Josh Marshall

Josh Marshall is editor and publisher of TalkingPointsMemo.com.

Articles by Josh

Okay, enough already. We've been chattering on about it for a couple months now. And with the help of a team of seven, almost three dozen contributors and more than 1500 TPM Readers who helped fund the project, TPMCafe is finally ready to open its doors.

TPMCafe is very much a work in progress. And we wouldn't want it any other way. We've put a lot of time into creating a public meeting place to read about and discuss politics, culture and public life in the United States, a site with both blogs and public discussion areas. But we want your feedback. Let us know what you like and don't like, what's clear and unclear. Join us in shaping what this site becomes.

And this week, as we announced earlier, special guest-blogger, John Edwards.

I was beginning to think the coming and going of the November election had heralded not only the end of episodic national terror alerts but also the monthly ritual of Iraqi up-is-downism from Vice President Cheney.

Last night on Larry King Live Vice President Cheney said that the Iraqi insurgency was "in its last throes." In this he seemed to be picking up on President Bush's recent claims that the huge upsurge of violence and bombings of late was a sign that the insurgents were on the ropes.

Then, though, Cheney went on to say something ... well, I'm not sure whether to call it 'curious' or almost candid or what. But he went on to predict that the insurgency would end before the president leaves office, or in other words before January 2009, or in yet other words that the US will be fighting a counter-insurgency in Iraq for no more than six years.

And if that means it's in its 'last throes', well ...

How not to get annual performance awards (from the Baltimore Sun)...

John Riggs spent 39 years in the Army, earning a Distinguished Flying Cross for bravery during the Vietnam War and working his way up to become a three-star general entrusted with creating a high-tech Army for the 21st century.

But on a spring day last year, Riggs was told by senior Army officials that he would be retired at a reduced rank, losing one of his stars because of infractions considered so minor that they were not placed in his official record.


His Pentagon superiors said he allowed outside contractors to perform work they were not supposed to do, creating "an adverse command climate."

But some of the general's supporters believe the motivation behind his demotion was politics. Riggs was blunt and outspoken on a number of issues and publicly contradicted Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld by arguing that the Army was overstretched in Iraq and Afghanistan and needed more troops.

"They all went bat s- - when that happened," recalled retired Army Lt. Gen. Jay M. Garner, a one-time Pentagon adviser who ran reconstruction efforts in Iraq in the spring of 2003. "The military part of [the defense secretary's office] has been politicized. If [officers] disagree, they are ostracized and their reputations are ruined."


Garner and 40 other Riggs supporters - including an unusually candid group of retired generals - are trying to help restore his rank.

But even his most ardent supporters concede that his appeal has little chance of succeeding and that an act of Congress might be required.


(ed.note: Note of thanks to TPM Reader DH.)


This from <$NoAd$> tomorrow's Post ...

The Bush administration has launched a high-level internal review of its efforts to battle international terrorism, aimed at moving away from a policy that has stressed efforts to capture and kill al Qaeda leaders since Sept. 11, 2001, and toward what a senior official called a broader "strategy against violent extremism."


Much of the discussion has focused on how to deal with the rise of a new generation of terrorists, schooled in Iraq over the past couple years. Top government officials are increasingly turning their attention to anticipate what one called "the bleed out" of hundreds or thousands of Iraq-trained jihadists back to their home countries throughout the Middle East and Western Europe. "It's a new piece of a new equation," a former senior Bush administration official said. "If you don't know who they are in Iraq, how are you going to locate them in Istanbul or London?"

Much of what we call al Qaida -- not just al Qaida proper which is at least a somewhat specific entity or association of radical Islamist groups, but the broader movement of violent and extremist jihadism across much of the globe -- was the spawn of the cockpit of brutality and extremism that was the Afghan jihad of the 1980s.

What will this lead to? What will these guys do?

Would take your breath away if you had any left to take.

(ed.note: Note of thanks to TPM Reader BKS.)

Some folks just can't let this drop. One of them is Walter Pincus of the Washington Post. And God bless him for it. In today's paper, Pincus has an article detailing how two intelligence analysts responsible for what is probably the single greatest screw-up about Iraqi WMD (the aluminum tubes issue) have received job performance awards in each of the last three years.

It's always important to avoid punishment or scapegoating not tied to specific malfeasance or poor performance. But, as this and other articles amply demonstrate, the screw-up tied to the aluminum tubes wasn't just a bad call made with imperfect evidence. At a minimum, it also involved bad tradecraft on several fronts.

That each of these men could have been given such high commendations over the period of time in which their errors and poor performance became apparent makes it hard not to think that they were actually being intentionally rewarded for their flawed assessments. At a minimum, it demonstrates a complete indifference to any sort of accountability for a national embarrassment and scandal the magnitude of which the country has not even begun to come to grips with.

Almost across the board in this administration, the people responsible for this trail of error and/or untruth have been rewarded while those who resisted it or went along unwillingly have been marginalized, punished or fired.

It's truly a national scandal -- the surface of which has barely been scratched because the institutions with oversight responsibility have vested interest in not revealing what happened.

It's a national scandal for which, as time goes by, we all collectively become more and more responsible.

A TPM Reader <$NoAd$> chimes in on Social Security ...

Josh --

I admire the Bushies ability to come up catchy memes and repeat them endlessly (most recently, "Up or down vote.")

Here's my suggestion for what Bush is offering:

His "Nothing For Something"™ proposal.

The government keeps taking the same amount, only the Republicans give the middle class less. No carrot, all stick. Gee, I wonder why people aren't going for this?


Repeat it enough times and I guess it just might work.

Social Security partisans winning the battle of Staten Island?

The Staten Island Advance is reporting that Congressman Vito Fossella (R) of Staten Island is distancing himself from President Bush on phasing out Social Security.

Former phase-out man Fosella is saying no way to 'progressive indexing' (aka 'huge cuts for everyone but the working poor'). And while he says he's not against all private accounts, he's not ready to support President Bush's private accounts.

Perhaps this has something to do with the Empty Chair townhall meeting the In This Together campaign held a while back in Fossella's district or the 'Where's Vito' lawn signs they've been putting up around the area to get him to come clean on where he stands on phasing out Social Security.

Law & Order: Pitiful Intent?

Has The Hammer become a Man of Tender Sensibilities?

You've probably heard this already. But Tom DeLay fired off a letter to NBC this week complaining about an episode of Law & Order CI in which passing reference is made to his threats against members of the judiciary.

Specifically, in an episode about a white supremacist who kills a judge's family, as the detectives hunt for the killer, one of them quips, "Maybe we should put out an APB for somebody in a Tom DeLay T-Shirt."

DeLay's letter claimed that this "slur" was aimed at his statements about "the need for Congress to closely monitor the federal judiciary."

DeLay's interpretation notwithstanding, we thought it might have had more to do with the time he told supporters right after Terry Schiavo's death that: "The time will come for the men responsible for this to answer for their behavior, but not today."

DeLay even claims his First Amendment rights are being traduced: "To equate legitimate constitutional inquiry into the role of our courts with a threat of violence against our judges is to equate the First Amendment with terrorism."

Actually, DeLay's analysis gets even better when he lassos in Brit Hume as the impartial witness to establish his non-judge-whacking bona fides.

"When a responsible journalist like Brit Hume made an inquiry into such comments," DeLay continued, "he quickly understood them to be limited to Congress's oversight responsibilities and nothing more."

Tom DeLay, tender flower.

Late Update: TPM Reader EB tells me that the perp in the episode wasn't a white supremacist but rather someone disgruntled at their treatment by a judge. I was going from press descriptions of the episode. But perhaps they got it wrong. And as long as we're on the subject, aren't there some right-wing press hooligans we have on hand who go nuts when the MSM makes such an outlandish mistake?

It seems the half-life of the McClellan/DiRita slap-around of Newsweek may be rather short.

According to just-released FBI documents revealed by a FOIA request, there have been repeated claims of desecration or mishandling of the Koran in US detention facilities, some of them including precisely the sort of thing alleged in the Newsweek article. It is also clear that at least some of the accusations were ones the military found credible enough to discipline soldiers over.

What's worth noting is the motivation for all these antics over the last week.

We already know there have been serious problems, to put it charitably, with the treatment of US prisoners in Cuba, Iraq and Afghanistan. And it is hard to say that the claims of mishandling Korans were particularly egregious in comparison to things we know for a fact did happen.

Remember, the McClellan/DiRita attacks on Newsweek weren't simply about getting a few facts wrong or weakly sourcing a story. Their claim was that the charges were outrageous, damaging and false, when in fact it turns out they were outrageous, damaging and quite likely true. And even more damaging for the US after McClellan and DiRita spent a couple weeks heaping attention on them.

The result of the White House and DiRita's jihad against Newsweek has only been to encourage a whole new round of international outrage and embarrassment about abuses we have to hope are now being addressed. And all, obviously, to score points in the media wars at home -- which the Bush administration so often seems to consider the true central front in the war on terror.