Search Results for: ’

So not only has The Columbian endorsed Democratic Gov. Chris Gregoire in her re-election bid, but in Vancouver’s 17th Legislative District, traditionally a swing-to-leans-Republican district, all three Democrats have drawn the endorsement of the newspaper as well.

None of the endorsements are especially surprising, but perhaps the one that will draw the most notice elsewhere is the ringing endorsement of political novice David Carrier over long-time Republican state senator Don Benton.

David Carrier for state senator — You’ll be hard-pressed to find anyone who provides a greater contrast to blustery incumbent Don Benton than Democrat David Carrier, a soft-spoken political newcomer, avid outdoorsman and holder of a doctoral degree in economics from Notre Dame. Carrier is working tirelessly in the campaign. It paid off in the primary when he won 45.6 percent of the votes, a surprising showing against Benton, a 14-year legislator with three terms as state senator.

Voters, though, must have been familiar with those 14 years. He once missed 17 consecutive meetings as a member of the Higher Education Committee. Benton’s bellicose collisions with colleagues raised eyebrows as far back as 2000 when Republican leaders demanded his resignation as state chair. Through the years, he’s become an inveterate “Dr. No,” opposing sensible ideas that draw popular support, such as all-mail voting and abolishing the supermajority for school levies. He is even opposed to the proposal for replacing the decrepit and dangerous Interstate 5 Bridge.

Ouch. It’s kind of too bad the Washington State Labor Council has endorsed Don Benton for state senate in this, of all years. It’s not as if a bridge project would provide prevailing wage jobs or anything.

In the race to replace Rep. Jim Dunn, R-Vancouver, who was defeated in the primary by Joseph James, it’s also no contest, according to The Columbian. Democrat Tim Probst may never have held office, but the newspaper notes his far superior experience.

Few rookies are better prepared for elected office than Tim Probst. He currently works as leader of a statewide work force training group and has solid experience as state policy analyst, legislative liaison and assistant to Illinois Gov. Jim Edgar in the 1990s. Bolstered by 48.2 percent of the primary votes, Probst has the momentum and the expertise to help 17th district voters forget about Dunn.

And last but not least, incumbent Deb Wallace justifiably garners the endorsement over culture warrior Micheline Doan.

You have to be realistic, of course, about newspaper endorsements. They don’t count at the ballot box, and Republicans never, ever give up, but it’s a sign of the times that Republicans have fielded such poor candidates in a swing suburban district, while Democrats have come up with much better candidates. If the landslide really does happen, it’s going to be very tough sledding for Republicans everywhere.

The New York Times editorial board is appalled by the tone and content of the McCain/Palin campaign.  And it takes an awful lot to appall a New Yorker…

It is a sorry fact of American political life that campaigns get ugly, often in their final weeks. But Senator John McCain and Gov. Sarah Palin have been running one of the most appalling campaigns we can remember.

They have gone far beyond the usual fare of quotes taken out of context and distortions of an opponent’s record — into the dark territory of race-baiting and xenophobia. Senator Barack Obama has taken some cheap shots at Mr. McCain, but there is no comparison.

It is a sorry fact of the news biz that editorialists too often attempt to balance the transgressions of one candidate by pointing to the transgressions of their opponent, even when there is no reasonable comparison.  But in recent weeks the McCain/Palin campaign has simply slipped too far over to the dark side to make such journalistic equivalency even remotely believable.

Ms. Palin, in particular, revels in the attack. Her campaign rallies have become spectacles of anger and insult. “This is not a man who sees America as you see it and how I see America,” Ms. Palin has taken to saying.

That line follows passages in Ms. Palin’s new stump speech in which she twists Mr. Obama’s ill-advised but fleeting and long-past association with William Ayers, founder of the Weather Underground and confessed bomber. By the time she’s done, she implies that Mr. Obama is right now a close friend of Mr. Ayers — and sympathetic to the violent overthrow of the government. The Democrat, she says, “sees America, it seems, as being so imperfect that he’s palling around with terrorists who would target their own country.”

Her demagoguery has elicited some frightening, intolerable responses. A recent Washington Post report said at a rally in Florida this week a man yelled “kill him!” as Ms. Palin delivered that line and others shouted epithets at an African-American member of a TV crew.

They called the sound man a “nigger” and commanded him to “sit down, boy.”  But then, that’s the sort of visceral response Palin is shooting for.

In a way, we should not be surprised that Mr. McCain has stooped so low, since the debate showed once again that he has little else to talk about. He long ago abandoned his signature issues of immigration reform and global warming; his talk of “victory” in Iraq has little to offer a war-weary nation; and his Reagan-inspired ideology of starving government and shredding regulation lies in tatters on Wall Street.

But surely, Mr. McCain and his team can come up with a better answer to that problem than inciting more division, anger and hatred.

No, probably not.  What we are seeing is the logical conclusion of the Rovian strategies that secured narrow electoral victories by exploiting the cultural tensions in an otherwise closely divided nation.  As the failures of the Bush administration and his Republican Party have become too overwhelming to ignore, and have started to impact the day to day lives of average Americans, large segments of the electorate are shifting to the Democrats, even if only because they are not Republicans.  Thus as the political divide widens, the obvious Rovian response is to turn up the divisive rhetoric in a last ditch effort to keep swing voters in line through their weapons of choice:  fear, anger and hate.

It will be interesting to see how Republicans respond to a second straight cycle of devastating congressional losses, and a likely Obama victory.  It would be best for both them and the nation if they abandon Palin, and the dangerous fascistic streak she clearly embodies.

The McCain/Palin campaign might want to think twice before heading down that dangerous path toward guilt by association, as the candidates at the top of the Republican ticket have plenty of guilty associations of their own, some of which might even be fresh news to even the most attentive voters.

For example I had no idea about John McCain’s shady associations with the Iran Contra scandal until reading about it this morning in Politico, where former Tacoma News Tribune reporter Ken Vogel (one of the few ex-reporters around here to move up in the biz instead of moving out) sheds new light on McCain’s association with John Singlaub and the US Council for World Freedom.

Since the mid-1980s, there’s been almost no attention paid to John McCain’s long-ago association with a controversial group implicated in a secretive plot to supply arms to Nicaraguan militia groups during the Iran-Contra affair.

But now, with the Republican presidential candidate stepping up his negative blitz against Democratic opponent Barack Obama, some Democrats are hoping that the group – the U.S. Council for World Freedom, and its founder, John Singlaub – will become for McCain what Bill Ayers has become for Obama: a fleeting past association used as ammunition for political broadsides.

[…] “This guilt by association path is going to be trouble ultimately for the McCain campaign,” Democratic strategist Paul Begala said Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “John McCain sat on the board of a very right-wing organization, it was the U.S. Council for World Freedom, it was chaired by a guy named John Singlaub, who wound up involved in the Iran contra scandal. It was an ultra conservative, right-wing group.”

McCain later claimed that he “disassociated himself” from the group after learning of its secret program to arm the Contras, circumventing a Congressional ban on aiding the rebels, but he never informed authorities of these illegal activities.  And he never seemed too bothered by the group’s known anti-Semitic leanings.

Singlaub founded the council in Phoenix in November, 1981, as the U.S. branch of the World Anti-Communist League, which he also helped run for a time. The league billed itself as a supporter of “pro-Democratic resistance movements fighting communist totalitarianism.” But the Anti-Defamation League in 1981 alleged that the anti-Communist league also had had “increasingly become a gathering place, a forum, a point of contact, for extremists, racists and anti-Semites.”

An aide to McCain told Politico that “McCain has a long and consistent and strong record on issues involving Israel and he would never be associated with anything that was anti-Semitic in any way,” but, as Sarah Palin’s church has proven, being pro-Israel and pro-Jew are not the same thing.

After being sparked by a brief comment Sunday from Democratic strategist Paul Begala on NBC’s Meet the Press, the Singlaub story is quickly gaining some media traction on a path McCain may soon regret choosing.

Shortly after receiving a complaint in Utter vs. BIAW this morning alleging illegal collaboration between Dino Rossi and the Building Industry Association of Washington, a King County Superior Court judge has issued an  order approving the plaintiffs’ request to immediately subpoena witnesses and begin taking depositions.  Subpoenas will be served by October 7, and depositions will begin October 15.

In a press release, plaintiffs’ attorney Knoll Lowney said:

“One of the purposes of this suit is to learn Dino Rossi’s precise role in this fundraising effort, which the State Attorney General has deemed illegal.  We obviously have substantial evidence that Rossi assisted in this fundraising, or the Justices could not have proceeded with their lawsuit.  Now that the Judge has allowed us to begin discovery immediately, we will learn how deeply he was involved.”

Indeed we will.  Though, even under this expedited process it unlikely injunctive relief can come soon enough to prevent the BIAW from spending the remainder of its illegal warchest.

Of course, Rossi and the BIAW could attempt to resist the subpoenas by requesting a protective order, but if, as they claim, they have nothing to hide, why would they want to do that?

The Buildergate scandal takes a new twist this morning as former Washington State Supreme Court Justices Faith Ireland and Robert Utter filed notice with Attorney General Rob McKenna of their intent to bring suit against Republican gubernatorial challenger Dino Rossi, alleging illegal campaign coordination with the Building Industry Association of Washingtion (BIAW) and its political committees.  They also filed a lawsuit in King County Superior Court claiming that the BIAW’s coordination with Rossi disqualify it from making “independent” expenditures in the 2008 gubernatorial.

These dramatic legal developments could have a huge impact on the gubernatorial race.  The BIAW has already spent over $2 million on behalf of Rossi this year, mostly smearing Governor Chris Gregoire, and plans to spend an additional $700,000 during the final weeks of the campaign.  The justices are asking that further “over limit” expenditures be barred by court order.

These suits are just the latest in a widening Buildergate scandal for which the BIAW is already being prosecuted, in a case stemming from Utter and Ireland’s original October, 2008 complaint.  But while McKenna is pursuing the BIAW for numerous “egregious” campaign finance and reporting violations, he took no action on the assertion that the BIAW improperly coordinated its activities with Rossi, thus prompting Utter and Ireland to bring suit on their own.

In a joint statement, the two retired justices—both appointed to the bench by Republican governors—outline both the evidence behind their allegations, and their motivation for seeking enforcement.

The evidence upon which we base our legal action can be construed to show that Dino Rossi was not just a beneficiary of these illegal activities, but was a knowing and active participant.  The evidence shows, moreover, that the attack ads of the BIAW are not really “independent” of their beneficiary Dino Rossi.  This is because Dino Rossi helped the BIAW to amass the war chest for these attack ads.

This is an important issue for all races.  Special interests are increasingly supporting candidates through “independent expenditures” that are not subject to contribution limits.  These “independent” campaigns also tend to contain the most vicious and dubious negative attacks, since the benefitting candidate can say that they have no control over these messages.  It is critical to enforce the law that prohibits candidates from providing fundraising assistance to or otherwise coordinating with “independent” committees.

The fact that Dino Rossi had not publicly declared his candidacy when this alleged coordination took place is not a defense.  A person becomes a candidate when he helps a political committee to amass a war chest to support his candidacy.  And the evidence suggests this is what happened here.

If this coordination took place, then the BIAW’s expenditures would not qualify as an independent expenditure, and would be legally limited to $2,800.  The millions of dollars of attack ads that have blanketed our airwaves would be illegal, and further expenditures should be enjoined.

Washington campaign laws are in place to ensure our elections are fair, that all candidates know what they are facing from their opponents in terms of campaign financing. These rules are there to ensure that special interests cannot buy their way into a legislative process designed to serve and protect the interests of all citizens. Without enforcement our laws are meaningless.

When the Buildergate scandal broke last week, the Rossi campaign tried to dismiss it as frivolous, partisan electioneering, a sentiment that seemed to ooze into some of the press coverage (the Seattle Times, for their part, ignored the story entirely), but remember, these are two retired Supreme Court justices making the charges, and like their original complaint, for which the BIAW is now being prosecuted, their legal arguments seem to be fairly airtight.

In fact, Rossi has publicly admitted the action at the heart of this scandal, that he called board members of the Master Builders Association in May of 2007, when they were considering a request to contribute to the BIAW’s “fund for Rossi.”  Rossi excuses his actions:

“I didn’t ask them to put money anywhere but it would have been perfectly OK for me to do that because I wasn’t even a candidate.”

But as Utter and Ireland point out in a FAQ posted to the website of attorney Knoll Lowney, Rossi’s claimed defense is little more than a distinction without a difference.  State law and prior Public Disclosure Commission (PDC) advisories make it clear that a candidate does not have to ask for a specific dollar amount to be involved in fundraising, and the very act of participating in such activity, even on behalf of a so-called “independent” campaign, automatically makes one a candidate by definition.

Indeed, back in June of 2004, the BIAW asked the PDC for an opinion on this very issue, to which the commissioners replied without equivocation:

One of the most fundamental ways a candidate could encourage a person to purchase political advertising supporting that candidate is to help make sure that person has sufficient funds to undertake an effective advertising effort. Assisting a PAC in fundraising fosters that committee’s ability to make the political advertising expenditure benefiting the candidate. As such, the PAC expenditure is not sufficiently removed from the candidate to qualify as an independent expenditure.
…
That collaboration disqualifies any resulting expenditure from the definition of independent expenditure.

You really can’t get any clearer than that.

Buildergate is shaping up to be a classic political scandal, and like most such scandals, it’s the coverup that will eventually bring down the perpetrators, for had the BIAW properly reported its activities like it knew it should have, we may never have known about Rossi’s illegal coordination.

With most of the BIAW’s warchest already spent, there may not be time for the courts to impose any meaningful sanctions, so the only question remaining is whether Rossi will suffer the consequences of his unethical and illegal behavior before the election, or after?  I await to see if our local media will fulfill their obligations as public watchdogs, or merely resort to the kind of half-hearted stenography on this scandal we’ve seen thus far.

This will further enrage the already hysterical wingnuts, but The Columbian has managed to recognize skill, competence and results in the race for governor and endorse Chris Gregoire:

Gov. Gregoire has served well, particularly in matters affecting Clark County, and The Columbian today endorses her for reelection. Such was not our recommendation four years ago when we endorsed Rossi in a battle of two candidates who were seasoned politicians, but first-time applicants for the governor’s chair. Now, though, Gregoire is armed with a dossier that shows significant progress.

Rossi and other critics assail Gregoire most often in an area — the economy — where she actually shows strength and versatility. She helped turn an inherited $2.2 billion deficit into a balanced budget. And as the national economy erodes, Gregoire has hunkered down in the face of the state’s projected $3.2 billion deficit. In June, according to the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, she halted a three-building project at the capital after costs increased from $260 million to $370 million. A new data center, space for the Department of Information Services and State Patrol offices will have to wait.

Newspaper endorsements in tight races are always controversial, and you can bet this will lead to much wailing and gnashing of teeth amongst the local Orthogonians. It’s a Clark County election tradition to increase the volume of Nixonian anti-intellectualism to eleven.

Nothing is quite as poignant as the class resentments of the burghers, you know. All over the county this morning you can hear the echoes of “EM ESS EM” bouncing off the walls of gated communities. Furious threats to cancel already canceled advertising accounts will be issued first thing Monday morning. You can almost hear it– “Really, I was going to advertise just as soon as liquidity returns to the markets, but now I’m not.”

There’s no question that Gregoire has done a fine job as governor, and as the national economy tanks, we need a steady hand at the helm. I can’t honestly say that The Columbian endorsement helps Gregoire; it might or it might not. Most likely a wash overall. If you’ve heard the term “low information voter” well, Clark County is a “low information county.” Ironically, this is largely because of our unique media situation, as Oregon media dominates the area.

But we do know that lots of people registered to vote here in the last week.

Maybe many of them were intensely motivated by the thought of electing Dino Rossi governor? It’s his wink, isn’t it?

Two days ago:

Palin countered with a smile, “Say it ain’t so, Joe. There you go again, pointing backwards again. You prefaced your whole comment with the Bush administration,” She argued that Americans now need to “look forward.”

Today:

Stepping up the Republican ticket’s attacks on Senator Barack Obama, Gov. Sarah Palin on Saturday seized on a report about Mr. Obama’s relationship with a former 1960s radical to accuse him of “palling around with terrorists.”

You read it here first, the story HA broke about the Washington State Republican Party’s illegal spending on behalf of Dino Rossi, and while the allegations were pooh-poohed at the time by the usual Rossi apologists, WA State Attorney General was left with no choice but to bring suit against his own party and former top aide, WSRP chair Luke Esser.

The Republicans spent “exempt” funds, for which there are no campaign contribution limits, on “non-exempt” activities, for which there are strict contribution limits, essentially laundering hundreds of thousands of dollars of illegal contributions on behalf of Rossi and his wealthy patrons like Rufus Lumry and Skip Rowley.  And as I wrote at the time, the charges were “pretty cut and dry“:

This isn’t rocket science.  It’s Campaign Finance 101.  All the political candidates, consultants, committees and parties know damn well what is or is not allowed.  And yet the WSRP chose to blatantly violate campaign expenditure laws that have been in place for the past 16 years.

The question now is not whether the WSRP will be penalized, but rather, will they be penalized enough to discourage future such violations, and whether the court will be willing to issue an injunction barring similar activities between now and the election.  It appears that Rossi, the WSRP and the BIAW are willing to do whatever it takes to win this election, and have made the crass calculation that a Rossi victory is well worth any potential penalty, as long as it is incurred after the fact.

And as long as our media continues to withhold moral judgment of an obviously unethical and illegal strategy until the final court decision is issued months hence, then Rossi and his surrogates will have calculated correctly that crime does indeed pay.

Tuesday morning came and the world had survived the bail-out bust. So Goldy and friends turn to who really won the debate. Was it the cool and presidential guy or was it the snarling Pekingese guy averting his eyes? Next the panel turns to Dino Rossi, the BIAW and the new Buildergate scandal. The former Washington state Secretary of Transportation comments on Rossi’s Fantasy Transportation Plan™, the gubernatorial race, and the new Traffic Congestion Initiative (a.k.a. Lyin’ Eyman’s Initiative 985). All this and more….

Goldy was joined by Seattle P-I columnist Joel Connelly, former Washington State Secretary of Transportation and anti-I-985 activist, Douglas McDonald, initiative specialist Laura McClintock of McClintock Consulting, and HorsesAss and EFFin’ Unsound’s Carl Ballard .

The show is 55:34, and is available here as an MP3:

[audio:http://www.podcastingliberally.com/podcasts/podcasting_liberally_sep_30_2008.mp3]

[Recorded live at the Seattle chapter of Drinking Liberally. Special thanks to Confab creators Gavin and Richard for hosting the Podcasting Liberally site.]

The Seattle Times has a front page article on Darcy Burner and her ties to “liberal bloggers” like me, and while I have no argument with the piece itself, I wish reporter Emily Heffter had managed to get a hold of me.  (We played telephone tag last week, but never connected.)

One of the main points I would have emphasized to Hefter is that this popular notion that the netroots represent some sort of radical-left fringe, is nothing more than a Republican meme that has been eagerly embraced by old media stalwarts who understandably fear the very real threat we bloggers pose to the media and political establishment.

Sure, there’s a fringe element to the netroots, but then everything (except perhaps, a black hole) includes a fringe, and as inclusive as we try to be there are often times when pragmatists like me roll our eyes or pull out our hair at the counterproductive and shortsighted antics of our own wacky left.  (And yes, personally, I am nothing if not a political pragmatist, a self-described “1970’s centrist” who, while occasionally radical in my methods and my writing style, is far from revolutionary when it comes to policy.)  Reichert would point toward Darcy’s mere attendance at Netroots Nation as evidence that she’ll do our “bidding” instead of that of 8th CD voters, but in embracing this classic Rovian divide and conquer strategy, who exactly is Reichert branding as “the other”?  As I reported from Austin back in July, we’re not exactly the “dirty fucking hippies” we’ve been made out to be:

I had planned to get to bed relatively early last night, but somehow found myself at 1:30 AM, sitting in an IHOP with Darcy Burner and a bunch of veterans. Vote Vets co-founder and chairman Jon Soltz sat across the table, passionately detailing the Veteran Administration’s many bureaucratic nightmares as he relentlessly made his way through an enormous, whipped cream topped stack of chocolate chip pancakes. On his own unexpected politicization Soltz described heading to Iraq a true believer, only to have reality—political, military and otherwise—rip the veil from his eyes. “It was like learning that your parents are not really your parents,” Soltz explained as he tried to relate the sense of betrayal that accompanied his own disillusionment.

Perhaps the biggest surprise for those who don’t know squat about the liberal blogosphere might be that while 20-year-old slackers in bathrobes are in short supply here at Netroots Nation, veterans and military personnel are out in full force. At last night’s keynote, Gen. Wes Clark called out various groups one by one to stand up and be acknowledged… teachers, medical professionals, candidates, first responders, social workers, etc…. but by far the largest group in attendance were the veterans, and it was for them that the crowd reserved its loudest and longest round of applause.

It is an inside netroots joke that we sometimes refer to ourselves as “dirty fucking hippies,” the inherent punchline being that this description couldn’t be further from the truth. If we are radicals, we are the radicalized middle, a segment of the population historically loathe to forsake economic security for the sake of a mere cause, yet somehow provoked into producing a populist uprising. That veterans like Soltz and Daily Kos founder Markos Moulitsas Zuniga provide two of our most outspoken voices should come as no surprise from a broad movement that draws support from nearly every corner of American life.

For those who hope or imagine that Darcy’s close connections with the netroots will ultimately prove to hurt her standing with her district’s suburban voters, well, you should have been at IHOP last night, where Darcy was literally embraced by veterans who trust that she will deliver the kind of leadership, respect and support that they deserve. Yet more evidence that we are in fact a netroots nation.

I’ve watched Darcy hugged by bleary-eyed veterans at 2AM, not because they believe she will do their “bidding,” but because they know that as a congresswoman she will always be there to listen to their concerns, and then do the right thing.  If that’s the sort of embrace that’s supposed to alienate Darcy from 8th CD voters, then I guess our critics are right, and “liberal” bloggers like me really don’t know the district.

Documents released today reveal that Republican gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi was not only aware of the Building Industry Association of Washington’s (BIAW) illegal fundraising activities, but that he actively solicited funds on their behalf from at least one organization, the Master Builder’s Association (MBA).  According to a summary of events posted by attorney Knoll Lowney:

The MBA was one of the groups solicited for a donation. On April 30, 2007, BIAW President Daimon Doyle attended the MBA’s Board meeting to solicit a donation to BIAW’s campaign fund, which was considered a “Fund for Rossi,” according to Sam Anderson, the MBA Executive Director. Based upon a formula, MBA was targeted for a donation of over $570,000! The Board decided to table the request until the next meeting three weeks later, expressing concern that most MBA members were democrats and may not appreciate the donation and also about other pressing MBA expenses including building repairs.

When MBA leadership met next on May 21, 2007 at a “Chair Officers Meeting,” the discussion turned to BIAW’s pending request for campaign funds. While discussing the request, all three of the MBA’s top officers reported that they had received calls from Dino Rossi. The one call for which additional detail is provided clearly confirms that Rossi called to support a MBA contribution to the BIAW’s governor’s race war chest. The minutes leave no question that Dino Rossi spoke to this officer about whether and when MBA would give to the BIAW’s governor campaign fund. The officers receiving calls from Rossi were then-MBA President Doug Barnes, First Vice President Joe Schwab, and Second Vice President John Day.

The PDC has already found the BIAW and MBA guilty of multiple “egregious” campaign finance violations, and the Attorney General has subsequently filed suit.  And now we learn that not only did Dino Rossi know about the illegal fundraising, he actively solicited money for it.

This is a major scandal… the kind of scandal that could change the entire dynamic of this election.

More coming….

Chris Mulick has written his last blog post for the Tri-City Herald… or anything else for that matter, announcing that he’s turning in his press credentials tomorrow to take a public information post with the state Senate Democratic caucus.

I can’t point to one single reason that fueled this decision. There are many factors involved in the complex equation.

But certainly, the financial troubles plaguing this industry have created considerable uncertainty. And while the Herald has given me every assurance my job is safe in this bureau it’s unsettling how quickly the unthinkable has become reality in this business. With a young family, I’ve no choice but to risk jumping too soon. I simply can’t risk jumping too late.

Pretty soon the press houses in Olympia will consist of little more than Rich Roesler and Brad Shannon chatting with each other via a couple tin cans and a taut length of string.

Yet another Washington political reporter leaving the business, and only six weeks before one of the most consequential elections in history.  This really sucks.

Rep. Jay Inslee was the only Democratic member of WA’s congressional delegation to vote against today’s Wall Street bailout bill.  Here is his statement:

WASHINGTON, DC — Today, U.S. Rep. Jay Inslee (D-Wash.) voted against the $700 billion bailout package for troubled American financial markets in what he called “a vote of conscience.”

“The initial plan by Secretary Paulson was completely unacceptable, but the revised package was not much better,” said Inslee.  “For all the talk of protecting the taxpayer, there were only limited promises that the taxpayers’ $700 billion investment would be paid back and there were no provisions to help struggling homeowners.”

“If we authorize $700 billion in a bailout for Wall Street, we must ensure – and not just hope – that all the money gets paid back to the American taxpayer.  The plan we were presented with did not do that.  Also, I saw no real provisions in the revised plan to help stem the real cause of the crisis, which is the collapse in our housing markets.  We needed a pro-growth bill to stimulate the economy, and that was not what we got.”

“But now is the time for Congress to come together again and vote on a real, comprehensive plan that will solve the crisis while still protecting the taxpayers and restarting our economic growth.  I am prepared to stay here and in session as long as it takes, and I know many of my colleagues in Congress feel the same.”

“The American people deserve better.  I could not, with good conscience, vote for the bill presented to me.”

While the country’s attention is understandably focused on the financial sector bailout, the Justice Department has released a report (300 plus page PDF) on the politically motivated firings of nine U.S. attorneys, including John McKay, who was the USA for Western Washington. From the AP via The Seattle Times:

Attorney General Michael Mukasey appointed a prosecutor Monday to pursue possible criminal charges against Republicans who were involved in the controversial firings of U.S. attorneys.

His move follows the leading recommendation of a Justice Department investigation that harshly criticized Bush administration officials, members of Congress and their aides for the ousters, which were seen by many as politically motivated.

Results of the investigation were made public Monday. The report singled out the removal of U.S. Attorney David Iglesias of New Mexico – among 9 prosecutors who were fired – as the most troubling.

Republican political figures in New Mexico, including Sen. Pete Domenici and Rep. Heather Wilson, had complained about Iglesias’ handling of voter fraud and public corruption cases, and that led to his firing, the report said.

That initial AP article doesn’t mention McKay, so a quick look at the report itself is in order. The voluminous report examines the McKay firing in extensive detail, including the demands made by a certain “association” and “an outside group,” in Washington state about the 2004 gubernatorial recount, doubtless referring to the BIAW and the Evergreen Freedom Foundation, who were very public in their demands for McKay’s scalp.

Bottom line is that the key administration officials involved (Rove, Miers, Goodling, et al.) have managed to thwart the investigation to this point. From page 267 of today’s DOJ report: (bold added)

In sum, we could not determine whether complaints to the White House about McKay’s handling of the voter fraud allegations stemming from the 2004 Washington State gubernatorial election contributed to his placement on the removal list, particularly without interviews of relevant White House officials.

The report castigates the administration in other conclusions regarding McKay’s firing. On page 268 it concludes that alleged concerns about sentencing statistics were not convincing:

In sum, this purported reason appears to be another after-the-fact rationalization for why McKay was included on the removal list. We believe that raising this claim in the briefing to Congress was misleading and cast further doubt on the Department’s credibility in providing the real reasons for the removals of the U.S. Attorneys.

And finally, the section about McKay’s firing reads like a finely-tuned legal document when it comes to whether McKay’s concerns about an information sharing system called LInX played a role. From page 269:

In sum, we believe the evidence suggests that Sampson placed McKay on the list for removal because of his actions in the LInX matter. However, the Department’s various descriptions of why McKay was removed severely undermined its credibility when it tried to explain its actions.

This thing isn’t over from what I can tell.