« July 2007 | Main | September 2007 »

Comedy, central

August 24, 2007 5:34 PM

For the Webcast today we took another look at comedian Rob Riggle's attempts to find comedy in Iraq (FREE VIDEO HERE)...

As you may recall, my attempt to do so didn't turn out so well. (WATCH HERE or HERE)...

Speaking or Iraq, here's more on that lobbying push for Ayad Allawi, from big-time GOP lobbyists with close ties to the White House HERE...

So…I will be out next week. May try to post, but if I don't, see you after Labor Day.

Best

Jake

August 24, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

BGR Allawi documents

August 24, 2007 2:50 PM

My colleague Miguel Marquez, currently in Baghdad, obtained a copy of the documents Barbour Griffith & Rogers filed with the Justice Department.

You can view them HERE.

-- jt

August 24, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

Shadow White Houses?

August 24, 2007 10:17 AM

We took a look at Vlad Putin's baring of his midriff (as opposed to his soul, which is more President Bush's expertise) for Nightline last night.

HERE'S THE DOT-COM VERSION.

Of perhaps far more international consequences that Putin's beefcake photos is the lobbying campaign against Iraqi prime minister Nuri al-Maliki by a big-time GOP lobbying firm in DC that has taken on former interim Iraqi prime minister Ayad Allawi as a client.

Allawi in an op-ed this month in the Washington Post (LINK) wrote that "there will be no lasting political reconciliation under Maliki's sectarian regime."

The firm, Barbour Griffith and Rogers (LINK), purchased the web domain "Allawi-for-Iraq.com" and has sent myriad emails from that address.

BGR's international president, Ambassador Robert Blackwill (LINK), served as President Bush's envoy to Iraq in 2004, during Allawi's reign.

Let's meet the rest of the team at the firm trying to bring down Maliki…

BGR also includes among its officers many folks with close ties to the White House and Bush administration….there's former Condi Rice adviser Philip Zelikow; Bush Ranger Lanny Griffith; former George H.W. Bush White House aide Ed Rogers; former Department of Energy chief of staff Eric Burgeson; and former HUD chief of staff Dan Murphy.

Hill connections? Say no more…

There's former counselor to ex-Speaker Dennis Hastert, Elliot Berke; former national security aide to Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., Stephen Radamaker; former Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., foreign affairs adviser Andrew Parasiliti; former Executive Director of the House Conservative Action Team Jennifer Larkin; House Committee on International Relations Deputy Staff Director Walker Roberts; and former policy director to the House Republican Conference Chairwoman, Shall Ross.

(You can read more about BGR and Allawi at ABC News' The Blotter, HERE).

BGR used to have as its Vice President Brad Blakeman, a former White House aide. But this week Blakeman announced he was becoming president of Freedom's Watch, a Republican issues group launching a $15 million pro-surge ad campaign, which we covered this week (MORE HERE).

What do you think?
- jpt

August 24, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (7) | TrackBack (0)

Bigotry on the Bayou?

August 23, 2007 12:20 PM

Ugly religious charges and counter-charges have emerged in the Louisiana gubernatorial race, with the Louisiana Democratic Party running a TV ad accusing the frontrunner, GOP gubernatorial candidate Rep. Bobby Jindal, R-La., of having once called Protestants "scandalous, depraved, selfish and heretical."  The Jindal campaign says the ad is unfair, pulling and twisting out-of-context quotes from an essay Jindal, a Rhodes Scholar, wrote for the New Oxford Review in 1996, and is instructing television stations to pull the ad.

The 30-second TV spot - said to be running in central and north Louisiana, heavily Protestant areas -- features an actress saying "Most Americans believe we should respect one another's religion, but not Bobby Jindal. He wrote articles that insulted thousands of Louisiana Protestants." The actress says Jindal "questions the beliefs of Baptists, Methodists, Episcopaleans, Pentacostals and other Protestant religions."

You can view the ad HERE
Louisiana's open primary is October 20; Democratic Gov. Kathleen Blanco is not running for reelection. The major Democratic candidates are Public Service Commissioner Foster Campbell and state sen. Walter Boasso, neither of whom has called for the ad to be pulled.

The full essay is far more complex than the Democratic Party ad would have it, and a couple of the words they use in the attack ad are being twisted. The word "depraved," for instance, is actually Jindal quoting French Protestant theologian John Calvin, and "selfish" is a reference to the desires of all Christians.

But Jindal uses the words "scandalous" and "heresy" in his essay "How Catholicism Is Different" against Protestants, to argue that Catholicism is preferable to other Christian faiths, if only because the Catholic Church is the one source to be trusted when interpreting Scripture.

"The meaning of Scripture is not self-evident," Jindal writes. "Sincerely motivated Christians studying the same texts have disagreed on the fundamentals of the faith, thereby dividing not only Protestants from Catholics, but also particular Protestant denominations from each other. Post-Reformation history does not reflect the unity and harmony of the 'one flock' instituted by Christ but rather a scandalous series of divisions and new denominations, including some that can hardly be called Christian."

Jesus, Jindal writes, would believe in Christian leadership to maintain unity. "The same Catholic Church which infallibly determined the canon of the Bible must be trusted to interpret her handiwork; the alternative is to trust individual Christians, burdened with, as Calvin termed it, their 'utterly depraved' minds, to overcome their tendency to rationalize, their selfish desires, and other effects of original sin. The choice is between Catholicism's authoritative Magisterium and subjective interpretation which leads to anarchy and heresy."

Jindal concluded the essay by writing "I am thrilled by the recent ecumenical discussions that have resulted in Catholics and Evangelicals discovering what they have in common, in terms of both theology and morality, and as exemplified by joining to oppose abortion and other fruits of an increasingly secular society, but I do not want our Evangelical friends to overlook those beliefs that make Catholicism unique. The challenge is for all Christians to follow Jesus wherever He leads; one significant part of that challenge is to consider seriously the claims of the Catholic Church."

Jindal was raised Hindu but converted to Catholicism after a Southern Baptist friend told him that “you and your parents are going to hell."

-- jt

August 23, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (18) | TrackBack (0)

Shadow White House communications shop?

August 23, 2007 11:15 AM

A new Republican group, "Freedom's Watch," burst onto the scene yesterday with $15 million worth of TV, radio, and internet ads in favor of continuing the fight in Iraq.

Watch the new ads HERE.

Read more about it HERE…

What do you think?

-- jpt

August 23, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (13) | TrackBack (0)

White lines

August 23, 2007 10:55 AM

White lines

On GMA this morning, we took a look at a recent cocaine bust in the Pacific….(YAHOO VIDEO HERE).

Excuse me now, for some reason I have the sudden impulse to pace around my office rubbing my gums.

More later

--jt

August 23, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

Comedy in Iraq, opposition to illegal immigration in Newark

August 22, 2007 9:25 AM

Sorry no blogging yesterday. Ran to New York City to interview Rob Riggle, the comedian filing dispatches from Iraq for "The Daily Show" (WATCH THAT HERE or READ ABOUT IT HERE)...

We then hopped to Newark to look at the debate over illegal immigration in that inner city, given the arrests of two illegal immigrants for the shocking triple murder of three promising young college students there.

READ MORE ON THAT HERE...

What do you think about Riggle's reports? In the best tradition of M*A*S*H and Catch-22? Or in bad taste?

And what of the rising animus towards illegal immigrants in the inner cities?

-- jt

August 22, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (27) | TrackBack (0)

Paging John Kerry, John Kerry White Courtesy Telephone

August 20, 2007 5:34 PM

Shockingly, former President Bill Clinton channeled John Kerry last week.

Around the world, the former President said in Nevada Friday night, "every single political leader I talk to says, 'I hope your wife wins. We want the world to like America again.' This is the first election in my lifetime where a substantial number of Americans will actually cast their vote based on what they think the rest of the world will think about America." (LINK HERE)

You might remember during Campaign 2004 when Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., alluded to the coterie of international prime ministers and presidents rooting for him to defeat President Bush.

"I've met foreign leaders who can't go out and say this publicly but, boy, they look at you and say, 'You've got to win this, you've got to beat this guy, we need a new policy' -- things like that," Kerry said at a Florida breakfast.

The claim was quite controversial at the time.

At a town meeting in Pennsylvania, one Bush supporter asked Kerry to identify the world leaders (LINK HERE).

"Were they people like [British Prime Minister Tony] Blair or were they people like the president of North Korea?" he asked. "Why not tell us who it was? Senator, you're making yourself sound like a liar."

And former Secretary of State Colin Powell agreed. "If he feels it is that important an assertion to make, he ought to list some names," Powell said. "If he can't list names, then perhaps he should find something else to talk about."

Kerry refused to say. "I can't violate any conversation because no one would share something with me again," he said. Kerry also backtracked on what he'd claimed. "I think the quote, the quote in the comment I made publicly, I believe, was that I 'heard from,' that's the direct quote," he said. "I've likewise had meetings. I've also had conversations. I said I've heard from, that was what I believe I said."

The issue isn't necessarily whether or not world leaders would prefer Clinton or Kerry (or Clinton) to Bush. With a few exceptions (like, say, ALBANIA LINK HERE), liberal Democrats are more embraced internationally than conservative Republicans. Same as it ever was.

But during a primary election, I do wonder why the former President would say that "every single political leader" he talks to prefers his wife over, say, Sens. Barack Obama, D-Ill., Chris Dodd, D-Conn., Joe Biden, D-Del., or former Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C.?

And if you're going to make such a claim, why the secrecy?

I'm trying to think of world leaders...I suppose Gen. Musharraf would NOT be an Obama supporter...

Meanwhile, Republicans are all competing for the blessing of former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher (LINK HERE)...

I called former President Clinton's office today -- they declined to specify which political leaders he was talking about. No comment from his wife's office, either.

-- jpt

August 20, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (14) | TrackBack (0)

Is Fred Thompson Skirting Election Law?

August 20, 2007 1:26 PM

A liberal activist today lodged a complaint (LINK HERE) with the Federal Election Commission against former Sen. Fred Thompson, R-Tenn., contending that Thompson's "testing the waters" committee has long since surpassed that designation and that he, for all intents and purposes, is a candidate for president.

This is not without precedent. Previous pre-candidates who tried the "testing the waters" committee -- including Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., Rev. Pat Robertson, and Rev. Al Sharpton -- invited FEC scrutiny.

The rule is pretty simple. If you spend more than $5,000 on campaign activities, you're a candidate, whether or not you've officially declared. The question is what constitutes "testing the waters" activity, and what constitutes "candidate" activity.

In 2004 the conservative National and Legal Policy Center filed a complaint with the FEC (LINK HERE)  alleging Sharpton was using the "testing the waters" committee to run an "off-the-books campaign," not declaring his candidacy officially while clearly a candidate, thus avoiding disclosure rules.  The FEC investigated the matter, and arrived at a settlement with Sharpton.

The FEC ruled that Robertson had violated the "testing the waters" rules in 1988, fining him $25,000.

The campaigns of some of Thompson's potential GOP rivals have groused  -- off the record -- that Thompson is similarly skirting the law. 

Thompson was in Iowa over the weekend. Check him out HERE.

Thompson himself has been clear in interviews to NOT declare himself a candidate, telling CNN on August 17, "We are going to be getting in if we get in, and of course, we are in the testing the waters phase."

But how much is this once-staunch advocate of campaign finance reform truly "testing the waters"? In June Thompson signed a long-term lease on a Nashville location for his national campaign headquarters. He's been to Iowa and New Hampshire, and headlined GOP dinners.

Moreover, when Thompson filed his disclosure form with the IRS, he revealed that $72,000 of  the $3.4 million raised  is to be used for the general election. Former FEC General Counsel, Larry Noble  told the Washington Post "I think it's problematic. Clearly it's a red flag." (LINK HERE)

The real issue here, for campaign finance reformer types?

Disclosure.

If Thompson waits until September 6 to formally declare his candidacy, he wouldn't have to disclose any of the cash given to his campaign until January 31 -- after many major contests are over, including the Iowa and Nevada Caucuses, and the New Hampshire, South Carolina, Michigan and Florida primaries.

Thompson's campaign says that he's complying with all rules and regulations, and Thompson has cast all questions about this in terms of him not doing things the way Washington, DC, insiders want them to be done.

What do you think?

-- jpt

August 20, 2007 in Weblogs | Permalink | User Comments (27) | TrackBack (0)

Huckabee praises the Clintons

August 20, 2007 10:02 AM

On NPR's "Bryant Park Project," former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee said some nice things about his fellow razorbacks -- Bill and Hillary Clinton.

Huckabee, like President Clinton, hails from Hope, Arkansas, and was president of the state's Baptist Convention when Clinton was governor.

"We've had a very cordial relationship," Huckabee says. "I've never hated the Clintons. I have great respect for them. There are two things about Bill Clinton I tell Republicans. It drives them nuts, but here it is.

"Number one, don't get it lost on you that a kid from a very small, southern rural state aspired to be President of the United States. This kid came from a dysfunctional family, alcoholic abusive father and yet, he didn't just aspire, he was elected president of the United States not once, but twice.

"That is an affirmation of the system. And it is a wonderful testament to give to every kid in America that no matter where you come from, you've got an opportunity to do something extraordinary.

"The second thing, and this will really rankle some of my Republican colleagues: Bill Clinton and Hillary went through some horrible experiences in their marriage because of some of the reckless behavior that he has admitted he had. I am not defending him on that, it's indefensible.

"But they kep their marriage together. And a lot of the Republicans who have condemned them and talk about their platform of family values, interestingly, didn't keep their own families together."

Huckabee, who lost 110 pounds a few years ago, also offered some tips on how to diet while on the road.

You can listen to it HERE ...the Huckabee interview comes about 49 minutes into the show.

Will Huckabee's nice -- dare I say Christian -- comments about the Clintons hurt him in the GOP primaries?

-- jt

August 20, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (17) | TrackBack (0)

Why I Wish I Were In Iowa

August 17, 2007 4:49 PM

I can't travel much these days -- our baby is due any day -- but this video posted by the John Edwards campaign (LINK) makes me long for the road.

Forgetting Edwards' promise of universal health care, the comments by Dean Pro, an elderly Iowan who tells Edwards about how half his income goes to pay for health insurance, are what this presidential race is about. Real people, real problems.

Whether the issue is Iraq, the threat of terrorism, outsourcing, "fraudsters" who prey on the elderly, international relations, or whatever, going on the road reminds reporters what elections are supposed to be about. And too often aren't. Real people, real problems.

I'll do my best to remember that as we continue into Campaign 2008, and I hope you'll do your best to remind me.

Have a great weekend,

Jake

August 17, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (9 ) | TrackBack (0)

Odds and/or Ends

August 17, 2007 9:22 AM

Following our "when money gets in the way of the message" discussion yesterday, here comes another story about former Sen. John Edwards, D-NC, and Fortress Investments' subprime lending.

The Wall Street Journal reports that 34 New Orleans homes have had their owners face “foreclosure suits from subprime-lending units of Fortress Investment Group LLC" -- the hedge fund Edwards worked for in 2005 and 2006 and where he has $16 million invested.

READ MORE HERE

Furthering the Kos v O'Reilly smackdown, Kos himself was "grilled" about the hate speech on his website by Stephen Colbert this week. You can watch the video clip HERE.

Less approvingly, the Wall Street Journal's Kimberly Strassel takes a look at Kos Kampaigns against moderate Democrats HERE.

Later today in Tacoma, Washington, Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash, will chair a Senate Veterans Affairs Committee hearing on Army suicides which, according to a new study, are at a 16-year high, with links between suicides and extended tours of duty. Could be quite compelling. More on that later...

What sayeth you?

-- jpt

August 17, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (4) | TrackBack (0)

When money gets in the way of the message

August 16, 2007 9:46 AM

Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, was decrying scams against seniors in Iowa yesterday.

Does it matter that one of her biggest financial supporters is being investigated by the Iowa Attorney General for his role in the exact same kinds of senior scams? Read more HERE…

On ABC News Now's Politics Live yesterday I chatted with the Boston Herald reporter who broke the story that former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney has some investments in companies that support embryonic stem cell research. You can watch that video HERE and read the original story HERE.

Since Casey Ross originally broke this news, Romney has decided to change his investments (CLICK HERE).

Is it fair to follow the money to see if it always squares with a candidates' professed views? Is there a difference between campaign contributions and a candidate's personal wealth?

-- jpt

August 16, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (11) | TrackBack (0)

the Politics of toy recalls

August 15, 2007 3:02 PM

Former Sen. John Edwards, D-NC,  wrote letters to both President Bush and the Democratic leaders of Congress to take the issue of toy safety more seriously . he implored Bush -- "As one father to another" -- to "take immediate action to stop the growing crisis of dangerous toys being imported from China." Specifically Edwards called for "mandatory, independent third party testing" of toys. 

"We also need to put the Consumer Product Safety Commission back on the side of consumers — by strengthening its enforcement powers and eliminating conflicts of interest."

You can expect to see more of these statements, since consumer activists have faulted the Bush administration for never taking the Consumer Product Safety Commission seriously.

Of the three Bush nominees to be chair of the CPSC, one was rejected in the Senate (Mary Sheila Gall), the second (Hal Stratton) only served out half his term, and the third -- Michael Baroody, a former vice president of the National Association of Manufacturers -- withdrew his nomination when it became somewhat rocky. The woman serving as acting chair, Nancy Nord, has never been confirmed.

What are the political issues here? 

According to Ed Mierzwinski, Consumer Program Director of the U.S. Public Interest Research Group, the CPSC is not taken seriously, with a dearth of money, staffing, enforcement authority and leadership. Its budget is $63 million -- less than half of its original 1974 budget, if one corrects for inflation. (With inflation the budget should be $149 million, he says.) In 1980, the CPSC had a staff of 978. Now its staff is less than 400.

As for staffing, the CPSC is supposed to regulate the safety of 15,000 products (toys being just one part) -- but it does so with only 15 inspectors TOTAL at ports of entry, and 90 inspectors total across the country. Congressional investigators recently visited the CPSC's laboratory in Bethesda, Maryland, and according to Mierzwinski found it "like a bad high school lab."

It is true that the ultimate responsibility for the safety of these products lies with the corporations who sell them and are expected to comply with laws by, for instance, not putting lead-based paint on children's toys. 

But if the manufacturers bear no serious risk but for their reputation in a crisis scenario, consumer advocates argue, where's their incentive to act if the CPSC is so toothless and impotent?

"Manufacturers are more afraid of Wal-Mart and its insistence of price guarantees than they are of CPSC and its insistence on safety," Mierzwinski says.

As for the CPSC's argument that the lead-related recalls have taken place with no injuries or deaths reporter, Mierzwinski says that's a red herring.

"Lead is a chronic hazard," he says. "It makes you sick over time, lowers your IQ, it may even make you violent."

Injuries wouldn't show up right now or even necessarily be directly traceable to the toy...it's an environmental hazard that would manifest itself over time, likely in combination with other factors.

Bottom line -- expect to hear more about this from Democrats, and expect consumer groups to back them. And expect corporations and manufacturers to accuse Democrats of taking actions to enlarge the government and drive up prices for consumers....fun for the whole family!

-- jpt

August 15, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (11) | TrackBack (0)

'All for Jesus'

August 15, 2007 9:30 AM

Comments by Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kansas, at the Iowa Straw Poll have raised some eyebrows.

Brownback quoted Mother Teresa telling him, "All for Jesus. All for Jesus. All for Jesus. All for Jesus."

"Faith is a good thing,"Brownback says. "Not a bad thing."

You can watch it HERE.

This is hardly the first time Brownback has shared this story (LINK), but since he's a presidential candidate now -- one who came in third in the Iowa Straw Poll -- there are those who take issue with it.

Such as Ryan Sager at the New York Sun, who writes (LINK) "Brownback, more than any other candidate in the race, is making an explicit statement that religion — and, specifically, Christianity — should be at the center of American politics. Saying 'All for Jesus!' four times isn't part of some nuanced debate about faith informing public policy or being a positive force in public life. It's pure and simple tribalism, whipping the crowd up by promising to be on the side of conservative and fundamentalist Christians against the rest of American society."

(Sager originally didn't note that Brownback was quoting Mother Teresa, which garnered him some criticism (LINK) but beyond that mistake I think lies an interesting debate.)

What do you think?

-- jpt

August 15, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (25) | TrackBack (0)

"Air-raiding villages and killing civilians"

August 14, 2007 5:13 PM

In Nashua, NH, Monday, Obama said that the U.S. has "gotta get the job done" in Afghanistan which "requires us to have enough troops that we're not just air raiding villages and killing civilians which is causing enormous problems there. It means that we have enough civilian support, agricultural specialists, people who are engineers, people who are building schools and so forth to help the Afghani government do a better job of delivering on behalf of its people."

The chairman of the RNC, Mike Duncan, is among those trying to fan the flames of any controversy those comments might cause, today issuing a statement decrying "Barack Obama’s offensive statement in New Hampshire that our men and women serving in Afghanistan are just ‘air-raiding villages and killing civilians.’ It is hard to imagine that anyone who aspires to be Commander in Chief would say such a thing about our brave men and women in uniform. Obama owes our armed forces an apology -- today.”

What are we to make of this? Clearly the U.S. is not "just" air-raiding villages and killing civilians...

But as the Washington Post pointed out (LINK), "Much of the U.S. military's emphasis here, however, remains on killing or capturing insurgents, ...(b)ut energetic pursuit of insurgents has produced another problem -- a mounting toll of civilian casualties, mostly in bombing raids. The deaths have inflamed public opinion, turned many Afghans against the foreign forces and further strained (Afghan president Hamid) Karzai's credibility. 'Sooner or later, every liberating force becomes an occupying force,' said one Western analyst here. 'A majority of Afghans were glad to see the coalition arrive in 2001, and most of them still are, but collateral damage and cultural insensitivity are key issues here. Even if the Taliban are using civilians as human shields, in the court of public opinion it is still the foreign forces that killed them."

This was addressed by President Bush during his visit with Karzai earlier this month (LINK).

"Let me comment on the civilian casualties, if I might," said the president. First, I fully understand the angst, the agony and the sorrow that Afghan citizens feel when an innocent life is lost. I know that must cause grief in villages and heartbreak in homes.

"Secondly, I can assure the Afghan people, like I assured the President, that we do everything we can to protect the innocent; that our military operations are mindful that innocent life might be exposed to danger, and we adjust accordingly.

"Thirdly, it is the Taliban who surround themselves with innocent life as human shields. The Taliban are the cold-blooded killers. The Taliban are the murderers. The Taliban have no regard for human life. And therefore, we've spent some time talking about -- as the President rightly expressed his concerns about civilian casualty. And I assured him that we share those concerns."

Karzai, for his part, said he "had a good discussion with President Bush on civilian casualties. I'm very happy to tell you that President Bush felt very much with the Afghan people, that he calls the Afghan people allies in the war against terror, and friends, and that he is as much concerned as I am, as the Afghan people are. I was very happy with that conversation."

Did Obama step in it? Or is this much ado about nothing?

-- jpt

August 14, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (15) | TrackBack (0)

What I've Been Up To

August 14, 2007 4:09 PM

Mayor Giuliani talks about immigration reform while his campaign pushes back against Gov. Romney's attack (CLICK HERE) ...

Is God an invention? Christopher Hitchens discusses his new book "God is not great" on the ABC News Shuffle podcast (CLICK HERE)…

Word.

jt

August 14, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

Moby Dick speaks

August 14, 2007 9:33 AM

We covered the resignation of Karl Rove yesterday on dot-com (CLICK HERE).

Here are some clips you might like...

About 4 minutes into this lengthy Dan Rather spot from 1972, a very young, thin, follically confident RNC aide named Karl Rove discusses reaching out to young people. (CLICK HERE)

At the Aspen Ideas Festival in July, former President Bill Clinton is asked what he might ask Rove, who was set to appear at the conference the next day. Rove has clearly gotten under Clinton's skin…quite remarkable. (CLICK HERE).

Other interesting clips…

Rove on the scurrilous racist rumors against Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., during the 2000 GOP primary in South Carolina (CLICK HERE)…

Rove recalling the morning of 9/11 (CLICK HERE)…

Conservative columnist Robert Novak calls Rove "a confirming source on the Valerie Plame story" (CLICK HERE). "Karl Rove has been a source since he was a young fella…"

-- jpt

August 14, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (4) | TrackBack (0)

Rove: 'I'm Moby Dick.'

August 13, 2007 6:37 PM

WHITE HOUSE PRODUCER JENNIFER DUCK WRITES that Rove just held an off-camera, on-the-record briefing about his departure.

BACKING AN '08ER?

Rove said he won't have an official role with a GOP campaign in '08. "I don’t intend to take a formal role. I've got friends in all the campaigns. I do want to see this President succeeded by a Republican. I'll be happy to, if asked my opinion, I'm an opinionated person. But I don’t anticipate taking any formal role in any campaign, and if I did I would shortly thereafter die -- check the whereabouts of my wife if I'm found dead."
Does he see a permanent GOP majority in the country in the future? Rove responded nothing is permanent in politics and called '06 a temporary setback.

NOT BUSH'S BRAIN

Q Do you think the public has a misconception of you?

ROVE: I'm not certain I understand what's -- other than that I'm the evil genius, yes.

Q "Bush's brain."

ROVE: Well, that is -- that's not me. That's an attack on the President. That is the critics of the President trying to be cute. This guy is a Yale undergraduate and history major, a Harvard MBA, and one of the best-read, most thoughtful people I know. Now, I know he likes to play sort of the Midland/West Texas -- but he is smart. And the "Bush's brain" was, interestingly enough, a construct of two journalists as a way to diminish him by suggesting that he wasn't capable of developing his philosophy or his approach or his ability to win elections; somebody had to do it for him, which is incredibly demeaning and really stupid. And I don't mind saying that the two guys that coined it are stupid in their characterization.

WHY LEAVE NOW?

Rove said, "We started talking about this over a year ago and we just -- we mutually reinforced bad behavior by constantly finding excuses that we could postpone the discussion. But now is the right time to do it. It gives -- if Josh has thought through, and is thinking through -- I think he's thought through, if the truth be known, about how he wants to handle this, and this gives him enough time to both put responsibilities into some people's hands and recruit people to step in to do other responsibility."

Rove explained Bush knew he was going to leave in late spring / early summer of last year but things just kept coming up: "We've been talking about this for a year. I can't tell you what time this spring, or late this winter where we sort of finally agreed. But constantly it was, like, we'd say, okay, both of us recognize that it's time. And then we'd say, well, let's talk about this again after the State of the Union, or let's talk about it after the surge. But this was just the best logical point to do it, after Congress went out and before the fall."

Rove insists his departure does not mark the end of President Bush's political life. He says Bush is the President of the U.S., and still has the ability to shape political debate.

When asked if the President requested Rove stay, Rove said, "Both of us would have liked to have been in a place where we both could have walked out, where I could have followed him out the door on the 20th. But I've got a family, and I've asked my family to go through a lot and to sacrifice a lot."

UNFINISHED BUSINESS?

Rove admits there is a lot of unfinished business but said they're "winning some of those battles." Rove says the President has his phone number. "There's a robust set of issues that we're dealing with. And, again, I'd love to be around for them. In a way, I'll be kibitzing from the outside -- he knows my phone number and I know his. But, no, there's a lot of unfinished business ahead and we're in the midst of some very important things."

IS ROVE REPLACEABLE? "YES, ABSOLUTELY" ACCORDING TO ROVE

Q: are you replaceable then?

ROVE: Yes, absolutely. Absolutely.

When asked if everyone is, Rove said, "Everybody is. Except two."

WHAT'S NEXT?

"I have no idea. I'd like to teach eventually, but in the meantime I need to make some money. I have an employment record that I think would be attractive to any employer: I've worked in an industrial kitchen in a hospital; I've waited tables; I've worked in convenience stores and have been robbed at the point of a gun twice; I've pumped gas; I've babysat; I've cut lawns; I've delivered newspapers."

"The President has encouraged me to write a book. I will do a book," Rove said in all seriousness.

What's the subject?

"It's going to be about the most important and interesting thing that the American people want to know, which is my relationship with you. With you. (Laughter.)" But in all seriousness, Rove said, "I think it's going to -- I'm a student of history, so I'd rather talk about the history of this President and get in there, stay in there and be in there."

SURGE IS WORKING

Rove said, "We're in the midst of an unpopular war, and he's been hammered by the Democrats. But I would point out to you, the Democrat Congress is less popular than the President, and they got there a heck of a lot quicker. As the war in Iraq -- as it's clear to the American people that the surge is working, the President's popularity will rise."

SUBPOENAS

Rove said subpoenas were not the cause of his departure: "It's not figured in my decision, no.  I think they are only vaguely aware of the subpoenas.  They obviously were more than vaguely aware of the investigation. And look, I'm realistic enough to understand that the subpoenas are going to keep flying my way.  I'm Moby Dick and we've got three or four members of Congress who are trying to cast themselves in the part of Captain Ahab -- so they're going to keep coming."

Rove continued, "But anybody who suggests the investigations had something to do with getting me out is sort of putting Congress in the position of being the rooster that believes that by crowing loudly brings the sun to come up."

Rove also emphasized he is still protected with exec privilege. "After I leave the White House the things that I've -- the advice that I've given the President, my role within the White House remains protected; I do not lose privilege by leaving the White House -- just as former Presidents don’t lose the privilege when they leave the White House.  You remember that there have been instances where the current President, on behalf of President Clinton, has asserted privilege."

Rove came back to the conversation of subpoenas voluntarily near the end of his talk with reporters. "I'm a competitive guy. I'm tempted to stick around when somebody sends a subpoena my way. I'm tempted to stick around for the next fight. I'm tempted to stay around for the battle over the budget. I'm tempted to stick around to see if we can get a standard health care insurance deduction through. I'm a competitive person."

-- Jennifer Duck

--jt

August 13, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (28) | TrackBack (0)

MC Rove

August 13, 2007 6:07 PM

At the end of the day, this is really all you need to remember about Karl Rove. (LINK)

-- jpt

August 13, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (4) | TrackBack (0)

That quiet sound you hear

August 13, 2007 4:34 PM

That quiet sound you hear from Republicans says all you need to know about party officials' current feelings about Karl Rove.

Not one GOP presidential campaign has proactively put out a statement paying homage to Rove or thanking him for his service. Certainly former Governors Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee can't be delighted with Rove stealing attention from their Iowa Straw Poll victories this weekend with the timed announcement of his departure.

Asked on CNN's "American Morning" if he would welcome Rove to his campaign, Huckabee's first response was, "I would welcome anybody to my campaign at this point."

There's also reluctance by these GOP pols to have their names appear in news stories that mention the Valerie Plame leak, the firing of the US Attorneys, congressional subpoenas, and the general tenor of Rove-style politics.

While Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, put out a statement thanking Rove, the office of House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, only did so upon request.

The Boehner statement is one that could have been written for Paul Begala, when you get down to it: "Karl Rove has served the President and the American people with dedication and distinction since 2001, and while he’ll certainly be missed by his colleagues at the White House, I’m sure he and his family are looking forward to spending some well-deserved time together in Texas," Boehner writes. "Karl has my thanks for all of his years of inspired public service, and he and the entire Rove family have my very best wishes for the future.”

Congressional Republicans have long felt that the Bush administration never really "got" the Hill, and Rove especially never understood how to deal with Members of Congress. He was rude to them, some said.

"For awhile there he was king of the Hill, and he shoved your face in it," a GOP official told me. "He also had an enemies list as long as the New York phone book."

At a recent meeting with House Republicans on immigration reform, the reception was "chilly," in the words of one attendee.

In other words, though the "Goodbye, good riddance" statement issued by former Sen. John Edwards, D-NC, is too strong, few elected Republicans are as choked up as the President and Mr. Rove were this morning about his departure.

-- jpt

August 13, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (9) | TrackBack (0)

Farewell to the "turd blossom"

August 13, 2007 9:41 AM

In his inimitable style, presidential aide Karl Rove this morning knocked the Iowa Straw Poll victors Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee off the political headlines today to tell his pal Paul Gigot at the Wall Street Journal that he's leaving the White House. (LINK).

"I just think it's time," Rove said.  

The so-called "Architect" (the president's other nickname for him: "turd blossom LINK) has left quite a legacy -- winning back-to-back presidential election victories, historically picking up seats in the 2002 mid-terms, leading the political charge for a Medicare prescription drug benefit, tax cuts, and education reform.

President Bush came to Washington, DC, promising to change the tone and the tone has changed -- it's worse. Rove, and his political tactics, are partly to blame for that. And despite his protestations that the GOP would hold on to the House and Senate in 2006 -- he told one NPR reporter that the reporter was entitled to his math, but Rove was entitled to THE math -- he shuffles out leaving the president with a hostile Democratic-controlled Congress, failures on immigration and Social Security reform, and two wars not going so hot.

What do you think of Rove?

-- jpt

August 13, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (33) | TrackBack (0)

More on the "gay debate"

August 10, 2007 3:45 PM

HERE'S THE DOT-COM STORY about the Democrats' debate last night and HERE'S THE FREE VIDEO of the GMA spot this a.m….

Right now we're taking a look at the controversy involving GOP presidential frontrunner Rudy Giuliani who yesterday in Ohio said of 9/11 workers with serious health troubles: "I was at Ground Zero as often, if not more, than most of the workers ... I was there working with them. I was exposed to exactly the same things they were exposed to. So in that sense, I'm one of them."

Giuliani's comments angered many rescue and recovery workers, though today Giuliani attempted to clarify what he meant to say…. (READ MORE HERE)

More to the point, it gives us an opportunity to look at Giuliani's 9/11 record, one of his big selling points to voters….

-- jpt

August 10, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

Meet the Press, with Melissa Etheridge

August 10, 2007 9:53 AM

Rock star Melissa Etheridge offered the Democratic some tough questions at the so-called "gay debate" last night, sponsored by the Human Rights Campaign and broadcast on LOGO.

To John Edwards:

Referring to an account from Edwards' former political adviser Bob Shrum, Etheridge said to Edwards, "I have heard that you have said in the past that you feel uncomfortable around gay people. Are you okay right now?"

Edwards disputed the account. "It's not true, it's not true," he insisted. "Elizabeth and I were both there, and both of us have said he's wrong."

To Bill Richardson:

Etheridge asked Richardson, "do you think homosexuality is a choice, or is it biological?      
                                                                           
"It's a choice," Richardson said.

"I don't know if you understand the question," Etheridge said to laughter. "Do you think a homosexual is born that way, or do you think that around seventh grade we go, 'Ooh, I want to be gay?'?"

"Well, I -- I'm not a scientist," Richardson said. His campaign later issued a statement declaring that he didn't think homosexuality was a choice -- the correct answer for that crowd.

To Hillary Clinton:

"Senator, I have a personal issue here.  I remember when your husband was elected president.  I actually came out public -- publicly during his inaugural week.  It was a very hopeful time for the gay community.  For the first time, we were being recognized as American citizens.  It was wonderful.  We were very, very hopeful, and in the years that followed, our hearts were broken. We were thrown under the bus.  We were pushed aside.  All those great promises that were made to us were broken. And I understand politics.  I understand how hard things are, to bring about change.  But it is many years later now, and what are you going to do to be different than that?  I know you're sitting here now; it's a year out -- more than a year.  A year from now, are we going to be left behind like we were before?"

"Well, you know, obviously, Melissa, I don't see it  quite the way that you describe, but I respect your feeling about it," Clinton said.  "I think that we  certainly didn't get as much done as I would have liked, but I believe that there was a lot of honest effort going on by the president, the vice president and the rest of us who were trying to keep the momentum going"

Someone sign this woman up and give her a cable show!

"Come to My Window," live on CNN!

-- jpt

August 10, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (4) | TrackBack (0)

The Iowa Caucus in December?

August 09, 2007 5:22 PM

Probably not. But check out why anyone is even talking about this HERE from the Webcast ....or HERE from World News with Charles Gibson, where the graphics were a little better.

-- jt

August 9, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (5) | TrackBack (0)

The Bush women tackle a boy who doesn't like to read

August 09, 2007 3:46 PM

USA Today reports (LINK http://www.usatoday.com/life/books/news/2007-08-08-bush-book_N.htm) that First Lady Laura and First Twin Jenna Bush are co-writing a children's book "about a funny, mischievous second-grader 'who professes not to like books. He says he likes real things,'" says the First Lady.

They claim the idea came from their experiences as teachers. 

-- jt

August 9, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (4) | TrackBack (0)

Iowa Mud

August 09, 2007 9:15 AM

As Saturday's GOP straw poll vote approaches,  the Iowa attacks are getting intense. 

With former NY Mayor Rudy Giuliani, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and former Sen. Fred Thompson, R-Tenn., having taken a pass on the event (which is really kind of a bogus event), the 2nd and 3rd tier candidates are competing for momentum...and they are pulling out all the stops...and the mud.... as this invaluable piece by Slate's John Dickerson describes (LINK)

As we've covered before in this blog (LINK), Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kansas,  is accusing former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee of supporting anti-Catholic bigotry after a supporter (and local pastor) wrote an email saying he preferred an evangelical such as Huckabee.

Both have now accused the other of not being "Christian" enough. .....

At the "Iowa Values Not for Sale" website (LINK)  fomer Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney  is charged by a conservative activist with buying votes  -- with a list of Iowa consultants on the Romney payroll. ....

In push phone calls Brownback has taken on Romney for having been pro-choice....and he's also taken on Rep. Tom Tancredo , R-Colo. ,  for having "accepted tens of thousands of dollars from the founder of a Planned Parenthood network." (That would be Dr. John Tanton, a founder of the Northern Michigan Planned Parenthood Association, who is on the board of directors of the Federation for American Immigration Reform  - hence his support for Tancredo, a leader of the conservative movement against illegal immigration). ...

Tancredo has put out a web video demanding that Brownback apologize for the push phone calls (LINK) -- "We do expect more from people who at least call themselves Christians." Tancredo says. 

Plus, of course, Romney attacked Giuliani yesterday on the subject of illegal immigration, which we covered on World News (DOT COM STORY HERE)....

And this is just the stuff we know about! 

If you're heading to Ames, bring your waders.

-- jpt

August 9, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (4) | TrackBack (0)

The Mitts Are Off

August 08, 2007 5:40 PM

Former Gov. Mitt Romney went after former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani today for being soft on illegal immigration.

We did a dot-com write-up on this (CLICK HERE ) and will have more on World News with Charles Gibson.

Also … here's a little WEBCAST WRAP-UP of the Democrats' AFL-CIO debate last night …

--jt

August 8, 2007 in 2008: Republicans | Permalink | User Comments (3) | TrackBack (0)

Edwards a Phony?

August 08, 2007 9:21 AM

The editor of South Carolina's biggest newspaper has a rather nasty op-ed called "Why I See John Edwards as a Big Phony." (LINK).

The author cites three examples of Edwards being, in his view, less than genuine. I personally find the evidence rather thin for such a scathing verbal attack. Candidates turn their on-stage personas on and off, they can be caught in bad moods and impatient and running behind schedule just like all of us. But what do you think?

The White House is so excited about a radio interview Gen. David Petraeus did with Alan Colmes they sent out a transcript and an MP3 file of the entire thing. Spoiler alert: he thinks the surge is working..

Listen to the full interview here.

More later…

jt

August 8, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (13) | TrackBack (0)

Political trail mix

August 07, 2007 3:42 PM

Some news from the Hill for y'all...

JOHNSON BACK TO SOUTH DAKOTA

For the first time since his near-fatal brain hemorrhage eight months ago, Sen. Tim Johnson, D-SD -- who is up for reelection in 2008 -- is returning to South Dakota this month.

In a statement released by his office, Johnson says, "I know my return has taken longer than some people have liked -- count me among them. But I learned early on in this journey the importance and necessity of relying on the advice and counsel of those doctors, nurses and therapists without whom my return would have been impossible."

Johnson is expected to return to the US Senate in September for the first time since the incident.

In the meantime, the senior senator has new grandchildren to greet him in "The Land of Great Faces and Great Places." Johnson's son Brendan and wife adopted two children from Ethiopia -- Trualem, age 10, and Peneal, age 8 -- who arrived last week.

ADMIRAL SESTAK: DON’T DAMN THE TORPEDOES…

Retired three-star Admiral and freshman Democrat Rep. Joe Sestak of Pennsylvania may have recently endorsed Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, but he sounds more cautious than she when discussing how quickly US troops can leave Iraq.

Before a crowd at the liberal Center for American Progress today, Sestak said "the time to do it will take at least -- at least -- a year," and likely between 15 and 24 months to do it well. Even 15 months, he said, "is probably pushing it to do it safely unless you just walked away" leaving bases and equipment behind.

This reality check contradicts much of the Democratic rhetoric coming out of the House…including Sestak's own call in June 2006 for the Bush administration to withdraw US troops "within a year, give or take a few months, so our military leaders can do it safely,"

BOEHNER BONER?

The somewhat left-leaning good government group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington asked the Department of Justice to look into whether House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, broke any national security laws during a July 31 interview with Fox News Channel's Neil Cavuto about FISA laws.

During that interview Boehner said "there's been a ruling, over the last four or five months, that prohibits the ability of our intelligence services and our counterintelligence people from listening in to two terrorists in other parts of the world where the communication could come through the United States."

Boehner was arguing that Democrats should have acted long before the deadline came last week.

Says CREW: "By telling a reporter that a FISA court has restricted the U.S. intelligence community's surveillance of suspected terrorists overseas, Rep. Boehner appears to have transmitted information relating to the national defense in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 793(d)."

That law, of course, "provides that anyone with lawful possession of information relating to the national defense, which could be used to the injury of the United States, who willfully communicates that information to any person not entitled to receive it, is subject to up to ten years imprisonment."

A Boehner spokesman denied his boss had said anything that wasn't already part of the public record and called the complaint "laughable."

-- jt

August 7, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (3) | TrackBack (0)

Was Obama proposing an "invasion" of Pakistan?

August 07, 2007 1:29 PM

The Sioux city (Iowa) Journal today reports (HERE) that Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois,  says his foreign policy speech from last week (CLICK HERE FOR MORE) was the victim of  "misreporting."

"I never called for an invasion of Pakistan or Afghanistan " he said. Obama said that what he actually said was that if there were "actionable intelligence reports" showing Osama bin Laden in Pakistan, U.S. troops should enter  the country and try to capture  bin Laden and al Qaeda terrorists  -- an entry only if "the Pakistani government was unable or unwilling" to  do so.

Huh?

That's what the media reported, Senator. If there were actionable Intel that high-level terrorist targets were in Pakistan and Gen. Musharraf were not willing to act, you would be. You would send in US troops into another sovereign country to take out the terrorist targets.

Let's go to the tape...

"I understand that President Musharraf has his own challenges," Obama said  last Wednesday , "but let me make this clear. There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again. It was a terrible mistake to fail to act when we had a chance to take out an al Qaeda leadership meeting in 2005. If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf will not   act, we will."

A lot of the disagreement seems to be about the word "invade," which Obama did not use in his speech. According to dictionary.com, invade could mean:

1. to enter forcefully as an enemy; go into with hostile intent: Germany invaded Poland in 1939. 
2. to enter like an enemy: Locusts invaded the fields. 
3. to enter as if to take possession: to invade a neighbor's home. 
4. to enter and affect injuriously or destructively, as disease: viruses that invade the bloodstream. 
5. to intrude upon: to invade the privacy of a family. 
6. to encroach or infringe upon: to invade the rights of citizens. 
7. to permeate: The smell of baking invades the house. 
8. to penetrate; spread into or over: The population boom has caused city dwellers to invade the suburbs. 

Certainly what Obama was proposing was not invading as Germany invaded Poland in 1939, since the U.S. presumably would leave as soon as the capture or killing of the al Qaeda operatives was completed, and Pakistan would not be perceived as the enemy.

But I suspect Pakistan and the United Nations would consider such an operation technically an invasion, especially if it were conducted against Musharraf's wishes.  And I suspect we would view it the same way if Pakistani forces flew into Dubuque, and either captured or killed high-level members of an anti-Pakistani militia. After all, it's considered an "invasion" of U.S. airspace when a plane encroaches on our territory.

Certainly sending in Navy SEALs, Army Rangers, and CIA operatives with weapons and parachutes, shuttled in on a C-130 aircraft -- as would have happened in the 2005 operation Obama faulted the Bush administration for not carrying out (LINK)-- spelled out exactly the kind of military action Obama was talking about.

Is there a difference in terminology depending on the size of the force? The column that broke the news of this aborted op reported that "the number of troops involved in the mission had grown to several hundred with "various planners bulked up the force's size to provide security for the Special Operations forces."   Said "the former senior intelligence official involved in the planning" of the operation, "The whole thing turned into the invasion of Pakistan."

But this is precisely the mission Obama says he would have OKed.....

What do you think? Did the media (and I) overstate the case by using the term "invade"?

--jpt

UPDATE: I emailed our resident expert, Anthony Cordesman, who told me that Obama is correct, what he's talking about militarily would not be considered an "invasion."

"Technically," Cordesman writes, "an invasion is an incursion of an army for conquest or plunder. Moreover, since Pakistan has both admitted that hostile forces come from its territory to Afghanistan and said it cannot stop all  of them, an  incursion to defeat the insurgents is probably legal under international law.

"Life isn't fair, and neither are the laws of war."

He does offer the caveat that lawyers and human rights groups would likely disagree with him, though.

August 7, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (31) | TrackBack (0)

Myths and Misses

August 07, 2007 8:11 AM

We take a look today at the Watergate mythology that his built around former Sen Fred Thompson, D-Tenn. -- READ IT HERE.

And in response to news that 17-year-old Caroline Giuliani was, at least according to Facebook, a fan of Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, we chatted with her brother Andrew Giuliani (READ THAT HERE)…

More in a bit -

jt

August 7, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

The Chris Dodd-cast

August 06, 2007 9:53 AM

On the ABC News Shuffle this week we had a long and interesting conversation with Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn, about his presidential campaign, whether he would have been a more effective Senate leader than Tom Daschle, his fight with Bill O'Reilly, and more…

LISTEN TO IT HERE

-- jt

August 6, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

Caught on Tape

August 06, 2007 9:51 AM

There were many interesting moments during Sunday's Republican debate (which you can see HERE), but I found another moment perhaps even more enlightening, at least when it comes to current Iowa GOP frontrunner Gov. Mitt Romney.

That moment (CLICK HERE) occurred during commercial breaks of a provocative interview of Romney by a conservative talk radio host. Romney didn't know the off-air comments were being filmed by the station's DV camera, but they were and you can watch them HERE.

Initially the Romney campaign objected when the video was posted -- they thought it was off the record -- but ultimately campaign officials decided Romney looked good during the confrontation and they posted it on their own website.

Speaking of interesting Youtube videos, there was a good moment during the YearlyKos convention's candidate