July 14, 2005

7/14: The Spy Who Came In From The Cold And The Adviser Who Came In For Some Heat

If the Blogometer swore off publishing speculation, then we wouldn't have much to write about. Indeed, it is almost all speculation today. On the left and right, interested observers are poring over transcripts, interviews, books, plus newspaper and magazine articles both new and old, looking for a new angle that may help illuminate the truth behind you-know-which ongoing investigation and explain what it all means. Here are just a few of the theories to surface, either for the 1st time or with renewed significance, in recent days:

• WH dep. CoS Karl Rove could face espionage charges rather than mere indictment under intelligence protection statues.
• Ex-Amb. Joe Wilson may have leaked wife Valerie Plame's role in his Niger trip to friends in the Washington press.
• New York Times' Judy Miller may have leaked the Wilson/Plame gossip to the WH.
• Or, Miller and the Times may be protecting another source, one unsympathetic to the WH.
• Ex-WH spokesperson Ari Fleischer may have leaked Plame's name.

All are covered below, plus a greatly diminished amount of other news, a report on Rep. Louise Slaughter's (D-NY) blogad campaign -- and, our latest Blogger Spotlight, with Eric Alterman.

TRACKBACKS: Is Karl Rove The Next Mark Felt?

Where the blog swarm is headed, who's taking part, and what they're saying:

• The 7/13 Wall Street Journal editorial "Karl Rove, Whistleblower" comes in for a major drubbing by the left. Some on the right take note as well, but fewer add substantial commentary.
  
  

  >> From the left -- Hullabaloo: "Yeah. ... Rove was an interepid whistleblower, putting himself on the line exposing government wrongdoing when he outed Plame. He is the Daniel Ellsberg of the Bush administration bravely risking all to let the people know what its government was doing. My head hurts." · Obsidian Wings calls it "The Oliver North Effect": "I don't know whether Rove committed a crime in l'affair Plame. (In fact, I rather suspect that he didn't.) But this defense of Rove in The Wall Street Journal is ridiculous." · World O' Crap: "[L]et's take a brief look at today's unsigned Wall Street Journal editorial which also tells why Karl is the real victim here. (Okay, the piece is unsigned, but I'm betting it was penned by James Taranto -- the 'kerfuffle' always gives him away)..." · Fafblog, in jest: "As the Wall Street Journal points out today, the true tragedy in the Plame affair has been the burning of Karl Rove. Indeed, if there is any integrity left in Time Magazine, it must fire Matt Cooper. By outing Karl Rove as the man who outed an undercover CIA agent, Matt Cooper has selfishly, recklessly, and amorally endangered a top administration official, exposing Rove and those he works with to threat from political opponents, news organizations and the Justice Department, to say nothing of the damage done to Rove's career as one of America's hard-working partisan hacks. With his identity revealed, how will Rove effectively leak the leaks and spread the rumors necessary to serve his party? Such shameless and reckless abuse of partisan security cannot be tolerated. Matt Cooper must go."
  

  >> From the right -- Vodkapundit: "Finally, my thoughts come down to this. Republicans have complained since 1975 that Congress gutted our human intelligence -- and it's a fair cop. Between Congressional meddling and Clinton rule-making, Republicans are right when they say our human intelligence resources have been gutted. But those complaints seem less justified -- and more hypocritical -- when a high-ranking Republican treats an agent's identity with anything less than perfect circumspection." · Others take note of the editorial, but don't add much in the way of commentary: Wizbang, Ed Driscoll, Volokh Conspiracy.
  
  

  >> From the center -- Joe Gandelman calls Rove "a modern day political untouchable."

ROVE I: Miller's Crossing

At NRO's The Corner, John Podhoretz wote on 7/12, a "vital detail" in Byron York's widely-discussed 7/12 NRO piece -- that Cooper "called Rove to talk about something else" before switching to Wilson/Plame. He writes, "This is important, because it suggests Rove wasn't 'retailing' the information about Wilson and Plame ... but was rather a passive source." More: "It means that clearly information was circulating around Washington about the identity of Wilson's CIA operative wife Valerie Plame." Considering that Wilson was "cozy" with DC journalists, what if Miller discovered Plame's role from Wilson, and what if Miller "let it all slip and ... was the original source of the 'Plame's in the CIA' info?" In a follow-up post on 7/13, he speculated further that perhaps "Plame's identity as a CIA operative came not from White House sources eager to out her, but from those eager to bolster Wilson's case against the White House (like, say, Wilson himself)."

Righty JunkYardBlog asks, "Who is Miller sitting in jail to protect? Most likely, herself. Most of upper crust DC knew who Plame was and that she worked for the CIA before Novak's story ever hit. ... And therefore she knew of Wilson's connection to Plame without having to hear it obliquely from Karl Rove. And Wilson's connection to Plame, about which he lied repeatedly to the press when he denied her role, was and is very much relevant to the story because it addresses his credibility as a fact-finder. ... The job wasn't sanctioned by anyone higher than Plame's immediate colleagues. The press hasn't bothered to ask why Plame and her little clique did this?"

At liberal TPM Cafe, Mark Schmitt tries to sort out the theory, which he says doesn't "make a bit of sense." Going off the version posted to RedState, he begins: "First, since the New York Times is liberal, and also called for a special prosecutor on the Plame case, it doesn't make sense that they would be defending Miller's refusal to testify if Miller were protecting Rove or another White House official, so perhaps she's protecting a Democrat..." Schmitt: "I love the old 'Can it be...?' method of empirical inquiry. Especially when the answer is, 'Ummmm, No.'" (On a tangential point, Schmitt writes that RedState is "still the best conservative blog, because at least they have comments" -- a comment similar to ones we've seen on other liberal blogs.)

ROVE II: Not Just Sabotage, But Espionage?

Washington Monthly's Kevin Drum writes, prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald "is sure acting like a guy who has the goods on this whole affair, and if he starts delivering indictments it's going to make the Greek chorus singing Rove's praises look pretty silly. Oh, it was six reporters? Over the course of three days? And some of the calls were from Air Force One? Um... Frankly, smart Republicans would be well advised to hedge their bets. As Mark Kleiman explains, the legal case against the leakers is probably stronger than most people believe, and if Fitzgerald decides any of these guys lied to his investigators he's going to throw that into the mix as well. Sometimes discretion is the better part of valor."

In the above-linked post, UCLA prof Kleiman writes: "Rove's conduct certainly meets the far less demanding elements of the Espionage Act: (1) possession of (2) information (3) relating to the national defense (4) which the person possessing it has reason to know could be used to damage the United States or aid a foreign nation and (5) wilful communication of that information to (6) a person not entitled to receive it. Under the Espionage Act, the person doing the communicating need not actually know that revelation could be damaging; he needs only 'reason to know.'"

Liberal Whiskey Bar's "Billmon": "In my wildest, my most delightful dreams, I could not imagine that the guy who just three weeks ago was equating liberals with traitors could soon be facing trial as a ... traitor. I mean, I wouldn't dare put something like that on my Christmas list. Gluttony is one of the seven deadly sins."

Right-leaning QandO goes to the relevant section of code, and disagrees: "Again, questions follow. Was Ms. Plame's status with the agency classified at the time the information was released? If so, did Mr. Rove know it to be classified? Again, this gets us into a very murky area. If Ms. Plame was, in fact, going to work every day at CIA Headquarters in Langley, then her employment with the CIA can hardly have been classified, since she could be observed working there daily."

At conservative PoliPundit, Lorie Byrd writes "Perhaps it would be easier for me to believe" Dems and reporters such as David Gregory and Terry Moran "when they get all worked up about the national security implications of the Valerie Plame matter, if their concerns were not so recently born." She lists reasons why she doesn't buy it: "1. Senator Patrick Leahy's history of leaking"; "2. Former National Security Advisor Sandy Berger's theft of documents"; "3. Eight years of the Clinton White House." On the last point, asks rhetorically: "When Bill Clinton gave a young intern enough blackmail ammunition (through hours of phone sex and cigar handling) to sell to any enemy of the U.S. for enough money to let her live like a queen for life, did we hear any concern for the national security implications?"

ROVE III: Fleischer, With The Lead Pipe, In The Front Of The Plane

CAP's ThinkProgress raises the question: was ex-WH spokesperson Fleischer the 1st leaker? In 2/04, Fitzgerald focused on the WH comm. staff, subpoenaed Fleischer and AF1 phone records, and at least at one point Fitzgerald suspected those records would reveal the leaker's identity. Fleishcher was "on a presidential trip to Africa, where he might have had access to the classified State Department document brought aboard" by then-Sec/State Colin Powell "that likely tipped administration officials off to Plame's true identity."

ROVE IV: From The Cheney Gang To The Chain Gang?

The Left Coaster's "eriposte" responds to GOP arguments that Wilson had falsely claimed VP Cheney had sent him to Niger in an extended entry under 3 headers. The 1st: "A. Does the GOP's Talking Points For Treason(TM) offer evidence for their claim against Joseph Wilson? Short Answer: NO" 2nd: "B. Did Joseph Wilson Make Such a Claim (about Cheney)? SHORT ANSWER: It depends on what the claim is." 3rd: "C. CONCLUSION: Is there any merit to the GOP's assertion? SHORT ANSWER: NO" On the 2nd point, eriposte writes: "If the claim is that "Cheney sent him" there is evidence (above) that Wilson said the opposite. If the claim is that Cheney's office was somehow involved in his trip to Niger, then yes Wilson had said something to that effect. But this does not prove the GOP's case ... Indeed, the GOP ... provides a quote by Dick Cheney issuing a denial on 9/14/03. When all it takes to correct an inaccuracy is to state what is accurate, there is no explanation on earth that can justify the need to expose Valerie Plame's identity to make the same point."

ROVE V: For The Record

Nation corr. David Corn, in his 7/13 column, cross-posted to his personal blog, writes: Rove did pass classified information to Cooper," even if "unwittingly," assuming he didn't know Plame's "employment status at the CIA was classified information. But he and his posse cannot say the information he slipped to Cooper was not classified. The Intelligence Identities Protection Act makes it a crime to identify 'a covert agent'" of the U.S., and defines the term, "in part, as 'a present or retired officer or employee of an intelligence agency or a present or retired member of the Armed Forces assigned to duty with an intelligence agency whose identity as such an officer, employee, or member is classified information.'" He adds: "Not all wrongdoing is a crime. But leaking classified information is always serious business."

Just One Minute's righty Tom Maguire: "We seem to be approaching agreement on the issue of whether Ms. Plame was involved in the selection of her husband to go to Niger." Dems have argued, as Wilson wrote in his book, that "Valerie had had nothing to do with" his going to Niger. But ex-CIA agent Larry Johnson wrote at TPM Cafe on 7/13 (see 7/13 Blogometer) that "it is true she recommended her husband to do the job." Maguire adds: "We have no idea why Larry Johnson has abandoned [Wilson] on this point. Other than common sense."

Under the header "Day 3: What Did the President Know, and When Did He Know It?" Daily Kos' "Hunter" asks: "When did the President first learn of Karl Rove's involvement in this case?" He adds: "That's not a question President George W. Bush is going to be able to dodge forever. The longer the White House refuses to answer, the more media reports will begin to dig for the answer on their own."

Conservative Villainous Company posts an amusing photo of John Kerry in an almost-goldenrod biking outfit, and comments on John Kerry's "Karl Rove must go" petition: "Poor John Kerry. Is there any doubt that we've entered the doldrums of Washington's annual silly season? If so, a visit to the Senator's web site will soon dispel it. Having recently failed to re-take Capitol Hill in a manner reminiscent of Genghis Khan, the junior legislator from Massachusetts is reduced to circulating petitions on the Internet. But thank God for small favors... intrepid KerryWatchers should be grateful he's not flogging those horrid canary yellow bike outfits he wears on the Home Shopping Network.

Liberal Daily Howler's Bob Somerby points out (2nd item) that Wilson is a "shaky messenger" re: Nigerian yellowcake -- indeed, the report he filed actually supported the report that Iraq had sought yellowcake uranium in Niger, though Wilson's later statements downplayed this finding. Somerby takes "liberals and Dems" to task for getting behind Wilson in the first place. He concludes, "some libs have now caught a virus from the kooky talk-show right." Additionally, he puts readers on notice for the "ridiculous up-is-down lie" that Cheney sent Wilson to Niger, adding: "[Y]ou'll want to keep an eye out for gullible reporters who parrot it."

Along with his readers, Balloon Juice's John Cole has been working step-by-step through a list of statements on the Rove/Plame case, trying to ascertain what everyone can agree on about the case. 4 statements have been agreed to, 2 more are under debate, and Cole opened debate on statement #7 starting yesterday.

At Reason's Hit and Run, libertarian Jeff Taylor makes 2 points: "One, let's be adult about this, Rove was not "out to get" Joe Wilson or his wife. He was attempting to make the minor, but still valid, rhetorical point that Wilson could not be described as an internal critic of the Bush administration and was not vetted by the White House inner circle for his trip to Niger. ... Second, the White House and official GOPdom is fast approaching unsustainable, Clintonian 'depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is' territory by insisting that Rove somehow did not 'name' Plame. Of course he did. And course Bush should fire Rove or else be judged a hypocrite on his pledge to fire any leakers involved in the matter.

BLOGS VS. THE MSM: If Rove Throws The Medal Over A Capitol Hill Fence, At Least He Can Go Pick It Up Later

On 7/12, FNC's John Gibson said on his show: "I say give Karl Rove a medal, even if Bush has to fire him. Why? Because Valerie Plame should have been outed by somebody, and nobody else had the cajones to do it." Crooked Timber's Ted Barlow: "This is idiotic. Even if I were to grant Gibson every element of his argument ... all I'm granting is that Plame used bad judgement in suggesting her husband. Gibson is forced to argue that a covert CIA agent who shows bad judgement in a personnel suggestion should be exposed, rather than (say) ignored, reprimanded or even fired."

On 7/13 the New York Times editorialized against gov't "officials peddl[ing] disinformation for propaganda purposes or to harm a political adversary." Power Line's John Hinderaker opines: "Yes, we certainly agree with that. That's why our opinion of Joe Wilson is so low. He leaked the contents of his own report to the CIA -- in the pages of the New York Times! -- only he lied about his own report. He 'peddled disinformation,' falsely claiming to have found no evidence of an Iraqi effort to buy uranium from Niger, in order to 'harm a political adversary,' President Bush. The Times didn't mind that particular disinformation, however, since it fit the paper's political agenda." He adds that not only has the Times issued no correction, but they linked to the '03 Wilson op-ed in said editorial.

POLITICAL MONEY BLOG: Under The Pink

With a hat tip to PoliticalMoneyLine and Michael Lewis' Moneyball, we present our 2nd report on political blog advertising:

Yesterday the Blogometer spoke to ex-Dean staffer/Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY) manager Karl Frisch about Slaughter's "Send Karl Rove His Pink Slip!" Blogad campaign. When readers click on the blogad, they are taken to a page on Slaughter's official re-elect site, VoteLouise.com. The campaign asks interested readers to sign a petition and fill in their own reason why Rove should be fired.

Frisch said the campaign is aiming for 100K participants and will keep it online as long as it needs to do so -- perhaps longer if the goal is met quickly. Required fields include 1st and last names, e-mail address and zip code, but one needn't give a reason why Rove should be fired. Online petitions raise awareness for a subject the sponsor cares about, and also builds an e-mail list for future use.

Through the campaign, Frisch bought 42 out of the 74 adstrips from BlogAds' Advertise Liberally network, mostly on blogs with high traffic and those he knew from having read blogs for a few years. The ads started running on 7/12. As of about 10:30 a.m. this morning, Frisch reported 17,709 petitions had been signed.

Another note: Slaughter's re-election website is surprisingly complete and active for a rep. with a clear path to re-election. In addition to the blog and the Rove campaign, she even has profiles on Friendster and MySpace. Frisch wouldn't take credit for the decision, saying only that Slaughter wants to be involved at every level of the Internet -- but the Blogometer isn't currently aware of any other members of Congress with a page on MySpace, nor one who claims "South Park" as a favorite TV show.

Note: For our 1st report on political blog advertising, see the 6/17 Blogometer.

DELAY: Hang A Lampson On Your Problem

TX-based lefty Charles Kuffner writes, House candidate Nick Lampson (D-TX) "had himself a fine fundraising quarter for the period" ending 6/30, raising $500K in 8 weeks. Lampson is challenging House Maj. Leader Tom DeLay, who has raised $1.3M. More Kuffner: "Fine by me if GOP incumbents are giving extra cash to DeLay. As many of us observed last year, the more money and time that DeLay has to spend on his own reelection, the less he can spend helping his buddies. I'm happy for him to be a drain on national campaign resources instead of a pump."

MISCELLANY: More Fuel For The GOP-Is-No-Longer-The-Party-Of-Fiscal-Responsibility Fire

• Power Line's Scott Johnson congratulates fellow MN blogger Ed Morrissey of Captain's Quarters on joining the Weekly Standard as a contributing editor to the online Daily Standard. His first article went up yesterday.
• The NV Young GOPers is $25K in the red after their nat'l convo, and chapter chair Nathan Taylor is blasting GOPers Sen. John Ensign and Reps. Jim Gibbons and Jon Porter because the state party didn't help defray costs. GOP blogger Balloon Juice: "Fabulous. Get this man a job at the CBO." Lefty Atrios snarks: "I hear the military is offering good signing bonuses now."
• At David Horowitz's FrontPage magazine, Alan Dershowitz comments on a charge of academic plagiarism against longtime adversary/Columbia prof Rashid Khalidi. The charge was 1st leveled by right-leaning Jewish blogger Martin Solomon. Khalidi later told HNN that he was not the author.
• Martin Kramer criticizes fellow blogger Juan Cole for suggesting that 9/11 was motivated "in some large part" by U.S. support for Ariel Sharon's policies: "Did Cole read the same 9/11 report as the rest of us? There's not a single passage in the 9/11 report mentioning Sharon's (or Israel's) policies, and I challenge him to produce one. Cole just made it up. And in point of fact, the report's narrative definitively contradicts him.

BLOGGER SPOTLIGHT: Altered States

Today the Blogometer talks to lefty journalist, author and blogger Eric Alterman, who writes Altercation for MSNBC.com.

What is your full name?

Eric Ross Alterman

What is your age?

45

Where did you grow up?

Queens, New York, and then Westchester

Where do you live now?

Upper West Side, Manhattan

What is your occupation? Have you ever worked on a political campaign or for the mainstream media?

I'm a columnist, a professor, an author, a think-tank guy, and a blogger. I volunteered for various campaigns as a student. I was the stringer for The Boston Globe at Yale for two years. I have freelanced for most major magazines and newspapers at one time or another but never on staff, unless you include Rolling Stone, where I did politics for a couple of years.

When did you start blogging and why?

My bosses at MSNBC.com requested that I replace the column I was doing for them with a weblog. We began it in May, 2002 and I don't think we've missed more than a couple of days in the past three years.

What has been your favorite post, or favorite story to write about, in that time?

I guess I am proudest of the contributors I've managed to corral, Tom Sawyer-style, into writing for for Altercation for free. That would include Charles Perce, Major Bob Bateman, Eric Rauchway, Siva Vaidhyanthan, my music reviewer, Sal, and others. I also feel like we've created a kind of virtual community among readers and letter-writers and I'm proud of that, too.

Describe your typical blogging schedule. And what is your average output?

I wake up early, put on the coffee, and get to work while the rest of the family is asleep. Then I send everybody off to school and work and try to finish up by ten a.m. or so, and wait to see 'The Note' before sending it off to my editor, usually by eleven. We do a little back and forth and it goes up. Then I check for mistakes, which sometimes come to me in the form of angry emails, passed through my assistant. (I stopped reading them both because of time constraints but also because of the viciousness of the tone that characterized many of them. Now I read only those that are passed along to me.) It's a lot of words per day, more than a thousand--sometimes, even more than that -- but I don't write all or necessarily even most of them.

Who is your favorite political blogger? Favorite non-political blogger?

It changes regularly. People have streaks. I think those kids at TAPPED are terrific, particularly Matt Yglesias. Josh Marshall is obviously great, too, as is Atrios in a much different way. I like academic blogs, like Siva's [Sivacracy], Left2Right, HNN, and Michael Berube. I like having Andy around because he gives me so much material; it's almost worth being called a self-hating Jewish traitor by a goyish foreigner.

Who is your favorite mainstream media columnist?

Does Garry Trudeau count? Truthfully, this changes too, or more accurately, rotates between, Rick Hertzberg, Mike Kinsley, E.J. Dionne and Frank Rich. (I admire Krugman, but he is not a stylist. I think Richard Cohen is a great columnist, but his thinking gets fuzzy sometimes.) Wile we're on this topic, let us note for the record that none of these people appear on television. That may be because, a) genuine liberals are not invited to be on television, or b) going on television regularly ruins you as a writer. (Want to know my least favorite? It's a tie between Bob Novak and Alex Cockburn. In a just society -- or a punditocracy that was not dominated by right-wingers -- they would be equally obscure, instead of just Alex being obscure and Novak being whatever it is he is. (And is it just a coincidence they agree completely about Israel?))

What is your favorite television news program, either network or cable?

(Unless you are including Charlie Rose) Jon Stewart is literally the only one I can stomach.

What MSM-produced websites (i.e. newspapers, magazines) do you visit on a daily basis?

MSNBC.com, the Guardian, NYT, WP, LAT, WSJ, Slate, The Note, and Le Monde when I'm feeling ambitious.

What non-MSM websites (i.e. blogs) do you visit on a daily basis?

What non-MSM websites (i.e. blogs) do you visit on a daily basis? Lemme see, daily? If I'm not teaching that day, usually, Romensko, Salon, TAPPED, Center for American Progress, ThinkProgress, Arts and Letters Daily, Atrios, Josh, Arianna, Media Matters, Wonkette, History News Network, H-Diplo, and I suppose Andy. I read my boss, Katrina vanden Heuvel's blog too. I try to avoid Drudge, but he keeps sucking me back in.

How often, or do you ever, read a newspaper in its dead-tree (i.e. print) form?

I get the Times and the WSJ delivered, but I'd read the WSJ online if it were me paying for it. I also get the Forward, which I think is great. I don't think I could live without the Times on paper in the morning, however much it infuriates me sometimes.

How do you see the new media and old media affecting and influencing each other in the next five years?

Hey, this is an essay question. No fair.

THOUGHT OF THE DAY:

Stakes Is High

National Journal's Danny Glover writes at Beltway Blogroll that the DCCC "sees an opportunity to trim" the GOP House majority by taking the OH seat vacated by U.S. Trade Rep. Rob Portman. DCCC's Stephen Yellin wrote at The Stakeholder: "Can we raise $25,000 in two weeks to get [Dem candidate] Paul Hackett elected? We did it in 2004 with Ginny Schrader in a week, and this race is no less important. And when I threw the first pebble into Ginny's wave of money, I knew that her race mattered. So does Paul Hackett's."

LEST WE FORGET: Caddyshack 3

BuzzMachine blogger/Entertainment Weekly founder/New York Times consultant/MSNBC contributor Jeff Jarvis goes golfing on vacation.

NOTES AND ERRATA: The Coffee Cop-Out

The Blogometer wrote yesterday's "Backlog" post about Mediacrity's tangle with the New York Times and its public editor, Barney Calame, before we had our coffee yesterday. Although the item was, as Mediacrityput it, opaque, we thought it was worth mentioning that we agree -- it does appear that the Times did lift the info from his blog without attribution.

°   °   °   °   °

BLOGOMETER SPECIAL: The Old Man And The Sea Of Rumors

What the blogosphere is saying about the SCOTUS vacancy:

Conservative UCLA law prof Stephen Bainbridge wrote on 7/12: "I got an email today from a reliable source opining that Justice John Paul Stevens will retire this summer if, but only if, CJ [William] Rehnquist steps down. The theory is that Stevens will be willing to let Bush fill his slot only if there are so many spots available that [Pres.] Bush will feel free and/or pressure to nominate at least one moderate. If true, my guess is that the three slots would go to: Alberto Gonzales, probably as Chief, since he's Bush's closest judicial friend and Bush seems so eager to appoint the first Hispanic; Edith Jones (or possibly Janice Rogers Brown) so that a woman replaces O'Connor; and Michael McConnell to make both business and social conservatives happy. Let's see Tradesports figure out a contract for that one!"

Right-leaning T. Longren comments: "I don't really believe any of this. Sure, there's a chance it could happen, but I could also be killed right now from a poopsicle falling from a jetliner. I don't know why I should trust this guy's source ... I'll stay skeptical."

RedState's Erick Erickson shares more rumors on the SCOTUS front: "Three-quarters of Washington says the Stevens rumor is garbage. The other quarter is right."

More Erickson: "Even prior to his hospitalization, the White House is moving forward with its judicial picks to find someone to replace the Chief Justice. Michael Luttig and John Roberts are both getting a thorough review. The White House wants to make sure the Chief knows his Court will be left in good hands, should the Chief want to go on and get off the bench." Yet more: "John Cornyn looks to be a favored compromise pick. His name has circulated privately between Democrats and Republicans. Democrats want to fight like hell against any nominee, but doing so against a Cornyn pick would further break down collegiality between the Republican majority and Democratic minority in the Senate. Several folks in the White House have started mulling this idea with some seriousness."

GANG OF 14: Fat Lot Of Good

Captain's Quarters, on what the Gang of 14 compromise means to the SCOTUS confirmation process: "What this shows is that the Memorandum of Understanding signed by the Gang did nothing but kick the can down the road. Democratic Party leaders have continued to ratchet up the rhetoric and their demands, with Schumer claiming that the President owes them a list of people for the minority party to vet. Even McCain had to speak out after that, scolding Democrats for ignoring the elections that put them clearly in the minority. In the end, we will face the same fight, only months later and probably with the same harried vote-counting that preceded the MOU. The only gain made was to the egos of 14 Senators who got the best press coverage of their lives. And that, sadly, was probably all that mattered to them in the first place."

A Byrd In The Hand ... Or On The Blog

GOP-leaning Jackson's Junction quotes, and posts video of, Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV) saying: "[Bush] called me today and I said to him, I am shouting your name from the steeple tops for reaching out, reaching across the aisle." Trey Jackson comments: "So -- if you ever hear someone on the left complaining about the President not 'reaching out' -- direct them to Senator Byrd's statement on the issue!"

Posted by at July 14, 2005 12:34 PM

Copyright 2007 by National Journal Group Inc.
The Watergate · 600 New Hampshire Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20037
202-739-8400 · fax 202-833-8069
NationalJournal.com is an Atlantic Media publication.