President Bush, already suffering from low poll numbers on his handling of Post-War Iraq and the economy suffered another setback today when the Republican-dominated Senate voted to overturn the recent FCC rule changes that would have allowed media congomerates to own even more media outlets.

The Senate approved, 55-40, a resolution that would roll back the Federal Communications Commission rules allowing television networks to own more local stations and permitting conglomerates to own a newspaper, television stations and radio outlets in a single market.

Supporters of the rule changes included Viacom, CBS and NewsCorp (Fox).

Critics, ranging from the National Rifle Association to Consumers Union as well as Democrats and Republicans in Congress, charged that the rules would narrow the choices of viewpoints and cut local news coverage.

Kobe Bryant's lawyers are not yielding in their effort to have his accuser take the stand at his October 9 preliminary hearing. Nor are they letting up in their demand for her medical records.

In a pleading filed yesterday, Kobe's lawyers argue:

"These records are sought prior to the preliminary hearing because it is believed, based on law enforcement reports and other information in the possession of the defense, that the records will contain information important to the court's assessment of the accuser's credibility."

The defense motion to close the preliminary hearing to the public is here.

We think the defendant's right to a fair trial trumps the media's right to access. If the accuser is not going to testify at the preliminary hearing, then her videotaped interview of what happened should be excluded from consideration -- or the hearing should be closed to public access. If the defense can't cross-examine the accuser on the details of the interview, her statements haven't been tested for truth. That is what cross-examination is all about. It has been described as the greatest legal engine ever invented for ferreting out untruths in the courtroom. While the rules of evidence are relaxed at a preliminary hearing, Colorado courts caution against excessive use of hearsay.

The defense says they need her medical records from her prior forced hospitalization (one that resulted from a determination that she was a danger to herself) to establish her lack of credibility and the implausibility of her testimony. That's a tough sell, but technically, they are right. A judge can toss the charges at a preliminary hearing if he or she finds the accuser's testimony to be incredible or implausible as a matter of law. It's more than which person to believe though--it really would have to be that her testimony was simply not believable at all.

We think the motion to close the preliminary hearing is a stronger one. The Constitution says trials are open to the public--not pre-trial proceedings. In a case such as this, where evidence will be introduced that may not be admissible at trial, in light of the massive media interest in reporting and analyzing every nuance of the case, the only way to preserve Kobe's right to a fair trial by an impartial jury is to close the hearing.

We don't know what time this airs in your area today, but it was a lot of fun to do and we think it has a good mix of the legal and social justice issues involved in the Kobe Bryant case. The promo is here.

Don't miss Calpundit Kevin Drumm's Interview With Paul Krugman

AN INTERVIEW WITH PAUL KRUGMAN....You probably think you know Paul Krugman, the liberal New York Times columnist with never a kind word for George Bush. Think again.

Is Krugman merely someone who dislikes Bush and thinks his policies are horribly misguided? Oh no. In fact, in his most recent book, The Great Unraveling, he makes it clear that he thinks it's much, much worse than that.

Great job, Kevin, as always.

Cheers to Chrysler Corporation....if we hadn't just bought a new car last month, we'd go right out and buy one from them now:

Lonnie Erby, freed after 17 years in prison for three rapes that DNA tests recently showed he did not commit, got his old job back Monday at the DaimlerChrysler plant in Fenton.

"He's coming back on night shift," said Louis Johnson, a steward for United Auto Workers Local No. 110. Erby had worked seven years at the plant, and DaimlerChrysler agreed to give him credit for those years, something the car company maker did not have to do, Johnson said. "It's a pretty good thing on Chrysler's side," he said.

Erby, 49, is expected to work in the paint department, the same place he worked before, Johnson said. Dan Bodene, a DaimlerChrysler spokesman, confirmed the hiring and said, "We're glad to have him back in the Chrysler family."

DARPA, the Pentagon's research arm which until recently was under the direction of John Poindexter, and which was responsible for the outrageous Total Information Awareness (TIA) Program-- has had its budget slashed by more than $100 million dollars by the Senate. Noah Shachtman at Wired News has the details of what gets cut.

The Senate bill eliminates $103 million from the Information Awareness Office's $169 million requested budget, wiping out controversial programs like Human Identification at a Distance, Darpa's effort to identify potential suspects by the way they walk.

Other projects have been shelved in the Senate bill, as well. Funds from Darpa helped launch Duke University's Center for Neuroengineering, where Craig Henriquez was one of a team of researchers developing techniques to control mechanical limbs using brain power alone. In a widely cited paper in Nature, Henriquez's colleagues showed how a monkey, implanted with a series of electrodes in its brain, could move a robotic arm -- just by thinking about it.

Some DARPA programs may be worthwhile, such as one to study the effects of sleep deprivation and ways to combat it. But, it looks like the baby will be thrown out with the bath water. In our view, Poindexter tarnished the reputation of the agency, making Congress skeptical of just about everything bearing its name. Good riddance, Admiral.

Did you know that your bank can blacklist you in the name of homeland security? Financial institutions can close accounts and cancel credit cards with little explanation. Not surprisingly, complaints are beginning to stream in.

Banks have long played a role in stopping the flow of money among suspected terrorists, money launderers, and narcotraffickers. But the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, raised the bar. More watch lists have been generated, more institutions have become accountable -- and more consumers may feel the heat.

And while alleged government violations of civil rights under the USA Patriot Act have received steady attention, consumer complaints in the private sector have fallen largely off the radar.

"No one paid attention to the lists because they primarily affected foreign nationals," says Peter Fitzgerald, an expert on government watch lists at Stetson University in Florida. "Now it affects those who do business with those who do business with those who do business with someone suspected of terrorism."

New York Attorney Lynne Stewart lost her bid to suppress wiretaps and videos yesterday. The federal court in New York ruled that the electronic surveillance was proper under FISA.

In July, the Court threw out terrorsim charges against Stewart. She remains charged with conspiracy to defraud the United States making false statements.

More than 85,000 audio recordings of voice calls, faxes and computer transmissions were made by the government during its seven-year investigation as it worked to build a case that Stewart and the three men were conduits for the sheikh to his terrorist followers, and helped him, among other things, to communicate to them his desire for a resumption of terror attacks.

The defendants argued before Koeltl that the government violated the U.S. Constitution and procedures under FISA, 50 U.S.C. § 1801 and following, and that evidence obtained in the surveillance should be not used at trial.

Stewart was not named as a target in the surveillance applications under FISA. As to the 20 videotapes of her, her client Sheikh Abdel Rahman, and an interpreter at the jail, the Judge ruled:

.... Stewart "simply ignores the cases ... that have squarely held that surveillance authorized and conducted in accordance with FISA does not violate the Fourth Amendment rights of those whose communications are intercepted."

Our full Lynne Stewart coverage is here.

Lawsuits over alleged police brutality have been filed by 12 inmates at the Grant County Detention Center in Williamstown, KY and by the jail's former nurse who says she refused to cover up....the charges are despicable. For now, just don't get busted for a minor crime in Kentucky.

Here are some of the allegations, as described in lawsuits and interviews with former inmates and their attorneys:

• One guard is fond of spiking inmates' toothbrushes and deodorant with mace, Christopher Hughes told his lawyer, Hill. Hughes said the same jailer first broke his hand by kicking the metal food-slot flap down over his fingers, then feigned concern, asked to see the inmate's injured hand -- and twisted it hard. Hughes has not sued; Hill said the assault occurred more than a year ago, too distant to file suit.

• Five suits describe jailers ganging up on inmates to administer vicious beatings, one of them on Cox, who owns billboard and crane companies in Falmouth and who was arrested for drunken driving on March 13. After he dropped his belt and shoes on the floor rather than in a bag, Cox and a witness, inmate Kenneth Townsend, said jailers rushed him and administered a beating.

While Janet Reno was Attorney General, the Justice Department's policy in considering Freedom of Information Act requests leaned towards disclosure. Attorney General John Ashcroft revised the policy In October 2001, imposing new restrictions on the information. He directed agencies "to carefully consider national security, effective law enforcement and personal privacy before releasing information."

Ashcroft also said the Justice Department would defend agencies' decisions not to release information if there was a ``sound legal basis'' for such withholding under FOIA. Under the Reno policy, Justice would defend an agency's withholding information only when the agency reasonably foresaw that disclosure would harm an interest protected by an FOIA exemption.

Turns out, Ashcroft's restrictions have had little effect on the amount of information released. A report released today by the General Accounting Office surveyed almost half of the FOIA officials at government agencies. Some findings:

Forty-eight percent of surveyed government officials who handle FOIA requests said they noticed no changes in what their agencies release to the general public since Ashcroft changed the Justice Department's FOIA memorandum. Only a third of the officials -- 31 percent -- said their agencies release less information to the public because of Ashcroft's 2001 directive, according to the General Accounting Office, Congress's watchdog arm. Of that 31 percent, only 8 percent saw more than a slight decrease, the GAO report said. [link via Behind the Homefront]

[comments now closed]

It should be any day now--maybe even tomorrow. Wesley Clark has summoned his top aides to Little Rock to strategize his presidential bid.

Top advisors include: George Bruno, a New Hampshire activist; Mark Fabiani, former spokesman for the Clinton White House; Ron Klain, a strategist in Al Gore's 2000 campaign; and Washington lawyer Bill Oldaker.

Is it too late? Probably not.

A Clark White House bid would grab the political spotlight and undercut the strength of several in the nine-way Democratic race. However, he would be competing against more experienced politicians with more money and deeper staffs. An Internet-fueled draft-Clark movement has developed the seeds of a campaign and more than $1 million in pledges.

There's a nice profile of Clark today in the Memphis Commercial Appeal.

Right now Dean and Gephardt are tied in the latest Iowa poll. Kerry moves backward (in our view) as his top communications director resigns over campaign differences. Dean leads Kerry in the latest New Hampshire polls. Kerry challenged Dean to a one-on-one debate yesterday and Dean refused, saying it would be unfair to the other challengers.

We won't be surpised to see the race boil down to Dean and Clark, although Gephardt clearly has some support. Daily Kos sees it much the same way, except for Lieberman, who he thinks is stronger than we do.

Kerry looks like he's floundering, especially with Lehane's resignation. And Clark upstages him on the military credentials front. Edwards now has to share the stage with another Southerner. Graham is literally irrelevant.

Gep and Lieberman, while losing some support, should do fine. As should Dean. If Clark enters, this race will come down to those four. Everyone else will just be garnish.

If Bill Clinton endorses Clark, that could be a major plus for Clark.

Update: Why the recall decision is correct.

Just off the wires:

A federal appeals court postponed California's Oct. 7 gubernatorial recall election, ruling the historic vote cannot proceed as scheduled because some votes would be cast using outmoded punch-card ballot machines. [link via Atrios]

Here's more from the San Francisco Chronicle:

a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said Monday it is unacceptable that six counties would be using outdated punch-card ballots, the type that sparked the "hanging chads" litigation in Florida during the 2000 presidential election.

The appellate panel agreed with the American Civil Liberties Union that the voting machines were prone to error and that Davis' fate could be decided later. By that time, the counties have promised to replace their punch-card machines under a court order in separate litigation.

The counties include the state's most populous region, Los Angeles, in addition to Mendocino, Sacramento, San Diego, Santa Clara and Solano. They represented 44 percent of the state's registered voters during the 2000 election.

You can read the 66 page opinion here.

Update: As always, Howard Bashman of How Appealing has the bottom line on the decision:

Cheers for The Boss, Bruce Springsteen. An opponent of the death penalty, Springsteen allowed an anti-death penalty group to have a booth at his North Carolina concert this past Saturday. He did the same in 2000.

When Springsteen played shows in Charlotte and Raleigh in 2000, he dedicated a song each night to the statewide death penalty abolition group and encouraged the audience to support it. Before the shows, PFADP volunteers met members of the E Street Band and Springsteen met with PFADP's executive director.

"Bruce Springsteen makes the connection between the lives portrayed in his songs and the ones reflected in our death penalty system in North Carolina: people struggling through hard lives, a random few of whom are extinguished by this broken, corrupt system we call capital punishment," said PFADP Executive Director Stephen Dear. "We are grateful that he is willing to make this statement time and again. We only wish he did not have to."