A complicated week ahead in Washington
The Senate Judiciary Committee opens hearings today into the nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court. At Politico, they take a look at the GOP’s political calculations in gauging just how harshly to treat Sotomayor. It’s another iteration of what has become the classic Republican dilemma: Do they attack, thus pleasing the base but further antagonizing Hispanic voters they had at one point hoped to attract?
And The Wall Street Journal offers a good curtain-raiser on the process, laying out the basic plot lines:
“Democrats, focusing on her 17-year record as a federal judge, will portray the nominee as a meticulous judicial workhorse, impartially applying the law, even as her rise from the projects marks her as a quintessential American story.
Republicans, dismissing the bulk of her rulings as dictated by precedent, will seize on a handful of controversial decisions and off-the-bench remarks to paint Judge Sotomayor as an extremist who could use her Supreme Court seat to even the scales for minority groups she considers victimized by American history.”
“The week’s second big story out of Washington involves reports that at the order of Vice President Cheney, the CIA had withheld notifying top members of Congress about a secret program or initiative of some sort. As The Los Angeles Times reports:
Democratic lawmakers criticized former Vice President Dick Cheney on Sunday for allegedly ordering that a CIA counter-terrorism program be kept secret from congressional leaders, with two senators questioning the legality of such concealment.
A top Democrat called for an investigation.
Republicans were far more circumspect, but some acknowledged the White House should have briefed Congress.”
The program itself seems less of an issue than the fact that Cheney ordered Congress kept in the dark, in clear violation of U.S. law. (The Wall Street Journal reports the program involved some sort of effort to assassinate top Al Qaida personnel, but there’s surely more to that story. An effort to kill Al Qaida members should not have been either secret or controversial.)
The latest revelations lend credence to Nancy Pelosi’s claim that the CIA had not told her the entire truth regarding waterboarding. It also comes in the wake of reports last week from five inspectors general that, contrary to claims by the Bush administration, the controversial warrantless wiretapping program had produced little in actionable intelligence, and stories suggesting that Attorney General Eric Holder could pursue a criminal investigation of torture involving U.S. officials.
In the end, we’re going to need a non-criminal, non-congressional and nonpartisan investigation of who did what in the Bush administration and what its impacts and consequences were. There are too many substantive cases in which laws may have broken to allow the country to simply turn its back on it all.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Guides
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2011 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
269 comments Add your comment
George American
July 13th, 2009
7:57 am
Wonderful an activist commie latino to do the bidding of the NWO president. This country is going to hell in a cess bucket.
I Report :-) You Whine :-(
July 13th, 2009
8:00 am
An effort to kill Al Qaida members should not have been either secret or controversial.
This lib doesn’t even know what war is all about.
Killing the enemy, eewww!
The latest revelations lend credence to Nancy Pelosi’s claim that the CIA had not told her the entire truth regarding waterboarding
Did I not tell you what this is all about?
And Sotomayer is a racist with the poll numbers of Harriet Meyers but if you want to call it whining…..
I Report :-) You Whine :-(
July 13th, 2009
8:02 am
And now, let’s get back to the things the democrats want you to forget about-
Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist George Will has raised serious questions about that 45.7 million figure. He notes that 39% of the uninsured live in the border states of California, Texas, Arizona, New Mexico, and Florida. An estimated 21% of the uninsured are not U.S. citizens. That’s 9.7 million, a huge chunk of that fabled 45.7 million figure. -AmSpec
Misdirection play with AG, keep your eyes on the ball Repugs.
Dave R.
July 13th, 2009
8:04 am
“The latest revelations lend credence to Nancy Pelosi’s claim that the CIA had not told her the entire truth regarding waterboarding.”
In what way, shape or form is this statement even remotely true, Jay? One instance is where the VP is alleged to have kept the “Gang of Eight” in the dark about one program, while the other instance is where MULTIPLE CIA leaders have stated that Pelosi WAS informed about waterboarding. In act, the only member of the “Gang of Eight” that claims to not have been informed about waterboarding is San Fran Nan!
I guess they don’t teach reason or logic in journalism school, do they? Get a clue, Bookman.
George American
July 13th, 2009
8:04 am
Thank God for Dick Cheney and his tireless defense of American safety. He has kept us safe for more than 3/4 of a decade.
Since B. Hussane O and his lackeys won’t continue Cheney’s brave efforts, maybe Cheney should refocus (wink) on his new enemies Pelosi, Sonya Sodomizor, this Holder clown and their (not mine) Messiah.
ByteMe
July 13th, 2009
8:07 am
Investigating whatever Cheney did is too late. It’s too late to impeach him and any other legal attempts will also end up being too late to affect the guy with the bad ticker. All it can possibly do is finally shut him and his daughter up, which in itself is a “good thing.”
The Sotomayor hearings will be a bloodless affair. Republicans will look stupid pushing any line of investigation into her rulings, because all she has to do is say that she was following precedent set by SCOTUS. They will look stupid trying to take her remarks out of context the way they have been, because all she needs to do is read the entire remarks into the public record and people will see what the fuss is about. All they can do is try to get her to go on record about how she might rule in a hypothetical case and she’s never going to bite.
Much ado about nothing. She’ll be confirmed by end of month.
FinnMcCool
July 13th, 2009
8:08 am
Sotomayor is a brilliant pick. The Repugs lose either way. If they drag her through the mud, they lose more hispanic voters. If they give her a pass they get a liberal hispanic female on the Supreme Court.
Either way, she is still going to the Supreme Court. Mwuahahahahaha
FinnMcCool
July 13th, 2009
8:10 am
The Brits have figured it out:
The National Health Service of Britain has sparked controversy with their controversial sex education campaign promoting an orgasm a day:
A National Health Service leaflet is advising school pupils that they have a “right” to an enjoyable sex life and that regular intercourse can be good for their cardiovascular health…Alongside the slogan “an orgasm a day keeps the doctor away”.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/12/ogasm-a-day-campaign-dire_n_230221.html
Mrs. Godzilla
July 13th, 2009
8:10 am
After what bluster the GOP can muster, Sotomayor will be easily confirmed. She’ll make a great Justice.
And yes, we must and will investigate Bush miscreants.
Let’s roll.
Brad Steel
July 13th, 2009
8:13 am
Nothing like baiting the haters with a mention that there is even the slightest possibility that Pelosi, one of the most powerful senators in the country, may have a legitimate grip with Bus/Cheney-styled illegal intelligence gathering.
The wingnut are all too Pavlovian. Suckers.
And George American, seig heil to you too.
Gale
July 13th, 2009
8:18 am
I don’t see how anyone could consider Sotomayor an activist judge when some 90% of rulings on constitutional issues were with the majority and the Republican appointed judges. Lot at the facts, not the sound bites, George.
DB, Gwinnettian
July 13th, 2009
8:19 am
Pelosi, one of the most powerful senators in the country
Senators?
(I know, don’t stop him, he’s on a roll…)
Trust me
July 13th, 2009
8:22 am
The Republicans do not even view the actions of Reagan and Rumsfeld and their kind as illegal or even immoral or unethical. They are clearly the party of anything goes as long as all things bad are directed at someone else. Yuck. But, no more. It is just so refreshing to see the Republicans squirm and moan now that they are out of power. Another seven and a half years of bliss.
Redneck Convert
July 13th, 2009
8:24 am
Well, Bookman didn’t even mention how the libruls are trying make the army stop smoking. What’s next? Making soldiers get permission from the enema to shoot at them? I remember when I was in the army they let us have a cigarette for shooting a perfect score on the rifle range. As a reward. Now smoking is being treated like some big Sin.
Like I said yesterday ain’t nothing going to happen at this hearing for Sotomayor. The Republicans will set around trying not to offend the Mexicans. And if they ask her a tough question she’ll say she can’t answer because she might have to rule on a case involving it. They’ll all squirm like a man wearing a mohair suit and in the end she’ll get put on the Supreme Court. Just what we need–another librul to make law from the bench. I ain’t against making law from the bench if it’s a good Conservative law. But this librul junk–forget it.
Now the libruls want to go after Cheney for keeping a secret about killing the Terrists. Well, everybody knows Congress can’t keep a secret, they’ll blab to everybody, and if you can’t have a program to kill the Terrists I don’t know what we’re at war for. But no, the libruls won’t be satisfied till everybody that ain’t a librul is locked up.
It’s all so disgusting. Have a good day everybody.
Peadawg
July 13th, 2009
8:30 am
“Republicans, dismissing the bulk of her rulings as dictated by precedent, will seize on a handful of controversial decisions and off-the-bench remarks to paint Judge Sotomayor as an extremist who could use her Supreme Court seat to even the scales for minority groups she considers victimized by American history.”
Amen!!!
Maybe So
July 13th, 2009
8:33 am
Good Luck to Ms. Sotomayor.. regardless of the position and political stance.. I wouldn’t want to be in that seat today.
As for withholding information on operational tasks from congress.. I can’t say that I blame them. Keeping secrets in Washington seems like a hard thing to do for everyone these days. Funny how the media works.. they have no issue keeping an “unnamed” source secret.. however, if it puts actual lives in danger.. so be it.
USinUK
July 13th, 2009
8:39 am
Gwinecian –
“(I know, don’t stop him, he’s on a roll…)”
the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor???
USinUK
July 13th, 2009
8:44 am
question for the class … since the British media hasn’t been covering the US Supreme Court, the coverage I’ve had is all from print. Because of that, I don’t know how she pronounces her name — is it Sotomayor (kind of like Oscar Meyer) or SotomaYOR (as in the tales of yore)
help an expat out.
RW-(the original)
July 13th, 2009
8:48 am
Wonder why we never read that dragging Miguel Estrada through the mud was going to cost Democrats the Latino vote? Oh well, we’ll chalk that one up to the usual journalistic double standard. I’d prefer to take issue with Jay B’s pet phrase anyway
Clear violation of US law Jay B, don’t you think that you should be able to remotely describe what was done or not done if you’re going to label it violation of US law clear violation of US law? And if it, or all the other supposed violations you claim, are clear violations of US law why would you want to decriminalize them? You libs better be careful what you wish for because when spend the next year on fruitless witch hunts and show trials of the Bush administration and a large building goes up in smoke somewhere you’ll be out of power until the next generation of government school “educated” kids grows up.
RW-(the original)
July 13th, 2009
8:50 am
USinUK
Soto My Or
ByteMe
July 13th, 2009
8:51 am
USinUK: the latter. YOR.
FinnMcCool
July 13th, 2009
8:52 am
USinUK,
Correct
ByteMe
July 13th, 2009
8:52 am
RW: the clear violation of US law was the creation and operation of a secret intelligence program without Congress’ oversight or consent. The program itself may or may not have been illegal, since we don’t know what it is, but the law is clear on Congress’ oversight authority.
ByteMe
July 13th, 2009
8:54 am
But I also don’t think that having a secret program clears Pelosi of anything, since I think all she’s been saying is that she wasn’t notified as early as she actually was notified, which is splitting hairs, since when she claimed she was notified, she still didn’t do enough to call attention to the problem.
danjonglee
July 13th, 2009
8:55 am
Roadside bomb kills two U.S. soldiers in Afganistan….STOP Obama’s unjust and Illegal WAR..
USinUK
July 13th, 2009
8:58 am
RW, ByteMe and Finny – thanks!! I’ve been mispronouncing in my head all these months …
RW-(the original)
July 13th, 2009
8:59 am
BM,
You’re assuming facts not in evidence. Nice leap to claim as fact that this was an operational program though. I’m fully on board with your “investigations” though. Go for it.
FinnMcCool
July 13th, 2009
9:00 am
RW said: “spend the next year on fruitless witch hunts and show trials of the Bush administration”
like the Clinton years? How much money did you folks waste there? Wasn’t that all started over sex? Maybe breaking the law is too serious a crime for you Repugs to consider wasting money on? You’d prefer to waste money on researching cigars and dresses? Hehe
RW-(the original)
July 13th, 2009
9:01 am
UsinUK,
I could never pronounce it until I wrote it the way I did at 8:50, but they’re right that the y sort of rolls onto the or.
Doggone/GA
July 13th, 2009
9:04 am
Spanish vowels are easy…they are ALWAYS pronounced the same:
a = ah
e = eh
i = ee
o = oh
u = oo
RW-(the original)
July 13th, 2009
9:07 am
BDAtlanta errrrr Finn,
The White Water investigations were not about sex and several prosecutions came out of them. I said I’m on board with your investigations, but as I said downstairs if you guys are going to issue a guilty verdict along with your accusations like you did at 9 then why aren’t you ready for trial?
ByteMe
July 13th, 2009
9:07 am
RW: Panetta has already admitted there was a program, Congress wasn’t notified at the insistence of Cheney, and he (Panetta) shut it down on June 30. What am I assuming that’s not in evidence?
And did you see me saying anything about “investigations”?? Speaking of assuming facts not in evidence.
USinUK
July 13th, 2009
9:08 am
doggone – I had no idea (studied French – loads of different vowel pronounciations, just like English)
my, but we’re a wide-ranging bunch …
RW-(the original)
July 13th, 2009
9:10 am
Dear blog gods,
I’m fond of USinUK’s 8:58 with the little yellow smiley face too, but must you put me back there every time I refresh?
Thank you and goodbye.
See y’all upstairs unless the server finally hides Jay B where he can never be found again.
jconservative
July 13th, 2009
9:11 am
Sotomayor will get at least 10 Republican votes for confirmation.
A few Democrats & a few Republicans will make speeches for their particular base. A few from both sides will try to show that they know more than the nominee & should be a future pick for the high court.
This hearing will be more high comedy than high drama.
But do notice how often both sides will laud the “activist, legislating from the bench” decisions that their particular base approves. If I like the decision it is a strict interpretation of the Constitution; if you like the decision it is from an activist judge legislating from the bench. The New Haven fire fighter case is a perfect example: the court wrote a new law that says if an institution believes it will be sued over promotions it must also prove that it would lose such a suit.
Legislating from the bench. But that is now what the law says. Most Republicans & Democrats like the decision. We Constitutional Conservatives hate it.
But, the hearings will be educational – get a copy of the Constitution & sit back & enjoy.
AmVet
July 13th, 2009
9:12 am
Good morning fellow bloggers,
“Thank God for Dick Cheney and his tireless defense of American safety. He has kept us safe for more than 3/4 of a decade.”
Yeah, it was that other quarter that kind of blows that argument all to hell.
Rip van Winkles…
“Sotomayor is a brilliant pick.”
Finn, perhaps. I just sense that the conned are PO’d because she’s not a flaming lesbian, flag-burning, terrorist-coddling, baby killer. But then I skip past so much of their tripe, maybe they have said that.
RW, you’re not a product of government school “education”? (Damn elitists…)
But there is some good news for the faithful!
Georgia’s Golden Wonderboy – Ralph Reed – is gonna resurrect (get it?) the Christian Coalition. Version 2.0 (How brain numbingly unoriginal.)
Abramoff’s flunky was good for a helluva laugh then. He should be doubly good this time…
USinUK
July 13th, 2009
9:13 am
RW –
“The White Water investigations were not about sex and several prosecutions came out of them”
first of all, the investigations only took off after the whole Monica thing came to light – prior to that the other IGs said there was nothing to investigate regarding the Clintons’ involvement, that their participation was above board. Additionally, Ken Starr said there was the same.
secondly, the prosecutions that did happen (McDougal and Tucker) weren’t a part of the IG’s investigation -
RW-(the original)
July 13th, 2009
9:14 am
BM,
You’re assuming the program was operational. If it wasn’t your “violation” becomes far more murky, but if it makes you feel good about yourself to call it a clear violation of law go right ahead. I know it’s difficult for a lib to actually look at all the possibilities.
Now I really must get to the forest.
RW out
ByteMe
July 13th, 2009
9:15 am
RW: go be snide elsewhere, ok? I’m sure the forest loves you more than we do.
USinUK
July 13th, 2009
9:15 am
AmVet –
Christian Coalition v. 2.0 — now, with more gambling!!
FinnMcCool
July 13th, 2009
9:20 am
Not Ralph Reed! Say it aint so.
Oh well, Reed is like Palin: We need them around so the Democrats can sweep elections.
USinUK
July 13th, 2009
9:23 am
btw – on a totally unrelated note …
on this date 24 years ago … LIVE AID!! criminey, I feel old.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/july/13/newsid_2502000/2502735.stm
Bosch
July 13th, 2009
9:23 am
Non-criminal? Hell no. Cheney should for once, take a cue from GWB, and shut the hell up and fall into obscurity. I would love to see Cheney carted off in handcuffs. And if I were Lynn Cheney, I’d have a paternity test to see if Ann Coulter wasn’t the pod responsible for having that spawn.
Tom
July 13th, 2009
9:24 am
Jesse Jackson has added former Chicago Democrat
Congressman Mel Reynolds to Rainbow/PUSH Coalition’s payroll.
Reynolds was among the 176 criminals excused
in President Clinton’s
last-minute forgiveness spree.
Reynolds received a commutation of his six-and-a-half-year
federal sentence for 15 convictions of wire fraud, bank fraud,
and lies to the Federal Election Commission.
He is more notorious, however, for concurrently serving
five years for sleeping with an underage campaign volunteer.
This is a first in American politics: An ex-congressman who had
sex with a subordinate…won clemency from a president who had
sex with a subordinate…then was hired by a clergyman who had
sex with a subordinate!
His new job?
Ready for this??
***** YOUTH COUNSELOR *****
IS THIS A GREAT COUNTRY OR WHAT?
Bosch
July 13th, 2009
9:25 am
Oh, and Sotomayor? The GOP can whine, fling themselves in the floor and pitch all the juvenile fits of rage and anger they want – and I hope they do. Ain’t gonna make no difference and reinforce the notion of them being totally irrelevant.
USinUK
July 13th, 2009
9:25 am
Tom – please. learn how to format. unless you’re writing in blank verse.
AmVet
July 13th, 2009
9:30 am
USinUK.
One day just for laughs it would be fun to make that extensive list titled “Buffoonish Politicians from the Peach State.” Hell, the last twenty years alone might take a couple of pages…
Bosch
July 13th, 2009
9:32 am
In Kamchak fashion,
(choke) Ralph Reed (choke)
USinUK
July 13th, 2009
9:35 am
AmVet –
heck, why limit it to just GA – why not make a Time Life series and document the atrocities from the entire Bible Belt …
although, if you are really looking for buffoons, you could have a ball just in the State Leg, alone … heck, I could name a few from my tenure working there, people who barely had 2 brain cells to rub together!
@@
July 13th, 2009
9:39 am
My hope is that Sotomayor will continue her unbiased rulings. My fear is that Obama’s support for an “empathetic” judge has opened the door for her to rule in favor of her personal ideals which have been outlined in her many speeches. Her judicial preference will be colored (not intended as a racist comment) by her personal experiences.
My understanding is that this “secret” counter-intelligence program (not enacted) was to prevent leaks. Given the NYT’s propensity to do just that (NSA Surveillance), ’twas a wise decision in my opinion.
To kill or tap? The NYT chose to tap OBL with a heads-up warning.