Presidential candidates usually have to wait until they’re elected to start obstructing investigations into their own wrong-doing. But ready on day one as he is, John McCain and Sarah Palin are getting a jump on this front too. I’m not sure I’ve ever seen an instance of a president, let alone a presidential candidate, quite this nakedly doing everything in his power to shutdown an investigation. And look closely — Palin herself has at this point entirely turned the obstruction over to the McCain campaign. They’re even the ones who make the announcements. (I won’t get into the battery of lawyers plumbers up in Alaska getting all the small fry to clam up and digging up dirt on all Palin’s accusers.)

Meanwhile, the claim that the Obama camp has ‘tainted’ the trooper-gate investigation is truly risible. This investigation was well underway and already looking bad for Palin and her husband well before John McCain picked her as his running mate. (We know: we were already covering it.) What I do not think that many people know is that this investigation up in Alaska has actually been authorized and is being run by Republicans. They make up a majority in the state senate. The committee member overseeing the investigation happens to be a Democrat. But at any moment of their choosing, they could pull him off the case, overrule his decisions, or shut the investigation down entirely.

Palin’s response to this — to the question of how Obama could have tainted the investigation which is under the control of Alaska Republicans — is to claim that there are actually a lot of Republicans in Alaska who oppose her. And that’s true. But observing that a sizable number of officeholders of your own party think you’re probably a crook too does not amount to an affirmative defense. Really, it doesn’t.

The fall back defense, when claims about Obama’s ‘taint’ fall flat, is that Palin’s someone who ‘shakes things up’. That’s what she’s done in Alaska and that’s what she’s going to do in Washington.

But a pattern of crony hiring and politicized firings of public officials all followed up by stonewalling and obstruction of justice really would not amount to ‘shaking things up’ in Washington. After eight years of President Bush, that’s more like steady as she goes.

Sarah Palin goes mano-a-mano with Sean Hannity starting tonight. Here’s a preview:

McCain supporting Hillary Clinton backer Lady Lynn Forester de Rothschild, international financier who splits her time between homes in New York and London, says she can’t support Obama because he’s “an elitist” …

In an interview with CNN this summer, Forester did not hide her distaste for eventual Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama.

“This is a hard decision for me personally because frankly I don’t like him,” she said of Obama in an interview with CNN’s Joe Johns. “I feel like he is an elitist. I feel like he has not given me reason to trust him.”

Forester is the CEO of EL Rothschild, a holding company with businesses around the world. She is married to international banker Sir Evelyn de Rothschild. Forester is a member of the DNC’s Democrats Abroad chapter and splits her time living in London and New York.

Sounds like a natural McCain supporter.

More of this the better. Can we arrange for Cruella de Ville’s and Richie Rich’s endorsement of McCain too? Even Endicott Billionson?

Obama gets a more assertive riff going here on the economy and John McCain’s remarkable story of being brought up by a pack of lobbyists but turning out to be a reformer:

From the AP:

John McCain embraces and expels Washington like an accordion player belting out a song.

Squeeze in and he touts his vast knowledge of the capital city. Draw out and he casts himself a reformer bent on changing its ways.

Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA) gets taken to the woodshed by Chris Matthews:

Did John McCain really just suggest that the Prime Minister of Spain might be one of America’s enemies? One of those international leaders he’d refuse to meet with?

Does he want to liberate Spain too?

The passage in question is at the end of the interview linked here (with translation into Spanish) …

We wanted to give you an update on the post below where we described Sen. McCain’s latest gaffe in which he seemed to suggest that he might not be willing to meet with Spanish Prime Minster Zapatero because he is among those world leaders who want to harm America.

The story is already getting picked up pretty quickly in the Spanish press. And the way it’s being interpreted in the Spanish press is that McCain got confused about the fact that Spain is a country in Europe, rather than a rogue state in Latin America.

Our review of the audio suggests the same conclusion. In the interview, McCain is asked about Hugo Chavez, the situation in Bolivia and then about Raul Castro. He responds to each of these with expected answers about standing up to America’s enemies, etc. Then the interviewer switches gears and asks about Zapatero, the Spanish Prime Minister. And McCain replies — very loose translation — that he’ll establish close relations with our friends and stand up to those who want to do us harm. The interviewer has a double take and seems to think McCain might be confused. So she asks it again. But McCain sticks to the same evasive answer.

This is obviously a story that’s difficult to get a handle on because of multiple layers of translation and retranslation. So I would ask that those of you who are speak Spanish fluently to review this article in El Pais and the audio in the post below, and let us know any other information you find.

Well, it doesn’t appear to have registered in the American press yet. But the story keeps bubbling in the Spanish press about McCain’s bizarre gaffe about the Spanish Prime Minister. Here’s the front page cut out from the Spanish news channel that did the interview. They’ve talked to the interviewer now. Her take? McCain didn’t know who Zapatero was …

Late Update: So McCain is the candidate with the foreign policy experience ready to lead on day one. But he doesn’t know who the leader of Spain is. He gets confused in an interview, apparently thinking Zapatero is someone from Latin America who is an enemy of the United States and manages to create a minor international incident.

Later Update: Here’s another Spanish press reax. In Spain, there seem to be two lines of thinking. The great majority appear to think the McCain was simply confused and didn’t know who Zapatero was — something you might bone up on if you were about to do an interview with the Spanish press. The assumption seems to be that since he’d already been asked about Castro and Chavez that McCain assumed Zapatero must be some other Latin American bad guy. A small minority though think that McCain is simply committed to an anti-Spanish foreign policy since he’s still angry about Spain pulling it’s troops out of Iraq. Finally, a few of those who lean toward the first view speculate that McCain may have confused Zapatero with the Zapatista rebel group in Mexico.

Even Later Update: One representative reader response, from among many …

I listened to the interview. The characterization is correct. I originally gave McCain the benefit of the doubt, thinking that he was just snubbing Zapatero (something that would be welcomed by the Spanish right). When I was there, there was a lot of agitation among Spanish conservatives because Zapatero was ignoring the country’s relations with the U.S. and making overtures to more leftist countries in the Latin America–Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia (all the countries mentioned in this interview before Spain). There was even a controversy because Zapatero sat down when the U.S. flag was passing by in a parade. I believe his excuse was “his legs were tired.” So I figured McCain was giving the Zapatero the cold shoulder in the same manner as the Bush administration has done.

After listening to the interview, however, I agree with the characterization that McCain was unaware of our relations with Spain, or even the country’s geographical and political position. When asked about meeting with Zapatero and the country’s relationship with the U.S., McCain ignored the question and went into some boilerplate about America’s friends and enemies and analyzing relations (think Palin and the Bush Doctrine). Then, he tried to transition his answer into more friendly territory, discussing President Calderon’s government in Mexico. He never really addressed Spain, but pushed right into commenting about Mexico. The interviewer actually tried to redirect him several times (again, think Charlie Gibson and Palin), until she actually stated that she wasn’t talking about Latin America anymore, but rather Europe. For whatever reason, McCain responded to this question by repeating what he said before about analyzing America’s relationships with our friends and enemies.

Seriously, this was pretty bad.

To recap, tonight we’ve been discussing Sen. McCain’s bizarre interview in which he appeared not to know who Spanish Prime Minister Zapatero was and, in an effort to wing it, assumed he must be another left-wing, anti-American leader from Latin America. In the Spanish press analysis of the interview, at least, many seem uncertain whether McCain even knows where Spain is, though that strikes me as a bit excessive.

Just how this will get played in the American press will be interesting to see because it cuts to two of McCain’s key vulnerabilities — the first being his apparently rather shaky foreign policy experience if can’t identify the leader of a major NATO ally and the second being what I guess we would call declining mental acuity.

Now, bear in mind that so far we’ve only been able to clearly hear the audio of the interview in the translations provided by the Spanish radio station that conducted the interview. But the interview, which was conducted entirely in English, was recorded. I’d assume that if this story gets any traction some media outlet here will prevail on the Spanish news organization to release the English language recording of the interview.

All of the Spanish language speakers I’ve heard from who’ve listened to the interview think there’s no doubt that McCain just got confused and didn’t know who Zapatero was or possibly didn’t even know where Spain was. But again, in the released audio, you just hear the translator, with the original English sufficiently far in the background as to be largely inaudible. So we probably won’t know just what happened until we hear the original.