DCDL

I’ve been halfway following online the House Judiciary Committee’s questioning of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Here are a few disorganized thoughts:

• Ranking Republican Lamar Smith of Texas (known to us as the guy who tried to sabotage the DC voting rights bill by adding an amendment repealing DC’s gun laws) lobbed a bunch of softballs to Gonzales, but Gonzales couldn’t even manage those very well. For example, when asked whether the White House had pressured him to fire US attorneys to interfere in ongoing investigations, rather than strongly denying the possibility, he said “Not that I recall.” Shouldn’t that be something he’d absolutely recall if it happened, or are corrupt orders from the White House just so common that he can’t keep track of them all?
• Chairman John Conyers (D-MI) said that Gonzales was not under oath. Why on earth are we still having people testify before congressional committees without swearing them in? Shouldn’t that just be a standard part of the process rather than something that needs to be decided anew every time? If it always happens, then no one needs to take offense when they’re asked to swear.
• The Republicans questioning Gonzales, including Howard Coble (R-NC) and Bob Goodlatte (R-VA), are obsessed with intellectual property laws (when they’re not obsessed with illegal immigration). Apparently there are networks of people counterfeiting Gucci bags to fund terrorist attacks, so we need to prevent people from using TiVo and listening to Internet radio, or something.
• Later on, another Republican asked a question very similar to Lamar Smith’s, and again Gonzales gave an answer that wasn’t a simple, flat denial.
• Gonzales refused to answer a lot of questions out of concern for “the integrity of an ongoing investigation”. It’s too bad that similar concerns didn’t prevent him from firing US attorneys when they’re in the middle of ongoing investigations of Republicans.
• A frequent theme from the Republicans was that conducting this hearing kept the attorney general away from his job at the Justice Department, where he has important work to do protecting us from terrorists, illegal aliens, child predators, pornographers, and trademark violators. Apparently oversight is just a waste of time. But Gonzales has already established that he isn’t very involved in the running of the department, so how does his spending the day on Capitol Hill really make any difference?
• I’m surprised that at this stage the Republicans are supporting Gonzales and Bush so wholeheartedly. There’s none of the harsh Republican criticism of Gonzales that I remember from the Senate hearing several weeks ago. They’re raising all sorts of long-debunked bogus defenses, including the ever-popular “Clinton did it too!”

You may have already seen the video, but this was too good not to preserve as text.

On Wednesday, Lurita Doan, Administrator at the General Services Administration, came to talk to talk to Henry Waxman’s committee. She was there to answer questions about a meeting this past January between GSA and Karl Rove’s Office of Political Affairs, a meeting that was by all appearances a Republican strategy session held in a government agency that is supposed to be nonpartisan. That’s why this was probably an illegal meeting.

Bruce Braley (IA-1) is the freshman Democrat who led the questioning. His focus was the Powerpoint presentation on recent Congressional elections that was given at this meeting by Karl Rove’s deputy, Scott Jennings.

BRALEY: Let’s look at Slide 578. This is the slide that has at the top “2008 House Targets Top 20″. … This slide is depicting Republican targets that identify Democratic seats that are vulnerable in 2006. Isn’t that what it says? … And it shows district by district the individual what the percentage of that district was in the 2004 election and what percentage that particular Democratic candidate received in the 2006 election. Correct?
DOAN: Yes, it appears… I-I-I honestly, I have not seen this chart until yesterday, I don’t remember, I mean, I really truly don’t remember seeing this chart until yesterday when I tried to dig it up and I have to say I don’t know what the explanation was that accompanies this. I truly do not remember this part of the presentation.
…
DOAN: [T]his was not my meeting, I did not convene it, I didn’t run the agenda of it, I did not invite… Scott Jennings to the meeting, I actually didn’t have any involvement in it.
WAXMAN: You were just there, though.
DOAN: I did attend the meeting. Yes, I was there, and I-
WAXMAN: Well I’m going to let Mr. Braley continue.
BRALEY: You would agree that a reasonable interpretation of this slide is that it was a political attempt to try to target the top 20 Democratic candidates for defeat in 2008.
DOAN: No, I would not say that. I would say that this was a slide that says “2008 House Targets Top 20.” I do not want to try to speculate what was intended by Mr. Jennings on the slide. I really think you have to ask him.

Sniff-sniff. Smell something?

(more…)

From Bush’s press conference today:

We will not go along with a partisan fishing expedition aimed at honorable public servants. The initial response by Democrats unfortunately shows some appear more interested in scoring political points than in learning the facts. It will be regrettable if they choose to head down the partisan road of issuing subpoenas and demanding show trials.

Bush knows a thing or two about show trials, considering he has people “voluntarily” confessing to lists of crimes in Gitmo right now. I don’t think demanding that witnesses testify under oath is quite the same as waterboarding, though I can see how it might seem that way to people from an administration as allergic to truth telling as this one.

On Thursday, October 12, Join us in the back room of Timberlake’s, 1726 Connecticut Ave NW (Dupont Circle Metro), for this special screening of Robert Greenwald’s latest film, Iraq for Sale.

Cash bar starts at 6:30, and the screening will start at 7:30.

Iraq for Sale: The War Profiteers is the story of what happens to everyday Americans when corporations go to war.

Acclaimed director Robert Greenwald (Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price, Outfoxed and Uncovered) takes you inside the lives of soldiers, truck drivers, widows and children who have been changed forever as a result of profiteering in the reconstruction of Iraq. Iraq for Sale uncovers the connections between private corporations making a killing in Iraq and the decision makers who allow them to do so.

From MyDD, via the comments at the Brad Blog:

I just got this email from the Donna Edwards campaign.

Hello,

By now you are aware of the multiple layers of problems that occurred in the Tuesday, September 12, election in Maryland’s 4th Congressional District. Whether these flaws are attributable to incompetence, inefficiency, or fraud — we may never know. Votes are still being tabulated in Maryland’s 4th District — provisional ballots arriving as late as Tuesday, September 19, a truckload of machines and memory cards arriving 21 hours after the polls closed on September 12, changing estimates of absentee ballots to be counted, etc.

Needless to say, the system is deeply flawed — leaving voters with little reason to be confident. In the midst of all of this system failure and uncertainty, I wanted to share with you the transcript of an exchange that took place on Tuesday, September 19, between my opponent, Albert Wynn, and his colleague on the powerful House Energy & Commerce Committee:

BARTON: Down in Texas, we had a Democratic primary about 50 years ago that Lyndon Johnson won by 54 votes. And he got the nickname “Landslide Lyndon.” We have Mr. Wynn next. He had a little bit of a tussle last week, but he did win. And so, I want to recognize “Landslide Wynn” for any opening statement that he wishes…
WYNN: Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. In fact, they’re still counting, but we’re quite optimistic. And I did take a couple pages out of Lyndon’s book, so if I win, it can be attributed to Texas know-how.
(LAUGHTER)
(UNKNOWN): Did you (inaudible)?
BARTON: I hope not. I hope you win fair and square.
(LAUGHTER)
WYNN: A win is a win.

P.S. Just within the last couple of hours, the Board of Elections in Prince George’s County opened up a machine with no tamper tape (so much for security), and at least one other machine that recorded votes for other offices but none for U.S. Congress.

And from the comments:

Re: Al Wynn Brags of Stealing the Election (3.00 / 1)

I can’t stream audio presently but I think this is the hearing where this exchange occured. Can anyone listen to the webcast & verify this?

by pragmatic adjustable hed on Thu Sep 21, 2006 at 02:27:41 PM EST

Re: Al Wynn Brags of Stealing the Election (3.00 / 1)

Yep that’s it. The comment start at 27:36.

by miguel on Thu Sep 21, 2006 at 03:39:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

One bright spot: the more the gloves come off and politicians are publically seen discussing how the government actually works, the more likely it is to be changed.

Note to K&K - WordPress’ editor doesn’t like nested blockquotes. :D

With the Abramoff scandal nipping at your heels, it was probably a good idea to throw in the towel on your reelection campaign without waiting until you’re actually indicted (after all, Tom DeLay waited and now he’s being forced to stay on the ballot). But I’m not sure you used the best choice of words in praising your chosen successor, Ohio state senator Joy Padgett:

“She is a person of passion and conviction,” Ney said. “I can think of no better person to represent this district.”

It’s true that the “person of conviction” joke has already been exhausted during this period of rampant Republican corruption, but that’s exactly why using the phrase triggers thoughts of incarceration in people’s minds. I’m sure Padgett appreciates it.

We’ve written before about the media’s desperate attempts to portray congressional corruption as being a problem affecting Republicans and Democrats equally. Nowadays you’d expect those seeking bipartisan scandals to be rejoicing over the recent troubles of Democrat William Jefferson. But focusing on Jefferson is just too obvious for some people, and it can be hard to pretend that one isolated corrupt Democratic congressman can balance a network of corruption at the center of the Republican Party.

John Solomon of the Associated Press continues to go the extra mile in smearing Senate minority leader Harry Reid, by suggesting yet again that he must be guilty of something, even though he didn’t break any laws or even vote the way his supposed bribers wanted. Paul Kiel of TPMmuckraker has the details.

Three interesting book events this week, and I’m going to try to make it to all of them:

• I just got this message from MoveOn about an event tonight that’s on the theme of this MyDD post by David Sirota:
  

  Tonight, Tuesday, May 9, our friends at The American Prospect magazine and the AFL-CIO are hosting a book launch party and panel discussion entitled, “Fighting the Hostile Takeover in America’s Red States” Speakers include Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer (D), author Thomas Frank, columnist Harold Meyerson, David Sirota and, ah…well me. I’ll be joining the panel to talk about how MoveOn members make a difference across the country.

  You are invited. Here are the details.

  What: “Fighting the Hostile Takeover in America’s Red States” panel discussion and book party.

  Who: Special guests include Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer (D), author Thomas Frank, columnist Harold Meyerson, David Sirota and MoveOn’s Tom Matzzie.

  When: Tonight: Tuesday, May 9, 2006 at 7:00 PM.

  Where: AFL-CIO Building, 815 16th Street N.W., Washington, D.C
  (Metro: Red Line Farragut North or Blue/Orange Line McPherson Square)

  Books will be made available for purchase at the event by Politics & Prose bookstore.

  The book explores how corruption is supported in Congress and takes a critical look at the dealings of politicians in both parties. It is a useful reference book. For example, when you hear an issue discussed — like energy — you can look up all of the big ideas progressives have for dealing with energy issues. At the same time it provides the facts for de-bunking the right-wing spin. […]

  —Tom Matzzie

• The insanity of the prison-industrial complex and how it affects elections and other facets of our politics is something I’ve been getting more interested in lately. It also ties into the prisoner abuse scandals perpetrated by Americans outside the US. This event on Wednesday at Busboys & Poets (2021 14th St NW) features authors of two books on the subject:
  

  6:30 - 8:00 PM (Langston Room) Two Authors/One Event! — Sasha Abramsky and Marc Mauer — In his revised edition of his seminal book on race, class, and the criminal justice system, Race to Incarcerate, Marc Mauer, executive director of one of the United States’ leading criminal justice reform organizations, offers the most up-to-date look available at three decades of prison expansion in America. The book tells the tragic story of runaway growth in the number of prisons and jails and the over reliance on imprisonment to stem problems of economic and social development. Race to Incarcerate documents the enormous financial and human toll of the “get tough” movement, and argues for more humane and productive alternatives.

  In his new book Conned: How Millions Went to Prison, Lost the Vote, and Helped Send George W. Bush to the White House, Abramsky takes us on a journey through disenfranchised America, detailing the revival of antidemocratic laws that came of age in the post-Civil War segregationist South, and profiling Americans who are fighting to regain the right to vote. Sasha Abramsky is a freelance journalist. His work has appeared in The Nation, The Atlantic Monthly, New York magazine, The Village Voice, and Rolling Stone. This event is free and open to the public.

• Finally, on Saturday, there’s an event at Politics and Prose (5015 Connecticut Ave NW) that several of us from DCDL are going to go to (e-mail dcthu@drinkingliberally.org if you’re interested in joining us):
  

  Saturday, May 13, 1 p.m.
  ERIC BOEHLERT
  LAPDOGS (Free Press, $25)
  Boehlert, a former Salon.com journalist, has written an extended indictment of the mainstream media in their coverage of the Bush administration. Rather than performing the role of watchdogs, such media giants as the New York Times, CNN, and CBS, he contends, have committed journalistic malpractice with their soft coverage and failure to challenge President Bush.

The Washington Post had an important editorial on Monday on the stakes involving this week’s critical votes on lobbying and ethics reform. Without meaningful reform, disastrous pro-corporate legislation like Medicare part D will continue to be passed — and progressive legislation will be ignored. Few people in Washington are as expert on these issues as our speaker, Craig Holman of Congress Watch.

The importance of ethics reform was underscored by Rep. Louise Slaughter and Rules Committee Democrats, who recently documented the impact of all the corruption on working Americans in an important report, “America for Sale.”

Debate begins Wednesday on two relatively feeble “reform” measures that have been combined into one bill, omitting the key element of enforcement through an independent Office of Public Integrity. As Public Citizen points out:

The U.S. Senate’s floor debate on lobbying reform starts on Wednesday, March 8. The bill (S. 2349) that will be on the Senate floor is a composite of two bills approved last week by two Senate committees…. This package is inadequate and would not do enough to curb the excesses of moneyed interests in Congress.

The composite bill is available at:
http://www.cleanupwashington.org/lobbying/page.cfm?pageid=24.

This week’s speaker, Craig Holman, is Public Citizen’s Congress Watch legislative representative and an expert on Congressional ethics. The Senate marked up weak reform legislation last week and will vote on the bill this week, but there’s still a chance to influence our legislators (if you don’t live in the District) to get a stronger bill or learn how you can become a clean government activist. I wrote about it at Huffington Post. This week the Senate will vote on whether to have an independent public integrity office as an amendment to mild lobbying reform legislation. Unfortunately, they’re more interested in the fig-leaf of upgraded disclosure than real reform.

Here’s the latest on what the Senate did last week, from Public Citizen’s Joan Claybrook:

The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee significantly improved a lobbying disclosure and reform bill today by adding a requirement that major lobbyists disclose the money they spend on grassroots lobbying. But the committee took a giant step backward — crippling the reform effort — by rejecting an independent Office of Public Integrity.

Overall, this measure is insufficient because it focuses on disclosing corruption, rather than deterring it. That’s like tallying the number of people killed in highway crashes instead of making safer vehicles.

Learn more this week when Craig Holman speaks.

Update from Keith: Holman will be at the Thursday DCDL gathering March 9, starting around 6:30pm in the back room at Timberlake’s, 1726 Connecticut Ave NW (2½ blocks north of the Dupont Circle Metro). Free appetizers and extended happy hour drink specials. Subscribe to the announcement list to hear about future events.

This week’s speaker, Craig Holman, is Public Citizen’s Congress Watch legislative representative and an expert on Congressional ethics. Senate committees are starting to mark up weak reform legislation last week and vote on the bill this week, but there’s still a chance to influence our legislators (if you don’t live in the District) to get a stronger bill or learn how you can become a clean government activist. I wrote about it at Huffington Post. This week the Senate will vote on whether to have an independent public integrity office. Unfortunately, they’re more interested in the fig-leaf of upgraded disclosure than real reform. Here’s the latest on what the Senate did last week week, from Public Citizen’s Joan Claybrook:

The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee significantly improved a lobbying disclosure and reform bill today by adding a requirement that major lobbyists disclose the money they spend on grassroots lobbying. But the committee took a giant step backward — crippling the reform effort — by rejecting an independent Office of Public Integrity.

Overall, this measure is insufficient because it focuses on disclosing corruption, rather than deterring it. That’s like tallying the number of people killed in highway crashes instead of making safer vehicles.

The independent Office of Public Integrity is so crucial because it would conduct investigations and make recommendations to the Senate and House ethics committees free of political pressures. It would also regulate compliance with the Lobbying Disclosure Act, which has been subject to little oversight. The ethics committees operate in complete secrecy, so the public has no knowledge of what they do. No decisions were announced by the House or Senate ethics committees in 2005. The executive branch does not self-regulate; rather, it has both independent inspector generals in each agency and an Office of Public Integrity, located in the Justice Department and covering all federal employees. An independent office for Congress must be created.

Learn more next week when Craig Holman speaks.