ironic

* americablog:

"It is ironic that Bush accuses others of emboldening the terrorists when it's exactly what he has done.'

ironic.

* sdut:

"Rules governing the use of classified information in the case against former Poway defense contractor Brent Wilkes and ex-CIA official Kyle “Dusty” Foggo are unconstitutional and should be scrapped, defense lawyers said.
[]
The case against Wilkes and Foggo, who are accused of corruption related to the Randy “Duke” Cunningham bribery scandal, is legally complicated because some of the evidence is top secret and a judge has to approve its use in court. In some situations, clients and lawyers are not even legally able to discuss the classified information without court approval."

* kevin:

"The fact that loyalty is a one-way street with Bush the Younger is not exactly the news of the century."

actually, it has long driven me mad that lotsa people, even those on 'our side', seem to thing that Blinky is 'famously loyal'

* larisa:

"Yes, it is and this just adds to an already ample body of evidence that the Bush administration is nothing more than a Congress approved crime syndicate. Seriously, consider that the Attorney General of the United States obstructed justice to get his pals a free pass for very serious crimes. Consider that the Vice President led this, based on lies, into an illegal war. Consider that the most recent former DCI, Porter Goss, had to resign over allegations of bribery, including the use of hookers. Consider that FEMA let an entire city drown. Consider that the head of the FBI has admitted to abusing the Patriot Act. And that is just a handful of examples. I am quite frankly at a loss over how overt this criminal conduct is, indicating that this syndicate knows no one will stop them."

* xymphora:

"If this were a normal situation, Wolfowitz would have already resigned, but, as always, this has turned into a test of strength for the Lobby.

* henley:

"I do think Moyers could get an hour out of a good show on the role The Blogosphere played in the buying of the war. “Conservative bloggers” got the briefest of shoutouts in tonights story, liberal bloggers none at all, and the seepage at the boundaries between Left and Right and Prowar and Antiwar nothing either. The good show would explain that The Blogosphere performed two distinct functions throughout 2002 and early 2003: part of it amplified the Administration’s case and acted to ridicule anyone dissenting from it, but another part of it provided the criticism all but missing in the bigtime print and screen outlets. The first group were largely but not exclusively “conservative.” The second group was largely but not exclusively “liberal.”

Such a show would have to consider the question of whether either group of bloggers genuinely mattered. I go back and forth on that question.

* riverbend:

"I remember Baghdad before the war- one could live anywhere. We didn't know what our neighbors were- we didn't care. No one asked about religion or sect. No one bothered with what was considered a trivial topic: are you Sunni or Shia? You only asked something like that if you were uncouth and backward. Our lives revolve around it now. Our existence depends on hiding it or highlighting it- depending on the group of masked men who stop you or raid your home in the middle of the night."

* froomkin:

"Richard Clarke writes in a New York Daily News op-ed: "Does the President think terrorists are puppy dogs? He keeps saying that terrorists will 'follow us home' like lost dogs. This will only happen, however, he says, if we 'lose' in Iraq. . . .

"How is this odd terrorist puppy dog behavior supposed to work? The President must believe that terrorists are playing by some odd rules of chivalry. Would this be the 'only one slaughter ground at a time' rule of terrorism?

"Of course, nothing about our being 'over there' in any way prevents terrorists from coming here. Quite the opposite, the evidence is overwhelming that our presence provides motivation for people throughout the Arab world to become anti-American terrorists. . . .

"[I]n the fantasyland of illogic in which the President dwells, shaped by slogans devised by spin doctors, America can 'win' in Iraq. Then, we are to believe, the terrorists will be so demoralized that they will recant their beliefs and cease their terrorist ways."

* froomkin:

In a letter to the House oversight committee, the Republican National Committee turned over a heavily caveated list with 37 names on it. It was described as a "current list of users who we believe are or were White House employees using RNC accounts for whom we have been able to identify active e-mail data on operational RNC servers." The RNC said more names may well show up later.

The RNC says it is "working diligently to identify and preserve all potentially relevant data that may exist" and has already gathered 25.5 million kilobytes of e-mail from the 37. It has also hired a computer forensics firm that has "imaged" several RNC computers and blackberries that are currently being used by White House employees.

ummm. who uses kilobytes as a metric?