Witnesses Back Up Mitt Romney On MLK — Or Maybe Not
It's looking like Mitt Romney might have been judged too quickly on the Martin Luther King business. Two witnesses have now come forward to The Politico, insisting that they saw the late Gov. George Romney (R-MI) make a surprise appearance alongside King in 1963.
The campaign has also posted a collection of citations — including a contemporary account from the Detroit Free Press — attesting that it happened.
There's one lingering question, though: If the facts do vindicate Mitt Romney on this one — and at first glance, this looks legit — why did he handle it so awkwardly and ineptly right off the bat? Why all the parsing about what the word "saw" meant, and the business about "march with" being figurative?
Late Update: Or perhaps not. The Boston Phoenix is standing by their story — the elder Romney participated in the march, but they insist King did not:
Then-governor George Romney did indeed march in Grosse Pointe, on Saturday, June 29, 1963, but Martin Luther King Jr. was not there; he was in New Brunswick, New Jersey, addressing the closing session of the annual New Jersey AFL-CIO labor institute at Rutgers University.
Late Late Update: On closer inspection it looks like the Free Press article actually doesn't show that the two men were there at the same march. So if King wasn't actually there — even if George Romney was — then this whole thing looks like it was just spin from camp Romney, right down to taking the Free Press and other news sources out of context.
--Eric Kleefeld
Got Muck?
We'll follow up with a more detailed and official notice. But we're hiring a new full-time reporter-blogger to work at TPMmuckraker.com. If I don't say so myself, I think it's one of the coolest reporting jobs in the business. But maybe I'm biased. Interested? Let us know.
--Josh Marshall
Third party groups supporting Hillary dropped nearly $300,000 yesterday on mailings and phone-bank calls.
--David Kurtz
McLazarus
McCain sources say he's up 500% in online contributions this week over last week. Of course, big percentage jumps are a lot easier to put together when you're coming back from near zero. Still, he's clearly back in the race. Bears watching.
--Josh Marshall
Condi?
New docs obtained by TPMmuckraker under a FOIA request show that the State Dept knew of Blackwater's fraudulent practices back in early 2005 but signed them up anyway.
TPMmuckraker reporter Spencer Ackerman got hold of a pretty amazing stash of documents here. So we'll have more coming on this throughout the day and into next week.
Stay Tuned.
--Josh Marshall
Help!
Okay, you've been reading about all the excitement growing up around the Golden Duke awards. This morning, Local Scandal 
nominee Penn. State Sen. Vincent Fumo was written up in the local paper, the Philadelphia Inquirer, for his nomination. And in early January the Dukes are going to be featured on Bill Moyers Journal on PBS. Seriously, I kid you not: I'm going to go on Moyers' show and talk with Bill about the Golden Dukes and who the winners are.
Anyway, readers who sent in the winning nominations are going to be getting lots of cool TPM/Golden Dukes swag. And you can see the official Golden Duke statuette right there on the right. But here's the dirty secret. That's it. I have to confess that while there's a picture of the official Golden Duke statuette, there is no actual statuette. But we want to change that. We need to get a real life statuette.
But the truth is we have no idea how to get one made. It doesn't need to be fancy; doesn't have to be any nicer really than the kind of Hooray You Won Tenth Place in the Division trophies I used to get playing AYSO soccer back in the day. But it does have to look like the statuette in the picture. It just won't do to have the Duke be a guy kicking a soccer ball.
Now I normally come to you, the august TPM readership, for tips on political matters and various sorts of expertise. But there must be more than a few of you who know how we'd get this done. Obviously, it can be done. It's just a matter of how much we'd have to pay and just who we go to, or what kind of outfit we go to, or designer, or whatever to get an estimate.
So, the fate or at least the greater glory of the Dukes is in your hands. If you know who we need to call, what we need to do, please let us know as soon as you can.
--Josh Marshall
Former Ned Lamont campaign manager Tom Swan, on the prospects for carrying on the legacies of the Dean and Lamont campaigns.
--David Kurtz
DesperateHillaryAttacks.com
In today's installment of the quest by each of the Democratic presidential candidates not to be seen as the candidate going negative (what's up with that? are Democratic voters that sensitive?), they debate the finer points of adjective placement.
Maybe Mitt Romney can diagram it for us.
--David Kurtz
Mitt X
Alright, I cut the Mittster a little slack last night. But this is getting ridiculous. Andrew Sullivan picks this out of the latest piece in the Boston Globe.
Mitt Romney went a step further in a 1978 interview with the Boston Herald. Talking about the Mormon Church and racial discrimination, he said: "My father and I marched with Martin Luther King Jr. through the streets of Detroit."
I think we just blew right through the parody wall here.
I'm looking forward to hearing more about that week he spent in the slammer in Selma with John Lewis, especially after his role organizing the Fruit of Islam.
--Josh Marshall
My Dad Sailed With Columbus
Last night, I gave you my opinion of the Mitt Romney 'saw my Dad marching with MLK' brouhaha. But in case you haven't seen what the Mittser actually said, let's go to the tape ...
For my money, the real time bomb for Mitt may be his comment last night about seeing "the Patriots win the World Series." Heck, they haven't won a Series since Yastrzemski was quarterback.
--Josh Marshall
Today's Must Read
In the sort of twist peculiar to national security investigations, the CIA has referred a criminal investigation to the FBI over public disclosures made by a former CIA agent about the interrogation of Abu Zubaydah, at the same time that the FBI and CIA are engaged in an institutional struggle over the legality and efficacy of the interrogation techniques used on Abu Zubaydah.
Confused? Spencer Ackerman sorts out the conflicting interests at stake.
--David Kurtz
McCain?
There've been a few polls suggesting a new uptick in support for John McCain, particularly in New Hampshire, which is a state kind of suited to his politics and one where he beat George Bush in 2000. But maybe there's more to this.
There's a new ARG poll out tonight that shows something pretty striking.
ARG has McCain tied for first with Romney. Both are at 26%. And in Iowa, ARG has him in second behind Huckabee. Huck 28%, McCain 20%, Romney 17%.
Let me stipulate all the standard 'just one poll' caveats. But these aren't in a vacuum. This is the first poll that's shown McCain in anything like that kind of position in Iowa, though he's been trending up modestly. In New Hampshire though, that poll has good company. The three immediately previous public polls for New Hampshire all have McCain over 20%; and one of those three actually had him at 27%.
Meanwhile, today's Fox News poll has him in a three-way tie nationally with Huckabee and Rudy.
There are two big obstacles McCain has in front of him, at least two -- his recent embrace of immigration policies that are completely anathema to core Republicans and the general dislike many, many core Republicans have for him.
On the other hand, if he can put together surprise victories in these early primaries, there is simply no way to overstate the deep well of adoration, tacit support and general desire to fluff that McCain will be able to draw from within the Washington press corps. And even those core Republicans who've never been crazy about him will breath a elemental sigh of relief that they've got a candidate of stature, experience and ability rather than a freak, a goof or a Ken doll.
--Josh Marshall
Saw in the Sense of Imagined
Okay, I've invested a lot of my credibility saying how I think Mitt Romney is the odds on guy to take the Republican nomination. So I really don't take kindly to him making such a fool of himself that he's threatening his shot at the nomination.
TPM's Eric Kleefeld just found this latest installment from NBC's FirstRead on the brouhaha over Romney's claim to having seen his pops, George Romney marching with Martin Luther King ...
Romney says that it depends on what the definition of "saw" is.A defensive Romney was peppered with questions today on exactly what he meant when he said -- most recently on Meet the Press -- that he "saw" his father march with Martin Luther King Jr. Recent articles have indicated that his father, the late Michigan Gov. George Romney, didn't march with the civil-rights leader.
Admitting that he didn't see the march with his own eyes, he said, "I 'saw' him in the figurative sense."
"The reference of seeing my father lead in civil rights," he said, "and seeing my father march with Martin Luther King is in the sense of this figurative awareness of and recognition of his leadership."
"I've tried to be as accurate as I can be," he continued, smiling firmly. "If you look at the literature or look at the dictionary, the term 'saw' includes being aware of -- in the sense I've described."
The questioning did not relent. "I'm an English literature major," he insisted at one point. "When we say I saw the Patriots win the World Series, it doesn't necessarily mean you were there." (He meant the Super Bowl, of course.)
Seriously, after all I've said about his strengths in the GOP nomination race, I think Mitt owes me a little more than to make a fool of himself like this. More seriously, I've seen lots of pols get tripped up on stuff like this -- memories that turn out never to have happened. Sometimes certainly they're just fibbing. But I think it's actually not that uncommon to have childhood or decades-old memories of events get conflated or blurred. Our minds are not Xerox machines or hard disks. And memories get shaped and distorted by subsequent events, desires, understandings of ourselves and a lot else. So often these falsehoods aren't lies or even necessarily conscious embellishments.
I haven't looked enough into this particular case of Romney, his dad and King to have any particular opinion one way or another of which it is, though his pretty obvious fibbing in the Muslim cabinet member episode doesn't give me a lot of confidence in his candor. But when you have to start referring to dictionary definitions or you lit degree to add weight to your dingbat hermeneutics it's just time to pack it in.
--Josh Marshall
You Be The Judge!
In yesterday's episode of TPMtv we announced the official nominees for this year's Golden Duke Awards (in honor of disgraced and incarcerated Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham) in six categories to 'honor' outstanding achievement in public corruption, betrayals of the public trust and generally outrageous behavior. Readers sent in nominations and the TPM staff chose five nominees for each six categories.
You can see the video announcement below. But we've now also put together the official 2007 Golden Dukes nominee page, with each category, the nominees in each category, accompanying video as well as the text of the winning reader nominations (i.e., their argument for why their choice should be nominated).
In categories 
like Best Testimonial Trainwreck, you just can't evaluate without seeing the awful truth preserved in video. So you'll definitely want to check it out.
Readers whose nominations were chosen will be notified by email tomorrow. But if you just can't wait to know whether or not you won check out the page to see if you won.
So, go over, take a look, consider all the layers of mucktitudinous evidence and send us in emails telling us which of the five nominees in each category should win the Golden Duke.
The nominations are now in the hand of our distinguished panel of judges and we'll be announcing the winners on December 31st.
And if you want to see the official announcement of the nominees, feast your eyes on the video below ...
--Josh Marshall
FBI Investigating Ex-CIA Agent for Going Public About Torture
McClatchy's Jonathan Landay reports:
The Department of Justice is investigating whether a former intelligence officer illegally disclosed classified information in interviews he gave on how the CIA interrogated a suspected senior al Qaida member.In interviews with ABC News and The Washington Post earlier this month, former CIA officer John Kiriakou gave detailed descriptions of how a detainee known as Abu Zubaydah was waterboarded. The procedure produces the sensation of drowning and is widely considered a form of torture, which is illegal under U.S. and international laws.
The interviews were the first public confirmation that Zubaydah, a Palestinian who allegedly helped finance the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, had been subjected to the technique while in secret CIA custody. The CIA surrendered Zubaydah to the U.S. military in September 2006, and he's now being held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
The department opened the criminal probe of Kiriakou after receiving a "criminal referral" from the CIA, according to officials familiar with the process. The officials requested anonymity because criminal referrals aren't made public.
--David Kurtz
Report: Gonzo Opposed Destruction of CIA Torture Tapes
The AP reports that Alberto Gonzales was among a group of White House lawyers who opposed destruction of the tapes:
One official familiar with the investigation said the review so far indicates that Alberto Gonzales, who served as White House counsel and then attorney general, advised against destroying the videotapes as one of four senior Bush administration attorneys discussing how to handle them. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because of the ongoing investigation. Gonzales' attorney, George Terwilliger, declined comment.Another of the administration attorneys, John Bellinger, then a lawyer at the National Security Council, has told colleagues that administration lawyers came to a consensus that the tapes should not be destroyed, said a senior official familiar with Bellinger's account of the 2003 White House discussion. Bellinger could not be reached for comment.
"The clear recommendation of Bellinger and the others was against destruction of the tapes," the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter. "The recommendation in 2003 from the White House was that the tapes should not be destroyed."
No mention of Cheney's David Addington.
--David Kurtz
House Intel Committee Readies Subpoena for CIA's Rodriguez
In a statement just put out by his office, House intelligence committee Chairman Silvestre Reyes (D-TX) says that a committee subpoena has been issued for the CIA's Jose Rodriguez, the official reportedly responsible for the destruction of the torture tapes:
“In addition, the committee is working to secure testimony for January 16 from John Rizzo and Jose Rodriguez. We are in discussions with CIA officials regarding Mr. Rizzo’s testimony. We have been told that Mr. Rodriguez would like to tell his story but his counsel has advised us that a subpoena would be necessary. We therefore have issued the subpoena for Mr. Rodriguez. We look forward to his testimony as well as the testimony of others who have information about this matter.”
The issuing of a subpoena is different than the serving of a subpoena. The statement suggests to me that with subpoena in hand the committee can now begin negotiating with Rodriguez's lawyer, Bob Bennett, for his client's testimony.
In other developments, staff lawyers for the committee have been at CIA headquarters today reviewing documents, and at the Justice Department investigators have been going through CIA emails and other documents.
--David Kurtz
Possible DeListing?
Earlier this afternoon, I pointed out the beginning of the run on the Rudy contract at the key political betting/prediction sites.
That was a bit after noon. He's fallen like another five points since that post. Current price is 27.3.
To give a little perspective, at the Intrade site, Rudy's seldom traded under 35 since June. He's almost never gone below 40 since September. And he peaked at around 49 on the last day before the Shag Fund story broke. And then in the last three weeks or so his contract has lost almost half its value. And in just the last day his contract has lost almost ten points.
--Josh Marshall
Panglossiani
Flat-lining in key states and losing the lead in the national polls? No problem, says Rudy's pollster.
--Josh Marshall
TPMtv: How We See It
We're right on the edge of the Christmas holiday. And it's jarring to think how rapidly we'll hit the first two contests -- Iowa on Jan. 3rd and New Hampshire Jan. 8th. Depending on how things play out one or possibly both nomination battles could be effectivly over on January 9th. With all that in mind, in today's episode of TPMtv, we're taking an overview of both races today to give you our best read on who the likely winners are, the key developments to look for and just basically what the hell's going to happen ...
--Josh Marshall
The nomination of TPM fave Hans von Spakovsky to the FEC appears to be dead.
--David Kurtz
An Insider's View of GOP GOTV
In his upcoming book, NH phone-jammer and former GOP operative Allen Raymond recounts one story of how racial and ethnic divisions in New Jersey were pinpointed then exploited by the GOP with robocalls.
--David Kurtz
Before It Hits the Society Pages
Scenes from the TPM Holiday Dinner bash ...
--Josh Marshall
Dawg!
Seems a GOP insider has finally spilled the beans on how the coded race signals (mainly caricatured African-American lingo or voice styles) are used in GOP robocalls. More soon.
--Josh Marshall
William Hartung, on Kissinger and Schlesinger's lame attacks on the Iran NIE.
--David Kurtz
Ruddddyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy ......
Okay, I know I'm sort of a fanatic about these political prediction/betting sites. But I thought I'd draw everyone's attention to the fact that we seem to be seeing the beginning of the long-predicted (okay, only by me, but whatever) run on the Rudy contract at the two big sites.
Dingbat Factoid: The Intrade markets now give Obama a marginally better chance of getting the Democratic nomination than Rudy has of getting the Republican nomination.
--Josh Marshall
Around and Around They Go
John Edwards goes after Hillary over a mailer attacking Obama.
--David Kurtz
You Thought Your Office Xmas Party Was Awkward
Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK) RSVPed that he'd be attending the FBI director's annual Christmas soiree last week--just months after FBI raided his home. Regrettably for muckrakers everywhere, Stevens was a no show.
--David Kurtz
The Decider Becomes The Judger
The President just finished up his pre-Christmas press conference. He skated with one exchange on the CIA torture tapes, reiterating that his own knowledge of the tapes and their destruction didn't come until he was briefed shortly before the story went public. But then Bush shifted the focus, declaring that he wouldn't make any judgment about the case until all the facts came out, trying somehow to position himself as a neutral arbiter, rather than a crucial fact witness, key player, and the official with ultimate responsibility for what happened. President Bush, just as curious as the rest of us to learn what happened.
--David Kurtz
Today's Must Read
Are DOJ and CIA really waving the white flag in agreeing to cooperate with the House investigation into the torture tapes--or is this just designed to take a little heat off, keep GOP members in line, and buy time until after the holidays?
--David Kurtz
Ace in the Hole Out the Door
When Rudy Giuliani's soft lead in the national polls evaporates, suddenly he'll be just another GOP hopeful lining up to get his head sliced off in the first big primary and caucus contests. And we seem to be there.
If you look at the trendline graphs created by Professor Charles Franklin for Pollster.com, the Huckabee line has finally converged with the Rudy's.
Those numbers were from polls as of December 16th. And the exact numbers are actually Rudy 22.6% and Huckabee 22.2%. So there's still a hair's breadth of distance between. But the trend line is awfully clear.
And this is borne out by two new polls just out this evening.
The new Wall Street Journal/NBC poll out tonight has Mitt Romney and Rudy tied at 20% with Mike Huckabee at 17%. That's close to a three-way tie for first with Rudy.
Then there's a Zogby phone poll out this evening which has Rudy at 23%, Huckabee at 22% and Romney at 16%. The details are different, especially for Huckabee and Romney. But the big picture is clear: Rudy's lost his nationwide lead wide.
And the downward momentum will probably push him still further too.. With dismal numbers in the early races and lukewarm numbers nationwide, what's his political strategy again? Is there any rationale for still calling him the frontrunner?
--Josh Marshall
Rudy?
Post-Shag Fund, what stories have you read about Rudy Giuliani? I see news about Huckabee, Romney, even McCain (who really may be up to something in New Hampshire). But Rudy? Beside some scattered stories about his flagging poll numbers, I don't think I've read much of anything. Not only is he tanking in the polls but he's MIA in the national political debate.
--Josh Marshall
The Other Shoe Starts to Drop
McClatchy reports on the New Hampshire phone-jamming case:
The Justice Department delayed prosecuting a key Republican official for jamming the phones of New Hampshire Democrats until after the 2004 election, protecting top GOP officials from the scandal until the voting was over.An official with detailed knowledge of the investigation into the 2002 Election-Day scheme said the inquiry sputtered for months after a prosecutor sought approval to indict James Tobin, the northeast regional coordinator for the Republican National Committee.
The phone-jamming operation was aimed at preventing New Hampshire Democrats from rounding up voters in the close U.S. Senate race between Republican Rep. John Sununu and Democratic Gov. Jeanne Shaheen. Sununu's 19,000-vote victory helped the GOP regain control of the Senate.
While there were guilty pleas in the New Hampshire investigation prior to the 2004 presidential election, involvement of the national GOP wasn't confirmed. A Manchester, N.H., policeman quickly traced the jamming to Republican political operatives in 2003 and forwarded the evidence to the Justice Department for what ordinarily would be a straightforward case.
However, the official, who requested anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter, told McClatchy that senior Justice Department officials slowed the inquiry. The official didn't know whether top department officials ordered the delays or what motivated those decisions.
Read the rest.
--David Kurtz
Whammo!
McCain in a statistical tie for first in New Hampshire according to new Rasmussen poll.
Romney 31%
McCain 27%
--Josh Marshall
Out of the Limelight
You know how it is with the awards shows. There's always a sullen loser, who refuses to go to the after-parties and sulks for months about the lack of respect from the industry. So it is, too, with the Golden Dukes.
From TPM Reader CH:
Whither Gary Aldridge?Man.
Liberty University alumnus, former employee for Jerry Falwell, pastor of
a Montgomery, AL Baptist Church.Hogtied, auto-asphyxiated, bound with straps, still carrying a
condom-wrapped dildo in his anus, and wearing not one, but two wet-suits.Gary Aldridge gave his life for a Golden Duke, but was denied even a
nomination. This is a travesty, and a sad day indeed for those aspiring
to one day bask in the glory of their very own Golden Duke.What will I tell my children?
Alas, not everyone can dig their stiletto heels into the plush red carpet.
--David Kurtz
Silence Says It All
Dan Froomkin, in his column today titled "The Tell-Tale Stall" (nothing to do with Larry Craig):
The best indicator of how seriously this White House is involved in a political scandal may be how emphatically it refuses to comment.By that standard, the CIA's destruction of its torture tapes is shaping up to be a doozy of a White House story.
--David Kurtz
Dukey Nominees Announced!!!
Okay, the big moment has arrived. Or at least the biggest moment till December 31st. As you know, TPM is running the First Annual Golden Duke awards, named in honor or iconic political crook Randy "Duke" Cunningham and awarded to the biggest political crooks, scoundrels and bamboozlers in six separate categories. TPM Readers sent in dozens of great nominations measuring the comparative muckliness and bamboozlism of TPM favorites like Larry Craig, Alberto Gonzales, Bradley Schlozman and many, many others. And now we've chosen the official nominees.
So who are the nominees for Best Testimonial Trainwreck? Best Scandal -- Sex and Generalized Carnality? You know you want to know. So find out in today's episode of TPMtv! Winners will be announced right here on December 31st.
--Josh Marshall
Greg Sargent has an advance look at a new heavy-on-attitude memo from the John Edwards campaign, attacking the press for its general coverage of his campaign.
--David Kurtz
Too Hot For WaPo
With the Senate still deadlocked over the nomination of vote-suppression guru Hans von Spakovsky to the FEC, two former Justice Department officials writing at TPMCafe urge the Dems to hold firm.
Their op-ed, by the way, was rejected by the Washington Post – after the paper ran an editorial urging the Senate to approve von Spakovsky (“a flawed FEC is better than no FEC at all”) and a George Will column that, beyond urging von Spakovsky’s confirmation, attacked the former Department officials who’d opposed it. They respond to Will here as well.
--David Kurtz
From Dana's Lips to Our Ears
Did the New York Times really agree to a White House demand to issue a correction about today's Gonzales Torture tapes article? That's what Dana Perino said in today's White House briefing. Check it out ...
Update: Now the Times says that they'll correct the sub-headline to their piece, but not the substance.
--Josh Marshall
Prepare Yourself!
Today's the day. We're announcing the official nominees for this year's Golden Dukes Awards (aka the "Dukeys").
If your nomination was one of the winners (i.e., was accepted as a finalist nominee), we'll be contacting you shortly and giving you details about the exciting TPM merchandize you've won.
--Josh Marshall
Has the NYT agreed to run a correction on its CIA torture tapes story? That's what Dana Perino is saying at the White House press briefing: "I have heard now from the New York Times that they will retract that headline and they are going to run a correction tomorrow."
Late Update: Apparently the NYT is backing off the subhed to the story, “White House Role Was Wider Than It Said.” From The Hill:
Catherine Mathis, senior vice president of corporate communications for the newspaper, stated that the sub-headline has been changed, adding that a correction would be printed. However, Mathis also pointed out that the White House did not challenge the contents of the article.
--David Kurtz
Insert Joke Here
From the AP:
Thick black smoke billowed from a fire Wednesday on the White House compound in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building.The blaze appeared to be located in Vice President Dick Cheney's suite of ceremonial offices on the second floor of the building.
Overheated shredders? Addington burning files?
Take your whack at it.
Late Update: Joking aside, as a former veep staffer points out in an email, the Vice President's Ceremonial Office is a national treasure and fire damage to it would be a sad loss.
--David Kurtz
You're Kidding Me, Right?
I really hope the Obama camp is kidding when they say Barack is the most scrutinized candidate in the race. If they're not, they're living in a fantasy world that makes me question whether they're up to the rigors of a national campaign.
Let me be clear: there's legitimate scrutiny of legislative records, policy positions, personal finances, history of decisions made in tough, pressure-filled situations (the only really legitimate meaning of character), etc. There's been some of that and should probably be more.
Then there's the collective assault that constitutes modern press 'scrutiny', especially for a Democrat who generally has to deal with the tag team of the national political press and the regrettably much more able and ruthless GOP oppo research cadre, which has an established feeding operation mainlined to most national political reporters.
It ain't fair; it ain't right; but it's the reality. And if he thinks he's already gotten that, well ... what's he been smoking?
--Josh Marshall
TPMCafe's live discussion forum on bankruptcy and foreclosures, which I mentioned earlier this morning, is now underway.
Head on over and take part.
--David Kurtz
Got a Bridge in Brooklyn to Sell You
Obama flack: "No candidate in this race has undergone more investigations and examinations than Barack Obama has."
--David Kurtz
White House: NYT Piece "Pernicious and Troubling"
The White House pushes back--hard--on the NYT story on the involvement of White House attorneys in discussions about what to do with the CIA torture tapes.
Here's the statement out this morning from White House press secretary Dana Perino, demanding a correction:
The New York Times today implies that the White House has been misleading in publicly acknowledging or discussing details related to the CIA's decision to destroy interrogation tapes.The sub-headline of the story inaccurately says that the "White House Role Was Wider Than It Said", and the story states that "...the involvement of White House officials in the discussions before the destruction of the tapes...was more extensive than Bush administration officials have acknowledged."
Under direction from the White House General Counsel while the Department of Justice and the CIA Inspector General conduct a preliminary inquiry, we have not publicly commented on facts relating to this issue, except to note President Bush's immediate reaction upon being briefed on the matter. Furthermore, we have not described - neither to highlight, nor to minimize -- the role or deliberations of White House officials in this matter.
The New York Times' inference that there is an effort to mislead in this matter is pernicious and troubling, and we are formally requesting that NYT correct the sub-headline of this story.
It will not be surprising that this matter will be reported with a reliance on un-named sources and individuals lacking a full availability of the facts -- and, as the New York Times story itself acknowledges, some of these sources will have wildly conflicting accounts of the facts. We will instead focus our efforts on supporting the preliminary inquiry underway, where facts can be gathered without bias or influence and later disseminated in an appropriate fashion.
We will continue to decline to comment on this issue, and in response to misleading press reports
The statement then lists all of the no comments from the White House in recent days.
The essence of the pushback isn't about whether the White House knew of the tapes and their destruction or about whether White House attorneys were deeply involved. The White House is focusing narrowly on the issue of whether it has been misleading by minimizing its role or mis-characterizing it. The pushback, in short, is: Hey, we've been stonewalling and haven't said jack about this.
Now that's a defense.
Late Update: The White House highlights its on the record "no comments." What about the anonymous accounts that have been coming from White House officials? We'll have more on that soon.
Later Update: The White House's outrage would appear to be misplaced.
--David Kurtz
Today's Must Read
The New York Times reports today that the usual suspects were in on the discussions about destroying the CIA torture tapes: Gonzales, Addington, and Miers. What remains unclear is what they advised to the CIA to do.
--David Kurtz
Liveblogging the Subprime Mess
TPMCafe is hosting a live blogging discussion today from 11-12 ET about HR 3609, the proposed bankruptcy amendment that would cleanup some of the subprime mortgage mess.
Organized by OpenLeft's Matt Stoller and The Sunlight Foundation, participants will include amendment co-sponsors Reps. Brad Miller (D-NC) and Linda Sanchez (D-CA), TPMCafe regular Elizabeth Warren, a Harvard law professor; Bob Lawless, a law professor at the University of Illinois who blogs at creditslips, Adam Levitin, a law professor at Georgetown; and Hale Stewart, a Houston lawyer who blogs at DailyKos and at his own blog, The Bonddad Blog.
Elizabeth Warren previews the discussion:
Congressman Miller's bill would give some homeowners caught in upside-down loans the chance to write down the loan to the value of the home and put the homeowner in a long-term, fixed mortgage. The bill is designed to reduce the number of foreclosures, not by putting them off with a temporary rate freeze, but by moving some families into long-term mortgages they can afford.
Stop by the Cafe between 11-12 ET and join in the discussion.
--David Kurtz
Who Woulda Thunk it?
From the NYT ...
At least four top White House lawyers took part in discussions with the Central Intelligence Agency between 2003 and 2005 about whether to destroy videotapes showing the secret interrogations of two operatives from Al Qaeda, according to current and former administration and intelligence officials.The accounts indicate that the involvement of White House officials in the discussions before the destruction of the tapes in November 2005 was more extensive than Bush administration officials have acknowledged.
Those who took part, the officials said, included Alberto R. Gonzales, who served as White House counsel until early 2005; David S. Addington, who was the counsel to Vice President Dick Cheney and is now his chief of staff; John B. Bellinger III, who until January 2005 was the senior lawyer at the National Security Council; and Harriet E. Miers, who succeeded Mr. Gonzales as White House counsel.
--Josh Marshall
How It's Looking to Me
I just got back from a week's vacation out of the country on Sunday. And I did my best to clear my head of politics while I was away. So I'm just now getting back in the rhythm of the campaign. And on the Republican side, it still looks like Romney to me. But that's by a by-default logic that applies almost uniquely to this campaign.
Clearly, Romney has had a bad few weeks as Huckabee has rocketed from being Ron Paul's colleague down in the single digits to the leader or near leader in several key states. Hell, he's almost tied with Rudy for the lead nationally. But as we're now seeing day after day with Huckabee, despite the affable manner and the politics that are gaining him huge support within the GOP's evangelical base, the dude just has way too much baggage to get him to the nomination -- letting a bunch of anti-Clinton whacks convince you to let a serial rapist out of prison, all sorts of completely whacked views, wild unpreparedness on foreign policy. And they haven't even gotten to truly nutball ideas he's for like the 'Fair Tax'. I'm not saying it can't happen. But I just think Huckabee's got too much baggage on too many fronts.
Then you have Rudy, of whom I've already said quite a bit. Republican voters are starting to realize that pro-choice wasn't just a policy position for Rudy. He lived a lifestyle as mayor that made it a critical option to have on hand at any given moment. With Huckabee's rise, attention has gone off Rudy's mix of boffo boffing scandals and shady business deals. But there's still so much more to be scrutinized, especially on the latter front, when and if the attention returns.
My own take is that Rudy's campaign is near a tipping point. As long as he was dominating the national polls and running strong in big starts on or after February 5th, there was a case to be made that he could afford to getting shellacked in the early states. But he's now close to nose-diving in the national polls and he's fallen in almost every state. If the fall continues nationally, he's going to be tied or just competitive nationally. And you're going to hit a tipping point, a crisis of confidence in Rudy's campaign, where suddenly there's no ace in the hole to get people to ignore the fact that he's going to get clobbered in each of the early contests that almost always determine the course of the rest of the campaign. At that point the emperor of New York City will be exposed as having no clothes, not even silk pajamas-cum-Hef-pipe to amble from one assignation to the next.
And that leaves us with ... Mitt Romney.
Incredibly phony, endless flipflops and with the Mormon issue that will probably keep him from ever dominating the GOP's evangelical base. But a fairly strong campaigner and probably no boffo scandal that makes you scratch your head and wonder what the guy was smoking.
So, all humor aside, despite his campaign's being in the doldrums and facing real danger in Iowa, by process of elimination, it still seems to me that Mitt Romney's the man to beat in the GOP.
--Josh Marshall
Kevin Drum and Steve Clemons suss out Clinton's strengths as a potential president vs. Obama.
--Josh Marshall
Interested in US history? How it ties in with current events in this country of ours? Check out the new Edge of the West blog.
--Josh Marshall
The Spectrum of Aberration
Greg Sargent interviewed a Huckabee spokesperson today about the excerpts from Huckabee's late '90s book that received so much attention yesterday.
In trying to, um, what I guess we'll call "clarify" what Huckabee meant in the book, Joe Carter offered the following observations:
"He's not equating homosexuality with necrophilia," Carter told us. "He's saying there's a range of aberrant behavior. He considers homosexuality aberrant, but that's at one end of the spectrum. Necrophilia is at the other end."Carter added: "No way is he saying that homosexuality is like having sex with dead people. That's not it at all."
More of Greg's interview here.
--David Kurtz
Huckabee's Rise and Rudy's Fall
We've put together a chart at TPM Election Central that helps to give an appreciation for just how fast Mike Huckabee's rise in the polls has been--and how broad--compared to Rudy Giuliani, who seems to have taken much of the hit from the Huckabee surge.
--David Kurtz
Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) sits down at TPM Cafe to explain what happened yesterday in the Senate on FISA and telecom immunity.
--David Kurtz
The White House is refusing to answer any questions about the CIA torture tapes--and sidesteps the chance to respond to Mike Huckabee's description of the President's "bunker mentality"--in today's White House press briefing:
--David Kurtz
Phone-jammistas Behold!
Longtime readers of this site know that the history of TPM is rather intertwined with the history of the 2002 New Hampshire phone-jamming scandal. In case you don't remember, that's the case where the state Republican party (almost certainly with the knowledge and probably with the cooperation of the national party) hired a phone bank to jam the phones of the Dems' and the local firefighters' GOTV phone banks.
The guy close to the center of the whole scam was the media operative/consultant hired to run the operation, Allen Raymond. And he's written a new tell-all book, How to Rig an Election: Confessions of a Republican Operative.
Now, as you probably know, most tell-all books are more like tell-little or tell-nothing books. We've still got one reader still sulking because he was hounding us for days about why we weren't giving more attention to the Scott McClellan memoir non-bombshell. But I got word yesterday that Raymond's offering is the real deal. Our copy arrived at the office today. And upon a limited initial perusal the normally low-key and laconic Paul Kiel concludes that it is "awesome." So that's saying a lot.
As it happens, this is not surprising from what we've seen thus far of Raymond. Of all the phone-jam scammers, he was the only one who not only took his criminal justice lumps but seemed genuinely to want to wash his hands of the whole rotten business. The rest, as you'd expect, are back on the GOP payroll in most cases after a short pitstop in the can.
Raymond on his sojourn in the slammer: "After 10 full years inside the GOP, 90 days among honest criminals wasn't really any great ordeal."
Anyway, check out the book and we're working on getting Mr. Raymond over here to TPM to discuss the book and perhaps answer your questions.
--Josh Marshall
Stabbed in the Back
At TPMCafe's Table for One, Jonathan Stevenson and Steven Simon are deconstructing President Bush's revisionist history of the U.S. involvement in Vietnam, as applied to the war in Iraq.
--David Kurtz
We Finally Have a Taker
We were working the story of Rep. Don Young's Coconut Road earmark pretty hard earlier this year at TPMmuckraker. For those who weren't following along, in 2005 the Alaska Republican managed to get an earmark inserted for a highway interchange in Florida after the bill had passed both houses but before it went to the President for signature. It was, basically, an extra-constitutional bit of pork barrel legislation for a developer who gave generously to Young's re-election campaign.
But even with those startling facts, the story pretty much died there. Until perhaps today.
Anti-earmark crusader Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) is now calling for the creation of a select committee of both representatives and senators to investigate the circumstances surrounding the virgin birth of the Coconut Road earmark. And until Coburn gets the investigation he wants, he will object to unanimous consent on the bill working its way through Congress now that would essentially fix the 2005 bill.
Paul Kiel has more, including a copy of Coburn's letter to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.
Late Update: If you're late to the Coconut Road story, this August TPMtv episode will catch you up:
--David Kurtz
What Ron Paul Juggernaut?
The maverick Republican polls the same as Alan Keyes--3% nationally--in the latest Gallup poll.
--David Kurtz
Add Specter to the List
According to Arlen Specter (R-PA), "what Senator Lott said was in no means out of line." Take a look:
--David Kurtz
Not Just Gordon Smith
Here's Orrin Hatch (R-UT) today on the Senate floor, delivering his own impassioned defense of Trent Lott's Strom Thurmond debacle:
--David Kurtz
Gordon Smith's warm embrace of Trent Lott's warm embrace of Strom Thurmond's segregationist past:
--David Kurtz
"We knew what he meant"
For my money, this is the best part of Sen. Gordon's defense of Trent Lott's Strom Thurmond homage:
"We knew what he meant."
Who's we? And what did he mean?
--David Kurtz
Say It Ain't So, Gordo
It's another Senate homage gone bad.
This time it was Sen. Gordon Smith (R-OR) praising his friend and colleague, the retiring Trent Lott (R-MS), in a speech on the Senate floor, and launching into a defense of Lott's segregationist remarks from 2002, delivered as a paean to then-Sen. Strom Thurmond on the occasion of his 100th birthday.
Here's Gordon from this morning:
"I was celebrating my re-election and on vacation. I watched over international news as his words were misconstrued, words which we had heard him utter many times in his big warm-heartedness trying to make one of our colleagues, Strom Thurmond, feel good at 100 years old. We knew what he meant. But the wolfpack of the press circled around him, sensed blood in the water, and the exigencies of politics caused a great injustice..."
Video soon.
Late Update: Smith is singing a different tune than he did back in 2002.
Later Update: Watch the video.
--David Kurtz
With Scooter Libby's appeal over, will Henry Waxman finally get some of Patrick Fitzgerald's files from the Justice Department?
--David Kurtz
Federal judge who ordered preservation of torture evidence schedules Friday hearing on destruction of CIA torture tapes.
--David Kurtz
TPMtv: Obama Revealed!
Finally, someone has the courage to ask the question Barack Obama won't answer ...
--Josh Marshall
Today's Must Read
The Washington Post gets a retired FBI agent on the record who contradicts much of what former CIA agent John Kiriakou had to say last week about the capture and torture of Abu Zubaydah. Who to believe?
--David Kurtz
Old Dog, Old Tricks
From Roll Call (sub. req.):
Despite scrutiny from investigators representing at least five federal departments and agencies, a midsummer raid of his home by law enforcement officials and a home-state governor increasingly hostile to earmarks, GOP Sen. Ted Stevens of Alaska is showing no signs of abandoning earmarks and directed spending, netting interests in the state more than $88 million in this year’s omnibus, according to a review by Roll Call.That total includes nearly $3.5 million for the Alaska Sealife Center — which is being investigated by the FBI, Department of Interior and the Internal Revenue Service as part of their inquiry into Stevens — as well as millions of dollars for berry research, “alternative salmon products” and other programs benefiting Alaska businesses with ties to the lawmaker.
Late Update: Paul Kiel has more.
--David Kurtz
The Iranians Are Coming!
Via Nicaragua?
Fox News is on the case.
[Thanks to TPM Reader TH for the links.]
--David Kurtz
Please Don't Make My Job Any Harder
I take a pretty hard line against those crude online name-callers who say that conservatives are just a band of pathological liars constantly using this or that scam or felony to pump up their fantasies of victimization at the hands of the repressive liberal establishment. But the likes of Francisco Nava don't make my job any easier.
Nava is a Junior at Princeton University making a name for himself as a comer in the conservative, pro-chastity community on campus. Along those lines he was an officer of something called the Anscombe Society, which has charted for itself the uphill battle of making abstinence until marriage the norm on campus.
Not surprisingly, Anscombe's faculty advisor is none other than theocon icon Robert George, professor of jurisprudence and all-around moral values macher, who is as up on Aristotle as he is down on condoms. And now he seems to have developed a sideline in mentoring undergraduates intent on unintentionally demonstrating that pro-abstinence student activists, not surprisingly, show pretty clearly they haven't had sex when they try to write about sex. For example, from the Anscombe Society website ...
Within marriage, sex serves as the ultimate physical expression of love and unity. Because in marriage spouses are united to one another on the mental, emotional, legal, and perhaps spiritual levels, it is appropriate and good that they also be united on a physical level. Such physical union is actualized in sexual intercourse. The nature of this sexual act is itself unitive—two become one flesh. Sex is thus the actualization of the marital union, concretizing the mutual gift of self between the partners. If experienced outside the context of marriage, therefore, it cannot actualize the union, for no union exists.
But, I digress.
Last month, Nava gained attention for a column in the Daily Princetonian ("Princeton's Latex Lies") criticizing a university condom hand-out program as "tacit sponsorship of hookup sex." But the message didn't fit well with campus sex and free love advocates. Soon Nava began receiving a series of email death threats telling Nava, among other things, to "shut the f-ck up", that "you are not welcome here" and that "we will destroy you."
Indeed, Nava wasn't the only one getting the emails. They also went to the other officers of the Anscombe Society and even Professor George himself.
"It would be safe to say that the Anscombe Society is a common factor linking all of us," Anscombe Society Veep Jonathan Hwang told the student paper. "It is the most intense reaction to the Anscombe Society that I've ever received."
The emails prompted new calls from conservatives about the repressive pro-sex, anti-conservative atmosphere on campus and claims of a double standard applied to intimidation against conservative students. And the outrage only spiraled further out of control when Nava claimed that on Friday evening two pro-sex advocates wearing black clothes and ski caps accosted Nava near campus and severely beat him.
Nava told the campus paper he was sure the attack "at least had something to do with" the threats against the Anscombe Society and noted that his attackers, like the threatening emailer, had used the phrase "shut the f-ck up."
"I'm still committed to having the beliefs that I do," said Nava, "and I hope that Princeton will show these two characters that intimidation doesn't work."
Nor were others bending to the threats. Aptly named campus right-winger Wyatt Yankus wrote at Princeton Tory blog: "An assault on those who express their opinion hurts all of us who might want to express their views. If you have a problem with what I say, then come and get me."
Right-wing rage-addict David Horowitz told the New York Sun, "It's a terrible incident, but it doesn't surprise me. The left has now become the hate group."
The Sun picked up the mood on campus over the weekend ...
Over the weekend, Mr. Nava's jaw was badly swollen, his face was covered with cuts and abrasions, and the inside of his mouth was bleeding, Mr. George, who was also a target of the death threats, said after visiting Mr. Nava in the emergency room.Mr. Nava was moved over the weekend to the McCosh Health Center on campus.
Yesterday, a line of solemn-looking students, including Mr. Nava's girlfriend, stood outside his room while a nurse allowed two police officers to enter. The nurse eventually turned the friends and this reporter away, and said too many visitors were creating a disruptive atmosphere.
With an active Republicans Club, a pro-life club, three major Evangelical groups, and the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions that is led by Professor George, Princeton University is considered one of the Ivy League's more conservative campuses.
But many conservative students at Princeton say they were being singled out for expressing unpopular views.
"There would rightly be outrage had the student been part of some other minority on campus," said a 2006 Princeton graduate who works at a conservative think tank in Washington, D.C., Michael Fragoso. "I have yet to see that right now, and that's rather disappointing."
"Are there double standards and reforms that need to be made? Absolutely," Mr. George said in an interview.
Now, at this point, I have to confess, I think I would have been a bit skeptical. It's been going on two decades since I was on campus. But in my day at least, I can't see the hounds who were the biggest advocates of hookup sex reacting in quite this fashion. I think they'd have been far more likely to be happy one more potential competitor had taken himself out of the running than beat the guy's head in for promoting dangerous anti-sex views. But apparently, George bought into Nava's story big time.
In fact, his belief sustained him even when it emerged that Nava had gotten busted for fabricating a death threat against himself and his roommate while he was at prep school at Groton. "Those of us who saw him at the emergency room find it difficult to believe he could have done this himself. The physical manifestations were too evident, too severe," George told the Sun.
Alas, George's credulity has not been rewarded.
After finding discrepancies in Nava's account of the beating, Princeton Township detectives confronted Nava. And Nava admitted fabricating both the bogus assault and the campaign of pro-sex, anti-Anscombe Society death threats.
George now says that he became suspicious of Nava from the moment he heard of the earlier Groton incident. And he's looking on the bright side about the fallout from the Nava hoax.
"The administration, Public Safety, the students who were threatened [and] the other members of Anscombe have all acted in an exemplary manner," George told the Daily Princetonian late today. "They have worked together and cooperated together. Within 72 hours, we were able to expose this as a hoax ... Princeton, all the way from the administrators down, had the good sense to hold their fire, get the facts first, before drawing conclusions. There's a good example for other institutions. Follow the example of Princeton, not Duke."
--Josh Marshall
From The Schadenfreude Department
Karl Rove's memoir not drawing as much interest from publishers as expected.
--David Kurtz
TPMCafe Book Club: The Legacy of the Dean Campaign
Four years later, what did it all mean? We've invited some of the leading innovators from that campaign to join us to discuss the legacy of the Dean campaign.
Dean's former deputy press secretary, Garrett M. Graff, will be discussing his new book, The First Campaign: Globalization, the Web, and the Race for the White House. The Dean campaign was not really about the internet, it was about the message, Graff contends in his first post.
Joining Graff will be Zephyr Teachout and Thomas Streeter. Their new book is Mousepads, Shoeleather, and Hope: Lessons from the Howard Dean Campaign for the Future of Internet Politics. In her first post, Teachout argues that people have misunderstood the lesson of the campaign by focusing just on how it allowed the campaign to decentralize tasks instead of focusing on how it decentralized power.
Other participants this week include Jerome Armstrong, Zack Exley, Aldon Hynes, and Tom Swan.
--David Kurtz
TPMtv: Crunch Time in Iowa
Suddenly Iowa's a real race in both parties. And the Sunday show yakkers were full of talk about the nosediving Hillary and Rudy campaigns. Check out what they said in today's Sunday Show Roundup ...
--Ben Craw
Dodd promises to filibuster FISA bill until he runs out of breath. Still no word on what Clinton, Obama and Biden will do.
--David Kurtz
NYT covers blogger's nasty attack on author of WaPo's Obama Muslim piece--but devotes only one sentence to actual criticism of piece.
--David Kurtz
Death Spiral Watch
Rudy pulls resources out of New Hampshire to focus on Florida, where he's also falling fast.
--Josh Marshall
Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) has a post up at TPMCafe on today's debate on the new FISA bill and telecom immunity.
--David Kurtz
Today's Must Read
House intel committee makes a bipartisan vow not to be thwarted from investigating the CIA torture tapes.
--David Kurtz
The education of David Frum
It took a while, but David Frum, the former Bush speechwriter seems to have noticed a problem with the conservative movement's approach to competence.
It also has to be admitted: Many of us on the conservative side have fed this monster. (Rightly) aghast at the abuse of expertise by liberal judges, liberal bureaucrats and liberal academics, we have sometimes over-reacted by denying the importance of expertise altogether.
"'Heart' is crucial," one of George W. Bush's early evangelical supporters argued in a 2005 newspaper column. This same writer accused those conservatives who questioned Bush's "faith-based initiative" of having "holes in their souls."
So now instead of holes in our souls, we conservatives are getting candidates with holes in their heads.
As Kevin Drum put it, "Welcome back to the reality-based community, Mr. Frum. Good luck reining in the beast you and your colleagues have spent the past three decades unchaining."
--Steve Benen
90 days later
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), 90 days ago:
"What we do can affect the outcome. But if we don't see progress on two of the three big issues -- oil revenues, de-Baathification, provincial elections -- in the next 90 days, it may not happen. And Iraq could be a failed state."
Just for good measure, let's also not forget that Graham also said we need not worry about Iraq failing the vast majority of the agreed upon benchmarks for progress, because a major step forward was near. "In a matter of weeks, we're going to have a major breakthrough in Baghdad on items of political reconciliation — the benchmarks — because the Iraqi people are putting pressure on their politicians." That was Sept. 2.
Oh, all right, one more. Graham told Time magazine's editors that unless there was political reconciliation in Iraq within 90 days, Americans should give up hope. "If they don't deliver in 90 days, I will openly say the chances for political reconciliation are remote," Graham said, adding, "If they can't do it by the end of the year, how do you justify a continued presence?" That was Sept. 26.
For reasons that I’ve never entirely understood, the media establishment decided years ago that Graham is a “serious” lawmaker whose opinions on Iraq necessarily have merit. I have a hunch, reality notwithstanding, this won't change.
--Steve Benen
'Less than the sum of its parts'
It's hardly a secret that the Republican presidential field is surprisingly unimpressive, which has contributed to a GOP malaise. Poll after poll has shown Democratic voters enthusiastic about their choices, while Republican voters generally feel the opposite.
But it's worth pausing, from time to time, to realize just how feeble this field really is.
It is hard to think of another campaign when Republicans have seemed less excited about their choices. That was the unmistakable lesson of the rapid ascension in recent polls of Mike Huckabee, the former governor of Arkansas, the latest in a line of Republican flavors of the month. A New York Times/CBS News poll last week found that none of the Republican candidates -- not even the suddenly hot Mr. Huckabee -- was viewed favorably by even half of Republican voters. [...]
[W]hat is worrying Republicans these days is that this tepid rank-and-file reception to the best the party has to offer suggests that the Republican Party is hitting a wall after dominating American politics for most of the last 35 years. Republican voters are reacting to -- or rather, not reacting to -- a field of presidential candidates who have defined their candidacies with familiar, even musty, Republican promises, slogans and policies. [...]
Richard Lowry, the editor of the conservative magazine National Review, said the field "has been less than the sum of its parts."
To quantify this a bit, Richard Bond, a former chairman of the Republican National Committee, noted data that showed a 17-point "intensity gap" between the Republicans and the Democrats looking ahead to the '08 campaign. "That is a monster number," Bond said. "It shows that the Republicans are not fired up and it's going to take a nominee who can clearly articulate a post-Bush vision for the country."
To be sure, this could change once there's a Democratic nominee Republicans can rally in opposition to. But what does it say about the modern Republican Party that they need a Dem to save their electoral chances?
--Steve Benen
Lieberman to endorse McCain
Marc Ambinder and Mike Allen are both reporting this afternoon that Joe Lieberman will appear in New Hampshire to endorse John McCain's presidential campaign.
A source familiar with the endorsement said that the two will appear of NBC's Today Show tomorrow morning and at a town hall meeting in New Hampshire.
The endorsement could help McCain with independents in the state.... The move will heighten speculation that McCain might ask Lieberman to join his ticket.
A few thoughts. First, this news hardly comes as a surprise. As far back as January, Lieberman said he would consider backing the Republican nominee in '08. Obviously, given that McCain and Lieberman have been joined at the hip in support of Bush's Iraq policy for five years, I would have been more surprised if he didn't endorse McCain.
Second, McCain's campaign is certain to score points with the David Broders of the world, but this endorsement may not deliver much in the way of primary votes. Indeed, Lieberman's support in New Hampshire is hardly impressive -- remember the classic "three way tie for third place"?
And third, on the possibility of a McCain-Lieberman ticket, this has been touted of late by everyone from The Weekly Standard's William Kristol to National Review's Peter Wehner, though it seems terribly far-fetched given Lieberman's support of abortion and gay rights.
This is the natural evolution of an embarrassing senator who lost his way quite a while ago. It's unlikely, in a 51-49 Senate, that the Democratic leadership will punish Lieberman for this (by, say, reevaluating the decision to give him a committee chairman's gavel he never uses), but it's hardly an unreasonable move given the circumstances.
--Steve Benen
Fighting over who values Bush more
After a series of humiliating incidents, Mike Huckabee has earned his reputation for knowing less about foreign policy than any credible candidate in either party. To help address his obvious deficiency, Huckabee wrote (or, more likely, someone on his staff wrote) a piece for the upcoming issue of Foreign Affairs, in which he criticizes the administration's handling of Iraq, specifically lamenting Bush's "arrogant bunker mentality," which he described as having "been counterproductive at home and abroad."
Assuming Huckabee read the piece, he had to realize there'd be at least some pushback. Mitt Romney was the first out of the gate, suggesting Huckabee sounded like a Democrat.
Romney kept this up on "Meet the Press," saying the criticism is "an insult to the President and Mike Huckabee should apologize to the President."
Oddly enough, Huckabee is already starting to back down, telling Wolf Blitzer that he's the true Bush ally, not Romney.
"I didn't say the President was arrogant.... I've said that the policies have been arrogant.... I'm the one who actually supported the President's surge. I supported the Bush tax cuts, when Mr. Romney didn't. I was with President Bush on gun control, when Mitt Romney wasn't. I was with the President on the President's pro-life position, when Mitt Romney wasn't."
As a rule, the GOP presidential field realizes that the president's name isn't supposed to be uttered at all. In this week's Republican candidate, not a single Republican hopeful used the word "Bush" over the course of the 90-minute event.
And yet, now, two credible challengers for the Republican presidential nomination are anxious to align themselves with the least popular president in the modern political era. Great idea.
--Steve Benen
Media identifies, but won't fix, problem
What's that old cliche? The first step towards recovery is admitting you have a problem.
Several political reporters covering the presidential campaign seem to have that down pat. The Washington Post's Anne Kornblut, for example, explained on MSNBC in October:
"I have to say we in the media are spoiling for a fight. Usually we are biased in favor of a good tussle at about this point. ... I wouldn't be surprised if somewhere between now and January 3, now that we know that's when the Iowa caucuses are going to be, to see some kind of reverse, some kind of Obama surge or an Edwards surge. Something that is going to knock Hillary down a few pegs. Whether it's a media creation, or something that actually happens on the ground. I would be shocked if there were nothing like that."
It sounds like a healthy first step. Kornblut identified a common media problem -- the media likes to manufacture a fight, and take down a frontrunner whether the facts warrant it or not.
But as Greg Sargent explained today, it's the second step that seems to be the trouble:
[P]undits and commentators have a strange and widespread tendency to talk about their profession's collective failings -- but without displaying any desire to change them, without showing any awareness that these failings could be changed with a little effort, and even without betraying any awareness or concern that they themselves might be contributing to the problem.
--Steve Benen
Looking the other way on DADT
When it comes to kicking Americans out of the military because they're gay, the occasional defense -- offered by conservatives who know the policy is absurd -- is that the Pentagon is merely following the law. If Congress wants able-bodied, patriotic, American volunteers to join the Armed Forces, regardless of sexual orientation, lawmakers should change the policy. If not, the Defense Department doesn't have a lot of choice.
Except, that's wrong. "60 Minutes" is scheduled to have a report tonight on gays in the wartime military, and the apparent trend to occasionally disregard "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," in the face of recruiting difficulties, retention challenges, and a severely overstretched fighting force. In one instance, CBS's Lesley Stahl spoke with a gay solider who not only disclosed his sexuality to his superior officers, but "even offered graphic proof." He was neither discharged nor reprimanded, DADT be damned.
[Army Sgt. Darren Manzella], a medic who served in Iraq for a year, currently serves as medical liaison for the 1st Cavalry Division stationed in Kuwait, where he says he is "out" to his entire chain of command, including a three-star general. After leaving Iraq, he started receiving anonymous emails warning him about his openness that suggested he was being watched, so he went to his commander to head off an investigation he felt was coming. "I didn't know how else to do it," he tells Stahl, acknowledging that he initiated an investigation of himself by violating the policy. "I felt more comfortable being the one to say, 'This is what is real,'" Manzella says.
He then says his commander reported him, as he was obliged to do, and then "I had to go see my battalion commander, who read me my rights," he says. He turned over pictures of him and his boyfriend, including video of a passionate kiss, to aid the investigation. But to his surprise, "I was told to go back to work. There was no evidence of homosexuality," says Manzella. "'You're not gay,'" he says his superiors told him. This response confused him and, he says, the closest a superior officer came to addressing his sexuality was to say "I don't care if you're gay or not."
It's apparently part of a trend. Gay soldiers discharged under the DADT policy have dropped from 1,200 a year in 2001 to less than half of that now.
A few months ago, John McCain said gay people in the military represent an "intolerable risk" to morale, cohesion, and discipline. When push comes to shove, the military apparently disagrees.
--Steve Benen
Who needs fiscal sanity?
Quick quiz: what's going to cost the U.S. more over the next decade: the exploding costs of entitlements like Social Security and Medicare or Bush's tax cuts? Despite all the talk we hear about the prior, it's not even close -- the tax cuts are poised to cost the treasury far, far, more.
And yet, every Republican presidential candidate in the field, to a man, vows to make each of Bush's cut permanent, beyond their scheduled expiration in 2010. As the NYT's Tom Redburn notes today, over the next 10 years, it will cost "roughly $2.5 trillion in revenues now expected under current law. And that's just the beginning."
Even without taking on any additional tasks, merely meeting the government's existing obligations -- mostly to pay for the military and to keep up with the health care and retirement needs of the elderly -- would send the budget deficit soaring, pushing overall federal debt held by the public from under 50 percent of the size of the nation's economy today to over 300 percent by 2050.
"The combination of roughly constant revenues and significantly rising expenditures would quickly create an unstable fiscal situation," the [Congressional Budget Office] report notes alarmingly, but in its characteristically dry and understated manner.
How would the Republican candidates deal with this problem? Most say they would try to hold down spending -- and cut taxes even more.
Keep in mind, most of the GOP field, including Rudy Giuliani and John McCain, are on record believing in the Tax Fairy -- tax cuts can pay for themselves with increased revenue. It's transparent nonsense, but it helps explain why the Republican field doesn't even pretend to care about fiscal sanity.
--Steve Benen
'Broader and deeper' surveillance
With the Senate set to move on a revised FISA bill, and the renewed debate over retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies that cooperated with legally dubious NSA requests, the so-called "Terrorist Surveillance Program" is on the front-burner again.
But the NYT adds a new wrinkle to the debate today: the Bush administration's surveillance efforts are even "broader and deeper" than previously believed.
[T]he battle is really about something much bigger. At stake is the federal government's extensive but uneasy partnership with industry to conduct a wide range of secret surveillance operations in fighting terrorism and crime.
The N.S.A.'s reliance on telecommunications companies is broader and deeper than ever before, according to government and industry officials, yet that alliance is strained by legal worries and the fear of public exposure.
To detect narcotics trafficking, for example, the government has been collecting the phone records of thousands of Americans and others inside the United States who call people in Latin America, according to several government officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the program remains classified. But in 2004, one major phone carrier balked at turning over its customers' records. Worried about possible privacy violations or public relations problems, company executives declined to help the operation, which has not been previously disclosed.
Glenn Greenwald characterizes the landscape as one approaching a "surveillance state."
The Executive Branch and the largest telecommunications companies work in virtually complete secrecy -- with no oversight and no notion of legal limits -- to spy on Americans, on our own soil, at will.
More than anything else, what these revelations highlight -- yet again -- is that the U.S. has become precisely the kind of surveillance state that we were always told was the hallmark of tyrannical societies, with literally no limits on the government's ability or willingness to spy on its own citizens and to maintain vast dossiers on those activities. The vast bulk of those on whom the Government spies have never been accused, let alone convicted, of having done anything wrong.
One should assume the debate will now subtly shift to include the new revelations. Before, if you believed that the Bush administration should get a warrant before spying on Americans, and if you suggested that telecommunications companies ought to follow the law and respect customers' privacy, White House allies insisted you were effectively "pro-terrorism." After all, if you're "strong" on national security, you wouldn't mind giving the NSA and telecoms unchecked, unregulated authority to spy on whomever they pleased.
We're bound to hear a similar argument here. Instead of the "Terrorist Surveillance Program," the label will be expanded to the "Drug Kingpin Surveillance Program." If you expect the Bush administration and the telecoms to follow the law, you must be "soft" on narco-traffickers.
--Steve Benen
