Your turn.

This is an Open Thread.

BTW, on the first of a series of votes in the House on the economic stimulus bill precisely ZERO Republicans are voting in favor.

When Obama does it apparently. My friend Booman writes:

But if the bill is already as good as passed, then why are Democrats stripping elements of the bill out? The short answer is that it is politics. The Obama administration would like to get a big vote in favor of the stimulus for three reasons. They want to demonstrate the efficacy of their post-partisan rhetoric, they want to get some cover for the Democrats in case the stimulus doesn't work, and they want to splinter the GOP caucus on the first big vote of their administration. For all these reasons (tone, politics, demonstration of power), they are willing to make some generous and unnecessary concessions. We may not like or agree with these concessions, but we should try to understand the game that is being played.

Sounds pretty Bill Clinton Third Wayish to me. Of course, what is missing from that analysis is what Bill Clinton did in his first economic plan and the fact that the Third Way Bill Clinton emerged after Republicans captured the Congress. More . . .

As the battle rages on between Obama partisans (these are persons who have, and perhaps it will be justified, an almost blind faith in Obama) and other progressives who are, to put it mildly, skeptical about the post-partisan unity schtick (I count myself among this group, a group cynical about all pols and who count Obama as a pol), I think there is little doubt that President Obama and his postpartisan unity schtick are about to face a major acid test -- the President's performance in shaping an economic stimulus plan.

I think this test should reveal a few things. First, is Obama as progressive as we have been told on matters economic. Second, what does he really believe "will work" to stimulate the economy adequately. Third, how effective was the post partisan unity schtick in helping the President achieve his political and policy goals.

More . . .

Good riddance to Wayne Tucker, who until this morning was the chief of police in Oakland. Tucker resigned before the city council had a chance to hold a planned no-confidence vote. Just yesterday, Tucker said he wouldn't resign.

Tucker's four year reign as police chief has been a disaster. Tucker promoted Edward Poulson to head the department's internal affairs division, despite Poulson's interference with an internal affairs investigation in 2000. [more ...]

I've been at work all day, and will be Wednesday as well. We have a new diary up by James TX on an interesting Kansas case involving the prosecution of a doctor who prescribed pain medication.

Nonpartisan has a diary on Wilmington, Delaware and the attempt to create a Green Zone for jobs.

This is an open thread, all topics welcome.

Some are noticing this story. President Obama is meeting with Republicans today on the issue.

The question is this - is Obama posturing by holding this meeting or will he offer even more concessions (his proposal pre-conceded on a lot already)? Is this a play to the Media? If so, will it work? Or does Obama think this description was apt?

I'll wait to see what Obama does.

Speaking for me only

The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals held oral argument Monday in the appeal of Zacarias Moussaoui, who is trying to withdraw his guilty plea.

The grounds:

Moussaoui's guilty plea was invalid because he was confused about the charges and didn't know that other al-Qaeda members had given information to interrogators that could have cleared him.

[More...]

Your turn.

This is an Open Thread.

Via Steve Clemons, the Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee wrote:

I and many others believe that the use of torture and indefinite detention have not only tarnished our honor but also diminished our security. In this global counterinsurgency effort against al Qaeda and its allies, too often our means have undercut our efforts by wasting one of our best weapons: the legitimacy that comes from our moral authority.

. . . Torture elicits lies -- not just from those experiencing it, but from those who seek to conceal it. After years of Orwellian denials and legalistic parsing, what a relief it was to hear our new attorney general-designee finally acknowledge what we know to be true: that yes, "waterboarding is torture."

As Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Senator Kerry seems well positioned to investigate and document these hard truths. It should be part of his work now.

Speaking for me only

Here is the actual CBO report (PDF) (as opposed to the GOP press release on a partial report) on the economic stimulus legislation. The report concludes that the stimulus plan will have a positive impact on job creation and economic growth (kind of a "duh" conclusion). The report does not seem to tell us how much impact. This economic stimulus plan seems entirely too timid to me.

Speaking for me only

Eugene Robinson would be in jail today after writing this ignorant and unintelligent column:

[I]t is unclear to me what else Blagojevich has done that a duly constituted jury would find illegal. Even in the matter of his menacing mop, at worst he's a co-conspirator in a dastardly act committed by his barber.

Try reading the Illinois House's impeachment report (PDF) or the US Attorney's criminal complaint (PDF) next time Gene. It will save you from the stupid.

Speaking for me only

The Liberty City aka Sears Tower trial begins again in Florida after two mistrials in which jurors couldn't agree on a verdict.

Prosecutors tried to prove that the original seven defendants, a group of laborers from the tough Liberty City neighborhood, provided “material support” to a terrorist organization, and planned to destroy buildings. But they relied mostly on the men’s words, citing their loyalty oath to Al Qaeda and aggressive comments made to two F.B.I. informants.

More concrete evidence did not emerge. Testimony showed that a search by the Federal Bureau of Investigation of what it called the group’s headquarters did not yield guns, explosives or blueprints for an attack. Besides a samurai sword, no weapons were found.

This was the trial hyped by Alberto Gonzales to the media. The Bush Administration played the "fear card" to the max and still couldn't get a guilty verdict. It should be more difficult this time around.

As University of Miami Law Prof Bruce Winnick says, it's more like a grade B movie plot than a criminal case.

Our past coverage of the trials is accessible here.