The Congress sent up the inadequate Iraq supplemental funding bill for the President's signature today. And he is signing, a veto message:

Democrats sent the Iraq war-spending bill to the White House this afternoon after a ceremony at the Capitol. Aides to President Bush said he was eager to veto it before nightfall. . . .The White House said that Mr. Bush would wield his veto pen shortly after 6 p.m. Eastern time . . .

The Democrats are in luck. What a stupid move by Bush. The bill sent to him has no binding requirements on troop withdrawal. It has no binding benchmarks. It purports to require that withdrawal commence in 120 days but it has no requirement for when it should end. Bush could remove 1,000, or even 1, troop, and comply. And who is gonna call him on it anyway?

Bush blows it tonight. But will Dems blow it again? We'll see. I predict that even non--binding timelines will be stripped from the bill. Which, let me surprise you, is fine by me. Conditions and benchmarks and timelines and guidelines are so much nonsense with a person like Bush.

There is one way to end the war. Do not fund it. And no, it need not and will not happen today or tomorrow. But how about say, March 31, 2008? Tell the President and the country now that Mr. President, March 31, 2008, 11 months from now, is the last day of funding. Make sure the troops are out by then. The American People want this.

Does the Democratic Congress have the desire and courage to end the Iraq Debacle? This is what we will discover.

This story is both political and legal. Today the DC Circuit ruled that Jim McDermott was not protected by the First Amendment when he released to reporters an illegal tape recording he received from private citizens of Newt Gingrich violating his ethics settlement agreement.

Let's be clear what happened here. Rep. John Boehner (R-OH), sued McDermott because McDermott gave to reporters a tape of Newt Gingrich violating his agreement with the House Ethics Committee.

The en banc DC Circuit agreed the tape was newsworthy. But 4 of the 9 judges ruled that the First Amendment did not protect McDermott's actions, which were alleged a iolation of a federal law. (McDermott challenge to the federal law was an "as applied" challenge, where he argued that applying that law to these particular circumstances violated the First Amendment. 1 concurring judge opined that while the First Amendment would have normally shielded McDermott's actions, because McDermott voluntarily agreed to the rules of the House Ethics Committee, which prohibited such disclosure, he also voluntarily relinquished his First Amendment rights. The interesting opinion here is the dissent. I will discuss them on the flip.

According to a new disclosure report (mandated by the Patriot Act), there were a record number of secret FISA warrants in 2005.

A secret court approved all but one of the government's requests last year to search or eavesdrop on suspected terrorists and spies, according to Justice Department data released Tuesday.

In all, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court signed off on 2,176 warrants targeting people in the United States believed to be linked to international terror organizations or spies. The record number is more than twice as many as were issued in 2000, the last full year before the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

And here's the rub:

More...

As predicted, turnout for today's immigration rights marches had a lower turnout than last year. There's more fear this year than last, in the wake of the feds' immigration raids at workplaces.

What are they marching for? While not every immigrants' rights group's goals are the same, here are the goals of the National Immigration Solidarity Network:

1) No to anti-immigrant legislation, and the criminalization of the immigrant communities.

2) No to militarization of the border.

3) No to the immigrant detention and deportation.

4) No to the guest worker program.

5) No to employer sanction and "no match" letters.

6) Yes to a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants.

7) Yes to speedy family reunification.

8) Yes to civil rights and humane immigration law.

9) Yes to labor rights and living wages for all workers.

10) Yes to the education and LGBT immigrant legislation.

More...

In a good Media excoriation piece, Eric Boehlert features Brian Williams, he of the perfect hair, discussing his hair cuts and how much he pays for them:

NBC anchor Brian Williams appeared as a guest on David Letterman's show last week where discussion soon turned to Edwards' haircut. Asked what was the most he'd ever paid for a trim, Williams responded, "probably $12."

Really? I have to pay $16, plus tip, for a trim at a little barbershop on Valley Avenue in the New Jersey 'burbs. But Williams, who lives in a restored farmhouse in Connecticut where he parks his 477-horsepower black Porsche GT2 (that is, when he's not decamping on the Upper East Side), gets his haircut for just $12. And remember, that's probably the most he's ever paid.

Williams enjoys a $10 million salary. He's a celebrity journalist and recent Men's Vogue cover boy, who, up until just a few years ago, was probably known as much for his perfectly coiffed locks as he was his reporting skills. Yet, eager to project himself as one of the guys, Williams insists his trims cost chump change.

Al Masri, the bloodthirsty terrorist who attacked us on 9/11, who supposedly is the key to the whole Iraq Debacle, now that the previous two keys, Saddam Hussein and Zarqawi are dead (not to mention 8 million #3s), is DEAD! again. Check that. Nope, it is misinformation we are now told. So how is that different than what the Media has been reporting for the last 6 years?

Meanwhile, we can report that Osama bin Laden is alive and well, living in Pakistan/Afghanistan/Waziristan/Off The Bush Radarstan.

This is scary:

The News Corporation, owner of Fox News and The New York Post, has made an unsolicited $5 billion bid for Dow Jones, publisher of The Wall Street Journal. . . . The acquisition of Dow Jones would broaden the reach of News Corp, owned by Rupert Murdoch, into business reporting and American media in general.

In running The Times (UK), Murdoch's record has received mixed reviews. But Murdoch in England is not Murdoch in the US, where his media properties are nothing but GOP propaganda vehicles. If Murdoch acquires the Wall Street Journal, will we lose the Wall Street Journal news operation, one of the best in the business (as opposed to the editorial pages which Murdoch could not be happier with one imagines) to Fox like bias?

Jon Chait attempts an explanation of the Netroots for perplexed The New Republic readers. It is a quite good piece and Chait has some interesting things to say, but he gets a lot wrong. To me, this is his biggest mistake:

All the lessons the netroots have gleaned about U.S. politics were on display in this noxious denouement [the 2000 Post-Eloection Fight], and those lessons have been reinforced time and again throughout the Bush presidency. The Democratic leadership and the liberal intelligentsia seemed pathetic and exhausted, wedded to musty ideals of bipartisanship and decorousness. Meanwhile, what the netroots saw in the Republican Party, they largely admired. They saw a genuine mass movement built up over several decades. They saw a powerful message machine. And they saw a political elite bound together with ironclad party discipline.

It is not admiration that the Netroots expresses here. It is dealing with the reality of the situation. Chait mistakes understanding your political adversary, what you are up against, with admiration.

No one wants the nation so divided politically. Everyone wishes we could all be reasonable. But only a fool acts as if the world is how he wishes it to be. I have written about this in the past:

Via Atrios, E&P has this from the NYTimes:

By Michael R. Gordon and Eric Schmitt
BAGHDAD, May 2 --
The Bush administration is planning to withdraw most United States combat forces from Iraq over the next several months and wants to shrink the American military presence to less than two divisions by the fall, senior allied officials said today. . . .

That was May 2, 2003.

Isn't it great?:

President Bush announced in a nationally televised address that "major combat operations in Iraq have ended."

"In this battle, we have fought for the cause of liberty, and for the peace of the world. Our nation and our coalition are proud of this accomplishment," Bush told the Navy men and women aboard the warship Thursday.

Bush also made a direct connection between the war in Iraq and the continuing war on terrorism. "The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September 11, 2001, and still goes on," Bush said.

. . . "The liberation of Iraq is a crucial advance in the campaign against terror," he said. "We have removed an ally of al Qaeda and cut off a source of terrorist funding."

Worst President in history.

For the second May Day in a row, immigrants across the country will take to the streets in protest.

In New York, groups are planning an "American Family Tree" rally, where immigrants will pin paper leaves on a large painting of a tree to symbolize the separation of families because of strict immigration laws.

In Chicago, demonstrators will march more than three miles through downtown, ending at a lakefront park.

In Fresno, Calif., organizers planned a rally focusing on children whose parents had been deported. The San Joaquin Valley is home to thousands of seasonal workers who cross the Mexican border illegally each year to work in the fields and construction industry.

In Milwaukee, Ricardo Chavez, the brother of famed agricultural labor leader Cesar Chavez, was expected to speak, as protesters demanded a stop to immigration raids. A raid last year in Whitewater, Wis., saw the arrests of 25 workers and the owner of a packaging plant. Mothers were separated from their children.

More...

D.C. Madam, Deborah Jeane Palfrey, facing racketeering charges, explains why she gave ABC her client roster and is outing them via the media. She's seeking witnesses. She fully expects her customers, especially the prominent Washingtonians among them, like Randall Tobias who resigned as Deputy Secretary of State last week, to say there was no funny business going on, just legal escort services.

She wants these deniers as defense witnesses, to counter the Government's assertion that her escorts provided sexual services.

Pretty desperate strategy, if you ask me. The clients are hardly going to be willing witnesses. What if they just tell her lawyer, when they get their subpoenas, there was sex involved? Surely, she won't publish their comments since it would be adding to the Government's case against her and hurtful to her defense? Nor would she dare actually put them on the stand.

Just in time for sweeps week, she'll be on 20/20 this Friday. I doubt she'll drop any famous names during the show, though the reporters may.

This is taking sleaze media to the extreme.