But as for Congress and Iraq — the stupidity of bombing Iran (or any nation) is so obvious that it should have roused Congress to intervene forcefully, even if it meant arresting Cheney and Bush. Now, I’m hopeless.

And here’s why:
The neocon brainaics have spent 20 and 30 years obsessing on war with Iran; all that metabolic energy was directed to build cognitive networks of neural pathways activated over, and over, and over by the meme ‘Iran = threat! Destroy! Destroy!‘ Activate any neural network enough times, over a long enough period, and people lose their ability to things realistically; they see them the way their brains have been ‘wired’ to see them, and they lose the capacity to see any alternatives.

Strikingly, Bush and the neocons seem to view anything unfamiliar, novel, or inconsistent with their assumptions as a threat. It’s as if (like Germany prior to WWI) they derive security and self-importance from their Grand Plans, which in their minds are a blueprint for success. Take their Grand Plans away and they’d only be puny, frightened, flaw humans like the rest of us.

I just don’t see anyone with enough power to step in and prevent this lunacy, unless it’s individual military commanders who mutiny. And that also seems problematic.

I’m really tired of watching this lunacy, helpless to do anything about it.
And I am REALLY getting fed up with the US Congress (!!)

Well, what took you so long??? By the way, congratulations on keeping Bennett around; I think that bodes very well for Wazzou.

Given the hysterical belligerence about Iran, somethings happening with this network. Either they’re increasingly afraid of being revealed, or someone got punked Big Time.

I’m really tired of watching this lunacy, helpless to do anything about it.
And I am REALLY getting fed up with the US Congress (!!)

CondiMaru, as far as I’m concerned.
A flagship of the Ferragamo line, no doubt.

And on 118 – isn’t that the argument that got the “Alice in Wonderland” response, too? That the very legal reasoning is “secret”? I can’t remember with any specificity but I kind of think that may be the one.

I understand that parts of the transcript were being unsealed over time, but there were two areas (at least) in the transcripts that remained sealed – the references to K’s cooperation with other investigations and the governments reasons for sealing (not the legal argument that the President can do what he wants – which is what has been recently unsealed – but instead the factual reasons given to the court as to why the the proceedings should have been sealed)

The 9th has made its ruling on those items if I understand it and there will not be a lot more unredacted (”The judges also ruled that there was no right to access portions of transcripts outlining the government’s reasons for sealing the proceedings)

But I believe the article is about the documents that were recently released – and those documents are the responses by the Prosecutors to the 9th Circuit’s questioning on how much deference the court was required to give. Apparently, the Prosecutors wanted their answer – the legal reasoning as to how much deference should be give – sealed too. They were sealed, but are now unsealed. And they are being met with the same kind of response as the Yoo opinions

And implicit in the court’s unsealing of them is a rejection of the argument. Because if the argument was accepted by the court, the court would have accepted that answers to its questions should stay sealed until a President decided to the contrary.

Apparently the appellate court split the baby some and ruled that there was no compelling reason to seal the references in the plea agreement to K’s agreement to help on other matters – but also ruled that the portions of the transcript where prosecutors argue why they want the plea and transcripts sealed could remain sealed

That is exactly what the 9th did. I have the order and that is about the extent of what it says.