Skip to content

Month: January 2010

Lame-O-Rama

by digby

Howie at Down With Tyranny  writes:

Would it shock you if Jim Matheson of Utah, co-chair of the congressional Blue Dog Caucus, did a fundraiser for Donna Edwards (D-MD), one of Washington’s most stalwart fighters for working families? Don’t worry; that’s one shock you’re not likely to ever have to live through. Instead, please consider the implications of this invitation that southern California progressives got found in their in-boxes yesterday:

Isn’t that nice? After all, poor Jane is one of the richest people in the congress, so she needs to take money from progressives and then vote with Blue Dogs. I guess since the district is the westside of Los Angeles and is as likely to fall to a Republican as Nancy Pelosi’s is, you just don’t want to take any chances.

This is crazy. Woolsey is the Chair of the Progressive Caucus. Harman is a Blue Dog, who is way out of touch with her district and faces a primary challenge from a true progressive, Marcy Winograd. If Woolsey can’t bring herself to campaign against her pal Jane, the least she could do is stay out of this race.

Blue Dogs would never, ever, ever do this. They recognize that the power of the their bloc is their solidarity, their numbers and their financial commitments to each other. Personal friendship isn’t the issue.  It’s how they maintain their power.

You can sign up for Winograd’s newsletter, here.  She’s a real progressive and she came damned close to beating Harman four years ago.  That’s why Harman needs the cover of someone like Woolsey.  Woolsey should not give it to her.

Howie has a good idea:

How about making a donation to Marcy Winograd’s campaign on the anti-Blue Dogs page, in the hopes that she’ll win, get into Congress, join the Progressive Caucus and beat Woolsey in the next co-chair election. She’d certainly do a better job!

If you’re of a mind to let Woolsey know that the progressives she represents don’t appreciate this, you can give one of her offices a call:

Washington DC Office:
202-225-5161
Fax: 202-225-5163

District Offices:

Marin Office:
1050 Northgate Drive
Suite 354
San Rafael, CA. 94903
Ph.: 415-507-9554
Fax: 415-507-9601

Sonoma Office:
1101 College Avenue
Suite 200
Santa Rosa, CA 95404
Ph.: 707-542-7182
Fax: 707-542-2745


.

As Predicted

by tristero

On 11/13/09, I wrote that Louis Dobbs, was “a duplicitous flippy-floppy far-right opportunist whose morals stink as bad as an industrial hog farm” and characterized him as a “professional xenophobe.”

Well, well. Looks like he’s a’ flip-floppin’, and right on schedule:

Lou [sic] has always been supportive of high levels of legal immigration so long as the federal government is enacting public policy that includes programs to assimilate immigrants into American society. Lou [sic] is working hard on solutions that will help illegal immigrants in the country meet necessary conditions for a path to legalization. He is calling on the best minds in America to work together to constructively resolve the troubling challenges represented by as many as 20 million people in this country illegally.

Expect him to reach out into the Hispanic community, as well as to other parts of society, to find answers and solutions to not only illegal immigration but also larger economic and public policy issues …

As noted earlier, there’s a big difference between this rightwing lunatic (Dobbs) and others. He is a deep insider in mainstream American media. Odds are very good they will give Dobbs a free pass to disappear his history of insane statements and wacko advocacy.

What Do You Mean “We”?

by digby

Chris Matthews asks Chuck Todd about Obama’s “liberal” approach to fighting terrorism. Toward the end of the clip Todd slips up and refers to Obama’s conservative critics as “we”.

.

9/11 Doesn’t Count

by tristero

Nor does the anthrax terrorism, Richard Reid, the July 4, 2002 on El Al at LAX, or attacks on abortion clinics in 2001, 2005, 2006, and 2007 (see here).

All of this happened under Bush, but it doesn’t count, according to Giuliani.

You know what’s worse than Giuliani’s lie? That Stephanopolous let him get away with it.

Backscratchers

by digby

The big story of this week is this bombshell that Tim Geithner colluded with AIG when he was chairman of the NY Fed. Spitzer, Black and Portnoy are calling again for full release of AIG emails over the past decade and it’s very hard to see any good reason why it shouldn’t happen:

In a December New York Times op-ed, we called for the full public release of AIG email messages, internal accounting documents and financial models generated in the last decade. Today, a Bloomberg story revealed that under Timothy Geithner’s leadership, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York told AIG to withhold details from the public about its payments to banks during the crisis. This information was discovered when emails between the company and the Fed were requested by representative Darrell Issa, ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

[…]

The emails today detail the efforts of the Fed to suppress the disclosure of payments made to banks such as Goldman, Sachs Group for reimbursement of their credit-default swap exposure. When the Treasury Department stepped in, AIG had at least $440 billion in credit-default swaps outstanding. The Fed, led by Tim Geithner, paid Goldman, Sachs Group and other banks 100 cents on the dollar for these instruments rather than negotiating a lower rate closer to the actual value, (estimated by some to have been as little as 20 cents). In testimony to the Congressional Oversight Panel, Tim Geithner insisted it was necessary to make these payments in full, arguing that even a small downward negotiation would prove catastrophic to the financial sector. Elizabeth Warren, head of the oversight panel, has repeatedly challenged this assertion.

Right. Goldman had to be made “whole,” come what may. Evidently, even this hadn’t fully protected them from some exposure:

In late October 2007, as the financial markets were starting to come unglued, a Goldman Sachs trader, Jonathan M. Egol, received very good news. At 37, he was named a managing director at the firm.

Mr. Egol, a Princeton graduate, had risen to prominence inside the bank by creating mortgage-related securities, named Abacus, that were at first intended to protect Goldman from investment losses if the housing market collapsed. As the market soured, Goldman created even more of these securities, enabling it to pocket huge profits.

Goldman’s own clients who bought them, however, were less fortunate.

Pension funds and insurance companies lost billions of dollars on securities that they believed were solid investments, according to former Goldman employees with direct knowledge of the deals who asked not to be identified because they have confidentiality agreements with the firm.

Did Geithner know about this at the time he told everyone not to disclose, do you suppose?

This isn’t the only case where Treasury allowed AIG to withhold important information:

There was A.I.G.’s behind-closed-doors argument against Feinberg’s directive to pay its top people in large part with A.I.G. stock. The company’s reasoning? That the stock — trading briskly at the time at around $40 on the New York Stock Exchange — was actually worthless. Yet Feinberg would be pushed by staff at Treasury and officials of the Federal Reserve Bank to accept that argument and others in order to keep the captains of these broken companies from quitting.

Feinberg’s push for long-term accountability was met with what Feinberg calls “intense pressure” from officials at the Treasury Department and from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, which had provided most of the A.I.G. bailout, to make accommodations for the firms whose perceived extravagance had created his job in the first place. First, there were those cash retention bonuses, which 8 of the 12 A.I.G. executives now under Feinberg’s purview received in 2009. Feinberg pushed to have the executives return the money and replace it with salarized stock. They all refused, even those who had pledged to give the bonuses back altogether. Among those who insisted on keeping the cash was David Herzog, A.I.G.’s chief financial officer, whose bonus was $1.5 million. He and the others told Feinberg, through A.I.G.’s vice chairman Anastasia Kelly, that if they didn’t get to keep that bonus, plus get additional bonuses for work in 2009, they would leave, which would grievously imperil the company. No one at A.I.G. seemed to be embarrassed to argue that the chief financial officer of Wall Street’s Titanic was irreplaceable.

Now that the emails have been revealed, you can certainly see why Treasury might have been so anxious to keep those AIG Big Boyz happy — and it didn’t have anything to do with how valuable they were.

This is a now a real scandal and it’s getting bigger. Obama needs to cut Geithner loose, call for a full investigation and end this charade once and for all. It’s no longer just a policy matter — this is now a very dangerous political problem.

.

Overdue

by digby

Good news:

Two high-ranking Maricopa County officials confirmed late Thursday that they will testify next week before a federal grand jury exploring allegations that the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office has abused power.

County Manager David Smith and Assistant County Manager Sandi Wilson said they were preparing to testify before the grand jury on Wednesday.

Sheriff Joe Arpaio denied any knowledge of the grand jury, but news of sheriff’s officials being called to testify before a federal panel has been circulating in county circles for months.

“I’m not going to comment on that situation,” Arpaio said Thursday. “We’re just going to continue doing our job and our investigations that we have in progress.”

Sheriff’s detectives have undertaken a series of controversial investigations into county officials in the last year which heated up in recent months with indictments of two members of the Board of Supervisors, and a wide-ranging racketeering complaint filed in federal court that alleges a vast conspiracy against county supervisors, judges, private attorney and administrators including Smith and Wilson.

But the allegations of abuse of power have dogged Arpaio since long before that claim was filed.

The man is a crook and a psychopath and should have been thrown out of office long before now. He’s gotten away with murder for years.

But it looks like he finally fucked with the wrong Justice Department:

On March 3, 2009, the United States Department of Justice “notified Arpaio of the investigation in a letter saying his enforcement methods may unfairly target Hispanics and Spanish-speaking people” Arpaio initially denied any wrongdoing and stated that he welcomed the investigation, and would cooperate fully. By May, 2009, Arpaio had hired a Washington D.C. lobbyist, who wrote to Obama administration officials suggesting that the decision to probe Arpaio had been driven by political rivalries and score settling. In July, 2009, Arpaio publicly stated that he would not cooperate with the investigation.

In October 2009, the Department of Homeland Security removed the authority of Arpaio’s 160 federally trained deputies to make immigration arrests in the field. Despite the actions of the Department of Homeland Security, Arpaio has maintained that he will still pursue illegal aliens under Arizona state law.

And now this. Good.

.

They’ll Oppose It Anyway

by digby

There is something wrong with a system that allows this to happen:

It’s interesting to examine the distribution of states’ winner-loser status relative to political alignment. Support for reform has been restricted to Democrats, with only one Republican House member supporting reform and all Senate Republicans opposing. When we examine the seven states most likely to be winners under reform, we see a combined split in their Senate delegations of twelve Republicans versus two Democrats. The three states most likely to lose under health care reform are collectively represented by four Democrats and two Republicans. When we add in the group that would be losers under the income-tax option, the split becomes even stronger, with these states being represented by eighteen Democrats and four Republicans.

The overall pattern therefore shows a curious alignment: States with the most to gain under health care reform are overwhelmingly represented by Republicans, while those states likely to do worse are much more likely to have Democratic senators.

I’m sorry, but that just pisses me off. If I thought that the Republicans actually gave a damn about the people they represent, I might see that as a potential plus for the reforms holding over the long run.  But they don’t.  And for an awful lot of the beneficiaries, I’m afraid that the fact that some of these benefits will be going to the wrong people (if you know what I mean) means they will willingly give up their own benefits just to deny it to them.  It’s an old story.

Via Echidne, posting over at Atrios’ place.

Spy vs Spy

by digby

Robert Mackay writes:

Mark Mazetti’s newest article on the suicide bombing that killed CIA agents in Afghanistan, “U.S. Saw a Path to Qaeda Chiefs Before Bombing, ” has this interesting tidbit worth considering:

Mr. Balawi proved to be one of the oddest double agents in the history of espionage, choosing to kill his American contacts at their first meeting, rather than establish regular communication to glean what the C.I.A. did — and did not — know about Al Qaeda and then report back to the network’s leaders.”

That did make me think about what sort of threat AQ really is.

These guys…are idiots.  Bear with me a moment.

True.  but that raises another question. Why in the hell wouldn’t the CIA and Blackwater handlers did search him before his first meeting with his American contacts?

It sounds to me as if everyone needs a little remedial spycraft …

.

Shocker

by digby

I have been watching the gasbags anxiously await the President’s “shocking” announcement all day going on and on about what they thought he was going to say. And he didn’t really saying anything, at least not that I could discern. (Why all the hype?) but now th gasbags are l;eft with nothing to say and this is the kind of thing we’re hearing:

Blitzer: he said he’s not interested in laying blame right now.Ultimately the buck will stop with me and and when the system fails it will be my responsibility. he was under pressure, I think, to say that.

Gloria Borger: Yeah, I think he was, and I think he’s the president of the United States and the buck does stop with him. I think what was also very interesting about what he said was that not only didn’t we connect the dots, but we didn’t understand the dots…

Yeah, that’s quite the fascinating insight.

CNN had a former FBI guy on who said that we need to have an aviation summit with countries all over the world to standardize security and create a new world aviation treaty, at which point I heard Glenn Beck’s head explode from this fresh evidence of the progresso-fascist New World Order with its black helicopters coming to grab your gun, give it to a Muslim and then devalue the dollar. Scary stuff.

Maybe I’m missing something here, but this seems like an intelligence bureaucracy cock-up that fortunately didn’t end in disaster. But, we’ve been dealing with middle eastern terrorists attempting to blow up airplanes for some time and it’s clear there’s never going to be completely foolproof security. When you have a wake-up call like this you thank your lucky stars the plot didn’t work, review your procedures and re-double your efforts. Short of starting a war with another country that didn’t attack us, what else can we do? This 24/7, garment rending is just playing into terrorists’ hands. It’s annoying.

I’m not blaming Obama for this. I would guess he finds it annoying too that that people are clamoring for him to grab a bullhorn and start spouting stupid cliches just so the gasbags can get the lovely warm feeling they always get when the Preznit acts like The Dad Who Is Always Mad. He seems to be trying to put on that silly pageant as best he can, but it’s clear his heart isn’t in it. Thank God.

.

Panic Artists

by digby

(Via DKos) Georgie Ann Geyer:

This is what I think history, written a half-century or even a quarter-century from now, will say of all this:

“The United States began the 21st century as the pre-eminent and undisputedly greatest power in the world. It was the center of science, learning and innovation. Its democratic system was the envy of much of the world, which engaged in different experiments in governance but basically always used the American experience as its systemic and structural basis.

“Then, after one attack on New York City in which several thousand Americans tragically died, the United States embarked upon a series of ill-thought-out military adventures across the world that took it into small country after small country, never understanding that its very presence turned people against it. It lost the modesty of its founding fathers, who vowed not to meddle abroad, and began to dream of ‘nation-building.’ But in the end, it only de-energized and impoverished its own country, as Asia and particularly China moved in on all levels with economic and diplomatic tools to grasp world leadership.”

There were many other ways we could have responded to 9/11 besides all-out wars, such as police and intelligence actions against particular al-Qaida actors, but those paths were not chosen.

Yes.

.