What Are You Watching This Sunday Night?

Might we make a suggestion?

I am advised by CBS News that their long-awaited feature dealing with the trial of former Alabama Governor Don E. Siegelman will air on the next 60 Minutes program, on Sunday, February 24.

This story is related to the politicization of the Justice Department--remember those days, when Gonzales ran things and no one knew what was really going on? What with all of those missing E-mails, and with Mukasey making sure no one holds the Justice Department accountable, we'll probably never know. People who have previewed or seen transcripts say that the 60 Minutes piece is going to wow some people.

Here's why the Don Siegelman case is so important:

BIRMINGHAM, Ala., May 31 — Alabama has a tradition of savage political warfare, but Don E. Siegelman’s fight to stay out of prison is reverberating all the way back to Washington.

Federal prosecutors here are seeking 30 years in prison for Mr. Siegelman, who was the Democratic governor of Alabama from 1999 to 2003 and was convicted last year of accepting $500,000 in bribes from the chairman of the HealthSouth Corporation.

Mr. Siegelman, who is scheduled for sentencing on June 26, says he was singled out by prosecutors with close personal ties to Alabama Republican leaders and to the Bush White House.

Mr. Siegelman’s defenders have tied his plight to the uproar in Washington over the Bush administration’s decision to dismiss eight United States attorneys, but they have produced no firm evidence of political interference.

Now they have an affidavit from a lawyer who says she heard a top Republican operative in Alabama boast in 2002 that the United States attorneys in Alabama would “take care” of Mr. Siegelman. The operative, William Canary, is married to the United States attorney in Montgomery, Leura G. Canary. Mr. Canary, who heads the Business Council of Alabama, was an informal adviser to Bob Riley, a Republican, who defeated Mr. Siegelman in 2002.

Earlier, Mr. Canary worked in the White House under President Bush’s father and has close ties to Karl Rove, Mr. Bush’s top political strategist.

In the affidavit, the lawyer, Jill Simpson, said Mr. Canary’s remark was made in a conference call with her and Rob Riley, Governor Riley’s son and campaign manager.

Ms. Simpson said Mr. Canary assured the younger Mr. Riley that “his girls would take care of” Mr. Siegelman before he had a chance to run for the governor’s seat in 2006 and identified “his girls” as Leura Canary and Alice Martin, the United States attorney in Birmingham.

Neither Mr. Canary nor Mr. Riley responded to requests for comment about Ms. Simpson’s affidavit.

In 2003, Ms. Canary recused herself from the investigation, after Mr. Siegelman’s lawyer accused her of conflicts of interest. She turned the case over to Louis Franklin, a career prosecutor who had served under Republicans and Democrats.

After a nine-week trial last year, a jury acquitted Mr. Siegelman on 25 counts and convicted him on 7, almost all tied to accepting money from Richard Scrushy, the former chairman of HealthSouth. Mr. Siegelman was not convicted of pocketing any money himself. Rather, a jury convicted him of persuading Mr. Scrushy to pay $500,000 to retire the debt of a political group that had campaigned to win voter approval for a state lottery.

Yes. That Scrushy:

Scrushy guilty of bribery in case involving ex-governor
Updated 6/30/2006

By Greg Farrell, USA TODAY
Richard Scrushy, the charismatic former chief executive of HealthSouth who was acquitted last year of masterminding a $2.7 billion fraud, was found guilty of bribery and related charges by an Alabama jury Thursday.

Scrushy, the only CEO to triumph over the Justice Department in the government's recent campaign against corporate fraud, was convicted of funneling $500,000 to former Alabama governor Don Siegelman in exchange for a seat on the state hospital regulatory board.

The jury convicted Siegelman and Scrushy of six charges of bribery, conspiracy and mail fraud. Siegelman was also convicted of obstructing justice. The two men face as much as 30 years in prison each. Both vowed to appeal.

Scrushy's conviction is yet another reversal of fortune for a man who's been riding a legal roller coaster for three years. Throughout the 1990s, Scrushy was a highly respected CEO who helped HealthSouth grow from a regional chain of hospitals into a Fortune 500 company.

So what does it all mean? Tune in and find out. It should be a hell of a show.

Jose Rodriguez brings the push-back

The undoing of the criminal conspiracy that has been attempting to pass itself off as a presidency may face it's undoing because it chose the wrong guy to try to make a patsy of.

Jose Rodriguez is showing no signs of going gently into that dark night. Quite the opposite, in fact - he has not only lawyered up, he has hired Robert Bennett. Bennett is the guy you hire when you are not just going to stand your ground, but you intend to capture the other guys flag...

Just. To. Make. Your. Point.

Rodriguez is well known in the intelligence community as one of the most cautious men on the face of the earth. People who know him all state, without even an inkling of reservation, that the thought of Jose Rodriguez making a unilateral decision to destroy those tapes is simply unthinkable. It is something he would never do. Period. Not without direct orders from someone of a sufficiently higher pay grade.

This is going to reach deep into the White House. We already know that four administration attorneys were involved in discussions about what to do with the videotape evidence. Not only were White House attorneys involved, but the evidence was withheld from the 9/11 Commission, and destroyed after the Commission delivered their findings.

The House Intelligence Committee has summoned Rodriguez to appear on January 16, and Chairman Sylvestre Reyes has indicated he isn't looking for scapegoats, he is looking for the truth - and that is an indication that Reyes might offer Rodriguez the immunity he is obviously angling for in exchange for his testimony.

Larry Johnson thinks it's going to go high up the chain, too. “The CIA and Jose Rodriguez look bad, but he’s probably the least culpable person in the process. He didn’t wake up one day and decide, ‘I’m going to destroy these tapes.’ He checked with a lot of people and eventually he is going to get his say. He has been starting to get his story out and was smart to get Bennett.”

“It looks increasingly as though the decision was made by the White House,” said Johnson. He believes it is “highly likely” that Bush saw one of the videos, as he was interested in Zubaydah’s case and received frequent updates on his interrogation from George Tenet, the CIA director at the time.

It has emerged that the CIA did preserve two videotapes and an audiotape of detainee interrogations conducted by a foreign government, which may have been relevant to the trial of Zacarias Moussaoui, the Al-Qaeda conspirator.

The CIA told a federal judge in 2003 that no such recordings existed but has now retracted that testimony. One of the tapes could show the interrogation of Ramzi Binalshibh, a September 11 conspirator, who was allegedly handed to Jordan for questioning.

Seven years of Machiavellian machinations, hubris and arrogance driving policy, disdain for anyone deigning to question the administration, and a pervasive attitude of "it isn't treason if the president is the traitor" passed it's sell-by date a long freakin' time ago. It has even led them to try to make Jose Rodriguez their fall guy.

But Rodriguez is nobody's dupe, and too many people know him too well. Immunize him, Mr. Reyes, and let him tell all.

I imagine that prospect has a whole lot of nutsacks shriveling all over the West Wing. And that thought pleases me immensely.

Was it Arrogance? Was it Hubris? Whatever it was, somebody needs to GO TO JAIL!!!

Do not pass Go. Do not collect $200. Go directly to jail.

The CIA withheld evidence from the 9/11 Commission, and then destroyed it.

In interviews this week, the two chairmen of the commission, Lee H. Hamilton and Thomas H. Kean, said their reading of the report had convinced them that the agency had made a conscious decision to impede the Sept. 11 commission’s inquiry.

Mr. Kean said the panel would provide the memorandum to the federal prosecutors and congressional investigators who are trying to determine whether the destruction of the tapes or withholding them from the courts and the commission was improper.

A C.I.A. spokesman said that the agency had been prepared to give the Sept. 11 commission the interrogation videotapes, but that commission staff members never specifically asked for interrogation videos.

The review by Mr. Zelikow does not assert that the commission specifically asked for videotapes, but it quotes from formal requests by the commission to the C.I.A. that sought “documents,” “reports” and “information” related to the interrogations.

Mr. Kean, a Republican and a former governor of New Jersey, said of the agency’s decision not to disclose the existence of the videotapes, “I don’t know whether that’s illegal or not, but it’s certainly wrong.” Mr. Hamilton, a former Democratic congressman from Indiana, said that the C.I.A. “clearly obstructed” the commission’s investigation.

What? The? Fuck???

I'm not the only one mad as hell about the obstruction of justice - Kean and Hamilton - whose authority to investigate the events of September 11 was granted by both the White House and Congress - are pissed off, too.

And so is Pat Leahy.

On Friday, the Senate Judiciary Committee sent a letter to AG Mukasey and DNI McConnell, specifically instructing them to "preserve and produce to the committee all remaining video and audio recordings of 'enhanced interrogations' of detainees in American custody." The letter was signed by Chairman Leahy and Ranking Member Specter, and requested an extensive search of the White House, CIA facilities and other intelligence agencies to determine whether or not other recordings exist that might show interrogation techniques “including but not limited to waterboarding.”

Officials speaking for the government have steadfastly maintained that the evidence destroyed in 2005 were the only recordings made by employees of the CIA, but the lie was put to this claim in September when attorneys who represent the government informed a federal judge in Virginia that three more recordings of detainee interrogations had been discovered.

As easy as it is to believe the absolute worst about this craven cabal, I keep reminding myself that at their very core, they are a bunch of Mayberry Machiavellis, and they are completely out of their depth. If they weren't incompetent, we would really be screwed.

The CIA torture-tape case isn't going away

In a terse, one-sentence order issued Tuesday, Federal Judge Henry H. Kennedy rejected the Justice Department's appeal to let DoJ cover up investigate the destruction of videotapes that showed the torture interrogation of terrorism suspects.

Instead of rolling over and playing dead for the DoJ, Kennedy ordered the attorneys to appear before him at 11:00 a.m. Friday. He offered no hint at what he might ask the attorneys, or why the order was issued.

Judge Kennedy is not likely to be too inclined toward sympathy for the administrations position, however - in 2005, he personally issued the order to the administration to maintain "all evidence and information regarding the torture, mistreatment, and abuse of detainees now at the United States Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay."

Five months after Kennedy's original order was issued, the CIA destroyed the videos anyway, and DoJ threw up a feeble smokescreen, asserting that the videos weren't covered, since the interrogation didn't take place at Guantanamo, but instead was conducted at a secret CIA "black site" in Thailand.

So now we have one pissed-off Federal Judge, and pressure mounting for a Special Prosecutor to look into the matter. And an issue that is not going to go away any time soon.

Meet the New Boss...Same as the Old Boss

Well , it certainly didn't take the new Attorney General long to start throwing up roadblocks to interfere with congressional investigations that might expose the current occupant of the Oval office as a torture-lovin' thug who gave illegal orders and is absolutely guilty of every war crime the left has accused him of since the invasion of Iraq.

The Department of Justice is refusing to provide DoJ documents to congressional committees that might clarify any role the department had in the decision to destroy the video evidence. But the Department of Justice is not just refusing to cooperate with congressional inquiries into the destruction of videotapes by the CIA that show terrorist suspects being tortured - they are requesting that congress shelve their own inquiries into the matter.

The Justice Department request was met with anger from both Republican and Democratic members of the House Intelligence Committee, who said the department was trying to interfere with their investigation. The committee had summoned two C.I.A. officials to testify at a hearing next week, a session that will now almost certainly be postponed.

The inquiry by the House committee had been shaping up as the most aggressive investigation into the destruction of the tapes, and in a written statement on Friday, the two senior members of the panel said they were “stunned” by the Justice Department’s request.

The lawmakers, Representative Silvestre Reyes, Democrat of Texas, and Representative Peter Hoekstra, Republican of Michigan, threatened to issue subpoenas to get testimony and other information from the C.I.A. “There is no basis upon which the attorney general can stand in the way of our work,” they said.

The committee had demanded that the C.I.A. produce all cables, memorandums and e-mail messages related to the videotapes, as well as the legal advice given to agency officials before the tapes were destroyed. Friday’s deadline passed without the arrival of any of those C.I.A. records on Capitol Hill.

The DoJ and the CIA are conducting a theatrical exercise joint inquiryto determine how the tapes came to be destroyed, who authorized the destruction of evidence, and the legality of the action.

The Congressional inquiry follows the same path, but are also interested in determining if anyone in the Executive branch was involved in the decision to destroy the tapes in an effort to suppress evidence of torture.

Meanwhile, Hayden now finds himself in a difficult position - having pledged cooperation to all investigative bodies, the DoJ, the IG for the CIA and the Congress.

Mukasey was busy giving the high-hat to requests from Congressional committees that oversee Justice itself, while the committee members (some of whom confirmed his ass over the strenuous objections of left-wing nut jobs like yours truly...) sent along sternly worded letters demanding that, by golly, the time was nigh to come clean.

Mukasey's response? “At my confirmation hearing, I testified that I would act independently, resist political pressure and ensure that politics plays no role in cases brought by the Department of Justice,” Mr. Mukasey wrote in one letter. Accordingly, he went on, “I will not at this time provide further information in response to your letter.”

=========================

And the more things change...the more they stay the same.

Mukasey in the Hot Seat

During his confirmation hearings last fall, new Attorney General Michael Mukasey pledged to act independently and swore that he would not hesitate to pursue investigations that might displease the Bush administration.

A month in, he is faced with calls for an investigation into the destruction of video of interrogations of terror suspects that show the men being tortured. Such an investigation would delve into the heart of darkness itself, and expose some of the most closely guarded secrets of the Bush administration, highlighting the "aggressive interrogation" favored - nay lusted after - by the small men in the administration for what it is: Torture.

Torture is a crime against humanity, under treaty as well as international statute.

Last week, Senator Dick Durbin (D - IL) officially requested the Attorney General open an investigation into the destruction of the tapes. "The CIA apparently withheld information about the existence of these videotapes from official proceedings, including the 9/11 Commission and a federal court," Durbin charged in the letter he sent to Mukasey.

But this story just keeps getting weirder and weirder:

Justice officials refused to comment on what the new A.G. will do, but White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said that if he does open an investigation, the White House would support him. The videotapes, made in 2002, showed the questioning of two high-level Qaeda detainees, including logistics chief Abu Zubaydah, whose interrogation at a secret cell in Thailand sparked an internal battle within the U.S. intelligence community after FBI agents angrily protested the aggressive methods that were used. In addition to waterboarding, Zubaydah was subjected to sleep deprivation and bombarded with blaring rock music by the Red Hot Chili Peppers. One [FBI] agent was so offended he threatened to arrest the CIA interrogators, according to two former government officials directly familiar with the dispute. [emphasis added]

Yes. You read that right. An FBI agent was so put off by what he witnessed, he threatened to take the CIA interrogators into custody. And when an FBI agent threatens to arrest CIA agents,it is safe to say that the CIA agents have definitely crossed a bright line.

Officials with the CIA claim that the decision was made three years ago to destroy the tapes. The "reason" the CIA gives for the destruction is laughable: The identity of the torturers interrogators might pose a security risk if the tapes were to leak.

Please.

Spare me.

The identity of the interrogators might pose an incarceration risk.

And if they were acting on orders from the White House, they would most likely say so before they went to prison for a long time for committing war crimes.

The CIA destroyed the tapes in spite of requests for records of interrogations by multiple entities, includign the Senate Intelligence Committee and the 9/11 Commission. Representative Jane Harman, then the ranking Democratic member of the House Intelligence Committee had also submitted a written directive that videos of interrogations be preserved.

Additionally, in the trial of Zacharias Moussaoui , defense attorneys requested any video of interrogations, but the CIA told a Federal judge that no videos existed. (Got Perjury? Hows' about Obstruction of Justice?)

A thorough investigation into the destruction of the video tapes by the Justice Department would be undertaken with one goal: Find out who issued the orders and make that person accountable. Porter Goss was the CIA Director at the time, and thought he had an "understanding" with ops officials that the tapes would be preserved. He reportedly was extremely unhappy when he learned that the tapes had been destroyed. Meantime, Jose Rodriguez, who as head of the Clandesting Service at the time and issued the destroy order has a reputation as a "loyal subordinate" who would never have taken it upon himself to make such a decision.

Whoever ordered that the tapes be destroyed, all eyes are on Mukaey now.

Is it time to start the Mike Hayden death-watch?

From the New York Times:

In a statement released on Saturday, General Hayden said he welcomed the inquiry and the “C.I.A. will cooperate fully.”

For the most part, the only people who say they welcome investigations are those who desperately hope that saying they welcome investigations will be enough make the investigations go away.

This CIA destruction of evidence and obstruction of justice thing isn't going away, at least not so far, so maybe some potentates will. For a good long time.

BREAKING: No Stay of Sentence for Scooter

A glimmer of Justice was seen flickering in the sunlight today when the three-judge appeals panel unanimously rejected the plea by Scooter “Treason” Libby to remain free on bond while appealing his sentence. Instead, he will have to report to prison in just a few weeks to start serving his much-to-short sentence.

Look for the apparatchiks who place Party over country and the rule of law to turn up the volume on their bleating about dedicated public servants. (Who happen to commit treason and successfully obstruct justice!)

And when they start in, call them on it. Mock them, ridicule them, and question their patriotism. At least with them and their ilk it’s justified, because they do excuse treason. (Fred Thompson, I'm calling you out right now.)

Scooter, one word of advice. Don’t drop the soap, lest what happened to our country with your mendacious assist, could very well happen to you.