The season finale of "24" included the implanting of a microchip in a teenager to track his whereabouts. I remember one other episode where the same thing was done.

Looks like some legislators in Oklahoma had the same idea:

Legislation that would authorize microchip implants in people convicted of violent crimes was sent back to a committee yesterday. This after state House members questioned whether the proposal would violate constitutional civil liberties.

The measure, approved by the Senate, authorizes microchip implants for persons convicted of one or more of 19 violent offenses who have to serve at least 85 percent of their sentence. (my emphasis)

The tiny electronic implants are commonly used to keep track of pets and livestock, but several House members questioned whether their forced use in people would be unconstitutionally invasive.

The measure passed the Senate? Is this an aberration? Sentencing Law and Policy thinks it may be the trend of the future.

I've been appalled at GPS monitoring of my clients. I've fought it unsuccessfully when it was imposed as a bond condition in a stalking case. But a microchip? I'd take it to the Supreme Court. And little good that will do if we get more Bush-nominated right wing judges on the Court.

If Rudy Giuliani can't even manage civil discourse with his children and ex-spouse, how will he manage the various adversarial encounters he will face as President?

Rudy and Judy went to Harvard-bound Caroline's high school graduation today. They sat 30 yards from former Mrs. Giuliani Donna Hanover and son Andrew and never spoke to them.

When the commencement speaker, Sen. Charles Schumer, noted Giuliani's presence and the audience broke into applause, Hanover and her son, Andrew Giuliani, sat stone-faced and didn't clap.

But Hanover and Andrew jumped up and cheered when the Harvard-bound 17-year-old Caroline received her diploma from the tony Trinity School, while Giuliani and his wife, Judith, didn't even crack a smile.

Then Rudy and Judy ducked out early.

Rudy and Judith Giuliani avoided his children and ex-wife by arriving minutes before the ceremony began, entering through a side entrance, and they ducked out 10 minutes before it ended....At the graduation yesterday, Andrew did not acknowledge his father and stepmother and would not say whether the couple would join them later.

Rudy didn't attend Andrew's high-school graduation. Did he attend this one only so the press would report he was there?

I have been a somewhat lonely defender of both Jane Harman and Joe Klein of late, finding that Rep. Harman has been quite good in her votes and statements since she engaged the blogs a year ago in the face of a strong primary challenge from the invaluable Marcy Winograd, and that Klein had improved greatly since he began blogging at Swampland.

Now, apparently, Harman had a conversation with Klein before the Iraq Supplemental vote and Harman indicated to Klein that she was going to vote for it. Apparently, Harman changed her mind as she voted against it. Klein wrote a blog post not knowing Harman changed her mind, and held her up as an example of what he preferred from Dems on the Iraq Supplemental, a vote for it, and criticized Sens. Clinton and Obama for voting against it. Obviously, I think Joe was wrong on the merits. But so what. Joe is wrong in a lot of opinions. That he got the facts wrong is the problem here. But he corrected it, though not in a timely nor gracious way. But the strangest thing is the upshot, where Rep. Harman apologizes for not telling Klein she changed her mind.

It's too nice to stay inside today and blog. But, maybe it's raining where you are or maybe you're at work or otherwise logged on.

Here's a place for your thoughts.

The L.A. Times brings back the story of the under-qualified immigration judges appointed during Alberto Gonzales tenure.

I wrote about this in 2005 with respect to John Ashcroft and I'm glad to see it back in the news.

Jon Alter, writing about the Dems' Iraq Supplemental disaster, says:

It isn't easy to make the case for capitulation and gamesmanship when human lives are at stake, but I'm going to try. That's because many Americans—especially on the left—don't understand why Democrats in Congress had no choice but to proceed the way they have this week on the war in Iraq.

I'm going to concentrate only on the politics of the situation here, let's leave the human lives at stake aside. Ahhhhhh. Just writing that sentence tells us what is wrong with this thinking. The POLITICS won't let us leave that aside. For this is the essential Democratic problem, they are viewed as standing for nothing. For having no principles. As Ruy Texeira and John Halpin put it:

The thesis of this report is straightforward. Progressives need to fight for what they believe in -- and put the common good at the center of a new progressive vision -- as an essential strategy for political growth and majority building. This is no longer a wishful sentiment by out-of-power activists, but a political and electoral imperative for all concerned progressives. . . . [T]he underlying problem driving progressives' on-going woes nationally [is] a majority of Americans do not believe progressives or Democrats stand for anything.

Alter's thinking is a reflection of this.

Earlier I wrote about the Government's sentencing memorandum for Scooter Libby, and noted that it would be filing an explanation of how it calculated Libby's guidelines at 30 to 37 months. I've uploaded the newly filed calculations here, and I have to say, I disagree with them. As does the Probation Department.

It's a very complicated calculation because instead of just using the perjury, obstruction and false statement guidelines, it asks the Court to cross-reference those guidelines with the higher guidelines for violations of the IIPA and Espionage Act.

More....

Christopher Newton was put to death like a dog in Ohio yesterday. The execution took two hours and ten attempts.

The execution team stuck Christopher Newton at least 10 times with needles Thursday to insert the shunts where the chemicals are injected.

He died at 11:53 a.m., nearly two hours after the scheduled start of his execution at the Southern Ohio Correctional Facility. The process typically takes about 20 minutes.

"What is clear from today's botched execution is that the state doesn't know how to execute people without torturing them to death," American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio attorney Carrie Davis said Thursday.

On the other hand, you wouldn't do a dog this way.

The Government filed an 18 page sentencing memorandum for I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby today. You can read it here. In the memorandum, the Government says Libby's guidelines are 30 to 37 months and asks the Court to follow the guidelines. The Government said it will follow-up with a filing explaining how it arrived at the guideline range later today. As of now, it has not been filed.

My initial calculation of the guidelines, with links to the specific provisions, is here. Christy at Firedoglake provides her take and Josh Gerstein of the New York Sun reported today. (Both were written before the Government's memorandum was filed.)

Points of interest. The Government did not say it agreed with the Probation Department's calculations of the Guidelines, it said it believed the guideline range to be 30 to 37 months. It may be that the Probation Department calculated the guidelines to be lower than that.

Also, Libby has not filed a Sentencing Memorandum, at least as yet. There are a few explanations for this.

More...

Two new books about Hillary Clinton are set for release in June. One is by Jeff Gerth and Don Van Natta Jr., the second is by Carl Bernstein.

As for the ridiculous assertion that 20 years ago Hillary and Bill were planning on how to each be two-term Presidents, Media Matters provides the debunking.

What's left is like sifting through old coffee grounds. Do we really need new books re-hashing old Clinton marital woes?

How about the facts? Gerth and Van Natta, Jr. make a big deal out of Hillary's non-review of the National Intelligence Estimate when it came out. Why? It's not as if she claimed otherwise. Only six senators did review it (none of whom are current Presidential contenders.)

When Hillary was asked about this a few weeks ago in New Hampshire, she said she was briefed extensively on it. That only six Senators read it was documented during the 2004 presidential campaign, for example by ABC on 4/14/07 and the Washington Post (article by Dana Priest) on 4/27/04.

More old coffee grinds:

If you buy this one, the Times has a nice bridge to sell you:

The Bush administration is developing what are described as concepts for reducing American combat forces in Iraq by as much as half next year, according to senior administration officials in the midst of the internal debate.

How many times have we heard that one? A lot:

"My commanders tell me that as Iraqi forces become more capable, the mission of our forces in Iraq will continue to change... We will increasingly move out of Iraqi cities, reduce the number of bases from which we operate, and conduct fewer patrols and convoys. As the Iraqi forces gain experience and the political process advances, we will be able to decrease our troop levels in Iraq without losing our capability to defeat the terrorists." 11/30/05, George W. Bush

Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT), who I support for the Democratic Presidential nomination, promises to keep fighting to end the Iraq Debacle:

Senator Barack Obama (D-IL), our newest proponent of the not funding after a date certain option, learns that the GOP does not play nice, and strikes back very effectively:

More please Senator. And fight for the only alternative for really ending the Debacle, the not funding option.

Between, John Edwards, Senator Obama and my personal favorite, Sen. Dodd, we have three more leaders capable of leading on this issue. Senator Clinton's voice in this fight would be most welcome. Her recent votes are a good start, but I personally would like to see more leadership. I am confident she can deliver such leadership. Please step up Senator Clinton.