Fitz!!

Fitz two?

Fitzolicious

Fitz me to the moon…

Thanks, Christy. You win some kind of marathon Plame blogging award today, what a prize-winning set of posts.

yea fitz!

Always glad to hear good news before I retire for the night. Fitz is the ‘male man!’

wow, things are looking up, I am wondering when the administration gets to pull the judge from the case and put in one picked by abu gonzales

and I wonder when the administration is going to pull fitz a la nixon did

cuz this is going too good to be true

Beautiful, beautiful job, Christy. I can’t remember another day when I’ve absorbed so much important information on this case so painlessly. Thanks again for all you do here.

Christy -

Thank you very much for your compliment expressed above and for today’s superb trilogy!

From downstairs….

orangejumpsuit,

“I’m no expert on the ways of the bottle, but IMHO, Hitchens drinks in order to continue writing. Without the lubrication of drink, his words and ideas would dry up. Hitchens suffers from the same fate that have visited many talented writers, Faulkner, Hemingway, to name just a couple, whom Hitchens cannot hold a candle to, even in his best days.”

Man, did that hit home. A well known songwriter (who shall remain nameless) and friend of mine fits that to a tee. Brilliant writer, just brilliant, but he had to be smashed to write.

Perhaps Judge Walton is just a bigger believer in the importance of protecting ALL the nation’s classified secrets than Scooter and his pals are.

I, for one, am a bit concerned about Judge Walton’s propensity for protecting U.S. secrets. I’ll grant that it bodes well within *this* case, but the general idea of Fed judges being quick to pull the curtain on “secrets” creeps me out more than a little.

I just summarized. I didn’t link. But I’ll take the praise, anyway. :)

How great is this lady? CHS for Attorney General ‘08.
CHS, Fitz or Spitz, can’t do any better than that.
I’ll go ahead nominate Jane for press secretary or VP, whatever she wants.

Karma is smiling on you…all of you.

OT, but on-thread for the last thread, re: Hitchins vs the Professor…

Juan Cole now has a very succinct slapdown of Andrew Sullivan, who rushed to Hitchins’ defense without thinking of the consequences…

Informed Comment

Yo, I clicked on Dr. Probst’s link and it didn’t take me to his exact post.
Can someone in here fix that?

jayt, I agree. I hope this case turns out well (in other words badly for the Bush administration) but Walton’s secrecy bent wasn’t so benign in the Sibel Edmonds case.

Thanks, all. It’s always nice to report a little victory for the good guys. :)

From the Boston Globe, via Raw Story: http://www.boston.com/news/glo.....aw?mode=PF

Our monarch, above the law
By Scot Lehigh, Globe Columnist | May 2, 2006

Has George W. Bush come to believe he’s king?

That’s the question that springs to mind upon reading Charlie Savage’s front-page report in Sunday’s Globe detailing the president’s sotto voce assertion that he can disregard laws if he thinks they impinge on his constitutional powers.

That novel claim resides in the ‘’signing statements” the administration issues outlining its legal interpretation of laws the president has signed — interpretations that often run contrary to the statute’s clear intent.

As Savage reports, Bush has registered hundreds of those reservations, adding them to statutes on subjects ranging from military rules and regulations to affirmative action language to congressionally mandated reporting requirements to protections Congress has passed for whistle-blowers to legal assurances against political meddling in government-funded research.

Bush’s position reduces to this: The president needn’t execute the laws as they are written and passed, but rather, has the right to implement — or ignore — them as he sees fit. (Were it not for our pesky written Constitution, perhaps George II could take his cue from Charles I, dismiss Congress, and rule — ah, govern — without any legislative interference whatsoever.)

Even members of the president’s own party have balked at that claim.

After Republican Senator John McCain succeeded in passing a ban on the torture of detainees in US custody, forcing it upon an unwilling White House, the president’s signing statement made it clear he thought he could disregard the law if he deemed it necessary. That brought a pointed rebuke from McCain and fellow Republican Senator John Warner.

Other presidents have periodically appended signing statements to legislation, setting the objectionable precedent that Bush has followed here. But as Savage reports, this president has taken it to a new level, issuing such statements on more than 750 laws, or on more than 10 percent of the bills he has signed.

Rendering Bush’s assertion more worrisome is this reality: Because so much of what this administration does is shrouded in secrecy, it’s hard to know which laws are being followed and which are being ignored.

(snip)

Who writes the signing statements?

Good on ya, Christy Hardin Smith!

My thanks also go to ’stop the bleeding’ at DU for posting a heads-up there linking to today’s ruling.

P.S. Mary posted a hint in the last thread (with no link as yet) that the Judge is now focusing tightly on Libby’s Third Motion to Compel Discovery. He seems to be trying to narrow down the scope of that Motion’s reach for documents in advance of what looks to be a significant oral argument hearing this Friday, May 5, as I understand it.

Steve Parrish– My guess is tha w. has nothing but his temper to do with writing them– he can barely speak much less write.

I think Harriet Miers and the whole legal eagle team with grostesque consultation by Cheney, Rummy, Bolton, and Abu Gonzales (who still is the personal attorney of w., not our Attorney G) and a whole bunch of K street poops in the room, etc.

tha is missing a “t”. sorrie.

My God, Steven Parrish, that is a great question. I would love for someone to ask that at the next WH briefing.
That signing statement thing is such BS. it infuriates me.

Gosh, do you think Harriet does?
Would need a lawyer’s touch and George sure couldn’t put all those words together. I went and read a few, they’re on all kinds of things, including a Resolution about the Russians in 02.

zennurse– there is a Resolution about the Russians on oxygen? Really? *g*

Even though Harriet is the Personal lawyer, she’s the personal presidential lawyer, not just the one who writes his will, if you get my drift.

It’s Harriet, I’ll be damned, that little snake.

*g*, I didn’t even see that one coming!!!

YES FITZ!
Thanks Christy!

Who writes the signing statements?

I’m thinking that anyone with a law degree and a WWYD (What would Yoo do?) T-shirt could do it….

I have to say, I often wonder where we’d be without our man of letters and links, Stephen Parrish, CPA.

YOu always have the right question and the perfect link. thank you.

FDLawyers…was the federal prosecution hamstrung on the Moussaoui sentencing due to any administration fuckups?

If so, can we get a podcast or something to counter the mighty wurlitzer? (couldn’t read threads today, sorry if already addressed)

http://tinyurl.com/a6erq

Help Impeach Today

1) Sign petitions if you have not already
2) Send a letter to your reps in Congress
3) Send a letter to the media
4) Pass the link around… Post it on a blog, email it to friends and family and ask them to chip in some time.
5) Thank you to all those helping!!!

Although, angie, with all that smoking and vodka, the Russians could probably do with a little 02.

“I’m no expert on the ways of the bottle, but IMHO, Hitchens drinks in order to continue writing. Without the lubrication of drink, his words and ideas would dry up. Hitchens suffers from the same fate that have visited many talented writers, Faulkner, Hemingway, to name just a couple, whom Hitchens cannot hold a candle to, even in his best days.â€

Man, did that hit home. A well known songwriter (who shall remain nameless) and friend of mine fits that to a tee. Brilliant writer, just brilliant, but he had to be smashed to write.

I’m sorry, but I have to call bullshit on that one. That is an excuse that people who are sick with alcoholism and addiction use in order to not have to give up the thing that is killing them. I’m a recovering junkie and I can tell you from experience that the stuff I wrote on junk was crap. I just thought it was brilliant. The stuff I am writing with a clear head is in a whole different league. I think Hitchens has bought his own myth about how he can hold it together with a blood alcohol level akin to that of a bottle of Bacardi 151, but as his current output attests, he is losing whatever penetration and intellect he ever had to his addiction. The artist who can’t he can’t create without intoxication is either lying to you or themselves. It is a dangerous myth that keeps people who need help from seeking it.

Okay, stepping down off the soap-box and slowly backing away…

“…Rendering Bush’s assertion more worrisome is this reality: Because so much of what this administration does is shrouded in secrecy, it’s hard to know which laws are being followed and which are being ignored.

That makes it difficult for matters to ripen into a court challenge, notes Boston attorney Harvey Silverglate. ”He is setting it up so that the people hurt by what this administration is doing are unable to get to court, because it is secret,” Silverglate says…”

“…But the president shouldn’t be allowed to quietly disregard or reinterpret provisions of a law he dislikes, for in doing so, he is not protecting his own authority, but rather usurping the legitimate power of Congress. Further, his assumption that it is within his purview to decide whether a law is constitutional treads on ground that is the clear province of the Supreme Court…”

Is there no other route to a Supreme Court slap-down than a suit brought by an “injured party”? And, if Bush can manage to name another Justice, could he have by then inoculated himself against even a Court rebuke?

Don’t back away from that, TRex, you’re spot on. I was a late night caller with the most scintillating personality at 3am, according to me. I was also the best dancer in the room, knocking over tables, and the prettiest, with makeup drifting down my face. You are so right.

God, I’m so glad I’m not that girl anymore.

zennurse, wonder if w. was imbibing the 02 when he looked into Puti- put’s soul. Naw, it was probably nitrous oxide, N20.

Tonight’s Law&Order is loosely based on Plamegate.

angie, cleter, and zennurse -

As I wrote my post above, I thought (in no particluar order) of Harriet Miers, Alberto Gonzales, and others in the Department of Justice who render advisory opinions as the most likely candidates. I think it is prudent to mention Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, since they have apparently been proponents of expanded presidential powers for some years. Are they vicariously exercising those powers?

Oops - that should be in no particular order in my prior post!

They’re going to argue about it soon, Bobby-babe, he’s got 2 in the dock, one is a former Starr star and the Dems are calling him out on it.

As for the signing statement authors, I would bet David Addington also gets in on the fun, at least on issues near and dear to Deadeye’s heart (torture–rendition–gulags–)

I’m not at all concerned with the judge following the law and taking advantage of his right to review the evidence in private. This is, after all, a case where the government is alleging that the people involved have shown little regard for the classified nature of the information to which they were privy.

Also, given the propensity of Team Libby to try their case in the court of public opinion, I think it was incumbent upon the judge to exercise more, not less, restraint with respect to the documents in question, until he knows what it is.

Christy, what a day you’ve had - above and beyond, for sure. The beauty part, at least for me, is that being able to get all that information in three manageable chunks, on the same day, has allowed me to process it in a way that makes it all so much clearer. But what really makes it work is your clear narrative, which distills the complex into the understandable. I work with lawyers, so I know that isn’t always the easiest thing to do!

We are - as always - forever in your debt and hugely grateful. :-)

I think you are right, but I doubt Rummy gets too involved with that stuff. I would think they would have chats about the general philosophy intended, the imperial presidency, and would know that Harriet “Best President EVER!!!!!” and Abu “Can’t talk about that program, only this one” would follow through like good little subjects.

Stephen Parrish, CPA– I do think so. I read today that Cheney tried like hell to usurp Condi’s powers at the NSC and w. granted it… not entirely, but Cheney would preside in w.’s absence. Cheney is the real deal– Dr. Evil. And he and Rummy have been bosom buddies for a long while. See what happened to Powell– not that I forgive him, but lookie there. All the naysayers that have come out since their “retirement” were most likely forced out by the cabal.

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2....._0502.html

zennurse -

That’s a big longer-term worry of mine, that bush will be able to appoint yet another rightwing judge that will back his plenary powers play down the road. He only needs 5 votes to become Emperor.

“babe” LOL! (((((*!*)))))

I think people drink when they cannot get in the creative frame of mind they formerly attained with ease.
This does not mean that the drinking leads to good writing (or music-making, etc.).
In most creative fields, I think the subjective ecstasy of youth does not remain as middle age approaches, or at least lessens. The lesson to learn is that your feeling of brilliance is not in 1-1 correlation with actually brilliant output. So, just work, and whatever talent you have will show.

Stephen P - from below - yes, it’s on Pacer. I don’t have a link, but here’s a cut and paste of the body of the Order (w/o caption, signatures, etc.)

ORDER
On May 5, 2006, this Court will conduct a hearing to address the defendant’s Third
Motion to Compel Discovery Under Rule 16 and Brady. A substantial number of the defendant’s document requests, which are the subject of this motion, are predicated upon the defendant’s desire to respond to each factual allegation in the October 28, 2005 indictment. Accordingly, resolution of many of the issues in the defendant’s motion may depend, at least in part, on which factual allegations in the indictment the government intends to introduce evidence about in its case-in-chief.

Accordingly, it is hereby this 3rd day of May, 2006,

ORDERED that the government should, at the May 5, 2006 hearing, be prepared to specify which factual allegations contained in the indictment it intends to introduce evidence about in its case-in-chief.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I think Christy did a great job simplifying on the other Order/Opinion, but the nit I’ll pick is bc of Frank’s post below thread - there was never a ruling that prevented the Prosecutor from filing ex parte docs. When he started to submit things to the Court in that manner in order to have the Court determine whether his grounds for not turning over to Libby were correct (under basically two statutory approaches) Libby objected and when the Court was inclined to OK the process anyway, Libby argued that IF the Prosecutor submitted the docs to the Court ex parte, he should only submit accompanying filings to the extent necessary to describe the docs. Libby’s argument was that the Prosecutor should not be able to *argue* ex parte the grounds for exclusion. For example, if the grounds were materiality, how could the Prosecutor know what is material to the DEFENDANT’S case? Team Libby said *we* should get a shot at arguing why things might be material instead of there being a bring your own pleading party for two in chambers.

The Judge agreed with Libby on that portion and incorporated it into his first Order. THEN the Prosecutor said — well, actually, there are going to be some very particularlized situations where we pretty much have to be able to proffer some argument with the ex parte submissions and gave some examples. Gov then asked the Court to either clarify that it did not mean THOSE kinds of things, or if it did, to reconsider the Order. Judge agreed with the Prosecutor, so he reconsidered the Order based upon a determination that his prior Order’s limiation on argument had been “clearly erroneous.”

Just to say - there was never any prohibition on ex parte filings. It’s also interesting to speculate on whether that was all purely protective “get it right” paperwork or wether some of the kinds of instances described might be floaters working their way downstream.

Oh, I forgot Addington, neuro, good call.

Hadley? He might be in the naughty corner for hanging out with Fitz at recess.

This Law and Order is pretty good– wonder what ole Fred Thompson is really thinking as he acts and draws a paycheck and serves on the Libby Legal Defense Fund thingie at the same time…

Anne says:

“…Christy, what a day you’ve had - above and beyond, for sure. The beauty part, at least for me, is that being able to get all that information in three manageable chunks, on the same day, has allowed me to process it in a way that makes it all so much clearer. But what really makes it work is your clear narrative, which distills the complex into the understandable…”

You got that right. Major props to Christy. Cannot be overstated.

zennurse says:
May 3rd, 2006 at 7:17 pm

Thank you!!

Angie, cleter, and zennurse -

Another question: didn’t Josh Bolten show Harriet Miers the door? If so, when (and where) was that on the news?

EPU’d a couple of times, but still wondering:

Christy–if you are still here–

You are doing a great job as usual of keeping us informed and up to date. I have a question. Please excuse me if it is already addressed somewhere in today’s comments, I haven’t had time to read them all.

Question: Does the prosecuter have standing to challenge discovery requests by the defendant made to witnesses, and in their possession (as opposed to materials originating with witnesses that the prosecution already has custody of)? I assume Fitz is not going to make any arguments of, say, privacy or privilege or burdensomeness, on Judy’s behalf, but can he argue that production of more and more documents sought from witnesses in Libby’s fishing expedition becomes a burden to the prosecution, as it would need to review any documents so produced, and since they aren’t likely to be relevant anyway,it is a big waste of time? Is the fight over the current round of discovery going to be strictly between Judy Miller and other NYT staff and their attorneys, on one hand, and Libby’s team, on the other, or will Fitzgerald also be involved in that fight?

EL PASO, Texas (AP) — Border authorities inspecting a car crossing into the United States from Mexico uncovered an ordinary, but banned food item hiding in a strange place.

Customs and Border Protection officers and agriculture agents searching a man’s car Sunday found 2 pounds of raw pork sausage. The meat was wrapped in foil inside two disposable baby diapers.

Bringing in pork is prohibited because the meat can harbor hog cholera.

The 27-year-old Colorado man had told the Zaragoza Bridge inspectors he had no fruits, meat or plants to declare.

Inspectors also found seven stalks of raw sugar cane, which is banned because it can carry a pest in its peel.

Authorities seized the items and the man was fined $250, officials said.

When questioned, the man said that he was in training to run for congress.

So, have any of these signing statements been challenged? Where did he come up with a justification for them? In what strict constructionist tome do you find a legal justification? I’m not a Constitutional law expert, but I’m pretty sure that one of the powers the president expressly does NOT have is the ability to magically give himself extra powerness by scrawling bullshit in the margins of official documents.

Can he give himself powers by scrawling on cocktail napkins as well? Can he turn invisible? Can he fly?

Extraconstitutional powers…ACTIVATE!!
Kazzam!

Thesaurus Rex,

“Man, did that hit home. A well known songwriter (who shall remain nameless) and friend of mine fits that to a tee. Brilliant writer, just brilliant, but he had to be smashed to write.

I’m sorry, but I have to call bullshit on that one. That is an excuse that people who are sick with alcoholism and addiction use in order to not have to give up the thing that is killing them. I’m a recovering junkie and I can tell you from experience that the stuff I wrote on junk was crap. I just thought it was brilliant.”

Point taken. On the other hand, this friend of mine did write some brilliant stuff (and only while shit faced). Country music and lyrics (yuk!) but so well known everyone here would recognize it. Of course it’s a crutch, no argument there.

http://select.nytimes.com/gst/.....94DE404482

Bushmiller article about Bolten and Miers

marky-

One of the baddset books I EVER read about creativity is Steven Pressfield’s “The War of Art.”

Check my blog post about it:

http://santafeandthefatcityhor.....f-art.html

Get a copy. It’s inspiring.

State of the Parties:
Republicans: RNC Chairman Ken Mehlman met with Republican members of Congress this week to impress upon them just how bad the opinion polls are looking for them, and warning that they face a possible catastrophe in November.

1) This warning contributed to GOP determination to pass a tax reconciliation bill that will extend the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts beyond their current expiration dates at the end of the decade.

2) On Tuesday, Senate Finance Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and House Ways and Means Chairman Bill Thomas (R-Calif.) were supposed to meet with President Bush in the Oval office to discuss the tax bill, which, if passed, will be one of the most important Republican accomplishments of 2006 leading into the midterm elections. But Grassley bowed out, giving the excuse that he had constituents in town from Iowa. Even in the face of disaster, Republicans seem unable to get their act together.

3) Despite all the media coverage given to the issues of immigration and “corruption,” polls show that the issue currently concerning voters the most — even more than immigration — is the wasteful spending by the Congress. With its vote on Thursday in favor of the rule for the lobby reform bill, the House has taken its first step toward patching up damaged Republican credibility.

4) Republicans will focus in their campaign on the danger of electing Democrats to a majority in Congress. Their catch-word is “dangerous,” a word taken from an ill-considered appearance by Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) on the Senate floor next to a sign (color-coded to match her outfit) stating “Dangerously Incompetent” in large letters. The Stabenow appearance was meant to highlight the administration’s incompetence.

Stephen @ 51– I heard it was a possibility and it was floated about, but no hard news that I have heard of. w. is probably clutching at her ankles desperately as Josh is dragging her out of the West Wing and he is screeching: “no, no, not again! My one true fan. You can’t have her… I am the deciderer and it’s my job to presidate and you gotta let me have her”

T Rex - I know at least one prominent mental health professional who would disagree - he uses the example of musicians using herion to find their “muse.” Doesn’t think it is a good thing, and is in fact indicative of other mental disorders (e.g. severe depression); that is, if the person using in fact didn’t suffer from some underlying mental illness that they could find their muse without the drugs (and alcohol is a drug). Thus, you could accept as true the statement that to “create” the person has to be self medicated as true, doesn’t mean that it is the drugs that lead to the creativity - that is always there - it is how it is “unlocked,” and without it, the persons mental illness prevents it from coming out in a sober state. Thus, in this analyses, let them say that Hitchens needs drink to write b/c otherwise his personal demons get in the way (and the alcohol is not the demon).

On Topic - I think the Judge’s decision is just more support for my strongly held belief (which I do repeat often, I will admit) that defense motions are just going through the motions and the prosecution almost never loses. There should have been no other expectation but that Fitz would win. But that’s me.

BobbyG,
Thanks. I definitely agree with
the “screw healing” advice.

rw, is that the new fax from Mehlman?

“With its vote on Thursday in favor of the rule for the lobby reform bill, the House has taken its first step toward patching up damaged Republican credibility.”

Every paper in the country hates this bill and they should be ashamed if they think it has any reform in it. Louise Slaughter was at kos about this and posted her speech which I missed. I can’t find it now, but she highlighted all the important things it doesn’t do, underscoring that it has no teeth for the real issues.

marky -

It’s really a great little book, bro’.

Dems voting for the reform bill

Barrow
Boren
Boswell
Cuellar (who is begging for another primary challenge in 2008)
Marshall
Matheson
Melancon
Taylor (MS)

zennurse says:
May 3rd, 2006 at 7:48 pm

You will find a link to it on the Huffington Post:

http://www.humaneventsonline.c....._enpr.html

On the graphic: “(Statue of Winged Victory of Samothrace, Marble, h. 3.28 m (11 ft), found on the island of Samothrace, sculpted around 190 BC, Musee du Louvre, Paris.”

Otherwise known as “Nike” of sportswear fame.

Thesaurus Rex,

“I’m sorry, but I have to call bullshit on that one. That is an excuse that people who are sick with alcoholism and addiction use in order to not have to give up the thing that is killing them. I’m a recovering junkie and I can tell you from experience that the stuff I wrote on junk was crap. I just thought it was brilliant.â€

Just to clarify, that “someone” I know isn’t me ; ) And Hitchens is a moron, one of the reasons I didn’t renew my Vanity Fair subscription.

BobbyG– is your wife home safe and sound? Hope your enjoying a nice evening.

that is you’re not your… maybe I need something other than constant comment…

See that, Stephen, that’s just what I was talking about!

Thanks, it’s a good one and I’ll never figure out kos.

early night for me, friends, play nice.
See you tomorrow.

angie -

Yeah, thanks for asking. Little Ms. Hottie is home from rainy Milwaukee, yummy. Missed her.

Here’s lyrics from a song I wrote for her for our 25th (think John Prine on Quervo):

Silver

I blink my eyes,
It’s been twenty five years;
Barrels of laughs
And a bucket of tears.
We’ve blowed a few tires,
Stripped a few gears,
But, baby, just gimme
Twenty five more years.

Now, we both know
There’s no guarantee,
’Cept the one at the End,
Good Lordy, me.
But, under the table
And under the sheets,
The world’s OK
When I can feel them feets.

We’ve got the silver,
Goin’ for gold.
Never been boring,
Never gets old.
Since the first day I met ’cha
I been totally sold.
Now, the silver’s in the pocket
And we’re goin’ for Gold.

Ninety one hundred
And thirty one nights.
A mess of good lovin’
And eight or nine fights.
You set a big fire burnin’,
Doused all my fears,
Pretty baby, just gimme
Twenty five more years.

We’ve got the silver,
Goin’ for gold.
Never gets jaded,
Never ever gets cold.
Just a couple of kiddies
With a few gray hairs,
I’ll be chasin’ ya
Long as I can climb them stairs.

We’ve got the silver,
Goin’ for gold.
Never been boring,
Never gets old.
Since the first day I met ’cha
I been totally sold.
Now, the silver’s in the bank,
Savin’ up for Gold.

rwcole - hog cholera sounds slightly better than something else you can get from eating contaminated pork in the Rio Grande Valley - neurocysticercosis. My 3rd and 4th years of med school were spent in El Paso and surrounding communities. It was eye opening. Saw a lot of things you hardly ever see in typical US cities. Lots of babies being born at Thomason hospital as well. My 3rd yr, I delivered 25 in 6 weeks ! “empuje…descansa…respire…” All of the deliveries were essentially teens who had crossed the border 4 blocks away and arrived in labor. I give the young moms and Mother Nature the credit, however.

Stephen Parrish, CPA @ 7:06 pm (#19) - Thanks for the link. It appears that there is a charming local custom in Boston requiring editorial writers to read their own newspapers.

And then there are manic depressive artists who can’t create when they take their meds.

oops - still OT, but to clarify, ingesting ova from fecal contaminated water is how you the pork tapeworm in a place like your brain. That said, it’s not surprising Hepatitis A is endemic downstream from Juarez/El Paso. btw, I never witnesed a Hog cholera Code Brown.

sweeeeet, BobbyG, very lovely. ;)

btw, coincidentally, my favorite couple in the entire universe celebrate 52 years of devotion and love and marriage tomorrow.

joyeux anniversaire de mariage!

manic depression is different. People who take lithium have a flatter affect than NORMAL people, let alone manic depressives—it’s no wonder they can’t create on the drugs.
Same thing with anti-psychotics, but 100 times worse—you just can’t think on those. No, i’m not speaking from personal experience, but I’ve seen plenty. I’m only saying this because there is a perception that psychiatric drugs restore normal function. That just isn’t the case.

Damn good work, Christy. Yay Fitz. (Can you tell I’m exhausted? LOL)

Barrels of laughs
And a bucket of tears.
We’ve blowed a few tires,
Stripped a few gears,
But, baby, just gimme
Twenty five more years.

That’s effing brilliant, BG!

Who knew you had such a soul full of poetry?

I could share some of my lyrics about my ex for you all here, but I think we might end up reading more like LGF and Malkin. So, in the interest of decency laws and the high tenor of the discourse here, I shall refrain.

Aheh, I said “refrain” in a sentence about songwriting. High-five me, punaise!

TRex– you also used tenor in a song about songwriting– that’s a two-fer!

Thesaurus Rex,

I haven’t seen my songwriter buddy since the 80’s, and I just found this…Oh, man…

http://www.chron.com/content/c...../mack.html

Muzzy 76 - I read a novel where the wife was doing in her husband by something like that tapeworm in the brain thing BLECH. I can’t remember details bc I couldn’t make myself read them and my memory is weird that way. ;)

btw OT but for anyone interested, here is a link to the letter Conyers and his Dem Pals on the House Judiciary Committee have been sending out the last few years.

I paticulary noticed that he sent out a “follow up” letter 4/20/06 w/re: to requested investigations into how the CIA leak was handled initially. http://www.house.gov/judiciary.....r42006.pdf

Including a request into an investigation about Ashcroft and how he handled recusal (Conyers is also the one following up on the Ashcroft references in the Abramoff emails - I know the site hero ;-) thought back in Patriot Act Roadshow days that people were awfully tough on poor AG Ashcroft, who couldn’t catch a break if it was tossed by a 12 yo girl throwing underhand, but I gotta say — Go Get Em JCJr.!

In an earlier letter, cross referenced, Conyers had spelled out a few thing in addition to the Card and 12 hour issue. http://www.house.gov/judiciary.....r72605.pdf
This may all be old news to you guys, but some of it surprised me. In addition to the delay (likely more than 12 hours bc likely more advance notice on what was coming down the pike) he mentions:

On July 24, 2003, CIA attorney leaves phone message for chief of counterespionage section of DOJ, noting concern over outing of Plame; not returned.

July 30, 2003, CIA reports to Criminal division of DOJ possible violation of criminal law from the exposure - no reply.

September 5, 2003, CIA faxes concerns to DOJ.

September 16, 2003, CIA advises DOJ that they have completed their own investigation and provides a memo detailing results and requesting FBI undertake criminal investigation

September 29, 67 days after initial contacts expressing concern, DOJ responds and tells CIA the COunterespionage Div has requested FBI to undertake investigation.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Question for anybody in the know: if the FBI or any other agency with investigative/police powers obtained evidence during an unrelated investigation, could DoJ retrieve and make use of it in the course of an investigation like the CIA Leak case?

Example: In October 2005, former U.S. Marine L. Aragoncillo of Philippine heritage arrested for spying in the OVP; during the course of the investigation, the FBI goes through the contents of computers in the OVP. Allegedly most of the material obtained by Aragoncillo was pulled from government computers and sent by email to persons opposing Philippine president Arroyo.

Savvy? What’s the chances that something germane to the CIA Leak case was in the same computers and in the same emails?

Oh, gosh, Cozumel. I’m so sorry. 51 is way, way, way too young to leave this world.

It’s just a topic I get particularly steamed about. I have watched so many bright and talented friends drown their uniqueness and talent in addictive chemicals because they believed they needed it to “be creative”. I’m one of the lucky ones, gaining on a year of clean time. Most of my friends and my ex lover are not so lucky.

Nuevo thread aqui!

BobbyG: or maybe Tom Waits or John Hyatt?
BTW i think it’s Cuervo (no Q)

All you folks about the drug/alcohol thing and creativity… some people process these things differently than others. for those of an artistic persuasion, writing or painting or playing a horn while high can work if you’re not trying to be precise. you can get an interesting stream-of-consciousness riff going or come up with some combination of stuff you might not think up otherwise. i wouldn’t edit in that condition though.
however, once the use starts taking control of your life, that’s a different brand of ear wax entirely…….

Christy, please, if you read this, would you please submit your Plame analyses to the State Bar of Texas so I can claim some CLE hours for devouring them all? You are AMAZING.

“I Cogitate
Vanity Fair does Patrick Fitzgerald
By Cogitator | bio

The January 2006 issue of Vanity Fair has a David Margolick-written lengthy look at Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald. The more I read it, the more I liked Fitzgerald and his values and actions.

And that isn’t solely because he refuses to be intimidated by the ‘vanity fair’ of the Bush Administration.

Patrick Fitzgerald will not be sucked into the Bush/Rove/Cheney vortex and could care less what Bob (Savin’ My Ass) Woodward, Victoria (damn, where’s my White House talking points memo) Toensing and Judith (I know Ahmed Chalabi and Patrick Fitzgerald can’t hold a candle to his truthiness) Miller have to say about him.”………….

http://americaabroad.tpmcafe.com/node/29444

Valerie Plame Seeks Book Deal

*
E-Mail
* Print
* Reprints
* Save

Article Tools Sponsored By
By MOTOKO RICH
Published: May 4, 2006

Valerie Plame Wilson, the Central Intelligence Agency covert officer whose name was publicly disclosed three years ago, is shopping a book proposal among a small group of publishers, according to two people familiar with the project.
Skip to next paragraph
Readers’ Opinions
Forum: Book News and Reviews

Both people were granted anonymity because their publishing companies have signed nondisclosure agreements about the content of the proposal.

The leak of Ms. Wilson’s name, which first appeared in a column by Robert D. Novak, the syndicated columnist, produced a full-scale Washington scandal. Investigations are continuing into the identity of the person who told Mr. Novak, and possibly others in the media, about Ms. Wilson.

snip>

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05.....ref=slogin

Ginsburg: Congress’ Watchdog Plan ‘Scary’

By GINA HOLLAND, Associated Press WriterTue May 2, 8:16 PM ET
Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said Tuesday that a Republican proposal in Congress to set up a watchdog over the federal courts is a “really scary idea.”

Ginsburg told a gathering of the American Bar Association that lawyers should stick up for judges when they are criticized by congressional leaders.

“My sense now is that the judiciary is under assault in a way that I haven’t seen before,” she said.”…………..

http://tinyurl.com/gfpvj

Can we try them for treason yet? Can we, huh huh? What’s the penalty for that again? Impeachment my ass

coming full circle:

If you have never seen the Victory of Samothrace at the Louvre, in Paris, the way you come upon it is much like Fitzgerald’s investigation: climbing a long staircase, suddenly, you look up and there,looming overhead, this incredibly glowing, as if lit internally by a mysterious light, Nike. One simply gasps in awe at the beauty of the sculpture. And, you have a moment of artistic truth. It is one of the greatest artistic statments of ancient Greece. Might Fitzgerald be creating, for us, one of the defining moments in our Constitutional history?

Rayne at 84

Yes they can. You have to represent the info to the new grand jury. If you have ever heard the term “spin off case”, it’s when you discover evidence of a crime while investigating another crime.

margaret (94) — yes, Winged Victory is every bit as you describe; she slowly takes your breath away , sans head and hands, in spite of those missing appendages. One can only marvel at what she was fully equipped; I wonder that she would have fit that landing upon the stairs had she been complete.

looseheadprop (95) — in this case, I wonder two things: was the Aragoncillo situation a put-up, a method by which the OVP attempted to obstruct justice by removing evidence while stroking the Arroyo administration…or if not a put-up, could there be evidence gathered by the FBI that Fitz could use in the investigation and prosecution of the CIA Leak case? Food for thought.

wow. Judge Walton is really a standup guy. what a nice way to say “I’m sorry.” No harm, no foul.

Didn’t you have a French Harpie in sensible shoes screaming, “NO FLASH PHOTOGRAPHY!” when you took that picture?
I did.
I have exactly the same shot from exactly the same angle.