Tony & Dick & the duck hunt -- Ultimate Catch-22?

[nixonwasbetterthanW]

The host of the Cheney-Scalia duck hunt was oil executive Wallace Carline.

So suppose Carline is one of the folks who went to the '01 energy meetings whose lists of attendees Cheney is trying to hide from the public. If Scalia doesn't recuse, then is part of a majority that holds the secrecy as constitutionally sound, WE'LL NEVER KNOW that, because Carline WAS an attendee, Scalia was thoroughly compromised!

The only way we can know whether Tony is ethical is if the names are released. But privacy of the names is the nub of Cheney's (and his oil exec pals') case!

[David Zephyr]

1. Here's What's Going On At This Very Moment at the SCOTUS & The White House

Here's what is going on:

1. Cheney's problem is that two courts have already ruled that Cheney must release the records.

2. When the Supreme Court "decided" to hear the case, rather than let the two lower courts rulings stand, it was obvious that something very dirty was in the makes. Consider this, one of the 9 Justices would have had to make the argument to the other 8 to take the case, right? It is now obvious that the one that did so was Scalia.

3. Now there were certainly four who would have opposed taking the case which would have been Stevens, Ginzberg, Souter and Bryer. This means that Kennedy and O'Connor would have gone along with Scalia and the other two rightwing nutcases.

4. Kennedy and O'Connor are certain to be besides themselves at this very moment with Scalia's being a guest for a "vacation" with the Vice President, who is the defending litigant in the case.

5. Still, Scalia can not recuse himself. Can't do it. Why? Because it sets up the Court for a 4-4 tie, even if Kennedy and O'Connor support the Vice President's position.

6. A 4-4 means that the lower court's ruling must stand and Cheney must release the papers, the notes, the names, the times and the dates.

7. Since releasing the information will bring down the White House as the meetings will reveal that Ken Lay and Mr. Carline were present...and I believe that Mr. Karzai, was probably there as well making everyone wonder why.

8. Therefore, Scalia can not and will not recuse himself. But...

9. If Scalia does not recuse himself, it will probably signal that O'Connor and Kennedy will be voting with him in favor of Cheney's position.

10. If Scalia does recuse himself, it will be only because he knows that either Kennedy or O'Connor individually or together have signaled that they will vote with Stevens, Ginzberg, Souter and Breyer against Vice President Cheney.

We are close to a constitutional crisis again, like Watergate.

I also think that the fingering of the Vice President's office for the RevengeGate against Ambassador Wilson is Old Man Bush's way of getting leverage against Cheney and his wife, Lynn, who do not want to be replaced on the 2004 ticket. Now, George W. Bush can dangle a full, blanket pardon over Cheney for their willingness to leave quietly.

This sets up Bush to bring in John McCain for his VP to bolster up the "military" credentials that Bush lacks and is explains (to me) why McCain was the first one named for the 2004 version of the whitewashing Warren Commission.

James Baker will broker the millions that Dick and Lynne Cheney will require and the Saudis will provide every last penny of it.

[never cry wolf]

3. Awesome analysis!!

Doubly in the trick bag for scalia. If the papers DO come out and carline WAS at the meeting and hosted lil antonin on their duck slaughter the dirt sticks to scalia.

So, if he does not recuse and cheney loses, he is screwed. If cheney wins, word may get out about carline anyway and he is screwed again.

If he does recuse, either way the case goes he personally keeps a modicum of cleanliness but odds are his philosophical buddies lose when the papers are released.

Being a greedy repug, I am betting on the latter. He'll save his own ass.

[David Zephyr]

18. Thanks.

Glad this was helpful.

Scalia will only recuse himself if he knows that either O'Connor or Kennedy are going to support the lower Courts' decisions. It will be a face-saving charade.

[salinen]

4. Who is Mr. Karzai?

[never cry wolf]

5. The installed leader of Afghanastan.

I don't know why he would be there. Was he in exile from the Taliban at the time? Obviously his purpose would have been to discuss the pipeline.

If he was there, what else would be his purpose?? That would mean that the invasion of both countries was on the agenda at these meetings.

Sheesh........

[Jacobin]

6. The Iraqi refugee guy

who wears $3,000 suits, sucked up to the DoD, gave them fake intelligence so he could have the U.S. military knock off Saddam so he could go be dicatator there next. Now on the Iraqi governing council

Also the same guy who skipped out on a 20 year prison sentence from Jordan(?) for massive bank fraud.

A guy any Bush could love

[never cry wolf]

7. No, that was Chalabi, not Karzai.

Karzai was our afghan version of chalabi.

[Jacobin]

12. Ah

Yes. The puppets get so mixed up.

[notadmblnd]

8. Karzi was a high level exec for uno-cal?

If I'm not mistaken, US corporations were involved in negotiations with the Taliban to build a pipeline through Afghanistan up until just before either 911 or the bombing of the WTC. There is a quote out there somewhere, something to the effect that the Taliban was told that it could "either rain money or bombs"

I used to spend a lot of time keeping up with events in Afghanistan over at paknews.com forum its a major Pakistani Newspaper. I should probably get back over there and check things out.

[Toots]

9. Wow you blew my mind

I believe every word.

[BrotherBuzz]

15. My head is spinning!

Dead on analysis...Thanks

[T Bone]

16. I have said all along that the scandal of the energy meetings was

that non-citizens of the USA were in the meetings with Cheney making energy policy for our country. Your point on Karzai matches what I have felt all along. My guess is that Karzai was not the only non-citizen there. What if there was a bin-Laden in attendance?

[ThoughtCriminal]

17. Ouch - that's some kick ass analysis.

Pray for leaks.

[Jacobin]

2. I hadn't looked at it that way, but

you make a very interesting point!!

And Carline is not just an "executive". He's a major stockholder, owns stock in a local bank and is an all around local republican bigwig.

He probably was at the fricking meeting.

You just couldn't make this stuff up, its all so corrupt and venal

[never cry wolf]

10. I have to kick this one

I didn't know an oil exec was the host of the trip.

[maggrwaggr]

11. So Dick Cheney's running around using AirForce2 like he owns it?

Isn't there a BIG problem with this? Air Force 2 is supposed to be for official business, but didn't he use it to go on his pheasant-slaughter, and now this duck-hunt?

Is he just flying around the country like a rock star, using OUR plane for his pleasure and giving his friends rides?

[OneBlueSky]

13. whatever happened to . . .

the old notion of avoiding even the appearance of impropriety . . . not only do these guys not avoid it, they seem to like to throw it in our faces . . . and I don't mean just Tony and Dick, but the whole BushCo operation . . . their attitude seems to be "We'll do whatever the hell we want to do, and we don't give a good God-damn what ANYONE thinks!" . . . that's pretty scary, imo . . .

[Eric J in MN]

14. We know Cheney was at the meeting. Whether that particular oil executive

We know Cheney was at the meeting.

We know he took Scalia on an expensive trip shortly before Scalia will vote on a case affecting Cheney.

Whether that particular oil executive met with Cheney before the energy bill was written is less important.