Set aside for a moment the propriety of the NSA organizing off-the-record seminars for reporters to discourage them from reporting NSA secrets. Which news outlets actually consented to their reporters attending these classes?

Spokesperson Dana Perino was asked about the transcript published this week by the Spanish newspaper El Pais. It purports to be from a meeting just before the U.S. invasion of Iraq between President Bush and the prime minister of Spain. In it, President Bush is clearly set on a path for war, although he denied so publicly at the time.

Perino was mostly non-responsive to the questions, but notably the White House did not dispute the authenticity of the transcript:

Here is the relevant portion of transcript from the briefing:

Q If I can change topics, there’s a — about the history of the Iraq war here. There’s a transcript in the Spanish newspaper, El Pa s, that was said to be from a meeting between the President and the Spanish Prime Minister back in February 2003, in which, according to the tapes of this transcript of the conversations, Saddam Hussein offered to step down and go into exile one month before the invasion, and the President seemed to think that that was a realistic possibility at that time. Do you believe that this is an accurate transcript?

MS. PERINO: Well, without commenting on the details or talking about a private conversation between two world leaders and whether or not that happened, if you think back to that time, there were a lot of rumors. There were a lot of people floating ideas around about what may or may not happen. Unfortunately, Saddam Hussein decided to defy the international community. All diplomatic measures ran their course. And what we are focused on now is making sure that Iraq can be a government that can sustain and defend itself and make sure it’s an ally in the war on terror for that region.

Q And one more thing on this. The President is quoted in this transcript saying, “No matter what happens, we’ll be in Baghdad by the end of March.” Three days after that meeting, Ari Fleischer was at a podium in this room, saying, “The President has not come to the conclusion that the inspections have reached a dead end.” I’m wondering if you can —

MS. PERINO: I wasn’t there for the private meeting that the President had with President Aznar. I don’t know what Ari said. I do know where we are now, which is in a position of trying to make sure that the Iraqis have what they need in order to be a democratic force in the Middle East region.

Democrats have the momentum going into the 2008 House elections.

It’s remarkable what gets lost some days amid the mounting detritus of the Bush Administration. Yesterday the new Army Chief of Staff, Gen. George Casey, the former top commander in Iraq, went before Congress and essentially declared the Army to be broken.

The Boston Globe had the best account:

In his first appearance as Army chief of staff, Casey told the House Armed Services Committee that the Army is “out of balance” and “the current demand for our forces exceeds the sustainable supply. We are consumed with meeting the demands of the current fight and are unable to provide ready forces as rapidly as necessary for other potential contingencies.”

Officials said Casey, who appeared along with Army Secretary Pete Geren, personally requested the public hearing – a highly unusual move that military analysts said underscores his growing concern about the health of the Army, America’s primary fighting force.

Casey, a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, wanted a public forum even though he has ample opportunity to speak to lawmakers in closed-door meetings.

There’s a long history of military leaders going before Congress and making dire predictions of what will happen if their desired funding is not appropriated. But this is of a different order entirely. And note the initiator of this hearing: it was Gen. Casey himself. He wasn’t dragged up to the Hill so the majority party could score some points. He requested a public hearing.

Now Casey was essentially removed from his position as commander in Iraq because he was insufficiently enthusiastic about the President’s proposed surge. So perhaps some Republican yaker somewhere will claim Casey has an ax to grind. Except everyone knows the Army is broken. It’s no secret. Factually, there is no real dispute about it.

It is simply a measure of our times that when the top officer in the Army goes before Congress so that he can publicly warn about the state of readiness of his branch that it’s not the top news story of the day.

Rep. John Doolittle (R-CA) and five staffers subpoenaed in Abramoff corruption probe, AP reports.

Here’s our collection of all things Doolittle.

The Sacramento Bee is reporting that this is a new round of subpoenas, in addition to the ones issued to some Doolittle staffers in recent weeks. The new subpoenas seek records going back 11 years:

Doolittle declined comment about the development. But his criminal defense attorney said in a prepared statement that the subpoenas “raise serious constitutional issues going to the very core” of the separation of powers between the Congress and the executive branch.

In a release issued by Doolittle’s office, it said that the Justice Department has assured the five staff members that they are merely witnesses. Left unanswered is the question of what Doolittle’s status in the investigation is, and whether he has become a target in the on-going investigation related to disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff that would mean an indictment is near.

The AP has more on the separation of powers angle being advanced by Doolittle’s criminal defense attorney:

The Constitution prohibits the executive branch from using its law enforcement powers to interfere with legislative business. Barger said he and Doolittle would “be vigilant” to ensure Congress’ independence is “vigorously protected.” Any court challenge would go before a federal judge, but the documents would be sealed. . . .

“The rest of the Congress would be well served to pay attention to the message the Executive Branch seems to be sending about whether the three branches are truly coequal,” Barger said.

The raid on Rep. William Jefferson’s Capitol Hill office in an unrelated corruption probe has breathed new life into what had been a rather moribund area of constitutional law: the Speech and Debate Clause.

Democrats blast Limbaugh for “phony soldiers” comment.

Seems the GOP effort to pre-steal a chunk of California’s electoral votes is kaput. So says this LA Times blog. The outfit behind the scheme is “virtually dead with the resignation of key supporters, internal disputes and a lack of funds.”

Rick Hertzberg had a very nice piece in The New Yorker a couple months back with a run-down of what was afoot.

The State Department’s own initial investigation into the Nisour Square incident largely absolves Blackwater for the deaths of 11 Iraqi civilians.

Here’s an important story. If you’re a regular reader, you know that for the last week, Spencer Ackerman’s been turning over important new ground in the latest FISA dispute. DNI Mike McConnell said that restrictive FISA regs led to a critical delay in obtaining a warrant to surveil Iraqi insurgents who’d kidnapped American soldiers. But Ackerman’s sources disputed McConnell’s account. And now the Associated Press has obtained documents that appear to confirm Spencer’s reporting. The delay wasn’t caused by FISA but because administration officials couldn’t get their act together quickly enough. Check out Spencer’s latest.

Eric Kleefeld recaps last night’s GOP presidential debate, such as it was–the top tier candidates all ducked the forum at historically black Morgan State University.