Author Archives: Michael Froomkin

Predatorgate Scandal Spreads

The New York Times promotes the Predatorgate cover-up to a full page one scandal.

Glenn Greenwald has excellent play-by-play of the more recent developments.

One unanswered question: What On Earth were these people thinking? When they decided to take the cover-up option rather than investigate, were they really so arrogant as to think they could sweep it all under the rug? So uncaring as to the possible consequences for Senate pages that they didn’t even want to find out if there was a serious problem? Or so clubby and confident in each other that they believed their colleague’s assurances that there was nothing to worry about?

Maybe. Then again, remember this important rule about the modern GOP: Even when you factor in that they are much worse than you think, they’re still much worse than you think.

In that spirit, I bring you this commentary from a shrewd if also cynical e-mail correspondent:

I think that the reason that the GOP leadership allowed Foley to hang around knowing that he was a sexual predator will soon become clear: in machine politics you have to know who to trust and the only people who you can put a great deal of trust in are people who you can blackmail.

Its not a coincidence that Foley, Ney, Cunningham have been convicted, DeLay is indicted and Doolittle and Burns are facing imminent indictments. Thats the way machine politics works, the only people who can be allowed into the inner circle are people who they have the goods on.

RICO claims could be built on less.

Posted in Politics: The Party of Sleaze | 14 Comments

Shock waves Can Form Due to Steepening of Ordinary Waves

Shock waves can form due to steepening of ordinary waves. And I see steepening waves popping up all over. For example, they’re getting a little shrill over there at Hullabaloo:

America was once a vibrant and vocal enterprise where prominent people spoke with courage and conviction. We are now a muted and sublimated culture where the opposition is cowardly, and too afraid they will be ostracized if they speak out. A once participatory and opposition-minded mainstream press is now preponderantly part and parcel of the largest institution, that amalgamation of powerful forces referred to earlier. The most influential reporters (Russert, Brokaw and their ilk) are millionaire staffers, corporate automatons, and vanity authors who have become inured to the ways and customs of their employers. The elite way of living that goes along with their wealth and social status make them less likely to question the actions of government tyrants. Yet they are the very people with the responsibility to do so, and they are the people who are in a position to do so.

Yes, they’re getting very shrill:

Now, for those of you clinging on to the delusion that what is happening isn’t what actually is happening, let me spell it out. Gingrich is floating out there the very real possibility that Bush will not abide by any Supreme Court judgment he doesn’t like. Suddenly the idea that the Supremes aren’t the final arbiter on constitutionality is something that “merits discussion” and if you don’t think this notion is going to dominate the discourse if the Supremes strike down the torture bill, well, I hate to be so blunt about it, but you are completely, totally wrong.

I expect we’ll see lots more of this before it’s over. (And if we don’t, that’s even worse.)

Posted in The Media | 1 Comment

UK Lord Chancellor: US willing to do things beyond the law

Buried on page A12 of the Saturday (lowest weekly circulation) Washington Post, is a little lecture from the Lord Falconer. As you read this consider that this is undoubtedly a case of British understatement.

Briton Cites ‘Divergence’ With U.S.: Charles Falconer, one of the highest-ranking justice officials in Britain, said Friday that there is a “great divergence” in how Britain and the United States are handling the fight against terrorists, describing the U.S. approach as a willingness “to do things beyond the law.”

Falconer said in an interview that the practices of holding terrorism suspects without charge at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and interrogating them in secret CIA prisons have made it “harder to identify to the world what your values are.”

Falconer recently called Guantanamo Bay “an affront to the principles of democracy.” In a lengthy interview Friday, he said Britain had learned hard lessons in the 1970s when it pursued a hard-line course in response to the bombing campaign of the Irish Republican Army. Police got new leeway in interrogation, while suspects’ civil protections were reduced. In multiple cases, innocent people were convicted and sentenced.

“We suffered badly in the ’70s and ’80s,” Falconer said, adding that the United States was among those criticizing the British approach at the time. He also noted that IRA fundraising “shot up” during this period.

“Keep your justice system as pure as you can,” Falconer said. “This is advice to a friend from the experience we have had.”

Falconer said both countries value democracy and rule of law. But some U.S. practices are “undercutting the very values both countries adhere to,” he said.

Asked whether these practices had hurt U.S. prestige in the world, Falconer said, “it is something that is raised a lot.”

Posted in Civil Liberties, UK | 1 Comment

A Company With a Death Wish

In its unceasing campaign to lose market share to Japanese companies that understand the American consumer, GM has rolled out new promotion, the “You're a Great American” car giveaway. And they've hired Sean Hannity as their spokesmodel.

You have to wonder how small the ratio gets between the IQs over there and the MPG ratings of their cars: what sort of genius does it take to identify your (struggling) company with a guy who routinely insults more than half the country? As Think Progress reminds us, this is the guy who,

And GM thinks this will help them sell cars? Short the stock now.

Posted in Econ & Money | 8 Comments

‘Republicans Just Married the Torture Issue Shortly Before Election Day’

Maybe it begins?

The Agonist, Movements and Parties:For one Congressman, at least, torture doesn’t seem like an issue he really wants to engage in. In fact, when the candidate I work for (Bob Johnson … DrBob around here) forcefully challenged John McHugh on torture using the language of morality, well, there’s no other way to put it: John McHugh freaked out.

That’s some reaction, hm? He isn’t attempting to plead the need for torture – he’s trying to deny it happens under this bill.

Yep. He wants as far away from the moral implications of torture as he can possibly get. Because Americans would freak out at some of the techniques.

They were torturing before. They will torture again. And if a bill that outlaws torture came through, Bush would castrate it with a signing statement.

But politically – Republicans, in all their fun and excitement about making liberal heads explode, got a little carried away. They just married the issue shortly before election day without knowing precisely and specifically which techniques they authorized.

Now it’s time to start telling the American people what techniques Republicans potentially just authorized in loving and specific detail (ouch for the Dems that crossed the aisle, but it’s called “collateral damage” and it serves them right).

Handled right it’s a baby seal hunt. Wear clothes that don’t stain.

Personally, I’m a bit more dubious about the ease of getting the message out, and I find the baby seal image somewhat disturbing and inappropriate, but I do like the energy and optimism here.

Posted in Torture | Comments Off on ‘Republicans Just Married the Torture Issue Shortly Before Election Day’

Freedom Flier Baggies

It’s a movement. A subject on which I hope to have more to say soon. Meanwhile, enjoy this Boing Boing: HOWTO make a “Kip Hawley is an idiot” Freedom Baggie:

KipHawleyIsAnIdiot.com gives you instructions for making your own “freedom baggie” with your opinion of the TSA chief.

I flew from SFO to LAX yesterday morning, and was robbed at gunpoint by a TSA agent, who stole my cologne, face-wash, and moisturizer. She said that my moisture baggie could only contain vessels of 3 oz or less’ worth of moisture. I pointed out that all these vessels did have less than 3 oz’ worth of moist substances in them, as they were all half-empty, and she said yes, but the vessels were capable of holding more than 3 oz. Apparently, the risk is that a hair-gel bomber will take to the skies, and use a syringe to refill the tube of face-scrub through its tiny little aperture, somehow mixing some kind of moisture-bomb in the plastic tube without melting it. Apparently, liquids acquire magical explosive properties when they are in quantities of more than 3 oz.

A TSA supervisor took me aside and asked me why I was so upset. I said that my family left the Soviet Union to escape arbitrary authority, and the seizure of property by the state. She suggested that I send in a report to the TSA complaining, and I laughed and asked her how many of those people get added to the No-Fly List.

Of course, this is all a hollow joke. The risk of someone mixing a binary hair-gel explosive has been dismissed by chemists as a near-zero. Meanwhile, as KipHawleyIsAnIdiot.com points out, “air cargo is not screened and there is still no point-to-point baggage matching.”

Posted in Law: Right to Travel | Comments Off on Freedom Flier Baggies