Mar 30, 2007

Washington Post - Selective Memory

Mar 30, 2007

Washington Post - Selective Memory

By Howard Kurtz

Does everyone in the Bush administration have amnesia?

Alberto Gonzales kept saying he wasn't involved in any discussions about the firing of U.S. attorneys, but according to his former chief of staff yesterday, he was -- several times over.

Gonzales couldn't even recall a conversation with the president involving GOP complaints about some U.S. attorneys, although Bush remembered it.

In his Senate appearance yesterday, Kyle Sampson flatly contradicted his ex-boss's denials. As for himself, Sampson said that, whaddya know, he had forgotten some of the e-mails he sent and received when briefing the deputy attorney general about his appearance before Congress. At one point, Sen. Pat Leahy (D-Vt.) said: "We're trying to find out what in heaven's name he does remember."

GSA chief Lurita Doan, who testified Wednesday about a January videoconference in which a White House official briefed the agency about targeting congressional Democrats, said: "I'm a little bit embarrassed to admit this, but I can say that I honestly don't have recollection of the presentation at all."

She kept repeating the "do not recollect" defense until a Democratic congressman likened her to Sergeant Shultz, the see-nothing dufus Nazi guard on "Hogan's Heroes."

Scooter Libby is facing the prospect of jail because he told a grand jury he couldn't remember leaking Valerie Plame's identity to some reporters.

Is it something in the water over there?

Sampson said the famous e-mail about keeping the U.S. attorneys who were "loyal Bushies," that didn't mean political loyalty--ha ha ha, why would anyone think that?--but nonpartisan loyalty to President Bush's policies.

"The former chief of staff to Alberto R. Gonzales testified Thursday that he had consulted regularly with the attorney general about dismissing United States attorneys, disputing Mr. Gonzales's public account of his role as very limited," says the New York Times.

"The former aide, D. Kyle Sampson, who resigned two weeks ago, told the Senate Judiciary Committee that Mr. Gonzales's statements about the prosecutors' dismissals were inaccurate and that the attorney general had been repeatedly advised of the planning for them.

The two men talked about the dismissal plans over a two-year period, Mr. Sampson said, beginning in early 2005 when Mr. Gonzales was still the White House counsel. Mr. Sampson said he had briefed his boss at least five times before December 2006, when seven of the eight prosecutors were ousted."

Only five times? Well, how could anyone expect Gonzales to remember that?

"Sampson's testimony could be a major blow to Gonzales, who is struggling to hold on to his job in the face of growing criticism from Democrats and Republicans on Capitol Hill," says the L.A. Times.

"Sampson also disclosed how he and a small band of young lawyers at the Justice Department and the White House decided which U.S. attorneys should be replaced last year.

"In one revelation that seemed to startle some senators, Sampson described how he proposed replacing the U.S. attorney in Chicago, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, who was at the time investigating White House political strategist Karl Rove and others to discover who exposed the identity of a covert CIA operative. 'I said, "Pat Fitzgerald could be added to this list,"' Sampson said. He was in a meeting with then-White House Counsel Harriet E. Miers and Deputy Counsel William Kelley. 'They looked at me like I had said something totally inappropriate, and I had. Immediately after I did it, I regretted it.'"

I'm sure he deeply regretted it. And that would have looked good in the middle of the Plame probe.

Josh Marshall deconstructs the Sampson testimony:

"This use of the word 'political' is at the heart of Sampson's and others effort to lie their way out of what happened here.

" 'Political' can mean many things in different contexts. US Attorneys are 'political' appointees, in that they are overwhelmingly, though not exclusively, drawn from among the president's political supporters. They are also subject to 'political' direction, in that they are expected to follow the administration's law enforcement priorities -- more or less gun prosecutions, crack downs on dead beat dads or pornography, etc.

"Neither of these meanings of the word 'political' are what this investigation is about. And, like others, Sampson is using these multiple meanings of the word as a dodge. The charge against Sampson and crew is not that they fired them for 'political' reasons. The charge is that they fired these prosecutors for not using their law enforcement powers to help the Republican party."

It's official, and headed for a veto:

"Fresh from passing the first timelines to bring home U.S. troops from Iraq, congressional Democrats now face the daunting task of reconciling critical differences between a Senate withdrawal plan passed Thursday and one approved by the House last week . . . .

"The measures have prompted repeated veto threats from President Bush, who says he won't sign legislation that limits what military commanders can do in Iraq.

"Democratic lawmakers are gearing up for a high-stakes showdown with the president.

"But they must first reach a compromise among themselves, a process that will play out over the next several weeks. Lawmakers from both chambers must draw up language that wins House and Senate approval before the resulting bill can go to the president's desk."

This report in The Hill can't exactly help McCain's candidacy:

"Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) was close to leaving the Republican Party in 2001, weeks before then-Sen. Jim Jeffords (Vt.) famously announced his decision to become an Independent, according to former Democratic lawmakers who say they were involved in the discussions.

"In interviews with The Hill this month, former Sen. Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) and ex-Rep. Tom Downey (D-N.Y.) said there were nearly two months of talks with the maverick lawmaker following an approach by John Weaver, McCain's chief political strategist. Democrats had contacted Jeffords and then-Sen. Lincoln Chafee (R-R.I.) in the early months of 2001 about switching parties, but in McCain's case, they said, it was McCain's top strategist who came to them. At the end of their March 31, 2001 lunch at a Chinese restaurant in Bethesda, Md., Downey said Weaver asked why Democrats hadn't asked McCain to switch parties. Downey, a well-connected lobbyist, said he was stunned.' You're really wondering?' Downey said he told Weaver. 'What do you mean you're wondering?'

" 'Well, if the right people asked him,' Weaver said, according to Downey, adding that he responded, 'The calls will be made. Who do you want?' Weaver this week said he did have lunch with Downey that spring, pointing out that he and Downey 'are very good friends.' He claims, however, that Downey is grossly mischaracterizing their exchange: 'We certainly didn't discuss in any detail about the senator's political plans and any discussion about party-switchers, generically, would have been limited to the idle gossip which was all around the city about the [Democrats'] aggressive approach about getting any GOP senator to switch in order to gain the majority. Nothing more or less than that.' "

Weaver's version might be right, but the reporter subtly undermines that by saying he "claims" the feeler wasn't made.

By the way, McCain told CNN that there are neighborhoods in Baghdad where you can safely walk unarmed, and correspondent Michael Ware responds by asking where in "Neverland" this might be.

Is Rudy running on two-for-the-price-of-one?

"Rudolph W. Giuliani says that if he were president, his wife would be permitted to attend cabinet meetings and advise him on federal policy, an unusually overt role in government decision-making for a first lady."

There's more on that in the couple's Barbara Walters interview tonight.

Should pundits zip it for a change? Here's what National Review's Myrna Blyth says:

"What has happened to Elizabeth Edwards and now Tony Snow has reminded millions who have been touched by cancer that the disease can sneak back even when people have the most hopeful attitudes and the best possible care. Yes, bad things happen to good people, and cancer remains the great equalizer. Maybe the point is that people should do whatever they want to do in such trying circumstances. I know the radio talk shows across the nation have been debating the Edwardses' decision. Maybe everybody should stop giving their opinions for once, and instead of offering commentary, offer some prayers."

What accounts for the Fred Thompson mini-boomlet? Slate's John Dickerson says the "Law and Order" man may play better as a fantasy figure:

"What's most puzzling is that Thompson is liked by Republicans who say the war on terror is the single most important issue facing the country. They claim they understand the reality of the threats we face and that Democrats don't. And yet Thompson's security résumé is puny compared to his potential rivals. He has no executive experience and the wars he's fought have all been in the movies. Sure, you can argue that experience is overrated--after all, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld had plenty of it. The problem is that Thompson's supporters like Cheney and Rummy.

"The myth behind the Thompson quasi-candidacy is a dangerous one that bedevils both parties: If we just get a better communicator, people will love our policies. But once Thompson enters the race, he will have to either embrace or distance himself from GOP policies, which will either ruin his chances in the general election or hurt him with his conservative supporters. In short, he'll become just like any other candidate--something he might not like after such a big buildup. Thompson also has a reputation for not enjoying the grind of campaigning."

Bull Dog Pundit, who barks at Ankle Biting Pundits, responds to James Dobson of Focus on the Family saying that Thompson isn't really a Christian:

"Look, Dobson is flat out wrong. Thompson is indeed a Christian by the religious definition. Now, if Dobson had clarified his 'Thompson isn't a Christian' comment when he initially said it as meaning someone who doesn't speak as publicly about his faith as Dobson would like then I wouldn't have a problem with what he said.

"But what I do have a problem with is Dobson claiming that Thompson isn't a 'committed Christian,' and thus would not excite Christians to vote for him. Can someone please tell me what 'committed Christian' means? I assume it doesn't mean a Baptist who has been ordered to a mental institution.

"Does it mean you have to mention 'Jesus Christ, who is my Lord and Savior' in every interview or conversation? Does that mean you have to go to a 'born again' church and sing along with the choir? Does that mean you have to volunteer on so many church committees? Have to volunteer at a soup kitchen?

"Just how much do you have to do to pass Dobson's 'committed Christian' test and get his blessing for his followers to vote for you?"

A new scandal is brewing in Nevada, and the Wall Street Journal has the goods:

"The wife of Nevada Gov. Jim Gibbons was hired as a consultant to a defense contractor at the same time that her husband, who was then a member of Congress, helped the company get funding for a no-bid federal contract.

"Dawn Gibbons got about $35,000 in consulting fees in 2004 from Sierra Nevada Corp., of Sparks, Nev., the company said. Mr. Gibbons, a five-term Republican who served on the armed services and intelligence committees, sought funding that year for Sierra Nevada for a $4 million contract to develop a helicopter radar-landing system."

I profiled Dana Perino, the White House spokeswoman filling in for the ailing Tony Snow, yesterday. The Chicago Tribune has a piece today.

George Clooney wants to campaign for Obama, but feels he might hurt him in the red states.

The dustup over Jim Webb's aide being arrested for carrying a loaded gun into a Senate office building, and Webb refusing to say whether it's his, is just weird. Tim Noah has more ammunition on this:

"To one of the reporters present, this sounded as though Webb were saying not only that he carried a gun with him when he was in Virginia, where it's legal, but also that he carried a gun with him when he was in D.C., where it's not. (D.C.'s handgun ban was recently struck down by the D.C. Court of Appeals, but it remains in force while the city government seeks a review by the full D.C. Circuit.) The reporter therefore asked, 'Do you, senator, feel that you are above Washington, D.C.'s gun law?' Webb replied: 'I'm not going to comment in any level in terms of how I provide for my own security.' Webb then reaffirmed his belief in the Second Amendment; said he couldn't comment on any aspect of Thompson's case; denied, bafflingly, that he ever gave the weapon to Thompson (Did that mean he gave it to another aide who in turn gave it to Thompson?); and stated, most bafflingly of all, 'I have never carried a gun in the Capitol complex.' Was Webb saying he's carried a gun elsewhere in the District of Columbia? His office won't answer that question.

"Webb's silence increases the suspicion that he either has broken or continues to break the D.C. law, more or less daring the local authorities to do anything about it. That could be posturing; as Dana Milbank points out in the March 28 Washington Post, nobody ever lost a vote in the state of Virginia by thumbing his nose at gun control. Legally, though, Webb's evasiveness constitutes probable cause, entitling the next D.C. cop Webb encounters within city limits (but outside the Capitol) to frisk him. That's probably the last thing D.C.'s new mayor, Adrian Fenty, and his new chief of police, Cathy Lanier, would like to see happen. I therefore recommend that Fenty or Lanier phone Webb and ask the senator straight out whether he intends in the future to obey D.C.'s gun laws . . . If Webb answers anything other than 'yes,' then Lanier should dispatch a police officer to frisk Webb at the senator's next public appearance outside the Capitol. If Webb is carrying a handgun, that police officer should arrest him. Sounds absurd, I know. But how can the D.C. government do otherwise while on a daily basis it arrests less-well-dressed young black men for the very same offense?"

How often do you hear a pundit calling for a senator's arrest?

Finally, Salon's Rebecca Traister digs into the background of Rachel Marsden, a new star of Fox's late-night show "Red Eye":

"The 31-year-old columnist is already well known in her native Canada as an oft-accused and once-admitted stalker who made questionable rape charges of her own 10 years ago, in a case that eventually cut short the career of a university president and changed the tenor of harassment cases all over Canada. In 1999, a professor at the same university went to the police with charges Marsden was stalking him, and in 2004 she pleaded guilty to criminally harassing a former Vancouver radio host."

Marsden "has been featured as the 'Canadian correspondent' on 'The O'Reilly Factor' who formerly decorated her Web site with alluring photos of herself, and who was once named 'Republican Babe of the Week' by JerseyGOP.com . . . She also writes a weekly column for the conservative Toronto Sun, in which she revels in the sort of juvenile ad hominems about liberals beloved by righty louts. In the most recent, Marsden, an avowed disbeliever in global warming, ripped apart Al Gore's testimony in front of Congress, proposing that in a cross-examinations, lawmakers put this to the former vice president: 'Al Gore could really pollute a bathroom . . . Just look at the guy. If someone doesn't take away his pork 'n' beans, he's bound to get another one of those "gut feelings" and mistake his own greenhouse gas production for science!' "

Here's part of Marsden's bio from her Web site:

"Rachel survived growing up in Canada during the socialist regime of Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau, best known for his close friendship with Fidel Castro, decimation of the Canadian military, a wife who partied at Studio 54 with the Rolling Stones, and doing pirouettes behind the Queen of England's back."

---

Want the latest updates? Follow the DCCC on Facebook and Twitter: