Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

and let's press charges

Posted By: against on 2008-10-17
In Reply to: They support NRA so you can kill the guy who rapes you but - no abortion

someone who kills someone who is pregnant for a double homocide but WAIT A MINUTE...... that is not an actual life...


Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu


Other related messages found in our database

What were the charges?

Murder charges for 3 U.S. soldiers..sm
I have mixed feelings about this y'all. There is no doubt in my mind that mental issues are involved given the situation. However, they could have just been following orders. Or, worse just murdered the Iraqis on their own volition and threatened a fellow soldier.

Definitely worth the investigation, which sends the message that we (the US) does not tolerate this type behavior from our soldiers.

---------------------------------
Murder charges for 3 U.S. soldiers
They are accused of killing 3 Iraqis

Julian E. Barnes, Los Angeles Times

Tuesday, June 20, 2006
(06-20) 04:00 PDT Washington -- Three U.S. soldiers have been charged with the premeditated murder of three Iraqi detainees as well as with threatening the life of a fellow soldier who they feared would challenge their accounts of the deaths, military officials said Monday.

The three Americans were identified as staff Sgt. Raymond L. Girouard, Spc. William B. Hunsaker and Pfc. Corey R. Clagett, all members of the 3rd Brigade of the 101st Airborne Division. They were charged with shooting the detainees May 9 during a military operation near Thar Thar Canal in Salahuddin province north of Baghdad.

A murder conviction in the military carries the possibility of the death penalty. The accused soldiers are being held in Kuwait, a Pentagon official said. No personal information was available Monday about the soldiers.

The latest charges come as the military is conducting a separate investigation of the killing of 24 civilians in Haditha in November. Military investigators are examining possible murder charges against a group of Marines for those deaths. In addition, seven other marines and a Navy corpsman are being held in the brig at Camp Pendleton (San Diego County) in connection with the death of an Iraqi man in another town, Hamandiya. Since the start of the Iraq war, the military has brought criminal charges against at least 20 other service members in deaths of Iraqis.

Military officials first mentioned the Salahuddin investigation in a brief news release June 16. But details of how the three soldiers shot the men, near the Muthana Chemical Complex, have remained sketchy. The military has not said why the three Iraqis were being detained.

In addition to murder, the soldiers were charged with conspiracy and with threatening another soldier. Military officials said the accused initially reported they shot the detainees while they were trying to flee.

But that account was contradicted by a junior soldier who saw the shooting. Defense Department charge sheets released Monday identify the object of the threats as Bradley Mason, an Army private first class. The legal papers do not specify whether Mason is the soldier who witnessed the killings.

The accused soldiers are charged with threatening to kill Mason on May 29, as the group was traveling from its own operating base to Camp Speicher, near Tikrit, where the Criminal Investigation Division has an office.

You better not say anything, or I swear I will kill you, Girouard allegedly told Mason, according to charge sheets.

Girouard is accused of threatening to kill Mason six different times in the weeks after the detainees died. Hunsaker is accused of threatening Mason four times, and Clagett twice.

They face a hearing to determine if there is enough evidence for a court-martial. The first proceeding, known as an Article 32 hearing, is likely several weeks away, a military officer said.

The military has not executed anyone since April 1961, but nine people are on death row, including a sergeant in the 101st Airborne who killed two officers and wounded 14 soldiers in Kuwait in March 2003.
No offense taken. The charges she made sm
are based on the evidence, which is overwhelming. Popular Mechanics definitely did not debunk it. I think it shattered her belief system, just like it did mine.
Bush and rape charges....
He was never charged. A very mentally ill woman filed a lawsuit. I outlined it above. The one against Reagan was never a charge either....was in that Kitty Kelley rag of a book. Never substantiated.
Read the transcript of the charges

I know, I know, it's Fox News that most of you don't believe, but this is the whole transcript, 78 pages long. Hope you all are speed readers.


 


http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/rrb_-jh_FINAL_complaint_cover_and_aff.pdf


What about the charges and mysterious death of this woman...sm
Do you not find anything fishy here???

Never heard of rape charges against Reagan or GW. sm
Also, Kaye Summersby, Ike's *supposed* mistress said that they were very close but never consummated anything. 
10 federal employees and 1 w/ criminal charges
over improper relationships between interior dept officials who oversee offshore drilling and oil executives...............Big oil? Offshore drilling? Run afoul of the law?Nahhhhh
Hope they bring charges against him for war crimes.
I wonder if there is any member of the GOP who is able to accept these realities and own up to just a fraction of this despicable behavior? His inevitable legacy as the worst US President of all time does not even begin to address the justice he deserves.
911 widow charges Bush in RICO suit.sm
911 Victim Ellen Mariani Open Letter To The POTUS
Thursday, 27 November 2003
Press Release: Ellen Mariani Lawsuit
=======================================
Open Letter To The President Of The United States

Mr. Bush,

This ''open letter'' is coming from my heart. I want you to know that I am neither a Republican nor a Democrat and that this is not an attempt to ''bash the Government''.

You Mr. Bush should be held responsible and liable for any and all acts that were committed to aid in any cover up of the tragic events of September 11, 2001. As President you have a duty to protect the American people. On September 11th you did not instruct your staff to issue a nationwide emergency warning/alert to advise us of the attack on America. We had to receive the news of the attacks via the news networks.

In the months leading up to the attacks you were repeatedly advised of a possible attack on American soil. During your daily intelligence briefings you were given information that had been uncovered that the very real possibility existed that certain undesirable elements would use commercial aircraft to destroy certain target buildings. You never warned the American people of this possible threat. Who were you protecting?

When you took no responsibility towards protecting the general public from the possibility of attack, you were certainly not upholding the oath you spoke when you took office. In that oath you pledged to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America.

On the morning of the attack, you and members of your staff were fully aware of the unfolding events yet you chose to continue on to the Emma E. Booker Elementary School to proceed with a scheduled event and photo op. While our nation was under attack you did not appear to blink an eye or shed a tear. You continued on as if everything was business as usual.

In the days following the attacks all air traffic was grounded and Americans, including myself, were stranded wherever they had been when the flight ban was imposed. I was stranded at Midway Airport in Chicago, unable to continue on to California for my daughter's wedding. Imagine my surprise when I later found out that during this no fly period a number of people were flown out of the country on a 747 with Arabic lettering on the fuselage. None of these people were interviewed or questioned by any local, State or Federal agencies. Why were they allowed to leave and who exactly was on that flight. We know for a fact that some of the people on the flight were members of (or related to) the royal family of Saudi Arabia and members of the Bin Laden family. Were these people allowed to leave because of the long-standing relationships that your family has with both families?

It is my belief that you intentionally allowed 9/11 to happen to gather public support for a war on terrorism. These wars, in Afghanistan and Iraq, have not accomplished what you stated were your goals. Why have you not captured Osama Bin Laden? Where are Saddam's weapons of mass destruction? All that has happened is a bill that is passed before Congress for 87 billion dollars to rebuild what you ordered blown to bits. As an American who lost a loved one in the war on terror I do pray and support our troops who were sent to Afghanistan and Iraq by you. These troops have and will continue to die for your lies. As an American I can make this statement as it appears that associates of your family may stand to prosper from the rebuilding of Afghanistan and Iraq.

Mr. Bush the time has come for you to stop your control over us. Stop blocking the release of certain evidence and documents that were discovered by the 9/11 Investigation Commission if you have nothing to hide proving you did not fail to act and prevent the attacks of 9/11. Your reason for not releasing this material is that it is a matter of national security. When in fact I believe that it is your personal credibility/security that you are concerned with. You do not want the public to know the full extent of your responsibility and involvement.

After 9/11 the Patriot Act and Homeland Security Act were passed. Both of these allow the government to tap your telephone, search your home, and seize whatever they feel they need to do on a whim. They can do this without a judge's review or a warrant. I feel that this is in direct conflict with our rights as stated in the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

We the families of 9/11 victims need to have answers to the following questions:

1. Why were 29 pages of the 9/11committee report personally censored at your request?

2. Where are the black boxes from Flight 11 and Flight 175?

3. Where are the voice recorders from Flight 11 and Flight 175?

4. Why can't we gain access to the complete air traffic control records for Flight 11 and Flight 175?

5. Where are the airport surveillance tapes that show the passengers boarding the doomed flights?

6. When will complete passenger lists for all of the flights be released?

7. Why did your brother Jeb (the Governor of Florida) go to the offices of the Hoffman Aviation School and order that flight records and files be removed? These files were then put on a C130 government cargo plane and flown out of the country. Where were they taken and who ordered it done?

It has been over two years since hundreds of our lost loved ones remains have still yet to be identified and their remains placed in a landfill at Fresh Kill. We want our heroes brought back and given a public and proud resting place where we all can pay our respects and honor them. These innocent people never had a chance as they were taken from us on that sad September Day.

In the court of public opinion Mr. Bush, your lies are being uncovered each day. My husband, all of the other victims and their families and our nation as a whole, has been victimized by your failed leadership prior to and after 9/11!

I will prove this in a court of law!

Ellen M. Mariani ###


Germany seek charges against Rumsfeld for prison abuse sm

Friday, Nov. 10, 2006
Exclusive: Charges Sought Against Rumsfeld Over Prison Abuse
A lawsuit in Germany will seek a criminal prosecution of the outgoing Defense Secretary and other U.S. officials for their alleged role in abuses at Abu Ghraib and Gitmo


Just days after his resignation, former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is about to face more repercussions for his involvement in the troubled wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. New legal documents, to be filed next week with Germany's top prosecutor, will seek a criminal investigation and prosecution of Rumsfeld, along with Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, former CIA director George Tenet and other senior U.S. civilian and military officers, for their alleged roles in abuses committed at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison and at the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

The plaintiffs in the case include 11 Iraqis who were prisoners at Abu Ghraib, as well as Mohammad al-Qahtani, a Saudi held at Guantanamo, whom the U.S. has identified as the so-called 20th hijacker and a would-be participant in the 9/11 hijackings. As TIME first reported in June 2005, Qahtani underwent a special interrogation plan, personally approved by Rumsfeld, which the U.S. says produced valuable intelligence. But to obtain it, according to the log of his interrogation and government reports, Qahtani was subjected to forced nudity, sexual humiliation, religious humiliation, prolonged stress positions, sleep deprivation and other controversial interrogation techniques.

Lawyers for the plaintiffs say that one of the witnesses who will testify on their behalf is former Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski, the one-time commander of all U.S. military prisons in Iraq. Karpinski — who the lawyers say will be in Germany next week to publicly address her accusations in the case — has issued a written statement to accompany the legal filing, which says, in part: It was clear the knowledge and responsibility [for what happened at Abu Ghraib] goes all the way to the top of the chain of command to the Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld .

A spokesperson for the Pentagon told TIME there would be no comment since the case has not yet been filed.

Along with Rumsfeld, Gonzales and Tenet, the other defendants in the case are Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence Stephen Cambone; former assistant attorney general Jay Bybee; former deputy assisant attorney general John Yoo; General Counsel for the Department of Defense William James Haynes II; and David S. Addington, Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff. Senior military officers named in the filing are General Ricardo Sanchez, the former top Army official in Iraq; Gen. Geoffrey Miller, the former commander of Guantanamo; senior Iraq commander, Major General Walter Wojdakowski; and Col. Thomas Pappas, the one-time head of military intelligence at Abu Ghraib.

Germany was chosen for the court filing because German law provides universal jurisdiction allowing for the prosecution of war crimes and related offenses that take place anywhere in the world. Indeed, a similar, but narrower, legal action was brought in Germany in 2004, which also sought the prosecution of Rumsfeld. The case provoked an angry response from Pentagon, and Rumsfeld himself was reportedly upset. Rumsfeld's spokesman at the time, Lawrence DiRita, called the case a a big, big problem. U.S. officials made clear the case could adversely impact U.S.-Germany relations, and Rumsfeld indicated he would not attend a major security conference in Munich, where he was scheduled to be the keynote speaker, unless Germany disposed of the case. The day before the conference, a German prosecutor announced he would not pursue the matter, saying there was no indication that U.S. authorities and courts would not deal with allegations in the complaint.

In bringing the new case, however, the plaintiffs argue that circumstances have changed in two important ways. Rumsfeld's resignation, they say, means that the former Defense Secretary will lose the legal immunity usually accorded high government officials. Moreover, the plaintiffs argue that the German prosecutor's reasoning for rejecting the previous case — that U.S. authorities were dealing with the issue — has been proven wrong.

The utter and complete failure of U.S. authorities to take any action to investigate high-level involvement in the torture program could not be clearer, says Michael Ratner, president of the Center for Constitutional Rights, a U.S.-based non-profit helping to bring the legal action in Germany. He also notes that the Military Commissions Act, a law passed by Congress earlier this year, effectively blocks prosecution in the U.S. of those involved in detention and interrogation abuses of foreigners held abroad in American custody going to back to Sept. 11, 2001. As a result, Ratner contends, the legal arguments underlying the German prosecutor's previous inaction no longer hold up.

Whatever the legal merits of the case, it is the latest example of efforts in Western Europe by critics of U.S. tactics in the war on terror to call those involved to account in court. In Germany, investigations are under way in parliament concerning cooperation between the CIA and German intelligence on rendition — the kidnapping of suspected terrorists and their removal to third countries for interrogation. Other legal inquiries involving rendition are under way in both Italy and Spain.

U.S. officials have long feared that legal proceedings against war criminals could be used to settle political scores. In 1998, for example, former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet — whose military coup was supported by the Nixon administration — was arrested in the U.K. and held for 16 months in an extradition battle led by a Spanish magistrate seeking to charge him with war crimes. He was ultimately released and returned to Chile. More recently, a Belgian court tried to bring charges against then Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon for alleged crimes against Palestinians.

For its part, the Bush Administration has rejected adherence to the International Criminal Court (ICC) on grounds that it could be used to unjustly prosecute U.S. officials. The ICC is the first permanent tribunal established to prosecute war crimes, genocide and other crimes against humanity.


Abuse of Power charges stick to Palin like glue.

So, what goes around comes around.  After a hard week out on that campaign trail attacking Obama right, left and center, seems Sarah has a character issue of her own now to deal with.  Oops!   


Baby daddy's mommy arrested on drug charges

I heard today Palin is responding to Levi's charges
by throwing the dirt back at him. I say that is how every woman her age should behave, right? Tit for tat.
Bristol's future MIL arrested on 6 counts of felony drug charges.
Palins can't seem to catch a break this past week. 
Obama is letting them drop charges against terrorists for this horrible sick crime???

What orifice did you pull this out of?


And Associated Press
They have both been caught doctoring pictures. Another example of how you can't trust the MSM.

I haven't seen the photos, but I'm going to look them up tonight when I get home.
How about the Associated Press?
then select news.
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jkwn9iRCwdE76BB6ClH6Qmw8NcFQD938KQSO0

Will you believe Associated Press then?
Had to look hard for it, no surprise there.


New House rules reflect Democrats' election win

By LARRY MARGASAK – 2 days ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — House Democrats unveiled internal rules Monday that would end Republican-imposed, six-year term limits on committee chairmen and make it harder for GOP lawmakers to offer alternative legislation.

In changing how the House operates, Democrats sent a message that they will use the huge majority they won in November to overpower Republicans any time they wish. GOP leaders complained to Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., that they were being marginalized, but there is little they can do.

The changes are set for approval Tuesday after the 111th Congress takes office.

Not all of the new rules were partisan, but they reflected only the Democratic view of how the House should be run.

The Democratic majority will be 256 to 178 with one vacancy when the new House is sworn in, compared to 235-198 with two vacancies at the end of the previous Congress.

One rule would have a longer disclosure requirement for House members negotiating a post-government job. Under the change, negotiations must be reported until the lawmaker leaves office. Previously, the disclosure directive ended when a successor was elected.

It also would be easier to object to so-called "air drop" earmarks: special projects added to legislation by House-Senate conferees after both houses already approved legislation.

For Republicans, however, the changes were a reminder that the majority rules in the House, unlike the Senate, where it takes 60 of the 100 senators to pass controversial legislation because of filibuster rules.

"President Obama has pledged to lead a government that is open and transparent. This (rules package) does not represent change; it is reverting back to the undemocratic one-party rule and backroom deals that the American people rejected more than a decade ago," Republican leaders wrote Pelosi.

When Republicans won control of the House in 1994, they adopted rules to limit the terms of committee chairmen to three terms, or six years.

That change followed four decades of Democratic rule, when committee chairmen ruled by seniority and built up unchallenged power to pass or block legislation. The powerful chairmen also built up a system of perks for themselves, including a special bank that allowed lawmakers to overdraw their accounts without penalty. That helped lead to the Democrats' downfall in 1994.

Republicans said the term limits they established were designed to reward new ideas, innovation and merit rather than longevity.

However, the limits also generated huge fundraising efforts by chairmen-to-be, moving them closer to special interests in the legislative areas they controlled.

Republicans also objected to a proposal that governs how alternative legislation can be offered. Republicans said this would prevent the minority from trying to eliminate hidden tax increases added to larger pieces of legislation.




http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gnHMsHdiW-mG_jKo8vvmIqcdmKMQD95HAAJG1
Not according to the Associated Press. nm

hammered press sec
I thought it was great how the journalists finally yesterday started hammering the press secretary about Rove.  Yesterday I read where Hiliary Clinton equated Bush with Alfred E. Neuman, LOL.  Today I was thinking, what cartoon would be Rove.  Elmer Fudd.  So, we have Elmer Fudd, Alfred E. Neuman and **death warmed over Cheney** running the country.  Oh my, we sure are in good shape..NOT..and they we have the dinosaur backward thinking conservatives backing up whatever this administration wants to do/say..
Press conference
Gee, none of the stations out here covered it, LOL. 
WH press secretary would
I do almost feel sorry for Scott. Rove made his 4th trip to testify today as well. Scott better get ready for some major 'splainin' or catapultin'
There is a rumor going through the press that........ sm
Rahm Emanuel turned him in. I'm not reporting this as fact because I haven't checked it out yet, but I have seen that mentioned.
Another press conference going on now

If I didn't lose count, that's #8 since he was elected. Do I have to listen to 4 years of this?  Or is this just about chosing his cabinet and if so, did he fill all the spots yet?


I can read. I don't need to see him except when he takes questions from reporters.


FYI, I never listened to GW's press conferences either. I can't stand canned speeches.


Looks like BO's press honeymoon

The press might finally be wising up to a fact that's even more important (to their bosses) than playing suck-face with BO - namely, that even Americans who voted for this President are starting to really, really dislike his policies.  The last issue of Newsweek to feature an Obama (was it number 19?) barely sold enough copies to pay for the printing, and it's more or less a rule in the news business (and it IS a business) that "if they don't sell, they smell".  Obama is starting to sell less, and smell worse.  Lots worse. 


If the most recent news conference with BO is any indication, the honeymoon might just be over...and BO didn't like it one bit.  In fact, he got downright surly - and he is really one UGLY man when he gets surly.  Tsk - such a thin veneer.


http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/columnists/goodwin/index.html


Pres just had a press conference..
listened very discernibly, heard nothing different from his other press conferences...  Feel like I'm watching "Groundhog Day" starring Bill Murray, only Bill Murray is much more funny and quite a bit smarter!  When will get some real leadership?  We desparately need LEADERSHIP!!!
Palin not ready for the press

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/259517

Todd Harris, a GOP strategist, and McCain aide Nicole Wallace both said Sarah Palin won’t be available to the press. They said might make a mistake and American people don’t care about Palin talking to the press.
Todd Harris, GOP Strategist who is also close to the McCain campaign, told Chris Matthews, MSNBC that Palin won’t be available to the press for about two weeks. He said she might make a mistake in the show.

If she goes out and makes a mistake, that is something that voters will] care about, and that's something that will haunt McCain for awhile, so I think this is a smart move.

And the GOP is proud in making such a decision, despite telling everyone she has more experience than Obama and Biden.

In the second video, McCain aide Nicole Wallace told Time’s Jay Carney and Joe Scarborough, MSNBC that the press will not be given a chance to take shots at Palin. She said American people don’t care whether Sarah Palin can answer specific questions about foreign and domestic policy. She said the public will know about her from Palin’s scripted speeches and appearances on the campaign trail and in political ads.

Jay Carney responded with the following statement:

Wallace's bash-the-media exercise has its merits as a campaign tactic. It certainly rallies the base. But the base won't lift McCain to 50% in November. More importantly, in her smug dismissal of the media's role in asking questions of the candidates, Wallace was really showing contempt not for reporters, but for voters.

If she is not ready now, how can we expect that she will be ready in the next few months? Is there a two-month crash course for Presidency?
Meet the Press at 6 pm EDT. Watch

for the answers to these allegations.


A press conference is where reporters ask...sm
the candidate questions. The candidate does not know what questions are going to be asked. Hence, a teleprompter would be useless at a press conference. Teleprompters are for SPEECHES. Get it?
Watching press release
Could our president be double-standard? Reporters are asking really good tough questions. No confidence in this new administration whatsoever.
Interesting how it was leaked to the press
These types of studies are typically not for public consumption, but the timing of this one was just perfect for some manufactured outrage based on intentional misconstruing of the contents of the study.
I saw the press conference. Sad. Feel bad for the
nm
From the way Fitzgerald spoke in the press conference...sm
S. Libby has A LOT to be worried about. It seems he's a bald face liar, and I think what would be interesting to find out is why would he lie and say he didn't even know who Plame was under oath having been briefed on her at least 4 times before coming to court. I smell smoke...

Kiss freedom of the press goodbye
BY LEONARD PITTS JR.

lpitts@herald.com


Thomas Jefferson understood.

He said that if asked to choose between government without newspapers
or newspapers without government, ''I should not hesitate for a moment
to prefer the latter.'' Jefferson knew that a free and adversarial press
was the people's best defense against the excesses of their government
and a fundamental building block of healthy democracy.

Unfortunately, that was 40 presidents ago.

The present president has a decidedly different view of the news
media's role. His administration sees the press as a thing to be bought. In
fact, while political manipulation of the news is hardly new, Team Bush
has a long and singularly sordid record of trying to turn the media
into a wholly owned public relations subsidiary.

Now they're taking their act on the road. And get this: They're doing
it under the guise of building democracy. Which is rather like stealing
from the collection plate under the guise of giving to the needy.

I refer you to last week's Los Angeles Times report that the Pentagon
has been secretly paying Iraqi newspapers to publish stories, written by
American troops, that reflect favorably upon the U.S. mission in that
country. The stories, while basically factual, are reportedly written so
as to flatter U.S. forces and the Iraqi government and to omit
information or perspectives either might find embarrassing. These press
releases are presented to the Iraqi people as independent reports by
independent reporters.

One is appalled, but hardly surprised. After nearly five years of
watching these folks' truth-optional approach to dealing with the public,
one is seldom surprised anymore.

BUYING PRAISE

This is, after all, the same Bush administration that was caught buying
praise from an ethically challenged columnist -- in violation of
federal laws against propagandizing the public, according to a September
report by the Government Accountability Office. It's the same
administration that allowed into the White House press room as a reporter an
Internet porn entrepreneur who wrote for a GOP website. The same one that
issues video reports favorable to its policies to be broadcast without
attribution as TV news. The same one that censors and quashes its own
scientific studies when they conflict with its preferred worldview.

So this is just more of the same in a new ZIP Code.

It will be argued by the usual sycophantic Bush enablers that what's
being done is justifiable. We are at war, they will say, and in war it is
perfectly acceptable to propagandize the enemy.

So it is. But the flaw in that logic is this: We are not at war with
Iraq. We are at war in Iraq against insurgents seeking to topple the
government. At least, that's the line put forth by Team Bush. Iraq, they
say, is a sovereign nation to which we are simply helping bring the joys
of democracy -- one of which would be a free press.

That being the case, you cannot justify telling covert lies to its
people any more than you can justify telling them to ours. You want to
communicate something to them? Buy an ad. Drop leaflets. Put up posters.
But don't produce a commercial and tell people it's news.

CREDIBILITY AT STAKE

Doing so undermines both the message and the medium. It could also
conceivably encourage Iraqis to question how seriously they should take --
how seriously we ourselves take -- this whole notion of a free and
independent press.

Indeed, one can only guess how this is playing with Iraqi journalists.
After all, the messages could hardly be more mixed. On the one hand,
U.S. officials are offering them workshops in media ethics. On the other
hand, U.S. officials are violating the most basic media ethics with
blithe indifference.

But then, it's a sour joke in the first place that the Bush
administration purports to teach Iraqis how democracy works.

You can't teach what you don't understand.

James Montgomery, Esq. is holding a press

conference. Jesse Jackson, Jr. is "candidate #5" and he thinks Blagojevich should step aside and resign and let the Lt. Gov. take over. He states JJ, Jr. is qualified for the position. 


He states JJ, Jr. is not guity of anything. He is not worried about any consequences of this except the media frenzy that is being created by this. If the meeting between the Gov. and JJ, Jr. was taped, they have no concern over it.


He (JJ, Jr.) will be speaking with the investigators on Friday or Monday. He will be holding a press conference in 15-16 minutes.


St. Paul Police Protest the Press

Be careful of your constitutional rights - they are rapidly disappearing.


http://www.truthout.org/article/st-pauls-police-protest-press


I just saw Nancy Pelosi in a press conference...
and I was reminded of the interviews I have seen her in...and frankly...Palin does a HECK of a better job than she does....and nobody seems to mind that.  Bear in mind, if, God forbid, something happened to both Pres and VP guess who we get:  NANCY PELOSI.  She is TWO heartbeats away from the Presidency no matter who gets elected.  Good grief, no wonder they send the VP to an undisclosed location and don't let Pres and VP travel together.  lol. 
Obama press conference coming up...sm
Is it just me? Or don't we usually only have one president at a time. I thought for sure he didn't take office until January 20th.


Just an observation...Obama supporters -- no need to flame me for stating the obvious.

Valerie Jarrett on Meet the Press-Did you know?

 Born in IRAN. Worked for Richard Daley, was her mentor? She is co-chair of the Obama-Biden transistion team. She hired Michele in 1991.


She will not give any info on whom he may choose for his team.  "Everything is a possibility." She is not ruling out anything. "Obama is selecting the best team for the job."


Rahm Emanual: She knew him for over 15 years. He embraces O's philosophy.


Will she take the Rich Daley model and implement it? Roundabout answer.


What are his flaws? "That's what is nice about being his friend. I can talk about his strengths, not his flaws."


 


I recall Bush on a train with the press
not long after the 2004 election stating that he had 3 1/2 years to go...with a heavy sigh, thoroughly disgusted me.  He should have recused himself then, and we would have been much better off.
press conference aftermath prediction
FOX news offers Ed Henry a multimillion dollar contract.  ;-) 
Associated Press (!) Catches Obama in Lies

Amazing.  Maybe some in the press actually are beginning to wise up to Obama.  Read it here:


___________________



WASHINGTON (AP) - "That wasn't me," President Barack Obama said on his 100th day in office, disclaiming responsibility for the huge budget deficit waiting for him on Day One.

It actually was him - and the other Democrats controlling Congress the previous two years - who shaped a budget so out of balance.

And as a presidential candidate and president-elect, he backed the twilight Bush-era stimulus plan that made the deficit deeper, all before he took over and promoted spending plans that have made it much deeper still.

Obama met citizens at an Arnold, Mo., high school Wednesday in advance of his prime-time news conference. Both forums were a platform to review his progress at the 100-day mark and look ahead.















(AP) President Barack Obama speaks at a town hall meeting at Fox Senior High School in Arnold, Mo.,...
Full Image
At various times, he brought an air of certainty to ambitions that are far from cast in stone.

His assertion that his proposed budget "will cut the deficit in half by the end of my first term" is an eyeball-roller among many economists, given the uncharted terrain of trillion-dollar deficits and economic calamity that the government is negotiating.

He promised vast savings from increased spending on preventive health care in the face of doubts that such an effort, however laudable it might be for public welfare, can pay for itself, let alone yield huge savings.

A look at some of his claims Wednesday:

OBAMA: "Number one, we inherited a $1.3 trillion deficit.... That wasn't me. Number two, there is almost uniform consensus among economists that in the middle of the biggest crisis, financial crisis, since the Great Depression, we had to take extraordinary steps. So you've got a lot of Republican economists who agree that we had to do a stimulus package and we had to do something about the banks. Those are one-time charges, and they're big, and they'll make our deficits go up over the next two years." - in Missouri.















(AP) President Barack Obama speaks during a town hall meeting Wednesday, April 29, 2009, at Fox Senior...
Full Image
THE FACTS:

Congress controls the purse strings, not the president, and it was under Democratic control for Obama's last two years as Illinois senator. Obama supported the emergency bailout package in President George W. Bush's final months - a package Democratic leaders wanted to make bigger.

To be sure, Obama opposed the Iraq war, a drain on federal coffers for six years before he became president. But with one major exception, he voted in support of Iraq war spending.

The economy has worsened under Obama, though from forces surely in play before he became president, and he can credibly claim to have inherited a grim situation.

Still, his response to the crisis goes well beyond "one-time charges."

He's persuaded Congress to expand children's health insurance, education spending, health information technology and more. He's moving ahead on a variety of big-ticket items on health care, the environment, energy and transportation that, if achieved, will be more enduring than bank bailouts and aid for homeowners.

The nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimated his policy proposals would add a net $428 billion to the deficit over four years, even accounting for his spending reduction goals. Now, the deficit is nearly quadrupling to $1.75 trillion.

---

OBAMA: "I think one basic principle that we know is that the more we do on the (disease) prevention side, the more we can obtain serious savings down the road. ... If we're making those investments, we will save huge amounts of money in the long term." - in Missouri.

THE FACTS: It sounds believable that preventing illness should be cheaper than treating it, and indeed that's the case with steps like preventing smoking and improving diets and exercise. But during the 2008 campaign, when Obama and other presidential candidates were touting a focus on preventive care, the New England Journal of Medicine cautioned that "sweeping statements about the cost-saving potential of prevention, however, are overreaching." It said that "although some preventive measures do save money, the vast majority reviewed in the health economics literature do not."

And a study released in December by the Congressional Budget Office found that increasing preventive care "could improve people's health but would probably generate either modest reductions in the overall costs of health care or increases in such spending within a 10-year budgetary time frame."

---

OBAMA: "You could cut (Social Security) benefits. You could raise the tax on everybody so everybody's payroll tax goes up a little bit. Or you can do what I think is probably the best solution, which is you can raise the cap on the payroll tax." - in Missouri.

THE FACTS: Obama's proposal would reduce the Social Security trust fund's deficit by less than half, according to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center.

That means he would still have to cut benefits, raise the payroll tax rate, raise the retirement age or some combination to deal with the program's long-term imbalance.

Workers currently pay 6.2 percent and their employers pay an equal rate - for a total of 12.4 percent - on annual wages of up to $106,800, after which no more payroll tax is collected.

Obama wants workers making more than $250,000 to pay payroll tax on their income over that amount. That would still protect workers making under $250,000 from an additional burden. But it would raise much less money than removing the cap completely.

---

Associated Press writers Kevin Freking and Jim Kuhnhenn contributed to this report.


S/l you've been reading BMW press releases....
I was being facetious ...

Sure it would be great for emissions if the world drove hydrogen vehicles - but have you checked the cost of maintaining the hydrogen vehicle? The cost of replacing a fuel cell battery?

Where does hydrogen come from? Water, natural gas, plants, coal, other fossil fuels are big sources - all expensive and coveted, and potentially in short supply. To produce no pollution it must be pure hydrogen - and you must have enough electricity to separate the hydrogen from say water, without using fossil fuels. The electrical generating capacity in the country will have to double in order to take on the demands of transportation, and then it will all have to convert from fossil fuels to renewable sources.

A lot of sacrifice of comfort and convenience will have to take place - I'm willing do it, how about the rest of the world?

The DOE is funding a billion to produce a hydrogen car - but it will be years away and the expense out of reach for most folks. Recently Obama's cut hydrogen fuel cell funding in the 2010 budget. Such vehicles for now anyway will remain the toys of celebrities and folks who can afford one to run around the neighborhood.

Also, factor in the cost of extracting and producing hydrogen, and the fact that the rest of the car from tires to dashboard, and almost everything we touch in the modern world, is produced from oil - a hydrogen car will do little to reduce pollution. The main problem with hydrogen-powered fuel cells involves the storage and distribution of hydrogen - which no one has answered yet, not on the scale of the masses. And who will build the refueling stations if there are no customers? Who will buy the vehicle if there is no where to refuel? Or if you can plug your care in your garage - is that coal firing the electric plant?

Have you seen the Mini Cooper? It is 5-1/2 feet wide and 4-1/2 feet in height. There's a reason it's called mini.

The best way to stop pollution is curb consumption - and that doesn't seem to be on the political agenda in any nation.
WH Press Release & Background Sotomayor

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE


May 26, 2009


Family members of Judge Sotomayor in attendance at today’s East Room announcement:


Celina Sotomayor (mother)
Omar Lopez (stepfather)
Juan Sotomayor (brother)
Tracey Sotomayor (sister-in-law)
Kylie Sotomayor (niece)
Conner and Corey Sotomayor (nephews)


Judge Sonia Sotomayor


Sonia Sotomayor has served as a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit since October 1998. She has been hailed as “one of the ablest federal judges currently sitting” for her thoughtful opinions,i and as “a role model of aspiration, discipline, commitment, intellectual prowess and integrity”ii for her ascent to the federal bench from an upbringing in a South Bronx housing project.


Her American story and three decade career in nearly every aspect of the law provide Judge Sotomayor with unique qualifications to be the next Supreme Court Justice. She is a distinguished graduate of two of America's leading universities. She has been a big-city prosecutor and a corporate litigator. Before she was promoted to the Second Circuit by President Clinton, she was appointed to the District Court for the Southern District of New York by President George H.W. Bush. She replaces Justice Souter as the only Justice with experience as a trial judge.


Judge Sotomayor served 11 years on the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, one of the most demanding circuits in the country, and has handed down decisions on a range of complex legal and constitutional issues. If confirmed, Sotomayor would bring more federal judicial experience to the Supreme Court than any justice in 100 years, and more overall judicial experience than anyone confirmed for the Court in the past 70 years. Judge Richard C. Wesley, a George W. Bush appointee to the Second Circuit, said “Sonia is an outstanding colleague with a keen legal mind. She brings a wealth of knowledge and hard work to all her endeavors on our court. It is both a pleasure and an honor to serve with her.”


In addition to her distinguished judicial service, Judge Sotomayor is a Lecturer at Columbia University Law School and was also an adjunct professor at New York University Law School until 2007.


An American Story


Judge Sonia Sotomayor has lived the American dream. Born to a Puerto Rican family, she grew up in a public housing project in the South Bronx. Her parents moved to New York during World War II – her mother served in the Women’s Auxiliary Corps during the war. Her father, a factory worker with a third-grade education, died when Sotomayor was nine years old. Her mother, a nurse, then raised Sotomayor and her younger brother, Juan, now a physician in Syracuse. After her father’s death, Sotomayor turned to books for solace, and it was her new found love of Nancy Drew that inspired a love of reading and learning, a path that ultimately led her to the law.


Most importantly, at an early age, her mother instilled in Sotomayor and her brother a belief in the power of education. Driven by an indefatigable work ethic, and rising to the challenge of managing a diagnosis of juvenile diabetes, Sotomayor excelled in school. Sotomayor graduated as valedictorian of her class at Blessed Sacrament and at Cardinal Spellman High School in New York. She first heard about the Ivy League from her high school debate coach, Ken Moy, who attended Princeton University, and she soon followed in his footsteps after winning a scholarship.


At Princeton, she continued to excel, graduating summa cum laude, and Phi Beta Kappa. She was a co-recipient of the M. Taylor Pyne Prize, the highest honor Princeton awards to an undergraduate. At Yale Law School, Judge Sotomayor served as an Editor of the Yale Law Journal and as managing editor of the Yale Studies in World Public Order. One of Sotomayor’s former Yale Law School classmates, Robert Klonoff (now Dean of Lewis & Clark Law School), remembers her intellectual toughness from law school: “She would stand up for herself and not be intimidated by anyone.” [Washington Post, 5/7/09]


A Champion of the Law


Over a distinguished career that spans three decades, Judge Sotomayor has worked at almost every level of our judicial system – yielding a depth of experience and a breadth of perspectives that will be invaluable – and is currently not represented -- on our highest court. New York City District Attorney Morgenthau recently praised Sotomayor as an “able champion of the law” who would be “highly qualified for any position in which wisdom, intelligence, collegiality and good character could be assets.” [Wall Street Journal, 5/9/09]


A Fearless and Effective Prosecutor


Fresh out of Yale Law School, Judge Sotomayor became an Assistant District Attorney in Manhattan in 1979, where she tried dozens of criminal cases over five years. Spending nearly every day in the court room, her prosecutorial work typically involved "street crimes," such as murders and robberies, as well as child abuse, police misconduct, and fraud cases. Robert Morgenthau, the person who hired Judge Sotomayor, has described her as a “fearless and effective prosecutor.” [Wall Street Journal, 5/9/09] She was cocounsel in the “Tarzan Murderer” case, which convicted a murderer to 67 and ½ years to life in prison, and was sole counsel in a multiple-defendant case involving a Manhattan housing project shooting between rival family groups.


A Corporate Litigator


She entered private practice in 1984, becoming a partner in 1988 at the firm Pavia and Harcourt. She was a general civil litigator involved in all facets of commercial work including, real estate, employment, banking, contracts, and agency law. In addition, her practice had a significant concentration in intellectual property law, including trademark, copyright and unfair competition issues. Her typical clients were significant corporations doing international business. The managing partner who hired her, George Pavia, remembers being instantly impressed with the young Sonia Sotomayor when he hired her in 1984, noting that “she was just ideal for us in terms of her background and training.” [Washington Post, May 7, 2009]


A Sharp and Fearless Trial Judge


Her judicial service began in October 1992 with her appointment to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York by President George H.W. Bush. Still in her 30s, she was the youngest member of the court. From 1992 to 1998, she presided over roughly 450 cases. As a trial judge, she earned a reputation as a sharp and fearless jurist who does not let powerful interests bully her into departing from the rule of law. In 1995, for example, she issued an injunction against Major League Baseball owners, effectively ending a baseball strike that had become the longest work stoppage in professional sports history and had caused the cancellation of the World Series the previous fall. She was widely lauded for saving baseball. Claude Lewis of the Philadelphia Inquirer wrote that by saving the season, Judge Sotomayor joined “the ranks of Joe DiMaggio, Willie Mays, Jackie Robinson and Ted Williams.”


A Tough, Fair and Thoughtful Jurist


President Clinton appointed Judge Sotomayor to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in 1998. She is the first Latina to serve on that court, and has participated in over 3000 panel decisions, authoring roughly 400 published opinions. Sitting on the Second Circuit, Judge Sotomayor has tackled a range of questions: from difficult issues of constitutional law, to complex procedural matters, to lawsuits involving complicated business organizations. In this context, Sotomayor is widely admired as a judge with a sophisticated grasp of legal doctrine. “’She appreciates the complexity of issues,’ said Stephen L. Carter, a Yale professor who teaches some of her opinions in his classes. Confronted with a tough case, Carter said, ‘she doesn’t leap at its throat but reasons to get to the bottom of issues.’” For example, in United States v. Quattrone, Judge Sotomayor concluded that the trial judge had erred by forbidding the release of jurors’ names to the press, concluding after carefully weighing the competing concerns that the trial judge’s concerns for a speedy and orderly trial must give way to the constitutional freedoms of speech and the press.


Sotomayor also has keen awareness of the law’s impact on everyday life. Active in oral arguments, she works tirelessly to probe both the factual details and the legal doctrines in the cases before her and to arrive at decisions that are faithful to both. She understands that upholding the rule of law means going beyond legal theory to ensure consistent, fair, common-sense application of the law to real-world facts. For example, In United States v. Reimer, Judge Sotomayor wrote an opinion revoking the US citizenship for a man charged with working for the Nazis in World War II Poland, guarding concentration camps and helping empty the Jewish ghettos. And in Lin v. Gonzales and a series of similar cases, she ordered renewed consideration of the asylum claims of Chinese women who experienced or were threatened with forced birth control, evincing in her opinions a keen awareness of those women’s plights.


Judge Sotomayor’s appreciation of the real-world implications of judicial rulings is paralleled by her sensible practicality in evaluating the actions of law enforcement officers. For example, in United States v. Falso, the defendant was convicted of possessing child pornography after FBI agents searched his home with a warrant. The warrant should not have been issued, but the agents did not know that, and Judge Sotomayor wrote for the court that the officers’ good faith justified using the evidence they found. Similarly in United States v. Santa, Judge Sotomayor ruled that when police search a suspect based on a mistaken belief that there is a valid arrest warrant out on him, evidence found during the search should not be suppressed. Ten years later, in Herring v. United States, the Supreme Court reached the same conclusion. In her 1997 confirmation hearing, Sotomayor spoke of her judicial philosophy, saying” I don’t believe we should bend the Constitution under any circumstance. It says what it says. We should do honor to it.” Her record on the Second Circuit holds true to that statement. For example, in Hankins v. Lyght, she argued in dissent that the federal government risks “an unconstitutional trespass” if it attempts to dictate to religious organizations who they can or cannot hire or dismiss as spiritual leaders. Since joining the Second Circuit, Sotomayor has honored the Constitution, the rule of law, and justice, often forging consensus and winning conservative colleagues to her point of view.


A Commitment to Community


Judge Sotomayor is deeply committed to her family, to her co-workers, and to her community. Judge Sotomayor is a doting aunt to her brother Juan’s three children and an attentive godmother to five more. She still speaks to her mother, who now lives in Florida, every day. At the courthouse, Judge Sotomayor helped found the collegiality committee to foster stronger personal relationships among members of the court. Seizing an opportunity to lead others on the path to success, she recruited judges to join her in inviting young women to the courthouse on Take Your Daughter to Work Day, and mentors young students from troubled neighborhoods Her favorite project, however, is the Development School for Youth program, which sponsors workshops for inner city high school students. Every semester, approximately 70 students attend 16 weekly workshops that are designed to teach them how to function in a work setting. The workshop leaders include investment bankers, corporate executives and Judge Sotomayor, who conducts a workshop on the law for 25 to 35 students. She uses as her vehicle the trial of Goldilocks and recruits six lawyers to help her. The students play various roles, including the parts of the prosecutor, the defense attorney, Goldilocks and the jurors, and in the process they get to experience openings, closings, direct and cross-examinations. In addition to the workshop experience, each student is offered a summer job by one of the corporate sponsors. The experience is rewarding for the lawyers and exciting for the students, commented Judge Sotomayor, as “it opens up possibilities that the students never dreamed of before.” [Federal Bar Council News, Sept./Oct./Nov. 2005, p.20] This is one of many ways that Judge Sotomayor gives back to her community and inspires young people to achieve their dreams.


She has served as a member of the Second Circuit Task Force on Gender, Racial and Ethnic Fairness in the Courts and was formerly on the Boards of Directors of the New York Mortgage Agency, the New York City Campaign Finance Board, and the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund.


good grief, forget the clothes, the woman charges everthing to Alaska, plane tickets, hotel rooms, l
x
John Murtha to appear on Meet the Press today!

I set my VCR!


Amnesty International's press release on Lebanon....sm
http://web.amnesty.org/pages/lbn-220805-feature-eng
Summation of today's presidential press conference

Here is NPR's write up of today's press conference by the president for those who would like a quick run down.  I just listened to it.  Made me nauseous.


WASHINGTON December 4, 2007, 1:04 p.m. ET · President Bush said Tuesday that the international community should continue to pressure Iran on its nuclear programs, asserting Tehran remains dangerous despite a new intelligence conclusion that it halted its development of a nuclear bomb four years ago.


"I view this report as a warning signal that they had the program, they halted the program," Bush said. "The reason why it's a warning signal is they could restart it."


Bush spoke one day after a new national intelligence estimate found that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in the fall of 2003, largely because of international scrutiny and pressure. That finding is in stark contrast to the comparable intelligence estimate of just two years ago, when U.S. intelligence agencies believed Tehran was determined to develop a nuclear weapons capability and was continuing its weapons development program.


It is also stood in marked contrast to Bush's rhetoric on Iran. At his last news conference on Oct. 17, for instance, he said that people "interested in avoiding World War III" should be working to prevent Iran from having the knowledge needed to make a nuclear weapon.


Bush said Tuesday that he only learned of the new intelligence assessment last week. But he portrayed it as valuable ammunition against Tehran, not as a reason to lessen diplomatic pressure.


"To me, the NIE (National Intelligence Estimate) provides an opportunity for us to rally the international community — to continue to rally the community — to pressure the Iranian regime to suspend its program," the president said. "What's to say they couldn't start another covert nuclear weapons program."


He also asserted that the report means "nothing's changed," focusing on the previous existence of a weapons program and not addressing the discrepancy between his rhetoric and the disclosure that weapons program has been frozen for four years.


Bush said he is not troubled about his standing, about perhaps facing a credibility gap with the American people. "No, I'm feeling pretty spirited — pretty good about life," Bush said.


"I have said Iran is dangerous, and the NIE doesn't do anything to change my opinion about the danger Iran poses to the world."


Bush said the report's finding would not prompt him to take a U.S. military option against Tehran off the table.


"The best diplomacy — effective diplomacy — is one in which all options are on the table," he said.


The president also said that the world would agree with his message that Iran shouldn't be let off the hook yet.


In fact, Europeans said the new information strengthens their argument for negotiations with Tehran, but they also said that sanctions are still an option to compel Iran to be fully transparent about its nuclear program. European officials insisted that the international community should not walk away from years of talks with an often defiant Tehran that is openly enriching uranium for uncertain ends. The report said Iran could still build a nuclear bomb by 2010-2015.


In Kabul, Afghanistan, Defense Secretary Robert Gates reinforced the U.S. position that the new U.S. intelligence assessment shows that Tehran remains a possible threat. He said it shows that Iran has had a nuclear weapons program and that as long as the country continues with its uranium enrichment activities, Iran could always renew its weapons program.


The U.S. intelligence assessment "validated the administration's strategy of bringing diplomatic and economic efforts to bear on Iran," Gates said Tuesday, speaking at a news conference with Afghanistan's President Hamid Karzai.


Bush called the news conference, his first in nearly seven weeks, to intensify pressure on lawmakers amid disputes over spending and the Iraq war. Taking advantage of his veto power and the largest bully pulpit in town, Bush regularly scolds Congress as a way to stay relevant and frame the debate as his presidency winds down.


Democrats counter that Bush is more interested in making statements than genuinely trying to negotiate some common ground with them.


Specifically, Bush again on Tuesday challenged Congress to send him overdue spending bills; to approve his latest war funding bill without conditions; to pass a temporary to fix to the alternative minimum tax so millions of taxpayers don't get hit with tax increases; and to extend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.


"Congress still has a lot to do," Bush said. "It doesn't have very much time to do it."


On another matter, Bush was asked about a rape victim in Saudi Arabia who was sentenced to prison and 200 lashes for being alone with a man not related to her — a violation of the kingdom's strict segregation of the sexes. Saudi Arabia has faced enormous international criticism about the sentencing.


"My first thoughts were these," Bush said. "What happens if this happens to my daughter? How would I react? And I would have been — I'd of been very emotional, of course. I'd have been angry at those who committed the crime. And I'd be angry at a state that didn't support the victim."


Bush, however, said he has not made his views known directly to Saudi King Abdullah, an ally. But he added: "He knows our position loud and clear."


The president said the U.S. economy is strong, though he acknowledged that the housing crisis has become a "headwind." He said administration officials are working on the issue, but he is wary of bailing out lenders. "We shouldn't say, 'OK, you made a lousy loan so we're going to go ahead and subsidize you.' "


Asked about the 2008 election, Bush steered himself back out of commenting on politics. "I practiced some punditry in the past — I'm not going to any further."


On other issues, Bush said:


—"The Venezuelan people rejected one-man rule" when they rejected a constitutional provision that would have enabled Hugo Chavez to remain in power for life and drive changes throughout Venezuelan society. "They voted for democracy."


—He talked by telephone Tuesday with Russian President Vladimir Putin and briefed him on the new Iran intelligence estimate. Bush also said he told Putin that "we were sincere in our expressions of concern" about irregularities in the voting that produced a sweeping parliamentary victory for Putin's party.


—He has "cordial relations" with Democratic leaders of Congress despite the sharp words between the White House and Capitol Hill. He blamed Democrats for the lack of compromises, saying, "In order for us to be able to reach accord, they got to come with one voice, one position."


Well now when he shows up on Meet The Press like that I'll start to worry!
x
T.Boone PIckens will be on Meet the Press tomorrow morning (nm)
x