Former AG Chief of Staff Kyle Sampson's testimony appears to place a nail in Texas Al's coffin. Sampson directly contradicted Gonzales' statements regarding his non-involvement in the discussions leading up to the dismissal of 8 US Attorneys. At the White House press briefing later today, the spokeswoman notably did not take the opportunity to lend support to the embattled and incompetent gent from Texas, Alberto Gonzales.
As an aside, unlike Scooter Libby, I doubt that Texas Al has a prosperous future on the rubber chicken circuit, since he lack the conservative street cred. Nor do I expect that there will be a ton of legal work in his future. But, don't shed too many tears, the Bush mafia that bought GWB the Crawford "ranch" won't let 'em starve.
Thursday, March 29, 2007
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
Saudis Dis Bush - Condemning "Occupation" and Cancel State Dinner
In a relatively shocking blast to a President deeply wounded by the American public renunciation of his Iraq policy in polls and in the 2006 elections, he was hit with a devastating one-two combination from long-time Bush backers in Saudi Arabia. The Saudi King Abdullah first withdrew from his planned State dinner scheduled for April 17. That rebuke was stiffened by the King's harsh comments about the US "occupation" of Iraq. While it is well documented that the Saudi's (Prince Bandar, specifically) strongly cautioned Bush against its intention to invade Iraq (if for no small reason that the Iranians were likely to be the unintended beneficiaries by Bob Woodward and others, the Saudis criticism of the Bush administration has been publically muted. At least until now.
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
The President Draws a Line in the Sand
The president's brief press conference this evening was vintage Bush. While offering support for the embattled Attorney General, the real thrust of the press conference was to appeal the the public and seek to stem the bleeding by making the current crisis as a constitutional issue. The offer from the White House is to have Karl Rove and Harriet Miers (and likely others) testify before the judiciary committee in closed door, unsworn testimony. Prominent democrats have already dismissed this offer as unsatisfactory and will almost certainly issue subpoenas. The result is may be a protracted court fight, one that is unlikely to aid an administration already seriously handicapped push forward any political agenda. The only winners might be Republican political candidates who are better positioned to benefit from a pissing contest between Congress and the White House (remember everybody gets wet in a pissing contest).
What's odd is why the White House has waited until now to get off the defense and attempt to push back against the juggernaut. Irrespective, I still think Texas Al still has to go, the political Gods will demand sacrifice.
What's odd is why the White House has waited until now to get off the defense and attempt to push back against the juggernaut. Irrespective, I still think Texas Al still has to go, the political Gods will demand sacrifice.
WH Looking for Replacement For Texas Al, but Wait Tell Me it's Not So!!!
As the Al Gonzales death watch continues, reports emanate of possible replacements being floated. Without evaluating each of the potential candidates, one is certainly worthy of further discussion, the Crypt-Keeper, Michael Chertoff, current Director of Homeland Security. What Bernie Kerik isn't available? His name certainly comes to mind as one with the resume and Bush administration bona fides to be nominated, but I easily discounted him as unacceptable as a result of his almost criminal ineptitude in the response to Hurricane Katrina. Ah, but I was too hasty. Too willing to overestimate Karl Rove's political ability, too willing to underestimate the President's child-like need to play only with playmates that have already shared play dates with the Brat-in-Chief. My lord, is this the height of folly.
That said, I'm going to guess that the trial balloon related to Chertoff has already floated out into the Chesapeake Bay and sunk. Why anyone within the White House would want to nominate this chucklehead for anything me. The Democrats in the Senate would have a fiesta with him. Pummelling him like a pinata until he burst.
That said, I'm going to guess that the trial balloon related to Chertoff has already floated out into the Chesapeake Bay and sunk. Why anyone within the White House would want to nominate this chucklehead for anything me. The Democrats in the Senate would have a fiesta with him. Pummelling him like a pinata until he burst.
A Shout out to MyBlogLog.com
As is frequently the case, I have no recollection of how exactly I stumbled across (although it may have been via Stumble) MyBlogLog.com, but thus far I'm happy I did. It's an interesting concept, essentially a Blog community. It's initial impact was to drive a bit of traffic to my blog. A welcome event. I have to confess despite some remedial efforts to drive traffic to my blog, previous efforts were disappointing. So it's nice to not feelas though I'm shouting in the desert.
Friday, March 16, 2007
See Ya Texas Al
CBS News reported as it's lead that Al is gone. The WH fired back immediately to deny the story, despite acknowledging that everyone wants Al's head. Don't forget that I predicted his departure immediately after this story broke.
Thursday, March 15, 2007
Hasta la Vista Alberto
It increasing appears that the Attorney General is not long for this world. John Sununu became the first Republican publically calling for Mr. Gonzales' resignation. Combine that with the tepid words of support issued by President Bush and other members of the White House and the proverbial handwriting appears to be on the wall. The fact is that Gonzales has few friends on the Hill and his support within the White House might be limited to his political godfather, the President.
Given the highly sensitive nature of the upcoming detainee trials, I think it's unlikely that the White House feels it can go forward with a damaged Attorney General. Convincing the American public that Khalid Sheik Muhammad kidnapped the Lindburgh baby and murdered Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman, might be difficult.
Given the highly sensitive nature of the upcoming detainee trials, I think it's unlikely that the White House feels it can go forward with a damaged Attorney General. Convincing the American public that Khalid Sheik Muhammad kidnapped the Lindburgh baby and murdered Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman, might be difficult.
Tuesday, March 13, 2007
AG On Fire
US AG Alberto Gonzales, appearing extremely uncomfortable, put forward a limited defense to the firestorm surrounding the dismissal of 8 US Attorney's. He began with a general statement that everything that happens within the Dept of Justice is his responsibility, but then went on to say he didn't know the actions taken by his chief of staff, Kyle Sampson, despite the fact that the recently resigned Mr. Sampson had been charged with performance evaluations of the US Attorneys and ostensibly was vetting those evaluations through the White House. Mr. Gonzales repeatedly stated that 110,000 people work at DOJ and that as such he couldn't possibly know what each of those employees were up to. That comment might be true and acceptable in general, but it strains the bounds of credulity in the present case.
Gonzales focused narrowly on the issue of his recent Congressional testimony. He was forced to accept that his testimony was wrong, but that his misstatements of fact were the result ignorance of the actions of his Chief of Staff as well as Karl Rove and Harriet Miers. Mr. Gonzales demeanor was contrite if not terrified. My read at this point is that this may result in his resignation. His demeanor stands in stark contrast to his standard modus operandi - smug in the extreme, irrespective of the sensitivity of the underlying issue (i.e. warrantless surveillance, treatment of detainees etc.). That past behavior virtually ensures that Congressional Democrats are going to come at Gonzales with both guns blazing. The only thing Gonzales has going for him is the stubbornness of the President. The counterpoint is how much political capital is an already damaged White House willing to expend on Mr. Gonzales.
Gonzales focused narrowly on the issue of his recent Congressional testimony. He was forced to accept that his testimony was wrong, but that his misstatements of fact were the result ignorance of the actions of his Chief of Staff as well as Karl Rove and Harriet Miers. Mr. Gonzales demeanor was contrite if not terrified. My read at this point is that this may result in his resignation. His demeanor stands in stark contrast to his standard modus operandi - smug in the extreme, irrespective of the sensitivity of the underlying issue (i.e. warrantless surveillance, treatment of detainees etc.). That past behavior virtually ensures that Congressional Democrats are going to come at Gonzales with both guns blazing. The only thing Gonzales has going for him is the stubbornness of the President. The counterpoint is how much political capital is an already damaged White House willing to expend on Mr. Gonzales.
Monday, January 29, 2007
The Bears - No Respect
If you follow the national sports press, the conclusion is obvious, the Bears may as well stay home, Payton Manning is a man of destiny. No talk of the Colts inability to stop the run. The Super Bowl result is preordained, the Colts win.
I respectfully disagree. No one can argue who is the best quarterback playing on Sunday. Similarly, no one can argue that the Bears possess the superior defense. It's my belief that this is a closer game than the 7 point difference reflected in the point spread. I think the winner will be determined by which team is able to be more successful on the ground. If the Colts revert to the sieve run defense they displayed for most of the season, Peyton may be forced to generate a touchdown every other time his offense has the ball.
That said, I'd rather not see the Colts with the ball with two minutes left in a tie game. I just think, contrary to popular belief, that the Bears will win this game.
I respectfully disagree. No one can argue who is the best quarterback playing on Sunday. Similarly, no one can argue that the Bears possess the superior defense. It's my belief that this is a closer game than the 7 point difference reflected in the point spread. I think the winner will be determined by which team is able to be more successful on the ground. If the Colts revert to the sieve run defense they displayed for most of the season, Peyton may be forced to generate a touchdown every other time his offense has the ball.
That said, I'd rather not see the Colts with the ball with two minutes left in a tie game. I just think, contrary to popular belief, that the Bears will win this game.
Sunday, January 21, 2007
Managing Expectations
Reinforcements, surge, augmentation, escalation (let's call it "Plan Y"). You say potato I say potato. At the risk of sounding a bit callous, I think a lot about where we sit politically vis a vis Iraqis about the failure to properly manage expectations.
That failure began with the oversell of the threat posed by Iraq and the sacrifice necessary to extinguish that threat. The failure continued by premature declarations of success, firstly, in the contrived photo op of GWB landing on a aircraft carrier that was purposefully kept offshore and the display of Mission Accomplished banner.
The overselling of the political progress within Iraq, whether it was the drone about the progress (or as it should have been non-progress) of the Iraqi military or police forces, the development of an unworkable Iraqi constitution, or an election that displayed little more than the fractiousness of the Iraq body politic are all emblematic of poor politics. The reality simply did not comport with sales job. Accordingly, the American people are rightly suspicious when the latest proposal is proffered as the only possible course of action. At the same time, any disagreement with the Administration's is seen as cowardly.
The Administration has lost credibility with the American people and appropriately so. The American people are not unwilling to fight the good fight, but not a fight that is waged ineffectually and with an absence of candor. Even the current proposal is overly vague with respect to identifiable and quantifiable goals. Progress in Iraq is an identifiable goal and a worthy goal at that, but it is not readily quantifiable and the Bush Administration seems intent on keeping it that way.
The diehard talking heads that continue to support the Administration talk about the
necessity of Plan Y say they believe it will result in progress within 6 to 9 months. While I don't doubt the American military's ability to wage successful campaigns, the progress spoken of requires substantial changes in the way the Iraqi government and military operates. Is that even reasonable to expect within 6 to 9 months. Count me as a skeptic. More troubling is that this timeframe has not been signed onto by the Administration. Incremental improvements in Iraq over the next 6 to 9 months aren't likely result in a substantial change in the support for the efforts in Iraq.
Despite a mature economy that continues to grow at historical strong rates despite very large increases to oil, Bush is seen as a failed President. I think the primary reason is not that Iraq is a mess, but that he and his Administration has not told the American people how hard assisting in the formation of a sustainable, secular Iraq would be. It matters little to the voters whether that is the result of deception or ineptitude, it is a distinction that for the time being, without a difference. The lesson here is it is better to under promise and over deliver than it is to do the converse.
That failure began with the oversell of the threat posed by Iraq and the sacrifice necessary to extinguish that threat. The failure continued by premature declarations of success, firstly, in the contrived photo op of GWB landing on a aircraft carrier that was purposefully kept offshore and the display of Mission Accomplished banner.
The overselling of the political progress within Iraq, whether it was the drone about the progress (or as it should have been non-progress) of the Iraqi military or police forces, the development of an unworkable Iraqi constitution, or an election that displayed little more than the fractiousness of the Iraq body politic are all emblematic of poor politics. The reality simply did not comport with sales job. Accordingly, the American people are rightly suspicious when the latest proposal is proffered as the only possible course of action. At the same time, any disagreement with the Administration's is seen as cowardly.
The Administration has lost credibility with the American people and appropriately so. The American people are not unwilling to fight the good fight, but not a fight that is waged ineffectually and with an absence of candor. Even the current proposal is overly vague with respect to identifiable and quantifiable goals. Progress in Iraq is an identifiable goal and a worthy goal at that, but it is not readily quantifiable and the Bush Administration seems intent on keeping it that way.
The diehard talking heads that continue to support the Administration talk about the
necessity of Plan Y say they believe it will result in progress within 6 to 9 months. While I don't doubt the American military's ability to wage successful campaigns, the progress spoken of requires substantial changes in the way the Iraqi government and military operates. Is that even reasonable to expect within 6 to 9 months. Count me as a skeptic. More troubling is that this timeframe has not been signed onto by the Administration. Incremental improvements in Iraq over the next 6 to 9 months aren't likely result in a substantial change in the support for the efforts in Iraq.
Despite a mature economy that continues to grow at historical strong rates despite very large increases to oil, Bush is seen as a failed President. I think the primary reason is not that Iraq is a mess, but that he and his Administration has not told the American people how hard assisting in the formation of a sustainable, secular Iraq would be. It matters little to the voters whether that is the result of deception or ineptitude, it is a distinction that for the time being, without a difference. The lesson here is it is better to under promise and over deliver than it is to do the converse.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)