w/ Brad & Desi
NATIONWIDE STUDY FINDS ALMOST NO VOTER FRAUD
Just 10 cases of in-person impersonation in all 50 states since 2000...
VIDEO: 'Rise of the Tea Bags'
Brad interviews American patriots...
'Democracy's Gold Standard'
Hand-marked, hand-counted ballots...
GOP Voter Registration Fraud Scandal 2012...
The Secret Koch Brothers Tapes...
|MORE BRAD BLOG 'SPECIAL COVERAGE' PAGES...|
We're told that tonight's 60 Minutes features a segment with Mike Wallace on "Wounds of War" featuring soldiers injured in Iraq. (60 Minutes' website now has coverage of the segment, with a video link, but it's not the complete segment apparently.)
The segment, third on tonight's broadcast, features an interview with Tomas Young, whose story we first highlighted during our special "Operation Noble Cause" radio broadcasts on The BRAD SHOW from on the ground at "Camp Casey" in Crawford, TX, last summer. Apparently footage of me interviewing Young is a quick part of the segment.
Army Specialist Young was paralyzed from the waist down --- on the same day and in the same city as Cindy Sheehan's son, Casey --- while riding in a canvas-covered truck through Sadr City during the uprising there.
Young is seen in the photo at right at Camp Casey with his new wife, Bree, requesting a meeting with Bush. They had come to Crawford on their honeymoon. Bush had refused a meeting with Sheehan at the time on the grounds that he'd already met with her. As far as we know, Bush has still never met with Young, who wanted to ask him why he was refusing to support Stem Cell research so that he might someday be able to walk again.
UPDATE: Have now seen the segment, and it was interesting. We'll try to get it up here. One thing I didn't know until tonight was that Tomas' brother is still serving in Iraq. So for those who suggest that what Young is doing --- in speaking out against the war --- is harming our troops...well...he made clear on 60 Minutes that's the last thing he'd want to do with a brother still serving there!
FURTHER UPDATE: Here's the segment! Courtesy of the invaluable David Edwards!
(Hat-tip Jesse of Stakeholder for the heads-up!)
Election officials in Cambria and Somerset Counties in Pennsylvania "know" they will have touch-screen voting machines (DREs) in place for this May's primary election even though no contracts have yet been signed. They stupidly think they can take custody of completely new technology, train election workers and the voters and have a trouble free election all with a few weeks preparation. This is pure incompetence. Also Illinois violates their own state laws to help out Sequoia and Sequoia gets an attempted assist in New Mexico....
This just out minutes ago from Associated Press...
Harry Whittington, 78, was "alert and doing fine" after Cheney sprayed Whittington with shotgun pellets on Saturday at the Armstrong Ranch in South Texas, said property owner Katharine Armstrong.
Armstrong said Cheney turned to shoot a bird and accidentally hit Whittington. She said Whittington was taken to Corpus Christi Memorial Hospital by ambulance.
Cheney's spokeswoman, Lea Anne McBride, said the vice president was with Whittington, a lawyer from Austin, and his wife at the hospital this afternoon.
UPDATE FROM BRAD: Several sources (Fox, CNN, Reuters) confirming incident, but reporting it took place yesterday (Saturday) at 5:30pm Texas time. Why was the story withheld from the media until now? Almost 24 hours later? The man is reported to be in stable condition, apparently, at this time. Did they wait until they could report that he would be fine before releasing it at all? Would we have found out about it at all, therefore, if the man had died? Did they wait until after it was too late to be discussed discussed on the Sunday News shows?
Just some of the questions I expect we'll be hearing shortly.
And I also care a lot about gun laws. I worry sometimes that there is a growing antihunting sentiment that I run into with people...people who have no idea what it's all about...have never done it and don't like the idea of somebody else doing it.
On the Armstrongs, on whose ranch the incident occurred, and their relation to Cheney et al...From WhiteHouseForSale.org...
Katherine Armstrong is the daughter of Anne, and was the one who witnessed the incident, quoted in the stories.
MORE... Shakespeare's Sister has details on Cheney's victim, Harry Whittington, and his long-standing crony-hood with Boy Bush...
DETAILS FROM HOSPITAL ON WHITTINGTON'S CONDITION... As Josh Marshall points out, details on Whittington's condition has so far only been reported by the property owner, Katharine Armstrong who has, by-and-large, downplayed the injury as no big deal.
CHRISTUS Spohn Hospital spokesperson, Yvonne Wheeler, tells The BRAD BLOG that the only information currently given to them by doctors is that Whittington is in "stable condition."
She's not able to say whether or not his condition has been worse previously when he was admitted to the facility at 8:15pm CT on Saturday, and then upgraded more recently.
News reports have said that Whittington was shot at 5:30pm CT, but Wheeler had no explanation for the apparent delay in his admission, other than she understands he was initially treated on-site. While the hospital is a two-hour drive from Armstrong's ranch, Whittington was transported to the facility by the hospital's own helicopter, so the reason for the apparent two-hour time-delay is still unclear.
No word yet on when Whittington may be released from the hospital.
Wheeler said that the media has requested a doctor there give a briefing on hunting accidents in general, and they will be doing so shortly.
We've so far been unable to receive comment from Cheney's office.
According to AP, Armstrong had said about the shooting:
"The vice president didn't see him," she continued. "The covey flushed and the vice president picked out a bird and was following it and shot. And by god, Harry was in the line of fire and got peppered pretty good."
JAMES AND SARAH BRADY RELEASE COMMENT... And a hilarious one at that...
The "DVN Top 5" is a feature in the weekly voting newsletter of VoteTrustUSA. The February 07 edition can be found here. The selection of what will be the "Top 5" for each week and where it goes on the list is all mine. The fact that you may disagree with my choices is great because it shows that you have been reading the DVN articles that I've posted throughout the week here on The BRAD BLOG!...
On Friday, CIA Director Porter Goss wrote an op-ed for the New York Times claiming that national security whistleblowers are harming U.S. intelligence interests. That, as a "pre-emptive" attack on next week's U.S. House sub-committee hearings on the need for new whistleblower protection litigation.
Today, Sibel Edmonds, the former FBI translator turned whistleblower --- who knows a thing or two about what protections are and aren't available to patriots who wish to reveal unlawful behavior inside America's intelligence agencies --- posts a reply to Goss which cleans his clock. I mean: Cleans. His. Clock.
Read it in full to learn what's really at stake in this issue. But as a tease, here's her closing graf:
Is the Bush Administration getting nervous about growing GOP defections concerning their warrantless NSA domestic eavesdropping program?
A rare Saturday email to Congressional members announcing a last-minute scheduled briefing on Monday by the Dept. of Justice would seem to indicate that may be the case.
The email, sent earlier today and obtained by The BRAD BLOG, notified Congressional Republicans and Democratic members of the House Judiciary Committee of the newly announced briefing for Monday --- in advance of next Wednesday's mark-up of two Resolutions of Inquiry being put forward in the committee.
The email announcement follows in full...
Will be held at 3 pm on Monday, Feb 13th. Presentation will be followed by an opportunity for Q & A. This briefing is for Judiciary Committee Members and staff only. If you have questions, please contact Beth Sokul at 5-3951.
House Judiciary Committee
A House staffer confirmed to The BRAD BLOG that such Saturday notices are very unusual and speculated that the White House may be becoming increasing concerned about GOP defections concerning the legality of their warrantless domestic eavesdropping program.
The staffer speculated the move may be meant as an attempt to give the House Judiciary Committee a way to say, "Well, we've had this briefing now, so there's no need for full hearings on it."
Next Wednesday, the Committee is scheduled for mark-up of the two following resolutions:
The mark-up conference will be carried live on the web next Wednesday, February 15, 2006 beginning at 10:00am ET.
Full audio and video will be available via the Judiciary Committee website at www.Judiciary.House.gov
Guest Blogged by Special BRAD BLOG CPAC Correspondent Daniel Borchers
EDITOR'S NOTE: We've asked Dan Borchers of Citizens for Principled Conservatism, Brother Watch & Coulter Watch, to cover the "Conservative Political Action Conference" (CPAC) in D.C. this weekend as our Special BRAD BLOG correspondent. We've written about Borchers --- who was escorted out of CPAC in 2002 for distributing material critical of CPAC darling Ann Coulter and disallowed media credentials in the years following --- in several previous articles here, here, both of which include videos he's compiled showing Coulter to be a detriment to the Conservative Movement. As well, we wrote about Borchers in an article for the February issue of Mother Jones. He previous dispatch from "Bloggers Row" at CPAC on DAY 1 is here.
Anticipation for Ann Coulter's performance was high. Throughout the afternoon, the emcee repeatedly announced that the first four rows of seats were specifically reserved for gold club members. The panel preceding Coulter's speech was cut short to prepare for hers. Coulter's personal bodyguard ensured the stage was secure.
Coulter entered as if she owned that stage.
The audience gave Coulter a standing ovation as she graced the mesmerized crowd with her welcoming smile. The enthralled throng was jubilant. Audience members standing along the walls on the sides and back of the packed auditorium jockeyed for better viewing positions. Cameras flashed. And the audience cheered as she began to speak.
Coulter held the audience in the grip of her words, her voice, her message. A burst of applause and cheers greeted her "Raghead" joke: "I think our motto should be post-9-11, 'raghead talks tough, raghead faces consequences.'"
But just moments later, a deathly silence filled the room as people grasped the full import of Coulter's express wish that liberal Supreme Court Justices be targeted for assassination. But Coulter quickly lured back her audience.
During Q&A, one student asked Coulter what her greatest ethical dilemma was. Coulter toyed with the audience as the hushed auditorium awaited her answer to this personal question. Then Coulter replied, "One time I had a shot at Clinton. I thought, 'Ann, that's not going to help your career.'"
Another student (a Muslim) suggested Coulter stop denigrating all Muslims for the actions of a few, while a third student criticized her for her racist rhetoric. Coulter's responses were lackluster and non-responsive. Afterwards, one student noted, "She can dish it out, but she can't take it."
Coulter left the stage to another standing ovation and the emcee begged the audience to remain for the next panel. Many left to follow Coulter to a book signing at the Claire Boothe Luce Policy Institute booth. (Complete Audio of Coulter Speech posted previously here.)
But not everyone at CPAC was thrilled about Coulter's presence. Prior to the speech, I spoke with Mohammed Ali Hasan, a spokesman for "Muslims for Bush" and "Muslims for America" who feels that Coulter is "completely inappropriate" and that she "hurts" the Conservative movement. Hasan unapologetically denounced Coulter as a poor representative for Conservatism. "Ann Coulter spends more time being a racist and bigot, and we don't welcome her at this conference."
"Right now," Hasan went on, "I'd advise the leadership of CPAC to re-think who should be there speaker for next year." (Listen to my short interview with Hasan [MP3].)
After the speech, I spoke with one student, a Christian, who had deliberately gone down to the exhibit hall to apologize to the Muslim student for Coulter's objectionable "raghead" comments and others. Many other students were unnerved by portions of Coulter's speech and her "blatantly beating up on Muslims." (Listen to my short interview with several of the Students [MP3].)
Perhaps the weirdest recurrence at CPAC is Coulter-mania ? Ann Coulter has spoken at nine consecutive CPAC conferences ? and each year is more manic than the last. The longest lines are always for her book signings. Coulter-abilia is everywhere.
One remarkable aspect of Coulter's annual CPAC speeches is this startling fact: rarely is the subject known in advance. She is given free rein to speak on whatever she wants.
It is shocking how complacent conservatives have become despite Coulter's most extreme rhetoric. Indeed, many come to CPAC to see her because of her extreme rhetoric.
EDITOR'S NOTE: Later that evening, Coulter gave another address at George Washington University. A BRAD BLOG fan was on hand with a video recorder, but not allowed to tape the address despite prior permission granted.
Instead, he was able to tape some of the student protests of Coulter's appearance outside the auditorium as well as catching Coulter greeting fans...but dissing The BRAD BLOG...on her way home from the event!
Why does Ann Coulter hate us so?
Alaska is planning on finally turning over the voting files to the state Democratic party. It is hard to believe that what the party will get is going to prove or disprove anything now. In Florida the National Federation of the Blind lawsuit against Volusia Co. has been kicked out of the court. In New Mexico their voter verified paper ballot bill continues to move through the state legislature even against the scorn of some in the legislature and one stubborn county election official who may have staked her political future in her battle against verifiable elections. And the spigot of dis- and mis-information is wide open in Pennsylvania....
See RAW STORY for a few choice quotes from Coulter's standing room only speech just given at the "Conservative Political Action Conference" (CPAC) in D.C.
A couple such quotes reportedly include:
Coulter on killing Bill Clinton:
(Responding to a question from a Catholic University student about her biggest moral or ethical dilemma) "There was one time I had a shot at Clinton. I thought 'Ann, that's not going to help your career.'"
As Max Blumenthal mentioned at RAW, Coulter is the "rock star" of CPAC, and the complete audio of the event of her address (now posted below) complete with hysterical cheers from the adoring jam-packed crowd, of the event bears that out.
BRAD BLOG's Special CPAC Correspondent Dan Borchers submitted the following, along with the complete audio of Coulter's speech. (See this previous post for Borchers' details on DAY 1 from yesterday, and how he came to cover the event for us.)
Ann Coulter, speaking before a standing-room-only crowd, expressed racist views, said she wanted liberal Supreme Court Justices to be killed and explained that she once had a chance to kill President Clinton, but thought that would be a career-stopper. Here's the audio of that speech and Q&A [MP3]. A fuller report will follow, complete with photos and interviews.
(Apologies for the quality of the audio...it improves a bit as it goes on.)
UPDATE: Dan's more detailed report on the speech, including Audio interviews with some who are less than pleased with Coulter's appearance, as well as Video of protests outside and a warm BRAD BLOG greeting from Coulter is now posted here...
John Conyers (D-MI), ranking member of the U.S. House Judiciary Committee, has just sent the following letter to George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, The BRAD BLOG has learned.
The letter, published exclusively below, concerns questions about the revelations from National Journal yesterday that Cheney's former chief of staff, I. "Scooter" Libby testified to Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald's grand jury that he was "authorized" by Cheney and other White House "superiors" to leak classified national security intelligence to the media.
It should be noted that a Vice President's chief of staff, doesn't have all that many "superiors" in addition to the Veep himself.
The leaks, as reported by Murray Waas, were meant to discredit former Ambassador Joe Wilson's assertions that the Administration was manipulating various intelligence in the lead up to the Iraq War, and later, to justify the Administration's questionable use of pre-War Intelligence.
We post Conyers' letter in full, including questions seeking confirmation and clarification from both Bush and Cheney on these matters below...
The Vice President
The White House
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President and Mr. Vice President:
Yesterday, the National Journal and AP reported that the Vice President's former Chief of Staff, I. Lewis (Scooter) Libby, had testified to a federal grand jury that as part of an effort to discredit Ambassador Joseph Wilson and defend your Administration's use of prewar intelligence, he had been authorized by the Vice President and other White House superiors to leak classified information to journalists.(1) Moreover, correspondence filed by Special Prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald also reveals that Mr. Libby has asserted that he had been authorized to disclose to the media a still-classified portion of a National Intelligence Estimate about alleged efforts to develop nuclear weapons to the media.(2)
If this is true, I am concerned that it constitutes an abuse of power at best, and may be outright unlawful at worst. As I understand the applicable declassification regulations, they provide that "[i]nformation shall be declassified as soon as it no longer meets the standard for classification under this order."(3) Under these standards, it would appear that neither classified nuclear information nor Valerie Plame's status as a covert agent or the name of her employer warranted declassification. This is why Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald has stated that these leaks were "a serious breach of public trust"(4)
As a result of these reports, I would like to ask you the following questions:
1. Is the report in the National Journal accurate? Have you or your staffs authorized Mr. Libby or other personnel within the Administration to declassify and leak information to the media relating to the Iraq war and the use of pre-war intelligence on any occasions? If so, please describe.
2. What is the legal basis for authorizing such declassifications and disclosures?
3. On September 30, 2003, the President declared, "[l]isten, I know of nobody - I don't know of anybody in my administration who leaked classified information ... If somebody did leak classified information, I'd like to know it, and we'll take the appropriate action."(5) Do you still stand by the President's pledge and, if so, what action are you planning to take against any individuals who may have authorized the leaks described in the National Journal article?
To the extent you believe any of the information needed to respond to the above questions may be classified or sensitive, I am happy to meet with you or your staffs directly on these matters. I may be reached through my Judiciary Committee office at 202-225-6504, 2142 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, D.C. 20515. Thank you.
John Conyers, Jr.
3 Executive Order No. 12958, 68 Fed. Reg. 15,315 (Mar. 28, 2003).
4 Peter Slevin and Carol D. Leonnig, Inquiry as Exacting As Special Counsel Is, Washington Post, Oct. 24, 2005, at A3.
5 President George W. Bush, President Discusses Job Creation with Business Leaders, Remarks at University of Chicago (Sept. 30, 2003) (transcript available at: http://www.whitehouse.go.../2003/09/20030930-9.html).
Guest Blogged by Special BRAD BLOG CPAC Correspondent Daniel Borchers
EDITOR'S NOTE: The BRAD BLOG has obtained media credentials to cover this year's "Conservative Political Action Conference" (CPAC) which began on Thursday, and will be taking place this weekend in Washington D.C. We've asked Dan Borchers of Citizens for Principled Conservatism, Brother Watch & Coulter Watch, to cover the event as our correspondent. We've written about Borchers --- who was escorted out of CPAC in 2002 for distributing material critical of CPAC darling Ann Coulter and disallowed media credentials in the years following --- in several previous articles here, here, both of which include videos he's compiled showing Coulter to be a detriment to the Conservative Movement. As well, we wrote about Borchers in an article for the February issue of Mother Jones. We're pleased to have him corresponding for us from "Bloggers Row" at CPAC this year. This is his first dispatch...
If you think all conservatives think alike, guess again. CPAC is a great place for an education in Conservatism.
The 33rd annual Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) is being held in Washington, DC, February 9-11, 2006. CPAC features prominent national speakers, with thousands of students in attendance. White House officials, senators and congressmen, special interest groups and media personalities all converge at this largest annual gathering of conservatives to network, debate political issues, channel grassroots activism and define the direction of Conservatism for the coming year.
Conservatives of all stripes coalesce at CPAC, though anti-war paleoconservatives have been scarce in recent years. Neoconservatives predominate. Pro-market conservatives abound. Cultural conservatives thrive. Libertarians are free to liberate (to whatever degree they can) the Conservative Movement from the pro-security and pro-life wings of the party. This year, even the legalization of marijuana is formally debated.
You can find conservatives opposed to the Iraq War, Muslims supporting President Bush and an organization against the war on Christmas.
This year's theme was modestly called, "The Conservative Agenda for America." Among this kaleidoscope of conservatives, what that agenda will be remains to be seen. Unquestionably, the majority at CPAC favor President Bush and the neoconservative. What, exactly, unites these disparate threads of Conservatism? I suspect a mixture of freedom and faith, family and fortune.
As this year's CPAC Conference progresses, I'll file additional reports and photos. (See below for a selection of photos from the first day.)
(Ed Note: Photos from CPAC Day 1, taken by Dan follow, along with photos of Velvet Revolution's "ImpeachMobile" which was parked out front, and a report from the driver about the various "friendly gestures" they received from CPAC attendees, and a group he described as "Hitler Youth")...
UPDATE: Borcher's dispatch from Day 2, including details (audio and video) from Ann Coulter's big keynote speech is now posted here...
Guest blogged by David Edwards
At the end of December 2005, there were 84 detainees on hunger strike at Guantanamo Bay. Today, there are 4 detainees on hunger strike. The Pentagon has confirmed that some detainees on hunger strike were force-fed through a feeding tube.
Now, several detainees are claiming that the force feeding procedure is intentionally cruel and amounts to torture. CNN is reporting that detainees say their arms and legs were strapped down as they were overfed through the feeding tube. Afterwards, detainees were left strapped to the chair where they were forced to urinate on themselves.
CBS News reports:
He also said that detainees would no longer receive throat lozenges to ease the pain of the feeding tubes and that they would have their shoes, blankets and towels taken from them and confined to a room that was deliberately kept colder than normal if they refused food.
"I'm brave, but I'm not stupid," al-Odah is quoted as saying to explain his decision to quit the hunger strike. "On the chair, I'll be restrained and unable to resist. They are determined to torture me."
The Pentagon and the White House deny, deny, deny that torture is condoned or being used at Gitmo. (Scottie always takes an uncomfortably long pause right before he
lies about vehemently denies something.)
Here's a video report from CNN that includes comments from a lawyer for 3 of the detainees and White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan's vehement denial of torture and abuse.
Guest blogged by David Edwards
Crooks and Liars first posted a MSNBC Countdown clip last night which exposed Bush's LA terror speech as a load of bullshit.
MSNBC Security Expert Gerald Posner made some important points that are worth highlighting:
POSNER: ...it wasn't a plot that all of the sudden, like in [the Fox TV Series] "24", that they stopped on the eve of the execution taking place. It just happened to unravel and the people were eventually arrested.
OLBERMANN: ...why did this speech occur? What was accomplished by it?
POSNER: ...they're really trying to get [support] built up for The Patriot Act. They are trying to pass The Patriot Act. At the same time, I think they are looking at getting this scandal off of them - which is the NSA hearing scandal - something they are having trouble with.
OLBERMANN: The White House is also saying that it was able to disclose these plot details today because they no longer had intelligence value. Do you concur with that assessment?
POSNER: Boy, not at all. As a matter of fact, I'll tell you I've seen this game played by Democratic and Republican administrations. The Bush Administration plays hardball with it all the time and when they decide something doesn't have intelligence value they release it for political purposes as they did today. They want to get The Patriot Act through and they want to make sure they quell all this furor taking place over the NSA Domestic Spying routine.
So I'll tell you, they say it has no value at all but everything else... they are still holding on to information from World War II. We can't get documents released on the Kennedy assassination yet here's the President disclosing details on what happened on 911 just a few years ago.
OLBERMANN: We have talked before with deep sadness about the politicizing of counter-terror measures here. You have just put this into a political context. My stomach is queasy as I ask this. In the context of this today and what you have seen, are we far enough removed from that component of the [Orwell] novel "1984" - the part where the government turns a kind of terror faucet on and off to scare the public in to acquiescing to whatever [the government] wants to do?
POSNER: I'm afraid that we are unfortunately at that point. ...the government is also very effective, the Bush Administration, at using terror as a political weapon an making sure it can turn on the "fear spigot" when it wants to and turn it off at other times.
Crooks and Liars has this video in additional formats.
A Few Great Blogs
· Baghdad Burning
· Brilliant at Breakfast
· Crooks and Liars
· Dan Froomkin
· Fired Up! Missouri
· Freedom's Phoenix
· Freeway Blogger
· Glenn Greenwald
· Huffington Post
· Jesus' General
· Juan Cole
· Washington Monthly
· Media Matters
· Nashua Advocate
· Oliver Willis
· RAW STORY
· Sanoma State's
Project Censored Sites:
· Daily Censored
· Media Freedom
· Project Censored
· Scholars & Rogues
· Skippy the Bush Kangaroo
· Talking Points Memo
· Think Progress
· Tom Tomorrow
· TV Newser
· Ben Sargent
· Bill Deore
· Bob Gorrell
· Cagle's Index
· Chan Lowe
· Don Wright
· Doug Marlette
· Glenn McCoy
· Jeff Danziger
· Joel Pett
· Mike Luckovich
· Non Sequitur
· Not Banned Yet
· Pat Oliphant
· Paul Conrad
· Ted Rall
· This Modern World
· Thomas Burns
· Tom Toles
· Tony Auth
· Stuart Carlson
Or by Snail Mail
Make check out to...
7095 Hollywood Blvd., #594
Los Angeles, CA 90028