Archive for July 19th, 2007
Valerie Plame’s Lawsuit Against Administration Officials Tossed Out
July 19th, 2007
Perhaps we can put this baby to bed once and for all.
WASHINGTON (AP) – A federal judge dismissed former CIA operative Valerie Plame’s lawsuit against members of the Bush administration Thursday, eliminating one of the last courtroom remnants of the leak scandal.
Plame, the wife of former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, had accused Vice President Dick Cheney and others of conspiring to leak her identity in Plame said that violated her privacy rights and was illegal retribution for her husband’s criticism of the administration.
While Bates did not address the constitutional questions, he seemed to side with administration officials who said they were acting within their job duties. Plame had argued that what they did was illegal and outside the scope of their government jobs.
“The alleged means by which defendants chose to rebut Mr. Wilson’s comments and attack his credibility may have been highly unsavory, ” Bates wrote. “But there can be no serious dispute that the act of rebutting public criticism, such as that levied by Mr. Wilson against the Bush administration’s handling of prewar foreign intelligence, by speaking with members of the press is within the scope of defendants’ duties as high-level Executive Branch officials.”
Story here.
Judge Bates full opinion here.
On a side note. If you checked in earlier, yes there was a post by J on this topic with the same title. We decided to update and as the original story now had more information, this is how we chose to do so. Sorry if we made you think you were seeing double.
Posted in 
One Person Arrested For Stealing, Trying to Sell Nuclear Secrets
July 19th, 2007
Thankfully, he didn’t get the chance to sell the information, but the bigger question is: How did a low-level employee get his hands on this information in the first place?
One person has been arrested at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory for attempting to sell nuclear secrets, federal law enforcement officials told FOX News Thursday.
The person, who was not identified by officials, was named in a yet-to-be unsealed indictment and worked at the Tennessee facility, FOX News has learned.
The suspect is expected to appear at a federal court in Knoxville, Tenn., at 2:30 p.m. Thursday, WATE-TV reported.
The employee, a lab worker described by one official as “low level,” was unsuccessful in their attempt to sell the secrets, officials said.
This is a developing story so follow this link for more information as it becomes available.
Obama Says Sex Education for Kindergarteners is “The Right Thing to Do”
July 19th, 2007
Presidential hopeful Barack Obama has proclaimed sex education for kindergarteners is “the right thing to do”.
ABC News’ Teddy Davis and Lindsey Ellerson Report: Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., told Planned Parenthood Tuesday that sex education for kindergarteners, as long as it is “age-appropriate,” is “the right thing to do.”
“I remember Alan Keyes . . . I remember him using this in his campaign against me,” Obama said in reference to the conservative firebrand who ran against him for the U.S. Senate in 2004. Sex education for kindergarteners had become an issue in his race against Keyes because of Obama’s work on the issue as chairman of the health committee in the Illinois state Senate.
“‘Barack Obama supports teaching sex education to kindergarteners,’” said Obama mimicking Keyes’ distinctive style of speech. “Which — I didn’t know what to tell him (laughter).”
“But it’s the right thing to do,” Obama continued, “to provide age-appropriate sex education, science-based sex education in schools.”
I started kindergarten at almost five years of age. I didn’t know anything about sex nor did I care. All I knew was girls had to sit when they used the bathroom and boys had to stand, and I was jealous that I couldn’t stand. End of curiosity.
Has life changed so much in the last 55 years that kids aged 5 & 6 need to have sex ed in kindergarten? Are they less innocent than kids that age half a century ago?
My experience with a five year old grandson tells me no. He runs around our house without his shorts on, preferring to wear his boxer briefs with all their colorful characters on them than his pants. He’s not embarrassed to have me come to the bathroom while he’s in there or to come into the bathroom while I’m in there. I’m embarrassed when he comes in on me to excitedly tell me something after I’ve showered but it doesn’t faze him in the least.
What could anyone possibly teach this child that is “age-appropriate” without making him aware of things he should be blissfully ignorant of for a little while longer so he can remain that innocent little child?
Tell me, Mr. Obama, just what does a child that age need to know about sex?
Why Your Vote Matters
July 19th, 2007
I am very strong in my pro-life beliefs, believing abortion should be reserved only for cases where the mother’s life is at risk and not really being sure what I would do if I were in a situation where my daughter or daughter in law had to abort due to a life-threatening condition brought on by a pregnancy.
I believe in the sanctity of life, and I believe it does not stop at birth. I believe we have an obligation to see to it those children are properly cared for in all ways and not abandon them after they have been born simply so we can say we saved them from the abortionist.
This is why I am disturbed by this report. (Free registration required.)
WASHINGTON — Elizabeth Edwards said Tuesday that her husband’s health-care plan would provide insurance coverage of abortion.
Speaking on behalf of Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards before the family planning and abortion-rights group Planned Parenthood Action Fund, Edwards lauded her husband’s health-care proposal as “a true universal health-care plan” that would cover “all reproductive health services, including pregnancy termination,” referring to abortion.
Obama, who earlier gained the endorsement of Washington, D.C., Mayor Adrian Fenty, offered the group a vision of equal opportunity for women, tying a call for improved access to contraceptives for low-income women with a call for an “updated social contract” that includes paid maternity leave and expanded school hours.
Asked about his proposal for expanded access to health insurance, Obama said it would cover “reproductive-health services.” Contacted afterward, an Obama spokesman said that included abortions.
I do not want my tax money to go to kill unborn babies. Abortion should be very rare if used to protect the life of the mother. Unfortunately, it seems to be a form of birth control for some.
Now, some will argue they don’t want to have their taxes spent on a war they disagree with. That’s fine, but the Constitution says we are to provide for our defense and I guess that’s up for interpretation for those people.
There is no section of the Constitution that states it is OK to kill an unborn child, and I’m sure abortions were happening during the founding of our country.
The Supreme Court had to stretch to justify abortion by saying it was a right of privacy.
This is why I consider my vote to be very important. I must stand for certain things and other things I can be a compromiser. Abortion is one of those things for which I cannot compromise.
For what Mrs. Edwards has said on behalf of her husband and what Senator Obama has said about providing for federally funded abortion on demand, I could never vote for either man even if I were of their party and agreed with everything else they say.
I know Rudy Giuliani is pro-choice, but I haven’t seen anything from him yet that states he would sponsor legislation to provide universal health care that would provide for abortion on demand.
If a little girl is raped and becomes pregnant or becomes pregnant due to incest I have a moral problem with what to do. I can’t make a statement about what I would do because I have never been in that situation, but I would hate for her to have to go through childbirth. At the same time, she has already learned, unfortunately, about the reproductive system. It’s not her fault, and I am really conflicted over this. In a case like this I think I would lean ever so slightly in favor of abortion if that’s what the girl and her parents want. She shouldn’t have to carry the extra emotional burden.
Vermont town bans public nudity after brash displays.
July 19th, 2007
BRATTLEBORO, Vermont (Reuters) – A Vermont town that is gaining national attention for brash displays of nudity — from teens in the buff to naked elderly people — awoke on Wednesday to an emergency ban on nakedness in most public places.
Officials in Brattleboro voted 3 to 2 on Tuesday night for a temporary 30-day ordinance prohibiting people from going about in the nude.
Public nudity made headlines last summer when the weather grew hot and a couple of dozen teens took to holding hula hoop contests, riding bikes and parading past stores wearing only their birthday suits. The disrobing has resumed this summer.
But many locals say it has gone too far. Some cite a case in which a senior citizen from Arizona strolled through the center of town wearing only a waist pack and sandals.
“We’ve received quite a number of complaints on this,” Assistant Town Manager Barbara Sondag said. “This was brought up last summer … and kind of died down. Then a couple of incidents again this summer have got the issue to resurface.”
Vermont has a live-and-let-live tradition, allowing skinny-dipping and nude sunbathing. Brattleboro, the first permanent English settlement in the state in 1724, is home to a community of writers, artists and musicians as well as transplanted entrepreneurs from Boston and New York.
After the Blast in Midtown.
July 19th, 2007
Why is everything that explodes have to be a terrorist act? It’s like we live in constant fear.
Doesn’t that mean the terrorist are winning?
I’m insinuating nothing.
- Like a gushing geyser, a street in midtown Manhattan literally exploded Wednesday night, a 24 inch steam pipe blasting open, sending people rushing for cover during the height of rush hour. A huge crater sits in the middle the street, one big enough to eat up a large tow truck. Now it is time to assess the damage.
It happened just before 6:00 p.m. near 41st Street between 3rd Avenue and Lexington Avenue, and in the first moments after it hit there was chaos.
The Scene
People running through the streets, sirens blaring, and a loud thunderous roar: It’s a scene those who witnessed it will certainly never forget. Eyewitness Carol Bergendale described the scene on Eyewitness News. She said that there was a roar that lasted for over 10 minutes. When it hit, she says she started seeing cars driving the wrong way down Third Avenue trying to get away from whatever was happening. She says she saw cars hitting buses, cars driving on the sidewalk, and people running everywhere. She says in those first moments, everyone feared a terror attack.
FBI analyst sentenced for spying.
July 19th, 2007
Speaks for it self.
An FBI analyst and former vice presidential aide was sentenced Wednesday to 10 years in prison for espionage after he admitted supplying classified documents to Philippine nationals in an effort to overthrow that country’s government, federal prosecutors said.
Leandro Aragoncillo, 48, a former U.S. Marine and Philippine native who worked as a military aide to Vice Presidents Al Gore and Dick Cheney before joining the FBI as a civilian employee, pleaded guilty to four charges of espionage in May 2006.
The plea deal spared Aragoncillo from facing the death penalty, prosecutors said.
In a sentencing hearing Wednesday morning, U.S. District Judge William H. Walls sentenced Aragoncillo to 10 years in prison for his involvement in a plot to overthrow Philippine President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo. In addition, he fined Aragoncillo $40,000.
Aragoncillo could have been sentenced to up to 20 years for participation in a conspiracy to transmit national defense information, prosecutors said.
U.S. Attorney Christopher J. Christie, in a news release issued Wednesday, accused Aragoncillo of “betraying his Marine uniform, his adopted country and the trust bestowed on him as an FBI analyst.”
Florida ends death penalty halt.
July 19th, 2007
In this case justice prevails.
Florida Governor Charlie Crist has signed his first death warrant, ending a seven-month moratorium adopted by the US state after a botched execution.
His predecessor, Jeb Bush, suspended lethal injections in late 2006 after a convicted murderer took 34 minutes to die and had to be given a second dose.Mr Crist said steps had been taken to improve the execution process.
The warrant is for Mark Dean Schwab, sentenced to death in 1992 for kidnap, rape and murder of an 11-year-old boy.
He is scheduled to be executed on 15 November this year.
Two American Soldiers Accused of Premeditated Murder in Iraq
July 19th, 2007
Once again we are reading that U.S. soldiers have been accused of premeditated murder on an Iraqi.
BAGHDAD (Reuters) – Two U.S. soldiers have been charged with murdering an Iraqi last month near Kirkuk, the U.S. military said on Thursday, the latest in a string of accusations of abuse laid against American forces in Iraq.
Sergeant 1st Class Trey Corrales, from San Antonio, Texas, and Specialist Christopher Shore, from Winder, Georgia, were each charged with one count of premeditated murder, the military said in a statement.
… The premeditated killing of the Iraqi was alleged to have taken place on or around June 23 near the northern oil-city of Kirkuk, where the two soldiers were serving with the 3rd Brigade, 25th Infantry Division, the military statement said.
In addition, their battalion commander, Lieutenant-Colonel Michael Browder, while not a suspect in the case, was relieved of his duties because of a lack of confidence in his ability to command effectively, the statement said.
It gave no specific details on the incident.
Since there are no details it’s difficult to make any judgment as to whether or not we think they are guilty as charged.
As discussed yesterday, military justice is swift and sure and if they are found guilty the punishment will be just as swift and sure.
Iraq Now, the Garden Later. But What In Between?
July 19th, 2007
This is a good read, enjoy.
Sen. John Warner (R-Va.) isn’t giving an inch on revealing his plans.
No matter that he hasn’t raised much money for a 2008 reelection bid (fueling speculation that he will not run for a sixth term). Or that this influential legislator on defense matters is challenging the White House’s policy on Iraq (suggesting perhaps that he’ll stick around to finish business
Right now, he will say only that he remains focused on passing the proposal he introduced last week with Sen. Dick Lugar (R-Ind.) to revisit what he calls the “obsolete” war authorization and require the administration to begin drawing up nonbinding troop redeployment plans. Majority Leader Harry Reid yesterday postponed votes on the defense authorization bill and any war-related amendments, including Warner’s, because Republicans demanded a 60-vote margin for passage. But Warner was undaunted.“We can’t have any more loss of life. We need to restore the loss of credibility in some measure of the country and remain a respected source of authority in that region,” said Warner, 80. “We want to bring a measure of stability to Iraq, but at the same time, this needs to be brought to a conclusion.”
As a longtime senior Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, Warner is a highly respected voice on the conflict. The World War II veteran and former Navy secretary startled Republicans last year when he returned from a trip to Iraq and said that the country seemed to be “drifting sideways.” And as the Armed Services Committee’s chairman during the Abu Ghraib scandal, he raised eyebrows when he insisted in 2004 that Donald Rumsfeld, the defense secretary at the time, testify under oath.
Bush: No Deal On Children’s Health Plan.
July 19th, 2007
Wait one minute Grassley and Hatch are against the President vetoing the bill?
Do you think that maybe they really do care? I do.
yesterday rejected entreaties by his Republican allies that he compromise with Democrats on legislation to renew a popular program that provides health coverage to poor children, saying that expanding the program would enlarge the role of the federal government at the expense of private insurance.
The president said he objects on philosophical grounds to a bipartisan Senate proposal to boost the State Children’s Health Insurance Program by $35 billion over five years. Bush has proposed $5 billion in increased funding and has threatened to veto the Senate compromise and a more costly expansion being contemplated in the House.
“I support the initial intent of the program,” Bush said in an interview with The Washington Post after a factory tour and a discussion on health care with small-business owners in Landover. “My concern is that when you expand eligibility . . . you’re really beginning to open up an avenue for people to switch from private insurance to the government.”
The 10-year-old program, which is set to expire on Sept. 30, costs the federal government $5 billion a year and helps provide health coverage to 6.6 million low-income children whose families do not qualify for Medicaid but cannot afford private insurance on their own.
About 3.3 million additional children would be covered under the proposal developed by Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) and Republican Sens. Charles E. Grassley (Iowa) and Orrin G. Hatch (Utah), among others. It would provide the program $60 billion over five years, compared with $30 billion under Bush’s proposal. And it would rely on a 61-cent increase in the federal excise tax on cigarettes, to $1 a pack, which Bush opposes.
Grassley and Hatch, in a joint statement this week, implored the president to rescind his veto threat. They warned that Democrats might seek an expansion of $50 billion or more if there is no compromise.
Democrats Won’t Force War Vote.
July 19th, 2007
One more nail in the coffin of the Republican Senate.
Don’t be fooled. This has nothing to do with the war but everything to do with Politics.
Senate Democrats halted their quest to change President Bush’s war strategy yesterday after Republicans blocked a proposal to begin withdrawing troops from Iraq.
After the vote, which followed a rare all-night debate, Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) startled colleagues by announcing that the Senate would not vote on several other proposals intended to force Bush to revisit his war plans. Although war critics in both parties had supported the measures, Reid and other Democratic leaders dismissed them as too weak. Instead, they are holding firm in their bid to persuade GOP critics of Bush’s Iraq policy to embrace more aggressive Democratic measures to begin withdrawing troops.
Reid’s move was hailed by antiwar groups, which have urged Democrats not to compromise. But his decision may also have the effect of providing Bush with an opportunity that he has wanted: 60 more days to make his case that the war is making progress.Yesterday’s 52 to 47 vote signaled that a slim Senate majority supports bringing home most combat forces by May 1, 2008, and came amid indications in recent weeks that a growing number of Republicans are concerned about progress in Iraq. Although Democrats won four Republican defectors, they fell eight votes short of the 60 needed to overcome the GOP’s procedural objections.
After the results were tallied, Reid asked GOP leaders to accept simple-majority votes. When they refused, Reid announced that the debate would be suspended, possibly until after Labor Day or until Republicans dropped their filibuster. He called the 60-vote requirement “a new math that was developed by the Republicans to protect the president.”
The vote followed 24 hours of Iraq speeches on the Senate floor, stretching from 11 a.m. Tuesday until yesterday’s 11 a.m. vote. Cots that had been brought in for the overnight session were wheeled back out to a congressional storage facility, after being used by just six senators.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) called the all-night debate “serious and important,” while reminding Reid that the 60-vote requirement had become a standard hurdle for controversial measures in a narrowly divided Senate, including in recent years when Democrats were the minority party.
The war proposals are amendments to the annual defense authorization bill, which includes a military pay raise and Iraq equipment upgrades. Reid’s decision halted progress on that legislation, promoting criticism from Republicans.
“We are abandoning the men and women in the military if we don’t take this bill back up and pass it, conference with the House, and have it signed by the president of the United States, as we have for the past 45 years,” said Sen. John McCain (Ariz.).
But Reid’s decision pleased antiwar groups, which have pressed Democrats to bring the war to a close. “I think Senator Reid took an important step toward confronting Republican obstructionism and ending the war,” said Tom Matzzie, a strategist for MoveOn.org.
U.S. Says Insurgent Leader It Couldn’t Find Never Was.
July 19th, 2007
Speaks for it self.
For more than a year, the leader of one the most notorious insurgent groups in Iraq was said to be a mysterious Iraqi called Abu Omar al-Baghdadi.
As the titular head of the Islamic State in Iraq, Mr. Baghdadi issued incendiary pronouncements. Despite claims by an Iraqi Interior Ministry official in May that Mr. Baghdadi had been killed, he appeared to have persevered unscathed.On Wednesday, the chief United States military spokesman here, Brig. Gen. Kevin J. Bergner, provided a new explanation for Mr. Baghdadi’s ability to escape attack: he never existed.
General Bergner told reporters that a senior Iraqi insurgent captured this month said that the elusive Mr. Baghdadi was actually a fictional character whose declarations on audiotape were read by a man named Abu Abdullah al-Naima.
General Bergner said the ruse was devised by Abu Ayyub al-Masri, the Egyptian-born leader of the insurgent group Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia. Although the group is mostly Iraqi, much of its leadership is foreign, and Mr. Masri was reportedly trying to mask the outsiders’ dominant role.
The general’s briefing was part of an American effort to counter the psychological aspects of Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia’s campaign as well as the military ones. The news conference seemed tailored to rattle the 90 percent of the group’s adherents who are believed to be Iraqi by suggesting that they were doing the bidding of foreigners.
Franken Taps Entertainment Pals for Cash.
July 19th, 2007
I wonder who is going to win this one?
In an April episode of ABC’s “The View,” Bill Maher and Rosie O’Donnell professed their support for Al Franken’s 2008 Minnesota Senate candidacy, with O’Donnell saying she was “maxing out” to the comedian-turned-candidate.
O’Donnell kept to her word, contributing $2,300 to his campaign, the maximum donation for the primary, while Maher chipped in $1,000. They were among the more than 50 contributions that Franken, a former “Saturday Night Live” star, received from actors, writers, producers and others in the last reporting period, his campaign finance report shows.
The man that Franken has in his cross-hairs, Republican Sen. Norm Coleman, used April’s episode of “The View” to help with his own fundraising. In a letter to prospective contributors, Coleman wrote: “I need your help to fight back against Hollywood’s liberal elite! Rosie O’Donnell, Bill Maher and Larry David sit atop the Democratic Party’s elite clique of big benefactors.”
Franken’s friends in the entertainment field helped catapult him to a surprising lead in money raised in the second quarter of the year, covering April through June. Franken raised about $1.9 million, compared with $1.66 million for Coleman, R-Minn., and $750,000 for Democratic candidate Mike Ciresi.
Nothing to Write Home About
July 19th, 2007
While everyone is talking about President Bush’s low poll numbers, we haven’t really heard a lot about the approval rating of Congress.
According to this article the president is at 34% ranking him as good or excellent. This is an upward movement of about 4 points.
In contrast, Congress’ approval rating has slipped to 14%. No, that’s not a typo. The congressional approval rating is fourteen percent, the lowest approval of Congress ever recorded at least by the pollster John Zogby, who conducted this poll.
In contrast, last October, in the final days of the last Congress, Congressional approval stood at 23%. We all know what happened to that congress.
We don’t put much stock in polls around here, but I thought it was interesting since some people do care about polls.
I don’t need a poll to tell me how to feel about the president or Congress, and Congress is so much fun to pick apart. 
Can anyone name three major achievements of the current Congress seven months after it took over? There’s enough blame to go around on both sides of the aisle, but what we are seeing today is not a fight for the soul of America, but a fight for political parties and re-election. It’s time to send in the adults.
