President Bush on Iraqi independence and democracy …
“[Maliki’s] learning to be a leader. And one of my jobs as the president and his ally is to help him be that leader without being patronizing. At some point in time, if I come to the conclusion that he can’t be the leaderâhe’s unwilling to lead or he’s deceptiveâthen we’ll change course. But I haven’t come to that conclusion. As a matter of fact, his recent actions have inspired me.”
The Pentagon’s pattern: pushing dubious Iraq data on the GAO–and the public.
But, of course, Craig isn’t mounting that sort of bold defense that admits he is what he is and denounces the “pre-Stonewall morality fable” unfolding here. Instead, he’s rather implausibly denying that he ever went in for anonymous gay sex. At this point, Craig becomes a liar and a buffoon in ways that seem to be firing offenses on their own terms.
Perhaps this is not the best part of me. But I must confess that quite apart from the larger issues of public and private, public acceptance of homosexuality and Republican politics, I am in favor of an aggressive defense on Craig’s part simply because I cannot resist the novelistic clash of pathos, hypocrisy and ridiculousness of seeing Craig’s effort to ‘clear his good name’ torpedoing the White House’s September Petraeus propaganda campaign.
Surge architect Fred Kagan takes on the GAO Report …
The assertion that there is no “clear and reliable evidence that the level of sectarian violence was reduced” will surprise those who have been listening to American and Iraqi officers alike brief that the levels have been falling for months–as well as those who have walked the streets of formerly war-torn neighborhoods in Baghdad.
Sen. Craig (R-ID) making calls to senate colleagues to round up support.
I was debating whether to post on this. Then TPM Reader DR pushed me over the edge …
I don’t know about you, but if you ever wondered if CNN was in trouble, just look at what’s on the front page of CNN.com as I write this;
It’s beyond ridiculous, with all the news of significance going on in the world, THIS is what they choose to lead their webpage?
I’ve noticed this a lot recently on CNN, especially since their redesign. It’s not an issue of not fronting enough ‘good for you’ serious news versus tabloidy stuff. It’s more that they increasingly feature ‘weird but true’ stories as their lead. Not sure what that’s about.
Late Update: A quick survey of the other major news sites shows most are fronting the German terror arrests, which unlike the ones we usually have over here seem like the real deal.
Citing a Republican leadership aide says, the AP is reporting that Rep. Paul Gillmor (R-OH) was found dead in his apartment Wednesday (via CNN).
Late Update: The Hill has sources who say the cause of death was an apparent heart attack.
In a swipe at the GOP Senate leadership, Sen. Larry Craig (R-ID) sent one of his attorneys, Stan Brand, onto the Today show this morning to call for the complaint against Craig filed with the Senate Ethics Committee by the GOP leadership to be dismissed.
Late Update: Craig’s lawyers have followed up now with a letter to the Ethics Committee:
Lawyers for Senator Larry Craig of Idaho delivered a letter to the Senate ethics committee Wednesday asking the committee to reject a complaint relating to his guilty plea in an airport sex sting operation. The move opens a potentially ugly battle between Craig and the Republican leadership, as Craig reconsiders his plans to resign from the Senate.
Stan Brand, famed DC ethics investigation attorney, went on the Today Show this morning to defend Sen. Craig (R-ID), who has retained him to handle his senate Ethics Committee investigation. And he made what seems at least on first blush to be a pretty good point: at no time in the senate’s 200+ year history has the senate disciplined one of its members for a misdemeanor/petty offense not connected to his official duties. In other words, according to Brand, the whole idea of an ethics investigation should be ruled on its face.
First, I’m interested to know whether Brand’s history is accurate, but because of his expertise in this area and the central place he’s giving it in Craig’s defense, I strongly suspect that it is, at least narrowly speaking. Second, there’s a possible rejoinder to Brand’s argument. Separate from his guilty plea, Craig did apparently flash his senate business card to the arresting officer in an apparent effort to abuse his position to get special treatment. That probably does violate senate rules, and rightfully so. But if we substitute the sex sting arrest for a 100+ mph speeding ticket (to which it might be a legal equivalent), it’s hard to imagine that flashing the card would get more than a feather-slap from Craig’s senate colleagues. Third, perhaps Craig’s senate colleagues will argue that he pled down to a lesser offense. So it’s not really the disorderly conduct charge that’s relevant. To which I would say, maybe, but that’s a stretch.
So why is there an ethics investigation exactly? The answer seems clear, if on two levels. First, Craig’s senate colleagues want to engineer a soft expulsion from the senate. That’s obvious enough. And second, he was trolling for gay sex in a public restroom. And in the GOP catechism that’s not just a felony but a capital offense.
Of course, we know all this. But it is worth putting it there in black ink.