by TChris

The president announced his intent to select a replacement for Harriet Miers in a “timely manner.” Miers was torpedoed by extremist critics in the president’s own party, raising the fear of an appeasement pick.

Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) cautioned Democrats to be careful what they wished for. "For those who were concerned that Harriet Miers was too conservative, you should not be too sanguine about this," Obama said.

Dick Durbin warned that the president is “almost certain to turn to a nominee that is embraced by the conservative wing of the Republican Party.” Harry Ried cautioned the president not to travel that road:

Patrick Fitzgerald says there will be no leaks announcement today.

Rove's legal team made contingency plans, consulting with former Justice Department official Mark Corallo about what defenses could be mounted in court and in public.

It sounds like today will be the final day for those under the gun to make a deal.

by Last Night in Little Rock

This just in from CNN: President Bush has withdrawn the nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court at her request. The NY Times article is here:

On February 11, 2004, Newsday (quoted at length here) reported that former White House Press Aide Adam Levine testified before the Plame grand jury for 45 minutes on Friday, February 6. The paper also reported:

In the grand jury sessions, press aides were confronted with internal White House documents, mainly e-mails and telephone logs, between White House aides and reporters and questioned about conversations with reporters, according to sources and reports.

Levine's lawyer, Dan French, has confirmed for the Washington Post that Levine was interviewed again Tuesday by a member of Fitzgerald's legal team regarding a July 11 conversation Levine had with Rove. This is the same date that Rove and Time Magazine reporter Matt Cooper spoke - in a conversation that Rove apparently didn't recall during his initial questioning by FBI investigators or before the grand jury. The Rove-Cooper conversation is the one Fitzgerald reportedly is examining in deciding whether to charge Rove with perjury.

by Last Night in Little Rock

For the last two days, I haven't been able to get this line from the movie The Ref (1994) out of my mind:

Connie Chasseur: Who would catch a criminal, and then let him go free?

Mary Chasseur: Republicans.

Not much attention has been paid here to international press reports of the current state of the Bush presidency. Tomorrow's Independent has this description:

Senior White House officials face indictment over CIA leak. Protests across US as military death toll in Iraq passes 2,000. Republicans may force retreat over Supreme Court nomination

This perception, quite accurate I think, doesn't help him.

...the leak investigation has become a metaphor for the alleged manipulation of intelligence to make the case for military action.

Political Wire recommends this Atlantic Monthly profile (free link) of Karl Rove. I'm struck by this statement:

In the rare instances when he has failed to set the terms of debate, Rove hasn't fared nearly so well.

But the fact that he can't control Fitzgerald's playing field may make him more ruthless:

It is frequently said of him, in hushed tones when political folks are doing the talking, that he leaves a trail of damage in his wake—a reference to the substantial number of people who have been hurt, politically and personally, through their encounters with him. Rove's reputation for winning is eclipsed only by his reputation for ruthlessness, and examples abound of his apparent willingness to cross moral and ethical lines.

We have another day at least to wait. As Murray Waas says today, quoting former Nixon Aide Leonard Garment:

"We do not know what is happening, and that is what happening."

While you're waiting, here's my list of fellow Rove and PlameGate obsessives I read at least once a day:

• Jane and Reddhed of FireDogLake, who got this well-deserved and outstanding review today from Ron Rosenbaum at the New York Observer.
• Tom Maguire of Just One Minute
• Huffington Post, particularly the Patrick Fitzgerald page
• Digby

Other excellent analysis:

Update: Dan Froomkin of the Washington Post wrote today:

Broadcast journalists are reporting that there will be no public announcement today. But one popular rumor is that Fitzgerald will indeed present indictments to his grand jury today, the jury will vote on them -- and then he will put everything under seal, pending a public announcement tomorrow.

Even if he seals everything, Fitzgerald would have to take any indictments returned by the grand jury to a judge today. And he would be accompanied by his grand jury foreperson. So keep an eye out for that. Also keep an eye out for senior administration officials showing up at the courthouse very, very late at night.

Update: John at Crooks and Liars called Fitzgerald's office (I'll admit to giving him the number) and learned:

I just got off the phone with Fitzgerald's office and the person I talked to was very cordial even after a long, hard day. I was told it would be highly doubtful if anything happened tonight. I asked for permission to print that and was told I could.

by TChris

The right wing has one more reason to worry that Harriet Miers might not support their extreme views if her Supreme Court nomination is confirmed.

Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers said in a speech more than a decade ago that “self-determination” should guide decisions about abortion and school prayer and that in cases where scientific facts are disputed and religious beliefs vary, “government should not act.”

Miers’ professed belief that individuals should make their own decisions about contentious social issues, and her apparent belief that science should not give way to a governmentally-advanced religious agenda, prompted Mathew Staver, president and general counsel for the Liberty Counsel, to make the bizarre charge that Miers would be a judicial activist. While most might think that a judicial activist would actively impose his or her own will on others rather than letting them decide for themselves, any judge who lets individuals make their own choices about whether to pray or to have an abortion is apparently an “activist” in Staver’s world.

Thanks to TChris for providing updated Indictment news while I was in court this morning.

Here's an update: UPI reporter Richard Sale (who has been right on the money in this case and had this news-breaking article back in February, 2004) writes on Col. Patrick Lang's weblog that Indictments will be announced today and Fitzgerald will hold a press conference tomorrow.

In this entry, also today, Sale reports that Stephen Hadley, formerly the Deputy National Security Adviser, is a strong possibility for an Indictment. (Question: Was he Novak's source?)

And, Fitzgerald is looking at a Section 1983 civil rights charge for violating Joseph Wilson's civil rights. (Question: What about the rights of his wife Valerie?)

by TChris

Even as President Bush tries to pump up support for a war that has claimed 2,000 American lives, John Kerry announced a specific proposal to begin bringing troops home. Noting that “it is essential to acknowledge that the insurgency will not be defeated unless our troop levels are drawn down,” Kerry called upon the president to bring home 20,000 troops over the Christmas holidays, after the December parliamentary elections. Kerry has said that it would be reasonable to return all the troops within 12 to 15 months.