In it, but not of it. TPM DC

Time's Michael Scherer just asked an excellent question. During the campaign, Obama took the position that the Bush administration had abused the state's secret privilege, but since coming into office he has used it repeatedly to argue that crucial national security cases be thrown out of court.

Scherer asked the President to reconcile that contradiction. And Obama's answer was...a bit disingenuous. "I actually think that the state secrets doctrine should be modified," he said. "I think right now it's overbroad."

So why has he been hiding behind its breadth? "We're in for a week, and suddenly we've got a court filing that's coming up...and we don't have the time to think up what an overarching form that doctrine should take."

But it's hard to square that with what the administration's actually done. DOJ lawyers haven't asked the courts for more time, or to withhold key pieces of information. Rather, they've argued that these cases--Jewel v NSA, Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation v Obama, and Mohammed v Jeppesen Dataplan--be tossed out entirely. And they've done that by invoking the state secrets privilege. In fact, in Jewel, the administration went so far as to claim "sovereign immunity" for the government from just about any lawsuit involving wiretapping. That position is even more radical than Bush's was.

It's hard to imagine Obama walking that claim back. But as far as state secrets go, now he's on the record. The administration, he said, is "searching for ways to redact to carve out certain cases to see what can be done... there should be some additional tools so that it's not such a blunt instrument." That's news--the White House hasn't always been so straightforward. But there are incipient efforts in Congress to do just what Obama said, and if I had been offered a followup question, I might have asked whether this means he'll throw his full weight behind them.

Obama just addressed the significance of Arlen Specter's move into the Democratic party, saying, "I am under no illusion that I'm going to have a rubber stamp Senate. I've got Democrats who disagree with me." And boy is he ever right about that.

Republicans see things differently, though, and to them Obama said, "I want them to realize that me reaching out to them has been genuine." He added, though, that he can't accept a definition of bipartisanship that means agreeing with "certain theories of theirs that have been tried for eight years and didn't work."

As an example he suggested that Republicans should work with him on a health care bill, even if they disagree with him philosophically over the need for a public insurance option. That's an interesting case in point. A number of liberal groups have become concerned that the administration isn't as committed to a public plan as they'd like, and this suggests, at least to some extent, that he is.

ABC's Jake Tapper just asked Obama if he thought that the Bush administration "sanctioned torture" in its use of waterboarding and Obama, after a moment's hesitation, said "Waterboarding violates our ideals and our values. I do believe that it's torture."

In his opening statement he also said that his administration put an end to torture, and there's no reason to say that unless you think torture was happening. But it's probably the most direct admission to date and, given recent events, it comes at noteworthy time.

After making that acknowledgment, Obama reiterated many of the points he made when he addressed the CIA after greenlighting the release of the Bush-era torture memoranda--that torture makes the country less safe, is untrue to American values, and less effective than humane interrogation techniques.

The National Republican Senatorial Committee is taking some revenge on Arlen Specter, with a new robocall campaign targeted at Democratic primary voters in Pennsylvania -- reminding them of former President George W. Bush's support for Specter, in an effort to drive a wedge between Specter and the voters of his new party:



"I'm here to say it as plainly as I can, Arlen Specter is the right man for the United States Senate," Bush says, in the audio from a campaign ad from Specter's closely-fought 2004 primary against conservative challenger Pat Toomey. "I can count on this man -- see that's important. He's a firm ally when it matters most. I'm proud to tell you I think he's earned another term as the United States Senator."

That last line from Bush does have a certain dramatic irony, referring to a politician who switched parties five years later. A reader of ours has already told us they've received the call.

The NRSC has also set up a new Web page, Meet Democrat Arlen Specter, featuring some old Specter campaign ads from that 2004 primary, with the endorsements of George W. Bush and Rick Santorum, plus some video of Specter saying he'll stay a Republican, or criticizing Harry Reid, and all sorts of news clippings of Specter being a partisan Republican.

Full NRSC press release after the jump.

Read More →

In a guest-post today at the conservative Power Line blog, NRSC chairman John Cornyn has an interesting line in terms of playing up the dangers of a filibuster-proof Democratic majority:

Second, in the unfortunate and unlikely event that Senator Norm Coleman loses his legal battle in Minnesota, Harry Reid will now have his long-coveted 60-seat, filibuster-proof supermajority in the United States Senate. With Nancy Pelosi firmly in control of the U.S. House of Representatives and President Obama just 100 days into his administration, Republicans will have lost the ability to meaningfully impact legislation in any way.


Note that Cornyn refers to a Coleman legal defeat as an "unlikely" event -- despite the fact that hardly any neutral observer would predict that Coleman will win his court fight.

Cornyn has to walk a very fine line here. He obviously needs to communicate to the base just how dangerous a 60-seat Democratic majority is -- but if he admits that such a thing is actually happening, then he's given away far too much in the final remaining battle of the 2008 election.

The National Republican Senatorial Committee is now trying to channel the understandable rage of their base regarding Sen. Arlen Specter's party switch towards a constructive end: Bringing in some cash.

At the NRSC's Web page, this contribution box pops up:



Not too subtle, but again it makes perfect sense. Don't curse the darkness -- turn on the light (or in this case, bring in some money).

The Senate has passed the President's budget by a vote of 53-43.

Just as earlier this month when the Senate passed it's version of the resolution (and just as in the House earlier today) not a single Republican voted for it. And just as last time, they were joined by Sens. Evan Bayh (D-IN) and Ben Nelson (D-NE). And just as last time, Sen. Arlen Specter voted against it, too. Except last time around he was a Republican.

I'll post the full roll call when it becomes available.

Late update: Statements from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell below the fold.

Late late update: Here's the roll call. Specter's still listed as a Republican. Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV) also voted with the Republicans, presumably over the issue of reconciliation.

Read More →

Gov. Ed Rendell (D-PA) was just interviewed by Neil Cavuto on Fox News, and he predicted that Sen. Arlen Specter (D-PA) will easily have full Democratic support in his 2010 primary.

"Well, I think that Arlen will probably wind up running unopposed, or without a serious challenger," said Rendell. "Look, the President of the United States has already endorsed Arlen, the Vice President of the United States has. Everyone knows Arlen and I are personal friends, go back to when he hired me as an assistant district attorney without asking me what party I belonged to. I think every major Democrat is gonna be for Arlen. And I think he's got a lot of inherent support with Democrats and independents all across the state."

So despite any rumblings about Joe Sestak or some other Dem possibly running, Rendell is predicting a clear field.

Read More →

When Pat Toomey announced that he'd be challenging Sen. Arlen Specter in the Pennsylvania primary, we were prepared for Specter to tack to his right. And he did just that. After ushering forward and voting for the stimulus spending package, Specter voted for a Republican alternative budget that would have frozen spending. He announced his intent to oppose EFCA. And he withheld support from President Obama's OLC-chief designate Dawn Johnsen.

But then he ditched the Republican party and, with it, much of the incentive to do the bidding of conservatives. At about noon, he became a Democrat. At about 2:15, in a move that vexed liberals, he announced that he doesn't support Dawn Johnsen. A few hours later he voted to confirm the supposedly controversial Kathleen Sebelius to be Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services. This morning he appeared with Obama and other Democrats in a celebratory photo-op at the White House.

And tonight, he'll have another test.

Read More →

The national Democrats are now going on the air for the first time in a key 2010 Senate race -- against a potential candidate who isn't even officially in the race yet!

The new TV ad from the DSCC takes on Florida Gov. Charlie Crist (R), who is widely viewed as being likely to run for the open GOP-held Senate seat in this perennial swing state:



"Crist enjoys being governor when he attends basketball games and Super Bowl activities and when he takes over sixty days off with no schedule," the announcer says. "But now, the job's getting tough and Crist wants out -- leaving Floridians with the mess."

It's not immediately clear just how extensive the ad buy might actually be.

Late Update: The DSCC tells me it should start airing in Tallahassee tomorrow, and may expand later.

Late Late Update: NRSC press secretary Amber Wilkerson gives us this comment: "The DSCC obviously knows they're in trouble in Florida because this reeks of desperation. Too bad they haven't learned that voters in the Sunshine State are looking for real solutions, accountability, and checks and balances in Washington - not another round of pithy negative attacks."

LiveWire