Hurricane Irene is all the talk today.

I'm traveling to Washington today to get a closer look. No blogging until tonight.

Open Thread.

Busy day, but wish me a happy birthday anyway. Like Jack Benny (who?), I'm 39.

Open Thread.

I'm making a huge pot of soup with all the vegetables I bought Saturday at the Farmers Market, and watching Big Brother. Today's 98 degree heat broke a 75 year record.

The New Jersey Supreme Court has ordered changes to rules regarding eyewitness evidence . More on the changes here. The changes are expected to be watched closely by other states.

Currently, a defendant has the burden of proving there was undue suggestion during the identification process. That won't change. But the court has ordered that when a defendant can show some evidence of suggestiveness by police, a pretrial hearing must be held to explore it.

The court also requires a system be developed to better explain to juries the potential flaws with eyewitness identifications.

Steve Jobs has stepped down at Apple. He said:

"I have always said if there ever came a day when I could no longer meet my duties and expectations as Apple's CEO, I would be the first to let you know," Jobs said in a letter to "the Apple community" that was released by the company. "Unfortunately, that day has come."

This is an open thread, all topics welcome.

The Associated Press has more on its investigation into the secret infiltration of Muslim communities by the NYPD, through programs created for them by the CIA.

Since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, the NYPD has become one of the country's most aggressive domestic intelligence agencies. A months-long investigation by The Associated Press has revealed that the NYPD operates far outside its borders and targets ethnic communities in ways that would run afoul of civil liberties rules if practiced by the federal government. And it does so with unprecedented help from the CIA in a partnership that has blurred the bright line between foreign and domestic spying.

There are some details of a secret human mapping program: [More...]

Hectic day for me. No blogging.

Open Thread.

Matt Yglesias writes:

Henry Blodget has an intelligent article arguing that Bank of America may soon be in need of another bailout, and proposing a Swedish-style nationalization as an alternative. He lays it all out and it’s pretty compelling.

That said, I’m not sure that any of the underlying problems with the early 2009 version of this idea have actually been resolved. [. . .] Blodget['s] proposal, however, is for Geithner to “set a ‘trigger price’ for Bank of America stock” that is kept secret from the public and from Bank of America. Then if the price if breached, Treasury will nationalize the bank and do various things. Nowhere does Blodget note that this would be illegal. My read of the views inside the Treasury Building is that they think illegal seizures of private property would have undesirable impacts.

Consider it your daily reminder that in the American system of government, things generally require coordinated action between the executive branch and Congress to happen. What do you think the prospects are for timely congressional action on a new bank nationalization program? Not good. So we’ll muddle through.

I'm not sure on the legality of the proposal, but consider this proposal regarding Bank of America:

Really? An 5.9 earthquake on the east coast? How odd. Hope everyone's okay.

A 5.9 magnitude earthquake centered northwest of Richmond, Va., shook much of Washington, D.C., and was felt as far north as New York City and Rhode Island.

The quake sent hundreds of people spilling into the street a block from the White House, with other buildings evacuated in North Carolina and tremors felt as far away as New York City.

The heart of the quake apparently was Mineral, Va., in Louisa County. And I just read Colorado had an earthquake last night -- the largest one since 1967. It was in the southern part of the state, near New Mexico.

I used Scott Lemieux as a whipping boy yesterday, and was not totally fair about it. Lemieux is a smart good guy so I think I should try to be fair and link to his reaction:

[W]orking backward from my clearly stated position, he seems to be saying that we shouldn’t care about foreign policy and security policy (where presidential power is dominant or near-dominant), the appointment power, the enforcement of legislation, the ability to veto legislation, the power to set the agenda, and the real (if subordinate) power to influence domestic policy all don’t matter! I disagree — I think this stuff matters a great deal, and personally plan to follow the next presidential election with substantial interest.

That's fair tit for tat. I did misrepresent his position and of course he is paying me back by doing the same to me. I do think we have a fundamental disagreement on the power of the President on domestic policy. And I think he severely underestimates how important domestic policy is in a Presidential election. In short, I do not think his argument on Presidential weakness on domestic policy, particularly the economy, is going to cut it politically. I think it is wrong as a question of fact and I know it will not work as a question of politics.

Speaking for me only

Homeland Security has begun its review of 300,000 cases of undocumented residents eligible for removal (deportation) and giving reprieves to a limited few.

Under the policy, immigration authorities will use powers of prosecutorial discretion in existing law to suspend the deportations of most immigrants who, although they have committed immigration violations (which generally are civil offenses), have not been convicted of crimes.

In particular, officials will look to halt deportations of longtime residents with clean police records who came here illegally when they were children, or are close family of military service members, or are parents or spouses of American citizens.

The cases will be examined individually, with removals being canceled for those who fit the guidelines: [More..]

Busy day ahead.

Open Thread.

The Manhattan District Attorney's office has filed a 25 page motion asking the court to dismiss all charges against Dominique Strauss-Kahn. You can read it here.

“The nature and number of the complainant’s falsehoods leave us unable to credit her version of events beyond a reasonable doubt, whatever the truth may be about the encounter between the complainant and the defendant,” the papers state. “If we do not believe her beyond a reasonable doubt, we cannot ask a jury to do so.”

DSK's lawyers issued this statement: [More...]

Scott Lemieux, with assists from Jon Chait and the 2008 Ezra Klein. Yes, the usual suspects.

Here's what's weird to me about this - the continued argument against a straw man - the nonexistent argument that the President can do whatever he wants - ignores the fact that the President is the least relevant person in the country on domestic policy - except for everyone else.

Can a President do it by himself? Of course not. But a President can lead the conversation where he wants the policy discussion to go. Like say, deficit reduction. And he has been known to have some political power as well.

At this point, the discussion is just plain ridiculous. In any event, since I do think that who is the President matters, I'll continue to try and explain why I think you should vote for the reelection of President Obama, despite his shortcomings, ESPECIALLY on domestic policy and the economy. The usual suspects will in due course, I imagine, drop their defensive crouch on Obama's behalf and start arguing what Obama might be able to do on domestic policy in a second term. I hope so at least.

Speaking for me only