The Second Circuit Court of Appeals Monday issued a decision upholding the contemptible procedure of perp walks:

A federal appeals court has unanimously approved police "perp walks," in which handcuffed, camera-shy defendants are paraded before cameras, claiming it may sway others from attempting crimes similar to those charged to the defendants.

"The image of the accused being led away to contend with the justice system powerfully communicates government efforts to thwart the criminal element, and it may deter others from attempting similar crimes," said the opinion authored by Circuit Judge Fred I. Parker and released Monday, four weeks after he died Aug. 12.

The tradition does not violate a prisoner's civil rights so long as it is not "an inherently fictional dramatization" staged solely to satisfy press curiosity, a panel of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 3-0 in a New York case.

Perp walk: Think Lee Harvey Oswald who was shot to death during it. Timothy McVeigh, who wasn't even provided a bullet-proof vest. Here's our description of McVeigh's perp walk (taken from our brief asking that eyewitness identifications of him be suppressed from trial):

The Washington Post reports that Howard Dean has asked Wesley Clark to join his team if Clark decides not to run for President. The two met in California last weekend and discussed the vice-presidency.

Clark, in a telephone interview yesterday, said he did not want to comment about the private meeting. Asked about reports that the two men had discussed a wide range of issues, including endorsing Dean, joining the campaign, possible roles in a Dean administration and the vice presidency, he said only, "It was a complete tour of the horizon."

Smart move by Dean. It sounds like Clark is still undecided about jumping in the Presidential race. He is expected to announce his decision September 19 when he makes a speech in Iowa. Dean and Clark have met four times. Stay tuned.

Update: Noah Shachtman of Defense Tech has an article in today's New York Times on Wesley Clark --and the company he leads which is making a 21 speed bike.

The retired general has been devoting much of his time to running a company making a new kind of electric motor that does not require gears or a transmission, but uses computer algorithms to maximize torque and efficiency. The company, WaveCrest Laboratories of Dulles, Va., hopes to put these motors into hybrid gas-electric cars or even hydrogen-powered fuel-cell cars one day. But for now, WaveCrest is focused on bikes.

Update: Momentum Builds

Ben Glisan, originally charged in 24 counts of a 109 count Indictment naming him and Enron ex-execs Andrew Fastow and Dan Boyle, was sentenced today to five years in prison. He pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit securities and wire fraud without a cooperation agreement (meaning he didn't rat out the others) - and got the maximum term for the count. He was taken into custody immediately.

The judge recommended a minimum-security facility for Glisan.

Legal experts who watch the Enron cases see the plea arrangement as a minor win for both sides: Prosecutors show momentum in the huge slow-moving case by finally putting an Enron official behind bars, while Glisan gets a sure, swift sentence, cutting the risk that he could receive a far greater sentence after a protracted and expensive trial.

....Robert Mintz , a New Jersey-based attorney and former federal prosecutor who has followed the case, said he thinks this plea arrangement will set the bar for the sentencing of others. "It lays out a five-year standard. It's not likely the government will offer something more lenient to someone who was more culpable and isn't cooperating," Mintz said.

Glisan was a top-level executive at Enron.

Buzzflash interviews Paul Krugman, New York Times Journalist and author of the new book The Great Unraveling: Losing Our Way in the New Century.

Buzzflash writes:

Thank God for this Man! A Princeton University professor who pens a column for the New York Times, Krugman is probably the most visible mainstream media commentator, among a handful, who "gets it." He views the Bush Cartel as "revolutionary power...a movement whose leaders do not accept the legitimacy of our current political system." In short, Krugman understands that the Bush gang is anti-democracy at its core.

An ex-boot camp officer who abused a probationer by plunging his head into a toilet has been convicted of official oppression.

His punishment: two years' probation, a $1,000 fine and 10 weekends (160 hours) scrubbing toilets at the boot camp.

The prosecutor described the guard as "a sadist."

He said [the guard] Vera picked up a 5-foot, 100-pound probationer, "slammed him into a wall, kicked him, stuck his head in the toilet and flushed it."

The jury deadlocked 11 to 1 for conviction on charges he did the same thing to a second probationer. A third probationer has now come forward with the same accusation.

Just desserts.

Donald Rumsfeld today said that most of the detainees at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba will be held until the global war on terror ends but they will not be afforded trials.

Rumsfeld said the 660 or so men held at the Guantanamo Bay naval base are imprisoned not as punishment but "to keep them from going back and fighting again and killing people." He said most would be held until the global war on terrorism is over - a fight that Rumsfeld has said could last years, if not decades.

The defense secretary said he expects some suspects to be tried before military tribunals but prefers that most continue to be imprisoned indefinitely.

"Our interest is in not trying them and letting them out," he said in a question-and-answer session after a speech to the National Press Club. "Our interest is in - during this global war on terror - keeping them off the streets, and so that's what's taking place."

So we're going to continue to pay to incarcerate hundreds of men for possibly decades? With no criminal charges, no access to a lawyer and no judicial hearings or trials? What country is this?

Sorry, can't resist.... The Clark Sphere

The criticism of Bush's new Patriot Act starts slow, a few paragraphs at the end of a news article otherwise devoted to his speech and his supporters. But it's there. And if you join in, and call your elected officials in Congress at their toll-free number, it will grow louder and louder until we can't be ignored.

From the Knights Ridder News Service....in major newspapers tonight around the country (14 so far):

Critics of the original Patriot Act wasted no time Wednesday in attacking the administration's call for extending its reach.

"Politically and legally, further erosions of judicial oversight and the basic checks and balances that protect us and our democracy from political abuses of power are the wrong path to take," said Charlie Mitchell, legislative counsel with the American Civil Liberties Union.

Denver lawyer Jeralyn Merritt, the treasurer of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, called the proposed provisions dangerous.

"We are watering down judicial oversight to the point that it's meaningless and giving away much too much power to the executive branch," she said. "Once you give up power to the government, very rarely do you ever get it back."

Toll Free Switchboard: 1-800-839-5276 . Call now. Call often. Your voice counts.

Update: More than six bills have been introduced in Congress to repeal portions of Patriot Act I--Bush has threatened to veto them.

Here's the Transcript Arnold Schwarzenegger on 'The O'Reilly Factor' - who won?

Update: We just finished watching the 30 minute interview in its entirety. It wasn't a debate. It was a love-fest. O'Reilly was positively smitten. Still, Arnold did well. Excellent demeanor --he really seems to have the fire in his belly to help California--and he showed some knowledge.

While we strongly disagree with his opposition to drivers' licenses for undocumented residents, at least he ultimately balked at militarizing our borders (he first said it was ok, then backtracked and said he'd have to study the issue more-- but his face showed opposition to us) . And he said he will not attempt to interfere with a federal court order to provide services for the undocumented residents.

His passion is infectious. We like him.

But....vote "no" on recall, it's still the right decision.

Update: Arnold and Maria will be on Oprah Monday. Their first joint interview of the campaign. Celebrity sells, no question about it.

The new death penalty provisions Bush announced today as part of his new terrorism bill (consisting of three provisions of Patriot Act II) should scare everyone. There is no intent to kill requirement. Death by tragedy is sufficient.

Consider this--as the ACLU has done:

While the DOJ labels this provision as providing for the death penalty for terrorist “murders,” there is no language in the text that requires any showing by the government of an intent by the defendant to kill; it is sufficient that death results from the defendant’s actions.

Some of the ACLU's examples:

• Protesters at Vieques Island, the military bombing range, cut a fence to trespass and a bomb explodes killing one of the protesters. The surviving protesters could face the death penalty.

• Or if Greenpeace try to block an oil tanker from entering a port to protest the company's safety record and a crew member drowns while attempting to block the activists' boat, the activists could face the death penalty.

Dangerous protest activities should not be treated as terrorism. And death penalty eligible offenses should require an intent to kill.

Unbelievable. Bush and Ashcroft's lust for power knows no bounds. On the eve of the second anniversary of 9/11, Bush will make a speech at 3:15 ET today announcing a new terror bill--a remake of the bill known as Patriot Act II. Bush got busted earlier this year trying to sneak Patriot Act II to Dennis Hastert, the Speaker of the House, and when it got leaked to the media, he took it off the drawing board. Many, including us, have been warning that the Administration was not going to give up, but rather, give the bill shiny new packaging and introduce it piecemeal, so as to prevent an uproar of criticism.

A few of the provisions have already been passed. Today, Bush will announce a few more, including expanded use of the death penalty, denial of bail to terror suspects, and allowing investigators bypass grand juries to issue subpoenas.

This stinks. Here are the details of the three major provisions:

* Allowing law enforcement authorities to bypass a judge or grand jury and issue "administrative subpoenas" in terrorism investigations where "time is of the essence." Such authority is available in other types of investigations such as drug probes, McClellan said.

* Denying bail for terrorism suspects, to prevent them from fleeing. Bush was to cite as an example of the need for such legislation a case where a material witness in a terrorism case fled after being released on bail, McClellan said.

* Imposing the federal death penalty for terror-related crimes, such as sabotage of a military or nuclear facility "in a way that takes innocent life."

Protest loud. Protest often. These are your rights and civil liberties at stake. Ashcroft and the Justice Department are misleading the public as to the effect of the Patriot Act on average Americans.

Read this new report from People for the American Way and learn what freedoms you have already lost from the Bush and Ashcroft assault on the Constitution.

The first response we've read comes from Senator Patrick Leahy's office:

A Senate Democratic aide said he was unfamiliar with details of the legislation Bush is proposing, but said the action appears to violate a pledge by U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft.

"The attorney general has repeatedly promised to consult with Congress in drafting any sequel to the Patriot Act. To this point, that has not happened," said David Carle, spokesman for Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy, ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee.

David Ignatius writes Gen. Clark's Critique - Via The Horse

What makes Clark such a good candidate:

It's the fact that, like Dwight Eisenhower talking about Korea in 1952, the retired general can argue that he's the man to get America honorably out of a war others created.

A final reason to pay attention to Clark's version of "I told you so" is that it's linked to a broader analysis. He will argue in a book to be published next month that the administration showed "a fundamental misunderstanding of modern war." By rushing into battle, it lost the biggest advantage of American power, which is "the incredible leverage to bring other allies on board to help us." Bush's mistake, he argues, was not in overestimating U.S. power but in underestimating it.

When will Clark decide? He'll have some catching up to do, no question, but we'd like to see him get in the race -- and the remaining debates. We think this is still anyone's ballgame.