John Edwards has been vexed by questions about his cash-in stint with a hedge fund, but he had a ready answer for the AP:
WASHINGTON — Democrat John Edwards said Tuesday he worked for a hedge fund between presidential campaigns to learn about financial markets and their relationship to poverty — and to make money, too.
In an interview with The Associated Press, the former North Carolina senator said his yearlong, part-time position with Fortress Investment Group helped his understanding of the connection, but he has more to learn.
Edwards has made eradicating poverty a focus of his second White House bid.
Edwards, a multimillionaire after years as a trial lawyer, would not disclose how much he got paid for a year of consulting beginning in October 2005. He said the amount will be revealed when he releases his financial disclosure forms due May 15.
Asked if he had to join a hedge fund to learn about financial markets, Edwards replied, "How else would I have done it?"
He said he considered going to an investment firm such as Goldman Sachs, but Fortress was the most natural fit. Presented with the suggestion that he could have taken a university class instead, he said, "That's true."
"It was primarily to learn, but making money was a good thing, too," the 2004 vice presidential nominee said in an hourlong interview with AP reporters and editors.
Left unreported by the AP - John Edwards built his 28,000 square foot home to learn about homelessness in America, and he got a $400 haircut to learn about the emerging baby-boomer crisis of male pattern baldness.
Must we endure 18 more months of this (and possibly four, or even eight years)? One of Bill Clinton's many infuriating aspects was his unshakable belief that that he could sell any BS, however outrageous, to the rubes. If Mr. Edwards is positioning himself as the say-anything heir to Mr. I Didn't Inhale, I can't bear to watch.
That said, although Edwards' answer is rubbish, his concept is sound - there really are socially responsible investment funds out there and I suspect an earnest pol could learn something about the interplay between financial markets and good intentions by working at one.
However, Edwards chose to go to work for Fortress Investment Group (10-K), a perfectly respectable and credible group that makes no claim at all to emphasizing social responsibility in its investing.
Whatever. Edwards wanted to add to his pile, and there is nothing wrong with that - I am quite sure $15-50 million (est.) ain't what is used to be. But please don't tell us this was just an exercise in continuing education.
"Asked if he had to join a hedge fund to learn about financial markets, Edwards replied, 'How else would I have done it?'"
Hillary Clinton would tell him all he had to do was read the Wall Street Journal. Worked for her.
Nevertheless, this transparent fraud continues to poll quite well in head-to-heads against Rudy, McCain et al. Can anyone imagine this twit as President of the United States?
Posted by: Other Tom | May 09, 2007 at 10:57 AM
Huh! Shows how stupid I am: I've always wanted to learn about financial markets but it never occurred to me to join a hedge fund. And although I read the editorial page of the WSJ religiously, I don't seem to get much smarter about financial markets. Maybe Hillary and I are on different pages?
Posted by: anduril | May 09, 2007 at 11:02 AM
TM, H & R noted yesterday that THIS hedge fund is hq'd in the tax-free haven of the Caymen Islands, something not disclosed in the original report. \
Maybe like the Kennedy's (tax free trust funds in Tahitit) and Heinz (tax free munis) etc., he is studying how much money can be tax sheltered before the poor notice.
Posted by: clarice | May 09, 2007 at 11:13 AM
clarice, I just put on my special read-between-the-lines spectacles and reread that. Are you suggesting that Heinz and Edwards and the Kennedy's are somehow cynical? That the class warfare rhetoric is--what? Rhetoric? I can't bear the disillusion--I'll have to stomp my specs!
Y'know, no matter how many times you get your face rubbed in it, it really is breathtaking.
Posted by: anduril | May 09, 2007 at 11:20 AM
Maybe it is just age but the older I get the more I believe that a decent society cannot exist without a strong and vibrant middle class who maintain the very habits of mind and traits that the very rich despise. Representation w/out taxation means those of the very rich who seek political office have a large class of people to enlist in their war against the middle class. (The old grasshopper versus the ant.)
Posted by: clarice | May 09, 2007 at 11:52 AM
Last Sunday--Chris Wallace asked Edwards about the Cayman Island connection directly. Edwards responded that he did not know--while he was with the fund--about this and admitted it was not a good move on his part.
Posted by: glasater | May 09, 2007 at 12:01 PM
I really think what I find the most amazing trait on the left is what they can say with a straight face. You really have to give them some points for that. Edwards, Obama, Reid, Pelosi, Hillary - they all have advanced degrees in lying convincingly.
It's a heck of a major.
Posted by: Jane | May 09, 2007 at 12:03 PM
From the WaPo article with the Cayman info...and of course....this is priceless...
Posted by: Jeff Dobbs | May 09, 2007 at 12:04 PM
Leave aside the nonsense about poverty, and working for a hedge fund would indeed be one king hell way of learning about financial markets. What the hedge fund gets out of paying a "consultant" who doesn't know the business is less clear. (Were Edwards part of the Republican climate of corruption, to ask the question would be to answer it. As it stands, it's a deep mystery.)
Posted by: Paul Zrimsek | May 09, 2007 at 12:06 PM
"Representation w/out taxation"
Second time in as many days that I've seen that phrase--and I like it a lot! You realize, of course, that's revolutionary talk.
Posted by: anduril | May 09, 2007 at 12:12 PM
Next up. Edwards plans to become a slumlord to learn about inner city poverty and to join a lacrosse team to learn about rape victims.
Posted by: Lew Clark | May 09, 2007 at 12:15 PM
Last Sunday--Chris Wallace asked Edwards about the Cayman Island connection directly. Edwards responded that he did not know--while he was with the fund--about this and admitted it was not a good move on his part.
No surprise. Edwards is sitting at the defense table on this one, and his ideas about due diligence have changed accordingly.
Posted by: Paul Zrimsek | May 09, 2007 at 12:16 PM
Lew:
Next up. Edwards plans to become a slumlord to learn about inner city poverty
Well, Edwards could perhaps tap Tony Rezko since Obama is trying to distance himself from him...might need to act quick, though, in case Rezko is convicted...
Posted by: Jeff Dobbs | May 09, 2007 at 12:38 PM
What is Edwards trying to learn here...rap music or yoga?
Posted by: Jeff Dobbs | May 09, 2007 at 12:43 PM
H & R Since you haven't apparently, I submitted a blog on this, calling Edwards a Hedgehog.
Posted by: clarice | May 09, 2007 at 12:45 PM
http://apnews.myway.com/image/20070509/Bush.sff_WHRE102_20070509084300.html?date=20070509&docid=D8P0TR200>Someone has a way-back machine. Check out the date.
Posted by: Sue | May 09, 2007 at 12:52 PM
Yes, I didn't do anything for Edwards.
I tried to push something out on Obama yesterday, got home tried to get on the computer and was intercepted by an unruly mob of 3 people desperate for my attention.
(Don't tell Obama, but he's a little lower on the priority scale)
Actually, I did submit something yesterday but it was half-baked and stunk which, come to think of it would be a pretty good representation of Obama himself...we'll see what time permits today
Posted by: Jeff Dobbs | May 09, 2007 at 12:53 PM
Heh, Sue...well, what did happen on May 9, 2004?
Googling we find a few things...
Posted by: Jeff Dobbs | May 09, 2007 at 12:58 PM
h&r:
Are you sure your googling is work safe?
Posted by: Appalled Moderate | May 09, 2007 at 01:26 PM
No. But I have dirt on everyone above me in the food chain, so....
Posted by: Jeff Dobbs | May 09, 2007 at 01:34 PM
Clinton did it, too!
Posted by: manys | May 09, 2007 at 02:58 PM
Wow. Sarkozy in his first speech to France as president-elect.
Read the post at Volokh where this is quoted from. Sarkozy deviated from his written prepared text on several occasions, including this entire paragraph....wow.
David Kopel ends the post at Volokh with:
Posted by: Jeff Dobbs | May 09, 2007 at 03:22 PM
Hmmmmm, back to the topic of the post...
[Edwards] said the amount will be revealed when he releases his financial disclosure forms due May 15.
WHOA! Just caught that.
This whole millions of dollars earned at a hedge fund company and hundreds of thousands of dollars raised for his campaign there and offshore tax shelters and whatnot...IS ALL JUST A RUSE.
Read between the lines and you will clearly see that the May 15 filing will have more extravagent hair, nail and skin care expenses in it and he is just trying to throw everyone off with a red herring.
Keep focused people. Eyes on the ball.
Posted by: Jeff Dobbs | May 09, 2007 at 03:34 PM
I posted the following the other day and still feel it's a valid view of Edwards....
Today's insane quote from Edwards...
Presidential candidate John Edwards said Monday it's silly to suggest that his wealth and expensive tastes have hurt his credibility as an advocate for the poor.
"Would it have been better if I had done well and didn't care?" Edwards asked.
Mr. Edwards...Ya think?
Bill Gates have more money in his change bowl than you and he doesn't get 400 dollar haircuts..
I have been blessed with money also..The vanity of a 400.00 cut totally destroyed your street cred pal..
and because you can't even see that amazes everyone I know..
Spend 20.00 to style your hair and you can donate that amount to feed a thousand African children and then..maybe then, we'll buy your lame party line of 2 america's..no wait..It's too late. No one will swallow that now. Your 15 minutes are up..
****************************
My distaste of edwards runs deep..but some of you have called him a liar here.
Although i detest the man it's not fair to call him a liar just like it's not fair saying bush lied about Iraq.
If Edwards believes his nonsensical stump speeches then so be it but i don't think labeling pols we dislike as 'liars' is right.
Perhaps a better expression would be just 'flat wrong'.
Posted by: hoosierhoops | May 09, 2007 at 04:18 PM
Hoosierhoops, I for one have not called him a liar. I'm not aware of anyone having done so on this site, but I may well be wrong because I haven't by any means read everything posted here.
While I don't call him a liar I do, very lustily, call him a fraud, a hypocrite, a foppish dilettante and an idle poseur. Will that do?
Posted by: Other Tom | May 09, 2007 at 04:23 PM
Yeah hypocrite works for me. But it sure seems like most Democrat pols fit that moniker. But only a few do it with quite as much chutzpah as the silky one.
Posted by: gmax | May 09, 2007 at 04:30 PM
I'll call him a liar ---for saying that he consulted for that hedge fund to learn anything about poverty. There!
H & R that Sarkozy quote is fantastic.
Posted by: clarice | May 09, 2007 at 04:45 PM
While I don't call him a liar I do, very lustily, call him a fraud, a hypocrite, a foppish dilettante and an idle poseur. Will that do?
Posted by: Other Tom |
Yes OT..I suppose that will do fine in edwards case. ;)
The thing is..I really think he believes in what he is saying...
perhaps delutional is closier to the facts before us.
And Clarice..I must admit you make a strong case for intentional deception on edwards part...As usual you bring clarity to the table..I just hate the idea of people throwing around the word liar in politics.
It gets old when all i hear is bush lied..blah,blah...
H&R: when's the book coming out? you rock dude...
Posted by: hoosierhoops | May 09, 2007 at 05:01 PM
The thing is..I really think he believes in what he is saying
All the more reason he should never be considered a viable candidate for president. However, I don't believe he believes it. He says what he thinks the jury wants to hear. And from the looks of his house, he was good at it.
Posted by: Sue | May 09, 2007 at 05:08 PM
As H & R's biggest fan (excspt for his certainly adoring family) here are his words in neon (well on NRO's the Corner)
"Re: Oooops [Jonah Goldberg]
From a reader:
Oh, sure, Obama was wrong about the KS story — but piece together his thinking, and perhaps that many dead isn't entirely impossible...
What if the threat of the "Tyranny of Oil" which Obama has likened to the tyranny of fascism and communism were to unite in an alliance with "Cynicism" which Obama has identified as our biggest enemy? And heaven help us if that unholy union were to engage in the "Verbal Violence" which Obama pointed us to in the wake of the Virginia Tech tragedy.
A conflation of all his abstract analogies would create an unimaginable toll, one that would create casualities in numbers like the stars in the sky or the grains of sand on a beach or like the number of angels dancing on the head of a pin or the number of roads a man must walk down before they call him a man or something.
05/09 10:05 AM"
Posted by: clarice | May 09, 2007 at 05:48 PM
The Democrats have cleaned up in Washington.
Posted by: PeterUK. | May 09, 2007 at 05:48 PM
From TBOTW:
Nowhere in the dispatch does Edwards explain what his hedge-fund work taught him about poverty. Reader Robert Paci notes:
I work in the hedge-fund industry and have yet to learn anything about poverty from the experience. In fact, I went into the into the field to avoid poverty. I think almost everyone in the industry sees it my way. Maybe Edwards knows something we don't.
Posted by: clarice | May 09, 2007 at 05:55 PM
Clarice,
"Nowhere in the dispatch does Edwards explain what his hedge-fund work taught him about poverty."
Poverty,something that money can't buy.
Posted by: PeterUK. | May 09, 2007 at 06:15 PM
Someone, probably instapundit was saying that there are hedge funds out there that commit to certain causes, like education or alleviating poverty and stuff like that. The Hedge fund Edwards went to school on is not tied to any cause except making as much money as possible.
I think you can feel pretty comfortable calling him a liar at this point.
Posted by: Jane | May 09, 2007 at 06:39 PM
Thank you, Jane.(Remember he was heading up the Poverty Center at the time he was "consulting" for this Cayman Island tax-sheltered hedge fund. A liar, a posuer and a hyporcrite. Hedgehog.
Posted by: clarice | May 09, 2007 at 06:52 PM
Media airbrushing Obama.
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2007/05/the_media_declares_omerta_on_o.html>Airbrushing
Posted by: clarice | May 09, 2007 at 07:13 PM
My favorite thing about Fortress's relationship with it's intern, John Edwards, was when the WaPo published the donations Fortress employees had made to the Edwards campaign.
People were maxing out, sometimes writing two checks for several thousand dollars on the same day. Secretaries were giving $2300.
And one guy donated $10.
You don't think there was any pressure from the management to donate, do you?
Posted by: Maybeex | May 09, 2007 at 07:17 PM
The Kennedy family should give one of its Profiles in Courage awards to the dude who gave the $10.
Posted by: Other Tom | May 09, 2007 at 07:22 PM
While I don't call him a liar I do, very lustily, call him a fraud, a hypocrite, a foppish dilettante and an idle poseur. Will that do?
Posted by: Other Tom | May 09, 2007 at 04:23 PM
A conflation of all his abstract analogies would create an unimaginable toll, one that would create casualities in numbers like the stars in the sky or the grains of sand on a beach or like the number of angels dancing on the head of a pin or the number of roads a man must walk down before they call him a man or something.
hit and run
I think you can feel pretty comfortable calling him a liar at this point.
Posted by: Jane | May 09, 2007 at 06:39 PM
A liar, a posuer and a hyporcrite. Hedgehog.
Posted by: clarice | May 09, 2007 at 06:52 PM
Maybe we should just leave the question of the proper moniker to Ann Coulter? My take: never trust someone with hair like that. The guy probably spends more time in front of a mirror than the world class narcissist Clinton.
Why didn't I say that:
Poverty,something that money can't buy.
Posted by: PeterUK. | May 09, 2007 at 06:15 PM
Posted by: anduril | May 09, 2007 at 07:43 PM
From the BBC, no less:
"The world's biggest economy topped the rankings of 55 nations compiled in the Swiss-based IMD World Competitiveness Yearbook 2007.
"Singapore was the second most competitive nation, moving up a place from last year, followed by Hong Kong, Luxembourg and Denmark.
"Britain came in 20th place in the rankings, unchanged from 2006.
"The least competitive nation was Venezuela, whose government has recently embarked on a forced nationalisation drive."
Go ahead, H&R--blame it on Bush.
Posted by: Other Tom | May 09, 2007 at 07:50 PM
Well, since the Edwards campaign has very little to do with the current election (fat chance in hell)... Let's say that Clarice will win the nomination for the Republicans... Oh well, just wistful thinking...
Sorry Clarice...
Posted by: Deagle | May 09, 2007 at 08:11 PM
Don't be so hard on Pink Sapphire Hedgehog.
His quote was, "to learn about financial markets and their relationship to poverty "
He certainly could have learned of the inverse relationship between access to and participation in financial markets via employment in a hedge fund and poverty.
Sure, we can scoff that that seems ridiculously obvious, but he's probably a kinsethetic learner.
Posted by: Jeff Dobbs | May 09, 2007 at 08:40 PM
Other Tom:
Go ahead, H&R--blame it on Bush.
Oh definitely. I Blame Bush. BDS has been a large contributing factor in driving Chavez literally stark raving mad.
Posted by: Jeff Dobbs | May 09, 2007 at 08:47 PM
PUK:
Poverty,something that money can't buy.
Heh.
Try this thought experiment...
Working as an ambulance chasing trial lawyer, a pandering class-warfare promoting politician and a grubby hedge fund manager has left Edwards with a poverty of [fill in the blank].
[VIMH: But he grew up the son of a mill worker!]
Well he's a son of a something all right.
Posted by: Jeff Dobbs | May 09, 2007 at 08:53 PM
"Working as an ambulance chasing trial lawyer, a pandering class-warfare promoting politician and a grubby hedge fund manager has left Edwards with a poverty of [fill in the blank]."
Obvious the man has acquired poverty offsets.
Posted by: PeterUK. | May 09, 2007 at 09:06 PM
"One of Bill Clinton's many infuriating aspects was his unshakable belief that that he could sell any BS, however outrageous, to the rubes."
I cut the slob some slack, because it ain't bragging if you can do it. And boy, did he! The "sophisticates" were gulled even more than the rubes.
Cordially...
Posted by: Rick | May 09, 2007 at 09:14 PM
Thanks but I'm passing, Deagle. I'd rather right the Obama book with H & R.
Posted by: clarice | May 09, 2007 at 09:48 PM
Hehe... Oh well, a good book by H % R would a poor substitute. Sorry to hear that you are not running...(heh). Keep the chin up...I do love your input...
Posted by: Deagle | May 09, 2007 at 10:05 PM
He was for the hedge fund before he was against the hedge fund. Now cut the nonsense and let's go windsurfing.
Nick Kasoff
The Thug Report
Posted by: Nick Kasoff - The Thug Report | May 09, 2007 at 10:19 PM
OK, folks. I mean, I hate to say I told you so or anything like that, but here we go already with the stuff about how the Fort Dix Six would never have been a problem if it weren't for--you guessed it, us.
This is from the NYTimes:
"He [one of the Six] wanted the informer to lead the attack, according to a federal complaint. 'I am at your services,' the young man is quoted as telling the informer, who had presented himself as an Egyptian with a military background.
"That moment, recorded on tape and submitted in federal court this week in Camden, N.J., as the authorities charged six Muslim men in the plot, captures something of the complexity of using informers in terror investigations. The informer, sent to penetrate a loose group of men who liked to talk about jihad and fire guns in the woods, had come to be seen by the suspects as the person who might actually show them how an act of terror could be carried off.
"Indeed, over the months that followed, as the targets of the investigation spoke with a sometimes unfocused zeal about waging holy war, the informer, one of two used in the investigation, would tell them that he could get them the sophisticated weapons they wanted. He would accompany them on surveillance missions to military installations, debating the risks, and when the men looked ready to purchase the weapons, it was the informer who seemed to be pushing the idea of buying the deadliest items, startling at least one of the suspects."
Get it? These guys just like to shoot off guns in the woods. Did they ever pose any kind of danger? Of course not--at least not until that nasty informant pushed them over the edge. Anyway, it's all very "complex."
Trust me, this is just the beginning...
Posted by: Other Tom | May 09, 2007 at 10:52 PM
H & R,
I think a series of childrens books on the Pink Saphire is in order:
Who's Afraid of BHO?
Pinky and the Beast
Pinky on the Trail etc.
Sure, it's a limited market, but Pinky's story needs to be told.
To very gullible children.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | May 09, 2007 at 11:01 PM
Did anyone listen to RUSH today?
The Fort Dix terrorists could be among the Albanians Clinton brought to the U.S. from Kosovo. Very interesting connection!
Looks like an article only our beloved Clarice would do justice.
Posted by: ann | May 09, 2007 at 11:11 PM
Mexican Department Of Defense Acknowledge UFOs In Mexico
Todos Santos near Cabo is a UFO hotspot...haven't seen any here in PV
The thing is..I really think he believes in what he is saying...
yikes...I hope you are kidding
Posted by: windansea | May 09, 2007 at 11:21 PM
OT
Checkout votevets.org. Someone needs to "Swift Boat" crazy Major General John Batiste. He is nuts.
By the way, I love your posts. You remind me of my father-in-law. He was a great man and a Marine.
Posted by: ann | May 09, 2007 at 11:22 PM
Other Tom-
I admit it. All it would take for me to get involved in a plan to shoot up an Army base is for someone to just step up and organize the darn thing.
I think anybody who says they wouldn't jump in and pledge his allegiance to this Egyptian-looking guy that promises AK-47s is just fooling himself.
Posted by: Maybeex | May 10, 2007 at 12:09 AM
I dunno, but I am starting to get the feeling that Bolton and Wolfie intended on these things -- as in their mission was suspected to be short, it's been the "sunlight" mission...
George Will
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB117874835855997710.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
Posted by: topsecretk9 | May 10, 2007 at 02:40 AM
And seriously ...can we appoint a special prosecutor to go after the "leakers" and Blumenthal like smear merchants?
Where are the poor delicate little petal PLAME apologists? OH? the really like smears? Frauds? We thought so.
Posted by: topsecretk9 | May 10, 2007 at 03:00 AM
Sorry -- link
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/09/AR2007050902501_2.html
Ahem.
Posted by: topsecretk9 | May 10, 2007 at 03:06 AM
Just thought of a new group for JOMers
TWIST in honor of of the "literary flair" aficionado Wilson's favorite lie
TAXPAYERS WANT INTELLIGENT SANE TRUTHTELLERS! dot org
Posted by: topsecretk9 | May 10, 2007 at 03:27 AM
I've missed the whole "H&R and Clarice write a book about Obama" thing. I approve, of course, altho I think you should expand it to include the Pink Sapphire and Hillary. And then of course it will be banned for being one-sided.
Will you guys autograph my copy/
Posted by: Jane | May 10, 2007 at 06:12 AM
There are two Americas: One is on the North American mainland, and the other is in the Caribbean south of Jamaica.
Posted by: Paul Zrimsek | May 10, 2007 at 07:39 AM
About the book.
I'm currently negotiating.
A publisher for an advance. And a publicist for Obama to keep quiet.
The publisher is offering $14.67
The publicist, 3 cases of beer.
The book looks like a longshot at this point.
Posted by: Jeff Dobbs | May 10, 2007 at 07:48 AM
I'll give you 4 cases of beer and a bottle of good tequila to write it.
Posted by: Jane | May 10, 2007 at 08:01 AM
Wouldn't the corollary to Edwards' "understanding poverty by earning millions at a hedge fund" be this:
"Understanding wealth by giving it all away to live as an unemployed homeless person on the street" ?
Come on, John. Give it a try! LOL
Posted by: fdcol63 🇺🇸 | May 10, 2007 at 08:23 AM
fdcol63:
"Understanding wealth by giving it all away to live as an unemployed homeless person on the street" ?
Wait. You may be on to something here. But frame it so that it would resonate in today's pop culture.
Isn't there a reality show where two families switch wives? And usually it's like a rich family and a poor family?
Some poor, destitute wife could go live in the Edwards mansion and John could go live with some poor, destitute husband as his wife for a month.
No spa treatments, no facials, no manicures or pedicures, not fancy hairstyling -- FOR AN ENTIRE MONTH.
Film the whole thing.
Posted by: Jeff Dobbs | May 10, 2007 at 09:09 AM
Jane:
I'll give you 4 cases of beer and a bottle of good tequila to write it.
OK, but you have to give it to me upfront, and I won't sign any contracts.
And if you're worried about me just trying to get the alcohol without any intention to write the book...don't worry, I have every intention and will never stop thinking about writing the book.
Just like I have every intention of putting in that patio off our deck and never stop thinking about it.
Posted by: Jeff Dobbs | May 10, 2007 at 09:15 AM
OT
Judiciary committee hearing w/Gonzales is on C-SPAN 3 live.
Conyers can be very entertaining.
Posted by: SunnyDay | May 10, 2007 at 09:55 AM
FRED THOMPSON: "Oh, to be sure, the French media hates us, but there are a lot of people who say ours does too. Regardless, Sarkozy’s victory has sent shock waves through the world’s media centers."
Has anyone else noticed that Fred Thompson publishes something almost every day, and that it is always interesting and about something topical that we care about.
Contrast that to Barack, Hillary and the Pink Sapphire.
(Thompson article is from NRO)
Posted by: Jane | May 10, 2007 at 10:02 AM
OT: Wolfowitz.
Here's another interesting take on what was the immediate trigger of the bank putsch against him. Graft Fights Back
Posted by: alcibiades | May 10, 2007 at 10:05 AM
Fred's got a gig with ABC radio...(that NRO picks up)
The Fred Thompson Report
Posted by: Jeff Dobbs | May 10, 2007 at 10:07 AM
I tell you, Fred Rocks.
Oh and I'm considering your offer H&R - sipping tequila as I do. I seem to have this bottle hanging around.
Posted by: Jane | May 10, 2007 at 10:08 AM
I keep telling typepad to keep me signed up for 2 weeks, but it has a different idea of 2 weeks than I do, apparently. (More like 15 minutes. Time Flies on Typepad.)
H & R , I suspect you will drink the advance and I'll get stuck ..still I'll up the ante if you;ll do it.
Taranto has another edwards doozy this morning. The stuff writes itself.
alcibiades, thanks for the Financial Post cite. It's a great article.
It's time for all those post war institutions--the UN, the WB, the IMF to be scrapped. And I say that knowing what a disaster that would be for the airlines --loss of all those First Class fliers --and the fancy restaurants in NYC and DC.
Posted by: clarice | May 10, 2007 at 10:54 AM
Oh--and I heart Thompson because those daily posts of his are clearly written, straight forward and express my views exactly.
I am sick of scripted pablum designed to match focus group concerns.
Posted by: clarice | May 10, 2007 at 10:56 AM
Bless OT''s prescient heart. Right on schedule the NYT runs a piece questioning the informant in the Ft Dix case.
The front page of the WaPo also seems to have been outsourced today to raving lefty lunatics.
(If you haven't read Iowahawk's letters to subscribers detailing the decline of a fictional paper, run over there and do it now.Nothing could better explain the dreck filled NYT and Wa Po and why their subscription revenue is tanking. We get it only because my husband wants the sports page.)
Posted by: clarice | May 10, 2007 at 11:02 AM
I keep telling typepad to keep me signed up for 2 weeks, but it has a different idea of 2 weeks than I do, apparently
I'm under that 15 minutes = 2 weeks rule too. It's not like I'm getting any younger under it.
Where did you see the Taranto piece Clarice?
Posted by: Jane | May 10, 2007 at 11:04 AM
Found it!
Posted by: Jane | May 10, 2007 at 11:07 AM
Clarice:
I suspect you will drink the advance and I'll get stuck ..still I'll up the ante if you;ll do it.
Well, I can most assuredly make the same committment to you that I did to Jane. I will never stop thinking about writing the book. I will definitely muse. There will be much ruminating. I am committed to ponder at length and meditate in depth on the book.
Posted by: Jeff Dobbs | May 10, 2007 at 11:17 AM
Yeah, what's up with best of the web coming out before 10 am? I hadn't even gotten to yesterday's.
Most days I reply (i read it via email subscription) with some unusally insightful wit that Taranto and staff mostly ignore, yet with faint hope they will run with it.
Alas today, even that small glimmer of hope was unavailable to me because today's edition came out so early.
I Blame Bush
Posted by: Jeff Dobbs | May 10, 2007 at 11:23 AM
I'm having the same experience with TypeKey, but if that's what's keeping out the bores it's more than worth it. For my part, I have zero clue as to how any of this stuff works.
Taranto set the all-time indoor record for early Best of the Web with today's edition. The guy is mighty sharp and funny, but he could use H&R's input. H&R, try a couple of extra shooters before you write him; that oughta put you over the hump.
Posted by: Other Tom | May 10, 2007 at 11:27 AM
Wow. I really recommend going to LGF, scrolling down a bit, and playing the six-minute clip of Glenn Beck outlining the saga of how and why that network prevented him from airing the Hamas Mickey Mouse video. It is simply appalling. Bear in mind that this is the network that had no qualms at all, a few years ago, about running a vicious and absolutely false story (later retractd in the face of undeniable evidence) by Peter Arnett about US troops using poison gas during a raid in Vietnam.
Another media Profile in Courage.
Posted by: Other Tom | May 10, 2007 at 11:47 AM
Re: the demise of newspapers, I'm happy to live in a city where I can get the NY Sun delivered.
Posted by: alcibiades | May 10, 2007 at 11:47 AM
There's so much material available now that the campaigns have begun, Taranto will probably start posting new columns by 7 a.m. in a couple of weeks.
Posted by: clarice | May 10, 2007 at 11:50 AM
Welll...back to Edwards. He joined the hedge fund to learn about poverty and to become a Master Trader. I hear through the grapevine that his next endeavor is crab boats of the Alaskan shore. He will be baiting the boxes making him a Master Baiter.
Posted by: Specter | May 10, 2007 at 12:00 PM
Michael Moore Faces US Treasury Probe
Oh Good Lord
We need a quote where he fears for his life or fears being sent to a secret CIA prison and being waterboarded.
Posted by: Jeff Dobbs | May 10, 2007 at 12:04 PM
Re: Clarice's allusion to the "grasshopper and the ant."
Here's the modern version of the fable.
Posted by: jimmyk | May 10, 2007 at 12:06 PM
That Glenn Beck story has me steamed. The media in the US refused to run the pics of jumpers off the WTC or the beheadings of Pearl etc but ran the panties on head stuff at Abu Ghraib one trillion times. And that's just one example.
Yesterday the NYT ran a pic of the queen alongside Bush. His head was cropped and the caption read the queen and "an escort".
Now, Obama is getting the star treatment ..one paper even cutting off webpage comments critical of him and another media outlet is doctoring his photos
to make him look better (as opposed to those that make Rice look like a she-devil).
Lewt's start a move for a one day boycott of the press .(NYT,WaPo,LAT)to oppose this crap..I do not think they's yet caught on that about 50% of their readers are not amused
Posted by: clarice | May 10, 2007 at 12:11 PM
I hope they nail Moore's ass to the wall. He likes Cuba so much, leave him at Gitmo, altho he'd probably break the beds.
Posted by: Jane | May 10, 2007 at 12:12 PM
Any thoughts on the Gonzales hearing?
My favorite line so far: "I think I may be aware of that." Apparently, AGAG couldn't quite remember whether or not he was supposed to have forgotten.
Posted by: Crust | May 10, 2007 at 12:16 PM
I think they made a dumb move with Moore. It's a civil investigation, not criminal, and all it will do is feed his publicity machine. But this administration appears to have an unerring eye for the dumb move.
Posted by: Other Tom | May 10, 2007 at 12:18 PM
Very funny,jimmyk..and true. Look at NO versus Kansas.
Posted by: clarice | May 10, 2007 at 12:28 PM
Posted by: cathyf | May 10, 2007 at 12:29 PM
from where I sit, the Gonzales thing has pretty much blown over. We're onto bigger scandals now - like the 10k dead in Kansas because George Bush took the hummers to Iraq.
Posted by: Jane | May 10, 2007 at 12:39 PM
'from where I sit, the Gonzales thing has pretty much blown over.'
It's not over til the fat lady sings (and the Justice Eight finish whining):
----------quote---------
Two former U.S. attorneys said Wednesday they believe the White House had them fired along with six other federal prosecutors, and that ongoing investigations into the dismissals could result in criminal charges against senior Justice Department officials.
John McKay, the former U.S. attorney for Western Washington, and David Iglesias, the former U.S. attorney for New Mexico, also said they believe Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty lied under oath when they testified to Congress about the firings of eight U.S. attorneys. ....
McKay and Iglesias said they still don't know who at the White House ultimately put them on the firing list. But McKay said he believes obstruction-of-justice charges will be filed if investigators conclude any of the dismissals were motivated by an attempt to influence public-corruption or voter-fraud investigations.
"I think there will be a criminal case that will come out of this," McKay said during a meeting Wednesday with Seattle Times editors and reporters. "This is going to get worse, not better."
Additionally, McKay and Iglesias said they believe White House strategist Karl Rove and his aides instigated the dismissals and that someone in the White House ultimately decided who among the nation's 93 U.S. attorneys should be fired.
-----------endquote--------
Hey, if Valerie and Joe can get rich by running all over crying in their beer, why not these guys.
Posted by: PatrickR | May 10, 2007 at 12:53 PM
It's possible, but no one is paying attention. Even the blogs seem to have dropped it.
Posted by: Jane | May 10, 2007 at 12:56 PM
Did you notice? After the Waxman fandango, Val has been absolutely mum..even cancelling all her joint speaking engagements with Munchausen.
Before I die, I want to know who cooked up their little putsch.
Posted by: clarice | May 10, 2007 at 01:01 PM
Other Tom:
I think they made a dumb move with Moore.
Well, yeah -- and think about it. What if they try and "nail Moore's ass to the wall" as Jane suggested...
You think you could find a nail strong enough to hold him and a wall that wouldn't collapse?
Yeah, and I bet you would also believe that fire could melt steel.
Posted by: Jeff Dobbs | May 10, 2007 at 01:02 PM
And as far as I can tell, the CIA's general counsel is still "studying" whether she came within the meaning of covert in the IIPA.
Also, no word from the US Ct of Appeals on the Dow Jones case to unseal the redacted portions of the Fitz affidavit and the opinion in the Miller case.
AND no word from the DoJ's OPR on my complaint about Fitz which in Nov they told me they were examining and would let me know the outcome of the inquiry.
Mum. Silent. Gornisht.
Posted by: clarice | May 10, 2007 at 01:05 PM
Clarice:
Before I die, I want to know who cooked up their little putsch.
Well. Whoever in the JOM Cabal that was supposed to bid on that auction for a lunch at a safe house with Joe and Val dropped the ball.
Posted by: Jeff Dobbs | May 10, 2007 at 01:06 PM
...And perhaps end with a discussion of the psychological term "projection."
Ok, so the head of the Executive Branch, who is the chief law-enforcement officer of the United States, fired a couple of guys who were exercising prosecutorial discretion by not prosecuting public-corruption or voter-fraud cases. I know that the WH has always just rolled over for this nonsense in the past, but maybe Tony Snow ought to point out that according the non-kafka definition of "obstruction", the people on the hook for "obstructing" an investigation are the people who were trying to slow or stop it, not the people trying to make it a higher priority.Posted by: cathyf | May 10, 2007 at 01:20 PM
PatrickR:
It's not over til the fat lady sings (and the Justice Eight finish whining)
Actually, it's the Justice Nine now that it's been confirmed that Graves was fired.
And that doesn't include Yang whom Miers wanted to fire. You know, the prosecutor who was investigating Rep. Lewis. And resigned to take a $1.6 million signing bonus at the firm that was defending Lewis against said investigation. It's a large law firm so who knows maybe it was all a big coincidence, but I think Dems can be forgiven for having suspicions.
Gonzales' explanation of why Yang was in Miers' sights:
As Josh at TPM puts it:
Posted by: Crust | May 10, 2007 at 01:38 PM