advertisement
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
advertisement
The pressure continues to build of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to resign. Yesterday, a second GOP senator, Oregon's Gordon Smith, and a House member, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, called for his ouster over the firing of eight US attorneys. While most Republicans are holding their fire, at least for now, many believe it's a matter of time before Gonzales is forced to resign. The CBS Evening News led its broadcast last night saying, "That ticking sound around Washington tonight may be the clock running out on...Gonzales." The pressure on him "is building," and "one Republican strategist close to the White House told CBS News Alberto Gonzales is 'finished.'" The AP reports "one Republican member of the House Judiciary Committee who spoke on condition of anonymity because he has not yet announced his position, said Thursday he has told White House officials that Gonzales stands no chance. The lawmaker said he expects to be among other Republicans calling for Gonzales' resignation after the attorney general tells his story on Capitol Hill."
In addition to Sen. Smith, who joins Republican Sen. John Sununu in going public against Gonzales, the Washington Post reports Sen. Mark Pryor, "one of six Democrats to support Gonzales's confirmation, also demanded his resignation." Other Republicans stopped short of calling for the Attorney General's departure, but were critical of him. USA Today notes Sen. Norm Coleman of Minnesota said he is "deeply concerned about how this whole process has been handled." And Sen. Arlen Specter "characterized the attorney general's explanations for the firings as 'unacceptable' and 'mystifying.'"
In an even more ominous sign for Gonzales, GOP Sen. Mel Martinez, who is also Republican National Committee Chairman, said yesterday Bush might have to ask Gonzales to step down "at some point," says McClatchy. On CNN, the Florida senator said, "Gonzales has acknowledged mistakes. And the President said he is not happy about them. I would let the process work through a little bit before we start jumping in and asking for his resignation." The pressure on Gonzales also continues in major newspapers' editorial pages, with the New York Times and Washington Post running editorials critical of the Administration.
Justice Officials Subpoenaed The AP reports, "A Senate panel authorized subpoenas for Justice Department officials Thursday in a probe of the prosecutor firings." Subpoenas for President Bush's "top aides, including political adviser Karl Rove, could be approved next week." The DOJ officials subpoenaed are "Kyle Sampson, Gonzales' chief of staff who quit this week; Michael Elston, top aide to Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty; Associate Attorney General Bill Mercer; Monica Goodling, Gonzales' senior counsel and White House liaison, and Mike Battle, the departing director of the office that oversees all 93 U.S. attorneys."
Media Leaps On Rove Role Reports on the latest revelations on how the White House decided to dismiss several US attorneys adopt the breathless tone the media seems to reserve for any story about Karl Rove. NBC Nightly News led its broadcast with the "late-breaking news" that "newly discovered e-mailings suggest" the idea to dismiss the government lawyers "was raised by" the influential presidential adviser. ABC World News said "we now know" from the released e-mail was that Rove "was more involved" in the firings "than the Administration previously acknowledged."
The AP says the messages show Rove "raised questions in early 2005 about replacing some federal prosecutors but allowing others to stay." USA Today calls this "potentially significant since the White House" and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales "have maintained that Harriet Miers," then-White House counsel, "initiated the removal program in February 2005." Around that time, according to the Washington Post, the Justice Department advocated "removing up to 20 percent of the nation's US attorneys whom it considered to be 'underperforming' but retaining prosecutors who were 'loyal Bushies,'" according to the e-mails.
The CBS Evening News said Democrats "charged that new, unreleased e-mails will show" Miers "wasn't behind the original idea to fire all 93 US attorneys; Karl Rove was." However, CBS says a "source close to Karl Rove says he remains adamant it was never his idea to fire all 93 US attorneys," and White House Press Secretary Tony Snow reportedly said there is "nothing in these new e-mails that will contradict that." The Los Angeles Times headlines its report "Rove May Have Had Role In Firings," while a New York Times headline reads, "Rove Is Linked To Early Query Over Dismissals."
By a margin of 50 to 48, the US Senate yesterday defeated a Democratic measure calling for a US pullout from Iraq. Under Senate rules, the measure would have needed 60 votes in order to be approved. Both parties -- and the White House -- claimed victory after the vote. The media coverage, however, does not credit anyone with having won a significant victory. Instead, a number of stories and analyses only suggest the vote underscores that any congressional move to stop the US involvement in Iraq faces very long odds. The Los Angeles Times, for example, calls the Senate vote "an ominous sign for the Democratic legislative campaign to end the war in Iraq," and USA Today says it "demonstrated the dilemma facing Democratic party leaders." Two "centrist Democrats, Mark Pryor of Arkansas and Ben Nelson of Nebraska, voted against a resolution," which "attracted the support of only one Republican, Sen. Gordon Smith of Oregon." Sen. Harry Reid's resolution, needing 60 votes to pass, "required significant Republican support."
The New York Times reports, "The action in both houses threw into sharp relief the Democratic strategy of ratcheting up the pressure, vote by vote, to try to force the White House to begin withdrawing troops from Iraq." But "it also highlighted Republican unity in opposition." Republican leaders "said they counted the day as a victory." President Bush, speaking at a Republican fundraiser, "applauded the senators who voted against a timetable." But the Washington Times reports Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid called "the day's events 'a process of working every step of the way to bring our troops home.'"
Pelosi Does Not Yet Have The Votes In the House, meanwhile, a bill setting a withdrawal date was approved in committee, setting the stage for a floor debate. The Washington Post says this morning that Speaker Nancy Pelosi "still lacks the 218 votes she needs to pass the bill next week, aides said, but they insist she has the momentum." The Wall Street Journal notes that "given her own liberal, anti-war credentials," Pelosi "has a huge stake in winning over" anti-war "Democrats, who are among her core supporters. At the same time, Republicans have accented tensions between Ms. Pelosi and the AIPAC pro-Israel lobby over the Iraq debate -- and even suggest the Californian, as the first woman speaker, was manipulating the old bulls of the Appropriations panel, who were once her chairmen when she first came to the House."
McClatchy reports the House bill would require that the Pentagon abide by its standards of sending into combat only troops who are rested, trained and equipped. Yet it also would allow Bush to waive those standards as long as he explains why. It also would add $1.7 billion for military health care, $1.7 billion for veterans health care and $2.5 billion to improve the readiness of military forces still in the United States."
Will Democrats "Shut Down The War"? The Washington Post reports, "White House officials are increasingly convinced that Democrats have the votes and the fortitude to provoke a dramatic clash with the president. ... Congressional Democrats 'seem bent on a course of a veto showdown,' said one senior administration official. If Bush vetoes war funding, the White House could cover the mission's cost by borrowing from future appropriations and other military accounts, but such stopgaps will get more and more difficult if a stalemate drags on." The Post adds, "The stakes of a veto would be high, the official acknowledged, especially because many Democrats would be happy to shift blame to Bush for shutting down the war."
Sign up here to get the US News Political Bulletin emailed to you each morning at 8 a.m.
Khalid Shaikh Mohammed's claim of a key role in a variety of terror attacks and plots around the world continues to garner heavy news coverage, particularly his admission of beheading journalist Daniel Pearl. The Wall Street Journal reports, "Federal Bureau of Investigation spokesman Richard Kolko said the agency has long believed Mr. Mohammed was involved in the murder of Mr. Pearl. Mr. Mohammed 'stated so in the transcript, and although there is more work to be done, this helps reinforce the results of that investigation,' Mr. Kolko said." McClatchy, Los Angeles Times, Washington Times, Christian Science Monitor and New York Times, among other newspapers, also report on Mohammed's admissions.
Levin, Graham Secretly Visited Guantanamo To View KSM Hearing The Washington Post reports this morning Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin and Sen. Lindsey Graham "secretly flew to Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, on Saturday to observe the closed military hearing for al-Qaeda leader Khalid Sheik Mohammed, according to Capitol Hill staff members and Pentagon officials."
Valerie Plame will testify before a House committee today. The AP reports she will appear before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, "where Democrats are eager to explore the circumstances of her outing and how the White House responded to the leak of her identity." The Washington Post says "Plame's testimony will have all the trappings of a 'Garbo speaks' moment on Capitol Hill, with cameras and microphones arrayed to capture the voice of Plame, the glamorous but mute star of a compelling political intrigue. ... People close to Plame say her primary goal in testifying before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform is to knock down persistent claims that she did not serve undercover."
President Bush, no big fan of the prime-time press conference, is being urged by some aides and outside advisors to hold a full-scale nighttime press conference to help "define himself" at a time when his administration is under fire on several fronts. "There is discussion of holding a prime-time news conference where '43' can make remarks and get his licks in," an advisor tells the US News Political Bulletin. The event would be designed around discussing the results of his trip to Latin America and the latest from Iraq. But it would give him a chance to "frame the Department of Justice personnel issues and define himself and his administration," said the official, who is aware of the in-house discussions. "It's kind of a way to get in front of this ridiculous runaway train P.R. disaster. The sooner the better." One insider suggested that a major press conference would not only give Bush a chance to discuss Iraq, the controversy over the fired prosecutors, and even his embattled No Child Left Behind Act, but give him a chance to spin the issues his way.
Sign up here to get the US News Political Bulletin emailed to you each morning at 8 a.m.
Top
Sen. John McCain is seeking to find a little bit of the old magic from his 2000 campaign, bringing back his "Straight Talk Express" bus tour, a move which garnered heavy attention throughout the media. ABC World News reported last night, "Out on the political trail, today, a phenomenon we haven't seen in seven years. John McCain, out on the campaign trail, in the familiar campaign vehicle he used when he ran against George Bush for the Republican nomination in the year 2000." ABC's John Tapper, on the bus with McCain, added, "The bus is back. And with it, McCain's willingness to entertain any question." NBC Nightly News reported that McCain "this week is trying to recapture some of the good times during his 2000 primary season on his campaign bus. Here's Chip Reid." NBC (Reid) added, "In 2000, the original Straight Talk bus tour, free-wheeling and unpredictable so energized McCain's campaign, he nearly toppled frontrunner George Bush. ... Now with former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani surging past him in the polls, he hopes this bus tour will rev up his campaign, just as it did seven years ago."
However, many news reports focused on the changes McCain has undergone since the 2000 campaign. The CBS Evening News had reporter Sharyn Alfonsi on board, who reported, "Privately, some campaign insiders are worried the magic of 2000 may be gone." She asked McCain, "You were called a maverick, an underdog. ... Now people are calling you a Washington insider and part of the establishment. Is it a PR problem or have you changed?" McCain: "Obviously I'm the same, and I'm too old to change." In a front-page article, the New York Times says that McCain's "decision to reprise such a well-known symbol of his 2000 candidacy was evidence of the concern in Mr. McCain's campaign about the problems he faces in trying to adjust to an election that is not unfolding the way it had hoped. The outsider of 2000 is now an insider: the familiar face of Washington and the Republican Party, tied to an unpopular war and an unpopular president. It has, as his own advisers said, not been an easy adjustment."
The Boston Globe reported on its website, "A new poll of likely New Hampshire Republican primary voters shows a three-way race, a significant improvement for former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, who has been lagging behind Senator John McCain and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani in many polls. The survey, conducted by students at Franklin Pierce College, does have a high margin of error -- +/- 4.9 percent -- since only 400 people were polled. The poll found McCain with 29 percent, Giuliani with 28 percent and Romney with 22 percent. After Romney, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich had 5 percent."
The AP reports that Sen. Barack Obama (D) "vowed Thursday not to make the marital and other personal troubles of political rivals a campaign issue. 'Absolutely not,' Obama replied when asked in an interview on NBC's 'Today' show whether he would raise personal issues in the race. 'Everybody has personal issues,' Obama said. 'And I think, ultimately, what people want to know is what are you going to do on behalf of the American people -- and that's how it should be.'"
In a "Page Six" column in the New York Post, Richard Johnson relates, "The long love affair between Bill and Hillary Clinton and The New York Times seems to be over." At a fundraiser on Tuesday, Bill Clinton "spoke for two hours to a select group that had contributed the maximum $2,300 to Hillary's presidential campaign, and much of his talk was devoted to attacking the Times. 'He said his wife wasn't getting a fair shake from the Times,' said Curtis Sliwa, the WABC Radio host, who was there as a guest. ('I'm a Rudy guy,' Sliwa explained.) 'Clinton said the Times is attacking Hillary because she won't apologize for her vote on the war in Iraq,' Sliwa said. 'The Times has always been super-supportive. It's the equivalent of Rudy Giuliani attacking The New York Post.'" Former President Clinton "focused on the fact that three years ago -- shortly after Barack Obama burst onto the world stage with his speech at the Democratic National Convention where John Kerry was nominated -- Obama was asked how he would have voted on the Iraq war if he'd been in Congress at that time. 'And Obama said, "I'm not sure,"' Sliwa recalled. 'Clinton said the Times has a duty to report on Obama's initial ambivalence.'"
Sign up here to get the US News Political Bulletin emailed to you each morning at 8 a.m.
California and New Jersey now look like they will hold their national primaries on February 5, which is fast becoming the de facto national primary day. California move received extensive media coverage, while New Jersey's move generated little. The Los Angeles Times reports, "California made it official Thursday: The state's presidential primary will advance to Feb. 5. The shift, signed into law by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, vaults California ahead of most other states in the national scramble to choose candidates." However, "many analysts say that won't diminish the importance of the two traditional proving grounds, Iowa and New Hampshire." Schwarzenegger said on CNN's The Situation Room last night, "It is very important that California is part of the mix in the decision-making of who should be our nominees, because up until now, by having the June primary, you know, by that time, before the voters ever had a chance to vote, it was already locked in who the candidate is. And I think that is unfair to California, because we are number one, the number one state in the union." ABC World News also reported on the "huge change on how the nation will choose the next Presidential nominees," noting that "what you could end up with...on that one day, 24 major states all having primaries. Up to 126 million voters. This would be, effectively, a national primary. And for all intents and purposes, the chances would be that the nominees for each party would be determined finally on that day."
The AP reports, "Many strategists in both political parties believe" California's move "increases the significance of early successes in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina -- all of which will hold contests before Feb. 5. 'To go to California, you are going to need a huge head of steam,' said Democratic political consultant Jenny Backus. 'California moving up actually makes more attention go on the first lap. Even if you have all the money in the world, it will be hard to catch up to somebody who has racked up some victories in the first states.'"
The New York Times reports that the New Jersey state Assembly "voted on Thursday to move New Jersey's presidential primary up to Feb. 5 in an effort to have more say in who runs for president." New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine (D) said he backed the measure "and would sign it. ... Corzine said he looked forward to an 'exciting primary season' next year, adding coyly that although he had picked a candidate to support, he was not ready to disclose who it was."
Despite persistent rumors that his next move in politics would be a run for the seat now held by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R) said last night that he is not currently considering it. Asked on CNN's The Situation Room last night if he has given "any thought" to running for Senate in 2010, Schwarzenegger said, "No, absolutely not."
The Washington Post reports this morning that a bill giving the District of Columbia "its first full-fledged seat in the House of Representatives passed the Judiciary Committee yesterday, clearing the final hurdle before a vote by the entire House, expected next week." The House Democratic leadership "has vowed to pass the legislation and send it to the Senate, where it faces an uphill battle." The Committee "voted 21 to 13, largely along party lines, to approve the legislation. But in a dramatic move, a leading conservative Republican, Mike Pence (Ind.), who had been undecided, joined Democrats in voting yes." The Washington Times notes "one amendment, offered by Rep. Lamar Smith, Texas Republican and ranking minority member of the committee, would have required the bill to come before a three-judge panel in US District Court to review the bill's constitutionality if challenged. Any appeal of the panel's decision would then go straight to the Supreme Court." Smith's amendment "was defeated by a 19-15 vote."
Sign up here to get the US News Political Bulletin emailed to you each morning at 8 a.m.
Top
Jay Leno: "Oh, you probably know this story by now. Alberto Gonzales has gotten into trouble for firing eight US attorneys for what appears to be political reasoning. Yeah. President Bush said today he still has confidence in Gonzales. Same confidence he had in Rumsfeld, Scooter Libby; Michael Brown of FEMA doing a hell of a job."
Jay Leno: "Bush said today he's standing behind Gonzales, which is where you usually stand when you're about to push somebody overboard."
Conan O'Brien: "During a recent campaign speech, Barack Obama complemented his opponent, John Edwards, by calling him 'kind of cute.' Yeah. Yeah, and then he said that Hillary -- then he said that Hillary Clinton has a really great personality."
Sign up here to get the US News Political Bulletin emailed to you each morning at 8 a.m.
Top
Click image for larger view.
Smart analysis, insightful reporting, in-depth perspective—in a new, digital format.
Log in | Buy Now | See sample
View sample page 2View sample page 3View sample page 4View sample page 5advertisement
Get your POLITICALBULLETIN
Click image for larger view.
Smart analysis, insightful reporting, in-depth perspective—in a new, digital format.
Log in | Buy Now | See sample
View sample page 2View sample page 3View sample page 4View sample page 5Embed exclusive U.S. News headlines, rankings, columns, and blog postings to your Web site, blog, or social network.
advertisement
Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our Terms and Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.
