As TalkLeft reported weeks ago, Bernie Kerik, Giuliani pal and NYC former police commissioner Bernie Kerik, best known for his short-lived nomination by Bush as Homeland Security chief, appears headed for indictment.

Today's update:

Federal prosecutors have told Bernard B. Kerik, whose nomination as homeland security secretary in 2004 ended in scandal, that he is likely to be charged with several felonies, including tax evasion and conspiracy to commit wiretapping.

Kerik's indictment could set the stage for a courtroom battle that would draw attention to Kerik's extensive business and political dealings with former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, who personally recommended him to President Bush for the Cabinet. Giuliani, the front-runner for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination according to most polls, later called the recommendation a mistake.

At least Kerik should have plenty of money for legal fees.

Records filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission show Kerik had earned more than 6.2 million dollars in pretax profits through stock options he was granted by Taser International, a manufacturer of stun guns.

A Guantanamo military tribunal today approved a plea agreement between Australian David Hicks and the military and sentenced him to serve 9 more months, most of which will be served in Australia.

The sentence came at the end of a long day in Guantánamo’s military commission courtroom and followed the deliberations of an eight-member panel of military officers. Having deliberated for two hours, the panel returned at 8 p.m. with a sentence of seven years, the maximum it was permitted to impose under the deal in which Mr. Hicks pleaded guilty on Monday.

But the deal also provided that he actually serve the lesser of nine months or whatever sentence the panel arrived at. The balance of the seven years that could have been imposed is considered suspended.

The agreement for just nine additional months of imprisonment was remarkable for a detainee who, before the plea negotiations, had faced a potential life term and had become an international symbol of many of the 385 detainees here.

What did Hicks have to give up?

More...

For those of you who were wondering whether it's okay to smoke pot during Passover, the answer seems to be "no."

Every Sunday school student knows Pessah for its ban on food that rises, but a growing number of Jews are asking whether the holiday also precludes them from getting high.

....Following an inquiry by the Post, a spokeswoman for the party said the [Green Leaf Party] was sending out an e-mail to members warning them about hemp's possible kashrut problems.

"We are warning our people not to eat anything with hemp products if they follow the practice of kitniyot on Pessah," said party spokeswoman Michelle Levine. "We are considering announcing a ban on everything containing hemp just to be on the safe side. We are going with the rabbis on this. People should remove all cannabis and hemp from their homes."

Levine said one of the party's main arguments for cannabis legalization was biblical references to it.

Biblical references to pot?

Rep. Tom Tancredo will make it official Monday. He's running for President.

Like other presidential candidates using alternative forums to break the news that they are seeking the Oval Office, Tancredo, the anti-illegal immigration stalwart, is choosing the medium that has given him a home for almost a decade. "We're looking at a day of announcements on talk radio," a source close to the campaign said. "That's where the conservative movement has made its mark. That's where our people get their news."

So, Tancredo supporters get their news from right-wing talk radio, not the Denver Post, the Rocky Mountain News, the New York Times or even conservative blogs. How myopic. Then again, so is his vision for America. Does he even have a position on issues other than immigration?

I'm still hanging out with Jane in Connecticut. I don't know where the hours go, but there hasn't been much time for blogging. We're just now sitting on the couch for the first time all day, turning the tv on to see the news, and logging on to check our e-mails. The poodles are great. By the time I leave on Monday, I'll be able to tell Lucy from Katie (Kobe's easier, he's taller.)

As always, thanks to Big Tent and TChris for blogging while I'm away. And say hello to two new blogs:

• JusticeLA

A new social justice site with a (nominal) grant from the USC Annenberg Institute for Justice and Journalism and

• Sparkmeter:

The concept of the site is that users submit news and everyone ranks the recent news as having a left-leaning bias, right-leaning bias, or objective. The most active news rises to the top. Users are also given the ability to rate other users as left, right, or objective. (think digg/reddit but for political news)

This is also an open thread.

More....

mcjoan points out AG Alberto Gonzales' line in the sand defense:

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, amid a growing clamor for his resignation, acknowledged Friday confusion about of his role in firing eight U.S. attorneys but said he doesn't "recall being involved in deliberations" over which prosecutors were to be ousted.

. . . "I signed off on the recommendations and signed off on the implementation plan, and that's the extent of my involvement" . . .

So Gonzales' argument is, in essence, I am not a liar, I am just an incompetent. The firing of 8 US Attorneys did not merit his involvement. That is his defense?!

For Bush, saying you are not a liar is good enough. Think Brownie, Harriet Meirs, Rummy, Doan, Cheney . . .

Tomorrow are the best Final Four matchups in quite sometime.

Ohio State faces Georgetown. This is a battle of the aircraft carriers, Oden v. Hibbert, of a kind that we have not seen since maybe Ewing v. Olajuwon in 1984. Jeff Green is outstanding, but so is Mike Conley. And Ron Lewis is super clutch. Should be a great one. I like Georgetown.

Florida v. UCLA. A rematch of last years championship game. A replay of last year's result would suit me just fine. But I do not expect it. This is a much better UCLA team. Do I think Florida should win? Yes. But it will not be a walkover, period. This game will be close.

Let's Go Gators!

P.S. Like Billy D., I will not allow the UK job be a distraction from my Final Four preparation. Heh.

As I blast Time below, let me agree with Joe Klein (who is a darn good blogger imp), giving due props to the fantastic Edward Wong, and highlighting this heartbreaking quote:

And then, there's this epitaph for the war, from an unnamed U.S. Army sergeant, trying to console his anguished Captain:

“What can you do?...It’s their problem. This is their country, and they need to work it out among themselves. There’s nothing we can do about it.”

Bless the New York Times for its non-stop excellent coverage of this war.

When a Citizen Stengel makes you just about swear off the Madia, remember Edward Wong, John Burns, Dana Priest, Walter Pincus and the other great reporters that deserve our respect and admiration.

Via Josh Marshall, this is truly unbelievable:

the new issue of Time, on stands today, contains precisely zero stories on the [prosecutor purge] scandal. Nothing. As though it's not happening.

In the "Cybil" struggle over the soul of Time Managing Editor Richard Stengel, it appears Citizen Stengel defeated ME Stengel.

All kidding aside, this is simply inexcusable, horrible, embarrassing, firing offense journalism.

Alternet has an article/interview with Move On leaders Wes Boyd and Joan Blades that I think highlights well the flaws in Move On's approach of late generally and on Iraq specifically. Here is my first post "What Is Move On?, for background on the issue.

Alternet writes:

But after all is said and done, MoveOn is an electoral animal . . . MoveOn, perhaps because of its multiple roles, is sometimes misunderstood: It is a powerful lobbying group; a sometime protest organization

And there's a rub, you can not be a Dem organization, a lobbying group and a protest group. The hats are in conflict. And Move On's public image makes wearing all those hats even more difficult. For better or worse, Move On is perceived as the Left flank. Is it accurate? OF course not. But so it is perceived. Thus, when Move on endorses a position, that postion becomes perceived as the Left position. When Move On adopts the "pragmatic" or "centrist" position, then that position becomes perceived as the Left position. The Overton Window in reverse.

I have no idea why this deal was struck:

The House Judiciary Committee has worked out an agreement to have transcribed interviews with at least eight current and former employees of the Justice Department behind closed doors. The committee said that the deal followed a series of phone and written negotiations. The first interview will be today with Michael Elston, Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty's chief of staff. Following will be interviews with McNulty, Associate Deputy Attorney General David Margolis; the former director of the Executive Office for United States Attorneys Michael Battle; Monica Goodling, the DOJ's liaison to the White House (now on leave); acting Associate Attorney General William Mercer; and Assistant Attorney General William Moschella.

Why in Gawd's name was this deal struck? There is not even an executive privilege claim here. What am I missing? This seems supremely stupid to me.

The House and Senate have now passed versions of Iraq supplemental funding bills that both contain language either suggesting withdrawal dates or purporting to mandate to the President that all troops be removed from combat operations in Iraq.

The President continues to say:

He stood on the North Portico of the White House, flanked by Republican House leaders, and delivered his veto threat one more time. “We stand united in saying loud and clear that when we’ve got a troop in harm’s way, we expect that troop to be fully funded,” he said. “And we’ve got commanders making tough decisions on the ground, we expect there to be no strings on our commanders.

So what now? I'll explain what I am thinking on the flip.