That "swift and unambiguous response" will likely be to assign von Spakovsky to "investigate".

Posted at August 25, 2008 5:32 PM in response to Illegally Hired Immigration Judges More Likely to Rule for Deportation

Barnacles have no right of executive privilege.

Posted at August 25, 2008 5:30 PM in response to It's Richer vs. CIA on Suskind Charges

why should the telecoms take the hit?

Ah, the eternal refrain of the fugitive from justice, "Why should I take the hit?"

Posted at July 10, 2008 3:19 AM in response to Senate OK's New Wiretapping Law

I'm convinced that Intrade is a near-perfect lagging indicator, therefore McCain-Liebermann were toast 3 weeks ago.

Posted at July 10, 2008 1:59 AM in response to Lieberman On Questioning Obama's Commitment To Israel: "Why Wouldn't I Do That?"

The major reason to allow the lawsuits to proceed without extra-judicial intervention is to shine the light under the bogus 'national security' fig leaf the Cheney administration is desperately hiding behind.

Retroactive immunity for telcoms is a transparent attempt at a Watergate style coverup.

Posted at June 26, 2008 5:05 AM in response to Obama On FISA: Telecom Immunity Issue Doesn't Override National Security

I'm one of the not-fed-up-at-all with TPM.

But I'm also not still bitter that my first choice (Edwards) isn't the nominee either. (shrug)

Posted at June 17, 2008 1:18 AM in response to Are you as fed up with TPM as I?

he provided the false Iraq-al-Qaeda link while undergoing harsh interrogation.

So it turns out torture actually did generate "useful" intelligence -- to Cheney, in the form of made-up scare stories to justify the illegal invasion.

Posted at June 17, 2008 12:26 AM in response to Senate Report Shows Intel Debunked Al Qaeda-Iraq Link Before Bush's Speech

If they could get live video of Rove's history-making arrest by the Sergeant-at-arms, imagine what it would do for Fox News' ratings that week.
Just sayin'.

Posted at May 16, 2008 12:04 AM in response to Conyers on Rove: "Someone's Got to Kick His Ass"

Charlie Black must have misspoken, what he clearly meant to say was "talking to the State Department and the White House and clearing with them that U.S. foreign policy would be working in the interest of" his clients. It's the only way it makes any sort of sense at all.

Hey, is he related to Conrad Black?

Posted at May 14, 2008 10:33 PM in response to When Lobbying for Dictators Is OK

So what does this mean?

I'll take "People Who Literally Get Away With Murder" for $1000, Alex.

Posted at May 9, 2008 6:04 PM in response to Feds Unlikely to Charge Blackwater for Baghdad Shootings