Sigh. Farther they travel to get here, apparently, the harder they fall.
Yesterday, I discussed the case of Michael Kamburowski, COO of the California state Republican party, who in addition to being a foreign national is only a few steps ahead of the Department of Homeland Security which is trying to deport him for repeated immigration violations. Most recently they put him up at government expense at the Wackenhut Correctional Facility in Jamaica, New York. See yesterday’s post for more details on this joker.
Seems he’s decided to spend more time with his family and has left the job.
The guy who ran Arnold’s reelection campaign, Steve Schmidt, calls Kamburowski’s hiring “almost a parody of incompetence and malfeasance.”
By which I assume he means the guy’s a solid Republican.
(ed.note: Thanks to TPM Reader JK for the heads up.)
Satisfied with the non-denial denial? When a reporter finally got a chance to ask Karl Rove about the claims he had a role in orchestrating the prosecution of former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman (D) all he managed was a dodge: that he didn’t know anything about the phone call in which his alleged role was revealed.
Well, obviously, that doesn’t mean anything since no one is claiming he was a party on that call.
Folks are ignoring this one at their peril. With the track record of the US Attorney firings, when the president’s top advisor is accused, credibly and specifically, of orchestrating the prosecution of a Democratic governor, he should be able to give a straightforward answer.
Apparently he can’t.
Siegelman’s sentencing is tomorrow.
While America is bogged down in Iraq, China’s been quietly winning friends and influencing people.
This week at TPMCafe’s Book Club, we’re discussing Josh Kurlantzick’s Charm Offensive: How China’s Soft Power Is Transforming the World. Kurlantzick argues that “China savvily has amassed significant âsoft powerâ around the world through aid, formal diplomacy, public diplomacy, investment, and other tools” and is going to start to use it. We ignore this geopolitical shift, according to Kurlantzick, at our own peril.
Debating China’s quiet rise to power will be Naazneen Barma, Mauro De Lorenzo, Ely Ratner, Devin Stewart, John Feffer, Reed Hundt, and Daniel Drezner.
A reporter finally gets a chance to ask Karl Rove whether he played any role in the Justice Department’s prosecution of Don Siegelman, the Democratic former governor of Alabama.
New York Times digs deep into Rupert Murdoch’s sprawling media empire and political network. That and other political news of the day in today’s Election Central Morning Roundup.
Today’s Must Read: next up in The Washington Post‘s series on Cheney’s vice presidency, how he and his allies made torture (sorry, “cruelty”) the rule.
It seemed as though Chris Matthews’ election analysis hit rock bottom a couple of weeks ago when he expressed an inordinate interest in Fred Thompson’s odor.
But it turns out, his reports can still manage to get a little more troubling.
On the June 24 edition of the NBC-syndicated Chris Matthews Show, during a discussion about Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY), host Chris Matthews asked Kathleen Parker, a syndicated columnist with the Washington Post Writers Group, if “being surrounded by women” makes “a case for commander in chief — or does it make a case against it?” […]
Asked by Time managing editor Richard Stengel, “What are you suggesting by asking does this diminish her as a commander in chief by being surrounded by women?,” Matthews replied: “No, the idea that it — well, let me just get historic. We’ve never had a woman commander in chief.”
As a follow-up to his question, Matthews said: “But isn’t that a challenge, because when it comes down to that final decision to vote for president, a woman president, a woman commander in chief, will be an historic decision for people. Not just men, but women as well.” Turning to New York Times reporter Elisabeth Bumiller, Matthews added: “Elisabeth, you’re always thinking about these things.” Bumiller referred to Golda Meir and Margaret Thatcher — women who were elected to lead Israel and the United Kingdom — and said: “[W]e all remember these women…. I think we can get there.” Matthews responded, “But we’ve got Patton and John Wayne on our side.”
As Atrios put it, “It’s one thing to project misogyny onto the public-at-large and question whether they’re willing to support a woman for president, it’s quite another to question whether the mere presence of women makes one unfit to be president.”
As pathological as Dick Cheney comes across in today’s much-discussed Washington Post profile, our notorious Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales, hardly comes across looking good. (Barton Gellman and Jo Becker confirm that the president calls his long-time friend “Fredo.”)
For example, we’ve long believed that Gonzales was responsible for the infamous memo that dismissed the Geneva Conventions as “quaint,” and characterized Colin Powell as a defender of “obsolete” rules. Today’s piece explains that Gonzales didn’t even write his own memo; Cheney general counsel David Addington did.
This graf seems to capture the internal White House dynamic.
Gonzales, a former Texas judge, had the seniority and the relationship with Bush. But Addington — a man of imposing demeanor, intellect and experience — dominated the group. Gonzales “was not a law-of-war expert and didn’t have very developed views,” [John] Yoo recalled, echoing blunter observations by the Texan’s White House colleagues.
So, on top of everything we’ve already learned with regards to Gonzales’ on-the-job performance, we now also learn that our AG was looked down upon by his White House colleagues, and was given a nickname belonging to the feeble, incompetent brother from The Godfather.
It inspires confidence in the nation’s chief law-enforcement officer, doesn’t it? Maybe he’s been in the wrong job all along.
Rudy Giuliani’s claim that he blew off his commitment to the Iraq Study Group to avoid politicizing the panel’s work doesn’t stand up well to scrutiny, but in case there was any doubt, even Tim Russert is helping debunk the bogus rationalization.
On Meet The Press this morning, host Tim Russert offered more evidence that politics was not an issue in Giuliani’s decision to leave the ISG. “Several commission members have said to me that presidential politics never entered the discussion,” said Russert. “It was all about Giuliani’s schedule and commitments versus showing up for the Iraq Study Group.” […]
As PBS’s Gwen Ifil pointed out, the important work of the Iraq Study Group should have come before any political considerations. “Even if it were his presidential ambitions,” said Ifill. “Is that really a good answer that you were so political that you rather focus on politics than focus on the nation’s security?”
Just another reason to believe this flap will stick to Giuliani like tar.
Bill OâReilly was the featured speaker at the National Society of Newspaper Columnists (NSNC) conference on Friday, where he, I kid you not, complained about opinionated news dissemination.
OâReilly contended that many newspapers are losing circulation because theyâve allowed the âliberalâ ideology of their editorial pages to âbleed into news coverageâ — despite, he said, there being a greater number of âtraditional conservativesâ than liberals in the American population.
Yes, if thereâs one thing OâReilly and his network understand, itâs the importance of keeping a clear distinction between news reporting and opinion journalism.