Things are really heating up in this, the third night of the
Dickfest semifinals. I've been noticing that people have been taking choice lines and rhymes from the entries and posting them around the blogosphere, which is fabulous. These fine poems deserve to be read far and wide. They bring every bit of honor upon to the Veep that he lends to the office.
Hope everybody caught
Bill Maher last night, who is providing our grand prize material --
a copy of his book and a signed poster. So remember to vote by number and only once, the top three from each semifinal will move into the final round.
Said Dick to the rest of the crew,
I like hunting these peasants don't you? And imagining the poor on his foyer, he spun round and bagged an old lawyer. (201)
Is that a bird or is that a face I see?
Why is it they look the same to me?
Lest I be accused of being a hesitator.
I'll just shoot first and ask questions later. (202)
A manly man like Dick would surely
Not shoot his wad off prematurely. (203)
Cheney's got a gun....
Cheney's got a gun....
A long days' just begun
Fox News is the place to run (204)
torture some brown ones
ain't no disgrace
eat the farmed meat
shoot me some face (205)
And then forgot to tell the creep
That there's a maxim one must keep:
Don't ever, ever shoot the peop-le. (206)
Bushes are dumb,
Cheneys are sick,
But how could u shoot a poor man
you dumb Dick? (207)
Down in Dixie he had some Wiskey
quail in the bush, we may never know
Zocor, Plavix, Viox, coctail
Halliburton, Plame, WMD, Guantanamo
Remember the Alamo! (208)
Panderer, flatterer, hypocrite and a bad shot.
Satan and his architects are designing the new multi-story Cheney Ring, non-stop.
Lustful, wrathful, greedy and a glutton.
Big Time smiles as he finagles a no-bid contract in Hell for Halliburton. (209)
Dicklet, Prince of Texas
Behind the arras the old fool clucked.
The heir to the throne cried, "Now you're fucked!"
Then, "Damn!" he said. "Tis not the king!"
To catch Dicklet's conscience there is no thing. (210)
memo to Scooter:
you're next. (212)
When Dickie starts to get all blood-lusted
Everyone knows he shouldn’t be trusted
When he looked over his shoulder he knew
Harry had been raised domestically, too (213)
Shotguns and lawyers, Prime Minister Cheney
My tiresome subjects shall never arraign me
For we framed and hung a girl's blue dress
Done and burned Whit's blood-stained vest (214)
sociopath
go take a bath
in a tub well filled
with the blood you spilled (215)
Bird News Daily: From an undisclosed location
The lone survivor of a bird massacre,
Mr. Quail, with a beebee still in his heart
Leaks the identity of the responsible drunk to Judith Miller (216)
"Executive Privilege"
"Shot an old man in the face"?
I expressed myself rather forcefully,
felt better after I had done it. (217)
Tell a lie, tell a lie, tell a lie onward, into the public domain, rode the sick pundits
And was there a man dismayed? Though they knew Cheney had drunkenly blundered?
Their’s was not to make reply, their’s was not wonder why, their’s was but to spin and lie
About Plame or the shooting, they spin while Bush plunders (218)
A Texas quail hunt.
An errant shot, then silence.
Fuck Yourself, public. (219)
Quail hunt, Harry shot.
Tell no one. Say not a word.
Good to be vice-King. (220)
Cheney shoots. Man down.
Drinking? Timeline? Cover up?
Ask, and you're "loony." (221)
Cheney. AKA
Darth. Go Fuck Yourself. Shooter.
Penguin. Big Time. Dick. (222)
Cheney
sane, he? (223)
that man is like a god,
or as near to one as any republican can say;
that man, who blames you for standing in the way,
when he shoots at the setting sun. (224)
He who shoots and hides away
Lives to kill another day
Beware! (225)
My dick, my gun, the bombs that I control,
but who is left for me to fight? They run and hide in holes.
Let it be known that I have just begun,
to fuck, to shoot, to bomb to kingdom come. (226)
Hickory dickory dock.
The mouse ran up the clock.
Dick Cheney shot a man in the face. (227)
i know why the caged bird sings.
the shot was sprayed another way,
she lives to sing another day. (228)
He's down
Blood like a fountain
A tragedy here
at BrokeDick Mountain (229)
A Friends Face Shootin
Americans I'm Screwin
Iraqs in Ruins
I'm Dick Cheney, Bitch (230)
Hail the Quail set free
Feathers fly a bird dies
Then drunk in bloody bath
Make a pack of lies (231)
North, South, East, & West
Points his gun at all of US
Dick shoots himself best. (232)
Sunny, with darkness encroaching
Quoth the rancher regarding that day
Dick's aim was the last flushed-out covey
He said Harry just got in the way. (233)
Dick Cheney
All Dick, no balls (234)
pheasants and quail and bob-o-link too
hope for a season
to hunt just you (235)
said dick to his secret security: "More beer! It's only 1:30!"
quail, duck or pheasant, our veep twas ne'er hesitant,
"Shit! Waddaya mean it's not the season on peasants?"
..dying democracy just isn't purdy. (236)
Stop the car!
Grab my gun!
Lawyer huntin's
Manly fun. (237)
They came from Wyoming and Texas, addicted to power and drink;
They bullied and lied, they tortured and spied till most folks were too scared to blink;
But when Scowl shot a hunter he thought was a bird and Swag let New Orleans drown,
Folks finally saw what these guys really were: a crusty old coot and a clown. (238)
If you can point your gun where wise men wouldn't
And shoot before you've noticed everyone,
You'll do a thing that all men know you shouldn't,
And, which is more, you'll be a dick, my son. (239)
Go fuck yourself
You sad old prick
Methinks your name
Is your only dick. (240)
While looking for birds
Big Dick he gave chase
But he shot one old lawyer
right in the face! (241)
Got an orange vest and a twenty eight,
I'm a quail hunter, I look great,
A great quail hunter, bird of prey,
Go ahead Harry, make my day. (242)
I am the mighty Dick- the Dick who rules all Dicks.
No Dick shall be placed before me.
He who dares to step into the Dicks path.
Will feel the fury of his mighty rod! (243)
Not the Biggest Donor
That We ever had
So shot him down in Texas
Out west of Baghdad (244)
So I shot a quail in Texas
Just to watch it die
but I bagged a Texas Lawyer
'cause I was H.U.I. (245)
He wondered if his shot did miss
As he was ogleing the Swiss
Did the V-P's conscience him did prick,
as it noted "I think you've got a Harry, Dick"? (246)
How will the Dick survive
Shot an old man who refused to die
Hoping the world swallows one more lie
How will the Dick survive (247)
You shot Harry in the face
A bloody gaffe, I'm thinking
"The lies! The shills, What political thrills!"
But Dick, are you still drinking? (248)
That fearsome hunt- oh, be certain
Shall never be forgot!
For Whittington's chest and face are hurtin',
After Dick took aim and shot. (249)
Fuck Ari, Peggy, Marlin
and cocksucking, pussyeatin' prankstas
got Matalin & my homeys @ Fox,
DAMN, it feels good t/b a gangsta (250)
everybody run,
Big Time's gotta gun,
now everybody swallow,
Brit's soft balls soon to follow (251)
An arrogant V. P. by the name of Cheney,
Shot a lawyer friend with an excuse quite lamey.
The only good that might ensue?
Is if the country wakes up and gives THIS tricky dicky his due. (252)
Little lead pellets
Fly to man-bird
At sunset
I had a bad day (253)
There once was a Veep from Halliburton
Who knew that his poll numbers were hurtin
As he turned on the shooter,he thought he saw Scooter
And prayed Plamegate was buried for certain. (254)
I couldn't find the weapons, or muzzle our secret spying
I couldn't pass my torture bill, and not from lack of trying
I couldn't drill in ANWR or keep Scooter out of jail
So I'll be damned if Harry's face was gonna keep me from my quail. (255)
"Just an accident," you say
In hopes that it will go away
The newsman says it's all ok
We are being lied to (256)
1 part Whittington
1 part Jack Daniels
Pepper lightly (257)
'Neath the brambles and the waning Texas sun
Lies a corporate lawyer whose blood does run
Red state of affairs, beer, affairs of the heart,
Caged coveys of Truth sing Bunker Boy's depart. (258)
When Bill Clinton lied about shooting someone in the face, he was impeached. Doesn't Dick Cheney deserve the same treatment? (259)
I don't know who you think you are
You sure don't know your place
Quit questioning Dick Cheney or
He'll shoot you in the face (260)
Although it is your
shaving grace
it won't do Dick for
birdshot face (261)
When hunting fowl with Big Time Dick,
One rule to remember should do the trick:
Accept your place as quail or duck on his shelf,
Take one in the face or go fuck yourself! (262)
Well, listen to my story bout a man named Dick
Though a chickenhawk he was, on the trigger he was quick
Then one day he was shooting for some quail
And out from the bush, there came a mighty wail. (263)
Come clean with the country he theoretically serves?
Notify the proper authorities?
When self-interest meets duty you can count on Big Dick
To always have other priorities. (264)
How so many got it wrong
Is the real mystery here
Cheney didn't miss the bird
It's called tort reform (265)
Our man Cheney,
Maybe not so brainy?
Got muddled on ale,
Mistook lawyer for quail.(266)
With a nod to the left, or a nod to the right
Lies ambidextrously
'bout the shootin' in the night (267)
(i do not know what it is about this story
that does not fit; only something in me understands
the account is deeper than all bullshit)
nobody, not even the veep, has such a big gun (268)
Oh, Big Time...
what have you done?
You have failed the party,
by leaving witnesses. (269)
There once was a veepster named Dick
First thought that his blast left a nick
Kept coppers away, For nearly a day
Republican Chappaquidick! (270)
Drunky McShootster grabbed him a gun,
"Drinkin' and shootin' sure is fun!
But these damn quail take too much of a chase,"
So he shot an old man in the heart and the face. (271)
If theshooter was lit
you must not acquit (272)
My ambassador girlfriend, a rifle, some beer
Ingredients for a fun day
Gonna bag me a bird (good thing Lynne isn't here)
But then Whittington gets in the way (273)
I shot the attorney. 'Cause he was standing where I could not see.
I shot the attorney. And I did not tell the deputy.
I shot the attorney. Now he may die because of my BB.
I shot the attorney. I'll just go cop a plea on Fox TV. (274)
Little Dick-uns' Iraq...the canned hunt
Yet he would say he's sorry boys, and promise us to pray,
For everyone who's been undone, in their long years--or in their flower;
But does he then call on those whose debts he knows do fear the light of day,
And within the halls of justice, contrive to keep his power? (275)
One night while I was hunting quail
The beer in me was getting stale
No matter, says I , I can always find
A hunting partner and blow his mind (276)
The lawyer, though peppered, has the finest of care
The rich shooter's safe in his rarified air
A poor circus for fools who watch and ignore
The lives being lost in a cruel unjust war. (277)
is it just me
or does anyone else see
that Iraq will now be
Cheney's insanity plea? (278)
I'm 78, white and male
I don't look a damn thing like a quail
My name is Harry Whittington
And I got a ride on Crashcart 1 (288)
Did Dick Cheney just...
Blast a Senior Citizen
with a Big Shotgun? (289)
All this talk of the ill-chosen quarry
does obscure a real news story,
our cardiac kid, the second in line
scarfing down barbeque as if his heart were fine! (290)
Oh Dick you tragic prick
we always knew you're just a hick.
Thanks to your huntin 'slip'
we may yet be free of your evil grip. (291)
His was a preemptive strike
To overthrow a vicious coo
No doubt who has the biggest Dick
America, its you (292)
Cheney was out on the firing line
Killing birds n' feelin' fine
Old Harry wasn't shot cuz he made no sound,
He was shot cuz the meadow kept spinnin' around. (293)
Cheney shot an old man down
But his pals do own that town
Of no investigation did we hear
Cheney - "It was just one beer!" (294)
Harry and Dick went up the hill, To shoot a flock of birdies
Dick shot Harry
At 5:50
And was dining by 6:30 (295)
Roses are picked
Violets are plucked
I'm Dick Cheney
You can get F***ed (296)
He drank he shot he hit, then hid and lied and stalled,
He was much to busy for the nice deputy who called.
For the chumps, the marks, the drones, that would be a day they’d rue,
But he is so rich, and great and good, so honorable, he can say “f*ck you.” (297)
He shot him in the face
He doesn't need a warrant
All for the sake of their base
Isn't it abhorrhent? (298)
They say the coverup's worse that the crime
Sorry fellas not this time
You talkin bout dead-eye Dick's drunken aim?
No, he outed Valerie Plame (299)
Cheney shot Harry. Harry ain't dead.
The truth in this tale ain't been said.
The life in this story, that Dick can't throttle,
Is how far down was he in that bottle? (300)
Thanks to all the people who devoted their time and poetic talents to this contest. And remember, as long as there is
Republican rock, you are all winners.
(graphic by Jose G.)
|
Amidst all the articulate lefties like
Roger Ailes,
Brad DeLong,
David E. (happy birthday) and
Paul Lukasiak whose non-"hate speech" comments now fill
the reopened WaPo blog questioning the Post's ethics in any number of matters, there is one commenter who takes Brady's side. He says "let's hope the far left can contain themselves here" before going on to praise
Richard Cohen's recent article dissuading girls from taking math. He even provides a helpful link to his blog, where we find the following:
The column goes straight after the cult of numbers that rules so much of the thinking in the left-wing wonk and chattering classes crowd. These are the people who attack Bush because of the budget deficit (as if we didn't have one under Clinton) and question the numbers behind Social Security privatization. The people who think that their number-crunching ability gives them greater wisdom than the guidance the president gets from a Higher Power.
Congratulations, Jim. Now you know why the people you've courted into some unimaginably hideous three-way -- Hugh Hewitt and Instahack (we won't even mention the Power Tools for fear of inducing projectile vomiting) -- don't have comments sections. Because these are the kind of people who show up, and frankly, it's embarrassing.
Steno Sue should've been fired after her stint as Ken Starr leak ho. She wasn't. (Oh I'm sorry, she hates that name and makes you delete the comments that mention it -- I guess we shouldn't offend and say "Sue Schmidt.") Now she
steals the work of a dead man she refuses to acknowledge and uses her position to fuck up any kind of decent reporting on the Abramoff scandal in favor of whoring for the GOP.
These are the readers the Post is now courting.
This is your fan base.
These are the minds that read a Deborah Howell column and say "bravo!"
These are your people now, Jim.
Assume the position.
|
Further to
Redd's post on greymail this morning, I wanted to bring up another byproduct of a weakened Cheney that could affect the Libby trial.
As
immanentize mentioned here in the comments not long ago, another aspect of the greymail defense is the fact that it draws attention to the activities of Libby's superiors:
What I see in this exchange is a little litigation strategy power struggle. Will it be full-bore grey mail -- which would mean that Libby would have to, in the end, be willing to implicate his "bosses" in many ways (Rove Cheney, Hadley?). What I mean by that is that grey mail forces the inspection, if not the production, of documents and leads which the prosecutor might not yet have. In the end, the prosecution might not be able to use the stuff in court, but the point of grey mail is generally to turn attention to other/bigger fish. Think the Noriega trial and the attempts to drag the CIA and former Reagan officials into the defense in Florida.
Libby's lawyers definitely have different agendas. Cline is the greymail specialist whose strategy depends on Libby's willingness to cast the spotlight on his superiors while Jeffress is the Jim Baker partner who wants to use Libby for a firewall to the higherups. I'm also hearing that Ted Wells -- who would most likely defend Libby in court -- is pushing Scooter to defend himself and not take one for the team.
Which also has extremely interesting implications for a weakened Cheney -- if Scooter does not believe that Cheney will have the influence to protect him in the end, will he start leaning toward the Cline/Wells strategy? Or are the purse strings of his defense fund -- held by the odious Barbara Comstock -- tied to the maintenance of the firewall?
Just another factor to think about as we all enjoy the specter of Cheney on the ropes. You know
he's thinking about it.
(graphic by Joel)
|
Now that we've had a bit of a lull in
the Cheney cycle (not that I believe for a minute that it is anything more than a lull -- this story is not over) it is perhaps appropriate to take stock of what exactly happened this week.
When the Lords of the BushCo. junta wake up each morning they care about one thing: their polls. Everything is seen through the lens of their polling numbers, and not because George Bush wants to be liked. When their polls are strong they can hold their ranks in line and push through their agendas. When their polls are weak it is much more likely that individual members of congress will either a) become more responsive to the needs of their constituents or b) decide that this rapid weakening of their own power is not a good thing.
When the polls are bad people start to break ranks. And now that the Hammer is seriously wounded, their ability to hold off investigations into scandals that could wound them in the fall elections is in jeopardy. When Dubya was
jury tampering in his own softball interview with Brit Hume, he said of DeLay:
Well, I like him. When he's over there, we get our votes through the House. We had a remarkable success of legislative victories. A remarkable string of legislative victories.
Many people lamented this week that the "gossip" of the Cheney shooting eclipsed and obscured the more important matter of the Thursday vote by the Senate Intelligence Committee as to whether they would investigate the illegal NSA wiretaps. Several bloggers announced that the Cheney matter was merely inconsequential and quite beneath them; others argued that Cheney would undoubtedly survive and so covering the matter was useless. In doing so they really just announced their profound lack of insight into the way the administration operates.
Early in the week, while Whittington was in the hospital having his heart attack, Cheney was up on the hill trying to
strongarm members of the Intelligence Committee into killing the investigation altogether, according to the Washington Post. And Pat Roberts certainly seemed to think he had the votes to do so, at least initially. Yet when the time came,
Roberts tabled the vote -- an indication that Cheney had been unsuccessful and Roberts couldn't count on the Republicans on his committee to hang together and vote the way the Administration obviously wanted them to. It was a clear sign that Cheney was extremely weakened by what was going on and couldn't overcome whatever reluctance members of his own party had in the matter. This was something that we probably could not have accomplished if we'd shifted gears and written all the letters and faxes they could eat.
What do you do when openings like that arise? You hit them with everything you can lay your hands on, because you never know which stories are going to spread. I'm really proud that several of those that took root here in the comments --
Puppethead's comments about
Cheney's canned hunts, and John Casper and rusty's discovery of the
scrubbed MSNBC drinking references to name only two -- made their way into the much larger Cheney narrative that began to pervade scandal-addicted cable news. The savvy Arianna, who has been down this road a time or two, did likewise with her blog. The derision devoted by the wingnuts to these efforts only serves as a tribute to their effectiveness.
Opportunities don't necessarily arise in the tasteful and carefully framed manner you want them to. Instead you have to seize them when they come up, no matter what the shape, size and smell,
especially if you're the minority party and your leadership is in disarray. The amount of damage done to BushCo. this week in the Cheney shooting remains to be seen in -- yes, you got it -- the polls. Hopefully there will be enough lasting damage to allow the wiretap hearings and other investigations to squeeze through in a way that wouldn't have been possible before BushCo. took such a direct hit; at the very least it may keep them distracted, much like Monicagate did Clinton, such that they can't get anything done and must devote all their energies to dealing with it.
When you've got people like
Chuck Hagel saying...
"If [Dick Cheney] had been in the military, he would have learned gun safety."
...you know there's a lot of long-simmering resentment against Cheney that may be ready to come to the fore now and blossom. It certainly is a lovely thought.
Update: As
Glenn Greenwald notes, the
NYT is reporting that Pat Roberts is locking horns with BushCo. over the DeWine proposal to simply exempt the whole warrantless NSA program from the requirements of FISA. Hard to now what is motivating this, but noteworthy nonetheless.
(graphic by Dark Black)
|
Crooks and Liars has graciously offered to host
the hearing transcript (PDF) from the February 3, 2006, Libby scheduling conference and hearing. (For some contemporaneous notes on the Feb. 3rd hearing,
see this post and several others on this page.)
I've taken some time to comb through the transcript and thought that a little legal primer on greymail and CIPA might be useful for readers, along with a non-legalese translation for the hearing itself. So here goes.
The hearing transcript reads as a pretty standard representation of a usual scheduling conference, but deals with issues that are far above my former pay grade in terms of them dealing with serious national security and other classified matters. What both sides are trying to do, with the help of the trial judge, is to set up a framework for how classified documents and other evidentiary materials will be assessed and distributed -- and how disputes over whether discovery is proper will be resolved.
There is already a process set up for classified document review in federal courts. It is governed by CIPA (
The Classified Information Procedures Act), which was promulgated in 1980 to streamline cases involving classified materials. CIPA has several steps -- including having originating agencies review materials, reporting to the Federal prosecutor, and then taking that information to the court for review as to what is safe and what is not safe for release.
Obviously, this leaves a lot of room for haggling between Fitz and Team Libby -- and is one of the main reasons we are looking at a trial date for Scooter Libby set for next January.
For more on a USAtty's perspective on CIPA,
see here. For a history of CIPA and the CIA and other classified agencies,
see here.
"Greymail" is a term that refers to substantial classified document requests on behalf of a defendant. It's a tactic that is in bad standing with most prosecutors who deal with national security matters, because it puts you in a difficult place at times: defend your case or defend
your government's secrets.
Graymail is particularly invidious because it is likely to be most successfully employed by former officials from the heart of the government machine who subsequently face trial.
With regard to the "greymail" issue here, this is a complex subject that boils down to this for Team Libby: Scooter had a job that dealt with a lot of high level national security matters. He'd now like to use his complex job as an excuse for committing perjury, but to do that, he has to get access to a lot of the documents that crossed his desk in the service of the Veep. (Shorter Scooter: My job was hard, so you can't hold me responsible for lying.)
Fitz says those docs are irrelevent to the question of whether Libby is a perjurer/obstructor/false statement maker because, frankly, a lie is a lie.
In some cases,
a "greymail" defense is a good strategy. Defense counsel are required, ethically, to defend their client with everything they can muster -- otherwise they aren't properly doing their jobs. That is absolutely true -- and if you ever face criminal charges, you'll want an advocate on your side who will do everything she or he can to help you to win your case within the bounds of the law.
In Libby's case, one of his counsels (Cline) has a history of successfully launching client defense based on "greymail" -- for Wen Ho Lee, as one high profile example. However, I would argue along with Fitz that for this case it is a transparent attempt to force a dismissal by over-requesting materials to which the Defendant ought not be entitled (including requests for 277 PDBs, which is unheard of, frankly) because they are outside the bounds of materiality.
Basically, Libby's counsel are banking on the fact that the Bush Administration will refuse to turn over classified materials they have requested. Fitz is arguing that Team Libby has no right to even ask for a lot of the material. The Judge is going to make a determination at some point as to what does or does not have to be turned over to Libby -- and, if it comes to that, whether the case can continue or not if the material is not turned over by the President.
It's a high stakes gamble on all sides, but I would argue that the case law makes it clear that if the documents and evidence requested are neither "material" nor "relevant" to the charges in the indictment, nor are exculpatory (shorthand: make Libby look not so guilty), then the defendant is not entitled to the discovery. (See Fitz' response brief that
we discussed yesterday for more on this.)
The bottom line on this hearing: Libby has asked for a lot of information, most of which is highly classified. Fitz has already implemented review procedures on the documents which the judge has found acceptable. Scooter's poor handwriting is holding things up a bit, so the Judge has given everyone until early March to complete document review -- but an extension is possible, if needed.
There will be a hearing set at some point to argue whether or not Team Libby is even entitled to any of this material, and I'd guess that it will be likely that most of it is not discoverable based on the charges and the descriptions of what they are asking for at this point. Of course, nothing is certain until the Judge rules, but I think Fitz makes a persuasive argument that Libby is on a fishing expedition for information on how the ongoing investigation is going -- but he's asking for material that would only be relevent if and when he is indicted for IIPA or Espionage Act charges.
A huge thank you to Pachacutec, who braved the federal courthouse to obtain these docs
for all of us.
I went in a suit and tie. DC power drag. Looked like a lawyer with a leather satchel. But no one shot me. In the face....
Thank you, Pach. You are a peach!
|
It's a Saturday morning gift of giggles and links. Thought we could all use a snicker or two before smacking the hell out of the next political brouhaha.
Crooks and Liars has an hilarious video clip up of GOP Operative O'Bierne trying to spin the Cheney shooting as none of the President's business. Chris Matthews and David Ignatius have a fine time pummeling her idiotic spewing. As a bonus, John has a screen grab of the creepy guy who was standing behind Whittington at the presser yesterday -- just who is that guy, anyway?
The General exposes a fondness for...erm...goats among a certain fratboy set. Manimal, indeed.
Because you just can't get enough Ralph Reed in your day...he has
his own graphic novel. Mwahaha. (via
dKos)
TalkLeft links up a Fiore cartoon classic on Cheney, Gonzales and domestic spying. Classic.
TBogg is just funny. Period.
So is
Attaturk. This just cracked me up this morning. Probably the cold drugs.
Roger Ailes beats up Pajamaline...again. (And for an even more amusing pix, scroll upward to the next post, eh? Bwahahaha...
beerhunter...bwahahahaha.)
Oh, and then there is this laugh riot that I found
via Laura Rozen: via a FOIA, notes from an aide to Rumsfeld have been obtained that show how eager he was to pin 9/11 on Saddam Hussein and start a war with him. Oh wait, that's not really very funny, is it? Especially in the context of
Rumsfeld's new push to bring more propaganda to the masses.
(This picture is just too cute, and I've been saving it for a morning where I thought we could use a giggle. I found it on a website of
photos from Namibia.)
UPDATE:
Bopnews has some interesting thoughts on Rumsfeld and an attempt to coerce media censorship.
|
Not to state the obvious or anything, but the GOP is
cynically using religion for its own Machiavellian political aims. Again.
I know...shocker.
Just when religious leaders around the nation thought it was safe to trust their membership, the Republican Party apparatus is asking them...again...to swipe membership directories
from their churches.
Mears said the "Republican National Committee has completed a study on grass-roots activity that reveals that people who regularly attend church usually vote Republican when they vote."
"In light of this study's findings, it is imperative that we register, educate and get these potential voters from the pew to the ballot box. To do this we must know who these people are," the memo continued.
"I am requesting that you collect as many church directories as you can and send them to me in an effort to fully register, educate and energize North Carolina's congregations to vote in the 2006 elections," it said.
Nothing like asking your party faithful to go behind Jesus' back -- guess that whole parable about
the moneylenders in the temple was just so much paper for Ken Mehlman and his ilk.
I must say, I'm not exactly surprised, given that Republicans brought you such disgusting tactics as sending out a mass-mailing in WV and AR to say that Democrats were out to
ban the Bible (nothing like a little lie between the faithful, eh?) during the 2004 Presidential election. Or the ever-popular use of
Ralph Reed to bilk the faithful, using his flock to fill his own coffers along with that of the party -- gambling revenue and Jack Abramoff, anyone? Or the painful saga of Terri Schiavo. Or...well, it just keeps going, doesn't it?
It's not that Democrats haven't used the pulpit for political gains in the past -- but Karl Rove, Ralph Reed and their malignant band of cronies have taken this cynical manipulation of the faithful to an entirely new level over the past few years. To the point that the Southern Baptist Convention has called them out on
particularly egregious tactics.
There was an editorial a few weeks ago
in USAToday entitled "Playing the God Card," that really summed up how disgusting I find this manipulative political hypocrisy.
As religion scholar and writer Stephen Carter wisely argues in his book God's Name in Vain: The Wrongs and Rights of Religion in Politics, faith at its best resists being drawn too far into the nitty-gritty of politics. Who is to say whether Jesus would favor this or that specific policy — that he would frown on SUVs and drive only hybrid cars, as some environmentalists have claimed? Who's to say he would want any part of the often-cynical horse-trading and compromising that play a large part in the making of policy and law?
Faith at its best, at its most powerful, stands outside of culture, Carter argues, where it can best maintain its integrity and prophetic moral force. As Carter sees it, "Religion has too often allowed itself to be seduced by the lure of temporal power, a dysfunctional and even immoral love affair that has led to much human misery and has been destructive as well of true faith."
Amen.
|
What an embarassment of riches we have for this the second night of semifinals in Dickfest, our poetry contest in honor of our fearless Veep who crawled out of his bunker and grimmaced for the cameras today. The contest is so popular it has even
inspired imitators who could not constrain themselves to the four line limit, so abundant was their creative impulse.
Remember the winner will receive a copy of Bill Maher's latest book
New Rules: Polite Musings from a Timid Observer and a poster signed by Mr. Maher himself. His
series premeires tonight on HBO at 11pm.
Once again, please vote by the number at the bottom of the entry, and vote only once:
Two unsteady hunters sip, step the fields,
stopBlam! a cordite wind…. Says, “Hey, Jeez, watchit!
Don’t you be pullin’ a Cheney, on me now.” (101)
one lawyer, sans face
what to do...? maybe cheney
should have called The Wolf (102)
I think that we shall never see
A Veep who lies as much as Dick Cheney
Likely in a drunken stupor, he shot a friend in the chest
But his claim that it was from 30 yards fails the sportsman's common sense test (103)
Richard "Big Time" Cheney carries a heavy strap
Like Lee Harvey Oswald, he's bustin' caps
He takes fools out gat, scowl or shiv
The naked fuckin' face of the executive. (104)
News from Iraq hits the back burner
Investigations played down, not a big earner
The great state of Texas' proud flag we hail
R C the fuckin' Veep terrorizes quail. (105)
Fitzgerald on the march
Libby loose of tongue
Harry’s heart distraction (106)
"Stumbling from the ranch car into the brush,
Going after pen-raised quail, what a rush.
Then this old geezer jumped up out of no place
And startled my bird, so I shot him in the face." (107)
Down in Texas a Dick was shotgunning for quail.
Told that he couldn't shoot little birds dead
Without legal permit and risking jail,
He bagged his limit of lawyer instead. (108)
The only thing we have to fear is...
BLAM!!! (109)
Big Time Dick was on the prowl for a flock of feeble pen-raised fowl.
He swung his gun into the sun, and shot a geezer who went into a seizure.
They all stayed up late to get the story straight, about who drank what and when.
But it's all for naught, 'cause he's gonna get caught, and maybe do five to ten. (110)
Drunk Cheney locked & drunk Cheney loaded;
H. Whittington’s drooping white face exploded.
George flew the coop when the covey was flushed;
Dick, why? A Bush in your hand is worth two birds in the brush! (111)
Cheney's cell chirped, saying "no more birds, need a permit stamp."
Cheney says "Hell, twirps can't tell me what to do,
Got one more round left, only question is 'where to?'"
Takes a shot, another shot, another, back to camp. (112)
Dirty Dick
Didn't make Harry's day
When Harry met salvo
Down Texas way (113)
An accident it must have been,
And not a planned attack
Because Dick shot him in the face
Instead of in the back. (114)
one small step for man...
one giant...
BLAM!!! (115)
With bloodshot eyes and whiskey breath,
Cheney was on his game.
He shot poor Harry nearly to death.
Jack Daniels can shoot. He can't aim. (116)
Shot through the heart,
and you're to blame, Harry.
Don't give Dick
a bad name. (117)
Sip n' shoot, sip n' shoot, doesn't that feel nice?
Smoke over the meadow, bourbon over the ice.
Drunken death is Dick's delight; this is Cheney's show.
Dick can drink it straight -- but shoot straight? No. (118)
Swiss miss premature
ejaculation gun shot
Call Karl clean up (119)
Bird in grass
Reveals the hunter
And his lies. (120)
It's me on the hunt
Quail flushed;
my sneer turns to grin
Oh shit I shot my friend (121)
Birdie, birdie in the grass
Just take flight -I'll shoot your ass. (122)
Up you go, you sons of bitches.
BAM - shot one lawyer, collapsed in the ditches. (123)
here birdie birdie...
BLAM!!!
get up you sissy...
and don't bleed in my car (124)
"Yippiety do dah, dippity day
My oh my, what a wonderful day!
Plenty of sunshine heading my way
Dippity do - BAM, Harry hit the hay!" (125)
GEORGE! I finally got one. Heheheh. In the BUSH.
DANg - that ain't a QUAIL.
AL -Qaeda? Won't work - I only got him in the foot. Not ... enough ... GORE.
DICK. Heheheh. I'm Dick fucking CHENEY. (126)
pacemaker, perazzi, defibber,
went down to the ranch to play,
with quail a quiver, poor Harry will niver,
forget that fateful day (127)
face-time with pellet…
(my kingdom for a bird-stamp)
blood-- like picnic beer (128)
See Dick
See Dick Shoot
See Dick Shoot Harry
Don't Be Such A Dick! (129)
He's shot, nuff said - ain't like he's dead.
The law can wait til I'm good and straight,
and the press can wait even longer (130)
Let's not time the timing of the man who pulled the trigger
Not letting people know he'd bagged a lawyer not a quail –
Since bragging by the hunter is accepted, not de rigeur,
And modesty demands delay in telling this great tale. (131)
sound of gunshot rings
shots pepper innocent life
none could save the quail (132)
I pulled the trigger
So I guess it was me
So I’ll take the blame
In the absence of Libby (133)
Dick and Whittington
Sharing fun
"Run Harry run,
Dick’s got a gun!" (134)
Step out SUV
Take drink, raise gun, shoot lawyer
Quail, go f@ck yourself! (135)
...was yer cocktail
after the shot quail
a double Manhattan
“sorry bout where he got shot in” (136)
where there's smoke, there's fire,
where there's one beer, there's a liar (137)
WARNING NOTICE TO HUNTERS:
Please be advised
That lawyers may appear
As quail in disguise (138)
how many birds must a bald man kill
before he thinks he's a man
how many Plames must this bald man name,
before Fitz shows him his shame (139)
I shot the shareholder,
but I did not shoot no diplomat (140)
Let us go then, you and I
Where the evening is stretched out against the sky
Like a 78-year-old man blasted in the face with a shot gun wielded by a drunk, arrogrant lying fool (141)
if the shooter is tight, then we must indict!!! (142)
Whose woods are these? I just don't care
I know that there are quail out there
My good friend Harry must think it weird
That I mistook him for a bird (143)
Step out SUV
Take drink, raise gun, shoot lawyer
Quail, go f@ck yourself! (144)
dick peppered poor harry with lead.
now all the media is fed,
with lie after lie and rovian spin,
alas,once more, let their game begin. (145)
Firearms training? I had other priorities
Like mixing myself three Long Island Iced Teas
Before spotting a wingless bird and giving chase
And then shooting my lawyer friend in the face (146)
Hunting for feathers of mass destruction can be frustrating
But you're my friend
I shoot you in the face with my shotgun for nothing (147)
roses are red
violets are blue
my friend's not dead
so fuck you! (148)
peppered with lead
like a rib-eyed steak
fingers crossed when I said
it was my mistake (149)
it was my mistake
i'm sure you will
admit beacause
i shoot to kill (150)
I have the discression
to reveal to you Plame;
but please do not tell me
how to hunt down my game. (151)
Big Time, Packin' Heat.
Big Heat.
Packin' Time. (152)
be it quail, or harry,
or soldiers, or citizens
dick, sit there and ponder
your multiple mega-sins (153)
Cheney
Shot
Harry's
Heart (154)
There once was a Dick with a gun
went to Texas on a quail run
but when on the hunt he acted the c***
and shot his best mate, just for fun.(155)
swiss miss
mixed with beer
and peppered with harry
is a rotten brew (156)
Oh, Big Time...
How could you?
You hurt the party,
By leaving witnesses. (157)
Let the angry seas surge beneath and pound,
rain-lashed men heaving a wave-stuck net.
Far ashore the coolies toil, weathered under the harpoon's heft,
a trophy for the vice captain's mantle. (158)
Some men fish in the sea,
Where 'Perfect Storms' imperil,
Others drink a beer or three,
And shoot fish in a barrel. (159)
holy crap! see!
you shot he!
now off thee
to corpus cristi. (160)
The lawyers first!, the wise old bard once said.
Just blast away into the face and head!
All real men know that that will do the trick.
So burped the manliest man, our latest Dick. (161)
killing gamebirds in the night
swilling drinks with froth and bite
who the hell would ever figger
soon all would be so,very,very,very bigger (162)
When William Clinton was the president
To get a blow job was a big disgrace.
But times have changed, now it's OK
To shoot a load in some old geezer's face! (163)
As the shotguns ring out
look to this lot;
for it's the heart of a nation
that has been fatally shot. (164)
There once was a man from Wyoming
Who took a pot shot into the gloaming
He winged an attorney, who took a slow journey
Cheney thought he was a pidgeon who was homing. (165)
Paying Taxes naught
Patriotic?
We've bought
Idiotic (166)
Old man
Big balls
"But they're blue,
So I'll shoot you" (167)
Rich and old
No grandchild
Desperate, angry,
Poor and wild (168)
Trust us
We'll protect you
Bend over (169)
Get your news from TVs
Vote from your knees
We'll do
What we please (170)
“Bigshot Buckshot” on the spot:
Shooting birds, people, whatever you’ve got
Questions rise; he answers not
Is this a metaphor, or what? (171)
I was off in the bush with fair Pamela, When I turned old Harry to Spamela
We nearly got caught, Now Lynne is distraught
I hope no one brought their camera (172)
The shooting victim’s not to blame,
(His name is not dear Valerie Plame);
He came up behind me and gave a hoot
And I thought the bastard shouted “shoot.” (173)
In legal scandal firmly mired,
Cheney fired.
Approaching the body he was heard to curse,
"Eh. Could be worse." (174)
There once was a Veep named Dick Cheney;
He aimed at a bird's little heine.
He stumbled around, quite snockered but proud
to have bagged who he thought was Ma Rainey. (175)
democracy in its last throes
lining up crosses, row by row
hurling lies, like buckshot, at imagined foes,
this vice president has got to go (176)
With guns a blazin
the events of February 11
cannot compare
to his role in 9/11 (177)
with your gatling gun
and mary matalin run
to the fox news den
home of all your men (178)
The covey rose
as did Dick
His pellets aspray
ruined Harry's day (179)
While sipping on his pint of ale
Dick thought he’d like to shoot a bird
But he bagged Harry, not a quail
When his shot went off, premature (180)
The sheriff at last came a calling
But Dick was busy with his dinner
He dreamt that night of Harry falling
While his story spun into the spinner (181)
The story missed the morning paper
until word came from a lady rancher
this shot was no assault just pepper
y'all see its Harry's own fault, now can't you? (182)
here comes the bird flu
good news for you who
would like us all to
forget your boo-boo (183)
I’m not sorry, no I’m not sorry
I put that old man in his place
I’m not sorry, no I’m not sorry
I shot the country in the face. (184)
As the shotguns ring out
look to this lot;
for it's the heart of a nation
that has been fatally shot. (185)
On the front lines, defending the nation,
Protecting us all, from the quail invasion.
I fired off a shot, my duty, your Honor.
But old Harry forgot, to put on his armor. (186)
Many acres to hunt, but fewer
than one per dead Iraqi;
Many excuses needed, but newer
without a Libby-like lackey. (187)
Harry's face was bloody and raw.
He got a taste of shock and awe.
Faulty intelligence: the shot was clear.
Bin Laden the bird had nothing to fear.(188)
bunker blind dick shot
old man vexed
memo to Scooter:
you're next. (189)
Dick Cheney hunting
Drunkenly, he wheels around
Birdshot in the face (190)
A drunken shooter
Constitution in season
A drunken looter
All boozed up for treason. (191)
The Loaded Shotgun shoots; and, having shot,
Moves on: nor all thy silence nor spin shall lure it back to cancel half a Wound,
Nor all thy lies undo the crime of it. (192)
There once was a Dick with a sneer
Who liked to kill birds and drink beer
Though his aim was a shame, he deflected the blame:
"Go fuck yourself Harry, my dear" (193)
To "Duck"cheney we 're all quails.
Watch your back, face,neck and heart. (194)
Said Dick to the rest of the crew,
I like hunting these peasants, don't you?
And imagining the poor in his foyer,
he turned round and bagged him a lawyer. (195)
Richard Cheney went to Texas
To get away from dimwit,
Shot a rich guy in the face -
That's one more than the limit. (196)
As Cheney blasts lawyers
it's easy to tell;
that we fight for a Nation
gone blind as all hell. (197)
government privlege
our trust, honor, pride are gone
cheney owns the bank (198)
A Quail, A trail and some ice-cold ale
It's sunset and the air is freezin'
I flushed a covey, and as they flew above me
I bagged a lawyer, ooops, not in season! (199)
The sun was setting on the fields at a slow and saddened pace.
It shined its dying rays upon the man I shot in the face.
Did this involve some larger Godly message? I paused to think.
A metaphor for arrogance? Power and corruption? Naahh, let’s have a drink. (200)
And here's the nightly push for Ciro -- who, thanks to the efforts of everyone involved, has raised $136,000 through the internet. He started out with $43,000 to the DINO Cuellar's $292,000; we've given him a fighting chance (on this blog alone we've raised over $16,000 of that). Thanks to everyone. You can see his TV spot
here, and as Kos notes, if you're thinking of giving more, now is a good time to do it -- money didn't pour into the Hackett campaign against Schmidt until the last minute and it was too late to make good use of it.
So if you'd like to express your appreciation for the progressive poets who have entertained you this evening, the tip jar is here.Update: The WaPo blog is hopping once again.
David E., Paul Lukasiak,
Brad DeLong and others are
swinging for the fences.(graphic by Dark Black)
|
There was a lot of frustration this week about the fact that a full-court press wasn't made to influence the Senate Intelligence Committee into investigating the illegal NSA wiretaps. Aside from the fact that all the oxygen got sucked out of every other story when the Veep shot a 78 year-old
good friend acquaintance in the face, there wasn't anything that could have prevented what actually happened with the vote yesterday.
As
Glenn Greenwald says:
First, nobody ever thought that a just resolution of this scandal was dependent upon an investigation by the Senate Intelligence Committee, dominated, as it is, by the mewling, slavish and indescribably dishonest Pat Roberts. The notion that this scandal has come to an end all because Roberts blocked, for the moment, hearings that were to be held by that Committee is nonsensical. Thankfully, this scandal never depended upon the integrity of Pat Roberts, and hearings in front of that Committee were merely one of the many ways to compel a real investigation, but it was hardly the only or even primary way.
Moreover, the Committee did not vote against an investigation. Instead, Roberts merely invoked a procedural device as Chairman to prevent a vote, for now, from taking place. (Incidentally, what happened to the Republican mantra that procedural maneuvers ought not be used to block up-or-down votes? It seems that principle only applies to matters where they know they will prevail on the vote. Here, there were clearly Republican members of the Committee who did not want to go on record – and who may have been unwilling to go on record – voting to oppose an investigation. As a result, no vote was held).
Glenn goes on to provide some much needed context:
The reality is that the more the Administration fights to suppress investigations and conceal relevant facts, the more fuel is added to this fire. Every presidential scandal in history has been exacerbated by the cover-up component. Opponents of the Clinton Administration had some of their most compelling political P.R. victories when the Administration invoked precepts of "Executive privilege" in order to block interrogation and to avoid the disclosure of documents.
Rather than viewing each obstructionist step by the Administration as some sign of our inevitable defeat and doom, we ought to see it and use it as what it is -- a sign that, contrary to their bravado, the Administration is petrified of this scandal and is doing everything possible to prevent Americans -- through their Congress and the courts -- from discovering the truth.
The NSA scandal has been upon us for two months. Watergate took 2 1/2 years to come to a full boil. Abu Gonzales claims that he's not able to imagine what Comey and Ashcroft "add to the discussion," but clearly he can if they're
claiming executive privilege. The White House is very, very frightened about what could be unearthed in this investigation, and that's a very good reason to keep digging -- no matter how long it takes.
(graphic by Dark Black)
|
Come take a stroll through our new
FDL Cafe Press Annex, "The Cheney Collection" -- designed by Dark Black. A few
prêt-à-porter items the fashion conscious liberal barbarian will no doubt fail to wash.
Although the administration this morning went balls-to-the-wall today to kill the story about how the Vice President shot an old man in the face, it doesn't seem to be taking. Today on Hardball Matthews said: "George Bush was made to look like Fredo. He couldn't control his Vice President."
This is still in flux. Much fallout yet to come.
Junta loyalist
Peg-a-loon sent up a trial balloon about ditching Cheney, and the controvery continues to grow.
Holden has more about the gross errors made by Chief Wiggam and the Texas Park and Wildlife Service, and people are now trying to re-enact the official story -- with alarming lack of success. It appears Whittington was shot from between 15-18 feet, not the 90 Cheney claims. You can
see the video here.
Most telling -- Whittington himself today
thanked the media. Sounds like he may not have been so happy about being shot by a drunk, smeared by his buddies then
dragged in front of a camera for a massive PR stunt three days after having a heart attack, does it?
The Sunday talk shows should be revealing, as should the next round of polling.
So fix yourself another highball, Big Time. You ain't out of the woods yet.
MSNBC
wants to know what you think.
|
Church Lady Brady says that the WaPo blog is back on. He says "Tough criticism is welcome; personal attacks on writers or other readers are not."
Really? That brings up a good point. When Brady had his
long sit on the pity pot about mean liberal bloggers the other day, he climbed down long enough to devote some special time to tenderly rimming the Power Tools for their work on Dan Rather and the TANG story as an example of how valuable blogs could be (though the Tool Timers, in typical fashion, think Brady
should've spent a bit more time down there, they really wanted him to work the crevices).
Over at Corrente, Xan
made this comment:
Brady sez:Bloggers have indisputably helped fan controversy over a CBS memo on a broadcast about President Bush's National Guard service.
Whereas he could have said "Bloggers, specifically Paul Lukaisiak, unpaid and distributed for free, covered the story we didn't, that George Bush failed to complete the National Guard service that he still lists on his resume. We, and the (handsomely) paid establishment media, never covered that story at all, instead allowing ourselves to be suckered by the great 'faked memos' story, which we failed to investigate properly as well.
"Considering the no-stone-unturned, no-expense-spared, no holds barred coverage we gave to every cockamamie accusation against President Clinton, we could have done better, and we understand now why the disparity would lead some to suspect we are in the tank for Republicans. Sorry about that. Our bad."
Instead he spends virtually all of Page 1 of a 2 page story complaining about being called bad names. Sorry, Jim, being as civil, gracious and (sound of grinding teeth) polite as I can possibly manage, that still qualifies as "whiny" in my book.
Brady wonders why "these people" are "so angry." Could it possibly be because he is lying through is teeth? That tough criticism is anything but "welcome?"
One of the thing Brady still harps on in his piece is how Abramoff "directed" money to Democrats. One of the original commenters on the Maryland Moment blog
made this point about WaPo reporter Derek Willis:
Willis wrote: "But contrary to what some commenters have said here, Abramoff did direct donations to Democratic candidates and committees. Our reporters have documents showing this to be the case, and I have asked that we post at least some of them so that readers can see for themselves."
That was two hours ago. Now, it takes me about ten minutes to scan a document, and upload it to my own website, and post a URL -- and that's because I'm not very good at all this "internets" stuff.
Willis claims that there are documents in which Jack Abramoff directs his clients to give to Democrats. One assumes that these include signed letters or memos from Abramoff to his clients, or emails directly from Abramoff to his clients --- and one assumes that if such documents actually existed, the Post would have written about them as part of what Deborah Howell described as Susan Schmidt's "explosive" investigative work on the Abramoff scandal.....
But to date, all the Post (and Willis) have ever come up with are these facts
1. Native Americans tribes give money to both parties
2. Some Native American tribes were represented by a firm that Abramoff worked for
3. Some of these tribes gave money to some Democrats -- but since Abramoff has been around, they aren't giving Democrats as much
So, Willis, where are your "documents"? Its been two hours plus -- ten times as long as it would take for you to scan and post the "Abramoff memo" you need to show us that you aren't lying through your teeth....
Posted by: paul lukasiak | Jan 17, 2006 10:31:19 AM | Permalink
------------------------------------------------------
well, its now three hours and counting since Willis claimed that "Abramoff did direct donations to Democratic candidates and committees. Our reporters have documents showing this to be the case" and also claimed that he was going to get those documents posted...
but instead of posting these "explosive" documents, the Post deletes Willis's claim....
Posted by: paul lukasiak | Jan 17, 2006 11:29:24 AM | Permalink
Notice the author -- yes, Paul Lukasiak.
There is nothing in either of these posts that falls outside the realm of "tough criticism" Brady claims to so bravely court. Yet these comments -- which are preserved in archives -- have never been restored to the blog and Brady continues to characterize them as brutal and obscene. I asked Brady about them in the
WaPo online chat, I caught up with him at Jay Rosen's when he was commenting there and asked him, and he refuses to answer. He continues to use his pulpit to bash the liberal blogosphere like a big blubbering babyman but never answers this question, which effectively renders all his excuses hollow lies.
Remember the name -- Paul Lukasiak. He's done amazing work that deserves every accolade the Power Tools relentlessly insist on claiming for themselves. And I'll keep bringing up his name, and waving it in Brady's chickenshit face, until he answers what it is about Paul Lukasiak that sends him running for his mommie's skirts like a little girl -- could it be the fact that Paul continually shoots holes in their cheap, transparently partisan efforts to throw a robe over the naked emperor?
Brady wants to know why we use such coarse, hot language. Well, let's let him in on a really poorly kept secret. We use it consciously, because it's the only rhetoric that cuts through the mountains of bullshit people like him continue to rain down on us and everyone else who wants an honest answer out of government. If he can't stand it then he just better run home crying and get out of the fucking way, because it's not going to stop.
Oh it is now one month to the day since Deborah Howell
published her original article saying Abramoff gave money to Democrats. She has still not posted a correction to this article.
|
Patrick Fitzgerald has filed his Consolidated Response to Team Libby's Discovery Motions. It's a 32-page response brief that covers all the motions filed thus far by Team Libby, for all of the myraid of discovery requests that they have made. (Tom Maguire is graciously hosting
the PDF of the document here. Thanks, Tom. You can read his take on
the docs here, as well.)
After spending some time going over the response brief, it's pretty much what I expected in terms of argument from Fitz and his staff -- Fitz argues that Libby vastly overreaching on discovery requests that have no relevance to the charges he faces, and that Libby's defense counsel appear to be on some sort of fishing expedition for information pertaining to other matters outside the indictment charges of perjury, false statements and obstruction.
On page 9, footnote 1, of the brief, Fitz reveals that there was an additional filing from his team of an
ex parte (meaning it went only to the Judge, and not to Team Libby) affadavit under seal which makes extensive reference to grand jury information, including the identities of various witnesses, their testimony, and the strategy and direction of the continuing investigation. According to the brief, this was filed along with this response on 2/16/06.
My assumption is that this details some of the ongoing investigative work and potentially those areas to which Libby continues to be an impediment to the investigation, and where other members of the Administration may be implicated, along with where the investigation may be currently headed and why such requests for information from Libby would cause difficulties for the investigation.
The judge will review that material and make a determination on a couple of fronts: (1) whether or not the material referred to in the ex parte filing is, indeed, relevant or irrelevant to the charges faced by Libby and (2) to what, if any, of that information Libby may be entitled (as Fitz argues, none, but the judge will have to review the information in the context of the entire case and the applicable case law). There will be a motion date for arguments set at some point in the future where this will no doubt be argued much further by both sides, and a ruling will issue at some point after that.
On page 11, Fitz argues that the only reporter information which has not been shared with Libby is that which relates to other individuals (who may or may not be currently under investigation) who are not Libby. Fitz argues that this is neither relevant nor material to Libby's case, and that the material ought to be privileged due to grand jury secrecy requirements. (Standard prosecutorial objection, frankly, to a request that is beyond the boundaries of the "four corners of the indictment.")
I do wonder if Team Libby is fishing for some particular piece of information here -- potentially about someone who has testified adversely to Libby's or some other Administration official's interest. If there is some mole who has been feeding information to Fitz and his team, as some have speculated, this sort of fishing expedition might be one way to get a hint as to who that might be.
On pages 13-14, Fitz lays out more reasons why he feels that the Libby requests are tangential at best, and an attempt at overreach for a potential dismissal as a "greymail" tactic. This is especially true in the arguments advanced regarding Valerie Wilson's employment status -- and Fitz' argument that this has nothing whatsoever to do with the charges Libby faces (perjury, obstruction, false statements), and that Team Libby is using this as a pretext for a vast discovery fishing expedition.
Fitz hits this point heavily on page 15, stating that Team Libby, "whether by design or otherwise" has made discovery requests which impinge on governmental privilege issues and that the Judge ought to rebuff this transparent greymail attack under the guidelines established in CIPA. Fitz goes on to bolster this argument on page 20 (by saying Libby is attempting "to bootstrap" an argument that the massive PDB and other document requests have any relevance whatsoever to his charges) and on page 25 (by alluding to defense counsel's "breathtaking" and "transparent effort at greymail" on behalf of Libby).
Essentially, the entire response brief is one big "put up or shut up" from Fitz to Team Libby. We knew when Libby hired Cline (the former counsel for Wen Ho Lee who specializes in greymail cases out of Jones Day in LA) that this would be a large portion of the defense tactic at the start of the case, but the breadth with which such requests have been made truly is nothing short of ballsy. Requesting 277 PDBs is not something you try every day in defense of a client for a perjury indictment, let me tell you.
Based on my knowledge of the case law involved (Brady, Giglio, Poindexter, George and others), Fitz has a very good chance of winning his arguments. But, as with anything in court, nothing is certain until you get the written ruling.
The AP (via MSNBC) covers the filing, as does
Bloomberg, which notes that Fitz has already turned over more than 11,000 pages of documents to Team Libby to date.
Additionally,
the WaPo noted yesterday in an article about Cheney's declassification claims that Libby's defense may attempt to use those claims as a hook.
Libby is not charged with leaking classified information, and his lawyers said last week that there was no truth to a published report that they had advised the court or prosecutors that Libby will raise a defense based on authorization by superiors.
A legal expert said Cheney's comments could nonetheless foreshadow a Libby defense.
Former Whitewater independent counsel Robert Ray said, "If the focus is off the defendant and on to somebody else, generally for the defense that's a good day. If it turns out that Cheney was actively involved in decisions related to the disclosure of a CIA officer's identity and if the truth of it is that he was orchestrating the disclosure of information to the media, it seems to me that's a fundamentally different case than one centered around the activities of Libby."
I don't buy how declassification claims can make the fact that Libby lied repeatedly to investigators and the grand jury disappear in a poof of magic legal smoke, but then I'm not trying to spin the national media establishment on behalf of my client, either.
And finally, John Eckenrode, the chief FBI investigator on Fitz' team, is retiring after 32 years of service to the Bureau,
according to the Philadelphia Inquirer. He'll still be an integral part of any trial involving Libby or others who may yet to be indicted, because he was the chief officer who took witness statements and was involved in overseeing so many aspects of the investigation thus far. Here's hoping he has a great retirement, and a smooth transition into some nice private sector consulting gig or into a La-Z-Boy lounger of his choice. He's earned it and then some.
Fitz has clearly been down this defense block a time or two, although his tone in this brief is that of prosecutor who is laughing off the audacity of defense counsel's requests (a common tone, frankly, for prosecutors at this stage of back and forth on discovery -- I've been on both the receiving end of this as well as the dishing it out end). I think he has solid arguments that a large amount of the information requested by Team Libby is irrelevent to the charges in the indictment, that Libby is fishing for potential discovery for possible future charges for himself and others in the Administration (to which he is not entitled until such time as those charges may be filed).
One bit that amused me was on pages 28 and 29, wherein Fitz argues that Libby would not be entitled to information regarding Valerie Wilson's covert employment status unless he could show that he (Libby) had been privy to such documentary proof at the time that his alleged crimes were occurring. It's your basic "put up or shut up" response from Fitz -- but it requires that Libby either let it go (because he did not see such documentation, and thus admit that it has no relevence whatsoever to his state of mind at the time of indictment) or that Libby fesses up to knowing that she was covert (which would open a whole new level of speculation, now wouldn't it?) or that both sides will just keep on whistling past this issue altogether.
Never play poker with Fitz. That's all I'm saying.
|
From reader Harvey:
The parallels are endless, except in every case the things that got Clinton probed and vilified are comical compared to the far more numerous and serious things that this administration are allowed to skate free on.
Here's one: Clinton's discussion about Lewinsky with Betty Currie immediately following his deposition in the Jones case became grounds for impeachment (suborning perjury). Cheney's discussion with the non-eyewitness witness GOP lobbyist Armstrong about his having just shot a man in the face -- and Armstrong's subsequent telephone call with Karl Rove (the one where, as you said, Rove sat silently listening) -- well, that's just an attempt to be as accurate as possible before informing anyone, including the president, of what had happened.
MSNBC, the network that helpfully scrubbed any reference to Cheney's drinking, is now giving BushCo. unlimited time to drag an old man out of his hospital bed and prop him up as a PR stunt, let the Veep drone on at some hype-fest that is about as spontaneous as one of his canned hunts, and now Bush is doing his Anthony Robbins impression as he pimps for war. Meanwhile the MSNBC quote-unquote "reporters" are all quick to point out that the sheriff's report cleared Dick.
Pravda.
Update: Digby:
Teachable moments like this don't come along every day. Thankfully, we have a gooood man like Dick Cheney to show us how it's done. For instance, the next time somebody accidentally runs over a pedestrian and refuses to talk to police about it until the next day, we should remember that he was traumatized. After all, he witnessed someone get run over right before his eyes and it profoundly affected him. As long as there was no fellatio involved, he is as much a victim as the wounded person.
|
Some weeks are easier than others in terms of optimism. Having spent the past week peering into Dick Cheney's dark corners (never a cheery place to be, even in the best of times, let alone in a week where he shot a hunting companion), and optimism has been a little more difficult to come by than usual.
It just seems like the nasty bits and scandals are coming out of the woodwork of late, and that good news is becoming more and more difficult to find.
I know it is thoroughly nerdy, but in times like these, I pick up material from our nation's history and remind myself about what true obstacles really are -- and how much courage and conviction it took to overcome them at our nation's founding and throughout our history. Thought I would share an excerpt of what I was reading yesterday evening,
from Thomas Paine:
THESE are the times that try men's souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly: it is dearness only that gives every thing its value. Heaven knows how to put a proper price upon its goods; and it would be strange indeed if so celestial an article as FREEDOM should not be highly rated.
Someone said to me yesterday that these are big battles that we are waging -- and that the future of our nation hangs in the balance. I needed the pick-me-up and thought I would return the favor by passing that sentiment on to all of you: these are important issues that we debate and, just like Thomas Paine and the Founders who fought these battles before us, nothing that is worth having comes easily.
But the fact that we suit up and fight for what we believe to be right has so much value. To be able to do so alongside so many of you is an honor. And I just felt the need to say that this morning, so thank you for everything you do and have done -- and for everything we will continue to do as we move forward.
I'm reading through the Fitz motion response and will have notes on it later, as well as some other news from that front. Stay tuned.
THIS JUST IN: Whittington will appear at a news conference within the hour. Will update as I get details.
UPDATE: Whittington news conference going on as I type. Whittington looks fairly good, pretty much like every lawyer I spent my time with daily when I was practicing. (Reminds me of several people I know, actually.) Very much an old-style Southern gentleman, clearly one with some trial experience -- he's good in front of a crowd and quite smooth in delivery, and his primary concern is that this will have a lasting impact on the sport of quail hunting, and to make certain that he says repeatedly that it was an accident. Concern for the Cheneys and what they have had to deal with in this as well, and grateful to his family and friends and the medical folks who have provided treatment. Statement was brief -- he had some bruising on his face and neck, but not substantial visible injuries. Was dressed in suit and tie (once a lawyer, always a lawyer...lol), so no way to see any injury area on or around his chest or much of his neck. If I can find a full transcript of the statement, I'll link it up.
Very much a "nothing to see here, moving right along" sort of statement. Cheney is also speaking today to the Wyoming legislature -- I'll update if there is any news from there as well.
UPDATE #2: Jane says: Words I didn't hear in the press conference: "It was all my fault, just like Norm Coleman and Alan Simpson said."
MSNBC now showing Dick Cheney speaking to a very friendly Wyoming legislature -- and Lynn is with him today as well.
|
At what point do we all sit back and begin to wonder how much power Dick Cheney has accumulated in this Administration? Cheney decided that he could simply ignore all the directives coming from the White House, including apparently specifics coming from Karl Rove and Andy Card as to how and when announcements ought to be made.
Rumor has it that Cheney was supposed to do a brief presser outside the hospital on Sunday and decided not to do so -- but didn't tell anyone at the WH that he was taking a pass.
The shooting has been
a PR disaster for this White House, and especially for Cheney, who has never been the "warm and fuzzy" aspect of the ticket anyway. You know you are headed down the wrong path in your reaction when both
Marlin Fitzwater and Dick Morris smack you over the head with a dunce cap.
Speaking of Morris,
C&L has some video of Morris on Hannity's show where Sean pretends that Cheney has never been a drinker. Guess Sean missed the interview where the Veep admitted to drinking the day of the shooting to Fox's own Brit Hume. Sean gets peeved with Morris for questioning the Veep's actions -- talk about your cult of personality politics.
Do we have one president in this country -- or two?
It is not an academic question, but one that needs to be addressed, given the substantial activity that has gone on in this VP's office and the level of secrecy under which he tends to operate. (And given his claims of being able to declassify information on his own whim, which is a national security secrets disaster waiting to happen. NPR had a great piece on this issue yesterday, and you can listen to it
here.) And it is a question that policy wonks and media watchers from all sides of the aisle have started asking out loud.
The LATimes asked some tough questions yesterday regarding this Administration's failures in immediate response time in crisis situations -- and that this latest example of holding the press and the public at arm's length after Dick Cheney shot his fellow hunting companion was far too remniscent of the lack of candor and responsiveness
following Katrina.
"If the buck stops with you, you are the person who has to take charge," said Leon E. Panetta, a White House chief of staff under President Clinton. "I get the impression in this White House that the buck sometimes stops everywhere else but [with] the president…. Frankly, that mentality leads to nothing but trouble."
Some senior Republicans, including top officials from previous GOP administrations, privately said they shared Panetta's views.
Sounds to me like Poppy's friends aren't so happy with the Veep these days. Especially given the fact that Junior's poll numbers continue to
slide ever-downward.
E.J. Dionne hits a note that I think bears further discussion about this particular Administration: the phony populism that they have used to boost themselves with the "regular folk," as my Granny would have said, all the while knifing those folks in the back in what they are actually doing within the budget and its falsely-named initiatives.
A large number of GOP members of Congress are unhappy with this Administration's budget priorities -- especially with some of his proposed cuts as leading into the mid-term elections in the Fall. An open rebellion among some
has been reported, and with the ballooning deficit and the ever-expanding gap between the poorest Americans and those on the top of the pile, the question of priorities and of who we want to be in this nation gets raised more and more.
This all ties in to the question of leadership at the top: is this President truly running things in the country -- or is he being run by those around him who have their own agendas: Karl Rove and the desire for political dominance and power; Dick Cheney and the desire for more central control over federal governmental powers and a more militarized approach to foreign policy...the list is endless in terms of the varying factions within this Administration. But with a President who has seemed detached and, at times, unresponsive entirely, the question of how much of a tin ear he has is being raised more and more.
Look at the questions we ask here regularly:
Who was behind the outing of Valerie Plame Wilson and why? It sure seems like Dick Cheney played a fairly big role in that question, just based on what we know from the Libby indictment and surrounding documentation, doesn't it?
Was the President ever truly engaged in the Katrina disaster -- or was he not to be bothered while on vacation? The latest Congressional reports on that issue
are scathing, and they come from a predominantly Republican committee. (The Democratic report is
even more harsh in its assessment.)
I'm hard pressed to come up with any coherent summary of our foreign policy, other than "yeehaw" clearly doesn't cut it. The fact that
Condi Rice was raked over the coals this week for our dismal performance in Iraq and for being surprised by Palestinian election results and other matters in the Middle East and elsewhere hardly inspires confidence that any plan will be forthcoming with any more coherence than we are already seeing.
I'm not even sure where to start with regard to domestic policies. Between the mining disasters we've seen recently, some of which may be due to the undercutting of oversight under this Administration through to the cuts across the board in early childhood education initiatives, student loan programs, and the disaster that is Medicaid-D -- well, it's just dismal, isn't it?
Just who is in charge of this government? I'd sure as hell like to hand out a pink slip, if I could just figure out where the buck stops with this crew -- they sure do a good job of passing the buck around, don't they? Too bad it never gets to the people who actually need a hand up.
UPDATE: I'll be doing a bit with
ThinkProgress Radio later this morning. Details and a link to the podcast when I get it.
UPDATE #2: Here's
a link to the livestream of ThinkProgress Radio. I'll be on around 11:30 am ET this morning.
|
Last night's
Dickfest was such a success we're going to have to do this in a series of heats, we just can't put them all up at once and do them justice. Here are the first round of contestants and their poetic odes to our esteemed Veep. Please vote ONLY ONCE in the comments and only vote for one entry by number (listed at the bottom of each).
We'll have another round tomorrow night -- top three from each night will move into the finals. We boast some gifted poets in our midst, so enjoy:
errant brrr turned right
blaze of orange, sun, hillside,
bloody “Jeez, you fuck!” (1)
the veep was holding
the right flank of the line
noise….breathe…ready..fire.aim (2)
winter hunters move
women flank the wise master
he then shows them how (3)
caged birds cringe at dusk
waiting for the explosion
shouts, sirens, relief (4)
empty bottles bump
door slams as big man moves fast
empty shells fall hollow(5)
trigger snap sends peppering
two hearts snap as one briefly as sounds ring, fade
silencer now inserted (6)
heart, face, blood, ardor,
we bring the world here now
and the hunt evolves (7)
the veep was holding
the right flank of the line
noise….breathe…ready..fire.aim (9)
winter hunters move
women flank the wise master
he then shows them how (10)
caged birds cringe at dusk
waiting for the explosion
shouts, sirens, relief
empty bottles bump
door slams as big man moves fast
empty shells fall hollow
trigger snap sends peppering
two hearts snap as one briefly as sounds ring, fade
silencer now inserted
heart, face, blood, ardor,
we bring the world here now
and the hunt evolves
Whittington is red
My blood is blue
I'll do what I damn please....
Fuck you! (11)
Arrogant VP
Shot an old man in the heart
Only had one beer? (12)
Alas poor Dick,
I knew him well.
He sends young soldiers to die. With luck he'll rot in hell. (13)
I am Deadeye Dick
I am the real president
classified be damned (14)
My Time is Now
Don't Fuck With Me
I am Big DICK Cheney
or I'll Blow You Away (15)
Where quails are shaking/
The aspen are quaking (16)
Harry was my pal
Sure, I shot him in the face
It was Harry's fault (17)
Why pepper with birdshot
When the warm embrace of
A smothering pillow or an
Unplugged cord, will do? (18)
Why pepper with birdshot
When the warm embrace of
A smothering pillow or an
Unplugged cord, will do? (19)
We're in Texas now
I can drink and shoot a guy
Cops will never tell (20)
Richard B. Cheney
Doesn't hunt when it's rainy;
Eschewing dampened quarry,
He fires his shotgun into the chest of a 78-year old named Harry. (21)
Deadeye Dick's order is: "Ready, shoot, fire, aim."
Matalin says Harry's the name on which we must blame.
Bush thinks that shotgunning a grouse is like killing a spouse.
Roves' greatest assassination was Plame. (22)
The lovely landscape of Texas wealth,
The relaxed stalk of priveleged stealth,
Much time to quaff, no time to aim,
But eons to spin about who I maim (23)
Quail. Yes, quail
that bird that doesn't fly well.
Shoot.Yes, shoot
Damn, he hadn't been in the cell. (24)
I stalked my prey at a slow pace,
and I shot a 78-year-old-man in the face.
Everybody wants to blame me,
but I tell them, "Hey! I'm Dick Cheney!" (25)
SAT Analogy for the High Schoolers:
Salt : Injury :: Pepper : _______
Answer: Shooting a 78-year old man in the face (26)
Roses are red.
Violets are blue.
Dick Cheney shot a man in the face. (27)
Guns Don't Shoot 78-year old Men in the Face,
Dick Cheney does. (28)
What's your name?
I'm Dicky the clown.
Ask me again and
I'll shoot you down! (29)
Just One Beer
Ah, that's better
Everything's so clear
.... And that's a feather (30)
Coalition of the Shooting a 78-year Old Man in the Face (31)
Lesbian daughter
left us humiliated
shooting not as bad. (32)
Two hundred birdshot
lodged throughout an old lawyer
What's the chance they'll move?(33)
Dr. Pepper nose
didn't go with antelope
only booze would do.(34)
Swiss ambassador
engorged my dangly manparts
safety forgotten. (35)
Dick Cheney Determined to Attack in the U.S. (36)
Cheney shot
Then ran away
A Chickenhawk
He couldn't stay (37)
Deep in Texas scrub;
venal men play bloody games.
A great nation falls. (38)
Roses Are Red
Violets are Blue
Dick Cheney shoots old men
Instead of birds with the flu. (39)
Cheney's got a gun,
His whole world's come undone (40)
There was a big Dick from Wyoming
Who hunted for quail in the gloaming.
His last shot went wide and his friend almost died,
Which isn't considered quite sporting. (41)
Cheney's hunting misadventure
Nearly led to moidah
As it is, what we enjoy
Is merely shotgunfreude (42)
Ask not
what your country
can do for you...
BLAM!!! (43)
I'm a little veep-pot
this is my spout
go hunting with me
and I'll blow your brains out! (44)
Birdshot to the face
Our Veep shoots an acquaintance
Why is this not news? (45)
There once was a VP named Dick
Who was a notorious prick
But his friends let him carry
And down went old Harry (46)
Harry, Harry, Dignitary
Tell us your huntin' woes
'Bout farm-bred quails and frosty ales
And Dick's buckshot up your nose. (47)
He's always hiding, and not law-abiding,
but tricky Dick is in it pretty thick.
He peppered his friend and wants to pretend,
that he thought him a quail, but to no avail. (48)
Dick Cheney was loaded for bear,
But only his buddy was there;
A blast to the face, a potential disgrace--
But FoxNews is both balanced and fair. (49)
The Veep peppered Old Whittington, cried Alice,
After sloshing his beer from a chalice,
They found the lawyers Angina in South Carolina,
And part of his anus in Dallas. (50)
hume says veep
was just responding
to quail-hunting program
related activities (51)
I’m Dick Cheney
See me sneer
I’ve got a gun
Now toss me that beer (52)
the vice commander was not
loaded, half-cocked and shot.
the quail had a clue
too bad that Harry did not. (53)
Cheney was back from a weekend hunt,
Having committed a crime.
Bush asked, "Dick, did you hit anything?"
Cheney replied, "Yup. Big Tme." (54)
February is the cruelest hunt,
Freeping Pamela out of the wed hand,
Mixing Cheney and beer’d fire,
Blurring old coots with wing’d game. (55)
Venal Dick Cheney, didn't abstain -- he
Got paranoid, pissed off and drunk.
When the war was less fun, he pulled out his gun,
And shot an old man like a skunk. (56)
He cradled his power as he lurched to the brush,
his ailing heart pounding, blood and alcohol arush.
Then an instant of motion, an explosion, no words....
and the quail laugh last at the King of all Turds. (57)
Some Lone Star brew and a Scotch or two in the glow of the dying sun . . .
Showing my girl I’m a man of the world with my fast Italian gun . . .
With a wet kiss from my Swiss Miss, and her hands upon my tush . . .
Then I shot some guy. But I'll tell you why -- all I saw was Bush. (58)
don't ask.
don't tell.
harry's shot?
oh, well. (59)
dick shot harry in the heart
does that make him cupid?
four days to get his story straight
no, it makes him stupid. (60)
Shall I compare thee to a flushing quail?
Thou art more orange and sport not a feather on thy head
Yet my drunken wits are rarely known to fail
So stand ye still, and I shall try to shoot thee dead. (61)
Harry Whittington, what a great guy
That's what his friends all say
But Deadeye Cheney sorta went crazy
And blew poor old Harry away (62)
February is the cruelest hunt,
Freeping P.P. Willeford out of the wed hand,
Mixing Cheney and beer’d fire,
Blurring old coots with wing’d game. (63)
Harry's shot, not sprayed or peppered
Dick's thought: "I'll have one shaken,
Not stirred." (64)
There once was a lass named Pam Willeford
Whose affections to Lynne's I prefer
But I went off half cocked, some old coot got rocked
And instead of tapping ass I shot a barrister (65)
Cheney shot him in the face
And FOX insists it's no disgrace (66)
With or without a gun in his hand,
The Veep is the most dangerous man in this land.
But the world wonders what the hell he is thinking,
When he shoots birds and old lawyers while drinking." (67)
Dead-Eye Dick is his name
He shot a lawyer in the face
Ruining America's image is his game
Cause this isn't even his 2nd biggest disgrace (68)
Cheney shot an austin lawyer with a 28 gauge
Now his street cred is through the roof
Then he surprised and admitted to shooting Tupac
Even though there was no proof (69)
Cheney shot an austin lawyer with a 28 gauge
Now his street cred is through the roof
Then he surprised and admitted to shooting Tupac
Even though there was no proof (70)
Vice was gunning for young quail
but he just peppered an old bird (71)
In the bursh, Dick tossed his tenth emptied can,
Then on the trigger, a finger wet with condensation on his hand,
Wheel'd round and "Blammo!" Harry's face full of ammo,
He'd be in jail right now, if he was poor and mexican. (72)
I'm commander in chief
and Harry is a thief
Stealing my kill
Sent me over the hill (73)
Two old boys in the settin sun
one said "Dick"
and the other went "Bam" (74)
See
Dick
shoot?
Nope. (75)
When Jane and Redd challenged the doggies
To find poesy 'mongst horrors most lame,
The FDL bards outdid all of the bloggies
And howled through the night, but where's Plame? (76)
Na Na Na Na Naaa
We get away with murder
NaNa Na Na Naaa (77)
There once was a veep named Cheney, whose breaking of laws were many
when hunting some quail
his judgement did fail
but his aim was still quite uncanny (78)
see dick.
see dick shoot.
see america going to hell in a handbasket.
they don't call him dick for nuttin.(79)
Roses are red,
Violets are blue,
Blam! (80)
Two hundred BB's
split second karma soft flesh
a tower crumbles (81)
If he had a snort, the cops must report. (82)
The sun was low
The ground was red
The spin exploded
The facts all fled (83)
Now this is a short hunting tale
of Dick and the mighty quail.
Halfcocked but he could not fail
to safe face; there, beyond the pale. (84)
If Dick had a beer, the shooting was queer (88)
I've got Billy Idol's lip in reverse,
My gay daughter is kind of a curse,
So come hunting with me, there's a spot now that's free,
The last one went home in a hearse. (89)
Liquored up real good
Blasting birdies to pieces
Harry made me miss (90)
You taught me how to hunt, and so I mentored my son.
You saw God in the hunt but never convinced me.
You said “Texans respect the hunt, son, they do.”
You felt weird about all that near the end, though. (91)
So stalks the stealthy hunter in the field.
Tip-toed, quietly he marks his prey
and fires but the consequence is dire -
a bloodied lawyer lies in place of Quaile. (92)
Dirty Dick
Didn't make Harry's day
When Harry met salvo
Down Texas way (94)
The truth could not be blunter
Blame the victim, not the hunter
Drink, then shoot a friend in the face
Darth Cheney you're a national disgrace (95)
Satan wears a bracelet What Would Cheny Do (96)
Now this is a short hunting tale
of Dick and the mighty quail.
Halfcocked but he could not fail
to save face; there, beyond the pale. (97)
Four score and seven beers ago...
BLAM!!! (98)
Conscripted victims
Parade their blood before me,
A numb heart devoid (99)
OK, you say you're calm, just don't pull a Cheney... (100)
In Ciro news, Cuellar sure
loves him some Bush. And
MoveOn jumped in to support Ciro, he's certainly gaining momentum. You can contribute to the
boot the DINOS from the Democratic Party movement here(graphic by Dark Black)
|
Dr. Kirk James Murphy, from
the comments:
WHY IN THE HELL DIDN'T THE WHITE HOUSE DOCS SEND THE TRAUMA VICTIM TO THE NEAREST TRAUMA HOSPITAL?
Hi folks -
This stinks to high heaven - even in Texas.
Q: What variable determines survival after severe gunshot wounds to the head, neck, and torso?
A: How long it takes the trauma victim to receive trauma center care (or the equivalent).
The White House docs, of all people, know this. So does the Secret Service - when Reagan was shot in D.C., there were published reports of the SS cleaning out the civvies waiting in ER at gunpoint. They knew how to cut down on the wait - and they knew why.
I have every reason to believe the White House docs in Cheney's traveling ICU have excellent trauma medicine skills.
So I have all the more reason to ask what they were thinking of when they decided that the 78 year old victim of severe gunshot wounds needed the slow ambulance ride to the local non-trauma hospital - rather than the fast chopper ride to the trauma center?
If the White House docs and the Secret Service can't collectively figure out that trauma victims' chance of survival declines with each minute of delay in securing care, why are they being paid to protect assassination targets? Who hired these guys?
rwcole:
At the smaller hospital there would be fewer prying eyes- and it's possible some of em knew a doc there who could be counted on. Once they went to the big hospital- the chances of keeping it covered up evaporated.
Dr. Murphy again:
The same White House docs who turned down the helicopter medevac to the trauma center in order to send their elderly trauma victim by vehicle to the non-trauma hospital -
Those folks?
Earlier in the week Whittington's hospital said they were involved in his care when he developed cardiac complications.
Then Whittington's hospital changed the story to say they needed to consult with the doctors who had first treated the patient, hence the need to involve the White House docs in the care of the victim their boss shot some days before.
The chronology in the Corpus Cristi Times establishes:
The ambulance arrived at the Kingsville hospital between 6:45 and 6:50 p.m., Christus Spohn spokeswoman Yvonne Wheeler said.
HALO-Flight was called again at 7:07 p.m. after Spohn Kleberg medical personnel decided Whittington needed more advanced treatment.
OK - Whittington rolls in the non-trauma center's ER at Kingsberg and within seventeen to twenty-two minutes later the ER is calling the medivac flight - the same service the Secret Service first notified at around 6 PM. The ambulance left Kingsberg at 7:19 PM and arrived at [Memorial] fifty minutes later.
Hmm...so the same docs who were with the victim from 5:30 (or 5:50 - choose your eyewitness account) could have summoned the air ambulance at any time thereafter.
Yet it was the docs in Kingsberg who reached the astonishing conclusion that this 78 year-old victim of severe gunshot wounds required air transport to a trauma center - a conclusion which escaped the medical team caring for the patient over the preceding sixty to ninety minutes.
So we are asked to believe that when Mr Whittington's condition worsened, the docs at the trauma center required consultation with the same team who never figured out their patient required the trauma center...until they got to a hospital and some other doctor told them?
Uhhh-huuuh.
And here's
the kicker, found by CityGirl. Who's taking care of Whittington now?
Recently, the Iowa Board of Medical Examiners took the following action:
David E. Blanchard, D.O., a 49 year-old physician currently practicing in Victoria, Texas was charged by the Board with inappropriately prescribing excessive controlled substances to numerous patients. A hearing in this matter is set for September 13, 2000.
If that were my father I'd get him the hell away from these people. Post haste. They obviously have the same talent for healthcare that they do for international relations.
(thanks to pollyusa for the link to the Corpus Christi Caller-Times)
|
Mickey Kaus
sent me a link and let me know he has now dubbed us "Firedoglake: CSI." Which I must say I'm quite proud of. So I don't want to let Mickey down.
An overabundance of Chief Wiggams in Kenedy County have now bungled the investigation and stalled it until everyone got a chance to get their stories straight, but fortunately these people are so accustomed to lying without challenge they don't do it very well.
Reader TE sent me the following email, which I find quite interesting:
Don't know if any of your other readers noticed this but the Sheriff included the approximate GPS coordinates of where he was told the shooting took place according to the group (N26 56.352 W97 50.42). I plugged those into Google Earth and it comes up in South Texas rural area. I was only able to zoom into and measure from what looks like the only road near the incident. In every measurement I took the road is from 450 to 550 feet from where the incident happened. According to the report the women were in the car on this road and were pretty far away. In the report Cheney also notes that Whittington was at a lower elevation than him, and that's why he got hit in the face. From the GPS coordinates given I did a 100ft circle around that to see the changes in elevation and they are less than 1 Foot. Maybe some of your other readers can get better access to or have more experience with satellite data. Someone could also do a flyover of the exact coordinates given if they have time.
The picture above is from
Google Earth. Cheney has said over and over that Armstrong was an "eye witness." But wouldn't the account of Pamela Willford, who was ostensibly standing right next to Cheney at the time, be much more reliable? Where is she now? And what about her husband? Is he shaping up to be the Andrew Parker Bowles in all of this?
|
Among the entirely unsatisfactory explanations offered up by Team Cheney after the boozed up Vice President shot an old man in the face then lied about it and blamed the victim, none is quite as wild as the discredited
"migrating pellet" theory that got shot down relatively soon afterwards.
I've been trying to figure out the genesis of this story -- Dr. David Blanchard seems to have
implied that this happened when he spoke to the press, and it was further amplified by hospital spokesperson
Michele Mora-Trevino.
RJ Eskow has already noted that Blanchard is a right-wing evangelical Christian who has been downplaying Whittington's injuries from the get, and
the New York Times today brings up the fact that a simple x-ray would have immediately told doctors that the pellets were not, in fact, "peppered" just under the skin. The story strongly insinuates that Blanchard's accounts have been extremely misleading.
Nobody has adequately addressed the question of why Whittington got shunted to this particular hospital, and as
Sidney Blumenthal's article today notes, the "Texas aristocracy" roots are quite deep in this story as well as its coverup. Which is why my radar is going off about the
no comment Whittington's doctors offered about his blood alcohol content.
This smacks to me of the Goober Graham technique. Throw some red meat out there, get everyone swarming all over it as if it will prove something about Cheney (it won't). Then when everyone is good and overheated, somebody reveals that -- ta da! -- Whittington's bloodstream didn't have any alcohol. No surprise, a responsible hunter wouldn't drink and hunt. But a serious boozehound would, and one that didn't want to draw criticism down on himself for doing so would do it in private (Armstrong said she didn't see him drinking at lunch -- a telltale sign of a closet alcoholic).
Ole 60 Grit O'Beirne was on Hardball getting chewed up over her ludicrous defense of Dick and how he didn't contact the press until the next morning because he was caring for the old man. Dick wasn't at the hospital, he was back at the house fixing himself a highball IN FRONT OF EVERYONE so that if and when word got out and the police grew uncooperative, he'd have adequate reason for the alcohol in his bloodstream.
That's another alcoholic's trick.
I'd love to know what Whittington's blood alcohol level is, don't get me wrong, but if it was "0" it doesn't prove shit about Cheney. The fact that it got tossed out there by a doctor who has only been too willing to let Dick's medical staff make decisions for his patient and say overtly misleading things about Whittington's condition makes leaves me feeling quite suspicious about this one.
(graphic by Dark Black)
|
An
AP article on Monday contained a reference to a recently released Plame document:
Five government agencies are reviewing classified evidence that I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby may want to use at his trial to fight perjury and obstruction-of-justice charges, according to a court transcript made public Monday.
During a Feb. 3 hearing, Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald told a federal judge that the review of classified materials is being done by the CIA, National Security Council, National Security Agency, State Department and several components within the White House, including the offices of the president and vice president.
(snip)
The case against Libby is on two tracks _ one public, one secret. U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton and lawyers for both sides went into a secret session after a public hearing Feb. 3 to discuss classified evidence that could play a role in the case.
The 11-page transcript released Monday showed that the judge and lawyers didn't discuss anything in the secret session worth keeping from the public.
I've made a lot of calls but nobody seems to have it. Tom MaGuire's at home battling the flu but he checked PACER and found that they are holding this one close to the vest -- they are not putting it online, though it is available for public inspection at the clerks office in the courthouse, 9-4, Mon-Fri.
If anybody has seen a copy floating around, or is willing to go down to the courthouse and get it, please let me know and I will make sure a PDF gets put online. On behalf of me & Redd, Jeralyn, Tom M., emptywheel, Swopa and everyone else who cover the topic we would all love to know if there's anything of value here.
|
***MISSING WHTE WOMAN ALERT***
name: Pamela Willeford
race: white (duh...)
age: 50ish
sex: f (duh...)
occupation: US Ambassadress to Switzerland
last seen: Sat. 2/11/06, on a ranch in Texas, in the company of the V-POTUS
details: Ms. Willeford is missing after an incident involving firearms and alcohol. SHE MAY BE IN GRAVE DANGER. Please report any information immediately to the authorities.
(thanks
two beers)
Emptywheel has more on the holes in the extremely suspicious stories of those who may in fact be involved in her disappearance.
And
MSNBC would like to know how much you care.
A coincidence that we haven't heard anything from the uncharacteristically silent Lynne Cheney?
I think not!!!Update: CBS News: "Cheney is in a "state of meltdown" over shooting his friend and the political fallout it has caused, a source close to the Cheney has told CBS News."
|
The police report has finally been released regarding Vice President Cheney's shooting of a hunting companion in the face, neck and chest.
The Smoking Gun has several pages up on their website, but does not have copies of the affadavits and/or individual statements from Cheney, Whittington, Katherine Armstrong, Pamela Willeford or any other potential witnesses involved in the hunting party. The local cops are not releasing that information to the public, according to the Smoking Gun.
The fact that the local Sheriff spoke to a predecessor who now works for Ms. Armstrong should come as no surprise to readers from this morning. (
See here for details.) But there are a few interesting bits that I want to highlight over the five pages that Smoking Gun has made public.
The report is authored primarily by the Chief Deputy San Miguel, who was detailed to complete the investigation. According to his report, the call came in about the shooting at approximately 5:30 pm. His narrative begins the next morning -- when he was allowed to enter the ranch and speak with the Veep. He names the following as
witnesses to the incident and members of the hunting party (p. 1):
Dick Cheney, Michael Andrew "Bo" Hubert, Pam Willeford, Jerry Medellin, Katherine Armstrong, Sarita Armstrong Hixon, Harry Whittington, and Oscar Medellin
I don't recall seeing the name Bo Hubert prior to today, does anyone else?
Upon speaking with the victim, Whittington, in the hospital, he declined to have his statement recorded, but will be providing a later written affadavit. (No word as to whether said affadavit has yet been provided in the docs that Smoking Gun has.) Whittington tells the Chief Deputy that no one had been drinking alcohol and that (and this was also new to me) he had gone to the truck wherein the Armstrong sisters were sitting with his quail and offered to allow them to hunt, since he had gotten a double. (
Police report, p. 2) After they declined the offer, Whittington then returned to the field where Cheney and the rest of the party were hunting.
The positioning of the shot is detailed based on Cheney's statement on Page 1. Whittington was standing in a lower area, so Cheney would have been shooting downward at the bird. According to Cheney, had Whittington been standing level with him, he would have shot Whittington much lower on his body. (
Police report, page 1.)
There are still a lot of unanswered questions and details which are not included. I would hope that copies of the statements and affadavits would be made public at some point, but thus far no word as to when that will happen. It looks like Pamela Willeford did provide some sort of statement, along with others who would have been hunting in the field (at least, so far as the report indicates, anyway) with Cheney and Whittington.
No information on the type of gear any of the hunters were wearing -- including no answer as to whether protective ear gear would have been used or what type of clothing Whittington was wearing through which he was shot. No diagrams are included that I can find from the police, at least not on the Smoking Gun website. Clearly there was no alcohol or other toxicology testing done, since the Chief Deputy failed to meet with the Veep until the next morning. And no listing of medications is provided for assessment.
All in all, sketchy, but it looks like everyone's story was consistent-ish with everyone else's. At least, according to the police report, as far as we can tell without seeing the actual statements and affadavits for ourselves. Lots of questions, still getting sketchy answers -- I think that's the bottom line.
|
It's an Administration that would make
J.R. Ewing green with envy.
The interview that Brit Hume conducted with Dick Cheney yesterday was newsworthy for a number of items (transcript
available here) -- but most notably, to my mind, Cheney's coy flirtation with his alleged ability to declassify information at his own whim.
Q Let me ask you another question. Is it your view that a Vice President has the authority to declassify information?
THE VICE PRESIDENT: There is an executive order to that effect.
Q There is.
THE VICE PRESIDENT: Yes.
Q Have you done it?
THE VICE PRESIDENT: Well, I've certainly advocated declassification and participated in declassification decisions. The executive order --
Q You ever done it unilaterally?
THE VICE PRESIDENT: I don't want to get into that. There is an executive order that specifies who has classification authority, and obviously focuses first and foremost on the President, but also includes the Vice President.
Not to belabor the point or anything, but that is just bunk. I've been looking into the declassification process as much as any civilian can do so without top level security clearance, and every executive order that I have reviewed that is publicly available does not exempt the Veep from the regular declassification process under which all federal employees outside the President must operate. Dick Cheney is subject to the same rules as everyone else, no matter how he may think otherwise.
And I see that
Steve Clemons and
Liberal Oasis have come to the same conclusion. The two main Executive Orders that I have reviewed are
here (showing changes from the previously effective order) and
here, for your further perusal.
Classification and declassification are generally governed by fairly tight security protocols, precisely because the materials deal with sensitive national security matters. You can't just, willy nilly, have some person in the government randomly classifying and declassifying information without some process of notification and review being followed, otherwise you risk information being declassified for political, and not national security, reasons. (See, e.g., Plame Wilson, Valerie.)
Even
the WSJ has called Cheney's claims of declassification privilege into question. How shaky is Cheney's ground when the WSJ is calling him out on the foundations of his arguments publicly?
It sure seems to me like we've been seeing a whole lot more speculation in the last week or so about the shaky ground of this Administration in terms of its overreach beyond its Constitutional boundaries.
Op-eds like this shrill one from
George Will today, decrying the Administration's selective reading of only those bits of the Constitution which support its claims to power, and its selective ignorance of the whole of the rest of the document.
Besides, terrorism is not the only new danger of this era. Another is the administration's argument that because the president is commander in chief, he is the "sole organ for the nation in foreign affairs." That non sequitur is refuted by the Constitution's plain language, which empowers Congress to ratify treaties, declare war, fund and regulate military forces, and make laws "necessary and proper" for the execution of all presidential powers . Those powers do not include deciding that a law -- FISA, for example -- is somehow exempted from the presidential duty to "take care that the laws be faithfully executed."
The administration, in which mere obduracy sometimes serves as political philosophy, pushes the limits of assertion while disdaining collaboration.
Will goes on to cite the Youngstown case as establishing that the Executive branch is at its weakest when butting up against the laws as established by Congress. Is it only Will? Nope.
Peggy Noonan has a piece in today's
WSJ Opinion Journal speculating, in that tone so favored by Beltway insiders, about what "other people" might be saying about dumping Cheney from the ticket because he has become such a liability as the President's "hate magnet." (Her words, not mine.) FWIW,
Sean-Paul has a contest going on who the Cheney replacement might be...anyone want to lay odds on McCain or Guiliani or Condi?
The morass of mendacity that has followed this Veep like PigPen's cloud in the Peanuts cartoon is becoming too thick for even the kool-aid-iest of Administration supporters in the wake of Dick's shooting incident. Could just be pre-2006 election jitters, but something is certainly in the air this week. And it's not just a bad PR hangover, either.
Maybe it's
the new Abu Ghraib photos and information that Salon has gotten their hands on, and the continuing difficult news from the Middle East and the war that Cheney pushed so hard to have after 9/11. The ever-ballooning deficit as a result of the ill-planned war costs can't help matters, that's for sure.
Maybe it's the ever-constant drip, drip, drip from Scooter and the Traitorgate investigation, and the now-made-public revelation that "superiors" authorized Libby to reveal classified bits of the NIE to reporters. (Thanks for that one, Team Libby. Good on ya.)
Maybe it's just that Dick Cheney is too much bad news wrapped up in one, lone package. Whatever is going on, though, I feel a storm brewing in Washington. And I'd keep an eye on Lynn Cheney. Sue Ellen had nothing on her, that's for damn sure.
UPDATE:
Georgia10 at dKos has even more about the classification questions.
|
Well, now
isn't this cozy?
Minutes later, Salinas got a call from a U.S. Secret Service agent.
"He said the reason he was calling was to officially notify the sheriff's department that the vice president was involved in that shooting accident."
Soon after, Salinas said, Kirk called him from the Armstrong Ranch gate. He told him he was there with a U.S. Border Patrol agent who didn't know what was going on.
"I told him don't worry about it. I'll make a call," Salinas said.
Salinas called Ramiro Medellin Jr., a former sheriff who lives on Armstrong Ranch and works as a ranch hand. Medellin called Salinas back and confirmed the incident was an accident.
It was at this point that Salinas decided to wait until the next morning to send an officer to investigate the incident....
San Miguel said the case was not investigated as a criminal incident. He also noted that there were no 911 calls or radio transmissions between dispatchers and deputies because the calls went to the sheriff's home.
San Miguel and Lt. Juan Guzman interviewed Whittington at Christus Spohn Hospital Memorial on Monday, San Miguel said. He wouldn't divulge details of that interview until the report was complete but said Whittington was in good spirits.
Salinas and San Miguel said no one told them not to make details of the incident public, nor were they told how to investigate.
The department has not released an incident report, but will do so, Salinas and San Miguel said. The crush of national media has slowed the department, he said. (emphasis mine)
Yes, it is all the media's fault that the local Sheriff's department decided to take the word of people who might, oh, I don't know, have an interest in covering the Vice President's butt, and who told you that there had been
no alcohol involved in the incident whatsoever (despite
the Veep's admission to the contrary in yesterday's Fox News interview wherein he said he had "a beer" and Katherine Armstrong's statements to the contrary to MSNBC, or her statement that the Veep went back to the ranch and made himself a cocktail).
Call me crazy, but didn't Scooter Libby just get indicted for lying to investigators to form a firewall for the Veep? Seems like a M.O. for the folks who hang around with Dick Cheney, doesn't it?
It is all the media's fault that you got no breathalyzer and no blood sample for
alcohol or prescription medication levels testing, against almost every police protocol that I've ever seen after a hunting incident. Why didn't you immediately go to the scene and observe the shooter yourself -- or send a deputy? Because he was the Vice President and he and his friends and your sheriff predecessor told you not to worry your pretty little head about it?
Oh wait, some of your deputies did go over, and
security people wouldn't let them in that night. How silly of me to think this is anything but the media's fault.
It's all the media's fault that you relied on the eyewitness account of Katherine Armstrong who was
around 100 yards away from the scene and admitted to initially suspecting that the Veep had a heart attack, from watching the Secret Service run toward the scene. (And who knows if you talked with the Swiss Ambassador at any time, given that you have not released any police report whatsoever to the public. You'll pardon me at this point if I take your word for absolutely nothing without some documentation.)
And sure, it's all the media's fault that you can't finish your police report. Because that generally takes all of a coupla days at the most to type up on the pre-printed form. Or is it that you and Ms. Armstrong and everyone else are still working on the official version?
You know, I don't want to go all conspiracy theory on this, but the fact that you, Sheriff Salinas, relied on the statement of a person who worked for Katherine Armstrong over your own officers' immediate observations really calls into question your level of competence. Or maybe that's what Katherine Armstrong and the Veep had in mind in the first place.
(Hat tip to reader Holden for the link on this story.)
|
The GOP is caving to Rove's pressure tactics -- protect the boss at all costs, and the hell with the damage to the Republic.
Glenn's post on the cult of personality that is the Republican Party has never been more relevant than today.
It's time to contact your representatives in the
Senate Judiciary Committee, the
Senate Intelligence Committee, the
House Judiciary Committee, and the
House Select Committee on Intelligence.
Just a little reminder that some Americans still hold their Constitution more dear than the whims of the person who happens to sit in the Oval Office for a brief tenure. "L'etat c'est moi" is not our national motto -- nor should it be.
The Founders of this great nation did not overthrow the rule of a King only to have another petulant George take up the banner over two hundred years later. As Benjamin Franklin so wisely said, those who would sacrifice liberty for security, deserve neither.
|
Due to the spontaneous uprising of poetry in the comments section inspired by the sterling character of the country's Vice President who, while half in the bag, shot an old man in the face and then blamed him for it, we are having a contest:
Dickfest.
The winner will receive a copy of Bill Maher's latest book
New Rules: Polite Musings from a Timid Observer
and a poster signed by Mr. Maher himself,
whose series will premeire on HBO on Friday, February 17 at 11pm. (We will also be sending the poesy of the Dickfest finalists to Mr. Maher.)
Entries must be four lines or less; in addition to encouraging Roger Ailes-ian pithiness it also ensures that I will not spend the next two days cutting and pasting. We also reserve the right to put the final entries on a t-shirt if we can actually get our act together to do so and sell them in the FDL store.
The only entries that will be considered are those left in the comments section of this post, no emails please. We will have a runoff tomorrow night and a race between the finalists on Friday night, the news cycle permitting. And many thanks to
Crooks & Liars who arranged for the lovely prizes.
In other news, we have now raised almost $16,000 for Ciro Rodriguez. Which is a damn good thing because his DINO opponent Henry Cuellar has called on Congress to give $100 million to the
gun toting racist vigilante Minutemen.
Thanks to the blogs, the labor unions and DFA lining up behind him Rodriguez has a real chance to beat this monster back into the unemployment line. Isn't it better to give a few dollars
now to Ciro rather than $100 million later to the Minutemen?
(graphic by Graham G.)
|
Listening to four conservatives on Hardball tonight discuss -- well anything, really -- was quite the spectacle. I guess the "equal time" mantra only seems to enter the media equation when defending the right to insert baldface GOP lies into their narratives.
So
Peter Daou issues a challenge to the wingier residents of Greater Blogistan to back up their latest claim -- articulated by both Tony Blankley and
Ole 60 Grit O'Beirne -- that the only reason the story about Cheney drunkenly shooting an old man in the face persists is because of some sort of liberal media vendetta.
Peter takes on the task of proving that the major media outlets are regularly quite obedient to breezily repeating GOP talking points, and what else would you expect when they are being lobbied to the tune of
$1.6 billion. Peter argues quite persuasively that what these people are really arguing for here is "a servile, state-run press. Which, ironically, seems to be where we're heading."
As a side note, I'd also like to point out that when Dick Cheney refused to answer
Brit Hume's question today about whether he ordered Scooter to leak the classified NIE and Dick demurred on the grounds that he may be called as a witness he was, as usual, full of shit. Scooter is charged with lying to the FBI and the grand jury, not with leaking the NIE. There is no reason Dick can't talk about that and a real journalist should have challenged him on that point.
(
Update: David E. does an excellent job of reconstructing the he said/she said of the Hume dickfest.)
I was on Sean-Paul Kelly's radio show in San Antonio and we discussed how Dick capped his
good friend acquaintance. You can listen to the clip
hereAnd
RJ Eskow is going to be on MSNBC with the bow tie tonight. Tuckie, along with the rest of the wingnut punditocracy, is now trying to pass himself off as an
expert hunter.
Yeah and I'm the Duchess of Kent.
(graphic by Dark Black)
|
Alan Dershowitz:
Why would a media-savvy and clever man like Dick Cheney delay notifying the press and the police about an accident when a) he knew it would eventually be covered by the press and b) he knew he would be criticized for delaying release of the story?
A simple cost/benefit analysis suggests that he (or those advising him) must have believed that there was more to be gained than lost by a 14 hour delay that would eventually be made public. It is likely, therefore, that something happened during that 14 hour period which was worth the negative costs of the delay.
What is the most likely thing to happen during a 14 hour delay that is worth the negative publicity? One possibility is that it takes approximately that period of time for alcohol to dissipate in the body and no longer be subject to accurate testing. It is fairly common for people involved in alcohol-related accidents to delay reporting them until the alcohol has left the body. There is no hard evidence that this is what happened here, but we are entitled to a better explanation. We should be told whether Vice President Cheney's victim had alcohol in his system when he was taken to the hospital. Was there any alcohol at or near the hunting area? Were any in the hunting party carrying flasks (which is apparently common among hunters)? What was Cheney doing just before he went hunting? Did anyone in the hunting party have a drink? We do know that Cheney had two drunk driving convictions when he was in his early 20s, but he has apparently been clean since then.
(snip)
The burden of proof has now shifted to the Vice President to explain why he made this stupid, or very clever, decision. We're waiting for his explanation.
It will be quite telling when the next poll numbers are released. Bush was already at 39 when the whole thing happened; if Bush continues to tank it could have a significant impact on the Veep's future employment prospects.
(poem title by Punaise, graphic by
John L.)
|
Digby pulls up a CNN interview with the rapidly spinning Katharine Armstrong who earlier said that Cheney was not drinking that day but now says he came back after the shooting and fixed himself a cocktail. And despite the fact that she's maintained Dick did not drink beforehand, he now says he had "a beer" at lunch.
Boozehound Cheney was drinking all day. He went hunting without a license and shot an old man in the face. Wouldn't talk to Johnny Law until he sobered up. Got the sheriff and the Texas Parks and Wildlife folks to cover for him, hid from the public for four days then finally ran to the warm embrace of Fox News. Even
Jack Cafferty says that's kinda like Bonnie interviewing Clyde.
Wonder what the NRA will do about it?
From the
NRA website:
Never use alcohol or over-the-counter, prescription or other drugs before or while shooting.
Alcohol, as well as any other substance likely to impair normal mental or physical bodily functions, must not be used before or while handling or shooting guns.
If I was an NRA member I think I'd want to know what they think about this.
As
John K. noted, if Cheney had lunch from 12-1, say, and then went back out to hunt at 3, that's closer to 2 or 3 hours than 4 or 5.
That's shaping up to be
one hell of an inaccurate incident report. Under "alcohol or drugs involved" it says "no" rather than "unknown."
Is Chief Wiggum running the sheriff's department in Kenedy County?
|
Big whopping kudos to readers who spotted the
MSNBC scrub of Katharine Armstrong's "beer" comments yesterday, and also to everyone who contacted MSNBC about it. I have no doubt that the only reason Dick admitted to drinking a beer before shooting an old man in the face came because of that particular dust-up; he's not one particularly given to candor.
And while MSNBC is not explaining why they pulled the quote, it is now restored in a
somewhat altered fashion:
At a news conference Wednesday outside Whittington's hospital in Corpus Christi, reporters asked hospital officials whether Whittington's blood-alcohol level had been tested. The officials responded with a "no comment."
In a recorded, on-the-record phone call with NBC News, Armstrong said that beer may have been available at lunch that day. "If someone wants to help themselves to a beer," she said, "they may, but I did not see anyone do that," Armstrong says. She says she was not sure if there were beers in the coolers but wasn't ready to rule it out: "There may be a beer or two in there, but remember not everyone in the party was shooting," she told NBC News.
Armstrong added that she did not believe that Cheney or anyone else shooting in the hunting party had alcohol on Saturday before the hunting accident.
NBC News called the vice president's office for comment four times Tuesday and Wednesday and asked whether the vice president or anyone in the hunting party had consumed any alcohol on Saturday prior to the accident. In an e-mail statement Wednesday to NBC News, the vice president's press secretary referred NBC News to the Kenedy County Sheriff's Department report on the incident. Later in the day on Fox News, Brit Hume stated that Cheney told him during a taped interview that he had had "a beer at lunch" before the hunting incident.
So not only was Dick drinking before shooting, he tried to mislead MSNBC about it, showing the same commitment to truth he does every time he pays homage to Father Tim and re-asserts the connection between Osama Bin Laden and Sadaam Hussein.
For those of you with medical backgrounds,
here is a medical site supplied by Glenn Greenwald which speculates about the medications a man of Dick's age is likely to be taking after four heart attacks. Any of this conflict with alchohol?
(graphic by Anna G.)
|
So Dick Cheney is admitting he
had a beer beer before he shot a 78 year old man in the face? Sounds like he's doing damage control from the
MSNBC scrub of yesterday. Neil Cavuto and the other concern trolls over at Fox are now discussing "Politicizing Hunting Accident: Big Mistake For Democrats?"
We must be on the right track.
Regarding the "beer at lunch" comment, this from
police officer Michael Embly:
One lie I can always spot is "two beers." When I hear that from a driver that I've stopped for erratic driving, then I know that I've hit the jackpot. I don't know why 90% of drunk drivers say they've had two beers. It's like there is some sort of genetic code that dictates this answer. They could say they've had two glasses of wine or one martini but they rarely do. I don't mind though because it just makes my job easier.
The bottom line: the Vice President of the United States thinks it's okay to drink and then pick up a gun -- resulting in a serious injury to an old man -- and then not tell the country about it for four days.
What
will we tell the children?
(hat tip
Cozumel)
Update: John Nichols:
Vice President Dick Cheney, who was forced to leave Yale University because his penchant for late-night beer drinking exceeded his devotion to his studies, and who is one of the small number of Americans who can count two drunk driving busts on his driving record, may have been doing more than hunting quail on the day that he shot a Texas lawyer in the face.
This is where the hunting accident "incident" becomes a serious matter. The role played by the Secret Service in preventing questioning of Cheney on the evening of the shooting takes on new significance. If Cheney was in any way impaired at the time of the shooting, it was certainly to the Vice President's advantage put off the official investigation until the next morning.
(graphic by Dark Black)
|
Fox has played a first clip from the Brit Hume interview. Cheney was talking about privacy issues and why the local paper in Corpus Christi was contacted - says they contacted the local paper because Katherine Armstrong knew the reporter there and knew she was experience covering hunting matters.
Fox then spoke with Fred Barnes, who says that he feels Cheney mishandled this -- should have contacted national news.
Barnes says Brit should ask about sequence of events and why there was gap between incident and when the newspaper was called. And why Cheney did not call the WH press office himself. Says that
Second clip:
"Ultimately, I'm the guy who pulled the trigger. You can talk about all the conditions that existed at the time, but I'm responsible for what happened. It's a day I'll never forget." (That's me paraphrasing from the sound bite. C&L should have clips up soon and I'll link to it so you can see exactly what Cheney says here.)
Barnes says after the clip that hopefully the discussion of the sequence of events will flesh out just how responsible the Vice President really was. (In other words, Cheney will say he's responsible, while the Wurlitzer continues to blame the victim. Classy.)
Third clip:
Cheney talks about Whittington falling to the ground. Will never get it out of his mind. One of the worst days of my life at that moment. Guessing he was about 30 yards away when he was shot.
Barnes says not sure he consulted attorneys on this (after being prompted on this topic by Faux news host). Barnes says he probably talked with Armstrong on details to be sure he was accurate. (RH: Yeah, I bet he did.) Barnes says he needs to explain why the delay, take personal responsibility, and hope that Whittington doesn't take another turn for the worse.
Why do the sit-down today? Barnes says that WH press office angry that Veep hadn't taken care of this earlier. (This echoes what I heard from Bob Novak earlier on Fox, btw..."pissed at Cheney" meme continues.) Barnes says that it sounds like CHeney was "calling the shots" with media contacts (no pun intended).
Fourth clip:
Struck on the right side of his face, his neck, and the right torso. Ran over to Whittington who was laying on his back, bleeding, could see where the shot had struck him. Fortunately, had medical team with him -- always have one wherever Cheney goes -- and his physician's assistant was there to administer treatment. Cheney spoke with Whittington, and Harry did not respond. (That doesn't sound good.)
Barnes hits question as to why press wasn't notified immediately again. Fox says more to come at 6:00 pm ET. More tape may be forthcoming -- will try and report as I see it.
Brit Hume will be on Fox shortly to talk about the interview. Cheney apparently had no press people with him -- says it was a private hunting trip, so didn't bring anyone along.
Fifth Clip:
Katherine Armstrong was eyewitness, had hunted there all her life, says she was the past head of the Wildlife commission for the state of Texas, and she knew the local media people -- so Cheney thought that was the right call in getting the information out.
Demeanor is calm and not emotional in any of the clips I've seen.
Brit Hume on now.
Says Cheney is unapologetic on the information handling with press. Hume says public will likely be sympathetic to Cheney, given the way the Wshington Press Corps has been acting, but that's neither here nor there. (What a wanker!)
Played clip for the third time where Cheney says you can't blame Harry -- that Cheney is one who pulled trigger and shot his friend and that it is a moment he'll never forget. (This is clearly going to be the Fox News soundbite of the day. Sympathetic in verbage, but oddly distant in demeanor. Will be interested in people's comments on their take on Cheney here. He's perhaps a bit shaken, but really calm -- maybe all the interview prep has taken the edge off for him.)
Playing clip again of Cheney talking about Whittington falling to the ground.
Hume says that Cheney goes through in detail about why the decisions were made with regard to press contacts or lack thereof. Hume says he tried to ask as many reasonable questions as he felt fellow press folks would want to ask, especally if this is going to be Cheney's only press contact on this matter. Goes over medical concerns.
Whittington's wife was at the Armstrong ranch, and efforts made to immediately contact her to let her know Whittington had been shot and was on way to hospital and make arrangements to get wife to him. Goes through some of the timeline issues in the interview, apparently.
Hume goes over the press contact with local paper again. Shepherd Smith ask whether Cheney had any statement as to why he waited until today to make public statement. Hume says Cheney waited because he was concerned about Whittington's condition. Hume says Cheney has known Whittington since his work in the Ford White House -- a friendly acquaintence, but not a good friend.
Hume says he asked about leaving McClellan "out to dry," and Cheney said he thought McClellan was doing a good job, but no apologies.
Hume says Cheney said he had a beer at lunch -- that had been hours earlier -- no one was drinking. Went back to ranch, took a break for a few hours, and then went back out hunting at 3 pm. Says it was out of his system by the time they went back out. Cheney told Hume he had BBQ and a beer a lunch. (That should be an interesting point of discussion.)
Hume then goes on to say that people in America don't feel deprived that they found out about this on Sunday afternoon instead of on Saturday. "Not a question of cover-up." Private hunting accident made public because it was the Vice President who shot someone. If the Veep had been shot, it would have been another matter. (I'm sure the Whittington's appreciate that, Brit.)
The partisans are angry, of course, as usual, according to Hume. (RH: Because, you know, the fact that all the facts have been dribbling out now for days on end with nothing from Cheney directly until today is not odd in the least. *snerk*)
The interview ran 25 minutes in length -- they plan on running the interview at some length. Brit says he was transfixed while conducting the interview. (Yup, get out the nerf balls.)
|
Tom DeLay is having a not-so-good day, according to
Fired Up America. Subpoenas have been issued to the USA Family Network, according to
an article in the National Journal. The USA Family Network issued payments to some folks with ties to both DeLay and Abramoff:
Sources familiar with the Justice Department-led probe say that one area of interest to investigators is $15,600 that the U.S. Family Network paid in 1999 to Liberty Consulting, a firm run by Lisa Rudy, the wife of Tony Rudy, who was a deputy chief of staff to DeLay before becoming a lobbying colleague of Abramoff's
Tony Rudy was one of two former Hill staffers identified in Abramoff's January plea-bargain agreement with the Justice Department as having provided Abramoff with legislative help in exchange for gifts and other financial favors.
And here's an interesting tidbit from a
local ABC News affilliate: Rove and Abramoff were "casual acquaintences."
Three former business associates of Abramoff, who worked with the lobbyist in various roles between 2001 and 2004, told The Associated Press that Abramoff routinely mentioned Rove when talking about his influence inside the White House.
One said he was present when Abramoff took a call from Rove's office to confirm a White House meeting had been approved between Malaysia's prime minister and Bush in May 2002. Abramoff was being paid by Malaysia for helping it in Washington, according to evidence the Senate has made public....
Abramoff was a $100,000 fundraiser for Bush and lobbying records obtained by the AP show his lobbying team logged nearly 200 meetings with the administration during its first 10 months in office on behalf of one of his clients, the Northern Mariana Islands.
The contacts between Abramoff's team and the administration included meetings with Attorney General John Ashcroft and policy advisers to Vice President Dick Cheney, the AP reported last year.
Abramoff's former assistant, Susan Ralston, went to work for Rove in 2001. Abramoff's legal team declined comment Monday night.
Oh yeah, casual acquaintences. I am so not buying that spin.
I'm currently watching the press conference with the hospital in Corpus Christi -- the hospital is refusing to comment on how many pellets are in Mr. Whittington. But they've indicated that Whittington has waived his HIPAA privacy issues to allow the hospital to provide briefings. Interesting...to what extent has that waiver been given? Hospital saying they aren't removing the shot near or on the heart at the moment, that Whittington is stabilized with the use of medication, but that they are prepared to remove the shot should it prove necessary to do so with further defibrillation issues. No comment on any blood alcohol tests being done on anyone.
And on that note, reader
seesdifferent has a helpful diary up on DKos on the medical issues, with a great find of a medical journal article on a situation that was similar to Whittington's condition. Both Seesdifferent and
the NYTimes, along with the hospital briefing from yesterday, are saying that it is most likely that the shot went initially right into Whittington's chest -- and that the speculation that the shot migrated intravenously is more unlikely. More to come on this when and it we get it.
Speaking of Cheney, here's an older article on Cheney speaking about Fox News as being "fair and balanced,"
from the WaPo. (Oh, and catch the mention of the Veep being the Administration's designated speaker for the NRA meeting. Wonder why they've been so silent on the gun safety questions of Cheney's conduct? *cough*) (Hat tip to reader Captain Plaid on the find.)
This just in:
Ann Coulter may be facing charges in Florida for voting in the wrong precinct. (Hat tip to reader Kurt on this one.)
Today's
Froomkin is up, chock full of great links and reads and fantastic as always. (Thanks immanentize!)
UPDATE: Okay, there is a never mind on the
Richard Sale article, it's dated at the bottom as being from October of 2005 (I thought I was having deja vu as I was reading it, but I missed the date. I've e-mailed to check on this, and will update as I get a response. Sorry -- my bad.
Chertoff is still testifying, and the damning House reports on Katrina failures, from the President on down have been released. More on that
from the WaPo, and I'll post a link to the report if and when I find one.
As you can tell, it's a busy news day. Condi is speaking to the Senate, the President has a speech on health care plans at some point this afternoon, Chertoff is in the hot seat, the Veep will be dodging nerf balls on Fox this afternoon -- and that's not even the half of it. Stay tuned.
A personal thanks to all the readers giving me heads up on some of these bits -- it's great to have such a dedicated team on our side, and I can't thank you enough for all your hard work.
UPDATED to take out the Sale article paragraphs and reference to Fitz in the next to the last paragraph. If I hear differently from Sale or Sic Semper, I'll let everyone know. Apologies for getting anyone's hopes up prematurely today. Oops. My fault entirely for missing the date. (See how easy it is to take full responsibility?)
UPDATE #2: Two other items I meant to mention:
The Terrorism Watch list has reached 325,000 people. With no real means of oversight or ability for memebrs of the public to request having their name removed if it is on the list inaccurately, managing this unwieldy mess is raising a lot of eyebrows. Good on Walter Pincus for bringing this issue to the public's attention today.
And it looks like the Karl Rove
threatening and arm twisting on behalf of the Administration may be having its desired effect, considering there are reports that
the NSA Hearings may be spiked. Hmmmm...putting political expediency in front of the Constitution and considerations regarding separation of powers and history. Cowards. Much more on this as I get it.
UPDATE #3: Well, this isn't going to make Karl happy: turns out some of the NSA whistleblowers are pushing back
here and
here.
|
As
we reported earlier via a report on MSNBC, Dick Cheney is ready to break his silence on the shooting.
Fox News reports that Brit Hume will interview Dick Cheney today. They will be showing clips from the interview throughout the day, with the full interview to air around 2:00 pm ET on Faux News.
More on this as we get it. Expect some really tough questions from Brit Hume. (Oh, yeah, good one.)
(Hat tip to reader Maggie for the heads up. Thanks!)
UPDATE: Faux News now reporting that excerpts of the interview will air at 2:00 pm ET, with the full interview to air at 6:00 pm ET.
This says to me that they are doing the interview this morning, and will be slicing up the raw footage into a favorable interview piece fo the Veep. Wouldn't it be nice to see what the live interview actually said? Guess we'll never know, because Faux isn't going to just run a live clip, are they?
UPDATE #2: Fox now spinning the interview as Cheney has to get the information out, according to their WH correspondent Molly Hannenberg, so that he won't eclipse the President's major health care speech later this afternoon. (Yeah. Good one.)
VP also concerned about Whittington's health, so out of abundance of caution, the VP delayed telling the media about it until Sunday. (Because, you know, it had nothing to do with getting stories straight, or because Dick has a penchant for keeping everything secretly.) Says that because he's eclipsing the President, he's making comments on the shooting.
Great remorse, that. Nice to know that the political calculations are first and foremost in everyone's mind at the WH and the Veep's staff.
NOTE: Chertoff now testifying live to Senate Committee. Am not finding it on C-Span I or II as yet. But cable news networks are carrying his opening statement live at the moment. Will update when I get more.
PERSONAL NOTE: Holy crap -- I've been nominated for a
Koufax for Best Writing. Completely speechless, and so honored to be mentioned in the same breath as Digby, Wolcott and Arthur (and so many other phenominal writers). Whoa.
UPDATE #3: For a good feel for how Fox has been covering this story, take a peek at this
from Kos. From Neil Cavuto: "Hunting Accident Controversy: How Is VP Cheney Feelings?" Nevermind that the victim has had a heart attack and is back in the ICU...expecting some serious nerf ball questions from Hume in today's interview? You betcha. (Although, as several readers have pointed out in the comments and via e-mails to me, if he hits the Veep pretty hard, one has to wonder if Karl and the GOP are planning on using Hume to pitch Cheney further under the bus. To be continued...)
UPDATE #4: Fox's Hannenberg now spinning on Fox that Vice President's rarely do press conferences, but instead do interviews, hence the sit-down with Brit Hume. Well, given that this is the first Vice President to shoot someone since Aaron Burr, the usual rules aren't exactly applicable, are they? Nothing like a little message modification after the first pass at "protecting the President's PR flank" didn't fly as well as they had hoped, now is there? (Yes, I am still forcing myself to watch Fox News. Only for you guys...)
|
MSNBC is reporting this morning that Vice President Cheney may finally speak about his shooting a hunting companion in the face, neck and chest.
Vice President Dick Cheney is expected to make his first public statement about the accidental shooting of a hunting partner, sources told NBC News on Wednesday.
Cheney will “certainly” speak to the issue, the sources said, but they also cautioned that “we're at Wednesday” and suggested that progress made by Harry Whittington, the 78-year-old lawyer shot by Cheney, will play a big role in how any public comment is handled.
According to MSNBC, Cheney had breakfast with the President and lawmakers this morning, and I'm assuming they were pressing the Veep to stand up and take responsibility. He has no scheduled public events until Friday, and there is no word as yet when such a statement will be made. My guess is they want to give some more time for doctors to have a better idea of how Whittington's condition is going to go -- wouldn't want the Veep standing at the podium answering press questions while Whittington was having a heart attack or anything.
Especially since McClellan already covered that during yesterday's presser. (
C&L has the video, in case you missed it.) Look for a very heated exchange for an already embattled press secretary today. I think yesterday's disengenuous joking performance may have been one lie too far.
What was the Veep doing yesterday? Meeting with legislators on the Hill. (See picture above.)
I don't want to downplay how difficult it can be to shoot another human being. Having worked with police officers who have had to shoot someone in the line of duty -- appropriately and after much warning, with no question that they did the right thing -- I know how that can still tear you up. I also know a guy that worked with my dad who had a hunting accident, and how tough it was for him to deal with that fact (he never went hunting again, ever, and spent the first month after the accident happened breaking into sobs every time he even thought about it -- his victim was wounded superficially and young and healthy and came out fine, but it was still incredibly traumatic for everyone -- it was also, btw, a shotgun injury, but at a much larger distance.)
So sure, a little time to get yourself in order is not only appropriate, it's expected. I mean honestly, we all joke about Cheney coming out of his crypt, but he likely feels quite badly about shooting someone in the face, neck and chest, and causing his victim to have a heart attack after a pellet penetrated the man's chest and lodged on or near his heart, not to mention the other pellets lodged all over which will likely stay in his flesh, causing pitting and scarring and spending a week in the ICU. Oh, and he'll never be able to have an MRI because of the metal in his body, and will always have to worry about a pellet getting into his bloodstream and travelling to the small blood vessels in his brain. I sure as hell would awful, were I Dick Cheney, I know that.
But he's the Vice President of the United States on top of just being a person who shot another man. His office has issued only
one, terse statement on his behalf yesterday about the heart attack, and they have been less than forthcoming about Cheney's view of what happened, the facts and the timeline otherwise. (Read: he's lawyered up.)
The press coverage has shifted to a theme of "White House unhappy with Cheney" or "White House and GOP angry about how things have been handled." Take your pick. Take a look at these headlines:
--
Cheney's Response a Concern to GOP: Vice President Urged to Make Public Statement on Shooting (
WaPo via MSNBC)
--
Cheney Controversy Persists: Failure to Disclose Shooting Information May Have Gone Against President's Wishes (
ABC News) [Hello Karl, is that you again?]
--
White House Deferred to Cheney on Shooting: In A Break with Policy, Hunting Accident Was Not Disclosed for 14 Hours (
WaPo)
--
Slow Leak: How Cheney Stalled News Reports of Hunting Accident (
Time)
--
Growing GOP Concerns About Cheney (
CBS News)
Is it me, or would you be watching out for a big ole bus if you were the Veep? Because it sure as hell sounds to me like a whole lotta people in the Republican party, already skittish about the President's tanking poll numbers and their own shaky chances in the fall elections -- they've all gotten together over the last week and decided to throw the Veep under a bus for the good of the party. At least, it sure looks that way at the moment.
So, Dick is deciding whether or not to make a public statement -- not because his remorse and civic duty are pushing him the conclusion that he has to take public responsibility for his actions. But because his not doing so is making him politically unsupportable. Good ethical behavior that.
Bob Harris has a fairly good round-up of where things stand in terms of this Administration and how far they feel they can push the honesty and integrity boundaries. My personal favorite is this one: "Shootings by vice presidents are always reported by local newspapers, who learn a few carefully-chosen details from a friend of the vice president, after she has spoken with Karl Rove." Ahh, how true.
BarbinMD points out in her DKos diary that Katherine Armstrong, cheif spokesperson and self-described "eye witness" was actually 100 YARDS away from the incident. So how is it that she knew the exact play by play again? That's a pretty hefty distance away from the scene. She wouldn't have heard Whittington, had he actually spoken up softly to let the group know he was coming up behind (and he would have been speaking softly, because you don't do a lot of yelling around quail). And if it was shurbby terrain, as she said, her field of vision could easily have been blocked.
That overnight period between the shooting and the time Cheney spoke with police officers gets more and more curious. Especially given that Armstrong spoke with Rove and the crack cover-our-asses team at the WH. Getting everyone's story straight, were we?
Finally, there was a note from a police officer about the
"two beers" issue that I thought would be interesting to everyone. He's right, it is the excuse you hear most frequently -- and I have no idea why, because for most people, anything over one beer puts them over the legal limit in most states. (But I digress...)
As Jane pointed out yesterday, Armstrong initially reported to MSNBC (before they scrubbed the story) that some beer may have been in the community picnic basket lunch the hunting party shared. No idea whether the Veep partook or not -- but we'll never know, since the police officers were turned away at the front gate by Katherine Armstrong's security staffers.
Yeah, like that would work for any of us, right? It's good to have friends in high places.
Oh, and
Taylor says that the 30 yard question was raised on yesterday's Olbermann by Paul Burka, Executive Editor of Texas Monthly Magazine, who said:
"I'll tell you what really doesn't add up here. It's the 30 yards distance. When I talked to friends of mine who were avid hunters, a 28 gauge shotgun is not a powerful weapon unless you happen to be a quail or you happen to be very close. And I think that there's just a question whether at that distance those kind of injuries could occur."
Taylor also has some other great quotes, so it's worth clicking through the link to get more of a feel for the "Cheney going under the bus" thought process in the wider GOP at the moment. I bet Lynn Cheney is pissed off this morning. Wonder when Larry King will have her on as his very special guest for the evening?
UPDATE: Looks like the Texas Park and Wildlife Service is now saying that the accident was a result of Dick Cheney's error in judgment, according to
the Houston Chronicle. So much for the "blame the guy in the ICU" tactic. (Hat tip to reader Mimi Schaeffer.)
NOTE: Chertoff testifying today regarding the DHS/FEMA response (or lack thereof) to Katrina and problems within the Department. He'll be testifying live on C-Span later this morning. I'll update with a time when I get it.
|
We have so many stories to chose from tonight it's hard to pick one, so let's not:
1. Glenn Greenwald -- I know Redd I both touched on it earlier today, but Glenn brought InstaHack and the cult-o-Bush blogosphere to their fucking
knees with
this post at Crooks and Liars. InstaHack did Church Lady Brady one better in the WAAAAAHHH!! department and though virtually every major wingnut blogger vociferously objected to Glenn's challenge that they are not, in fact, true conservatives but rather authoritarian cultists, they also had to denounce Ann Coulter in the process. That includes K-Lo (above) who gave off hectoring about abstinence in order to do so (and yes, you all know the obligatory
TBogg truism that goes along with that one). Now
that is a fucking
coup.
2.
Crooks and Liars has the screen grab of the MSNBC story about alcohol being around when Cheney shot the old man in the face. Nice catch.
3. MoDo, behind the firewall,
talks about the classy Veep:
Private citizens have been enlisted to blame the victim. Maybe poor Mr. Whittington put himself in the wrong place at the wrong time. But he was, after all, behind Vice, not in front of him. And the hunter pulling the trigger is supposed to make sure he has a clear shot. Wouldn't it be, well, classy for Shooter to express just a bit of contrition and humility?
Instead, the usual sliming has begun, with the Cheney camp trying to protect the vice president by casting a veteran hunter as Elmer Dud.
(snip)
Admit no mistakes. Express sympathy. Blame the victim without leaving fingerprints by outsourcing the smear to the private sector.
4. Gregg Mitchell over at
E&P:
Bush is now trapped. If he'd admitted that no one woke him up to tell him, and that’s why McClellan didn’t know until Sunday morning, that would have painted a very troubling (though not fresh) picture of a disengaged #1 man who is actually, at best, #2. But at least it would suggest that Bush took action and ordered the story out when he did find out about it.
Yet in declaring that he did know about Cheney’s role at 8 p.m. Saturday—and did absolutely nothing to tell anyone about it—an even more disturbing, and perhaps sinister, picture of the true arrogance of power may emerge.
Wait until more evidence seeps out. Here's a fresh tidbit: Late Tuesday, the Secret Service related that the shooting actually took place at 5:50 p.m. Saturday, 20 minutes later than previously stated--and therefore, right up against sunset.
5.
Wolcott:
Rich guys pretending to be Jeremiah Johnson is one of the many fascimile editions of rawhide authenticity being successfully peddled in the media with no one willing to stop and say that inflicting unnecessary pain and suffering on animals should be a source of sin and shame, and that the decent thing to do would be to break Cheney's shotgun in two before anyone or anything else is harmed by his buffoonery.
Wishing you and yours a happy Valentines Day and more action than K-Lo. As our first day with over 80,000 visitors it was good for us.
Update: Reader Dan makes this observation:
How can an armed man (Whittington) advance on the VP without intervention by the Secret Service? If he separated from the party did the Secret Service lose sight of him? You know, the other guy with a *gun*. The secret service team's primary purpose is to protect the VP and they probably categorize other hunters as a far greater threat than Al Qaeda terrorists popping out of the grass. My point is that the Secret Service must have seen everything.
That is a very good point.
Update: I forgot about
this -- bet you didn't know Sherrod Brown was African-American either, did you? Neither did he.
|
Anyone -- journalist, politician or pundit -- who is putting out this "blame the victim" propaganda about the poor old guy Dick Cheney shot in the face is simply a repulsive and shameless waste of space. Case in point,
Anne Kornblut and Ralph Blumenthal of the NYT:
Ms. Armstrong and Ms. Willeford said the accident was largely the fault of Mr. Whittington, who had reappeared alongside two of his hunting companions without giving proper warning. Mr. Cheney, who was carrying a 28-gauge shotgun, had already begun to fire and sprayed Mr. Whittington.
"He got peppered pretty good," Ms. Armstrong said. "He fell with his head toward me." She said she ran over to Mr. Whittington, who had fallen, but stayed out of the way while Secret Service agents tended to him.
"There was some bleeding, but it wasn't horrible," she said. "He was more bruised."
Ms. Willeford, whose husband was also at the ranch, said in an interview after visiting the victim at the hospital that Mr. Whittington accepted responsibility for the accident. "He understands that he could have handled it better," Ms. Willeford said. "Harry should have let us know he was back there."
And what was Dick Cheney doing yesterday instead of apologizing to the victim he cared so very much about he couldn't speak with the sherrif for 15 hours after the incident? Why killing any congressional investigation into
the illegal NSA wiretaps, of course. (And for the record, let me express my profound disinterest in ever hearing about "good Republicans like Olympia Snowe who have seen the light" ever again.)
Since the NYT actually has a public editor with an IQ above that of a passenger pidgeon it might actually do some good to
let Byron Calame know that blaming an old man who may very well be dying -- as Alan Simpson, Norm Coleman and even Paul Begala continued to do today on CNN long after they'd heard news of Whittington's heart attack -- is really, really base.
(graphic by the talented and prolific Dark Black who has been photoshopping tirelessly throughout this whole thing)
Update: Jeannie Z reviews the
2004 Texas Hunting Accidents Analysis, and says: "Interestingly, they don't say that prevention is the responsibility of the person being shot."
|
It was only a matter of time before people who really care about Whittington got fed up with the whole "blame the victim" thing, and are they
mad. They are not buying the whole cockeyed Armstrong story either.
According to
Slate:
The official story is that the blast from the vice president's shotgun hit Whittington at a distance of 30 yards. Hunters at the Vaughn Building [the headquarters of Harry Whittington] are skeptical. The hunt took place on a cold, windy afternoon. Whittington and his fellow hunters were probably wearing warm clothing—say, a jacket and a flannel shirt. Cheney was using a 28-gauge shotgun, a smaller-diameter firearm with pellets smaller than BBs. Whittington's friends question whether the pellets could have penetrated his layers of clothing and skin at that range. Yet two pellets lodged against his larynx, another was in his liver, and another migrated into the heart muscle, causing the heart attack. The pattern of wounds was between the lower chest and the forehead, a pretty tight zone for shot of 30 yards. If the range was considerably less than 30 yards, then it is likely that Whittington's injuries were worse than the initial statement by Katharine Armstrong indicated. (The blast "knocked him silly," but "he was fine.")
And they have a few choice words for Scott McClellan:
If there is anything that Harry's friends at the Vaughn Building are angry about, it is not the shooting itself but the attempt by White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan to place the blame on the victim. It's the shooter's duty to know what he is shooting at and where his companions are. A shooting accident is always the fault of the shooter. Always.
The incompetence of the bumbling White House flaks is finally catching up to them. Even Chris Matthews said today that at this rate, Bush's approval ratings will be at 20 within the week.
Good catch by John Casper, who (along with Rusty) also caught the MSNBC scrub this afternoon.
(graphic by Dark Black)
|
Josh has picked up the question that
Taylor was asking earlier today about pellet spread and distance of 30 yards, and takes it a step further.
From TPM:
Would the weapon and ammunition Dick Cheney shot have the force to imbed pellets near Whittington's heart at 30 yards? A hunter wears a decent amount of clothing over the chest, remember. So these pellets would have to have pierced his clothing, his skin and then lodged inside the body cavity, somewhere near or around his heart. The shot came from the right and the heart is on the left so that might add to the amount of tissue needing to be traversed -- but without more specifics that's hard to know for sure. That takes a decent amount of force at 30 yards. Any thoughts from our TPM hunters and clinicians?
Hope Josh will forgive me for snagging an extended quote, but this is really something that has been bugging me as well.
As a prosecutor, I had the luxury of the State Police lab guys doing crime scene reconstruction for me, figuring out all the ballistics and physics involved in shooting incidents, determining distance between the victim and the shooter by evaluating spray pattern of the shot and a whole lot of additonal factors, you name it.
You wouldn't believe how much goes into this sort of scene reconstruction: WV has had one of the preeminant firearms and ballistics investigators in the nation for years (although he was, sadly, on the edge of retirement around the time that I was leaving work, so I'm not certain he's still on the job at the moment), a fellow who used to go to the FBI crime lab to train their new folks.
He taught me a lot about crime scene and evidence work, and although I pretty much always deferred to his analysis, I made him walk me through each calculation, each assumption, each piece of evidence in the chain for every case we worked on together so that I had a complete understanding of it myself. (You can't go forward with charges on someone that put them in jeopardy for life in prison without knowing all the facts, I always thought.)
And Josh is right: something just doesn't add up with the Dick Cheney story via Katherine Armstrong.
I know that once a pellet gets into the cardio-vascular system, because they are tiny and lightweight, they can travel. Given that Mr. Whittington was hit in the face, neck and chest -- a region that is fairly dense in terms of the number of arteries, veins and capillaries, many of which are close to the surface, especially in the neck. (Man, that is a bitch of a region to get shot, just based on all of the autopsy photos I've viewed in my day. Ergh.)
If any of our med. background readers have insights into this, I'd be very interested to know what your experience is with this. Especially given the fact that reports are that Whittington was hit with
between 6 to 200 pellets (depending on your media outlet).
You have a 78 year old man, with a region that is full of blood vessels, riddled with little pieces of shot. And clearly at least one of them has gotten to his heart. Which can cause death of muscle tissue and all sorts of enzyme problems, as I recall, but I'm working from memory and sketchy news reports on this, so I would sure appreciate an expert take on what this means for the long-term -- and when you have at least one shot in a multiple-pellet incident, how likely is it that this is the last time there will be a problem?
Beyond that, Josh makes a great point about the distance, the amount of damage done, and the facts not quite adding up properly here.
Hunters usually wear camo jackets or other long-sleeved shirts that blend into the surrounding background. Over that, you'd wear a blaze orange vest, usually made of some medium-weight material, mainly because the lightweight ones tend to flutter in the wind. When you are hunting birds, especially quail which spook, you don't want some fluttering piece of fabric flowing out behind you.
It seems to me unlikely that a shot from a 28-gauge at 30 yards when the Veep is said to have been using 7 1/2 shot would make it all the way through two layers of clothes at the end of its effective target range. So either (a) they were much, much closer together or (b) the pellets are travelling, and given the estimates of pellets with which Whittington may have been hit that I've seen, that's bad news.
And that's another thing, for a 28-gauge to lodge that many pellets into Whittington from 30 yards just doesn't sound quite right to me. Anyone have thoughts or experience with this to give a better assessment?
Any thoughts from the folks in the comments on all of this would be most welcome.
I talked with my dad, the big hunter in the family, today, and he also had some questions:
Why weren't they hunting in a line?
Who was responsible for doing the guiding -- normally with these big money hunts, dad says they pay a professional guide to take them out -- unless the Armstrong's have a gamekeeper on the property and/or didn't bother having a guide with this party, since they had hunted on the property before.
Who taught Cheney he could shoot blind into the sun, especially at sunset? (My dad then gave me the same lecture about gun safety I've heard a billion times -- muzzle pointed away from anyone that could get hurt, no taking off the safety unless you are aware of every member of your party AND dogs, never, EVER shoot unless you are certain what is in front of you and that you have a specific target...)
Why wasn't Cheney treated like any other American would have been -- why keep the police away from him after the incident until the next morning?
And dad says most 28's that he's familiar with wouldn't take a load from regular shells that had 200 pellets in it -- so unless this was a special load, and he was really close up, some of the stories don't work. Curiouser and curiouser.
My dad is a big gun rights kind of guy, but the fact that Dick Cheney got special treatment from the local cops really pisses him off. And he says that, ultimately, you pull the trigger, you take responsibility for what happens with your shot.
|
This is what the State of Texas
thinks of hunting accidents that injure innocent people if your surname happens to be Hispanic and you're not the big, white boozehound Vice President of the United States:
An undocumented Mexican immigrant was shot and killed Sunday evening in an apparent hunting accident on a Webb County ranch owned by the family of former U.S. diplomat John G. Hurd.
"The illegals were crouching out in the brush. They said they mistook this guy for a hog," said Webb County Sheriff Juan Garza....
Juan Garza Mendoza, 34, an employee of the ranch, was charged Monday with manslaughter, a second-degree felony punishable by up to 20 years in prison....
Mendoza had apparently hit Barrera Vasquez while shooting at a feral hog, and immediately contacted authorities after the shooting, Hurd said.
Sheriff Garza said interviews with three of the victim's Mexican traveling companions and the others in the ranch hunting party led him to rule out anything but an accidental shooting.
"They mistakenly shot a human being," he said. "It's reckless. It's inexcusable."
Mendoza was
indicted for manslaughter but the district attorney eventually dropped the charges in favor of a civil suit. The court found the ranch owner was liable to the tune of
$20 million in the case. No wonder Katharine Armstrong was so anxious to have the Texas Parks and Wildlive Division (of which she was
the former Chairman) come out and give Dick a pass on the whole thing, saying no alcohol or drugs were involved in the incident -- although there is no indication that they interviewed and/or tested Cheney or anyone else involved in the matter in a timely fashion.
(hat tip to Fred Vincy at
Stone Court)
Update: Dan Abrams is on MSNBC giving Cheney a pass, saying that "The Vice President didn't do anything wrong" and finding nothing irregular about the fact that he was not interviewed by law enforcement officials for 15 hours after the incident. Is Abrams the amazing Kreskin or something? How would he, or anyone, know that "the Vice President didn't do anything wrong" -- especially since Armstrong is now
backtracking on her story:
"There may be a beer or two in there," she said, 'but remember not everyone in the party was shooting.'"
These are the questions
you should be asking, Dan.
Update II: The beer quote seems to now be scrubbed from the MSNBC site, though you can still see it cached in the
Google abstract.
Update III: Remember this isn't
the first scrubbing we've found in this matter. To their credit CBS PublicEye addressed it
here, though the reporter's explanation is something less than satisfactory.
|
As we all sit around waiting futilely for Dick Cheney to express any remorse or regret or concern for his victim, helpful members of the press have done everything they can to pave the way and make light of the consequences of his actions.
AP:
White House Finds Humor in Hunting Mishap
By NEDRA PICKLER , 02.14.2006, 10:56 AM
The White House has decided that the best way to deal with Vice President Dick Cheney's shooting accident is to joke about it.
President Bush's spokesman quipped Tuesday that the burnt orange school colors of the University of Texas championship football team that was visiting the White House shouldn't be confused for hunter's safety wear.
"The orange that they're wearing is not because they're concerned that the vice president may be there," joked White House press secretary Scott McClellan, following the lead of late-night television comedians. "That's why I'm wearing it."
The president's brother, Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, took a similar jab after slapping an orange sticker on his chest from the Florida Farm Bureau that read, "No Farmers, No Food."
"I'm a little concerned that Dick Cheney is going to walk in," the governor cracked during an appearance in Tampa Monday.
CNN is reporting that at the time McClellan was making his jokes he knew about Whittington's heart attack.
Those not mining for comedy gold in the fact that an old man was shot in the face by the Vice President of the United States are trying to blame the old man. Former Wyoming Republican Senator Alan Simpson in
the NYT:
Groans at Home Re: (Cheney Joke Here)
ELISABETH BUMILLER
Mr. Simpson, for one, said he was outraged by the media frenzy, and blamed Mr. Whittington for not announcing that he was coming up behind Mr. Cheney in the field, which is protocol.
"When it's all through after a few days, people are going to laugh at the media for their overreaction," Mr. Simpson said in an interview from his home in Wyoming. "This is a hunting accident, created by the victim. Dick Cheney didn't do anything. He's a master hunter. And they're portraying him as some sort of assassin. I mean the headline I saw today was 'Cheney Bags Lawyer.'"
There really doesn't seem to be a limit to what these people will do or say. As
Glenn Greenwald notes, they are not conservatives. "They are authoritarian cultists. Their allegiance is not to any principles of government but to strong authority through a single leader."
This attempt at "spin" has exceeded all boundaries of appropriate behavior regarding a man who is fighting for his life and both Pickler and Bumiller should be ashamed to publish it. Okay what am I saying, I know better. But they
should.
The NYT Public Editor's blog is
here.
|
CNN is reporting that Dick Cheney's victim, Harry Whittington, has had a heart attack and that one of the pellets has moved to his heart.
It was exceptionally helpful that the Texas Parks and Wildlife Service
wrote that report yesterday for Dick, wasn't it? Slapped him on the wrist for a $7 fine but said he was not under the influence of drugs or alcohol at the time.
Quite convenient that
the former Chairman of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Commision is none other than Katharine Armstrong Idsal, the
Bush Pioneeer behind whose skirts Cheney is now hiding?
Note to press: time to stop using the word "peppered" and take a serious look into this situation. These are the people who want to
put you in jail for doing your job. Now might be the time to start doing it.
(graphic by Dark Black)
|
Just in case you were wondering, it's been FOUR days since the Vice President of the United States shot a man in the face, neck and chest, and still no public accounting and acceptance of responsibility from him. Nada. Zip. Zero.
Still hiding behind Mary Matalin's and Katherine Armstrong's skirts -- allowing them to take all the media heat, along with Scotty McClellan, who faced another round of peppering from a still-pissed press corps, who seem to be sick of being lied to by this White House.
I suppose it shouldn't come as a surprise, seeing that it is Dick Cheney and all...but still, what kind of message is that sending to the kids in this country?
"Go ahead and shoot your friends. Then blame them for getting in the way of the shot, and have a female friend deal with the press for you so you can hide behind her skirts and never have to accept any responsibility. Ever."
Nice.
How is the WH dealing with this mess? Apparently, the President, his Press Secretary and his staff have decided that when Dick Cheney shoots a man in the face, neck and chest with a shotgun,
it's a laughing matter for the formal WH staff. Including the President.
Nice. Really great example to set for young people. Next time I speak to my police and prosecutorial buddies, I'll ask them how much fun it is to have to deal with the "Well, Dick Cheney did it, and didn't do any jail time." defense in a reckless endangerment or improper control of firearms case. Really, oh so helpful for law enforcement. Idiots.
Why not ask the Whittington family, with the patriarch just out of three days in the ICU and still in the hospital with more than 200 pellets in his system -- some of which could travel through his bloodstream at any time now and block blood vessels in his brain -- how funny they find this incident. Did I mention that Cheney shot him in the face, neck and chest? Any idea how dangerous that is? Or painful. But the WH has decided to just laugh it off.
No more personal responsibility lectures from any of these people. That's just pathetic.
Oh, and in case you are wondering, hunters across the country, not just here at FDL, are saying that
Cheney violated the cardinal rule of hunting: look before you ever touch the trigger. See that photo above -- that's what two people hunting in blaze orange look like in Texas brush. Think that blaze orange vest and hat are difficult to see?
One of our commenters asked yesterday how, if Cheney couldn't see Whittington because of the sun in his eyes (you know, the sun at right before sunset...), how it was that he felt comfortable firing off a round at a "bird"? I mean, quail are very small, if he couldn't see a six foot tall man, how the hell was he going to be tracking a quail? The whole story stinks. Period.
Paul Begala sums up a lot of what I've been hearing from hunters around here and in my e-mail.
Ms. Armstrong says Whittington should have announced himself upon approaching Cheney. That is right. At the same time, Cheney, as a shooter, has an obligation to be aware at all times of the whereabouts of the dogs (who don't announce themselves) his fellow hunters, the guides, dog handlers, etc. I've been on hunting parties of ten men, and it's the obligation of the shooters to know where each of them is, and to be sure they are safe. Cheney knew Whittington was chasing a bird. If he could not see Whittington, if he was not 100 percent sure of his whereabouts, he should not have taken a shot. No bird is worth it.
In sum, even from Ms. Armstrong's whitewashed account, it sounds to me like Cheney was not being safe....
While hunting accidents do happen, this one may have been avoidable - if Mr. Cheney and his companions had been less trigger-happy and more prudent.
Taylor has a great post wondering whether it is possible that Cheney and Whittington were a helluva lot closer than 30 yards. And she does some physics experiments to check it out.
I'll say it again -- this "story" from Katherine Armstrong doesn't pass the smell test. Not for me, not for most of America. And the fact that police officers were prevented from meeting directly with the Vice President until the next day raises enormous investigative red flags in my mind: no on scene, immediate statement, which any other person in America would have had to give. No on scene personal observation by the officer, which any other person in America would have had to undergo, including no doubt a breathalyzer or blood test or other checks on intoxication possibilities, list of medications taken (because that can substantially impair judgment or sight, depending on the list). No immediate observation of demeanor or other information that a smart investigative cop knows to do. Nada. Zip. Zero.
Take a hike until it's convenient for Dick, and to hell with following the rules like everyone else. Nice. Great example to set for the nation, there, Trigger.
Four days and counting. No accountability. I'm watching you, Dick. And I'm not letting up until you stand up like a man and take responsibility for your poor judgment.
You owe it to kids in this country to be a real man and take your lumps. Every other citizen in this country would have to take responsibility for shooting a man in the face, neck and chest -- you don't get a pass any longer. Take responsibility for your own actions.
|
Peter Daou has a fantastic piece up today on the value of progressive blogs as a voice in the wilderness for liberal thought, critique and analysis. It's a must read, and something I'd like to build on in the weeks ahead.
First of all, and this was a thrill for me, Peter counts FDL among the bigs in his listing, so thanks to him. The high level of quality content, day in and day out, of the blogs on our blogroll never ceases to amaze me. Let alone the gift that we are given by our exceptional commenters every single day here. So thank you, I just can't say that enough.
And Peter correctly credits Digby and Glenn Greenwald for a couple of posts that have had me thinking as well over the last few weeks.
The attempt to marginalize progressive bloggers as part of an angry, unwashed, irrational mob is in full swing, but truth-telling has a self-sustaining power. Bloggers will continue to cut through the fabricated storylines, providing clarity, sanity, honesty, and an abiding loyalty to the Constitution and to the principles our country is founded upon.
History will look kindly on them.
Amen.
If you somehow missed
this Digby post or
this one from Glenn that Peter references, please click-through and read them. They are guaranteed to stick with you and make you think, and its an overall topic that I'd like to explore further -- the question of not only what are we against but what we stand up for, day in and day out.
The question of blog relationship to the media is something that Jane has been especially good at raising here at FDL, so I am giving her well-earned kudos. Peter highlights
a previous post of his on the subject that was particularly fine, and it also merits further thoughts and discussion.
It seems to me that we have reached a point where things are moving up to a whole new level of discourse among progressives around the blogoverse. The question is: what direction do we take things from here? Now that is a question worth pondering, isn't it?
Now I'm cracking the whip on myself -- let's get to work.
Oh, and Happy Valentine's Day to everyone.
(Photo credit to
Fbarbagallo. This is just a beautiful moment captured on film, isn't it?)
|
The Barbara Comstock story just gets better and better. Valley Girl went on a Lexis/Nexis search and found that the head of Scooter Libby's defense fund is quite proud of her collection of scalps.
From Roll Call, June 9, 2005:
Which brings us to many of the people who attended a book party for Posties Susan Glasser and Peter Baker, who co-wrote "Kremlin Rising," and John Harris, author of "The Survivor," a look at the presidency of Bill Clinton, whose darn near entire staff was deposed in one scandal or another during his eight-year stretch.
A look around the book party revealed plenty of former Clinton aides who gave depositions during Whitewater, Travelgate, Filegate, Monicagate, campaign finance investigations - you name it. Amid the Clintonites packing the party at the German Marshall Fund of the U.S. was one woman who stood out like a sore thumb: Barbara Comstock, who as a Hill counsel in the 1990s was one of the leading GOP attack dogs against Clinton and Co.
The affable Comstock was chatting with Post Whitewater reporter Susan Schmidt, who, like Comstock, is also loathed by the Clintons. Then suddenly the two ladies found themselves chatting in the same circle of partygoers as Marsha Scott, a supreme Clinton loyalist who was deposed in the Clinton Whitewater and Travelgate investigations ... by none other than Comstock.
Comstock said hello to Scott and then turned to Schmidt and said, "Sue, have you ever met Marsha? She was one of our favorite people we deposed."
Comstock tells HOH that she and Scott have remained friendly over the years, and it was a perfectly pleasant moment at the book party the other night. "I deposed Rahm. I chatted with him, too," Comstock said, referring to now Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.), a former senior aide to Clinton.
How charming. Somebody lets a bloodthirsty ghoul into the building and they proceed to treat her like a human being. That's what happens when you forget to festoon the door with garlic in DC.
Emptywheel has a superb treatise on how Fair Barbara during her tenure at the DoJ waged a war against Eric Lichtblau at the New York Times and blackballed him for reporting on stories unfavorable to the Republicans that quite probably included the current NSA wiretapping story. It's a fascinating read that further illuminates the small cadre of GOP thugs who always seem to be pulling an infinite number of unseen strings.
It's valuable to shine lights on gorgons like Comstock who have built personal fortunes dishing it out -- but can she take it? The real fun will come in the fall of 2006 if the Dems take back one of the houses of congress and get the power of subpoena back in the committees. Then it won't just be K Street lobyists shaking in their boots, it'll be the Barbara Comstocks of the world whose profiles we will continue to raise to the point where they can hopefully be held accountable.
So if you'd like to help fight for a new Democratic congress, I can think of no better way than contributing to the campaign of
Ciro Rodriguez. We've now raised
$15,275 for Ciro on this site. So if you want to make the Comstocks of the world feel a little less safe tonight, throw a little dough Ciro's way.
(graphic by Graham G.)
|
Media Matters tries to detangle who's lying, and it's not easy.
Byron York today in
the NRO:
Katharine Armstrong said she did not coordinate with the vice president's office before calling the Corpus Christi paper. If Armstrong had not made the call, it is not clear when, if ever, the vice president's office would have told the public about the incident. Asked what would have happened if the accident had happened another way -- if, for example, [Harry] Whittington [the Texas attorney that Cheney shot] had accidentally shot the vice president -- the administration source told NRO that it would have been handled in a similar fashion. "The priorities would have remained the same -- first medical care, then law enforcement alert," the source said. Still, in the case of Saturday's shooting, those matters were taken care of on Saturday, and the press was still not notified until after Katharine Armstrong made the decision to call her local paper.
No. She was not coached, not a bit. Just ask her.
MALVEAUX:
Are you saying that she's lying? That her --
But don't ask Scott McClellan:
MALVEAUX: Katharine Armstrong talked to CNN Sunday evening [February 12] and she said that she thought this was going to become a story, so she was going to go to the local press. She also told CNN that she did not believe the Vice President's Office was aware that she was going to go to the local press. How do you square that with your account, that --
McCLELLAN: The vice president spoke with her directly, and they agreed that she would make it public.
MALVEAUX: Are you saying that she's lying? That her --
McCLELLAN: No. You ought to check with her.
MALVEAUX: We did check with her. So you're saying that's not correct?
McCLELLAN: The vice president spoke directly with Mrs. Armstrong, and they agreed that she would make the information public.
Is it just me, or does it seem like Byron York and Scott McClellan are both competing to throw Cheney under the bus?
Also...per
Brad Friedman, still no video of today's gaggle up on the
White House web site. Small wonder.
Update: The NYT is reporting that Karl Rove was talking to Mrs. Armstrong within 90 minutes of the shooting. This was no doubt when Mrs. Armstrong told Karl about all the fine plans she had for handling the press while he nodded in silence.
(thanks to LJK for the photo)
|
This morning we posted that a CBS News report had
the following quote that was obviously quite troubling to the Cheney administration:
CBS News White House correspondent Peter Maer reports Texas authorities are complaining that the Secret Service barred them from speaking to Cheney after the incident. Kenedy County Texas Sheriffs Lt. Juan Guzman said deputies first learned of the shooting when an ambulance was called.
The Secret Service is looking into how the case was handled at the scene, Maer added.
Cheney was attending routine briefings Monday at the White House.
"It's clearly an accident, but the fact that the White House didn't release this information, that it sat around for almost a day is, in itself, bizarre," Time magazine's Matt Cooper told CBS News' The Early Show. "Late-night comics are going to be all over it. You know, these things — fairly or unfairly — tend to become a metaphor for a presidency and don't be surprised if you see lots of jokes about the vice president was trigger happy, or he might have had better aim if he'd served in Vietnam."
As Mimi Shaeffer notes in
the comments, the entire section has now been scrubbed from the CBS story.
It isn't just us --
Dave Johnson,
Talk Left,
The Blue Voice,
Think Progress and
others also has the same quote and the same link.
CBS got some 'splainin to do.
Maybe someone over at the
CBS News Blog can get to the bottom of this.
Update: Madam_Deb finds a different version of the story on
another CBS URL -- it contains the first Maer quote but the rest (including the shot by Cooper) is still scrubbed, in favor of this quote:
But the Secret Service told a different story, saying agents had informed the local sheriff of the shooting about an hour after it happened and that the vice president had been interviewed about the accident by local authorities on Sunday morning, CBS News White House correspondent Bill Plante reports.
So they didn't interview Dick until Sunday morning. Long past any time that they could have ascertained whether he had been drinking or not. Sounds like the "investigation" by the Sherrif's department
that indicated there was "no alcohol, or misconduct involved in the incident" is just a cheap coat of supposition based on nothing.
|
The Smoking Gun has a copy of the Texas Parks & Wildlife incident report:
According to the state report, Cheney was wearing a "blaze orange" cap and "coat/vest" and brown trousers and was toting an Italian-made Perazzi .28-caliber shotgun. In addition to the document's release, wildlife officials reported today that while Cheney had purchased a valid non-resident hunting license, he did not obtain a required "upland game bird stamp." As a result, a warning citation--which carries no fine or penalty--will be issued to Cheney, which state officials described as "routine."
They Kenedy County Sherriff also released a really
vaguely worded press release:
Due to a lack of communication the personnel manning the front gate upon Kenedy County Officer's arrival did not have any information and were unaware of the incident. Sheriff Salinas was informed shortly after the incident by Secret Service Agents by phone due to incompatibility of radio equipment.
The press release helpfully concludes that "the investigation reveals that there was no alcohol, or misconduct involved in the incident." The credibility of this statement would be greatly enhanced if they would come out and state that a) the Sheriff did in fact have immediate access to Cheney (
CBS reports they didn't, and their awkwardly worded statement seems to confirm this) and b) their conclusion about alcohol was backed up by the results of a test that had been administered in a timely fashion. They seem quite anxious to provide cover for DUI Dick so one would think that if they had anything like this they would've mentioned it.
Update: Mary points out that I did, in fact, leave out the best part of the sheriff's statement: "
Mr. Whittington's interview collaborated Vice President Cheney's statement." Well I guess it did at that.
Update II: Watertiger is about 700 hits away from hitting half a million today on her 1 yr. blogoversary.
You know what to do.
(graphic by Dark Black)
|
According to the
Texas Health and Safety Code, Section 161.041. MANDATORY REPORTING OF GUNSHOT WOUNDS:
A physician who attends or treats, or who is requested to attend or treat, a bullet or gunshot wound, or the administrator, superintendent, or other person in charge of a hospital, sanitorium, or other institution in which a bullet or gunshot wound is attended or treated or in which the attention or treatment is requested, shall report the case at once to the law enforcement authority of the municipality or county in which the physician practices or in which the institution is located.
I would assume that such a report requires something more than just a quick phone call, as in paperwork and other information to be filed along with the expected police report from any investigation which is done into the VP's shooting incident. Will we ever see it? No idea, especially given how the local Sheriff has made no public statement and hasn't been all that forthcoming as to what has been done in any investigation that may have gone on thus far.
Were authorities notified immediately about the shooting by medical personnel? That's a question I'd like to know the answer to, along with the exact time of notification. If the shooting did, indeed, happen around 5:30 pm and the ambulance arrived on the scene at around 20 minutes later, according to Katherine Armstrong, then that would make the time of notification by medical personnel required in the 6:10 pm to 6:30 pm time frame. Was a call or radio transmission made to the Sheriff's department at that time? The 911 service or sheriff's office ought to be able to answer that question, since it would be public record.
Speaking of the Sheriff's department, my read of the Texas criminal code matches up with
Jeralyn's earlier reporting on Texas Code Section 6.03. I took some time this morning to comb through everything I could find on applicable Texas criminal codes and
came up with this as well:
22.05. DEADLY CONDUCT. (a) A person commits an
offense if he recklessly engages in conduct that places another in
imminent danger of serious bodily injury.
(b) A person commits an offense if he knowingly discharges a
firearm at or in the direction of:
(1) one or more individuals; or
(2) a habitation, building, or vehicle and is reckless
as to whether the habitation, building, or vehicle is occupied.
(c) Recklessness and danger are presumed if the actor
knowingly pointed a firearm at or in the direction of another
whether or not the actor believed the firearm to be loaded.
(d) For purposes of this section, "building," "habitation,"
and "vehicle" have the meanings assigned those terms by Section
30.01.
(e) An offense under Subsection (a) is a Class A
misdemeanor. An offense under Subsection (b) is a felony of the
third degree.
If nothing else, the Veep ought to fit into the 22.05(a) category for investigative purposes. Whether or not this was an accident (and I have no evidence that it was anything other than an accident at this point, so let's go with that), the misdemeanor offense cited here from the Texas code does not require that the reckless conduct be "knowingly" done. It simply requires that the conduct in question be reckless.
I'm thinking shooting more than 50 bird shot pellets into a hunting companion at close range, lodging said pellets in the face, neck and chest area such that the man requires hospitalization in the ICU for several days might just be "reckless" conduct.
At least, it would be for the average American.
For the Veep, on the Armstrong Ranch in Texas, maybe the laws don't apply the same way they would for you and me. Not that I see anything in the law that allows for preferential treatment, but one has to wonder if that is what might be happening if a full investigation has not been done.
Given that there were
questions about whether a Sheriff's Deputy was prevented from speaking with the VP by some Secret Service agents, I think the press ought to get on this horse and ride it until they get some answers.
(Graphics love to
4Seasons Productions.)
(posted by Reddhedd who can't get into Blogger so I'm doing it)
|
Crooks and Liars has the video up of the McClellan press conference.
Nobody but nobody in the White House press corps is buying the bs story served up by McClellan whereby the Big Badass Vice President of the United States hides behind the skirts of a Texas housewife in a transparent dodge to keep anyone from knowing about what had happened until everyone could get their stories straight and Dick got the Wild Turkey off his breath.
VandeHei even elevates himself to Life Guard status briefly as he repeatedly asks the question McClellan stubbornly refuses to answer: "when did the President know that the Vice President had shot someone?"
You really, really need to see the arrogant Pravda-like steaming pile of nonsense that the White House is providing to reporters who know full well that the story was spiked.
Reporters need to remember that this administration is
conducting a witch hunt for James Risen today and it could be them tomorrow. If they value their ability to do their jobs with any integrity they will hold the White House accountable and realize the public has its teeth in this one, it's not "just another 24 hour story."
(graphic by Monk at
Inflatable Dartboard)
|
I guess some pigs are
more equal than others:
CBS News White House correspondent Peter Maer reports Texas authorities are complaining that the Secret Service barred them from speaking to Cheney after the incident. Kenedy County Texas Sheriffs Lt. Juan Guzman said deputies first learned of the shooting when an ambulance was called.
The Secret Service is looking into how the case was handled at the scene, Maer added.
Cheney was attending routine briefings Monday at the White House.
"It's clearly an accident, but the fact that the White House didn't release this information, that it sat around for almost a day is, in itself, bizarre," Time magazine's Matt Cooper told CBS News' The Early Show. "Late-night comics are going to be all over it. You know, these things — fairly or unfairly — tend to become a metaphor for a presidency and don't be surprised if you see lots of jokes about the vice president was trigger happy, or he might have had better aim if he'd served in Vietnam."
Is this what they had in mind when they were banging on about "restoring honor to the office of the president?"
I think the
Culture Ghost says it nicely (hat tip
Fixer). And
Vance lets you go quail hunting with DUI Dick.
(graphic by Dark Black)
|
Well, here's something I didn't think I'd ever be doing on this blog. Quoting from the
NRA Gun Safety section of their website:
The fundamental NRA rules for safe gun handling are:
1. ALWAYS keep the gun pointed in a safe direction.
This is the primary rule of gun safety. A safe direction means that the gun is pointed so that even if it were to go off it would not cause injury or damage. The key to this rule is to control where the muzzle or front end of the barrel is pointed at all times. Common sense dictates the safest direction, depending on different circumstances.
2. ALWAYS keep your finger off the trigger until ready to shoot....
3. ALWAYS...[w]henever you pick up a gun, immediately engage the safety device if possible....(emphasis mine)
We have a lot of readers who are also hunters. And all of them are saying the same thing -- the person shooting the gun is primarily responsible for what happens with that gun. Period. And the consensus of the real hunters in our comments is -- what an idiot.
From dex:
The White House spinners have a tough job on this one because they need to misdirect the story from Cheney's negligence and irresponsibility to some other area of lesser damage. But there really isn't any sensible area to take it to, other than the fact that Cheney was careless, indifferent to all hunting safety rules and then, to top it off, hoped to cover the story up completely. I'm sure that the victim, when he's finally briefed on what to say, will laugh it off as a fluke accident which could happen to anybody, but the truth is that it happens to very, very few. I spent my youth hunting in the woods and fields of Mississippi and I never got "sprayed" by any of the young people I hunted with...because we handled weapons sensibly.
And this from reader
Zergle:
The most consistent thing I heard though is why was he aiming so low? Was the quail already down and he was trying to finish it off? Most say that when quail hunting, you almost never lower your gone past 45 degrees for obvious safety concerns. Plus it's just more sporting to hit a moving target in the air. As one said, "if I wanted to shoot birds on the ground, I'd just go by a bunch of frozen chickens and toss them around the yard."
I'm hearing that a lot in my e-mail as well. Shooting birds low to the ground just is not done. Especially when you are in a group with other people, and with hunting dogs, because there is too much risk for injury. (Just ask Mr. Whittington about that one.) There's also this
from immanentize:
There is one hunt load -- I think remington produces it, for the 28 gauge which is brass shot, which might get the range to just about 30 yards.
Now, I have never packed my own cartridges, so I don't know how many #6 fit into the 1/2 charge, but if this guy actually got at least fifty pellets in the face and neck, my guess is he was closer to 15 to 20 yards away. And therefor in full view....
I really just don't see how this could have happened without arrogance or alcohol -- or probably both.
And this from
reader chris/tx:
Generally speaking - When quail hunting in groups, you usually fan out roughly in a line about 20-30 yards apart and walk forward. The bird dogs find and point to the birds. You would usually only fire in about a 150 degree radius in front of you.
If anybody ever "swung around", they would most likely be sent back to camp and never invited to hunt again.
And this from reader
the hunter in the crowd:
Number one. Everyone makes mistakes. Everyone. But serious, ethical hunters always put safety in front of everything else, and they do their damndest not to shoot anyone or anything except their intended quarry.
Number two. If you shoot someone else, you, and you alone, are responsible. No excuses, no "he wasn't supposed to be there" or "I didn't see him." If you're going to discharge weapons, you need to be certain you're doing so safely. Nothing else is acceptable.
This explanation from
reader Jeff is a very clear one:
First of all, I hate canned hunts. They are a big deal here in Texas, but where I come from (South Carolina) we would not consider it "hunting" to go assassinate a bunch of pen-raised birds and game. It is playtime for the rich and wannabe rich, period.
Second, I nearly choked when I read the account of Armstrong: "he came up behind them"....cause, what you normally do is approach shooters in their line of fire, right? And he "didn't make any noise or alert them to his presence"... well, you use dogs to scare up the birds, not a whooping and hollering hunter, and anyone coming up behind a shooter and yelling really loud is quickly going to earn an uninvite to the next hunting or shooting party. "He got peppered....I've been peppered before myself...." Well, yeah, when you are bird hunting it is not unheard of to have shot fall on you at times, but getting an ICU-worthy blast to the head and neck is not "getting peppered," it's getting "shot." And from even Armstrong's friendly description, what happened appears to be that Cheney tracked a bird with his gun at roughly shoulder height, roughly 180 degrees, and then fired. YOU NEVER DO THIS, especially when you have other people in your party that you have not accounted for-- because someone might be coming up behind you, ya know?
I think this is dangerous territory for Cheney et al. There is no good explanation for this, other than being drunk or stupid. Anti-gun people are going to hate the whole thing. Gun people like me are going to hate that he was such a complete idiot.
I think, as other have pointed out, that this is a microcosm of the whole administration:
1. Try to play tough, with a gun, or an army.
2. Fail to follow well-established rules, guidelines, and past experience (either out of ignorance or willful disregard, or both).
3. Get someone hurt or killed.
4. Try to keep the story under wraps for as long as possible.
5. When the story does come out, spin it so that there was no possible way the administration did anything wrong.
6. Blame someone else, where possible, blame the victim.
7. Make anyone who has a problem with it look like an un-American pussy.
Well, that pretty much sums the whole Administration up in one fell swoop, doesn't it?
There there is this
from Karl:
When quail hunting, the birds tend to flush within 5-10 yards of the hunters. They fly very low, up to eight feet off the ground depending on vegetation, and swerve around brush and trees.
Shotgunning is also very different from rifle shooting. The shooter looks only at the bird (or skeet) and relies on practice to fire the gun far enough ahead of the bird so the shot column intercepts it. Instead of looking down the barrel before shooting (a good way to miss every time), a shotgunning party relies on setting clear fire zones and knowing where the other members of the party are before shooting. It is common in both quail and dove hunting to shoot the foliage of a tree or bush (not Bush) when the bird flies behind or around it.
From the reporting so far, it looks like two errors were made. The birds flushed and flew behind the hunting line, so Cheney followed them into what is usually a no-fire zone since he thought it was clear. In addition, the victim seperated from the group and was not exercising due diligence when rejoining. Primary fault to Cheney, secondary to the victim.
And finally, this from
reader Uranius Pelican, which is dead on (no pun intended).
At 30 yards, an open choke pattern would spread to have enough distance between pellets (at least 10 inches or a foot with a 28 guage) that it could not do the kind of damage that this guy apparently suffered.
Also 7 or 8 shot is tiny and therefore has less mass and carries less energy at the same veleocity. That means it won't penetrate very far especially at 30 yards after it has been slowed greatly by the air resistance.
Most importantly, bird hunting accidents are almost always caused by one thing. People walking around with their gun off safety - ready to shoot in case a bird flushes. Shotguns are designed so that the safety is accessible to your thumb while your trigger finger is poised on the trigger.
Before I ever enter a field with someone I've never hunted with I stop and say OK, here's the deal, "I will not hunt with anyone here who does not agree to keep their gun on safe at all times until the moment just before they pull the trigger. If you don't want to do that tell me now and I'll go hunt somewhere else."
The story they are telling doesn't make sense to me. My guess is that Cheney's open choke 28 guage gun was being carried off safety and that he dropped it or stumbled and it went off accidentally hitting his partner at about 15 yards range or less. Of course, the story that the victim approached from behind unnannounced and therefore was at fault sounds good to someone who has never hunted quail - but it's a crock.
And finally, only a drunk, an asshole or a drunk asshole would ever shoot their partner or their dog.
And then there is this bit from one of the medical folks in the audience,
reader LittleBit:
Speaking as a 20-year veteran of The-Big-ICU-In-Knife-And-Gun-Club-Territory, there is no way in hell that the victim is relatively uninjured.
Shotgun injuries are some of the worst cases I have taken care of, due to the spread-shot nature of the wounds. If the victim got "peppered" in the neck, there are waaaayyyy too many important structures in that small space (oh, like maybe one of the internal or external carotid arteries) for this to be a "no big deal" situation. If any of the pellets nicks a blood vessel, it may travel as far as it can go--I took care of a kid shot in the chest and some pellets eneded up in his ankle, blocking the bloodflow, leading to an amputation. In this situation, add to that the victim's age and potential underlying medical problems--this is huge.
These days, God Almighty doesn't get to stay in the ICU unless it is absolutely imperative that He do so.
This stinks worse than a gangrenous leg....
Don't know about you guys, but that's an awful lot of questions that need to be asked by the press corps, isn't it? More to come.
UPDATE: You know, the more I think about it, the more I see this as a great teaching opportunity on gun safety for the NRA. Wonder if they will take it? I mean, gun safety is their top mission and all...I'm just saying.
|
I'm going to out something from my childhood this morning: I grew up in West Virginia, and I used to go hunting with my dad as a kid. I never actually shot any animals -- I was too much of a softie, and spent my time in the woods with my dad feeding peanuts to the chipmunks on the other side of the ridge from where he was hunting or sitting with him and whispering on occasion about woods lore and watching the deer trail in front of us for a big buck.
But I've always been a fairly decent shot -- my last NRA certification rating was 99% the last time I thought about qualifying myself for a conceal carry permit when I was receiving a threat or two as a prosecutor -- a problem I, thankfully, don't have to deal with on a daily basis any longer.
I've been around guns my whole life, going with my dad to adjust his scope before he went out for the week, and fire off a few rounds of target practice at a local quarry or at the target range at a local gun shop. My whole family has hunted for generations -- and gun safety was drilled into me from the time I was very small.
As was a strong conservation ethic, as in you don't just shoot something for the hell of it, but only for what you need to eat for your family. Period. So I have a substantial distaste for people who indiscriminately shoot an animal that was cage-raised for the sole purpose of allowing someone to just go out and blast the hell out of it as a recreational sport. That's just lazy and wrong -- and it's cheating in my book.
One of the first things my dad taught me was how to move around in the woods or in a field to maximize my safety. Aside from the blaze orange requirements today for visual safety, you stay behind the person with the gun, you keep your muzzle pointed away from people and dogs who are your companion animals (and reports are that they were using dogs to flush out the birds, so guns would have been pointed skyward to minimize potential accidents for the dogs), and you never, never, NEVER squeeze off a round without first ascertaining the entire visual in front of where you will be shooting, within the designated path of your particular firearm (different guns have different ranges and shot patterns, depending on caliber and load) -- in other words, look very carefully before you ever pull the trigger.
That Mr. Whittington was in the line of sight for Dick Cheney is regrettable. But no matter whether Whittington walked into the line of sight or whether Cheney turned to shoot at quail and placed Whittington within his line (which is a more likely hunting scenario, given that you generally try to walk up on a hunting party from behind if at all possible if you are at all experienced, to minimize possible accidents), it is the hunter's responsibility at all times to be secure in what he is seeing before he ever pulls the trigger. Period.
And no amount of trying to spin this to a press corps who has never fired a shotgun takes away from the fact that the shooter always has the obligation to ensure safety before pulling the trigger. ALWAYS.
Not doing so as a kid would have gotten me a serious butt whipping and worse. My dad was very, very serious about it, having known idiots who went out in the woods and caused just this sort of accident. You never, ever shoot without looking very carefully first. Cardinal rule of gun safety number one.
The narrative on the Cheney shooting incident goes as follows:
Cheney shoots hunting companion with a 28-gauge shotgun, at about 30 yards.
Mr. Whittington was about 30 yards from the vice president when the shooting occurred, Ms. Armstrong said. Altogether, there were five people in the group. Ms. Armstrong declined to identify the other hunters.
Well, that's interesting. A 28-gauge shotgun is a fairly specialized firearm. My dad called it a "ladies gun" when I learned to shoot as a kid -- it was the first gun I ever took out for target practice at the quarry. It shoots a fairly small pattern, compared to the spread you get from a 12-gauge, say, so the buckshot comes out in a fairly concentrated pattern, and there is little to no recoil -- which means you don't get that smack into your shoulder when the gun rebounds from the pressure of the shot like you would with a higher-gauge (stronger) shot. At least, that's what I remembered (it's been a while since I was a kid and went target shooting with my dad), so I did a little research and...yep, I
remembered correctly.
Shotgun writer and wingshooter Bob Brister agrees that dropping down in gauge size can make the hunting experience more enjoyable, when the game and situation allow it. Brister, whose detached retinas don’t take kindly to recoil, says that most upland-bird shooting is more pleasurable and just as effective when using smaller gauges, such as the 28. “It’s not how much shot you throw up in the air,” Brister notes, “it’s where the shot goes that’s important. It’s not hard to understand that you’ll shoot better if you’re not being punished, so it makes sense to match the gauge to the game.”
Unlike most other gauges, the 28-gauge shotshell is available in only the 2 3/4-inch length. Though there are a few heavy field loads in this gauge that contain 7/8 to 1 ounce, standard ammunition is loaded with 3/4 ounce of shot. This is 1/4 ounce less shot than a 20-gauge shell and 3/8 ounce less than a standard 12-gauge shell of the same length. With the reduced powder load needed to drive the smaller shotcharge, the 28 is a much sweeter-shooting round than its two larger stablemates. Surprisingly, it also tends to pattern very efficiently. In fact, as far out as 35 yards, the 28 puts as much of its shot payload (on a percentage basis) into a 30-inch patterning circle as the 12 and 20 gauge. That’s a long of bang without a lot of buck.
Since Ms. Armstrong so helpfully points out that Mr. Whittington was within about 30 yards of the Veep, that sounds like a fairly concentrated blast area to me. Which explains why he had injuries to his face, neck and chest from the shot. And why he's been in the ICU -- since Saturday.
Katherine Armstrong told the WaPo that the 28-gauge has a "smaller shot pattern." What she meant to say, I'm sure, is that the shot pattern is "more concentrated" - meaning that the pellets stay in a small circumferance as they move forward, rather than rapidly spreading outward in a larger pattern like you get with a 12-gauge.
Which means that at close range, a 28-gauge can do some serious damage. And at 30 yards, give or take, it explains why the blast pattern on Mr. Whittington was limited to face/neck/chest.
Also, a 28-gauge is used pretty much exclusively for small birds. And because of its lack of recoil, it would make sense that the Veep, with his heart and other health issues, would want to minimize any shocks to his system (so to speak). In my family, we just have "the talk" with the member of the family who ought not touch a shotgun any more. Guess it doesn't work that way in the Cheney family -- much to the Whittington family's dismay, I'm sure.
Also,
Armstrong said:
Whittington "came up from behind the vice president and the other hunter and didn't signal them or indicate to them or announce himself," Armstrong said, according to the Associated Press. (emphasis mine)
Well, now this is just assanine. Quail are jumpy little birds at the best of times, and you don't shout out "Hey guys, I'm coming up behind you." when your hunting buddies are closing in on their quarry. That will get you a smack upside the head.
Cheney's crack medical team staunches the bleeding until ambulance can get to the Armstrong ranch to take
victim to the hospital.
She told reporters that the small shotgun pellets "broke the skin" and that the blast "knocked him silly. But he was fine. He was talking. His eyes were open. It didn't get in his eyes or anything like that."
"Fortunately, the vice president has got a lot of medical people around him and so they were right there and probably more cautious than we would have been," she said. "The vice president has got an ambulance on call, so the ambulance came."
Well, this explains why Ms. Armstrong has been silenced now by the Cheney PR team -- nothing like reminding the public that Cheney has an ambulance always on call, is there?
And call me crazy, but a blast from a 28-gauge shotgun that puts you in the ICU isn't something that's just a surface scrape or anything. It hurts like hell. And no amount of calling it a "spray" or "being peppered" or whatever takes away from the fact that: this man was shot, at close range, by the Vice President of the United States, who then told no one in the American public -- and no one else did either, including the local police -- for 22 hours.
Something is weird about this. I can't put my finger on what it is, and I'm awaiting a read of whatever police report gets released, but the whole narrative is odd. And reeks of covering for something.
Maybe it's just covering for the fact that Dick swung around and fired without looking. Hell, I'd be embarassed, too, if I was that idiotic. But something about this stinks...and I'm putting together a list of questions on the legal aspects and other areas for later. If anyone else has some experience with this sort of thing, please chime in -- I'll be interested to see if the NRA really walks all their gun safety talk on this one. (btw, that's Wayne LaPierre of the NRA handing Cheney a gun in the picture above. It's not a 28-gauge, but it sure is a purty picture, isn't it?)
It may be amusing to snicker at the VP's poor choices in this, but gun safety is no joke. Neither is having the Veep be treated differently than any other guy who might be involved in a hunting accident. If any Texans are reading, I'd be interested in your take on this as well. Texas gun laws are...erm...pretty loose, so what goes here in terms of an investigation and requirements likely doesn't apply there. I'm doing some legal research on this and reaching out to contacts, but I'd love to hear some thoughts from our Texas readers on all of this.
Taylor has more
here and
here. Sean-Paul has more
here. Crooks and Liars has more
here.
|
Pamela Willeford, former Ambassador to Switzerland, has been
identified as the
third gunman on the little caged birdie shoot-a-thon:
Just before sunset Saturday, 78-year-old Austin lawyer Harry Whittington pulled off "a double": bringing down two quail with two successive blasts from his shotgun.
One of Whittington's hunting companions, Vice President Dick Cheney, wasn't as accurate.
A few minutes later, Cheney accidentally shot Whittington, according to Pamela Willeford, the U.S. ambassador to Switzerland, who was hunting with the pair on the 50,000-acre Armstrong Ranch in South Texas.
(snip)
Armstrong gave this account of the accident:
Whittington, Cheney and Willeford saw two coveys on the ground, one directly in front of them, with dogs on point, and the other 100 or so yards to the left.
"The idea was to shoot the first, then for the group to move ahead and shoot the second covey," Armstrong said.
After Whittington shot the two birds, he moved away to look for them. He had trouble locating one, so he told the group to move ahead.
Cheney and Willeford moved to the second covey. Unbeknownst to either of them, Armstrong said, Whittington had walked back near the group and was about 30 yards to the right of the vice president when Cheney fired at birds emerging from the covey.
Willeford added that the sun was behind Whittington, possibly making him difficult to see.
Meanwhile
The General (responsible for the above graphic) has more on
Dick's Big Problem.
Update: Taylor wonders if the NRA is going to call Dick on his deplorable hunting protocol or thoroughly embarrass themselves in front of their membership by giving him a free pass. Interesting dilemma.
|
Greg Mitchell in
E&P:
The more than 18-hour delay in news emerging that the Vice President of the United States had shot a man, sending him to an intensive care unit with his wounds, grew even more curious late Sunday. E&P has learned that the official confirmation of the shooting came about only after a local reporter in Corpus Christi, Texas, received a tip from the owner of the property where the shooting occured and called Vice President Cheney's office for confirmation.
(snip)
The president, who was at the White House over the weekend, was informed about the incident in Texas after it happened Saturday by Chief of Staff Andrew Card and Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove and was updated on Sunday, press secretary Scott McClellan said.
But neither the White House nor the vice president's staff announced the shooting. The Washington Post reported late Sunday that Cheney's office did not make a public announcement.
The delay in announcing the shooting "will likely be the main question asked of the White House about the apparent accidental shooting of a 78-year-old man during a Texas hunting trip by the vice president," the Tribune's James wrote on the Washington bureau's blog at the newspaper's site.
"When a vice president of the U.S. shoots a man under any circumstance," James noted, "that is extremely relevant information. What might be the excuse to justify not immediately making the incident public?
"The vice president is well-known for preferring to operate in secret....Some secrecy, especially when it comes to the executing the duties of president or vice president, is understandable and expected by Americans.
"But when the vice president's office, or the White House, delays in reporting a shooting like Saturday's to the public via the media, it needlessly raises suspicions and questions of trust. And it may just further the impression held by many, rightly or wrongly, that the White House doesn't place the highest premium on keeping the public fully and immediately informed."
I don't know all that was happening in those 18 hours, but I can tell you one thing --
that Armstrong woman's words were being carefully crafted. Whittington was "
sprayed" or "peppered" with "small shotgun pellets." It "knocked him
silly." He was "telling jokes." It was all the victim's fault. Tra-la-la, she'd has the same thing happened to her, many times, it was a common occurrence, no big deal.
Cheney's crack PR team then referred press questions back to her, as if it was on some Texas housewife to decide whether information about the Vice President of the United States shooting someone should be released to the media.
Too bad nobody put a muzzle on Mary "
uppity negroes" Matalin:
"The vice president was concerned," said Mary Matalin, a Cheney adviser who spoke with him yesterday morning. "He felt badly, obviously. On the other hand, he was not careless or incautious or violate any of the [rules]. He didn't do anything he wasn't supposed to do."
Nothing except, you know, shoot some poor bastard and put him in intensive care. Nothing to get "overly concerned" about.
What is she
on.
(graphic by
Seraphin)
Update: Crooks & Liars now has the clip of George Allen on Fox News Sunday calling for Cheney to be investigated over leaking the NIE. Sound like he's making a pre-emptive bid for the OVP to anyone?
|
I'm hearing speculation that the GOP will use this blast fest as an excuse to get rid of Dick. I have to admit that was my first thought, especially since
George Allen was on Fox News this morning calling for investigation into the declassification of the NIE. The GOP obviously knew the shooting had happened and after putting so much energy into spreading the meme that Cheney had the absolute right to do what he did they wouldn't allow Allen off the reservation like that without some sort of larger purpose. Maybe it was only a trial balloon, but still.
The fact is that they do not know what will happen in the fall of 2006, and should the Democrats take either of the houses of Congress the stone wall they've been able to erect in front of all their crimes suddenly begins to crumble. With subpoena power the Democrats could now start to dismantle the GOP crime family, and there could be a whole lot more people than Scooter Libby in need of pardoning.
Who will play the Gerald Ford in all of this? Who could be counted on to be the good soldier and pardon them all? Allen himself would be a prime contender, as would McCain or McConnell. Though after the drubbing that BushCo. has delivered to McCain if it was me I sure wouldn't want to put him in the position holding my life in his hands, paybacks being a bitch and all.
And then there is Condi, probably the one who could most reliably be counted upon to be the good soldier in the situation. We could be knee deep in people scrambling for power real soon.
So what do you think? Is Dick's hold on his power so secure this will all blow over? Or is the time right to push him out the door?
Jeralyn has more on whether Cheney could be charged with
reckless or criminal negligence in the case. And Taylor's hunter husband thinks the account of the accident being given to the media is
bullshit.
(rapid graphics response by Dark Black)
|
Remember Cheney's chest-beating comments about
Vietnam veteran John Kerry and hunting?Just hours after Kerry shot a goose during an early-morning hunt in Boardman, Ohio, near Youngstown, the vice president told supporters in another part of the state that the outing was nothing more than a photo opportunity to hide the four-term Massachusetts senator's record.
Kerry supports the right to bear arms but has backed the assault-weapons ban and background checks at gun shows. He denies the Republicans' contention that he wants to take away guns from owners.
Cheney said Kerry's camouflage jacket was "an October disguise — an effort he's making to hide the fact that he votes against gun owner rights at every turn."
"My fellow sportsmen, this cover-up isn't going to work," Cheney said, speaking to supporters in an upscale Toledo suburb that borders the Ohio-Michigan state line. "The Second Amendment is more than just a photo opportunity."
As
Puppethead points out, "Cheney doesn't hunt. He goes to game farms and kills animals. It's similar to Bush's 'fishing' that involves heavily stocking the lake/pond/whatever for Bush. No sportsmanship at all (what a surprise)."
Coming from five time deferment boy?
What a surprise:
Monday's hunting trip to Pennsylvania by Vice President Dick Cheney in which he reportedly shot more than 70 stocked pheasants and an unknown number of mallard ducks at an exclusive private club places a spotlight on an increasingly popular and deplorable form of hunting, in which birds are pen-reared and released to be shot in large numbers by patrons. The ethics of these hunts are called into question by rank-and-file sportsmen, who hunt animals in their native habitat and do not shoot confined or pen-raised animals that cannot escape.
The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reported today that 500 farm-raised pheasants were released yesterday morning at the Rolling Rock Club in Ligonier Township for the benefit of Cheney's 10-person hunting party. The group killed at least 417 of the birds, illustrating the unsporting nature of canned hunts. The party also shot an unknown number of captive mallards in the afternoon.
Rich old drunken farts blasting away at Tweety in a birdcage and thinking they're all butch. Yeah let's hear the one about how you're the big white bwana hunter again, Dick.
I know little girls in kindergarten with more stones than that.
PS: Any Texas law enforcement types out there who know what the procedure is following a gunshot accident? Especially with regard to testing for drugs and alcohol. No explaination as to why the guy was
shot at 5:30 pm but wasn't admitted to the hospital until 8:15 pm even though he was seriously injured.
(thanks to reader WD for the graphic)
|
rwcole: "A little known Texas law allows the president and the vice president to declare anyone or anything a 'quail for the purposes of a legitimate sporting hunt- bag limit three."
Five deferments later, Cheney is obviously only interested in shooting tiny little birds who can't shoot back.
The the crazy ol geezer was no doubt half in the bag. Wonder if they did a breathalizer test?
Comstockian version: "Cheney bravely battles avian flu."
Update: Bob Geiger has " Dick Cheney's Top 10 Excuses For Shooting Fellow Hunter." I'm partial to #3 myself.
(graphic by Dark Black)
|
Dick Cheney obviously believes he has the right to control the peasantry by any means necessary. After he
shot a 78 year-old man this weekend on a hunting trip, one has to wonder a) who thought it was a good idea to put a gun in the hands of a fat, drunken, ill-tempered gimp with a bad heart and b) what kind of world Cheney thinks he lives in.
And we're not the only ones who are a little worried. On
Fox News Sunday this morning both Jack Reed (D-RI) and George Allen (R-VA) called on Patrick Fitzgerald to investigate whether Dick Cheney had the right to declassify the NIE when he ordered Scooter to flash it to Judy Miller.
Said Allen:
I don't think anybody should be releasing classified information, period, whether in the Congress, executive branch or some underling in some bureaucracy.
Which causes us to revisit the question -- did Cheney have the legal authority to do so? I've written before about
the dubious ethics involved in leaking something to an easily dazzled dingbat that Dick Durbin couldn't release to the nation, and as a direct result thousands have died. But since a very interesting conversation on the topic has been taken up in the comments I thought we should front page the discussion.
TR points us to basic information on
classifying and declassifying material, and also provides a link to an
executive order pertaining to classified material signed by by Bush on March 25, 2003 (scroll down to part 3). TR also provides another page of links to
documents on secrecy policy.
And
KM writes:
[D]oesn't Section 3.5 state that all classified information must be subject to a mandatory declassification review by the originating agency unless it originated with the Pres/VP/etc. (i.e. the specific exemptions in paragraph (b))?
Since the NIE is not information falling under paragraph (b), one assumes that its declassification must be subject to a declassification review by the CIA, its originating agency. That is, not even the President can declassify the NIE without a CIA declassification review.
At any rate, let's make at least an analytic distinction between Libby being "authorized" to leak the NIE to a couple of select reporters (under the pretence of being a "former Hill staffer", no less) and actual, formal declassification of the NIE. Even if the Pres/VP is allowed to declassify unilaterally.
Shouldn't the MSM asking a very basic point of information -- was the NIE ever declassified prior to 8 July 2003? Not some mumbo-jumbo about "authorization" -- whatever this means -- Was it ever formally, officially declassified (by whatever authority, including the Pres or VP)? Presumably there must be some record of this -- even if the Pres or VP can unilaterally declassify the NIE, without the CIA's input, one presumes that there must be some formal documentation somewhere of this official action.
Because if not, and even if the Pres/VP has the authority to unilaterally declassify the NIE (which at least these paragraphs make it sound like they do not), then it seems that this "authorization" did not involve any official declassification, and thus was quite illegal.
I have seen almost no serious discussion of this point other than by people with a serious partisan axe to grind. In that the issue could take center stage I would appreciate hearing everyone's thoughts on the matter.
Meanwhile Dick seems poised to go all
Sir Henry at Rawlinson End on us all.
It was only a matter of time.
Update: Wolcott: "Time to take the shotgun away from grandpa, who's blasted perhaps hundreds of innocent birds into bloody feathers during his life, before he has another senior moment."
PS -- if anyone has a rare
Sir Henry DVD or VHS and can send along a clip of Sir Henry shooting the peasant to put them out of their misery I will glady post it.
(graphic by Dark Black)
|
The NYTimes has an editorial today detailing the reasons they see for not trusting the Bush Administration.
-- Domestic spying
-- Guantanimo and all those black ops sites
-- The war in Iraq
Seems to me they've missed a few things.
Speaking of the black ops sites,
the SundayTimesUK has an article on why Robert Grenier, former head of the CIA counter-terrorism center, was fired. Seems he had an ethical problem with torture and secret prisons, and the Bush Administration didn't like his criticism, so they Shensecki'ed him.
Larry Johnson points out another good reason not to trust President Bush and his malignant band of cronies: an Administration where national security leaks are only dangerous when they make the President look bad. The Administration has been awfully quick to leak information to discredit its critics or to try and stop a poll number freefall or to
shore up support with cherry-picked intelligence information, and Larry provides several examples at
No Quarter.
You know the Administration is on shaky ground when
even the WSJ is calling Dick Cheney's leaking tactics sleazy.
The implication from the disclosure that Mr. Libby had authority to discuss sensitive intelligence matters with the press "is that the White House -- the vice president -- has been using his declassification authority as a way to advance the administration's political agenda," said Mr. Aftergood. "In other words, information that supports the administration's position on Iraq or whatever is selectively declassified and other information is not. That's not a criminal offense, but it's kind of sleazy."
What else did the NYTimes miss? How about the disastrous response to Katrina -- and the fact that lessons still don't seem to have been learned.
The WaPo has more today regarding a scathing report that will be issued shortly from the House.
"If 9/11 was a failure of imagination then Katrina was a failure of initiative. It was a failure of leadership," the report's preface states. "In this instance, blinding lack of situational awareness and disjointed decision making needlessly compounded and prolonged Katrina's horror."
A report that details 90+ failures at all levels of government -- from the President on down. Should be interesting to see the WH response on this one -- will Chertoff be the next Bush-ite to fall on his sword for the team? The President has been running his disaster response team via staffing from Crony, Inc., at what point is he going to be held accountable for it?
Environment? Well, the Bush Administration is moving...again...to sell off large chunks of
national forest land. Despite the fact that Congress has rebuffed this idea repeatedly. Trust them...it's not for the benefit of timber cronies...really.
There is so much more. So very much more. Thought we could compile a list -- I'll update this post as we hit the
high points low, low points of this Administration.
|
Imagine, if you will, that you've been spammed by a fellow who also happens to correspond with someone who happens to be tangentially connected to al qaeda in some way (relative? pen pal? internet porn spammer?). You have absolutely no connection to these folks whatsoever, other than the fact that your e-mail address happens to have been the recipient of some e-mail spam, but your address shows up on the directory of the initial spammer. Whose address shows up on the hard drive of the al qaeda-connected-somehow fellow. (Who may, coincidentally, have also been the recipient of some mis-directed e-mail or piece of spam that might somehow have been connected to someone who is somehow connected to al qaeda...see where I'm going with this?)
The Federal government is just going to take a peek at the e-mail, realize you aren't participating in any wrongdoing, that you were the inadvertant recipient of random spam, and move on to a more productive target, right?
Not according to U.S. District Judge Thomas Hogan, whose decision on Feb. 2, 2006, okayed a world of surveillance possibilities under the Patriot Act,
according to this article on CNet.
Instead of asking to eavesdrop on the contents of the e-mail messages, which would require some evidence of wrongdoing, prosecutors instead requested the identities of the correspondents. Also included in the request was header information like date and time and Internet address--but not subject lines.
The federal magistrate judge balked and asked the Justice Department to submit an additional brief to demonstrate that such a request would be legal.
Instead, prosecutors asked Judge Hogan to step in. He reviewed the portion of federal law dealing with "pen register" and "trap and trace" devices--terms originating in the world of telephone wiretapping--and concluded it "unambiguously" authorizes the e-mail surveillance request.
Though the language may be clumsy, Hogan said, the Patriot Act's amendments authorize that type of easily obtainable surveillance of e-mail. All that's required, he said, is that prosecutors claim the surveillance could conceivably be "relevant" to an investigation.
Well, that's a pretty open-ended investigation, wouldn't you say? Which pretty much leaves the door open to track every piece of e-mail spam that goes across the web, so long as it crosses the path of some specific potential target. Looks like Judge Hogan is going with the
Professor Turner Viagra spam menace theory.
And what happens to these lists of e-mail recipients once the government starts compiling them? Do they eventually get deleted, or is there a file on every person who has received e-mail in the last five years sitting around somewhere...just in case. I'd like to think there is some oversight, some check or balance, but I'm not currently optimistic based on what we've seen from Congress thus far.
So much for
the Fourth Amendment. Talk about a waste of limited resources -- no wonder FBI folks are making
a lot of Pizza Hut calls for take-out these days.
|
Well, this certainly looks like an interesting morning line-up, doesn't it? (via
the WaPo.) Well, moderately interesting in part, anyway.
FOX NEWS SUNDAY (WTTG), 9 a.m.: Sens. Jack Reed (D-R.I.) and George Allen (R-Va.), the Rev. Joseph Lowery , former Bush aide Ron Christie and National Air and Space Museum geologist John Grant .
THIS WEEK (ABC, WJLA), 9 a.m.: Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice , Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.), Pennsylvania gubernatorial candidate Lynn Swann (R) and actress Sigourney Weaver .
FACE THE NATION (CBS, WUSA), 10:30 a.m.: Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean and Rice . (RH notes: Doesn't THAT look like a fun time in the Green Room? Mwahaha.)
MEET THE PRESS (NBC, WRC), 10:30 a.m.: Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.), Reps. Jane Harman (D-Calif.) and Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich.) and former Senate majority leader Thomas A. Daschle (D-S.D.). (RH notes: Wonder if Timmeh will talk to Daschle about the President's request for extended domestic surveillance being expressly turned down by Congress? Get set for Wurlitzer push-back later in the day, if so -- I bet fax machines have already been going on the coordinated response. Keep an eye on Drudge to see if the response gets posted before Daschle has even made it on the show...)
LATE EDITION (CNN), 11 a.m.: Sens. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) and Joseph I. Lieberman (D-Conn.), Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen , Egyptian Ambassador Nabil Fahmy , Israeli Ambassador Danny Ayalon , Palestinian representative Afif Safieh and former Iraqi interim prime minister Ayad Allawi
With Rev. Lowery on Fox News Sunday, I'm expecting the Juan Williams apologist ambush. And with both Lieberman and Biden on the menu on two other shows, I may need an extra pot of coffee. No idea if I'll get to watch any of these, given the latest obsession with Monsters, Inc. in our house, but it's the Talking Head Thread line-up nonetheless for everyone else's convenience. Post your thoughts and any fireworks from the shows in this thread. Or whatever strikes your fancy.
Weather here is lots of snow -- our dachshund is quite miffed, and sure that the weather gods have conspired to make her trip outside as miserable as possible. But the birds and squirrels are stuffing themselves silly on our bird feeder, much to Fiona's delight, and I'm just waiting for more Olympics.
(Found this photo a coupla weeks ago to use as a desktop pix. Can't remember where I got it, or I would credit it. This is how things look outside at my house this morning...well, minus the lovely old covered bridge, you have to drive about 10 minutes from here to find one of those.)
|
