There is a Difference Between Zero Tolerance For Fraud & Zero Enforcement Of Fraud

Harry Markopolis, the whistle blower who Bush's anti-regulatory SEC ignored when he kept warning them that Bernie Madoff was in the process of stealing $50 billion for investors, told Congress yesterday that there was basically no regulation of the capital markets-- or at least of fraud in the capital markets for the eight years Bush was overseeing the functions of government. Watch Congressman Alan Grayson (D-FL) questioning Mr. Markopolis at a House Financial Services Committee hearing yesterday:



On his blog today former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich explained that Americans actually bought into Obama's campaign message of Change and that now they want it-- and they want the real thing, not the Tom Daschle version, which labors under the false premise that people won't mind corrupt Democrats because they're not nearly as corrupt as corrupt Republicans.

Official Washington underestimated the public's pique at what appeared to be the old ways of Washington. Hill staffers tell me that many offices have been inundated with telephone calls, emails, letters and faxes expressing concern (to put it mildly) about Daschle-- not only his failure to pay back taxes but his relationships with major players in the health care industry and rich consulting contracts with the private sector since leaving the Senate, and even the fact that he was given a car and driver by one of them.

What's going on here? Maybe official Washington, much like most of Wall Street, is still not quite getting it.

Typical Americans are hurting very badly right now. They resent people who appear to be living high off a system dominated by insiders with the right connections. They've become increasingly suspicious of the conflicts of interest, cozy relationships, and payoffs that seem to pervade not only official Washington but our biggest banks and corporations. In short, many Americans who have worked hard, saved as much as they can, bought a home, obeyed the law, and paid every cent of taxes that were due are beginning to feel like chumps. Their jobs are disappearing, their savings are disappearing, their homes are worth far less than they thought they were, their tax bills are as high as ever if not higher.

Meanwhile, people at the top seem to be living far different lives in a different universe. They're the executives and traders on Wall Street who have lived like kings for years off a bubble of their own making while ripping off small investors, the financial louts who are now taking hundreds of billions of taxpayer bailout money while awarding themselves huge bonuses and throwing lavish parties, the corporate CEOs who are earning seven figures while laying off thousands of workers, the billionaire hedge-fund and private-equity managers who are paying a marginal tax rate of 15 percent on what they say are capital gains while people who earn a fraction of that are paying a higher rate, and, not the least, the Washington insiders who have served on the Hill or in an administration and then gone on to pocket millions as lobbyists for the same companies they once regulated or subsidized. To the American who's outside the power centers-- the places of entitlement and I'll-scratch-your-back-while-you-scratch-mine deal making-- the entire system seems rotten.

Markopolis noticed about the SEC exactly what anyone who has given even the most cursory looks at the Bush Regime regulatory agencies-- all of them-- has noticed: "The SEC is... captive to the industry it regulates and is afraid" [to bring big cases against prominent individuals and] is busy protecting the big financial predators from investors."

He attributes it to incompetence rather than to the venality and purposeful mendacity with which the Bush Regime ruled, although he did testify that the securities industry's self-policing organization, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, is "very corrupt," which is very disturbing since the head of that outfit is Obama's new SEC chief. She and the holdovers from the Bush Regime are already acting in bad faith and impeding the congressional investigation. They claimed they were restricted in what they could tell Congress. Obama should have called Ms. Schapiro and told her to clean off her desk, but I have no doubt that she is another of Rahm "The Vetter" Emanuel's personal picks.

Mr. Kanjorski, the hearing chairman, condemned that argument as an expression of arrogance that was at the root of the agency’s regulatory failures.

Congress is in the midst of creating regulatory changes that could change the agency’s fate, the congressman warned the panel of official witnesses. Lawmakers want immediate candor about the handling of the Madoff matter, not an “oatmeal” of generalities, he said.

“We didn’t call you up here to hear a traveler’s guide of the S.E.C.,” Mr. Kanjorski added.

Linda Chatman Thomsen, the S.E.C. enforcement director, told lawmakers that the agency staff had demonstrated its willingness and ability to pursue major fraud cases, including 70 Ponzi schemes.

Ms. Thomsen said the agency, under its new chairwoman, Mary L. Schapiro, would work hard to improve its receptiveness and responsiveness to whistle-blowers like Mr. Markopolos.

Her responses did not satisfy any of the half-dozen lawmakers who stayed at the hearing after Mr. Markopolos left. Their attacks were fierce and strident, with Representative Gary L. Ackerman saying at one point: “We thought the enemy was Mr. Madoff. I think it is you.”

The hearing at times seemed to enter verbal territory more often explored at organized crime hearings.

And speaking of organized crime hearings, let's not take our eyes off the ball and look over here when there's something going on over there... and over there.

The first is a continuation of the Justice Department scandals, this particular one featuring retired Senator Pete "Sneaky Pete" Domenici and his role in persuading the Bush Regime to fire David Iglesias, the U.S. attorney for New Mexico. Reading between the lines, it looks like Bush-- or at minimum, Rove-- may have been guilty of obstructing justice.

The federal grand jury is investigating whether Domenici and other political figures attempted to improperly press Iglesias to bring a criminal prosecution against New Mexico Democrats just prior to the 2006 congressional midterm elections, according to legal sources close to the investigation and private attorneys representing officials who prosecutors want to question.  Investigators appear to be scrutinizing Iglesias' firing in the context of whether he was fired in retaliation because Domenici and others believed that he would not manipulate the timing of prosecutions to help Republicans.

The second is another Rahm Emanuel vetting screwup. Turns out the Republican loon Obama picked to be Commerce Secretary for God only knows why was in bed with Abramoff through Kevin Koonce, his legislative director.

[Koonce] was cited in a guilty plea last week by Todd Boulanger, a former deputy to disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff. In federal court, Boulanger admitted he plied the staffer with front-row tickets to a hockey game, meals and drinks and other tickets to a baseball game, and in exchange received favors in spending legislation. The total value of the gifts Staffer F took from Boulanger exceeded $10,000, court papers said.

All this corruption-- and they've destroyed the country and are now obstructing the new president from doing anything to clean up their mess!

SENATE ETHICS COMMITTEE TO DOMENICI: "NAUGHTY, NAUGHTY"-- SO CAN HE RUN FOR PRESIDENT NOW?

Pete "Sneaky Pete" Domenici (R-NM) is well liked in the Senate-- on both sides of the aisle. That he outrageously breached Senate ethics by threatening-- and then following through on his threat-- U.S. Attorney David Iglesias' job in an attempt to get him to bring some politically-motivated indictments against Democrats, hasn't gotten many senators riled up enough to do anything to discipline him in any meaningful way. The Ethics Committee admonished him today, totally meaningless, especially for someone who is retiring.

Even if he weren't retiring it wouldn't mean much. When McCain was caught taking massive bribes for special favors from corrupt banker-- and close family friend-- Charles Keating, all the Senate did was "admonish" him. Now many Republicans are backing this corrupt turd in his lifelong goal to capture the presidency. Like in McCain's case, the pathetic and irrelevant Ethics committee did its best to soften the blow on the doddering Domenici, claiming it found "no 'substantial evidence' that Mr. Domenici 'attempted to improperly influence an ongoing investigation.'” Did it look? And wasn't he actually trying to do something else anyway-- get his execrable political protege, Heather Wilson, re-elected?

Wilson is running for Domenici's Senate seat now, though she isn't expected to win. The House Ethics Committee, every bit as much of a joke as the Senate Ethics Committee, hasn't hauled Wilson's ass in to answer questions about her role in the firing of Iglesias.


UPDATE: CREW ISN'T SATISFIED WITH SENATE'S DERELICTION OF DUTY

After reminding us that when Domenici was first asked about why he made the call, he denied everything, CREW issued a statement by Executive Director Melanie Sloan:

"The ethics committee may have been unable to wholeheartedly condemn Senator Domenici's conduct, but we have no such compunction. The committee's effort to minimize its reprimand of Senator Domenici itself reflects poorly on the Senate. Little is more destructive to our democracy than an attempt to use political power to influence a criminal investigation and it should be distressing to all Americans that the Senate Ethics Committee does not appear to share that view."

Congress again proves that it is fundamentally incapable of making or enforcing rules to regulate its own behavior. 

TOM UDALL JUMPS INTO NEW MEXICO SENATE RACE-- LOOKS LIKE A PICK UP FOR THE DEMOCRATS

With the political demise of New Mexico Republican Senator Pete "Sneaky Pete" Domenici-- caught up the Department of Justice firings scandal-- and his subsequent decision to retire, New Mexico's U.S. Senate seat was suddenly in play. The two Republican House members, Domenici protege Heather Wilson-- involved in the exact same Department of Justice scandal (in fact, the cause of it)-- and extreme right-wing loon Steve Pearce, immediately jumped into the race. A long cast of lackluster Democrats also started eyeing the race. Grassroots Democrats began a persistent effort to draft Tom Udall, by far New Mexico's best known-- a former two-term state attorney general and the son of beloved former Interior Secretary Stewart Udall-- and most popular congressman. He declined. Democrats persisted. Yesterday he agreed to run.

He will face Albuquerque's unpopular Mayor Martin Chavez in a June primary unless Chavez withdraws before then. Polling shows Udall will win the primary handily and go on to beat either tarnished Republican in November.

Tom Udall - 50%
Martin Chávez - 30%
Don Wiviott - 2%
Undecided - 17%

In match-ups against both Wilson and Pearce, Udall comes out on top. No other Democrat does.
Wilson (R) 45
Chavez (D) 42

Wilson (R) 38
Udall (D) 55

Pearce (R) 40
Chavez (D) 39

Pearce (R) 37
Udall (D) 54

RETIREMENTS IN THE SENATE ARE A LITTLE ONE-SIDED... AND NOT MAKING LIFE FOR THE GOP ANY EASIER

Sen. Pajama Man makin' room for Tom Udall in the Senate?

The only Democrats giving up their safe House seats are Tom Allen (ME) and Mark Udall (CO), each of whom is exchanging it for a Senate seat. There may be a third, Mark's brother Tom Udall (NM) who has tried to not run for the Senate but is practically being forced to by New Mexico voters across the board. On the other hand, at least a dozen senior Republicans have already announced their retirements or signaled that they will retire. Several others face long prison terms for corruption and may not be able to campaign.

Today's Congressional Quarterly reports an identical situation in the Senate. Forget for a moment the likely criminal indictment of Alaska's corruption king, Don Young Ted Stevens. Five Republican incumbents (of the 22 who are up for re-election next year) have already announced their departures-- Wayne Allard (Co), Larry Craig (ID), Pete Domenici (NM), Chuck Hagel (NE) and John Warner (VA). Democrats are now favored to win the resultant open seats in Colorado, Virginia and New Mexico. And even blood red Idaho and Nebraska-- where, respectively, Larry Craig and Bob Kerrey make the situations... fluid-- could offer pleasant surprises for the Democrats.

CQ calls it "a historic disparity in the partisan distribution of retiring senators [which] is creating headaches for Republican strategists, who already faced an uphill battle to regain control of the chamber." No Democrats are retiring from the Senate, except Hillary if she runs for the presidency and in that case it is likely that Governor Eliot Spitzer will appoint a solid progressive like Jerry Nadler or Maurice Hinchey. Overlooking the Stevens situation, CQ goes on to say that "if there are no more Senate retirements-- and any additional incumbent withdrawals at this point would be a surprise-- the partisan distribution of 'open' Senate seats would be the most lopsided in half a century."

In typical election years, the vast majority of incumbents are re-elected. But open seats, at least in politically competitive states and districts, can become much more vulnerable to takeover by the opposition party. That’s the problem Republicans face in 2008 as they try to reverse the 2006 result, when Democrats gained control of the Senate by a scant 51-49 operational edge.

Exacerbating that problem is the extremely weak Republican presidential line-up-- the pathetic pygmies™-- who consistently lose to "None of the Above" in polls of likely Republican voters. Between a libertine gangster like Giuliani, a flip-floppin' cultist like Romney, or even a doddering, stuttering and confused old stumblebum like Frederick of (Ancient) Hollywood why would anyone in Congress think they won't be suffering from reverse coattails in 2008?

SNEAKY PETE'S PLAN REVEALED: BEQUEST "HIS" SENATE SEAT TO REPUBLICAN RUBBER STAMP HEATHER WILSON

Tweedledee wants to sell you Tweedledum

OK, so Domenici says he's retiring because he has dementia-- which he clearly does-- not because his poll numbers show he would lose a re-election bid (which they do) and not because the Purge-Gate investigation into the brutal, unwarranted political firing of David Iglesias would destroy whatever positive perception that is left of New Mexico's longest-serving senator (which it would). He's out and his equally tainted protege, Heather Wilson, has decided to check the congressional seat she was unlikely to win again and run for the Sneaky Pete senate seat instead.

Remember, Sneaky Pete's reason for involving himself in what became the U.S. Attorneys scandal had nothing to do with his own election. He-- and Wilson-- demanded that Iglesias aggressively pursue Democrats, regardless of evidence, in order to make the case before the Wilson's tough re-election bid that it isn't only Republicans who are corrupt and untrustworthy but that Democrats get in trouble too. When Iglesias told them that their was no basis for the case to go forward, they called Karl Rove and had him fired.

Sneaky Pete, who has become famous for his notorious "lapses of memory"-- like when he forgot to get dressed and went strolling through the Capitol in his pajamas-- knew he would have to retire soon. He, and his establishment supporters, felt the only possibility for the GOP to retain the New Mexico senate seat-- in a state that has been turning bluer and bluer-- would be to run the relatively "moderate" Wilson, not the extremely ambitious extremist, Steve Pearce (NM-02) who already ran and lost s Republican senatorial primary.

Now, if you take a close look at the actual voting records of Wilson and Pearce, they're not really that different, at least not in the real world. Both are, basically, rubber stamp Republicans who have reflexively followed the Bush-Cheney line on every hideous part of the far right agenda that has been shoved down Americans' throats in the past 7 years. A case can be made that Pearce is more extreme and more of a true-believer whackadoodle and that Wilson, while basically voting nearly as badly, at least wrings her hands and moans about voting like a true reactionary.

BREAKING NEWS: PETE "SNEAKY PETE" DOMENICI (R-NM) IS CALLING IT QUITS

We should listen to another rousing verse of Queen's "Another One Bites The Dust." This time it's New Mexico senile and crooked Senator Pete "Sneaky Pete" Domenici. Chris Cillizza at the Washington Post just broke the story that Sneaky will announce tomorrow that he's finally retiring.

Domenici has struggled with health problems over the last several years and has been dogged by questions about the role he may have played in the firing of U.S. Attorney David C. Iglesias in Albuquerque. As a result, he had been long been rumored as a potential retirement. He joins Republican Sens. John Warner (Va.), Chuck Hagel (Neb.) and Wayne Allard (Colo.) on the sidelines for 2008.

The most likely candidates on the Republican side are Reps. Heather Wilson and Steve Pearce. Several Democrats are mentioned including Rep. Tom Udall, Albuquerque Mayor Martin Chavez, Lt. Gov. Diane Denish and former state Attorney General Patricia Madrid. The dream candidate for Democrats is Gov. Bill Richardson but his advisers insist he is not interested and focused on the 2008 presidential race. Wealthy businessman Don Wiviott is already in the race and has put several hundred thousand dollars of his own money into the bid.

What Cillizza doesn't mention is that Sneaky Pete's poll numbers show he can't win re-election and that an investigation of his interference in the Purge-Gate scandal is likely to wind up badly for him. His job approval rating is 43% and last year at this time no one under 50% won their re-election bids. Only 38% of women and only 34% on independents approve of Sneaky Pete's job performance. He may be losing his marbles but he still has someone around with enough sense to make him quit while he can still leave with a modicum of pseudo dignity.


AND I BET HE DIDN'T CARE SEEING THIS AD RUNNING IN ALBUQUERQUE AND ROSWELL

Maybe it can be used for Pearce or Wilson, a radical right kook and fake-moderate rubber stamp.




UPDATE: THE FALL-OUT IN NEW MEXICO

Adam Connor over at MyDD has a great outlook at what Domenici's retirement is likely to lead to-- an all Blue New Mexico. He and Jonathan Singer are working with locals on a Draft Udall campaign, the next domino after the long-overdue resignation.

WILL SENATORIAL BACK-SCRATCHING LET DOMENICI SLIP AWAY FROM SEVERE ETHICS VIOLATIONS IN THE U.S. ATTORNEYS PURGE? WHAT ABOUT HEATHER WILSON?

Professional staffers for the Senate Ethics Committee have turned up enough heavy duty evidence on Pete "Sneaky Pete" Domenici (R-NM) to possibly lead to a prison sentence in the purge of U.S. Attorney David Iglesias. But the actual political hacks who serve as senators are loathe to prosecute one of their own. They'd rather just stick together, regardless of party-- or even level of criminality.

According to some senior staffers working for lawmakers who sit on the Ethics Committee, the six-month preliminary investigation into Domenici has turned up enough evidence to open a formal, public investigation into the New Mexico senator, having determined that Domenici acted inappropriately and that he may have violated Senate Ethics rules when he called Iglesias to ask whether Aragon would be indicted before the state's voters went to the polls last year.

But it's unclear if the Ethics Committee will end up launching a formal probe. A sticking point, Ethics Committee staffers say, is the long-standing "ethics truce" between Democrats and Republicans that dates back to the mid-1990s where lawmakers from both political parties agreed not to file ethics complaints against each other.

...The House Ethics Committee, meanwhile, is continuing to pursue its preliminary investigation into similar claims that Rep. Heather Wilson (R-New Mexico), by making similar phone calls to Iglesias last year inquiring about a sealed indictment against Aragon, may have violated House ethics rules. Wilson phoned Iglesias about two weeks before Domenici called the former federal prosecutor. The House Ethics Committee interviewed Iglesias in July about the substance of the phone call he received from Wilson last year.

Coincidentally, New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson say's he isn't a candidate for the senile, corrupt and doddering Domenici's seat.

REPUBLICAN OBSTRUCTIONISTS BETRAY THE TROOPS

Bush & Domenici:Let's stick Together

Yesterday I asked an important question: How can someone claim to be for the troops against yet vote against the Webb Amendment that would guarantee that they would have sufficient rest before being sent back into battle? It seems impossible. Yet this morning 45 die hard reactionary Republicans plus Lieberman declared they would filibuster the amendment to death. Of the 60 votes needed to shut down a filibuster, Reid could only must 56. Although several frightened and desperate Republican incumbents who have supported the Bush Cheney war agenda flip flopped over to the Democrats-- Collins and Coleman, most notably-- some of the Republicans who have been wailing the loudest about how bad the occupation is going-- Pete "Sneaky Pete" Domenici (R-NM), Dick Lugar (R-IN), and George Voinovich (R-OH) showed their true colors and voted against the troops. Yep, when push came to shove, there was Domenici-- who is probably counting on a Bush pardon when he's thrown in prison for his role in the U.S. Attorneys scandal-- voting to protect Bush instead of protecting our soldiers.

I don't know if Reid expected to pull 60 votes or not and I don't know if he ever thinks about how he and Schumer sabotaged Ned Lamont's campaign against Lieberman, but he made a common sense statement after the Republican minority again obstructed what the vast majority of Americans want. It's as though McConnell and Sununu and Domenici and the rest are daring the voters to fire them.

I am discouraged that the Republican leadership chose to block this troop readiness amendment. If Republicans oppose troop readiness, they are entitled to vote against it. If Republicans don't believe that our courageous men and women in uniform deserve more rest and mental health, they can vote no on this amendment. If they don't agree that constant redeployments and recruiting shortages are straining our armed forces, they can vote no on this amendment.

But to block this amendment-- to not even give it an up or down vote-- shows that some of my Republican colleagues are protecting their president rather than protecting our troops. But just because some in the minority party are choosing obstruction does not mean that all Republicans must follow in lockstep. I urge all of my colleagues who believe we need a new course to support this amendment. It is a crucial first step on the path toward a responsible end to the war.

Here's the answer the Republicans gave Reid-- and the American people:



Last night CNN's correspondent in Baghdad, Michael Ware, tried to convey a sense of on the ground reality after all the patently false hope being bandied about by warmongers McCain, Bush, Graham and, worst of all, Lieberman.

COOPER: Is the enemy on the run in Iraq, Michael?

WARE: No, certainly not. And I think we need to be aware that it's enemies. I mean, America doesn't face just one opponent in this country, but a whole multitude, many of whom are becoming stronger, the longer the U.S. occupation here, or presence here, in Iraq continues. So, unfortunately, I'm afraid that Senator Lieberman has taken an excursion into fantasy.

No more proof is needed that Lieberman and the Republicans don't give a damn about our troops than the vote this morning on Webb's amendment. With the exception of Olympia Snowe, the only Republicans to vote with the Democrats-- and every single Democrats voted yes on this, even the Nelsons-- were Republicans on the verge of electoral defeat. Vitter didn't bother to show up to even vote. I don't know which Madam he's hiding out with this week.

Interestingly, this morning's Washington Post has a piece that drops a little bombshell on Bush and his Republican lackeys. General BeTrayUs' chief security advisor is Stephen Biddle and he had some words that don't sound like they were cleared by either Cheney or Rove.

"If the surge is unacceptable, the better option is to cut our losses and withdraw altogether. In fact, the substantive case for either extreme-- surge or outright withdrawal-- is stronger than for any policy between. The surge is a long-shot gamble. But middle-ground options leave us with the worst of both worlds: continuing casualties but even less chance of stability in exchange. Moderation and centrism are normally the right instincts in American politics, and many lawmakers in both parties desperately want to find a workable middle ground on Iraq. But while the politics are right, the military logic is not."

If the American people get to make the choice the Post poses-- Go Deep Or Get Out-- there is little guess work which way it's going to go down.

SNEAKY PETE JUMPS OVERBOARD AND SWIMS FOR SHORE

"Yo, Sneaky P, how many times did you vote against Cheney's Iraq dictates?"

Just an hour or two ago I was wondering when the rest of the "moderate" GOP incumbents and all the "independent voices" over in the Senate Republican caucus would join Lugar, Voinovich and Warner in starting to distance themselves from the Bush-Cheney Iraq occupation and escalation policies. One would think it would be especially difficult for ultimate rubber stamp Susan Collins because of her full body embrace of the Joe Lieberman Middle East agenda. But one only need remember that Holy Joe himself ran as a peace candidate after Ned Lamont beat him in the Democratic primary and it wasn't until 30 minutes seconds after he won re-election last November that the mask slipped off and revealed the hideously ugly truth. So, expect Collins to run on a platform of peace, love and bringing the boys home. Forget that her Iraq voting record-- starting with October 10, 2002's resolutions to authorize the use of force, is virtually dictated by Dick Cheney. There wasn't a single substantive vote involving the Iraq war or occupation where she and Cheney differed; a real independent voice.

But it's not going to be easy for any of the faux-moderate GOP incumbents. Not one of the Republican faux-moderates who have to face the voters in 2008 has a leg to stand on in terms of easily accessible voting records when they have to make the case about how "independent" they've been. But they'll try. Even the most bloodthirsty, reactionary, war-mongering Democrat (Ben Nelson) has been 4 or 5 times more independent than any of the Republicans up for re-evaluation by the voters. There are no words that could better describe the voting records of Collins, Coleman, Hagel, Smith, Warner, or Sununu than "rubber stamp."

But of all the Republican rubber stamps up for re-election in 2008, only one-- New Mexico's Pete Domenici-- scores a zero on the Iraq voting record scale. A zero means he couldn't even pull away from Bush and Cheney on minor, non-substantive issues, like humanitarian aid or gentle suggestions to think carefully about policies. Nope, "Sneaky Pete" was absent for only one vote out of the 31 on Iraq and he was wrong every single time. He could have just given Cheney his proxy for the past 5 years and said, "Dick, I'm shopping for new pajamas; can you cast my vote for me?"

Today Heath Haussamen, one of New Mexico's top political pundits takes a look at Domenici's sudden and thoroughly unconvincing "change of heart." All of a sudden, with just over a year before his constituents have to decide if they want to rehire the senile and doddering old war-monger, Sneaky Pete says he supports a redeployment of American troops out of Iraq, something he has consistently opposed.

The GOP senator from New Mexico announced today that he has decided to cosponsor legislation that would call for the implementation of many of the Iraq Study Group recommendations. The move represents a major shift for Domenici, who up until now has supported President Bush in backing a controversial troop surge and opposing a timetable for withdrawal.

“I am calling for a new strategy that will move our troops out of combat operations,” Domenici said. “This should result in a significant reduction in combat missions for U.S. troops and place more of a burden where it belongs – on the Iraqis.”

The move is certain to upset Bush allies, but will also bolster Domenici’s re-election bid.

Domenici said he changed his mind over the course of the last two weeks as it became clear that the Iraqi government is not meeting benchmarks that were to accompany the American troop surge. In addition, he spoke recently with the parents of fallen soldiers who urged a policy shift.

Domenici said he continues to support American troops, and his shift doesn’t mean he believes they have failed. But, considering that American troops are suffering and dying, Domenici said he is “unwilling to continue our current strategy” when Iraqis fail “to even make modest progress.”

...Domenici said he is “not going to say” the war was a mistake, but said it “didn’t go the way it was planned.”

“It didn’t work in its current role,” he said, adding that it’s not too late to try to bring positive change out of the situation. He’s now trying to make that happen.

“I’m joining with a group of senators that have good ideas,” he said.

With Domenici at his lowest approval ratings in the history of the SUSA poll-- 51%, a figure that presaged defeat for every incumbent that low last year-- he expects New Mexico voters to forget all that has happened until now and buy into his new stance. The only real hope Domenici, who is also in trouble with some voters for conspiring with Rove to oust U.S. Attorney David Iglesias, has to retain his seat is if the Democrats don't field a strong candidate against him. And, so far, they haven't.


UPDATE: IS IT ALL HOT AIR AND ELECTION STRATEGY?

Speaker Pelosi asked a good question today after Sneaky Pete's statement: Will Senator Domenici and other Republicans vote for change of course in Iraq? Democratic leaders like Pelosi and Reid, seeking that change of course, haven't had much success in translating Republican rhetoric into much needed votes to stop Bush and Cheney.

Another senior Republican senator has broken with the failed Iraq policy of President Bush. Senator Domenici’s March 2008 timetable is consistent with the legislation Democrats have proposed as recently as June 29 to redeploy our troops and reflects the recommendations of the bipartisan Iraq Study Group. Yet President Bush and most of his party in the House and Senate remain firmly committed to a policy that has failed and a war without end.

Senator Warner’s benchmarks, Senator Lugar’s declaration, and the realization by Senators Domenici and Voinovich that a change is needed in Iraq demonstrate bipartisan support for an end to the war. Now the question is whether they will join in a bipartisan way in voting to change course in Iraq and to bring our troops home? For those in Congress who have yet to speak out, the question is: how long until you respect the wishes of the American people to end this war?

Thanks to Karl or Monica or Kyle or Idiot Al or whoever, a star of sorts is born. Ladies and gents, we bring you fired U.S. Attorney David Iglesias!

"Want to get to the bottom of this? Get Rove and company in to testify under oath."
--former U.S. Attorney David Iglesias, today on washingtonpost.com

This afternoon washingtonpost.com celebrated Monica Goodling Testimony Day by having an online chat with one of her most celebrated victims, former New Mexico U.S. Attorney David Iglesias.


DI took advantage of numerous opportunities to express his support for most of his fellow U.S. attorneys and to repeat his view that a number of his fired colleagues shouldn't have been fired, noting in particular that a number of them--himself included--had ongoing investigations interrupted. Here's a question about a U.S. attorney who might have been fired:

Cheyenne, Wyo.: It was reported today that Wyoming's U.S. Attorney, Matt Mead, was on one of the first lists for consideration. This was a surprise to many of us and is hard to figure out. Have you learned what the White House originally sought to gain by carrying out these mass terminations? What political benefit did they think they would accrue by firing many of their own appointees?

IGLESIAS: Cheyenne: Matt Mead is a standup guy, and I enjoyed serving with him. What political gain could be served by firing appointees who were doing a good job? None. It was a terrible miscalculation.

DI, like the rest of us, seems focused on the mysterious provenance of The List. It has to have come from somewhere, and the possibilities aren't exactly endless.

Boston: I believe we have heard the AG and now Monica Goodling state that they did not know how the list of attorneys to be fired was developed, yet they both stated that the White House was not involved. Does this seem like a strange statement? If they do not know about the development of the list, how do they know the White House was not involved?

IGLESIAS: Boston: The list did not appear magically. Someone compiled it, and if DoJ didn't do it, then the White House did.

A number of questioners had watched or were watching Monica's House Judiciary Committee testimony.

Washington: I am half-listening to the hearing today, and get the sense we will be no closer to the bottom of this issue. What do you think it will take to finally answer all the questions pertaining to the DOJ?

IGLESIAS: Washington: Monica has dropped the dime on [recently resigned Deputy Attorney General Paul] McNulty, so that's one thing I've learned. Want to get to the bottom of this? Get Rove and company in to testify under oath. [Later Iglesias referred again to Monica's testimony that McNulty had been "appropriately briefed by Goodling."]

Many participants had questions or comments about Sen. Pete Domenici's and Rep. Heather Wilson's clearly inappropriate inquiries to DI about voter-fraud indictments, which he has previously acknowledged he should have reported immediately. (He pointed out today that his Arizona colleague Paul Charlton did, and it didn't accomplish anything, including saving Charlton's job.) When a questioner asked what the Senate should do about Senator Domenici's conduct, DI noted simply, "The Senate Ethics Committee has begun a preliminary inquiry."

One questioner elicited this tribute to the law of unintended consequences:

Washington: Has your view of the GOP changed in light of your treatment of late? Have employment prospects improved with this publicity?

IGLESIAS: Washington: I'm a disaffected Republican. My party doesn't practice what it preaches as to compassion. That being said, this scandal has resulted in unimaginable employment possibilites. Good can really come from bad.

My favorite question, I think, came from a participant in Chicago, who asked DI to forget "the underlying subject of this matter" and offer a veteran prosecutor's evaluation of the constantly shifting testimony of Attorney General Idiot Al "The Torture Guy" Gonzales.

IGLESIAS: Chicago: Any witness that keeps changing his story as to basic facts is an unreliable witness. You have to decide if you want to put this person on the stand due to credibility issues. You have to have a frank discussion with them before they testify because you know you can't put a witness on the stand that you believe may be lying.

Spoken like a canny veteran prosecutor!

A Hispanic questioner from Princeton, pronouncing himself "very dissapointed and extremely disillusioned" with Idiot Al, wondered about the effect of this scandal "on other aspiring Hispanics in the future":

IGLESIAS: Princeton: I hope this scandal does not have a chilling effect on other Hispanics/Latinos seeking public office.

What DI didn't have to say is that, ironically, he has wound up giving Hispanic-Americans a healthy jolt of the ethnic pride that was supposed to come from the appointment of "The Torture Guy" as attorney general.

It was left to a questioner from Las Cruces, in DI's home state, to wonder whether Sen. Arlen Specter will ever learn how to pronounce Iglesias's name.

IGLESIAS: Las Cruces: I sure hope so. It's not any harder than "Specter."

WHICH REPUBLICANS ARE MOST LIKELY TO RETIRE NEXT YEAR RATHER THAN FACE IGNOMINIOUS DEFEAT AT THE POLLS?

Obviously Allard doesn't count since he already announced he won't run again, in effect ceding a Republican seat in Colorado to Democrat Mark Udall. The most often mentioned are Elizabeth Dole (R-NC), John Warner (R-VA), Pete "Sneaky Pete" Domenici (R-NM), Thad Cochran (R-MS), Ted Stevens (R-AK), and Larry Craig (R-ID).

My guess is that Cochran, though not eager to spend the rest of his professional life in the minority and feeling his 70 years, is one of the least likely of this batch to retire. He says he hasn't decided yet but will by December. In the unlikely event that he does retire, expect a fierce battle between extreme hard right lunatic Chip Pickering and populist Democrat Mike Moore, a former Mississippi Attorney General. I am also doubtful that Stevens will retire, although he's suffering from advanced and debilitating dementia and threatens to retire every time someone says the bridge to nowhere might never be built-- or in any way disagrees with him. Running at 85 years old, though is quite daunting. Recent exertions in fundraising make me think Dole wants to go out fighting. And rumors about far right extremists Cornyn and Inhofe considering retirement are too good to be true.

Now the ones who probably are retiring: Larry Craig (outed from his closet), Pete "Sneaky Pete" Domenici (senile and criminal), and John Warner (old and depressed). Warner’s first-quarter fundraising sum of $500 is setting off yet another round of speculation that the aging senator will retire, leaving an open seat in 2008. Both Macacawitz and Rep. Tom Davis are salivating at the prospect of replacing him, although if he retires, former Democratic governor Mark Warner will run and win the seat.

Domenici is falling apart physically and mentally and has been seen walking around the Senate halls in his underwear and pjs. He's also grown nasty, even vicious as his mental capacities have diminished. At 75, he doesn't want to give up his seat but his recent exposure as one of the villains in the firings of the U.S. Attorneys-- along with his protege, Rep. Heather Wilson-- he could well be defeated even if he runs again. He has been raising a real campaign warchest, nearly $400,000, most of it in corporate bribes from the Big Business interests he consistently serves.


UPDATE: THE FIX IS IN

Not really. But Chris Cillizza at The Fix has his early predictions up about which senate seats are most vulnerable next year. He thinks the 3 most likely states to switch parties are Colorado (where Allard is retiring), New Hampshire (where Sununu's extreme right voting record and rubber stamp demeanor are hopelessly out of step with the moderate and independent-- and increasingly blue-- state), and Minnesota (where Coleman has the same problem as Sununu).


UPDATE: LARRY CRAIG DIDN'T FILE???

The only Republican incumbent who didn't provide the FEC with a quarterly report was... Larry Craig. There can only be two answers to why: he was either too busy at Bergdorf's picking out a new wardrobe for his post-Senate career or... he forgot.

NY TIMES PRE-OBITUARY FOR PETE "SNEAKY PETE" DOMENICI

Today's NY Times romanticizes the significance of a grubby and increasingly senile New Mexico political hack recently caught trying to bully U.S. Attorney David Iglesias, pulling strings to get him fired, and then blatantly lying about the whole sordid episode. The hack is Senator Pete "Sneaky Pete" Domenici, a 75 year old relic who, until his recent run-in with the law, was best known for blithely walking down the halls of Congress in his underwear. Oh, and for his extreme right wing voting record, one of the absolute worst in the U.S. Senate, crazier than Ted Stevens' but not quite as fringe as John Sununu's.

Carl Hulse's story is apologetic, maudlin and sappy and instead of painting "Sneaky Pete" as the criminal he is, attempts to earn him some cheap sympathy. To me it looks extremely like the Insiders circling the wagons for one of their own. The guy should spend the rest of his miserable life in a prison cell, not basking in his faded glory misrepresenting the people of New Mexico.

DOES ANYONE KNOW WHY DAVID IGLESIAS WAS FIRED? BUSH WON'T ALLOW ROVE TO TESIFY UNDER OATH. SO LET'S HEAR WHAT IGLESIAS SAYS

David Iglesias is a straight arrow attorney, the United States Naval Reserve commander whose character was portrayed by Tom Cruise in the film A Few Good Men. Until recently he was one of the GOP's best and brightest hopes for making political headway in the fast-growing Mexican-American community in the southwest. Bush appointed him to be U.S. Attorney for New Mexico in 2001. His official performance review was exemplary. And then he was fired-- and smeared. What went wrong?

Today's New York Times has an OpEd that may help us understand what happened. It's entitled Why I Was Fired and it was written by David Iglesias.

WITH this week’s release of more than 3,000 Justice Department e-mail messages about the dismissal of eight federal prosecutors, it seems clear that politics played a role in the ousters.

Of course, as one of the eight, I’ve felt this way for some time. But now that the record is out there in black and white for the rest of the country to see, the argument that we were fired for "performance related" reasons (in the words of Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty) is starting to look more than a little wobbly.

United States attorneys have a long history of being insulated from politics. Although we receive our appointments through the political process (I am a Republican who was recommended by Senator Pete Domenici), we are expected to be apolitical once we are in office. I will never forget John Ashcroft, then the attorney general, telling me during the summer of 2001 that politics should play no role during my tenure. I took that message to heart. Little did I know that I could be fired for not being political.

Politics entered my life with two phone calls that I received last fall, just before the November election. One came from Representative Heather Wilson and the other from Senator Domenici, both Republicans from my state, New Mexico.

Ms. Wilson asked me about sealed indictments pertaining to a politically charged corruption case widely reported in the news media involving local Democrats. Her question instantly put me on guard. Prosecutors may not legally talk about indictments, so I was evasive. Shortly after speaking to Ms. Wilson, I received a call from Senator Domenici at my home. The senator wanted to know whether I was going to file corruption charges-- the cases Ms. Wilson had been asking about-- before November. When I told him that I didn’t think so, he said, "I am very sorry to hear that," and the line went dead.

A few weeks after those phone calls, my name was added to a list of United States attorneys who would be asked to resign-- even though I had excellent office evaluations, the biggest political corruption prosecutions in New Mexico history, a record number of overall prosecutions and a 95 percent conviction rate. (In one of the documents released this week, I was deemed a "diverse up and comer" in 2004. Two years later I was asked to resign with no reasons given.)

When some of my fired colleagues-- Daniel Bogden of Las Vegas; Paul Charlton of Phoenix; H. E. Cummins III of Little Rock, Ark.; Carol Lam of San Diego; and John McKay of Seattle-- and I testified before Congress on March 6, a disturbing pattern began to emerge. Not only had we not been insulated from politics, we had apparently been singled out for political reasons. (Among the Justice Department’s released documents is one describing the office of Senator Domenici as being "happy as a clam" that I was fired.)

As this story has unfolded these last few weeks, much has been made of my decision to not prosecute alleged voter fraud in New Mexico. Without the benefit of reviewing evidence gleaned from F.B.I. investigative reports, party officials in my state have said that I should have begun a prosecution. What the critics, who don’t have any experience as prosecutors, have asserted is reprehensible-- namely that I should have proceeded without having proof beyond a reasonable doubt. The public has a right to believe that prosecution decisions are made on legal, not political, grounds.

What’s more, their narrative has largely ignored that I was one of just two United States attorneys in the country to create a voter-fraud task force in 2004. Mine was bipartisan, and it included state and local law enforcement and election officials.

After reviewing more than 100 complaints of voter fraud, I felt there was one possible case that should be prosecuted federally. I worked with the F.B.I. and the Justice Department’s public integrity section. As much as I wanted to prosecute the case, I could not overcome evidentiary problems. The Justice Department and the F.B.I. did not disagree with my decision in the end not to prosecute.

Good has already come from this scandal. Yesterday, the Senate voted to overturn a 2006 provision in the Patriot Act that allows the attorney general to appoint indefinite interim United States attorneys. The attorney general’s chief of staff has resigned and been replaced by a respected career federal prosecutor, Chuck Rosenberg. The president and attorney general have admitted that "mistakes were made," and Mr. Domenici and Ms. Wilson have publicly acknowledged calling me.

President Bush addressed this scandal yesterday. I appreciate his gratitude for my service — this marks the first time I have been thanked. But only a written retraction by the Justice Department setting the record straight regarding my performance would settle the issue for me.

OK, now I understand... completely. Darkness hates Light; that easy.


UPDATE: AND IT LOOKS LIKE I'M NOT THE ONLY ONE WHO UNDERSTANDS

Things may be more genteel in the Senate and Sneaky Pete may be allowed to retire graciously instead of being held up to the public for the bucket of stinking raw sewage he's long been. But in the House, Chris Van Hollen of the DCCC is wasting no time to drive home the point to Heather Wilson's constituents what they have representing them in Congress. Go listen to the ad. It's great having someone in charge of the DCCC who knows how to fight corrupt and reactionary Republicans.

DOMENICI: NON COMPOS MENTIS?

by Karen Allen

We’ve been seeing recently a Pete Domenici that his staff members hoped would never come to light. U.S. Senator Peter Domenici (R-NM) is 74 years old. He wears a hearing aid in each ear, has bursitis in both hips, has spinal stenosis and has made trips to former Senator Bill Frist’s "clinic" in Tennessee for treatment. Apparently he is under constant medical care. To get to the senate floor from his office, he walks slowly with aides supporting him on either side. He stops frequently to brace himself against a wall or desk before he reaches his own desk on the floor of the senate. On occasion he has been spotted wearing a jacket with a large rip in it. More notoriously, he was seen last December wearing black and white plaid flannel pajamas bottoms, ambling through the Capitol halls, his outfit complimented by a wrinkled t-shirt. Some have said they’ve spotted him walking the halls in just his boxer shorts. Questioned about this, the senator, through his staff, responded, "I believe in dressing New Mexico casual."

Domenici has been in the spotlight in the last few days for his prominent role in the firing of New Mexico U.S. Attorney David C. Iglesias in January. Iglesias has testified under oath this week in congressional hearings that Domenici in October violated a fundamental ethical rule by telephoning him at his office to gain information and to interfere with a case against a New Mexico Democrat, just one month prior to the November election. Iglesias refused to discuss the pending case with him. Confronted with the rumors of what Iglesias would state in his testimony this week, Domenici at first said he couldn’t recall ever phoning Iglesias. More recently, Domenici has admitted phoning Iglesias and later contacting the Department of Justice and the White House concerning the U.S. Attorney.

Although Howie doesn't give it any credence, Domenici has stated he intends to run for re-election in the upcoming 2008 election. Perhaps he wants to strengthen his tenure in the annals of politicians with dementia.


Karen Allen comes to us as a commenter from Firedoglake.com. Expect to hear more from her. She will be our new Mean Jean Schmidt expert.


UPDATE: TOM CRUISE DAVID IGLESIAS ON FILM

DOMENICI SHOULD HAVE HIRED LAWYERS BEFORE HE TRIED INTIMIDATING THE U.S. ATTORNEY FOR NEW MEXICO

This is just my own little theory but I never expected Domenici to run for re-election next year. I have believed for a long time now that he was aiming to hand-off the seat smoothly to his protege, Rep. Heather Wilson, mostly to keep the other Republican congress member from New Mexico, reactionary extremist Steve Pearce from jumping in, probably beating Wilson and then losing the seat to a Democrat. (The theory is that the more mainstream conservative Wilson can appeal to people with a 3-digit IQ whereas Pearce's extremist allure runs out when you get beyond the people who have learned to sing Horst Wessel Lied.) Anyway, Domenici has about a quarter million dollars cash on hand, a pittance for a Senate run-- and far less than Tom Udall has on hand (over $700,000) and nothing compared to what Governor Bill Richardson would have left over from what he's out raising-- and is transferable-- for a presidential or vice-presidential campaign that is unlikely to go very far.


This dovetails nicely with how both Wilson and Domenici got on Republican federal prosecutor David Iglesias' ass about not staging a showy political trial against some Democrats in time for what was proving to be a very tough re-election battle for Wilson. (She won by 879 votes and had she lost Domenici's plan would have been mortally wounded.) When Iglesias proven to not be a team player, Domenici got tough with him, threatened him, tried to intimidate him and eventually called Gonzales and had him fired. This is absolutely a New Mexico version of Nixon's "Saturday Night Massacre" and it probably dooms Domenici's and Wilson's plans no matter what they are.


This afternoon the Washington Post reported that Domenici, finally realizing what hot water he's in, hired a top defense attorney. He hired a Republican shyster who wasn't able to do much to keep his last GOP criminal client, Randy "Duke" Cunningham, out of prison. The Senate Ethics Committee has announced it is investigating Domenici's outrageous behavior. Hiring a heavy hitter like Blalack, who has managed to keep another crooked client, Bill Frist, out of jail so far for his stock manipulations when he was Senate Majority Leader, is very expensive. Like I said above, Domenici has around $260,000 in his kitty. Rep. Jerry Lewis, another Republican crook being investigated, has already reported spending almost a million dollars and he hasn't even been indicted yet!


What makes matters even worse is that Domenici has been unable to keep his stories straight and they change every day. At first he denied everything and accused Iglesias of lying. Now he admits he called him but disputes Iglesias' recollections. (Iglesias is sharp and Domenici, aside from being nasty and vicious, is noticeably senile.)

The DSCC smells a dead pig and they're eager to pick up a seat in Democratic-leaning New Mexico. As I said a few days ago, Bill Richardson, Tom Udall, Lt. Gov Diane Denish or Albuquerque Mayor Martin Chavez could all make credible runs against Domenici now. Richardson would be heavily favored to beat him.

Somebody has to say it: When it comes to poweful pols exerting pressure, a mere phone call can convey all the intimidation of a mob contract

It was a grotesque charade back when Vice President Cheney got away with all those "visits" to the CIA to help the team there make the "right" calls on all that crappy "intelligence" he and his people wanted blessed as credible. Oh sure, the CIA issued some kind of declaration insisting that there had been no coercion, no attempt to influence its work product, which remained pure as a mountain stream.

Still, we knew even as we were hearing about those "visits" that the veep's CIA stakeout was totally without precedent, and was totally inappropriate if not actually illegal. And all it took was possession of a minimally functional brain to know that there was only one reason he was doing it. He wasn't bringing doughnuts to his poor overworked pals, the guys 'n' gals at Langley. It was muscle--pure muscle. Anyone who thinks there is the tiniest possibility that this is less than 100 percent absolutely certain is too stupid to live and should be institutionalized pronto.

Now, when a U.S. attorney gets a call from a powerful congressman of his/her own party and home state or worse still from a U.S. senator--a personal call, mind you, not a staff inquiry, which goodness knows can be intimidating enough--"asking" for information about the status of an investigation, a question that both the U.S. attorney and the powerful pol know is forbidden, the pol doesn't have to make open threats to deliver a message.

Let's say you're a U.S. attorney in Washington State, for example, and you get a call from someone who's not only a local U.S. representative but the Official Hand-Picked Stooge (having been personally chosen to jam up the House We Got No Ethics Committee) of probably the second most powerful man in the other Washington. He doesn't have to make specific reference to the continued structural integrity of your kneecaps to (as we said) deliver a message.

Ditto in New Mexico. Senator Pete can tell us that all he did was ask the merest wisp of a question. And Representative Heather . . . well, it's a little hard to put an innocent spin on it when she thinks it helps her case to claim that she was offering the guy a chance to exonerate himself of this tidal wave of accusations of disloyalty.

Now imagine that you're the guy, the U.S. attorney--the person on whose independence and professionalism rests the application of federal law in your district--sweating on the other end of these phone calls. The fact that you occupy a position like U.S. attorney means you're no political neophyte. You didn't just fall off the turnip truck; you understand that the "subtext" of this conversation is: "I have a pipeline to people who when they're finished with you you'll wish that ALL that happened to you was you got shitcanned."

I mean, we all know this, don't we? Isn't it about time that somebody said it?

WILL HEATHER WILSON, THE LATEST BUSH REGIME CRIMINAL OPERATOR EXPOSED, RESIGN TODAY? OR IS SHE WAITING TO SEE IF SHE CAN SLITHER OUT OF THIS ONE?

Hillary Clinton once referred to the same people who are behind the Bush Regime-- pre-Bush-- as "a vast right-wing conspiracy." A better and more precise phrase would be to point out that they are also a vast criminal enterprise. While Libby was being found guilty on 4 out of 5 counts of purgery, obstruction of justice, and making false statements to the FBI, the Senate Judiciary Committee began hearings into why the Bush Regime fired 8 Federal Prosecutors without cause-- 8 Republican prosecutors, I might add, all of whom had been doing a great job pursuing criminals.

Former U.S. Attorney David Iglesias told the Senate Judiciary Committee today that Rep. Heather Wilson (R-N.M.) called him on Oct. 16 -- while she was locked in a tight battle for re-election -- to say she had heard that his ongoing criminal investigation into local Albuquerque Democrats may have produced indictments that Iglesias was sitting on.

"What can you tell me about sealed indictments?" Wilson asked, according to Iglesias' sworn testimony before the committee today.

Iglesias said "red flags" immediately went up in his mind about the conversation because it was unethical for him to talk about an ongoing criminal investigation, particularly on matters as sensitive as the timing of indictments.

Iglesias testified that he was "evasive and unresponsive" and Wilson and her mentor, U.S. Senator Pete Domenici-- after he also called and asked pointedly if Iglesias would file charges before Wilson's election-- went crying to Alberto Gonzales, who then fired Iglesias, previous a GOP hero and role model. Domenici slammed the phone down on Igelsias when he didn't get the answers he wanted-- typical bully tactics from a powerful, out-of-control senator towards a public servant-- and Iglesias was freaked out. "I felt sick afterward... I felt leaned on, I felt pressured to get these matters moving," Iglesias testified this morning.

Five other fired prosecutors will be testifying today. This is very brave of them since they have been threatened, Nazi-style, by Gonzales' thugs. "Bud Cummins, who was dismissed from his position as U.S. Attorney for Arkansas, said he had been threatened with retaliation by the Bush administration if he testified before Congress voluntarily. Cummins provided the committees with an e-mail he sent the five other prosecutors appearing with him today which detailed a tense conversation the former Arkansas federal prosecutor had with a senior Justice Department official regarding their public comments about the firings."

Hard to imagine this is the United States of America, isn't it? But under this illegitimate president who stole the presidency twice and has operated our government as though it were a criminal gang, this is just more of the same. If Democrats and any Republicans who are not complicit with this crime empire do not take real action, they will be judged by history as equally guilty. And this is about more than just making political points. This goes to the heart and soul of our threatened democracy.

Democrats, including Sen. Charles Schumer (NY) and Rep. Linda Sanchez (Calif.), who are leading today's hearings, have raised questions about whether the firings were politically motivated ousters designed to quell some of the investigations the prosecutors were running. Four of the eight led probes of important Republicans, while Iglesias was involved in the lengthy probe of Democrats and had drawn fire from local Republicans who expected a quicker indictments... In a carefully worded statement yesterday, the Senate Ethics Committee revealed that a preliminary inquiry was underway with regard to Domenici's role in speaking to Iglesias about an active criminal investigation. The House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, as the ethics panel is formally known, has not commented on the Wilson allegations.

The Congressional Ethics Committees almost never take any serious action against their comfy little old boys network so I have little expectations that Domenici or Wilson will suffer at their hands. But both will be up for election next year and both should face very stiff opposition. I expect Governor Bill Richardson to consider the New Mexico senate seat just thrown away by Domenici unless Hillary picks him to be her running mate (instead of Mark Warner). The money he's racing now for his "presidential" race can be transfered to a Senate race. Tom Udall (NM-03) might also consider switching from the House to the Senate (along with his Colorado brother) and he's got over $700,000 left over from his recent House re-election. Other possiblities to put the senile, doddering, pissed-off Domenici out of his misery are Lt. Governor Diane Denish and Albuquerque Mayor Martin Chavez.


UPDATE; OH... AND CORRUPT OLD DOC HASTINGS LOOKS LIKE HE WAS GUILTY IN THIS TOO, NO SURPRISE THERE

Doc Hastings (R-WA) was installed by Tom DeLay as chairman of the ethics committee for one reason and one reason only: he is a crook with absolutely no ethics and was willing to whitewash DeLay's criminal activities where other Republicans with more dignity and more respect for America wouldn't. So it should come as no surprise to anyone that he is also connected to the deepening scandal surrounding the firing of 8 Federal Prosecutors. The U.S. Attorney for Washington State testified this morning in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee that Hastings pressured him to interfere in Washington's gubernatorial election results. When McKay told him the call was "improper," Hasting's chef of staff slammed down the phone. Hastings is believed responsible for getting McKay fired by Gonzales. Think Progress has the video clip. [UPDATE: More Hastings criminal behavior.]

Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy compared the firings to the Watergate dismissals. "Not since the Saturday Night Massacre, when President Nixon forced the firing of the Watergate prosecutor Archibald Cox, have we witnessed anything like this," he said.

WILL INVESTIGATIONS LEAD TO IMPEACHMENT OF GONZALES? OR WILL HE RESIGN INSTEAD?

OK, so we know the Bush Regime was playing fast and loose with the Justice system by forcing out 8 federal prosecutors who were recalcitrant about politicizing their positions. In San Diego they axed Carol Lam because they were pissed off she exposed Bush's pal Randy "Duke" Cunningham and feared her pursuit of justice was leading to congressmen Jerry Lewis, Duncan Hunter, John Doolittle and to Bush himself, who sold a presidential pardon to crooked Republican millionaire Thomas Kontogiannis through Cunningham for $400,000. Now it turns out New Mexico Congresswoman Heather Wilson and her patron Senator Pete Domenici pressured the prosecutor there to speed up an investigation that they felt would help her electorally if it turned out the way they wanted it to turn it. When he refused to play ball, they demanded that Gonzales fire him, which he did.

Already there is a shocking new revelation in this unseemly matter. Tom DiBiagio, "the former federal prosecutor in Maryland said Monday that he was forced out in early 2005 because of political pressure stemming from public corruption investigations involving associates of the state’s governor, a Republican. 'There was direct pressure not to pursue these investigations,' said the former prosecutor, Thomas M. DiBiagio. 'The practical impact was to intimidate my office and shut down the investigations.'"


Today Congressional hearings begin about this outrageous perversion of justice. Although Gonzales claimed he had better things to do with his time, his ass is being hauled before the Senate and House investigating committees (where he will tell them this is all a p.r. problem that didn't go smoothly). It looks like the Regime has decided on their scapegoat in all this-- Michael Battle, who called all 7 prosecutors and told them they were fired. The Bush Regime hopes to save Gonzales from impeachment by tossing Battle overboard. Just as hearings begin in the Senate and House, they announced Battle-- more a messenger than an executioner in this matter-- is leaving the Justice Department.

Today's New York Times points to the relationship between investigations into the outrageous (and impeachable) way the Bush Regime has treated our wounded military men and women and investigations into the way they have perverted justice: oversight.

Democratic leaders say it is the beginning of a fundamentally different power relationship between Congress and the Bush administration. Representative Rahm Emanuel, the Illinois Democrat who is chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, said of the administration: “In the past, they would stonewall this through a news cycle and know they could ride it out. Now they know there's a Congress of another party, with the power of subpoenas, the power to hold hearings, the power to ask questions.”

Gonzales and the Bush Regime, of course, dispute all charges against them. Everyone else is wrong; all truth is with them. (Keep in mind that all of these ousted prosecutors are Republicans and all were political appointees of the Bush Regime and all just wanted to pursue crime wherever it led, regardless of politics.) Gonzales is now threatening the fired prosecutors, telling them that if they testify against the Regime, the Regime will come after them. Is this America or is this Nazi Germany?

A high-ranking Justice Department official [Michael Elston] told one of the U.S. attorneys fired by the Bush administration that if any of them continued to criticize the administration for their ousters, previously undisclosed details about the reasons they were fired might be released, two of the ousted prosecutors told McClatchy Newspapers.

Our Justice Department is being run by a pack of corrupt gangsters. Emanuel was bragging about the changing relationship between the Bush Regime and Congress. Let's see him call for Gonzales' impeachment.









BYE-BYE, PETEY 'N' HEATHER!
(AND MAYBE NEXT UP: "SEE YA, TORTURE GUY!"?)

Aww, poor Petey D! Poor Heather W! All they did was make those totally harmless little phone calls--oh, and maybe lie about them just a little. And now people, including fellow Republicans in their own state of New Mexico, are talking about them as if they're electoral toast. Aww!

Well, good riddance! Readers may recall that I've been hot about this business of blatantly politicizing U.S. attorneys' tenure since the dawn of the firing scandal. Of course everything in the execuive branch is political, including the U.S. attorneys--but there are limits. Of course in the Bush regime "limits" are what you trample over on your way to pillaging and plundering your next target. But really, there are limits, and if I wore a hat, I'd take it off to the congressional Democrats who've stayed the course pursuing this flagrantly unacceptable outrage. By rights, it should be sufficient grounds for the impeachment and removal of Chimpy the Prez. In reality, I'm stunned that a matter of such real but obscure substance--the fairness and effectiveness of the federal justice system rests on the trustworthiness of all those U.S. attorneys, political appointeees all but still some of our most crucial public servants--has gotten this much attention.

Already we're at the stage of hurling flunkies off the hard-chugging Chimpy Scapegoat Express. This Michael Battle creep probably thought he was some hot stuff 'cause the big boys let him be the button man who "took out" all those insufficiently loyal losers they'd marked for termination. Now he knows he's just the pathetic stooge of a bunch of grander stooges. Next up on the "hit" parade, let us hope: AG "Idiot Al" ("The Torture Guy") Gonzales--and after Idiot Al, well, maybe this housecleaning impulse will take hold.--Ken

SURPRISE! SURPRISE! HEATHER WILSON COMES OUT FROM UNDER HER ROCK... WITH A GUILTY PLEA

After skulking around and ducking the media for almost a week, rubber stamp Republican congresswoman Heather Wilson pops up and does a Pete Domenici me-too semi-guilty plea. Today's Washington Post is hot on the trail of the two crooked pols: "Rep. Heather A. Wilson (R-N.M.) acknowledged yesterday that she contacted a federal prosecutor to complain about the pace of his public corruption investigations, as the Senate ethics committee signaled that it had opened a preliminary inquiry into a similar communication by her state's senior senator, Pete V. Domenici (R)."

Like Domenici, her mentor who is planning on leaving her his senate seat, she still refuses to admit she pressured the now fired U.S. Attorney David Iglesias to speed up an investigation to help her re-election bid. She actually says she only got involved because her constituents were clamoring to know what was taking so long. This woman should be forced to take an oath and say this load of crap on a witness stand. In any case, I guess we'll see about that today when Iglesias testifies before Congress, along with several other illegally fired U.S. Attorney's who didn't fit in with the Bush Regime concepts of an authoritarian, politicized and tyrannical Justice Department.

The furor over Domenici and Wilson has rapidly become the focus of the dispute over the firings of eight U.S. attorneys and a change in law that allows Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales to appoint interim prosecutors for an indefinite period of time. The Justice Department has said that seven of the prosecutors were dismissed for failing to follow Bush administration policy on multiple issues, and acknowledged that one was sacked to make way for an ally of White House political adviser Karl Rove.

But most of the prosecutors have cited positive job reviews, and Democrats have alleged that there were political motivations behind the firings.

Yesterday CREW filed an ethics complaint against Domenici. They will probably do likewise against Wilson. (UPDATE: They did.) Domenici admitted he had lied over the weekend, although he's trying to make it sound like it wasn't exactly a lie... you know, another Republican straight-talker like his pal McCain.

Domenici is likely to attract a more substantial opponent next year, now that his name is mud. According to yesterday's Albuquerque Tribune, ex-Governor Dave Cargo, currently a member of the Republican Central Committee said that "This has the  potential to really cripple the (New Mexico) Republican Party. And the way (Rep. Heather (Wilson) and Pete are handling it, by essentially taking the Fifth, isn't helping them." Cargo complained that the GOP was salivating over the prospect of convicting some Democrats over something and suddenly "here are the Republican basically saying 'Ready, aim, form a circle and fire.' They're just killing each other.

As Iglesias said he feared all along, Cargo confirmed that his political future in New Mexico Republican politics is dead-- and that he may have even more to fear. "This thing could still cut a lot of ways, and I'd expect there's going to be a lot of scrutiny of his record. Still, here's this Hispanic prosecutor that you hauled all over the country and built up into a kind of poster child, and now here's your poster child and you're using him for target practice."

Sounds like Iglesias should come over from the Dark Side and join the Democrats. Wouldn't it be ironic if he ran for Wilson's seat!