Republican or Democrat, American or Foreign, the politicos are fine subject for speculation, rumination and a bit of derision
How Many Katrina Victims Could the Fitzgerald Investigation Help?
It’s a simple as this. Millions of dollars have been spent on the investigation into an administration leak of Valerie Plame’s identity – an investigation based entirely on a bad premise, the premise being that a law was violated in that exposing the identities of CIA secret operatives, if knowingly revealed, is a crime. Only problem, Valerie Plame was not classified as a “secret” operative at the time her employment at the CIA was revealed, nor had she been a “secret” spy for five years prior.
This is like the police investigating me for not putting oregano in my spaghetti sauce. Even if I should lie and swear I add oregano each and every time, and I am caught in that lie which is a crime, the original investigation was bogus and based on no law being broken.[ADBLOCKHERE]Couldn’t we just investigate anyone for anything at all, hoping that they’ll slip up and commit a crime during the investigation?
This whole thing is silly, but frankly I blame George W. Bush for openly endorsing such an investigation when, boom, right from the start there had been no law broken. And if revealing that someone works at the CIA is more a breach of ethics than broken laws, then should we be spending millions investigating the matter? Are there ethics committees for such thing or dare I suggest that the voters decide is such behavior is proper? Of course Bush was right in the middle of an election campaign when the situation arose, flamed by the hysterical media. For political expediency, Bush agreed to the investigation.
Every day we see pictures of the still-broken Gulf coast. We hear about Katrina victims being evicted from hotel rooms and we mourn the torn and wrecked former homes. Wouldn’t it be nice if all that money fueling this stupid investigation could go to where it is really needed?
The Fitzgerald response to Scooter Libby’s request for justification — based on the current law — for the investigation, is arrogance that knows no boundaries. Just because it’s mentioned in the indictment is no reason the defense has any right to it, or so goes the flawed Fitzgerald response.
This case is going nowhere. Time to shut Fitz and his money machine down and give Libby his job back.
Last December, Libby’s lawyers asked Fitzgerald to provide “all documents, regardless of when created, relating to whether Valerie Wilson’s status as a CIA employee, or any aspect of that status, was classified” in the time period before the Novak column was published. Fitzgerald refused, saying that “We have neither sought, much less obtained, ‘all documents, regardless of when created, relating to whether Valerie Wilson’s status as a CIA employee, or any aspect of that status, was classified'” during that period.
Later, Libby’s team repeated the request. Fitzgerald again refused, saying, in effect, that the information was none of Libby’s business:
The defense also seeks all documents “relating to whether Valerie Wilson’s status as a CIA employee, or any aspect of that status, was classified at any time between May 6, 2003 and July 14, 2003.” Mr. Libby predicates his request on a single reference in the indictment to the fact that Ms. Wilson’s employment status was classified during the relevant time. The defendant overlooks the simple fact that Ms. Wilson’s employment status was either classified or it was not. If the government had any documents stating that Ms. Wilson’s employment status was not classified during the relevant time – and we do not – we would produce them though not strictly required to under the doctrine of Brady v. Maryland. The defense is not entitled to every document mentioning a fact merely because that fact is mentioned in the indictment.
How About That Crazy Colorado Teacher?
Jay Bennish is his name and if he was teaching my kid I’d be out and marching to demand that this idiot be fired immediately. This guy’s lecture was all over talk radio this past week and the more I heard the madder I got.
Two things. First, as I think back long ago to my school days, I cannot ever remember a teacher acting like this guy. In fact, my memories of teachers are fond and happy. They taught their subject fluidly and hey, I learned.
Now we have a nation of teachers educated in public schools, a minus right there, with mighty unions that protest against any educational standards that might prove their students actually learned something.
Second, the United States of America is not a perfect country. But why is it all of a sudden some noble thing to hate, despise and propagate lies about it? Presenting an alternative point of view is one thing. Lying to impressionable young school kids is quite another.
From the American Thinker, here’s just one outrageous quote.
Teacher Jay Bennish: Who is probably the single most violent nation on planet Earth?!
Bennish: The United States of America!
By whose standards is the United States of America the single most violent nation on the planet Earth? This is brainwashing, pure and simple. Don’t we condemn Saudi Arabia and Pakistan with their extreme madrasses for creating the culture of hatred that will take at least a generation to un-do?
The fine Mr. Bennish, teacher of our children I remind again, has been put on permanent leave. He should be fired. Immediately. Nothing in his hateful lecture had a thing to do with Geography, the subject Bennish was supposed to be teaching. Kudos to the kid, Sean Allen, who taped this nut.
You know what really makes me smile about this whole incident? From now on teachers across the country are going to have to wonder “Are these kids taping me?” An act which is, until the mighty teachers’ unions stop it, perfectly legal. Maybe these propagandists and liars disguised as teachers will, heh, actually teach the subject if they consider that their words might be heard that evening by concerned parents.
A Funny Tidbit Were It Not So Pathetic
I’ve had this little tidbit in my in-box for quite a while. Seems the United Nations held a summit recently in New York. Seems one of the attendees spent quite a bit of dough while attending. Note the money amounts are in British pounds, which is almost half again in American dollars.
Bono should read this story. For if ever there was an indicator of how poorly these African nations are led, it is the following.
Congo leader’s £169,000 hotel bill
Tony Allen-Mills, New York
The leader of one of Africa’s poorest countries paid more than £100,000 in cash towards a £169,000 hotel bill run up by his entourage during last year’s United Nations summit in New York, according to court documents obtained by The Sunday Times.
Aides to President Denis Sassou-Nguesso of the Republic of Congo startled staff at the Palace hotel on Madison Avenue by pulling out wads of $100 notes to settle a bill for 26 rooms.
Sassou-Nguesso, who is chairman of the African Union, representing all the continent’s governments, is negotiating with the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to cancel many of his country’s debts on the grounds that it cannot afford to repay them. Yet the president spent a week last September in the Palace hotel, one of Manhattan’s most prestigious addresses.
He paid $8,500 (about £4,875) a night for a three-storey suite with art deco furniture, a Jacuzzi bathtub and a 50in plasma television screen. His room service charges on September 18 alone came to more than £2,000.
More than 70% of the 3m people in the republic – known as Congo-Brazzaville to distinguish it from its larger neighbour, the Democratic Republic of Congo – live on less than £1.15 a day.
Our “Friends” in the U.N.
I’m not enamored of this United Arab Emirates port deal, in particular the surprise with which is was sprung on the unsuspecting American public. So let’s see just how great an ally the UAE is to the United States.
How they vote in the United Nations:
Below are the actual voting records of various Arabic/Islamic States which are recorded in both the US State Department and United Nations records:
Kuwait votes against the United States 67% of the time
Qatar votes against the United States 67% of the time
Morocco votes against the United States 70% of the time
United Arab Emirates votes against the U. S. 70% of the time.
Jordan votes against the United States 71% of the time.
Tunisia votes against the United States 71% of the time.
Saudi Arabia votes against the United States 73% of the time.
Yemen votes against the United States 74% of the time.Algeria votes against the United States 74% of the time.
Oman votes against the United States 74% of the time.
Sudan votes against the United States 75% of the time.
Pakistan votes against the United States 75% of the time.
Libya votes against the United States 76% of the time.
Egypt votes against the United States 79% of the time.
Lebanon votes against the United States 80% of the time.
India votes against the United States 81% of the time.
Syria votes against the United States 84% of the time.
Mauritania votes against the United States 87% of the time.
U S Foreign Aid to those who hate us:
Egypt, for example, after voting 79% of the time against the United States, still receives $2 billion annually in US Foreign Aid.
Jordan votes 71% against the United States and receives $192,814,000 annually in US Foreign Aid.
Pakistan votes 75% against the United States receives $6,721,000 annually in US Foreign Aid.
India votes 81% against the United States receives $143,699,000 annually.
Take a gander at those other nations who take our money then stab us in the back. Ambassador Bolton’s working on it but it’s a tough row to hoe.
Howard Dean Lie? Say It Ain’t So!
I heard the man with my own lying ears say, I paraphrase, “No Democrat has ever take a dime from Jack Abramoff”.
Now we discover, oh no, that not only have plenty of Democrats taken money from Abramoff or his associates, but that Howard Dean himself was also a recipient.
From the American Thinker:
Even the Washington Post has admitted that Abramoff did not work in a vacuum on the controversial Indian tribal accounts. The Post went so far as to publish a chart of what it called the “A Team.”
Among the recipients of campaign contributions from A Team members: Howard Dean.
FEC contribution number 23991382452 lists a $1,000 donation to Dean by Greenberg Traurig lobbyist Ronald Platt, a member of the Post’s A Team, on June 30, 2003. At that time, lobbyist disclosure forms show Platt as working with Abramoff on two of the controversial tribal accounts: the Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana, and the Chitimacha Tribe of Louisiana . The forms show that Platt worked on a third controversial tribal account, the Sandia Pueblo, with other A Team members but not Abramoff.
Condi and Chavez
Hugo Chavez, another dictator “elected” and now enamored of Venezuela’s oil wealth, is very angry at Condoleezza Rice. He warns her not to mess with him although one wonders what “mess” means and what ol’ Hugo plans to do about it.
We can thank Jimmy Carter, who never met a despot or dictator he didn’t love, for verifying this guy’s election. Once they get power, these thugs, they don’t want to leave. I agree with Condi, such people are impediments to democracy.
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez launched a new verbal attack against US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, bluntly warning her “don’t mess with me, girl.”
Responding to remarks before the US Congress last week in which Rice called Chavez a “challenge to democracy” in Latin America, Chavez warned the top US diplomat to back off.
“She messed with me again,” he said in his weekly “Hello President” television show, deliberately mangling her name as “Condolences.” “Don’t mess with me, girl.”
Last week, after her US Congress testimony, Chavez dismissed Rice as “the imperial lady.”
What, No Riots?
Goodness one would think the British would be burning cars all over the place over the comments by London’s Mayor Ken Livingstone. Who browbeat a Jewish reporter with accusations of being a concentration camp guard and worse.
The Mayor was suspended. He should be “fired” although I suppose he was elected. Such inflammatory accusations are totally not necessary.
London’s Mayor Ken Livingstone, who exemplifies the curious affinity of the far left for Islamic extremism, has been suspended from his office for four weeks for asking a Jewish reporter whether he had been a “German war criminal,” since he acted “just like a concentration camp guard.” Livingstone refused to apologize for the incident. He also called the reporter’s employer, London’s Evening Standard, “a load of scumbags and reactionary bigots.”
On the Supremes
Came across this tidbit and it struck home. For I once lived on a small cove off of the Chesapeake Bay, a beautiful spot of water that I loved with all my heart. And for which I cared for and cherished, taking my responsibility as a lessee of such natural beauty quite seriously.
Put some self-important bureaucrats on the job and boom, we couldn’t even plant greenery to prevent the erosion of the land which would, go with me here, add silt to that water where the waterfowl bred and fed.
Even so, the biggest Supreme Court news this week is the Anna Nicole Smith hearings.
Powered by Sidelines
Future of nation’s rivers, wetlands hinges on two key cases.
The cases, both from Michigan and scheduled for hearing on Tuesday, could have an enormous impact. For property-rights advocates, an unfavorable ruling could spread the shadow of federal regulation over every tiny stream and rivulet in America, stifling development.
Federal agencies would be powerless to prevent “the discharge of sewage, toxic pollutants and fill into … the large majority of our nation’s rivers, streams and other waters,” said clean-water agencies from two-thirds of the states, including California.