Murray Waas has been digging into just how many Bush officials in the waning days of the administration refused to cooperate with the various internal investigations into the politicization of the Justice Department. He’s up to at least nine — not including the GOPers on the Hill who stonewalled, too. In his exclusive report at TPMmuckraker, Waas also gets us up to speed on who may or may not be cooperating with the subsequent criminal probes those investigations spawned.
Shorter Politico: Citizens increasingly out of touch with Beltway Media.
Zack Roth looks at the cast of characters in the orbit of Sir Allen Stanford and finds familiar names from other recent scandals popping up again and again — from Abramoff to Blagojevich.
We’ve also dug up photographs from a 2005 congressional junket to the islands sponsored by the Inter-American Economic Council, which Stanford backed financially. Here’s Sir Allen and former Florida Secretary of State and then-congresswoman Katherine Harris:
The rest of the photos are here.
We have to focus on the economic crisis.
There’s a line from the philosopher Seneca which, in English, goes like this: Fate leads the willing and drags the unwilling. And that seems like an apt description of where the consensus is heading on the possible takeover of some of the biggest national banks. Lindsey Graham says he’s for it. Yesterday, Alan Greenspan said he was for it. And this new article from the Financial Times says the Obama administration is moving toward embracing the so-called Swedish model.
With regards to Obama, this seems more like tea-leaf reading than anything concrete and specific. But it does seem pretty clear that this is where everything is trending. The issue isn’t whether people like the idea of ‘nationalization’. It’s better framed as whether you a) want the government to temporarily take over certain banks or b) want to continue giving away hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars in an effort that probably isn’t even going to work. Especially for Republicans, you really can’t be anti-bailout and anti-nationalization. Those are the only options.
Which GOP governors are grandstanding about maybe turning down their state’s stimulus money?
There aren’t a lot of investments paying good dividends these days. But the Republicans have definitely found one: funding Norm Coleman’s hopeless court suit to try to find some way to let him be senator again. As a matter of principle, I don’t really like when people try to shame candidates into throwing in the towel. Elections are important; candidates and supporters put immense energy, money and effort into winning them. So as long as a candidate thinks he or she won, they should be free to pursue whatever remedies and legal avenues are available. That said, it’s worth considering what Republicans are getting — not by keeping Coleman’s hopeless effort alive but far more importantly by delaying Al Franken’s swearing in.
The Stimulus Bill battle is a good example. The Dems needed Specter, Collins and Snowe to get the thing through. With Franken they would have needed only two of those votes. I don’t know precisely what each of them wanted. But I don’t think there’s much doubt that would have led to a less watered-down bill. And it seems quite possible that that missing vote will play a similarly consequential role in the weeks ahead. Perhaps in the months ahead.
The court process has to play itself out. There’s no way around that — though the judges seem ready to strangle Coleman. But we could do with a little more recognition of the fact that this is not about getting Norm Coleman into the senate. It’s about paying money to give the Republicans a few more months of leverage against the Democrats 59 seat majority.
Durbin gives Burris the old heave-ho …
(ed.note: As you can see in the statement below, there’s really little daylight between what Durbin says here and just coming out and calling on Burris to resign. And Durbin is his senate colleague from Illinois, has known the guy for 30 years and is very close to Obama.)
DURBIN STATEMENT ON SENATOR ROLAND BURRIS
[WASHINGTON, D.C.] – U.S. Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) issued the following statement today on the evolving situation regarding Senator Roland Burris (D-IL):
“When we met with Roland Burris in January, we made it clear that in order for him to be seated in the U.S. Senate he needed to meet two requirements – first, that he submit the proper paperwork certifying his appointment, and second, that he appear before the General Assembly’s Impeachment Committee to testify openly, honestly and completely about the nature of his relationship with the former governor, his associates and the circumstances surrounding this appointment.”
“We asked him to testify in the impeachment proceedings, not to embarrass Roland Burris, but to give him an opportunity to clear the air regarding this appointment from a tainted governor. Our hope was that he would use that opportunity to assure the people of Illinois and the other members of the United States Senate that he was not involved in any wrongdoing.”
“Now the accuracy and completeness of his testimony and affidavits have been called into serious question. Every day there are more and more revelations about contacts with Blagojevich advisors, efforts at fundraising and omissions from his list of lobbying clients. This was not the full disclosure under oath that we asked for.”
“These news reports and the public statements by Roland Burris himself are troubling and raise serious questions which need to be looked at very carefully.”
“The State’s Attorney in Sangamon County is reviewing the affidavit and other materials associated with Senator Burris’ testimony to see if criminal charges are warranted and the U.S. Senate Ethics Committee has begun a preliminary investigation into this matter.”
“This is the appropriate course of action and I await the outcome of those investigations. The people of Illinois deserve nothing less.”