Matt Stoller and I have disagreed on any number of things over the years, but one thing we have always agreed on is our admiration for General Wes Clark. Here he makes the case for Clark for VP. Read the whole thing, and I endorse the merits based argument for Clark, but I am interested here to the reaction on the unity part of his argument:

On the other political point, Clark is a Clintonista through and through, and so putting him on the ticket would be a key signal to the Clinton world that they will have influence in an Obama administration.. . . [T]he Clinton people need an incentive to work aggressively for the ticket, and Clark is that incentive. . . . Clark is . . . a supremely progressive advocate, and probably the best Clinton loyalist on national security issues that progressives have. . . . [MORE . . .]

Watch for yourselves. What's your take?

Despite the media predictions she will suspend her campaign Wednesday, is she saying she will stay in longer? Or is she just trying to make sure the people in MT and SD have a reason to go out and vote and she has an opportunity to meet with superdelegates when the voting has ended? [More...]

In a ruling favorable to defendants, the Supreme Court today narrowed the application of the crime of money laundering in an opinion by Justice Clarence Thomas.

''The rulings significantly raise the bar for prosecutors to prove money laundering,'' said Jeffrey Green, who represents the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.

Green said the decisions also will significantly affect the white-collar world, where money laundering charges are frequently tacked onto alleged violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, the law designed to prosecute American companies that bribe foreign officials.

From an e-mail I received from the Sentencing Resource Counsel:[More...]

Michael Tomasky is one of the better political reporters you will find. Smart, generally fair and well informed. Here, he writes a decent column on Obama's task to unify the Democratic Party and the DNC RBC meeting this Saturday. I have my quibbles with his opinions expressed in the column but I have a real problem with his ignorance of certain facts. Tomasky also wrote this:

A woman in the audience yelled, apropos of what I'm not sure: "What about Iowa? New Hampshire? South Carolina?"

It bothers me that Tomasky did not know why the woman yelled that. Of course I do not expect respected members of the Media to read my rants about the fact that DNC Rule 11, concerning the primary timing schedule, was violated by Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina. But he was at the hearing and must have heard Carl Levin's presentation on the subject. [More...]

This is an update to this morning's post about Peniel Cronin's latest report on the caucus vs. primary results in the Democratic presidential nomination race.

I sent her some questions I received from readers. She answers that her notes and figures are correct. However, to make it easier for readers to discern the difference in what she is saying, she has modified some of the wording in the footnotes.

The revised report is here. (The original report is here.)She adds: [More...]

R.I.P. Bo Diddley who has died at age 79. Video of Mona with Tom Petty here and with Ron Wood from the Stones here.

This is an open thread.

Update: The jury acquitted on all counts. Congratulations, Geoff and Gerry and Van!

The U.S. District Court jury returned its not guilty verdicts Monday afternoon in the case against the 57-year-old Fieger, of Bloomfield Hills, and 46-year-old Ven Johnson of Birmingham. It heard 18 days of testimony, then deliberated over parts of four days.

Geoff had this to say:

“I’m very pleased with the American system and the jury. I thank the jury for listening. I hope this puts an end to political prosecutions in the age of Mr. Bush,” Fieger said.

More...

NOTE: My original title to this post was "Obama blog "Let's Unify, You Lying Idiots!" It was deemed inappropriate for this blog and thus was edited to the current title.

It took some chutzpah for this blogger to write this post:

We have to reunite our party in time to successfully take on John McCain. [...] Hillary and her team have successfully changed the national mood, of Hillary's supporters, at least, from one of disappointment that their candidate lost, to one of outright anger . . . Yeah, there's been some sexism by irrelevant third parties, but I just don't [care] . . .

(Emphasis supplied.) Ok, I pulled an Aravosis there, he did not say "care." But then again, the blogger has never been married to the truth when it comes to Hillary. He is still at it today, falsely calling Hillary a liar. But oh btw, we have to unify. That blogger is just shameless and disrespectful of the truth. He is calling for unity? Please spare us your "calls for unity." Some of us hear enough insults as it is.

Speaking for me only

Comments closed

Senator Edward Kennedy is undergoing a risky six hour surgery at Duke University Medical Center in North Carolina.

Send good thoughts his way.

Hot off the press and only available at TalkLeft: Peniel Cronin's revised Caucus v. Primary report with numbers updated to today, showing how the caucuses, compared to primaries, have unfairly disenfranchised voters. (Background and original report here.)

I want this report to get as much exposure as possible. Thus, this post will stay at the top of TalkLeft for several hours. New posts will be below it.

Some Findings:

• 35.6 million people have voted
• The 37 primary states account for 97% of the vote.
• The 13 caucus states account for 3% of the vote.

Bottom line: Clinton’s lead is from 34.5 million voters (97%) in Primaries. Obama’s lead is from 1.1 million voters (3%) in caucuses. [More...]

Just for fun, ARG has some incredible polling for Clinton in South Dakota and Montana:

South Dakota

Clinton 60
Obama 34

Um what?

Montana

Clinton 44
Obama 48

Hmmm. It is ARG, but just for fun.

By Big Tent Democrat

Kathleen Reardon asks:

Why would a Hillary Clinton supporter vote for McCain? It does seem ludicrous. After all, he represents four to eight more years of George W. Bush. The country can't afford that.

. . . Yet why not turn the question around? If keeping McCain out of the White House is vital to America, why, despite what's touted as Hillary Clinton's "baggage," would Barack Obama not want her as the vice presidential candidate any less than she, as the nominee, would want him in that spot if it made a McCain win unlikely? Revenge? Not good enough. Disdain for a woman who criticized him as not ready to be president?

More...