More info coming soon!

Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. was rushed to a hospital Monday afternoon after suffering a seizure at his summer island home, a Supreme Court spokeswoman said.

Roberts, 52, fell on a dock after having a "benign idiopathic seizure," said Kathleen Landin Arberg, the court's public information officer. She said that Roberts has "fully recovered from the incident" but that he would remain at Penobscot Bay Medical Center here overnight for observation.

Arberg said the chief justice, who has presided over the court for two terms, suffered minor scrapes in the fall but that a "thorough neurological evaluation ... revealed no cause for concern."
Seattle Times

Roberts fell five to 10 feet and landed on the dock of his summer home, hitting the back of his head, according to the Courier Gazette of Rockland, Maine.

He appeared ashen and was foaming at the mouth, according to the paper.

Rehnquist also dealt with a bizarre health issue during his years on the court.

While serving as an associate justice in 1981, he checked into a hospital to kick an addiction to painkillers.

FBI reports released after his death show Rehnquist was plagued by hallucinations and imagined a CIA plot against him.
NY Post

Federal agents searched the home of U.S. Sen. Ted Stevens on Monday, focusing on records related to his relationship with an oil field services contractor jailed in a public corruption investigation, a law enforcement official said.

Stevens, 83, has been under a federal investigation for a 2000 renovation project more than doubling the size of his home in Girdwood that was overseen by Bill Allen, a contractor who has pleaded guilty to bribing Alaska state legislators.

An e-mail statement issued by Stevens through his Washington, D.C., spokesman said federal agents had alerted his attorneys that they wanted to search his home.

Stevens, who is the longest-serving Republican in Senate history, said the interests of justice would be best served if he commented after the investigation. "I continue to believe this investigation should proceed to its conclusion without any appearance that I have attempted to influence its outcome," Stevens said. "The legal process should be allowed to proceed so that all the facts can be established and the truth determined."

The report said the government was failing to provide basics such as food and shelter for eight million people.

It warned of a humanitarian crisis that had escalated since the 2003 invasion.

It suggests that 70% of Iraq's 26.5m population are without adequate water supplies, compared to 50% prior to the invasion. Only 20% have access to effective sanitation.

Nearly 30% of children are malnourished, a sharp increase on the situation four years ago. Some 15% of Iraqis regularly cannot afford to eat.

Karl Rove, President Bush's political lieutenant, told a closed-door meeting of 2008 Republican House candidates and their aides Tuesday that it was less the war in Iraq than corruption in Congress that caused their party's defeat in the 2006 elections.

Rove's clear advice to the candidates is to distance themselves from the culture of Washington. Specifically, Republican candidates are urged to make clear they have no connection with disgraced congressmen such as Duke Cunningham and Mark Foley.
In effect, Rove was rebutting the complaint inside the party that George W. Bush is responsible for Republican miseries by invading Iraq.

Romney: Americans angry with Iraq war

Presidential hopeful Mitt Romney said Friday that the country is angry over the lack of progress in the Iraq war, a stinging assessment of the Bush administration's handling of the conflict from a Republican candidate.

Campaigning in Iowa, the former Massachusetts governor also argued that despite the nation's frustration over the war, voters aren't ready to replace President Bush with a Democrat.

"I know the Democrats are getting all ready, they are measuring the drapes and getting the carpet all ready for how they are going to take over the White House, and I think they are going to get a big surprise," Romney told a crowd gathered at a golf course. "America is not happy with how the war in Iraq is going, and is angry. But America is not about to take a sharp left turn and put somebody in the White House who would turn America into a European-type state."

While Romney supported the March 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq and backs Bush's current troop increase, he has repeatedly said the post-invasion period was "mismanaged" with a lack of preparation for the insurgency and adequate planning for a government handover.

No Shit Sherlock

The GOP also lost ground on the Economy this month with Democrats now trusted more 47% to 38%. In June,the Democrats' advantage was 47% to 40%.

Forty-three percent (43%) now trust Democrats more on Taxes, 41% trust Republicans more.

GOP Candidates Invited To Attend YouTube Debate

The Republicans take their turn answering unpredictable YouTube questions on September 17 in St. Petersburg, FL. When the the debate was announced by the state party, CNN and YouTube last Friday, Sen. John McCain immediately RSVP'd. Since then, silence from the other campaigns.

Mitt:

Republican Mitt Romney isn't sure yet whether he'll participate in the CNN/YouTube.com Republican debate in September, but he's no fan of the format.

"I think the presidency ought to be held at a higher level than having to answer questions from a snowman," he said in an interview yesterday.

Rudy:

A Giuliani campaign source says that the ex-NYC mayor will most likely opt out of the 9/17 CNN/YouTube Debate in Florida. The reason: unspecified scheduling conflicts.

More from TPM:

You realize why Rudy doesn't like the YouTube debate format, right? He doesn't want the NY fire fighter's to get a clean shot at him on national TV. Maybe Newt was right. Maybe pygmies is the perfect word...

One of the thoughts that occurred to me with regards to the Democratic Youtube debate was how weird the questions for the GOP candidates could potentially be. For the Democratic debates, most of the issues that are on the table are pretty mainstream, like healthcare and Iraq and poverty and global warming, and thus its pretty difficult for the standard rank-and-file member of the democratic base to ask them in an amusing viral format like Youtube and still come out as looking too bizarre (unless they happen to be a talking snowman). As far as issues like illegal immigration and "coercive interrogation techniques" go, how does one ask questions like this in a Youtube format in an amusing way? The differences between the GOP base and the political mainstream can seem less extreme when asked by someone like Wolf Blitzer, but if presented from the standard GOP rank-and-file member of the base, it seemed like a great way to show how unhinged the GOP has become on some of these issues. Personally, I'm surprised the GOP ever got close to agreeing to this format, and once the Democratic debate happened and showed the format in action, I didn't see how it could have been pulled off by the GOP.

If elected, Romney vowed he would not embarrass the country as former President Bill Clinton did by having an affair with White House intern Monica Lewinsky.

"I will not embarrass the people of this nation by doing anything in the White House that will in any way demean the institution of marriage," Romney said.

In the wake of the House of Representatives' approval of two articles of impeachment, Bill Clinton's approval rating has jumped 10 points to 73 percent, the latest CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll shows.

That's not only an all-time high for Clinton, it also beats the highest approval rating President Ronald Reagan ever had.

"What we are witnessing is an out-of-control Congress which spends time calling for special prosecutors, starting investigations, issuing subpoenas and generally just trying to settle scores," said Scott Stanzel, a White House spokesman. "All the while they fail to pass appropriations bills and important issues like immigration reform, energy and other problems go unanswered."

The Constitution's text is quite plain with respect to one mechanism by which Congress might give legal effect to whatever judgement it makes: Congress's spending powers. Congress clearly may cut off funds entirely and bring an armed conflict to an end. It may also take the intermediate step of providing that the President may not use military appropriations to alter the scope of nature of the conflict that Congress has authorized and funded, such as by prohibiting the President from using appropriated funds to increase troop levels or broaden a conflict into additional nations or territories.

The Constitution expressly grants Congress extensive powers relating to war, beyond the well-known appropriations power and the power to declare war. Specifically, the Constitution authorizes Congress to:

• Lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defence and general welfare of the United States
• Define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas and offenses against the law of nations
• Declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water
• Raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years
• Provide and maintain a navy
• Make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces
• Provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections, and repel invasions
• Provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress
• Make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States or in any department of officer thereof.

These provisions plainly set forth an extensive role for Congress that goes far beyond the initial decision to declare war and subsequent decisions regarding its funding. This mass of war powers confers on Congress an ongoing regulatory authority with respect to the war. Indeed, these powers are so extensive that Chief Justice John Marshall opined... that "The whole powers of war (are), by the Constitution of the United States, vested in Congress...." As Commander in Chief, the President's role is to prosecute the war that Congress has authorized within the legitimate parameters Congress sets forth. Congress has exercised precisely this power to define the parameters of armed conflict or war on a number of occasions, some of which concern recent military engagements.

Thus, Congress may limit the scope of the present Iraq War by either of two mechanisms. First, it may directly define limits on the scope of that war, such as by imposing geographic restrictions or a ceiling on the number of troops assigned to that conflict. Second, it may achieve the same objective by enacting appropriations restrictions that limit the use of appropriated funds. Indeed, the reason that the Constitution explicitly limits appropriations for the Army to two years is in order to ensure that Congress oversees ongoing military engagements.

the man President Bush calls "Fredo"--was a Presidential nickname ever more apt?--should at long last be invited to spend more time with his family. Much more time. He should be a Soccer Dad, a Harry Potter Dad, a Couch Potato, Sleeping Late In The Morning The Better To Avoid Any Senate Judiciary Committee Hearings He Might Accidentally Stumble Into Dad, a Dad who doesn't leave the Gonzales family compound for any reason whatsoever without legions upon legions of intelligent adults accompanying him in a supervisory capacity.

Especially if he suddenly gets a hankering to serve his country once again. In which case, the legions upon legions of intelligent adults accompanying him in a supervisory capacity should move Heaven and Earth to convince Alberto Gonzales that "his country" is Kazakhstan. Or Portugal. Or Libya. Or Greece. Or [INSERT NAME OF ANY COUNTRY BUT THAT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

Now, whatever your view concerning just how scandalous this scandal is and no matter what your opinion may be on the proposition that the U.S. Attorneys serve at the pleasure of the President (and I think there is something to be said for the correctness of that proposition), it is near indisputable that Alberto Gonzales has created an Everest of a political problem for the Bush Administration with his "handling" of this issue.

Conyers Outfoxes Bushie in Contempt Showdown
by Patriot Daily News Clearinghouse
Wed Jul 25, 2007

Rep. John Conyers is methodically setting up the legal elements for Congress to pursue statutory and/or inherent contempt proceedings against executive branch officials in a manner that essentially wipes out any claim to executive privilege to shield the truth. A few weeks ago, I wrote a diary (here) on Impeachment by Frog-Marching Congressional Oversight, which suggested that Congress had a better chance -- according to US Supreme Court precedent -- to obtain evidence and testimony from the Bush gang if it conducted a "criminal proceeding" to investigate potential criminal or unlawful conduct by executive branch officials. The beauty of the "criminal proceeding" is that Bush is not likely to prevail on executive privilege claims. Well, it looks like the US Attorney probe has now been officially transformed into a "criminal proceeding" to determine whether Bush officials have violated specific laws.

Dems call for probe of Gonzales' statements

A group of Senate Democrats called Wednesday for a special counsel to investigate whether Attorney General Alberto Gonzales perjured himself regarding the firings of U.S. attorneys and administration dissent over President Bush's domestic surveillance program.

"We ask that you immediately appoint an independent special counsel from outside the Department of Justice to determine whether Attorney General Gonzales may have misled Congress or perjured himself in testimony before Congress," four Democratic senators wrote in a letter Wednesday, according to a draft obtained by The Associated Press.

"It has become apparent that the Attorney General has provided at a minimum half-truths and misleading statements" to the Judiciary Committee, they added.

Turd Blossom to be subpoenaed

Senate Democrats called for a special counsel to investigate whether Attorney General Alberto Gonzales lied under oath and subpoenaed top presidential aide Karl Rove Thursday in a widening probe into the dismissal of federal prosecutors.

"It has become apparent that the attorney general has provided at a minimum half-truths and misleading statements," four members of the Senate Judiciary Committee wrote in a letter to Solicitor General Paul Clement.

They dispatched the letter shortly before Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., announced the subpoena of Rove, the president's top political strategist.

"We have now reached a point where the accumulated evidence shows that political considerations factored into the unprecedented firing of at least nine United States Attorneys last year," said Leahy, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Iraq's largest bloc of Sunni politicians suspended membership in the government Wednesday, a bid that appeared timed to deepen disenchantment in Washington with the Shiite prime minister's faltering leadership.

The dramatic political development came as two suicide car bombers killed at least 50 soccer fans celebrating Iraq's ascension to the finals of a prestigious tournament. A total of 88 people were killed or found dead nationwide, according to police, morgue and hospital officials who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not allowed to release information.

The Iraqi Accordance Front, which has six Cabinet seats and 44 of 275 in parliament, gave Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki a week to meet its demands or see ministers quit the 14-month-old government.

In April, five ministers loyal to radical Shiite cleric cquit the government over al-Maliki's refusal to set a timeline for American forces to leave Iraq. Should the Accordance Front ministers quit, al-Maliki's so-called national unity government would be limping along with more than a fourth of the 38 Cabinet posts vacated by protest resignations.

Alaska's Young, Stevens Face Inquiry

WASHINGTON -- A senior House Republican has come under criminal investigation in the Justice Department's widening inquiry into alleged influence-peddling and self-dealing in Congress.

Rep. Don Young of Alaska, the former chairman of the House Transportation Committee, now is the subject of a continuing criminal inquiry involving possible political favors for a company in Alaska, people close to the case said. Sen. Ted Stevens of Alaska, the powerful former chairman of the Appropriations Committee and the longest-serving Senate Republican, is also now under criminal investigation, these people said.

Federal investigators are examining whether Rep. Young or Sen. Stevens accepted bribes, illegal gratuities or unreported gifts from VECO Corp., Alaska's largest oil-field engineering firm, people close to the case said.

It isn't known what VECO allegedly may have received in return. The company has been awarded a series of federal contracts since 2000, including contracts to provide logistics support for arctic research, among other projects.

HaHa!

The House Judiciary Committee voted today to seek contempt of Congress citations against a top aide to President Bush and a former presidential aide over their refusal to cooperate in an inquiry about the firing of federal prosecutors.

"It's not a step that, as chairman, I take easily or lightly," the head of the panel, Representative John D. Conyers, Democrat of Michigan, said before the committee voted to cite Joshua B. Bolten, the president's chief of staff, and Harriet E. Miers, the former White House counsel.

Democrats have scoffed at what several of them have termed the administration's arrogant, "take it or leave it" offer. Mr. Conyers said before today's vote that members of Congress could not tolerate a situation in which "our subpoenas can be readily ignored, where a witness under a duly authorized subpoena doesn't even have to bother to show up." Mr. Bolten and Ms. Miers refused to even appear before the committee.

But there is a further complication: the White House asserted recently that the law does not permit Congress to require a United States attorney to convene a grand jury or otherwise pursue a prosecution when someone refuses on the basis of executive privilege to testify or turn over documents.