfandiari, of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, and Kian Tajbakhsh, a consultant to the Open Society Institute. Both are being held in Evin prison. Esfandiari had been robbed of her passport in December while visiting her ailing 93 year old mother in Tehran, and since then has been undergoing interrogation by Iran's secret police, then house arrrest, and for the past 70 days, solitary confinement in Iran's notorious Evin prison. The 63 year old grandmother had run programs at the Woodrow Wilson Center that sought more than any other think tank I am aware of to promote US-Iran engagement. Its president, Lee Hamilton, a co-chair of the Iraq Study Group, has urged the Bush administration to talk with Iran.

Esfandiari's daugther Haleh Bakhash, a lawyer in Washington, writes in the Washington Post today about her mother's interrogators:

As I watched my mother, I thought ...about the fact that our ordeal has been nothing compared with my mother's: nearly seven months of interrogations; more than 10 weeks in solitary confinement; threats of trial and long years of imprisonment; being alone in the hands of brutal men going about their brutal business.

When the television program ended, I felt contempt for my mother's jailers and interrogators. But I was filled with admiration for my mother. In hugely difficult circumstances, she preserved her dignity, held her head high and did not lie. She did not falsely implicate others. It is her jailers, I thought, who have to work in the dark, behind the closed doors of prison interrogation rooms. It is they who hide their faces, who try to manipulate public opinion by controlling the media, smearing reputations and dishonestly splicing film.

"My mother has nothing to be ashamed of," Bakhash concludes. "They do."

July 18, 2007

Is the Federal Contracting System Out of Whack?

Meet Robin Smith. A veteran of the Air Force, she once guarded military aircraft bearing nuclear weapons before going to work for Wackenhut, the Florida-based private security giant that took in $400 million in federal contracts last year (and $516 million the year prior). Between June 2005 and April 2006, Smith served as a security officer at the Department of Homeland Security's Washington headquarters, where she says she witnessed a litany of security lapses by Wackenhut employees: guards who fell asleep at their posts, who were allowed to carry weapons after repeatedly flunking certification tests on the company’s gun range, and who gained access to sensitive locations without the requisite security clearances. On numerous occasions, she says, she saw the door to the guards' armory left open and unattended, allowing anyone access to the cache of weapons and ammunition inside.

But the most egregious breach happened in the fall of 2005, when a DHS staffer opened a letter containing white powder. Instead of quarantining the area, or calling for a hazmat team, the security guards who responded to the scene handled the envelope themselves and called others over to have a look at the suspicious powder. They also directed the employee who had opened the letter, and who had spilled some of its contents on herself, to wash the powder off. To do so she walked across a hall and past Michael Chertoff’s office, putting the Homeland Security secretary himself and other employees at risk of contamination. "I've never seen anything like the way Wackenhut ran Homeland Security,” Smith told the House Subcommittee on Government Management, Organization, and Procurement today. “I've never seen any company disrespect a government contract like Wackenhut did."

The purpose of the hearing was to examine why certain companies with spotty performance records (see: Halliburton, Bechtel, Boeing, among many others) are routinely rewarded with more lucrative government contracts. Such was the case with Wackenhut, which, despite security breaches at Homeland that were corroborated by multiple Wackenhut guards, went on to secure a 5-year, $250 million contract with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, a branch of the Department of Homeland Security

On hand to defend Wackenhut’s record was one of the firm’s VPs, Dr. Lawrence Brede, who told the subcommittee he was "disturbed" that the company's past performance was being called into question. He described the allegations against Wackenhut as a coordinated misinformation campaign carried out by "disgruntled, terminated" former employees who have been "co-opted by the SEIU," which he accused of undertaking a campaign to "besmirch our reputation" and "displace the unions" that serve Wackenhut employees. (Smith, for the record, wasn’t fired by Wackenhut.) According to Brede, the contract in question was originally with the Navy (which occupied the buildings later taken over by Homeland) and called for less stringent security. Under the circumstances, he said, Wackenhut met its "contractual obligations."

It’s hard to fault Brede for getting defensive—after all, his company’s track record is fairly pristine when pared with those of other federal contractors, some of which continue to receive taxpayer funding despite instances of outright fraud in their recent pasts. One of the worst offenders is Lockheed Martin, which, since 1995, paid out $288.5 million in fines (the company can afford it, it received close to $20 billion in federal contracts last year) and racked up 39 instances of misconduct, everything from procurement fraud to kickbacks to nuclear safety violations.

So why do federal contracting officers continue to place their trust (and our money) in the hands of companies that have played them in the past? One reason—and it certainly isn’t the only one—raised by the several witnesses today, including the Department of Homeland Security’s inspector general, Richard Skinner, is that the federal government lacks a single, centralized database containing detailed information (including on past investigations, settlements, and consent decrees) on the contractors that do business with the government. But it’s not as if such a repository doesn’t exist; the Project on Government Oversight has been operating a comprehensive “contractor misconduct” database since 2002, and released a new and improved version today. For as many years as POGO’s database has been in existence, Carolyn Maloney, the New York Democrat and a member of Towns’ subcommittee, has been trying to pass legislation to build a similar government database for use by contracting officers across all the federal agencies. Last week, she reintroduced the legislation, which is dubbed the Contractors and Federal Spending Accountability Act. It remains to be seen whether the bill stands a better chance now that the Dems have taken back control of Congress. Surely, there are powerful interests that would prefer that the various misdeeds of government contractors are not stored in such an easily accessible locale. As POGO’s general counsel, Scott Amey, noted in his prepared remarks this afternoon, “the top 50 contractors spent over $146 million on lobbying” in 2006 and “donated over $15 million to federal campaigns” during the last election cycle.

In the Midst Of Vitter Scandal, Let Us Not Forget David Almond

Republican David Almond, vice chairman of the House Committee on Children, Youth and Families for the North Carolina state legislature, resigned last week after the state's GOP caucus said it was investigating allegations against him of "serious, improper behavior."

According to DownWithTyranny!, Almond exposed his penis to a female staff member, chased her around the room, and commanded her to "suck it, baby, suck it." The employee filed a personnel complaint against Almond. State Republican leaders asked Almond to resign if there was any truth to the allegation, but, they said, "He did it [resigned] himself." I'm not sure what that means, but that is what they said.

One of the pieces of legistlation introduced by Almond was a bill to monitor sex offenders, which was recently signed into law by the governor, and which could come back to bite Almond on the--well, wherever he is most likely to be bitten. In the meantime, he says that intends to defend himself against the charges.

Campaigns Fail to Adapt to New Primary Schedule

Via Brad Plumer at The Plank, I spotted this neat New York Times graphic on where the major candidates have campaign offices. The most significant observation, other than the fact that the Democrats are running far more developed campaigns than the Republicans, is that all of the campaigns seem to be missing the significance of the new primary calendar.

Put aside the traditional early states of Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, and South Carolina (all between Jan. 14 and Feb. 2). Florida has moved up to Jan. 29 and a whole slew of states have moved up to Feb. 5: Arizona, California, Colorado, Georgia, Illinois, Michigan, Missouri, New Jersey, and on and on.

Let's take the six from that group of newly significant states that have the most electoral votes (i.e. largest populations): Florida, California, Illinois, New York, Pennsylvania, and Texas. Now using the NYT graphic, let's count up the number of campaign offices in each state (count limited to the three frontrunners in each party).

Florida: GOP 2; Dems 2
California: GOP 1; Dems 2
Illinois: GOP 2; Dems 2
New York: GOP 1; Dems 3
Pennsylvania: GOP 0; Dems 0
Texas: GOP 0; Dems 1

That's nothing! Compare this to the fact that Hillary and Edwards have nearly 20 offices apiece in the traditionally important combo of Iowa and New Hampshire. And Obama one-ups them, with almost 30! Obama has around 20 offices in Iowa, and zero in Pennsylvania and Texas. And only one each in Florida, California, and New York.

I know the candidates simply don't have the money to campaign everywhere, and I know it's still early. And I'm aware that the internet has allowed the campaigns to reach people in places where they don't have a physical presence. But it's easy to make the argument the campaigns, run by people who have been part of the system for years and were honchos in presidential elections past, are stuck in an earlier mindset. They have yet to adapt to present realities.

Straight Talk Express Runs Aground

John McCain's bus, which could be dubbed the "Flip-Flop Express" or the "Endless War Express," will now be called nothing at all. The bus, like the campaign, is out of gas, and McCain doesn't have the money to fill it up. So from now on, McCain will be taking the "Straight Walk Express" (yuck, yuck).

It's worth pointing out, though, that while McCain is seen as doomed because he only has $2 million on hand, Mitt Romney would have the exact same amount if he hadn't given his campaign a personal loan of $10 million. McCain's even doing better than Romney in some polls. The media tends to think and move in packs; maybe we should peel ourselves off the dog pile that is currently burying John McCain and take a look at the GOP's prettiest hypocrite?

Libya: Death Sentences Commuted in HIV Case

It's been long time coming, but, as reported in this morning's Washington Post, the five jailed Bulgarian nurses and one Palestinian doctor accused of intentionally infecting 460 Libyan children with HIV may soon go free. They have been languishing in Libyan prisons since 1999 and had been on death row since December. On Tuesday, however, Libya's Judicial Council—great arbiter of justice that it is—commuted all six death sentences to life in prison. Now, one could argue that death is preferable to eternity spent in a Libyan jail, but there are indications that the high court's move foreshadows the extradition of all six health workers to Bulgaria (including the Palestinian, who has been granted Bulgarian citizenship), where they would presumably be allowed to go free.

The long episode has raised passions in Libya and Bulgaria, which have both viewed the case as an issue of national pride. The European Union and the U.S. government have also weighed in, putting pressure on Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi to intervene in the case. The Libyan government has long contended that the childrens' infections were the result of a reckless HIV experiment undertaken by the six foreign health workers at medical facility in the Mediterranean port city of Benghazi. But independent investigations have concluded that the outbreak was caused by the hospital's poor hygienic conditions, which predated the foreign workers' arrival.

It now appears that the imminent resolution of the dispute could join the list of other conciliatory notes struck by the Libyan dictator, who in recent years has been working diligently to rehabilitate his reputation. According to the Post, a fund created by the Libyan and Bulgarian governments (under the auspices of the European Union) will compensate the families of the HIV-infected children to the tune of $1 million each; the Libyans had initially demanded $13 million per family.

Morning Trivia for July 18

Today's question is:

What is the largest consulting services company in the world? (Hint: It's a private company, but it's still a trick question).

I'll update this post later today with the answer and let you know if any of us got the question right. If you have a question, submit it to [email protected]. If it's good, we'll use it and credit you on the blog. Please let us know if you got it from another source.

Guess in the comments, and good luck.

Update:

IBM is the largest consulting services company in the world. IBM's "Global Services" division has revenues of almost $50 billion, a sum that represents more than half of the giant multinational's corporate revenue. Commenter Nicholas Beaudrot was first again, guessing the answer that no one in our DC bureau could come up with. Today's New York Times has more on IBM's consulting business.

— Nick Baumann

Flynt to Reveal Sexcapades of Another Senator?

On Larry King last night, Hustler published Larry Flynt hinted that another senator may be headed for a David Vitter-like fall from grace. Via Political Wire:

FLYNT: We've got good leads. We've got over 300 initially. And they're down to about 30 now which is solid.

KING: When are you going to print?

FLYNT: Well, the last thing now is we don't know if we want to let it to drip, drip, drip or we want to go with everything at once.

KING: You mean you might release 30 names at once?

FLYNT: A good possibility.

KING: Will we be -- I don't want to get into names yet. Will we be shocked?

FLYNT: Yes.

KING: Were you shocked?

FLYNT: I was shocked, especially at one senator but...

KING: One senator especially?

FLYNT: Yes.

The Usual Suspects

In case you thought Cheney might have secretly been consulting with Greenpeace, Human Rights Watch, and Amnesty International, have no fear. He was meeting with just who you thought he was: Exxon, Enron, British Petroleum, Duke Energy, and a Norquist/Gale Norton front group with ties to Abramoff.

July 17, 2007

Stop Worrying And Love The Bomb(s)

Matt Yglesias points his readers in the direction of a truly frightening article in the July/August issue of the Atlantic. We would be remiss if we didn't do the same. The article, by Keir Leiber and Daryl Press, argues that the gap between Chinese and American nuclear capability has grown so much since the end of the Cold War that there would only be a very slim chance of China being able to respond to an American first strike. (The authors' original study, which they discussed extensively in Foreign Affairs over a year ago, argued that even the Russian nuclear arsenal would almost certainly be destroyed by an American first strike.)

If the authors are right, this means the end of "Mutually-Assured Destruction," or MAD. They remind us why that matters:

During the Cold War, MAD rendered the debate about the wisdom of nuclear primacy little more than a theoretical exercise. Now that MAD and the awkward equilibrium it maintained are about to be upset, the argument has become deadly serious. Hawks will undoubtedly see the advent of U.S. nuclear primacy as a positive development. For them, MAD was regrettable because it left the United States vulnerable to nuclear attack. With the passing of MAD, they argue, Washington will have what strategists refer to as "escalation dominance" — the ability to win a war at any level of violence — and will thus be better positioned to check the ambitions of dangerous states such as China, North Korea, and Iran.

We're still fighting a conventional "pre-emptive war" that began over four years ago. If the hawks want to turn their pre-emptive wars nuclear, they can do so without fear of retaliation.

— Nick Baumann

The Leader of the GOP Field is... Hilarious

I know people hate horserace coverage of the candidates. I know they'd rather see serious issue discussions than polls and makeup scandals. But sometimes there's a punchline just sitting there.

From a new AP/Ipsos poll:

Democrats
Hillary Clinton 36%
Barack Obama 20%
Al Gore 15%
Other/None/Don't Know 13%
John Edwards 11%
Bill Richardson 2%
Joe Biden 2%

Republicans
Other/None/Don't Know 25%
Rudy Giuliani 21%
Fred Thompson 19%
John McCain 15%
Mitt Romney 11%
Newt Gingrich 5%
Mike Huckabee 3%

And that's with Thompson and Gingrich in the race. There is no "other" left!

Waxman: White House Politicization "More Widespread Than Previously Known"

"I took an oath to the president, and I take that oath very seriously." So said former White House political director Sara Taylor during an appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee last week, a statement she later retracted after Senator Patrick Leahy pointed out that she had actually sworn on oath to the Constitution, not to the commander-in-chief. Yet Taylor's gaffe was actually quite revealing—another sign that the Bush administration's political appointees often place loyalty to president and party above all else, which goes a long way toward explaining why partisan politics has permeated even the most remote corners of the federal bureaucracy.

While there's already a sizable body of evidence to suggest that the White House has presided over an unprecedented wave of politicization, Henry Waxman's Committee on Oversight and Government Reform reported today that the adminstration's "efforts to politicize the activities of federal agencies may be more widespread than previously known."

The documents Waxman's staff turned up speak for themselves. Among them is a November 20, 2006 memo from Taylor to the Office of National Drug Control Policy's White House liaison, Doug Simon, detailing events that drug czar John Walters attended (apparently at Taylor's direction) in the months before the mid-term elections. At most of these events Walters appeared alongside embattled—and in some cases allegedly corrupt—members of Congress, including Richard Pombo, John Doolittle, and Conrad Burns. According to Waxman, some of these events "were combined with the announcement of federal grants to the states or districts of vulnerable Republican members."

If there was any doubt that Walters, along with other Cabinet-level officials, were stumping for Republican candidates on the sly (and at taxpayer expense), that was cleared up by a post-election email from Doug Simon, which is worth reprinting in its entirety.

Folks,
I just wanted to give you all a summary of a post November 7th update I received the other night. Presidential Personnel pulled together a meeting of all of the Administration's White House Liaison's and the WH Political Affairs office. Karl Rove opened the meeting with a thank you for all of the work that went into the surrogate appearances by Cabinet members and for the 72 Hour deployment. He specifically thanked, for going above and beyond the call of duty, the Dept. of Commerce, Transportation, Agriculture, AND the WH Drug Policy Office. This recognition is not something we hear everyday and we should feel confident that our hard work is noticed. All of this is due to our efforts preparing the Director and the Deputies for their trips and events. Director Walters and the Deputies covered thousands of miles to attend numerous official events all across the country. The Director and the Deputies deserve the most recognition because they actually had to give up time with their families for the god awful places we sent them. I attached the final list of all of the official events that the Director and Deputies attended.

Karl also launched into a feisty discussion about the plans for the final two years of this administration. ln no uncertain terms, he said he is not going to let the last quarter of this presidency be dictated to by the Capitol Hill. There are a number of things this administration and more specifically ONDCP have to accomplish before the time is up. lt is time to regroup and move forward.

In the next 2-3 weeks I am going to set up one on one meetings will all political appointees to get a sense your plans for the next two years. lt will just be informational for planning purposes.

Thanks again, Doug Simon

Needless to say, Sara Taylor, who worked closely with Rove, may soon be making another uncomfortable appearance on the Hill, where Waxman has requested her to sit for a deposition by July 24 and a possible hearing on July 30.

An Important Omission from the NIE

Spencer Ackerman makes a point I should have made in my earlier post about the NIE. The document goes to absurd lengths to avoid the subject of the Iraq War. Probably because George Bush's grand blunder has made the war on terrorism so, so much more difficult.

New NIE Summary: Much We Already Knew, Some We Didn't

The publicly released version of the National Intelligence Estimate that Laura mentions below is only a page and a half, so it should come as no surprise that there is nothing terribly insightful in it. ("Breaking news! Al Qaeda is dangerous!") But let's take a look, shall we?

Al-Qa’ida is and will remain the most serious terrorist threat to the Homeland... We assess the group has protected or regenerated key elements of its Homeland attack capability, including: a safehaven in the Pakistan Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), operational lieutenants, and its top leadership.

The FATA referenced here include places like Waziristan, which Mother Jones profiled in an essay and stunning photo shoot in 2004, where the Pakistan government (usually) respects local tribes' claims to sovereignty and keeps only a loose leash on things. Because of the lack of control, the areas are often perfect for terrorist hideouts, a fact the U.S. has known for years — in fact, the emphasis on the FATA in this NIE matches policies from the beginning of the war on terror. Back then, we paid locals for turning in alleged al Qaeda operatives, which merely gave the locals a more powerful weapon in tribal conflicts and filled places like Gitmo with harmless and bewildered individuals who happened to have a well-connected enemy.

Other thoughts from the NIE (which is available here):

We assess that al-Qa’ida will continue to try to acquire and employ chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear material...

It's nice to know it doesn't have them yet.

We assess Lebanese Hizballah, which has conducted anti-US attacks outside the United States in the past, may be more likely to consider attacking the Homeland over the next three years if it perceives the United States as posing a direct threat to the group or Iran.

This is critically important, particularly because it is a subtle warning about Cheney and Co.'s saber-rattling about Iran. If we attack Iran, or even appear to pose a "direct threat" to Iran, we can expect a violent reaction from radical Shiite groups across the world. The folks who expected Iraq to be conventional warfare (and were wrong) may make the same mistake again — airstrikes against Iran, or heaven forbid, a ground invasion, would definitely not be quick and clean. A war with Iran could have thousands of fronts, including some here at home.

The main takeaway from the NIE, however, is this: terrorism remains out most important security concern, particularly because we haven't even dented al Qaeda's capabilities, and we need all the resources we can to fight it. That means not having huge portions of our military, intelligence community, and national security apparatus wrapped up in the Iraqi civil war.

Romney and Edwards: Blood Pomade Brothers

Oh, Mitt Romney, you hypocritical jerk. When John Edwards spent $400 on a haircut, how could you not know that every politician — including you — has embarrassing financial expenditures on his or her public record? Why couldn't you just let the man take the heat from others, instead of saying:

You know I think John Edwards was right. There are two Americas. There is the America where people pay $400 for a haircut and then there is everybody else.

You had to sit in your (multi-million dollar) glass house and throw stones. Today, Politico digs up the fact that you spent $300 on a service that calls itself "a mobile beauty team for hair, makeup and men's grooming and spa services."

Let's be real, Mitt. John Edwards is a perfectly tanned, perfectly coiffed, picture-book politician. You are a perfectly tanned, perfectly coiffed, picture-book politician. Did you honestly think the press wouldn't figure out that you both paid good money to get that way?

Swimmer Shivers to Call Attention to Global Warming

British swimmer Lewis Gordon Pugh, a.k.a. the "Ice Bear", has become the first human to set a long-distance swimming record at the North Pole. He undertook the excruciatingly painful stunt to highlight the threat of climate change. For more, go to Blue Marble...

Morning Political Trivia for July 17

Today's question comes courtesy of CQ Politics. Knock it dead:

How many women represented New Hampshire in congress before Carol Shea-Porter, who was elected last year?

I'll update this post later today with the answer and the results of our contest here (morning trivia keeps our DC reporting skills sharp). If you have a question, submit it to [email protected]. If it's good, we'll use it and credit you on the blog. Please let us know if you got it from another source.

Guesses in the comments section as always. Thanks!

Update

Commenter Nicholas Beaudrot writes: "The obvious guess is zero." It's also the obvious answer, which no one in the DC bureau guessed. They were all thrown off by reporter Laura Rozen's contention that Jeanne Shaheen once represented New Hampshire in congress. (Ms. Shaheen was actually the governor of the Granite State.) Congratulations to Mr. Beaudrot — we'll try again tomorrow.

— Nick Baumann

New NIE on Terrorist Threats to the US Homeland

Coming at 10am from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, a new National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on terrorist threats against the US homeland. I previewed some of what will be released here last week:

--Concern that Al Qaeda is getting more comfortable in "ungoverned spaces" of Pakistan, due to various factors, including a recent agreement by the Pakistani authorities with tribal leaders to leave Islamic militants in Waziristan alone. Intelligence community seeing more signs Al Qaeda is regrouping, able to train, and communicate in Pakistan ...

--Expect a new National Intelligence Estimate on terrorist threats to the homeland (this is not yet officially out ...), which [ODNI intel chief Thomas] Fingar rated the greatest threat to US national security. Al Qaida remains the greatest threat to the country. US intel community is increasingly concerned about Al Qaeda-linked militants in Pakistan using Europe, and in particular the UK, as a gateway to target the US homeland. Thwarted airplane plot last summer "very sophisticated" and of the type that concerns them, with its mix of UK and Pakistani-based terrorists working together on a plot to target the US. ...

We'll post and analyze the report when it's out. But for starters, go read Peter Bergen and Paul Cruickshank on how the Iraq war has increased the terrorism threat sevenfold worldwide.

Update: Here's the report (.pdf).

July 16, 2007

Vitter Watch: Senator Denies Ever Visiting New Orleans Establishment

In his first public appearance since going into seclusion, Louisiana Sen. David Vitter faced the news media today and denied he had ever visited the establishment of the "Canal Street Madam," Jeanette Maier, who says Vitter paid $300 an hour for services. Vitter, with his wife Wendy by his side, said again--as he said in 2004--that he had no relationship with a prostitute named Wendy or with any New Orleans prostitute. His only explanation for why Maier said he was a client and why there are alleged photos of him and Wendy Cortez was that his admission of guilt in the DC Madam scandal "has encouraged some long-time political enemies...to spread falsehoods."

Karl Rove's Reefer Madness-Induced Memory Loss

Karl Rove's game sure has improved since he was a young Republican on the make in the early 1970s. The New York Times recently found a letter written by Rove in the Nixon archives in which the 22-year-old Capitol Hill aide outlines his ideas to recruit kids for a sexy-sounding group called "New Federalism Advocates." His big idea: midnight showings of John Wayne movies and Reefer Madness. Like many a former fan of the cult antidrug flick, Rove now pleads memory loss. "God, this is 1973!" he told the Times. "You work the math. I don’t remember it all.”

Rove also said he's not surprised his old letter was found, explaining, “When you send something to a White House person, it tends to be collected and remain.” Yeah, unless that White House person happens to be "Dude, Where's My Email?" Rove.

KA Paul Says Bush Has Brought Death Upon "Thousands of Orphans and Widows"

The reverend KA Paul is at it again. The self-proclaimed advocate for the Third World poor, conscience of Third World dictators, and peddler of poorly inspected brands of snake oil, has stepped up his rebellion against his erstwhile patrons in the Republican Right, this time, through the court system in his native India. According to a press release, Paul has filed suit in Bangalore on behalf of thousands of widows and orphans who supposedly died after President Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice exerted their influence to cancel a peace mission with former Indian Prime Minister Deva Gowda to Iran, Libya, Sudan, Venezuela and Syria. I'm not sure how Bush was allegedly involved, how orphans allegedly died, and why anyone in India is still talking to Paul, who has been widely exposed as fraud, because the release didn't explain it. Still, I can't help but marvel at how Paul manages to keep getting attention. In October, I reported on his meeting with Rep. Dennis Hastert, in which he claimed to have convinced the embattled Speaker to resign over the Foley sex scandal. Ironically, Paul is now wrapped up in his own sex scandal: he was arrested in Los Angeles in May on suspicion of "lewd and lascivious acts with a minor." What's safe to say is that Paul (whom The New Republic once called "The world's most popular evangelist") will crusade on in his pirate ship as reliably as the political winds will blow him to some modicum of fame. Perhaps that explains his uncanny popularity with some evangelists here in America.

Ron Paul, Darling of the Web Military?

Check out these numbers. Ron Paul has received more ~~donations~~ money from employees of the Armed Services than any other GOP candidate in the 2008 race. It's really only a two-way race between the Libertarian Paul and the war hero McCain, who may have been hurt by the fact that he wants to keep servicemen and women in Iraq until everyone is dead, American, Iraqi, and otherwise.

Come to think of it, Ron Paul's call for America to stop "policing the world" might have unique appeal to our country's soldiers overseas. Anyway, here are the numbers.

Cand.: TOTAL [ARMY] [NAVY] [AF] [VETERAN]
Paul: 23,465 [6,975] [6,765] [4,650] [5,075]
McCain: 15,825 [6925] [6305] [1795] [800]
Romney: 3,551 [2,051] [0] [1500] [0]
Rudy: 2,320 [1,450] [370] [250] [250]
Hunter: 1000 [0] [1000] [0]
Huckabee: 750 [250] [0] [500]
Tancredo: 350 [350] [0] [0]
Brownback: 71 [71] [0] [0]
Thompson: 0 [0] [0] [0]

Now, from what I can gather, to be included in these stats a donor had to only put the words "Army," "Navy," "veteran," or what have you in their "employer" field when submitting a contribution. So these aren't the most exact numbers. But interesting nonetheless.

Also, looking at Ron Paul's financial numbers reveals that the dude is only spending a tiny, tiny fraction of his cash. Most of his publicity seems to come from internet folks seeking to interview him, in an attempt to explain or perpetuate his demigod status on the web.

Morning Political Trivia for July 16

Today's question comes courtesy of The Economist's "Democracy in America" blog. They got it from the Politico's Roger Simon. It's a doozy:

Name the eight U.S. presidents with one-syllable last names.

This is a trivia contest, not a research skills test, so no Googling! We compete every morning here at Mother Jones' DC Bureau. I'll update this post later today and let you know the results (and the correct answer). Remember, If you have a good question, you can always submit it to [email protected]. I'll credit you if we use your question (please let us know if you got it from another source).

Submit your answers in the comments section, and good luck!

— Nick Baumann

Update

The eight presidents with one-syllable last names are: Bush 41, Bush 43, Ford, Grant, Hayes, Pierce, Polk, and Taft. Jonathan Stein and Editor Clara Jeffery tied with 5/8, while Bruce Falconer and Dan Schulman had 4/8. Commenter Paul fared significantly better, getting 7/8 on his first shot, with commenter TarGator correcting his only mistake. Thanks for playing...we'll post another one tomorrow.

Drug War: U.S. Reporters Targeted by Mexican Cartels

Last summer, while in the early stages of researching several stories related to the U.S.-Mexico border and the drug trade, I called up Mother Jones' contributing writer Charles Bowden to get his take on things. Having spent much of his life living in the American southwest and writing about these subjects (see his most recent Mother Jones piece here), Bowden knows better than most the risks associated with reporting the drug war. As he explained, the border is a place where people simply disappear, usually by the hundreds each year. Very few are ever found, even if authorities bother to look, which they often don't. As an American, he said, I could expect to have *some* protection: cartel assassins often hesitate to go after reporters from north of the border, but not always. (See this piece from the Virginia Quarterly Review about the murder of freelancer Brad Will, the only U.S. journalist to have been assassinated since the recent surge in Mexico's drug violence.) Bowden suggested that I avoid hotels on the Mexican side, that I vary my schedule each day, and that I drive an alternate route whenever possible. The underlying message was clear: take precautions and, to the extent possible, make yourself hard to kill.

Well, since last summer, things seem to have grown even worse. Sunday's Washington Post reported on the San Antonio Express-News' decision to withdraw its drug trade reporter from Mexico after learning of an assassination threat. According to the Post:

Sources have told several Texas newspapers that hit men from Los Zetas, a group of former Mexican military officers who operate as the Gulf cartel's assassins, may have been hired to cross into the United States and execute American reporters. Word of the threat shattered the widely held perception here that foreign journalists are somehow shielded from violent retribution in a nation that is now second only to Iraq in deaths of journalists...

More than 30 journalists have been killed in Mexico in the past six years, but only one -- freelancer and activist Brad Will, who was shot to death during teacher protests last year in Oaxaca -- was American. Most of the killings are believed to be related to coverage of an ongoing war between drug cartels. Last year, drug gangs were suspected of firing automatic weapons and throwing a grenade into the newsroom of Nuevo Laredo's El Mañana newspaper, seriously injuring one reporter.

Express-News Editor Robert Rivard, a former Central America bureau chief for Newsweek magazine, said in an interview Friday that steps have been taken to conceal the location of his former border correspondent, Mariano Castillo.

Castillo wrote nearly 100 stories about cartels, crisscrossing the border from the newspaper's bureau in Laredo, Tex., for the past 4 1/2 years as drug violence escalated. His first piece about cartels, in late 2003, was headlined "Mexico town erupts into a battle zone; Grenades, machine guns roar south of the border." In his last front-page article, which ran in May, Castillo exposed the existence of a "shadowy and violent group that calls itself the 'Gente Nueva,' or New People -- and authorities don't want to talk about it."

For now the paper's border bureau, which is a 2 1/2-hour drive from San Antonio, sits vacant. Rivard is grappling with a challenge faced every day by his counterparts south of border -- how to cover a region where his reporters are targets.

"It's a dilemma," Rivard said. "On the one side, no story is worth a reporter's life; on the other side, you don't want to back down from telling readers about an important story."

Court Squashes One of Biggest Tax Fraud Cases in History

The AP reports that a judge has dropped charges against 13 former KPMG employees in what had been one of the largest criminal tax cases in U.S. history.

U.S. District Judge Lewis A. Kaplan said the dismissal was necessary because the government coerced KPMG to limit and then cut off its payment of the onetime employees' legal fees....

The case resulted after the government investigated what it described as a tax shelter fraud that helped the wealthy escape $2.5 billion in U.S. taxes.

Kaplan said the Department of Justice "deliberately or callously" prevented many of the defendants from getting funds for their defense, blocking them from hiring the lawyers of their choice.

A spokeswoman for federal prosecutors, Yusill Scribner, told the AP the government "had no comment."

A lawyer reader comments that the DOJ botched the case by overreaching in trying to an unusual degree to deny the defendants the ability to pay their lawyers. "This is a tactic the Justice Department started using under Ashcroft in white collar cases. It has been roundly criticized by civil libertarians, unions, defense counsel and many, many, federal judges. The policy was announced in the infamous Thompson memo, named after the Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division who issued it. It was so controversial that Justice recently announced it was withdrawing the memo. Too late for the largest criminal tax fraud case in history.

D.C. Seeks to Fight for Its 30-Year-Old Gun Ban in the High Court

This past March, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Parker v. District of Columbia, which dissolved the strictest gun regulations on the books of any state or district in the nation—the district's gun ban—using a broad interpretation of the Second Amendment, marking the first time this interpretation has been used to overturn state gun regs.

When the federal appeals court, just a few months later, denied Washington's request for the case to be heard before the full-judge panel (the case was originally heard before a three-judge panel), all anyone could talk about was how the case was headed to the nation's highest court. At Mother Jones, we wondered what D.C.'s Mayor, Adrian Fenty, would do. He could appeal to the Supreme Court and risk a victory for Parker that would have far-reaching implications for state gun laws across the nation or he could accept the ruling and face the music at home. Well, Fenty has made his decision. Today, a news release from the Mayor's office announced that the District of Columbia will petition the Supreme Court to review the decision made by its appeals court.

For more information on Parker and the man behind the case, see this Mother Jones interview with Cato Institute senior fellow and constitutional lawyer Dr. Robert Levy.

Iraqi Troops Get Mine-Resistant Vehicles; U.S. Troops Have to Wait

USA Today dropped a bomb on the Pentagon this morning, reporting that military officials "repeatedly balked at appeals—from commanders on the battlefield and from the Pentagon's own staff—to provide the lifesaving Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicle, or MRAP, for patrols and combat missions" in Iraq. Rather, to negotiate the country's IED-riddled thoroughfares, U.S. troops have had to rely on humvees that have been retrofitted with armor (some of makeshift design) and offer little protection from direct blasts. But here's the kicker: "Even as the Pentagon balked at buying MRAPs for U.S. troops, USA TODAY found that the military pushed to buy them for a different fighting force: the Iraqi army."

On Dec. 22, 2004 — two weeks after President Bush told families of servicemembers that "we're doing everything we possibly can to protect your loved ones" — a U.S. Army general solicited ideas for an armored vehicle for the Iraqis. The Army had an "extreme interest" in getting troops better armor, then-brigadier general Roger Nadeau told a subordinate looking at foreign technology, in an e-mail obtained by USA TODAY.

In a follow-up message, Nadeau clarified his request: "What I failed to point out in my first message to you folks is that the US Govt is interested not for US use, but for possible use in fielding assets to the Iraqi military forces."

In response, Lt. Col. Clay Brown, based in Australia, sent information on two types of MRAPs manufactured overseas. "By all accounts, these are some of the best in the world," he wrote. "If I were fitting out the Iraqi Army, this is where I'd look (wish we had some!)"

The first contract for what would become the Iraqi Light Armored Vehicle — virtually identical to the MRAPs sought by U.S. forces then and now, and made in the United States by BAE Systems — was issued in May 2006. The vehicles, called Badgers, began arriving in Iraq 90 days later, according to BAE. In September 2006, the Pentagon said it would provide up to 600 more to Iraqi forces. As of this spring, 400 had been delivered.

The rush to equip the Iraqis stood in stark contrast to the Pentagon's efforts to protect U.S. troops.

In February 2005, two months after Nadeau solicited ideas for better armor for the Iraqis and was told MRAPs were an answer, an urgent-need request for the same type of vehicle came from embattled Marines in Anbar province. The request, signed by then-brigadier general Dennis Hejlik, said the Marines "cannot continue to lose … serious and grave casualties to IEDs … at current rates when a commercial off-the-shelf capability exists to mitigate" them.

Officials at Marine headquarters in Quantico, Va., shelved the request for 1,169 vehicles. Fifteen months passed before a second request reached the Joint Chiefs and was approved. Those vehicles finally began trickling into Anbar in February, two years after the original request.

Who Contributes the Most Foreign Fighters to Iraq?

If you had to guess which country contributes the most foreign fighters to the Iraqi insurgency, you'd guess Iran, right? After all, the Bush Administration, specifically the vice president, is proclaiming far and wide that Iran is a nefarious force in the Iraq fight, and even Congress is censuring the oil-rich country for its complicity in killing Americans.

But the American saber-rattling points in the wrong direction. A Los Angeles Times report out today shows that more foreign fighters come from Saudi Arabia than any other country. "About 45% of all foreign militants targeting U.S. troops and Iraqi civilians and security forces are from Saudi Arabia; 15% are from Syria and Lebanon; and 10% are from North Africa," writes the Times, citing official U.S. military figures provided by a senior U.S. military officer. The remaining 30%, presumably, houses Iran's contribution. The officer also pointed out that half of the detainees in American detention facilities in Iraq are Saudi.

Saudi Arabia is an ally in the war on terror, of course, allowing us to keep military bases on the peninsula and cracking down (theoretically) on terrorists within its borders and future insurgents crossing its border into Iraq. But Saudis interested in joining the fight know there is a relatively simple path through Jordan and Syria and into Iraq. Both the senior military officer and a handful of Iraqi lawmakers the Times spoke with feel the Saudis can do more to stop future insurgents moving along this route.

A couple facts to keep in mind as you watch the administration raise the rhetoric with Iran while ignoring Saudi Arabia.

(1) The Saudis are the United States' fourth largest oil importer, sending us 1.2 to 1.5 million barrels per day.

(2) Fifteen of the 19 hijackers in the September 11 attacks were Saudi.

Just saying. For more, see here and here.

Kirkuk: Barometer of Civil War

As NPR reports, twin suicide car bombings in the northern Iraqi city of Kirkuk earlier today killed 80 people and wounded an estimated 150 more. The bombs targeted the office of a Kurdish political party and a popular outdoor market. Kirkuk sits on a lot of oil, and its history of ethnic tension between Kurds, Arabs, and Turkomen makes it a potential powder keg. Thanks to the so-called 'surge' in Baghdad, Iraq's violence is diffusing into new areas that, until now, have been relatively quiet. Should Kirkuk explode, there's no telling how things would end. The International Crisis Group released a report last summer about the struggle for control over the city. The New Yorker's George Packer also has also written on the subject in that magazine's pages. The level of violence in the city bears watching...

Petraeus is a Fall Guy? Impossible!

According to this morning's Washington Post, "Some of [Gen. David] Petraeus' military comrades worry that the general is being set up by the Bush administration as a scapegoat if conditions in Iraq fail to improve."

Uh, duh?

"Dysfunctional" House Intelligence Committee

Remember "Duke" Cunningham? He's the California Republican Congressman who pled guilty to bribery-related charges in late 2005, who is now serving an eight-year prison sentence. He also sat on the House Intelligence committee that, among other responsibilities, makes recommendations for the "black" budget of classified federal national security spending.

Concerned that Cunningham's mercenary motivations may have corrupted the Intelligence committee's business, the committee authorized an internal investigation, which was completed last year. But here's the rub: Neither the former House intel committee chairman, Peter Hoekstra (R-MI), nor its current chairman, Silvestre Reyes (D-Tx), have agreed to release the investigation's findings.

Ranking Democrat Jane Harman released the investigation's executive summary last December - to howls of outrage from committee Republicans. Today, the Los Angeles Times reports, it got a look at the whole thing -- at least the 23-page unclassified version of the 50-page report.

Its conclusion: "The committee [is] a dysfunctional entity that served as a crossroads for almost every major figure in the ongoing criminal probe by the Justice Department."

Staffers said that Cunningham seemed more focused on who was getting the money than on the merits of the underlying projects, and that they were disturbed by his close ties with contractors who seemed unqualified for the projects they had won.

Aides said they acceded to Cunningham's demands "to keep him from going nuclear or ballistic" and because they considered him an influential member of the House Appropriations Committee who might retaliate by blocking intelligence committee funding priorities. ...

At one point, senior committee aide Michele Lang sent out a staff e-mail describing the program, saying, "HOOAH! Another $5 million of taxpayer money wasted." By 2005, the funding for Wade had swelled to $25 million.

More evidence if you needed it that the intelligence oversight process is broken, that some of the companies hired to protect the country won their contracts through graft and are unqualified, and that post 9/11 homeland security and intelligence are just a big new trough for some contractors with the added benefit (for them) of no public accountability because the contracts are classified. Evidence as well that the entrenched conflicts of interest continue, to the degree that the committee still will not agree to publicly release even the unclassified version of the report. And that's just the greed factor. Who's looking out that the intelligence and security are any more functional? The same conflicted people.

July 15, 2007

"Breaking" News: Gilmore Out of GOP Presidential Race

Former Virginia Governor Jim Gilmore has dropped out of the Republican race. "Because of the front-loading of the primaries, I would have basically had to stop campaigning and spend full time organizing hundreds of people to raise money for me," he said. Gilmore had raised $381,000, compared to Mitt Romney's $35 million.

I hope this doesn't lead to a tumble of second- and third-tier Republican candidates leaving the race. The more candidates they have, the more spread out the demand for money and the less clarity the GOP can get in debates and on the campaign trail. Don't go anywhere yet, Sam Brownback!

Pyongyang to Close Nuclear Weapons Facility

Kim Jong Il has finally agreed to shut down the plutonium production facility at Yongbyon, rare good news in the longstanding dispute over North Korea's nuclear weapons program. For those of you who, like me, have grown disoriented by the constant twists and turns in this story, a piece in today's Washington Post offers a good recap of the last few years of diplomatic wrangling. An extended excerpt after the break.

Kim's government has based much of its power on the military, and possession of nuclear weapons has been described in North Korean propaganda as a matter of national pride. But the thought of nuclear weapons in the hands of Kim and his aides has unsettled his Asian neighbors, including China. As a result, they have persisted in the six-party negotiations despite repeated delays and abrupt changes of position by North Korean diplomats.

North Korea's decision to go ahead with the Yongbyon closure, for instance, came only after nearly two years of wrangling over about $25 million in North Korean accounts blocked in a Macau bank.

The funds were frozen because of U.S. Treasury Department allegations in September 2005 that they were tainted by money laundering and counterfeiting. After months of insisting the Treasury accusations were a law enforcement matter separate from the nuclear talks, the Bush administration switched positions and promised to get the money liberated, leading to February's milestone agreement. But several months more passed while Hill struggled to find a banking system that would handle the allegedly tainted money. Ultimately, the funds were transferred out of Macau via the Federal Reserve Bank of New York into the Russian banking system and, from there, transferred into North Korean accounts in a Russian trading bank near the border with North Korea

Diplomats from the six nations have suggested that, should they be successful, the North Korean nuclear negotiations could eventually evolve into a permanent forum for East Asian security cooperation, bringing North Korea into a closer relationship with its neighbors. But as Hill did in Japan on Saturday, they acknowledge they have a long road ahead before anything like that is possible.

Saturday's announcement, while widely applauded, essentially returned the East Asian landscape to what it was in 2002, when operations had been suspended at the Yongbyon reactor under an earlier deal put together in 1994 under the Clinton administration.

U.S. diplomats said in 2002 that North Korean representatives acknowledged a secret uranium enrichment program -- something North Korea has steadfastly denied since then -- and the Bush administration stopped the oil shipments that were part of the 1994 deal. In return, North Korea expelled U.N. weapons inspectors, quit the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and restarted operations at Yongbyon.

The North Korean government had made no formal announcement by early Sunday. But a diplomat at the North Korean U.N. mission, Kim Myon Gil, told the Associated Press that the reactor was shut down Saturday and its closure would soon be verified by the U.N. inspectors.

Longer than World War II...And About As Expensive

Sunday's Washington Post includes a piece about the profits of war—the rising fortunes of companies supplying the war effort. It cites a report, released June 7 by the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, showing that current military expenditures, expressed in real dollars, are at their highest level since 1946.

See Mother Jones' breakdown of the Iraq War's costs here.

July 21, 2007

July 20, 2007

July 19, 2007

July 18, 2007

July 17, 2007

July 16, 2007

July 15, 2007

RECENT ENTRIES

ARCHIVE

RECENT COMMENTS

SEARCH MOTHER JONES

TODAY ON...

BLOG LINKS

IN PRINT

DONATE TODAY