advertisement
Saturday, May 17, 2008
advertisement
As expected, the House was unable yesterday to override President Bush's veto of the Democratic Iraq bill, and the White House and Congress began work toward a possible compromise. There was a White House meeting between Bush and Hill leaders, from which all participants emerged with a markedly optimistic message. USA Today says "congressional leaders from both parties predicted quick approval of emergency funding for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan." The Baltimore Sun also notes "congressional leaders from both parties emerged with great optimism." The Washington Times notes yesterday's "30-minute meeting was originally scheduled for one hour." The reason, McClatchy reports, was that "congressional leaders arrived late" because of a House vote to override Bush's veto. Similar stories appear in the Financial Times and The Hill.
Media reports continue to suggest the eventual deal could include "benchmarks" for Iraqi leaders and exclude the Democrats' current pullout timetable. The Washington Post headlines its report this morning "Democrats Back Down On Iraq Timetable," and says Democrats yesterday offered "the first major concession: an agreement to drop their demand for a timeline to bring troops home from Iraq." Democrats "backed off after the House failed, on a vote of 222 to 203, to override the president's veto." The Post adds "a new dynamic also is at work, with some Republicans now saying that funding further military operations in Iraq with no strings attached does not make practical or political sense." The AP also reports Democrats "signaled they were ready to make significant concessions such as jettisoning the troop withdrawal timetable and cutting some of the domestic funds that are part of the bill and Bush opposes." The Los Angeles Times, meanwhile, considers the talk of "benchmarks" a sign that "some Republicans," feeling "distressed by the violence in Iraq and worried about tying their political fate an unpopular president," are "beginning to move away from the White House to stake out a more critical position on the US role in war." Editorials in the Washington Post and USA Today also endorse the "benchmarks" idea this morning.
On ABC World News, George Stephanopoulos said, "All this is going to be focused on the Senate. That's where the deal is going to be made. ... Everyone knows something is going to have to be reached in the Senate first. They're going to have to pass that, and send it over, and really force it down the Speaker and the Democrats' throat in the House." Within the Senate, the New York Times sees the greatest challenge on the Democratic side: "Think of Senators Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Russell D. Feingold of Wisconsin as the yin and yang of Democratic views on what to do about the Iraq spending legislation now that President Bush's veto has been upheld." Nelson, "a centrist, grudgingly voted for the measure calling for a troop withdrawal to begin by Oct. 1 because he was confident the deadline would be stripped out the second time around." But Feingold, "a liberal, grudgingly voted for the measure as a first step toward taking more substantial action, including ending most spending on the war by next spring." In "a stark illustration of the challenge facing the leadership, Mr. Feingold said he would not hesitate to break from others in the party if talks produced legislation that provided the money without binding language leading to an end to the war."
Story Of A Veto Pen The Washington Times reports that on Tuesday, Bush vetoed the Democrats' Iraq bill with "a regular black-ink, felt-tip pen, not his usual personalized Cross-brand pen when he vetoed a timeline for withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq. The pen was a gift from Robert Derga, the father of a US Marine killed in Iraq." Derga "of Uniontown, Ohio, gave Mr. Bush the pen after a speech by the president last month at the White House and had asked him to use it when he vetoed the timeline." Bush "met with the Dergas and other families for about 45 minutes and spoke directly with each family. 'I looked the president square in the eye,' Mr. Derga said. 'I looked at him and said, "Mr. President, if this Iraq supplemental comes down to a veto, I want you to use my pen to do it."' Mr. Bush 'kind of looked at me funny for a moment and then said, "Absolutely," and then handed the pen to his assistant,' he said." The Washington Post says "a call from the White House late Tuesday gratified Derga. 'We very much support the direction the president's taken. It's not a popular one, but he's doing what I feel is morally correct. He's staying the course,' said Derga, who aimed 'to let him know we fully support him and we can be a little part of it. It's not on his shoulders alone. I'm supplying the ink. He's doing the pen motion. We're in it together.'"
The CBS Evening News noted last night that President Bush, "for the first time," yesterday "raised the possibility of defeat" in Iraq. Bush was shown saying, "Slowly but surely the truth will be known. Either we'll succeed or we won't succeed. And the definition of success as I described is, you know, sectarian violence down. Success is not 'no violence.'" ABC World News offered a different interpretation of Bush's remark. After showing footage of the rest of Bush's statement ("Success is not 'no violence.' There are parts of our own country, you know, that have a certain level of violence to it. But success is a level of violence where the people feel comfortable about living their daily lives."), chief White House correspondent Martha Raddatz remarked, "ABC News reported a couple of weeks ago, that...the President would dampen down expectations. And that's exactly what he did today. ... An acceptable level of violence, that's the new definition of what they're looking at, as success in Iraq. Very far down from where it was."
Bush made that comment during a speech to the Associated General Contractors of America. The New York Times says this trade group "is heavily Republican and has a political action committee that gives more to Republicans than to Democrats, by a roughly six-to-one margin." Bush has spoken before friendly crowds "several times in the last few weeks, even as some onetime allies voice worry about the White House creating the impression that he is cloistered, hearing only supportive voices."
Print coverage focused on a different aspect of Bush's words: His assertion that al Qaeda, not sectarian violence, is America's "public enemy number one" in Iraq. The AP says Bush "put a heavy focus on al-Qaida, which carried out the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks that killed nearly 3,000 people. In doing so, he sought more bluntly to cast the unpopular Iraq war in terms that US citizens could connect to their own lives." Said Bush, "For America, the decision we face in Iraq is not whether we ought to take sides in a civil war, it's whether we stay in the fight against the same international terrorist network that attacked us on 9/11. ... I strongly believe it's in our national interest to stay in the fight." USA Today notes Republicans on Capitol Hill took up the same message yesterday.
In his "Washington Sketch" column for the Washington Post, Dana Milbank was derisive of Bush's message: "Bush is at odds with the American public and a restive congressional majority over the Iraq war, and even some Republicans talk about imposing new requirements that could trigger a troop withdrawal. It's time to play the Qaeda card. ... Never mind all that talk about sectarian strife and civil war in Iraq."
Sign up here to get the US News Political Bulletin emailed to you each morning at 8 a.m.
The controversy over the firing of eight US Attorneys continues to fester, with the Senate subpoenaing the email of Deputy White House Chief of Staff Karl Rove -- whom many Republicans believe to be their ultimate target in the scandal, and investigations expanding into the conduct of a former top aide to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. In this latest development, the Department of Justice announced yesterday that it is investigating whether Gonzales' former top aide, Monica Goodling, considered party affiliation in the hiring of assistant US attorneys. As the Wall Street Journal this morning, doing so "would have been a violation of federal law," because the assistant prosecutors "are career employees not meant to be subject to political litmus tests in order to get or keep their jobs." The AP reports DOJ spokesman Dean Boyd "confirmed Wednesday that the department's inspector general and Office of Professional Responsibility have been investigating for several weeks Goodling's role in hiring career attorneys -- an unusual responsibility for her to have had." The Washington Post calls the announcement a "signal that a joint probe begun in March by the department's inspector general and Office of Professional Responsibility has expanded beyond the controversial dismissal of eight US attorneys last year." Meanwhile the Los Angeles Times says Goodling "has become a focus of congressional investigators because she played a central role in identifying eight US attorneys who were fired last year."
Meanwhile, the Washington Times reports senators subpoenaed the Attorney General for "all e-mails related to presidential adviser Karl Rove and the firings of eight federal prosecutors." The New York Times reports Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy "said in a letter to Mr. Gonzales that 'significant documents highly relevant to the committee's inquiry have not been produced.'" USA Today says "the subpoena for the Rove communications represents an ongoing effort by Democrats and some Republicans to assess the White House's involvement in the firings.
Even fellow Republicans are not sparing Gonzales from their scrutiny. The Hill reports the "further evidence that Republicans are frustrated with Gonzales and DoJ comes in a letter that several senators sent him yesterday. Signed by Leahy and the panel's ranking Republican, Arlen Specter (Pa.), as well as Sens. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Schumer, it demands answers regarding an internal DoJ memo that surfaced this week." The "secret order" signed by Gonzales in March 2006 gave "two of his aides broad authority over the hiring and firing of most of DoJ's political employees."
The controversy is also ensnaring other Justice Department officials: The Washington Post reports Democratic Sen. Jon Tester of Montana called on William M. Mercer, "a top Justice Department official to resign his US attorney's post after revelations that he worked to alter federal law so that he and a handful of other senior aides could escape residency requirements that governed their assignments as federal prosecutors."
Adding to the pressure, six of the fired US Attorneys gave statements to the House Judiciary Committee that support the case made by Democrats that the firings were politically motivated. The Los Angeles Times says the statements, "released by the House panel, also show that as the scandal continues, several of the ousted prosecutors are becoming increasingly convinced they were dismissed for political rather than performance reasons." Bloomberg notes former US Attorney Daniel Bodgen "says he was told his dismissal was necessary to let a Republican lawyer get experience to qualify for a federal judgeship." And the (Northwest Arkansas) Morning News reports H.E. Bud Cummins, the "former US attorney in Little Rock, said he was told by a top Justice Department official that the White House was responsible for his ouster and for a plan to bypass Senate confirmation for his replacement."
Meanwhile Frank Bowman, a law professor at the University of Missouri-Columbia, writes in the New York Times that if Attorney General Gonzales "will not resign, Congress should impeach him." Though "provoked by individual misconduct, the power to impeach is at bottom a tool granted Congress to defend the constitutional order."
The US News Political Bulletin has learned Henry Waxman, Chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, is planning a broader and deeper series of investigations of the Bush administration than many expect. Waxman, a veteran Democratic representative from California, is already making news by looking into political activities in the Executive Branch that may run afoul of the law, and the administration's erroneous claims that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction in the run-up to the Iraq invasion.
But Capitol Hill insiders tell the Political Bulletin this is only the beginning. "Waxman is doing a great job of holding his powder and picking his shots," says a strategist with close ties to House Democrats. One of Waxman's next objectives will be not only to examine false claims by administration officials to justify invading Iraq but also to expose people and companies that have profited disproportionately from the war, congressional sources say. Hill Democrats think this line of inquiry will be explosive and will tarnish both the Bush administration and Republicans in general.
The Washington Times reports in its "Inside The Beltway" column on an interview of White House deputy press secretary Dana Perino, conducted by "best-selling author" Ronald Kessler: "Our favorite portion of the interview (read it in its entirety on NewsMax.com) deals with Mrs. Perino arriving home each night, kicking off her heels and commanding -- in most unusual political fashion -- her well-trained Hungarian hunting dog, 'Henry,' to retrieve her flip-flops. 'When Perino says to the dog, "Tell us what you think of John Kerry," the dog runs off and fetches flip-flops,' Mr. Kessler reveals."
Sign up here to get the US News Political Bulletin emailed to you each morning at 8 a.m.
Top
Obama Strongest Democrat In General Election. A new poll out this morning from Quinnipiac University shows Rudy Giuliani holding a far narrower lead over his GOP rivals than he had in a February poll. The big difference? The new poll includes former Sen. Fred Thompson in the mix, and he appears to draw most of his support from Giuliani. The poll shows Giuliani leading with 27%, followed by John McCain, 19%; Fred Thompson, 14%; Mitt Romney, 8%; Newt Gingrich, 8%; and the rest of the field at 2% or less. In the February Quinnipiac survey, Giuliani led with 40%, followed by McCain with 19%. On the Democratic side, Hillary Clinton retains a double-digit lead over the rest of the Democratic field, backed by 32%, followed by Barack Obama, 18%; Al Gore, 14%; John Edwards, 12%; with the rest of the field at 3% or less.
In general election match ups, Giuliani remains the candidate to beat. Only Obama comes close, trailing the former New York Mayor 44%-41%. Giuliani leads Clinton 49%-40% and Gore 48%-41%. Obama also does the best against McCain, tying him at 42% apiece. McCain leads Clinton 46%-41% and Gore 47%-41%. Maurice Carroll, director of Quinnipiac's polling institute, said, "The top Democrats, New York Sen. Hillary Clinton, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama and Vice President Al Gore, a non-candidate, all get the same 40 or 41 percent against 'America's Mayor,' Rudolph Giuliani. But Giuliani slips against Obama, making that the closest race at least today."
The GOP field meets for its first debate tonight, which will be hosted held at the Reagan Library in California. However, it is the shadow cast by President Bush, not Reagan, that will be the backdrop for the event. The New York Times reports that for the Republicans, "the question of how to deal with President Bush is vexing" them: "Do they embrace him as a means of appealing to the conservative voters who tend to decide Republican primaries? Or do they break from him in an effort to show that they will lead the nation in a new direction? Do they applaud his policies or question his competence - or both?" The leading candidates "are showing clear divisions on that score. In formally announcing his candidacy last week, Senator John McCain of Arizona, without naming Mr. Bush, attacked the performance of the White House at home and abroad." Rudolph W. Giuliani and Mitt Romney "have chosen to stick close to Mr. Bush, or at least to avoid breaking openly with him."
Another subtext to the debate is how the GOP field with deal with California's Republican electorate. The Washington Post reports that the candidates' political chiefs "are rewriting decades-old strategies about how to campaign in the nation's most populous state." With the state's "primary looming as the biggest prize in the massive national battle developing for Feb. 5, California has shed its status as a non-factor in recent nominating contests, say top campaign advisers and the state's veteran GOP activists." New rules "adopted by the state party, meanwhile, have scrapped winner-take-all voting for a system that awards three delegates to the victor in each of the state's 53 congressional districts." That change, coupled with the state's decision to move its primary date, has scrambled the GOP contest here 10 months before it takes place."
Tonight's debate is likely to have significantly more fireworks that last week's relatively tame Democratic event in South Carolina. U.S. News and World Report reports on its website that the debate "comes at a time of considerable volatility for the Republican ticket." As Giuliani "attempts to protect his lead in national polls," McCain "tries to shore up sagging support," and Romney "looks to introduce himself to many voters for the first time, that volatility may make for some fireworks during the debate, the first of the '08 cycle for the Republicans." But "flare-ups may be even more likely because a host of second-tier candidates, including former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback, and California Rep. Duncan Hunter, will be looking to attack the front-runners as being insufficiently conservative." In what is "likely to be something of a departure from last week's Democratic presidential debate, the Republican front-runners will be showcasing their individual records in arguing that they are best qualified to lead the country."
The Washington Post reports in a front page story that Sen. Barack Obama is "delivering pointed critiques of the African American community as he campaigns for its votes, lamenting that many of his generation are 'disenfranchising' themselves because they don't vote, taking rappers to task for their language, and decrying 'anti-intellectualism' in the black community, including black children telling peers who get good grades that they are 'acting white.'" Obama has "engaged in an intense competition for black voters," but the "first-term senator, who has sought to present himself as an agent of change eager to challenge political convention, has taken the unusual route of publicly criticizing his own community." Obama said he "is simply giving broader exposure to the problems that African Americans discuss with great frankness in private."
The race to frontload the primary system continues unabated, although the National Democrats are making the first serious move to contain it. The AP reports this morning that Tennessee Gov. Phil Bredesen (D) yesterday signed a bill moving up his state's primary from February 12 to February 5, joining the de facto national primary. Meanwhile, the Florida legislature is looking to jump over the massive February 5 contest to January 29, a change they are expected to vote on this week. However, the Miami Herald reports today that the Democratic National Committee yesterday said that any candidate who campaigned in Florida for a January 29 primary would not have their delegates from that state counted at the national convention. The threat prompted the Democrats to consider making the January vote non-binding, and apportioning delegates at a post-February 5 caucus.
Sign up here to get the US News Political Bulletin emailed to you each morning at 8 a.m.
Top
Jay Leno: "Bush has vetoed Congress' Iraqi bill, so two branches of government are now battling, you see. See, this is why President Bush wanted a monarchy, so he wouldn't have these kinds of problems."
Jay Leno: "You all know who Nancy Pelosi is, right? You know who she is? She's the second most powerful woman in the country, right behind the DC madam."
Jay Leno: "According to 'The New York Post,' Hillary Clinton used three private jets in a single day in a campaign swing through South Carolina. Three different private jets. And today, she was officially named a Hollywood environmentalist."
David Letterman: "By now you know that President Bush vetoed the Iraq troop withdrawal bill. Yeah. He said...it would turn the country into a cauldron of chaos. And you'd hate to see Iraq become unstable."
Sign up here to get the US News Political Bulletin emailed to you each morning at 8 a.m.
Top
Copyright © 2008 by the Bulletin News Network, Inc.
11190 Sunrise Valley Drive, Suite 130 • Reston, VA 20191
advertisement
Get your POLITICALBULLETIN
Best Careers 2008
In a shifting job landscape, we've identified where the growth lies.
advertisement
Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our Terms and Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.
