That Was Easy!

The NY Sun discusses Judge Walton's thirty page opinion in which he explains, with no apparent irony, that Libby's points of appeal are not even close or complicated questions.

On a related front, some commentators on the left cannot fathom the notion that Fitzgerald's prosecution of Libby may have been politically motivated - surely, they note, Ashcroft and Comey were good Republicans, as was Judge Walton?

Hmm.  That would be especially cogent if all politics was partisan politics.  Folks able to embrace the concept of factional disputes within an Administration will find these tidbits from the WaPo series on the Cheney Vice-Presidency to be interesting.

First, from Nov 2001:

To pave the way for the military commissions, Yoo wrote an opinion on Nov. 6, 2001, declaring that Bush did not need approval from Congress or federal courts. Yoo said in an interview that he saw no need to inform the State Department, which hosts the archives of the Geneva Conventions and the government's leading experts on the law of war. "The issue we dealt with was: Can the president do it constitutionally?" Yoo said. "State -- they wouldn't have views on that."

Attorney General John D. Ashcroft, was astonished to learn that the draft gave the Justice Department no role in choosing which alleged terrorists would be tried in military commissions. Over Veterans Day weekend, on Nov. 10, he took his objections to the White House.

The attorney general found Cheney, not Bush, at the broad conference table in the Roosevelt Room. According to participants, Ashcroft said that he was the president's senior law enforcement officer, supervised the FBI and oversaw terrorism prosecutions nationwide. The Justice Department, he said, had to have a voice in the tribunal process. He was enraged to discover that Yoo, his subordinate, had recommended otherwise -- as part of a strategy to deny jurisdiction to U.S. courts.

Raising his voice, participants said, Ashcroft talked over Addington and brushed aside interjections from Cheney. "The thing I remember about it is how rude, there's no other word for it, the attorney general was to the vice president," said one of those in the room. Asked recently about the confrontation, Ashcroft replied curtly: "I'm just not prepared to comment on that."

According to Yoo and three other officials, Ashcroft did not persuade Cheney and got no audience with Bush. Bolten, in an October 2006 interview after becoming Bush's chief of staff, did not deny that account. He signaled an intention to operate differently in the second term.

This next vignette is from July 2004 [corrected from 2005] well after the Fitzgerald appointment in Dec 2003 but reflective of ongoing trouble in paradise:

Ashcroft, with support from Gonzales, proposed a lawyer named Patrick Philbin for deputy solicitor general. Philbin was among the authors of the post-Sept. 11 legal revolution, devising arguments to defend Cheney's military commissions and the denial of habeas corpus rights at Guantanamo Bay. But he had tangled with the vice president's office now and then, objecting to the private legal channel between Addington and Yoo and raising questions about domestic surveillance by the National Security Agency.

Cheney's lawyer passed word that Philbin was an unsatisfactory choice. The attorney general and White House counsel abandoned their candidate.

"OVP plays hardball," said a high-ranking former official who followed the episode, referring to the office of the vice president. "No one would defend Philbin."

And of course the March 2004 story about Comey heading off Gonzales' attempted meeting with Ashcroft at the hospital is well-known.  Cheney and Libby had been advocates of the  contentious NSA around which this incident centered.

So one might infer that there had been little love lost between Ashcroft and Cheney for quite some time.

Comments

[Stobo Blobo]

chch16-

Stobo Schlomo Blowwwwwbo--

I've presented every opportunity to "listen" and once again there you go--slinging shit and names.

blah blah blah blah blah blah...

You wouldn't really know this, but I am not a masochist who believes in wasting his time paying close attention to insane fools and their rantings. So, because of that, I couldn't read the rest of your post, since it's painfully transparent that you are unable to make your points non-delusionally, succinctly, and without abuse.

I assert that you are the rough equivalent of a child in Gaza who hates Jews because her parents have taught her to do so. In other words, you are the victim of less-than-good parenting, and you haven't learned what "objective psychological analysis of oneself", and "respect" mean.

Can you give me one, just one, good reason why someone who honestly values rationality should indulge someone who is thoroughly rude, intellectually dishonest, mind-numbingly long-winded and narcissistic? What would be in that for the rational person?

[cathyf]

Can you give me one, just one, good reason why someone who honestly values rationality should indulge someone who is thoroughly rude, intellectually dishonest, mind-numbingly long-winded and narcissistic? What would be in that for the rational person?

Well, SB, since you are doing it, maybe you can tell us one? ;-)

(Sorry, just had to yank your chain. Remember to wash your hands after playing with the trolls.)

[chch16]

I help a good deal on pc groups mostly for Windows, some for Office and some for general software, hdw and we get plenty of trolls. They want to slam MSFT and tout Linux or Apple which is fine but they never help people fix things.

I took positions that were opposite to most of the ones you reenforce and I did it in the spirit of Tom Macguire who takes thoughtful positions for the most part whether you agree with him or not.

I was detailed as to why health care is not working when someone tossed a predictable endorsement of a Fred Thompson joke video dissing Mike Moore but offering none of the thoughtful health issues that Moore offered.

I gave some info on Iraq--and as I was typing, the former Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee was telling Bush "No More." Lugar is out and Voinovitch who has been a 6 year rubber stamp announced he's pealing away too. The Maine babes, some of the most equivocal and useless people in the Senate, are wavering but will probably follow.

Iraq has no endgame for the U.S. There will never be a victory. It's not a football game. They don't have a government now. The parliament has rarely met. They have not made a decision on one of the major issues they were asked to carve out for years. They aren't going to.

A lot of us don't want families broken and people dead or paralyzed because of this. This is not like any "war is hell" situation the US has been in, except it is similar to Viet Nam in that politically they knew they were feeding thousands into a meat grinder in Nam, and they know it now.

The US is much less able to address a crisis in another part of the world, and its foreign policy is a disaster.

I also pointed out the disigenuous position of the WSJ that refuses to cover major stories that they don't embrace politically, and then turns around and acts hollier than though as if the Bancrofts' don't do the same things as Murdoch as far as preferential coverage. Murdoch did it in Britain, he's doing it in China. He'll do it with the WSJ as have the Bancrofts.

I'm not selling anything and I don't need intelligent responses on this blog if they aren't offered.

But this does confirm my idea that the Republicans will run themselves into the ground in 2008 because they just assume people will trust them when they have no positions on the issues and people are fed up with a foreign policy in complete dissaray and no significant domestic advances.

I put the Libby brief up here, and I haven't seen a scinitilla of analysis by any of your lawyers yet.

You're going to find a hard task justifying Robbins's CIPA § 6 or Morrison positions I do believe.

[Charlie (Colorado)]

You characterize Iraq as successful?

Yup. interestingly, so did Hilary.

ch, a military campaign that liberates 25 million people in a country the size of France with 3500 fatalities is not just successful, it's prodigal. It's Thermopylae. It's Zama. Its Caesar invading Gaul.

And you're still an idiot.

[Charlie (Colorado)]

I put the Libby brief up here, and I haven't seen a scinitilla of analysis by any of your lawyers yet.

If you don't like Tom's free ice cream, go mooch off someone else.

[JM Hanes]

chch16:

"Larry Robbins' Reply Brief Filed Prettyman 6 26 07 for SCOOTIE and of course who is a bigger Prettyman than ole Scootie. I hear that's what his BOP Buddies plan to knickname Scootie--Prettyman."

LOL! You appear to have come unbuttressed.

Let me guess:

You got your blog all set up and nobody came?
You're tired of just blending into the woodwork on lefty sites?
You had three years of talking points just getting in the way around the house?
You've already given up on the Democratic Congress and Republicans are now your last best hope?

[Stobo Blobo]

cathyf-

Well, SB, since you are doing it, maybe you can tell us one? ;-)

Sorry, just had to yank your chain. Remember to wash your hands after playing with the trolls.)

You could yank my chain anytime you want! ;->

I know you were just yanking my chain, but I'd like to denote the difference between "indulge" and "chastise" at this point because I don't do troll-playing games-they aren't worth the hassle. :)

[Stobo Blobo]

chch16, after reading your post at 10:11, I'd like to say thanks for listening.

You bring up good discussion fodder, and it's a shame when you drown it out with aggressiveness.

[PeterUK.]

"A lot of us don't want families broken and people dead or paralyzed because of this. This is not like any "war is hell" situation the US has been in, except it is similar to Viet Nam in that politically they knew they were feeding thousands into a meat grinder in Nam, and they know it now."

Nothing like Vietnam.

"The US is much less able to address a crisis in another part of the world, and its foreign policy is a disaster."

Which crisis in which part of the world,"If you can't be with the crisis you want honey,deal with the one you are with".
Geopolitical issues tend to be interconnected,ie,run from Iraq and you will get another crisis,because you will have freed up your enemies so to do.

[hoosierhoops]

Iraq has no endgame for the U.S. There will never be a victory -chch16
I will probably regret talking to you but here goes...
I personally didn't want us to invade Iraq, But on the other hand everyone knew something had to be done..the place was a mess with no fly zones, a madman in control, possible developments of Nuclear weapons.. it was a slow boiling conflict that should have been done and over with during the first Gulf war..But hindsight is 20/20. I wished we had just taken care of AQ first and killed OBL without opening a second front on the war.
But Iraq is not a failure..it's just a difficult mission, not the first hard mission america has faced nor the last..
Leaving now would be worse than the first time we pulled out, so lets seal the boader,
kill the insurgents and stabalize the area.
My Son..or as I like to say, my Marine will arrive in Iraq 9-17-2007. Do i wish the war would end 9-16? of course, But it's going to take real men and women of the highest caliber to win this conflict and running away or hiding our heads in the sand isn't going to do anything that helps security in the middle east.

[attached photos]

Clinton was using 'the eye.' It's Lucifer's way of using. There was a nickname for Bill, Hitler. Charismatic. Chrisma is using. Bill was also a lawyer, so we all got the warning. Those tend to deal with Lucifer.

So, we all voted.

Larry is a game. He knows what the threat is and when. He uses it there to make money outside of his old job. The 9/11 threat was known because we were right in the middle of an exercies looking for precisely what happened. So, we should have been able to handle it.

[chch16]

What Hillary (2 L's did) was a mistake. Her failure to admit it was a mistake. Hilary has her own site and her own hired guns. So I'm not wasting time speaking for her.

She'd be my 3rd choice anyway.

Iraq is not a close analogy to any of those military campaigns. It's a frigging disaster and it's getting worse. Their army can't show up or fight its way out of a paperbag and they never will be able to.

They have no government and they refuse to do anything. Most of them are afraid to provide a parliamentary quorum or are in protest and we can't provide security for them or ourselves ever--American forces are fish in a barrel being blown up at will. The only win is to cut our losses and get the fuck out.

No military joke we bring over there is going to cause any kind of order--it's chaos fiasco cubed and a metaphor for the stupidity of Bush and the American apathetic majority who are getting the shit democracy they deserve.

I like Tom's analysis even though I disagree with nearly every point he makes in his Robbins' brief analyses. Tom doesn't call names. He is into making points as he sees them. That's the purpose of a good blog.

JM Hanes--do you ever make any issue points because you continue to be 100% wrong when you guess about me.

No political blog no one came too--I have a pc web site that helps with significant Windows problems and it's been well received.

There are some good Democratic sites. Lefty and righty are terms the IQ challenged use--meaningless.
I read a lot of them and comment when I feel like it, but they discuss issues whether the person posting agrees with them or not--it's different here with some of you.

You all want to attack the poster instead of the ideas.

Nothing's accumulating are getting in the way on my boxes, and the Republicans are the best hope---for the Democrats to run a grand slam in the next elections. They are imploding every day.

Trolls aren't people who hold positions you don't like. All of you who use the term and of course aren't expressing any positions because thinking gives you a forebrain hernia need to find out what a real troll is.

I only want to bring up discussion fodder. I've said it a lot of times.

PeterYuk--Iraq is everything like Nam and it will become worse. The number dead and severely crippled may be stopped before it reaches the numbers in Nam--but that's an open question.

I have seen no discussion about Iran on any thread from the JOMers---why not?

N. Korea no sweat right?

China everything copascetic?

They've been jailing and killing a lot and now they're sending you poison in your food and toothpaste and bad tires.

Your Bush Food and Drug and Agriculture is feckless.

Hoosier Hoops I wish the best for your Marine and a safe return. I hope it is a good experience for him. I respectfully disagree we should be there. We should have gotten OBL but getting him is far from the end and you know that. The Taliban is back in control in AG. HK has little overall control in the country, and Pakistan is not going to help us get OBL although they are providing some intelligence.

[chch16]

Tic Tic Tic for Representative Dolittle who along with his wife probably will join his Homeboy Republican Bretheren on the RPB (Republican Prison Bus):

director said Wednesday he was recently contacted by federal investigators in their probe of Doolittle's ties to jailed lobbyist Jack Abramoff.
Pete Evich, Doolittle's legislative director from 1998 to 2002 and now a lobbyist, told The Associated Press that he plans to talk to the Justice Department.

[http://www.catcaresecretsrevealed.com]

Recently, I chucked all that mess and decided that I would get not one but two cats. Not having time, space nor energy for the needs of a dog was no reason to remain without a pet. I went to the humane shelter where I found Scout and Atticus, and I can't tell you how happy I am that I did. They are house- trained (but I'm well aware that there will be hairballs from time to time, and stinky litter pans to clean regularly); they cuddle with me and with each other; they run and chase each other through the...