On November 27, 2007, embattled fundraiser Norman Hsu was indicted by the feds in New York on fraud charges arising from an alleged $60 million Ponzi scheme.

The 15-count indictment, unsealed today in New York, charges Hsu with wire fraud, mail fraud and violating election laws, alleging he lined up investors by promising high returns on short-term investments and used money from new victims to pay earlier recruits. He also pressured investors to contribute to political candidates he favored, Manhattan U.S. Attorney Michael Garcia said in a statement.

The indictment was unsealed today. I've posted a copy here.

Sen. Arlen Specter yesterday introduced a new bill on FISA substitution-- S. 2402, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Substition Act (pdf).

He also made this statement (pdf) about the bill yesterday which appears in the Congressional record.

Mr. President, I seek recognition to introduce The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Substitution Act of 2007, to substitute the Federal Government for the telephone companies in litigation challenging the so-called Terrorist Surveillance Program. ....

.... The legislation substitutes the U.S. in place of any electronic communication service company which provided communications in connection with an intelligence activity that was authorized by the President between September 11, 2001, and January 17, 2007, and designed to detect or prevent a terrorist attack against the U.S.

....If the provider assisted the Government beyond what was requested in writing, this legislation will leave the provider on the hook for any surplus assistance. On the other hand, the Government will be substituted if the Attorney General certifies that the electronic communications service provider did only what the Government asked. Once substitution occurs, Federal and State courts are directed to dismiss the providers from the action.

The bill may be taken up by the Senate Judiciary Committee tomorrow. Unfortunately, it does not have a state secrets fix.

For lots more on the FISA bills currently under consideration this week, the ACLU provides great information.

Vanity Fair has an advance copy of an article about Rudy Giuliani from its January issue, A Tale of Two Giulianis. It's about his shady connections and troubling client list at Giuliani Partners. The intro:

On the back of 9/11, Rudy Giuliani refashioned himself as a national hero, a top presidential candidate—and, through his consulting firm, Giuliani Partners, became a very wealthy man. But the questionable backgrounds of some of the firm’s clients make one wonder what Rudy wouldn’t do to make a buck. As Giuliani’s former crony Bernard Kerik faces trial, the author uncovers troubling signs of greed, poor judgment, and conflict of interest.

I'm looking forward to reading the whole thing.

Think Progress notes NBC White House Correspondent David Gregory's response to a question asking who is at fault for the polarization of American politics? His answer:

I think it’s because of the internet largely. The polarized atmosphere in the internet and blogs and whatnot have been a major contributor to that.

As John Amato at Crooks and Liars says,

Yea, and it was the blogs that spent millions of dollars trying to impeach and indict President Clinton for years and years and of course, we accused him of murdering Vince Foster. Didn’t we? Or maybe it was Richard Mellon Scaife. Isn’t he a blogger too?

From Annie Hall:

. . . MAN: Now, Marshall McLuhan--

WOODY ALLEN: You don't know anything about Marshall McLuhan's work--

MAN: Really? Really? I happen to teach a class at Columbia called TV, Media and Culture, so I think that my insights into Mr. McLuhan, well, have a great deal of validity.

WOODY ALLEN: Oh, do you? . . . Oh, that's funny, because I happen to have Mr. McLuhan right here. Come over here for a second?

WOODY ALLEN: Tell him.

MARSHALL McLUHAN: -- I heard, I heard what you were saying. You, you know nothing of my work. How you ever got to teach a course in anything is totally amazing.

WOODY ALLEN: Boy, if life were only like this.

Sometimes it is. Via Josh Marshall, Charles Krauthammer gets his comeuppance on some nonsense he wrote on stem cell research. Groundbreaking stem cell researcher James Thomson delivers it:

Krauthammer's central argument -- that the president's misgivings about embryonic stem cell research inspired innovative alternatives -- is fundamentally flawed, too. Yamanaka was of course working in Japan, and scientists around the world are pursuing the full spectrum of options, in many cases faster than researchers in the United States.

Ah, sometimes life IS like this.

Gillian Gibbons, the British teacher who named a teddy bear "Mohammad" prompting her arrest and cries for lashings and her execution, has been pardoned by the President of Sudan. She is now back in London.

The pardon came following efforts by Nazir Ahmed and Sayeeda Warsi, Muslim members of Britain's House of Lords, to persuade the Sudanese government that releasing Gibbons would create international good will toward their country.

Time Magazine explains what the brouhaha was all about.

Sometimes a teddy bear is just a teddy bear, no matter what you call it.

The New York Times shines its light on the felony murder doctrine today.

I wish they had included the case of Lisl Auman, which I think best shows the absurdity of the rule.

Many states still carry this archane law on their books. It's way past time for it to be abolished.

For the Fort Collins, CO couple who received dead pot plants back from the police.

After a Fort Collins, Colorado judge last week ordered the police to return 39 plants to two medical marijuana caregivers, the police department has complied: by returning dead plants.

James and Lisa Masters, the former defendants and owners of the plants, will sue. Their lawyer puts the value of the plants at $100,000.

The Judge ordered the plants and the grow system returned after ruling the search was illegal. The D.A. says there was no obligation to preserve the plants because the Masters weren't on the registry at the time of the search. (They couldn't afford it and with help from others, were placed on the registry several days later.)

Via Crooks and Liars, the 8th Circuit has struck down public funding for faith-based prisons.

The opinion is here (pdf.)

In the present case, plaintiffs demonstrated (and defendants do not seriously contest) that the InnerChange program resulted in inmate enrollment in a program dominated by Bible study, Christian classes, religious revivals, and church services.
The DOC also provided less tangible aid to the InnerChange program. Participants were housed in living quarters that had, in previous years, been used as an “honor unit,” and which afforded residents greater privacy than the typical cell. Among other benefits, participants were allowed more visits from family members and had greater
access to computers.

More...

Jena Six defendant Mychal Bell has reached a plea agreement with prosecutors. He will get an 18 month sentence to a juvenile facility and receive credit for time served. He will serve about 8 more months before being released.

Bell's attorneys said they agreed to the plea bargain to spare the former high school football star the danger of being convicted of more serious charges and also to win early release from juvenile custody.

In October, Mauffray sentenced Bell to 18 months in a juvenile facility for four prior juvenile convictions for battery and destruction of property. But under the terms of Monday's plea agreement, that time will be served concurrently with the new 18-month sentence for the Dec. 4 attack, and Bell will get credit for the nine months he spent in jail while awaiting trial. His attorneys said he could be released by June.

The D.A. is trying to work out plea deals for the remaining defendants.

(Speaking for myself only.)

As a weak Obama supporter at this time, folks will likely take my thoughts, rightly, with a grain of salt. But this most recent Gallup poll demonstrates, to me at least, that Barack Obama has a real chance to grab the Democratic nomination from Hillary Clinton:

Clinton's standing among Democrats dropped by 11 percentage points from early November and Giuliani's standing among Republicans fell by 9 points, though both continue to lead their fields. . . . Among Democrats, Clinton's fall wasn't matched by a statistically significant rise for chief rivals Barack Obama and John Edwards. Obama's standing rose 2 points from early November while Edwards was steady.

Clinton has slipped significantly. But Obama has not moved up. Why? I believe the reason is the doubts I have had and written about for some time - the doubt that Obama can fight for Democratic values against a vicious Republican Party. And I am not just talking about in a campaign. I mean as President as well.

Obama needs to demonstrate that he can fight FOR Democratic values and AGAINST Republican values. He needs to change this:

Clinton leads Obama by 26 points among Democratic partisans and 22 points among women.