Skip to content

Month: February 2008

Big Night

by digby

Wow, what a night. Congratulations to Senator Obama who has been rolling through these races like a bulldozer.

And special congratulations to netroots candidate Donna Edwards who just unseated a corrupt insider. She is a fantastic liberal candidate.

Finally, congratulations to the crew at MSNBC who managed to cover the races without sounding like they were reporting from a locker room. For the most part, anyway. Here’s Matthews describing a very bizarre reaction to Obama’s speech:

KEITH OLBERMANN: John McCain speaking after his three victories in the Potomac primaries tonight, from Alexandria, Virginia, to the tunes of Johnny B. Goode, instrumental only. And in a statement which I hope transcends political orientation and party affiliation and all that, I would think, Chris, as we start to analyze what we have heard here, the rule has to be, if you can, always speak before Barack Obama, not after Barack Obama. CHRIS MATTHEWS: I have to tell you, you know, it’s part of reporting this case, this election, the feeling most people get when they hear Barack Obama’s speech. My, I felt this thrill going up my leg. I mean, I don’t have that too often. OLBERMANN: Steady.

The man is a lost cause…

But for the most part, the crew behaved responsibly.

.

A Nicer Birthday Present

by dday

With all the sturm und drang I’ve brought here the last couple days, I have to at least try and change the tone and inject a little optimism. Voters in Maryland’s 4th Congressional district have rejected a corporate Bush Dog Democrat, and that’s a very meaningful victory:

With every precinct coming in with at least a 10% improvement for (Donna) Edwards over 2006, let me reiterate this point: the new primary voters who are coming out for Barack Obama are also going to result in the first progressive displacement of a centrist, corporate, congressional Democrat via a primary in years. This it it. This is what we have been working for and building for. This is our emerging majority. We finally have the organization, and the voters, and the whole ball of wax. The movement has thoroughly come of age.

Nancy Pelosi, Steny Hoyer and the whole gang fought hard to keep Al Wynn in power, They held fundraisers and made sure he was soaked with corporate cash. Donna Edwards had nobody but the people. And the people were enough.

This was a heavily pro-Obama district tonight, with tons of new voters. And they went for Edwards. Barack Obama’s going to wake up one day soon and figure out that the movement he’s inspiring is a whole lot more progressive than he is, and hopefully that will factor into his potential agenda.

Donna Edwards will not only be a Congresswoman whose vote we can count on, but a real progressive leader in the House. And Al Wynn will be just another lobbyist, with a fat salary so don’t weep for him.

Don’t mess with the progressive movement.

.

Raped And In Legal Limbo

by dday

I interrupt the usual campaign gloating and trash talking and pie fighting to bring you a disturbing and important story of the consequences of unrivaled corporate power and the shifting of our armed forces into mercenary operations.

Mary Beth Kineston, an Ohio resident who went to Iraq to drive trucks, thought she had endured the worst when her supply convoy was ambushed in April 2004. After car bombs exploded and insurgents began firing on the road between Baghdad and Balad, she and other military contractors were saved only when Army Black Hawk helicopters arrived.

But not long after the ambush, Ms. Kineston said, she was sexually assaulted by another driver, who remained on the job, at least temporarily, even after she reported the episode to KBR, the military contractor that employed the drivers. Later, she said she was groped by a second KBR worker. After complaining to the company about the threats and harassments endured by female employees in Iraq, she was fired.

For the last several years, we have in Iraq created a lawless society administered by similarly lawless corporate entities, all blessed with their own immunities and legal black holes, so that even abhorrent episodes like rape change nothing and get nobody fired except the accuser.

“I felt safer on the convoys with the Army than I ever did working for KBR,” said Ms. Kineston, who won a modest arbitration award against KBR. “At least if you got in trouble on a convoy, you could radio the Army and they would come and help you out. But when I complained to KBR, they didn’t do anything. I still have nightmares. They changed my life forever, and they got away with it.”

Mary Beth Kineston is not the only woman. According to former Halliburton employee and gang-rape victim Jennifer Leigh Jones, 38 women have told their stories of rape and assault to her, but none can come forward due to arbitration agreements:

Jamie Leigh Jones is testifying on Capitol Hill this afternoon. She says she and other women are being forced to argue their cases of sexual harassment, assault and rape before secretive arbitration panels rather than in open court before a judge and jury.

Jones returned from Iraq following her rape in 2005. She was the subject of an exclusive ABC News report in December which led to congressional hearings.

After months of waiting for criminal charges to be filed, Jones decided to file suit against Halliburton and KBR.

KBR has moved for Jones’ claim to be heard in private arbitration, instead of a public courtroom, as provided under the terms of her original employment contract.

In arbitration, there is no public record or transcript of the proceedings, meaning that Jones’ claims would not be heard before a judge and jury. Rather, a private arbitrator hired by the corporation would decide Jones’ case.

Corporate power is the thread tying all of this together. We know they can get the government to grant them amnesty for breaking the law. And in this case, they hire their own arbitrator to conduct sham hearings looking into malfeasance by their own employees.

And honestly, the only one saying much of anything about this is a Republican.

Congressman Ted Poe, R-Texas, who has been involved in the Jones case since the beginning, will also appear at today’s hearing. He disagrees with the arbitration solution.

“Air things out in a public forum of a courtroom,” said Rep. Poe in an earlier interview with ABC News. “That’s why we have courts in the United States.”

It’s his constituent that’s come forward, but there are apparently dozens of others. All of them have been subject to humiliating and dehumanizing conditions, had crimes committed against them by their co-workers, and these corporations are claiming that they signed away their Constitutional right to due process of the law with a trial by jury. Not only that, but since the crimes took place in a foreign war zone, the military justice system doesn’t apply to them, either.

This breeds lawlessness inside the contractor zones, for obvious reasons. When there’s no accountability, why modify behavior?

Paul Brand, a Chicago psychologist who counsels contractors who have served in Iraq, said the harassment of female workers by male colleagues was common. “The extent of the harassment varies greatly from contractor to contractor, depending on how diligently they screen job candidates and management’s willingness to encourage women to report problems,” he said. “In many instances, very little or nothing is done.”

Comprehensive statistics on sexual assaults in Iraq are unavailable because no one in the government or the contracting industry is tracking them. Court documents, interviews with those who were victims, their lawyers and other professionals, along with the limited data made available by the Bush administration, suggest a troubling trend.

The Criminal Investigation Command of the Army has reported that it investigated 124 cases of sexual assault in Iraq over the last three years. Those figures, provided to Senator Bill Nelson, the Florida Democrat who has taken the lead in the Senate on the issue, include cases involving both contractors and military personnel, but do not include cases involving contractors or soldiers investigated by other branches of the military.

This is especially abominable because there’s no need to have so many contractors doing work previously reserved for the US military and under military control, and because it’s a symptom of how corporate power has almost totally overtaken our government.

Take a few minutes out of your election coverage and really take a look at this story. It is the expected consequence of the Bush Republican era of corporate dominance.

.

Thanks Democratic Senate

by dday

The Senate passed the final version of the piece o’ crap Intelligence Committee’s FISA bill by a count of 68-29. There are only 29 Senators who care at all about civil liberties. The bill not only gives amnesty to the phone companies, but gives the President a great amount of leeway to spy on really whoever he wants. Dianee Feinstein, who said she would have a lot of trouble voting for the final bill if her amendments didn’t pass (and they didn’t), did opposed the bill, but that’s a small victory indeed.

Here’s Russ Feingold:

“The Senate passage of this FISA bill, while not surprising, is extremely disappointing. The Senate missed a golden opportunity to pass a bill that would give our intelligence officials the tools they need to go after suspected terrorists while also safeguarding the privacy of law-abiding Americans. Instead the Senate, with the help of too many Democrats, is yet again giving the administration sweeping new powers – and letting it off the hook for its illegal wiretapping program. I hope that our House colleagues will hold a stronger line, and refuse to accept the deeply flawed Senate bill. The calls from Americans tired of having their rights and their Constitution trampled on by this administration are only growing louder. Congress should stand up for the American people, and the Constitution, by opposing such a badly flawed bill.”

Four committees looked at this bill. Three thought it needless to give amnesty to the phone companies. Only the Intel Committee saw it as a necessity, and they got their way. As Chris Dodd called it on a conference call today, this is “the single largest invasion of privacy in American history.”

The bill is going to conference, and the House’s version is quite a bit better, though imperfect. You can sign this FDL petition here to demand that the House stands behind their bill. Many House leaders have come out today and spoken in defense of stripping amnesty out of the bill. Today John Conyers wrote that secret documents provided by the White House do not justify amnesty for the phone companies.

But we’ll see if this means anything. Truly this is the perfect crime: the President decides to break the law, he employs industry to help him do so, then when he’s called on it, he enacts the state secrets privilege to evade oversight from the Congress and the courts, and then demands immunity to let industry evade responsibility because they can’t defend themselves, restricting any peek into the scope of the lawbreaking.

Thanks for making me sick on my birthday!

UPDATE: This is the best explanation for why Dodd and the others agreed to the pretty awful unanimous consent agreement:

3.) Why didn’t Dodd object to unanimous consent on the “compromise” that determined vote thresholds?

Well, the answer is simple: If he didn’t Jello Jay would have bolted and brought Democratic Senators with him to vote in favor of a subsequent McConnell cloture motion. The same kind we beat back before the extension.

Had Dodd objected, there would have been no amendments at all. Not that the ones we got made a difference.

It was a damned if we did, damned if we didn’t situation. Which Harry Reid is pretty much responsible for, by virtue of bringing forward the Intelligence Committee version of the bill first.

.

Another Country Heard From

by dday

If the debate over torture ever gets appealed to the highest court in the land, it’s going to go through intellects like this:

The most outspoken judge on the US Supreme Court has defended the use of some physical interrogation techniques.

Justice Antonin Scalia told the BBC that “smacking someone in the face” could be justified if there was an imminent threat.

“You can’t come in smugly and with great self satisfaction and say ‘Oh it’s torture, and therefore it’s no good’,” he said in a rare interview […]

In the interview with the Law in Action programme on BBC Radio 4, he said it was “extraordinary” to assume that the ban on “cruel and unusual punishment” – the US Constitution’s Eighth Amendment – also applied to “so-called” torture.

“To begin with the constitution… is referring to punishment for crime. And, for example, incarcerating someone indefinitely would certainly be cruel and unusual punishment for a crime.”

Justice Scalia argued that courts could take stronger measures when a witness refused to answer questions.

“I suppose it’s the same thing about so-called torture. Is it really so easy to determine that smacking someone in the face to determine where he has hidden the bomb that is about to blow up Los Angeles is prohibited in the constitution?” he asked.

“It would be absurd to say you couldn’t do that. And once you acknowledge that, we’re into a different game.

“How close does the threat have to be? And how severe can the infliction of pain be?”

That these people are so concerned about the bomb that is about to blow up Los Angeles – by the way it’s always Los Angeles, since it’s a fictitious, Hollywood-style scenario – is touching for this Angeleno, but somehow, I don’t believe that he’s all that concerned about me. What Scalia really wants is to make sure the horrible judgment and lack of conscience from his duck-hunting buddies doesn’t have any consequences.

By the way, Scalia – and his ideological soulmates on the Court – won’t be going away after January 2009. This mindset – that human rights are OK for some but not for all, that as long as a crime is ALLEGED and not part of a conviction then you can torture whoever you want, that we should all be so afraid for our lives at every waking moment that it demands setting aside any sort of ethics or values, and that everything a suspected terrorist tells you under duress is absolutely and 100% true – isn’t going anywhere.

.

Evidence From Torture Now Admissable, Apparently

by dday

There’s absolutely no way that you can credibly charge Khalid Sheikh Mohammed with anything related to the September 11 attacks without using the evidence gained through torture.

Military prosecutors will seek the death penalty for the six Guantánamo detainees on charges including conspiracy and murder “in violation of the law of war,” attacking civilians and civilian targets, terrorism and support of terrorism, Brig. Gen. Thomas Hartmann of the Air Force, legal adviser to the Defense Department’s Office of Military Commissions, said at a Pentagon news briefing.

General Hartmann said it would be up to the trial judge how to handle evidence obtained through controversial interrogation techniques like “waterboarding,” or simulated drowning. Critics have said the harsh techniques, which are believed to have been used on several of the defendants, amount to torture.

As expected, the six include Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the former Qaeda operations chief who has described himself as the mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks, which killed nearly 3,000 people.

“The accused are, and will remain, innocent unless proved guilty beyond a reasonable doubt,” General Hartmann said.

So we’re going to leave it to a trial judge, and not a judge in a criminal court but a military trial judge, as to whether or not to admit evidence gained through the same technique that prosecutors convicted the Japanese for doing to prisoners in World War II. Not only is torture on the table, not only might the Bush Administration use the practice again if they so choose, but anything the victim says afterwards may be used in a legal proceeding, if this sets a precedent.

What has happened to America?

Also, I found the timing interesting:

General Hartmann said he could not predict when actual trials would begin, but that pretrial procedures would take several months at least. He said the accused will enjoy the same rights that members of the American military enjoy, and that the proceedings will be “as completely open as possible,” notwithstanding the occasional need to protect classified information.

So there will certainly be extensive news reports, if not video of the trials. And pre-trial motions would take “several months.” Several months from now puts us into the fall of 2008. Is there anything else going on around that time?

.

Animatronic President

by digby

Beavis weighs in on the election:

…this morning on Fox, President Bush himself echoed the attack, adding the (also familiar) hint that we don’t know enough about Obama.
“I certainly don’t know what he believes in. The only foreign policy thing I remember he said was he’s going to attack Pakistan and embrace Ahmadinejad,” Bush said.

I don’t know how convincing that line of attack is going to be coming from the party that elected this guy:

In the latest of a series of foreign policy gaffes, Texas Gov. George W. Bush failed to name three out of four world leaders when he was hit with a pop foreign affairs quiz by a reporter Wednesday.

Andy Hiller, political correspondent with WHDH-TV in Boston asked Bush to name the leaders of four current world hot spots: Chechnya, Taiwan, India and Pakistan.

Bush was able to give a partial response to just one: Taiwan.

”Can you name the general who is in charge of Pakistan?” asked Hiller. He was inquiring about Gen. Pervaiz Musharraf, who seized control of the country on Oct. 12.

”Wait, wait, is this 50 questions?” asked Bush.

Hiller replied: ”No, it’s four questions of four leaders in four hot spots.”

Bush said: ”The new Pakistani general, he’s just been elected – not elected, this guy took over office. It appears this guy is going to bring stability to the country and I think that’s good news for the subcontinent.”

I think this is the fundamental problem the Republicans face right now. The facade they built around this callow lightweight was completely unbelievable. He was like an animatronic amusement park version of a president from the very beginning and a majority of the public knew it. The Republicans couldn’t close the deal legitimately, after all. But 9/11 gave them the opportunity to reanimate him in the form of a “great leader” and it worked for a little while. (Nobody wanted to believe the country was being run by that man quoted above.)

But Bush as Winston Churchill was absurd on its face and as soon as the initial fear abated and smoke cleared, (and no WMD were found) they began to come back down to earth. It wasn’t in time for the 2004 election, but it was very close. At this point, people mostly cringe when they see him, reminded of their own misjudgment. Mostly, however, I think they are embarrassed for the country and leery of voting for the party that tried to turn this unqualified doofus into someone who belonged on Mr Rushmore.

The credibility gap is so huge, it can’t be bridged. I have been saying for some time now that the Republicans can read the tea leaves and they know this isn’t their election, so they are teeing up the next one. They aren’t going to make it easy for the Democrats — they’ll damage him or her as much as possible so that he or she can’t govern effectively. But they are going to lose and they know it, and they’re going to blame it all on their lost boy Bush and the maverick who tried to succeed him for not being conservative enough.

Here’s how a Republican explains it:

MR. RUSSERT: Joe Scarborough, former congressman from Florida who hosts the morning show on MSNBC, “Morning Joe,” offered these observations about the Republican Party, and they caught my attention. Let’s listen.

(Audiotape)

MR. JOE SCARBOROUGH: They believe this is going to be a landslide of historic proportions. They will not admit it to people in the media or, or on the air, but most Republicans believe this is going to be a landslide of epic proportions, and Mitt Romney has to know that, too. And guess what? It will always be remembered as, like ’64 was the Goldwater landslide. You know, this will be on John McCain’s hands.

(End audiotape)

Now I don’t happen to believe that it will be a landslide win. And I don’t think so for this one simple reason:

MR. RUSSERT: Now, David Broder, I read in your column on Thursday you may have dissent from that. You wrote this:

“Still, McCain is the only candidate in either party with a favorable personal rating by Republicans, Democrats, independents and evangelical voters. He will be formidable.”

MR. BRODER: I believe that, and I think against either Senator Clinton or Senator Obama–they’re very different races, depending on which Democrat wins, but I don’t see how McCain, positioned as he has been over time now, is anything less than a 46, 47 percent candidate.

I think it’s pretty clear St. McCain will get a little help from his friends. But it won’t be enough.

Bush also weighed in saying that he would help McCain with conservatives. Feel the magic.

.

.

This Just In: Bush Administration Screwed Up Iraq War Planning

by tristero

It looks like that far left think tank known as the RAND Corporation ruffled a few feathers at the Pentagon:

After 18 months of research, RAND submitted a report in the summer of 2005 called “Rebuilding Iraq.” RAND researchers provided an unclassified version of the report along with a secret one, hoping that its publication would contribute to the public debate on how to prepare for future conflicts.

But the study’s wide-ranging critique of the White House, the Defense Department and other government agencies was a concern for Army generals, and the Army has sought to keep the report under lock and key.

A review of the lengthy report — a draft of which was obtained by The New York Times — shows that it identified problems with nearly every organization that had a role in planning the war. That assessment parallels the verdicts of numerous former officials and independent analysts.

The study chided President Bush — and by implication Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who served as national security adviser when the war was planned — as having failed to resolve differences among rival agencies. “Throughout the planning process, tensions between the Defense Department and the State Department were never mediated by the president or his staff,” it said.

The Defense Department led by Donald H. Rumsfeld was given the lead in overseeing the postwar period in Iraq despite its “lack of capacity for civilian reconstruction planning and execution.”

The State Department led by Colin L. Powell produced a voluminous study on the future of Iraq that identified important issues but was of “uneven quality” and “did not constitute an actionable plan.”

Gen. Tommy R. Franks, whose Central Command oversaw the military operation in Iraq, had a “fundamental misunderstanding” of what the military needed to do to secure postwar Iraq, the study said.

The regulations that govern the Army’s relations with the Arroyo Center, the division of RAND that does research for the Army, stipulate that Army officials are to review reports in a timely fashion to ensure that classified information is not released. But the rules also note that the officials are not to “censor” analysis or prevent the dissemination of material critical of the Army.

The report on rebuilding Iraq was part of a seven-volume series by RAND on the lessons learned from the war.

Y’know, dear friends, I paid for that study. So did you. And I, for one, would like to read what I paid for, even if little in it comes as a surprise. Reading between the lines of Michael Gordon’s article – yes, that Michael Gordon – it’s clear that many people both at RAND and the Pentagon agree.

Leaking a study like that is what happens when a secretive, incompetent president garners a 30% approval rating. Which, if I may digress, is still frighteningly high. Think about it:

You walk down the street or through your local mall. Approximately every third person you see – one of those drunk college kids in the city for a weekend tear, or that obese forty-year-old outside the Fuddrucker’s whose wife sports an “I’m with Stupid” t-shirt – all those folks think George W. Bush is doing just a swell ol’ job.

Oh, America…

Heckuva Job

by digby

I missed this the other day:

We’re sorry you’re going through what you’re going through.

You know, life sometimes is, uh, you know, is unfair, and you don’t get to play the hand that you wanted to play. But, the question is, when you get dealt the hand, how do you play it?

And I’ve come away with this impression of the folks of Macon County. One, you’re down-to-Earth, good, hard-workin’ people. They have a respect for the Almighty, and this community’s going to be as strong as ever. That’s what I think.

Of course, people like Bush tend to have a little more money in the pot when these disasters strike and they have to “play their hand” don’t they? But, I’m sure these God fearing folks were very pleased to hear his encouraging words. It’s all they can expect from him.

Can we all agree that the single most important change this country needs is for its citizens to not have to look at this person on our TVs anymore?

.