Lucky Duckies
by digby
Unfortunately, I have to leave town for a couple of days and won’t be able to post. However, I am sure you will enjoy the blogospheric stylings of two fantastic guest bloggers: Julia of Sisyphus Shrugged and Glenn Greenwald of Unclaimed Territory.
Enjoy. I’ll see you on the week-end.
.
Credibility
by digby
Back when The NY Times was relentlessly flogging Whitewater, I agreed with Franklin Foer that it would be a bad idea to help discredit the mainstream press because their reputations would be so sullied that eventually they’d have no clout to protect sources and tell the truth.
I thought when the Washington Post took every self-serving leak from the Starr investigation and put it on the front page like it was VE Day that it probably wouldn’t be a good idea to vilify their obvious slavishness to GOP operatives because it would be bad when we need the media to have credibility on other major issues.
I was angry about the fact that more than 60 newpapers, including the NY Times editorialized (“until the Starr investigation, ‘no citizen … could have grasped the completeness of President Clinton’s mendacity or the magnitude of his recklessness.'”) that Clinton should resign because of a personal indiscretion. But I didn’t rail against the press for jumping on this Republican manufactured bandwagon because I thought that it was important not to paint mainstream journalism with a broad brush just because they were being absurdly obtuse in this particular case.
When the media treated Al Gore like a circus clown and overlooked the fact that George W. Bush was a gibbering idiot (and admitted openly that they did it for fun) I held in my intemperate remarks because I thought it would harm the party in the long run if we attacked the press as the Republicans do. When they reported the election controversy as if it would create a constitutional crisis if the country had to wait more than a month to find out whether they had the right president I kept my own counsel. After all, who would defend democracy when something truly serious happened?
After 9/11 when they helped the president promote the idea that the country was at “war” (with what we didn’t exactly know) I knew it was a terrible mistake and would lead to a distorted foreign policy and twisted domestic politics. But I didn’t blame the media because it was very difficult to fight that at the time. They’re human, after all.
And when they helped the government make their case for this misbegotten war in Iraq, I assumed that they knew what they were talking about. After all, I had been defending their credibility for years now, in spite of everything I’ve mentioned. If they would screw up something like this, then for what was I holding back my criticism? This was the most serious issue this country had faced in many a decade.
When no WMD were found and I was informed that they had assigned a neocon shill to report the story, and then defended her when she was implicated in a white house smear to cover up its lies going into Iraq, I no longer saw any need to defend the NY Times.
This is fifteen long years of watching the Times and the rest of the mainstream media buckle under the pressure of GOP accusations that they are biased, repeatedly take bogus GOP manufactured scandals and run with them like kids with a brand new kite, treat our elections like they are entertainment vehicles for bored reporters and generally kowtow to the Republican establishment as the path of least resistence. I waited for years for them to recognise what was happening and fight back. It didn’t happen. And I began to see that the only way to get the press to work properly was to apply equal pressure from the opposite direction. It’s a tug of war. They were not strong enough to resist being dragged off to the right all by themselves. They needed some flamethrowers from our side pulling in the opposite direction to make it possible for them to avoid being pulled all the way over.
So, it is with great respect and reverence for the press, which I consider to be indispensible to democracy, that I have become a rabid critic. It did this country no good to allow the Republicans to perpetuate their permanent “mau-mau the media” campaign for 25 years. And it does the press no good to be defended by liberals when they succumb to the mau-mauing. Indeed, history shows that their reaction is to lean even more closely to the GOP to show they are not liberal themselves.
I have criticized the press for its absurd behavior in the Plame leak — refusing to write about it, protecting their powerful administration sources even when they’ve been used as a weapon for political purposes, their trivial cocktail party insularity. The politically powerful should not be allowed to use the press to do their ratfucking for them. There is, of course, a huge difference between that and protecting genuine whistle-blowers, which I defend unconditionally.
But I will no longer defend the press unconditionally. They have proved that they can’t resist the powerful pull of rightwing intimidation and seduction without some counterbalance on the left and I’m more than willing to call a spade a spade to do that. It has not served my politics or my country well to quietly support the media so that they could maintain crediblity. I honestly don’t see that we have anything more to lose when presidents are being impeached for trivial reasons, elections are being stolen and wars are being waged on lies. Just how bad would it have to get to justify criticizing the press for its complicity in those things?
.
in light of the deaths of 12 coal miners, a timely reminder that Mr. Alito is on the record as deciding that the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act should protect miners less than it does.
It’s also worth remembering that since reaching office, Our Fearless Leader cut MSHA (Mine Safety and Health Administration) funds in real dollars, fired a whistleblower, put a mining company executive in charge, reduced staff by 170, tried to slash funding even more, and exempted the MSHA from the Freedom of Information Act.
He did, however, arrange a photo op with the last group of high-profile miners trapped in the ground, and said this for the cameras:
“It was their determination to stick together and to comfort each other that really defines kind of a new spirit that’s prevalent in our country, that when one of us suffer, all of us suffers.”
Mr. Bush, we are told, has given up spirits.
edit: are we all suffering now?
Scott and Barb tell us that the mine in question had (among other issues) a full 273 safety violations in the past two years
Leah puts all this into context
Good morning.
I’m Julia, and Digby’s asked me to put some stuff up here for a few days.
I thought I’d introduce myself by giving you a little background on our local New York Republican mess, since it’s been in the national papers quite abit lately, and there’s nothing quite so… operatic… in its sheer byzantine silliness as our local New York Republican mess.
from the Times: Republican federal corruption OG Al D’Amato sticks his oar in on behalf of the Democrat
Alfonse M. D’Amato, the former senator, sharply criticized a leading Republican candidate for governor, William F. Weld, saying last night that Mr. Weld was under the “cloud” of a federal investigation for once running a “sham college.”
Mr. D’Amato, a Republican, also chastised Mr. Weld for resigning as governor of Massachusetts in 1997, before his second term was over, and then seeking to lead New York “without any real experience here.”
…
Mr. D’Amato also said that Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, who is seeking the Democratic nomination for governor, had done an “excellent” job in office.
This is remarkably interesting for what it says about the current state of New York Republican politics.
a brief digression about Mr. Pataki, Mr. D’Amato and local politics, recent and not-so-recent, here in New York
Mr. D’Amato was, for many years, the autocrat of the New York Republican party, and he pretty much invented our departing Republican governor (mostly to piss Rudy Giuliani off – New York Republicans don’t much like Mr. Giuliani, but Mr. D’Amato likes him less than most. Mr. Giuliani is also a bit of a crook, but not part of this group). Unfortunately for the former Senator, Mr. Pataki isn’t doing all that well, and the rest of his current political stable is – shall we say – not quite ready for prime time.
Mr. Pataki (like NYC Mayor Mr. Bloomberg) cut a sweetheart deal with a politically well-placed union to get their endorsement in his re-election campaign. This hurt him badly with the national Republicans he’s desperately courting for a federal appointment (he’s pretty much played out here in New York).*
In this, parenthetically, he differs from Mr. Bloomberg, a billionaire who is in it for the good the Republican party can do his media empire through judicious deregulation. There are those cynical souls who think that his single-minded focus on the good of media company stockholders might have had something to do with the universal press support he got at election time for his less-than-universally-appreciated performance in office, but I digress.
Back to the strike: Like Mr. Bloomberg, Mr. Pataki saw an opportunity to get himself back in the good graces of fiscal hawks by cracking down on the transit union. With his usual deft political touch, he saw this opportunity after Bloomberg, badly bloodied in the court of public opinion, caved, declared victory and went home.
Part of Mr. Bloomberg’s cave-in was a deal to give the transit workers a refund of pension contributions they had made prior to an earlier contract which lowered the percentage of their pension contributions. This is particularly humiliating for Mr. Bloomberg, since the givebacks will more than cover any Taylor Law fines (two days’ pay for every day out on strike-public employees are barred by law from striking in New York) that were levied against unionmembers during the course of the strike, but of course Mr. Bloomberg doesn’t much care how much of the MTA’s money he spends to make his little problems go away (you’d want to keep in mind that Mr. Bloomberg might only control four out of the nine MTA board, but Mr. Pataki needs Republican friends with money very badly right now).
This left the field wide-open for Mr. Pataki, who is currently playing to the balcony by attempting to retroactively derail the contract agreement. Says the MTA board (which kept him apprised of the negotiations) never told him about the giveback (they say they did). Now he wants to unilaterally change the MTA’s agreement with the union to remove the givebacks, which would most likely send the union back out on strike, as well as (and here’s the beauty part) removing the “bargaining in good faith” component of the MTA’s negotiations that trigger the Taylor Law.
Honestly, it’s better than All My Children. You just have to find someplace other than the Times to read about most of it. I recommend Newsday.
end of brief digression about Mr. Pataki and local politics, recent and not-so-recent, here in New York
Back to Mr. D’Amato and Mr. Weld: it seems that the former Senator is still a bit testy about the former Governor leading the Justice Department investigation of the former Senator’s brother for misusing the former Senator’s office for private profit which ended in the conviction of the former Senator’s brother (later overturned on appeal). This is one of the factors that led to the former Senator’s defeat by Mr. Schumer, thus ending a staggering series of ethics violations and endless televised bootless trips to the fishing hole on Whitewater.
Amusingly, Mr. Weld’s experience in Tennessee is controversial specifically because it involved, er, for-profit education, working-class students getting screwed and backdoor union-busting.
It’s a shame. He sounds like Al’s kinda guy.
*This has been a real boon to New York politics watchers who needed a good laugh, as the national party gifted us with Mrs. Pirro’s short-lived Republican challenge to Hillary, which was the greatest thing since State Senator Espada and we all appreciated it
MSM Kudos
by digby
Multiple props to Janet Hook and Mary Curtius of the LA Times for getting the lead of this excellent story 100% correct.
See, it can be done:
The corruption investigation surrounding lobbyist Jack Abramoff shows the significant political risk that Republican leaders took when they adopted what had once seemed a brilliant strategy for dominating Washington: turning the K Street lobbying corridor into a cog of the GOP political machine.
Abramoff thrived in the political climate fostered by GOP leaders, including Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Texas), who have methodically tried to tighten the links between the party in Congress and business lobbyists, through what has become known as the “K Street Project.”
GOP leaders, seeking to harness the financial and political support of K Street, urged lobbyists to support their conservative agenda, give heavily to Republican politicians and hire Republicans for top trade association jobs. Abramoff obliged on every front, and his tentacles of influence reached deep into the upper echelons of Congress and the Bush administration.
Now, in the wake of a plea agreement in which Abramoff will cooperate in an influence-peddling investigation that might target a number of lawmakers, some Republicans are saying that the party will need to take action to avoid being tarnished.
“This is going to be a huge black eye for our party,” said Rep. Ray LaHood (R-Ill.), a senior member close to House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.). “Denny’s going to have to be very tough and really speak out against people who are indicted. He’s going to have to do it quickly and decisively and frequently.”
Hastert moved Tuesday to inoculate himself from the scandal by announcing that he would give to charity about $60,000 he received from Abramoff and his clients. He is the latest of several lawmakers who have returned or redirected money they received from Abramoff-related sources.
That’s the story folks. If Democratic staffers would keep their yaps shut about how scared they are of “innocent people getting swept up” and if the party would come out swinging, the truth might get out. This needs reinforcement.
.
Democrats Are Wimps, Republicans Are Crooks
by digby
Those two memes are the fundamental negative images people have held of the two parties for the last quarter century. The Abramoff scandal offers the Democrats an opportunity to change their negative meme and reinforce the GOP’s by swinging hard against this corrupt political machine.
Unfortubately it seems they are going to change it by turning it into “Democrats are wimps AND crooks, Republicans are just crooks.”
While Mr. Abramoff is most closely linked to Republicans, even Democrats, many of whom also benefited from his largesse, acted skittish.
“We’re talking about people who have longstanding careers in Congress who took contributions from somebody who knew somebody who knew somebody who knew Jack Abramoff,” said a Democratic Congressional aide who insisted on anonymity so as not to drag his boss into the scandal. “Now they’re panicked. The hope is that this investigation will root out the wrongdoing without innocent people getting hit with the ricochet.”
Mr. Abramoff’s plea bargain is scary to Washington’s power brokers precisely because he was so entangled with so many of them.
His ties to Grover G. Norquist, a leading conservative strategist and president of Americans for Tax Reform, and Ralph Reed, the former director of the Christian Coalition who is now a candidate for lieutenant governor in Georgia, date from his college days.
He once worked as a lobbyist alongside David H. Safavian, who was the head of the White House procurement office until just before his arrest last fall in the Abramoff investigation. And Mr. Abramoff’s former personal assistant once worked for Karl Rove, President Bush’s chief political strategist.
At the White House, administration officials have been reluctant to comment on the case, referring questions to the Justice Department and declining to defend Mr. Safavian. But on Tuesday morning, the White House spokesman, Scott McClellan, denounced Mr. Abramoff’s actions.
We have Abramoff intimately connected with two of the most powerful movement conservatives in Washington and directly with the White house and Karl Rove. This is the kind of thing that used to set the cable gasbags afire with speculation in the Clinton White House. Victoria Toensing’s head would be spinning like a top while she screeched about dirty money the rule of law. And Dan Burton and Orrin Hatch would be liberally quoted in the NY Times saying that there was a need for immediate congressional investigations to determine the length and breadth of Democratic corruption and if leads directly to the president, well, so be it.
Yet, right out of the box, the Democrat quoted in this article is an anonymous staffer discussing how afraid the Democrats are that a couple of them might be caught up in the scandal. Nancy Pelosi and others did speak out yesterday and they aren’t given any prime space in this article. But the truth is that the Democrats do seem skittish and it’s just plain stupid. There should be great joy and energy in Democratic circles at the idea of crippling the GOP machine — Delay, Norquist and Rove are all in trouble and that is unalloyed good news. It won’t destroy the machine entirely, but those three are extremely valuable cogs that are not easily replaced. And there is also the potential to expose these scam artists and strong arm thugs for what they are — thus proving that we aren’t actually wimps. Instead we are reinforcing that impression — and allowing the Republicans to frame this as some sort of abstract “Washington” problem. The press, needless to say, is going where the action is. Since we are motionless, they are focusing on the GOP response.
Why we are skittish about this I do not know. There is no serious downside for us. The scandal is just the latest in a series of Republican screw ups and it’s a doozy.
I just heard Newt Gingrich talking on Fox about how the Republicans need to take up the mantle of reform and vow to clean up the corruption in Washington. He said this without irony because he’s quite serious. He mentioned that the Democrats were investigated ten years ago for illegal foreign campaign contributions. He didn’t mention that there was never any there there. But it sounds good, doesn’t it? And the Republicans may just be able to finesse this because Democrats are so skittish about a couple of their brethren being caught up in the sweep that they are pulling their punches.
Republicans beat a decorated war hero with a fey draft dodger during wartime because they skillfully exploited the public’s long held anxieties about Democratic bona fides on national security. If Democrats can’t can’t run on the corollary “Republicans are crooks” meme in the midst of the biggest government abuse and corruption scandal since Watergate, then we really are useless. We saw this coming for months. And yet we are caught flat footed and the GOP is going to run as the party of reform. Dear gawd.
Update: Sam Rosenfeld has much more on this here. Highly recommended.
.
by digby
Tom: You were around the old timers — and meeting up on how the family should be organized. How they based them on the old Roman legions and called them regimes — the capos and the soldiers. And it worked.
Abramoff:Yeah, it worked. Those were the great old days you know. And one was like the Roman Empire. The Family was like the Roman Empire.
Tom: It was once. Jackie — when a plot against the Emperor failed — the planners were always given a chance to let their families keep their fortunes.
Abramoff: Yea — but only the rich guys Tom. The little guys — they got knocked off and all their estates went to the Emperors. Unless they went home and uh, killed themselves — then nothing happened. And their families — their families were taken care of Tom.
Tom: That was a good break — nice funeral.
Abramoff: Yeah — they went home — and sat in a hot bath — opened up their veins — and bled to death. And sometimes had a little party before they did it.
Tom: Don’t worry about anything Jackie Five Angels.
Abramoff: Thanks Tom — thanks.
.
Socially Close
by digby
Jane makes a vital catch.
What in gawd’s name is Alice Fisher doing anywhere near a political case? She should recuse herself immediately. Full stop.
The probe is being overseen by Noel Hillman, a hard-charging career prosecutor who heads the Public Integrity Section and who has a long track record of nailing politicians of all stripes. But politics almost certainly will creep into the equation. Hillman’s new boss will soon be Alice Fisher, who is widely respected but also a loyal Republican socially close to DeLay’s defense team.
Now, ask yourself if an investigation was being held into powerful Democrats under a Democratic administration if there would be shrieking harpies flying all over the airwaves today demanding a special prosecutor.
Yeah, I know. Whatever.
update: More from Jane on Alice.
.
Bipartisan BS
by digby
The media is working hard to make this into a bi-partisan scandal but that is simple bullshit. Ed Henry on CNN, for instance, couldn’t stop talking about Byron Dorgan being implicated in this scandal. I don’t know if Dorgan’s going to be swept up, but let’s just say that if he is he probably deserves it because he would be the stupidest man in the world. He’s the top Democrat on the Indian Affairs Committee and even Steno Sue writes:
Dorgan has asked some of the toughest questions in the committee hearings probing the $82 million Abramoff and Michael Scanlon charged their tribal clients.
I suppose some people would think this is a normal thing for a man on the take to do, but I would suggest that it’s unlikely. Here’s a good rundown on the Dorgan connection (and the media’s predictably bad reporting on it) from Media Matters.
Fasten your seatbelts. The press is surely under tremendous pressure from the Republicans to report this as a bi-partisan scandal and they are already buckling under. But that doesn’t change the fact that this is a GOP operation from the get — and they know it.
I wrote a piece a few months back about Abramoff and his two college Republican lieutenants Ralph Reed and Grover Norquist called Nixon’s Babies in which I discussed just how important Abramoff is to the “movement.” And I highly recommend reading Nina Easton’s Gang of Five: Leaders at the Center of the Conservative Ascendacy Anybody who looks at Jack Abramoff and sees anything but a hard core GOP influence peddler who was paid very well to finance the GOP machine is either a shill or a fool.
I just saw CNN’s Henry again say that this was a bi-partisan scandal and that Democrats were going to find it very hard to make the “culture of corruption” charge. This was not “he said/she said” — he was editorializing in his piece and his opinion is either uninformed, myopic or biased. This piece was followed by another from William Schneider in which he helpfully points out that while the public indicates that it thinks Democrats are less corrupt than Republicans that’s only because the public understands that it’s because the Republicans are in power and have more opportunity.
Bullshit. The reason people think this is because every few years we find out that Republicans leaders have no respect for the law. It’s like clockwork. If they aren’t selling themselves outright to big business on the floor of the congress they are claiming the constitution allows them to break any law they choose. Just in the past couple of weeks we’ve had news reports about legal trouble for corrupt Republicans George W. Bush, Ken Lay, Tom DeLay, Bill Frist, Karl Rove, Scooter Libby, Duke Cunningham, Ralph Reed and Jack Abramoff. Lot of dots there. Is it too much trouble for the media to connect them?
This characterization of the scandal as being “bi-partisan” is typical bad mainstream journalism, particularly the emphasis they are placing on the very small handful of Democrats who’ve even been mentioned (much less included in any legal procedings.) Not only are they creating some equity and illegality where none exists, by doing it they are missing the real story, as usual.
This isn’t a story about power corrupting or about a few bad apples. This is about a corrupt political machine — a system of money laundering and public corruption on behalf of one political party. It’s about a party that has used every tool at its disposal to legally and illegally enrich itself and enhance its power. It’s right there. It’s unravelling before our eyes.
And all Dana Bash and Ed Hanry can say is that Jack Abramoff lent his skybox to Democrats and Republicans alike. Which he did. He lent it 1% of the time to Democrats and 99% of the time to Republicans. That makes all of them equally corrupt.
Update: Crooks and Liars has some great Tweety spin footage. Seems it’s not partisan because Abramoff is Satan.
.
Press The Meacham
by digby
Media Matters caught Jon Meacham calling Howard Dean insane on Russert yesterday. I think that’s especially rich considering Meacham is the guy who penned this crazy shit:
The uniqueness—one could say oddity, or implausibility—of the story of Jesus’ resurrection argues that the tradition is more likely historical than theological.
He’s also the guy who told Imus (scroll down) that Joe Wilson went on his trip to Niger after we had invaded Iraq to “discover if those 16 words were true.” He really knows his stuff.
.