IN RELATED NEWS: Congress and the courts review the Bush Administration's unprecedented extra-Constitutional use of the "states secrets privilege." The same one used to keep FBI translator/whistleblower Sibel Edmonds' allegations of criminal misconduct from seeing the light of day for 5 years now and counting.

(Hat-tip to BRAD BLOG toon sherpa, Pokey Anderson!)

We don't normally run full articles from elsewhere, but since I'm on the road with very limited time online, and since this item is so important right now and of note to so much that we've covered here over the years (take a look at our Special Coverage page on ACVR to get a taste), I'm making an exception and taking the liberty.

The following is from Josh Marshall at TPM, and was originally published here yesterday. Click through the links below for much more detail!...

"A man who is good enough to shed his blood for his country is good enough to be given a square deal afterwards. More than that no man is entitled to, and less than that no man shall have."
-- Teddy Roosevelt, Republican (later Progressive), 1903

A late Veterans Day thanks, from The BRAD BLOG, to those who've served. We pledge to do all we can to continue the fight for that square deal, which each of you have earned in spades. We are indebted.

Guest Blogged by Alan Breslauer

Guest Blogged by Pokey Anderson

Just down the road from Mount St. Helens, there's an unexpected eruption. The small southwest Washington town of La Center is having a political eruption --- its state legislator is embroiled in a sex scandal, details of which are still unfolding.

This time, there's no resorting to the time-honored "wide stance" defense, and no encrypted toe tapping in an airport public restroom. This time, there is no explicit text messaging to a Congressional page from a member of Congress, then co-chair of the House Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children, while a bill is being debated on the floor of the Capitol.

This time, the stage is a booth in back of an X-rated video store, and then a room in the nicest hotel in Spokane, Washington.

This time, there's a lawmaker wearing black sequined lingerie...

Guest Blogged by Alan Breslauer

Are bloggers journalists? More importantly, should bloggers receive the same privileges the government bestows upon “professional” journalists including, in most states, protection from the forced disclosure of confidential sources of information by way of journalist shield laws?

These are some of the questions congress has been considering over the last month as part of the “Free Flow of Information Act of 2007.” As The BRAD BLOG often relies on confidential and whistleblower sources we have been tracking the issue closely.

With this backdrop, The BRAD BLOG jumped at the opportunity to interview the guy who literally wrote the book on the subject, D.C. constitutional law attorney Scott Gant. Released in June, We're All Journalists Now: The Transformation of the Press and Reshaping of the Law in the Internet Age, has enjoyed favorable reviews and led to appearances by Gant on C-Span's BookTV and The McLaughlin Group, where the host commented that the book was “A great read, an easy read and it breaks new ground, quite groundbreaking.”

Part 1 (7:32) of our interview above covers all things related to the shield law. Part 2 (8:30) of the interview above concentrates on access privileges and other benefits that journalists receive from the government that may be important to bloggers. Both follow below...

Earlier this month, BRAD BLOG's D.C. Correspondent, Margie Burns, sat in on Senate Judiciary Committee hearings concerning a federal "reporter's shield law," ostensibly meant as a way to offer protection for the sources of journalists, while defining exceptions for national security issues. As the bill was voted out of committee she posed some interesting concerns here about it.

Yesterday, Burns wrote at her own site, the House passed their own version of the GOP-introduced, MSM-supported law, but she notes there's a small --- yet very important --- difference in the House bill's definition of "covered person"...

Well, that's an important difference, indeed. One that could substantially effect bloggers, such as ourselves, and certainly those on blogs both smaller and larger (e.g., even the huge Huffington Post, where bloggers are not paid). Under the law, if the compromise version of both houses is passed using the House definition, it could potentially mean that we would not be "covered person" and thus not protected from being required by law to disclose our sources.

Such a statue could be a devastating blow to the ability of folks like us, not on a regular salaried contract with a major metropolitan newspapers or broadcast network, to guarantee privacy to our sources. Many of the stories that The BRAD BLOG has broken and reported over the years simply could not have existed without such promises to insider and whistleblower sources.

Burns goes on to bullet-point a list of those she feels would and wouldn't be covered by the definition of "covered person" in the House version of the bill, including most bloggers as she sees it.

"In other words," she charges, "a 'covered person' is basically anyone Bob Novak could tolerate, and not covered is everyone who might hypothetically or even accidentally be perceived as a threat to the Novaks of this world. What could be sweeter? --- for Robert Novak."

UPDATE: Nate Anderson at ars technica offers additional thoughts.

Special to The BRAD BLOG by Emily Levy

"The part what really makes me mad is the part that I don't know who hit me. You know, it might sound weird, but that'd be a little bit of closure for me to know who done it. You know, because when I got hit, and I hearin' somebody clicking a gun by my head about three, four times, and that gun not going off. You know, for a lot of years I've been hearing that click and I've been hearing that gun going off. Jumping up out of my sleep."
--Larry Young, July 2007, 18 years after he was attacked in the parking lot of a Savannah, Georgia Burger King.

You might think Larry Young would know who hit him, because two weeks ago the man who was convicted in the case came within 24 hours of being executed by the State of Georgia. But Larry Young doesn't know because he, like nearly all the witnesses whose testimony originally convicted Troy Anthony Davis of the assault on Young and the murder of a white police officer that night, doesn't believe Davis is guilty. Next week, the testimony these witnesses want to give, testimony that will show their original "witness statements" were coerced by police, will finally be heard.

On August 19, 1989, Larry Young, an African American man who was then homeless, was assaulted in a Burger King parking lot by two or three men. He was hit in the head by what is believed to be a gun. As Young described to The BRAD BLOG in a phone interview, he fell to the ground, bleeding. Someone held a gun to his head and tried to shoot him, but the gun didn't fire. Young's friend dragged him away from the assailants. Before they got far, they heard two gunshots. Police officer Mark Allen McPhail had been killed.

Young himself was detained that night, he told The BRAD BLOG. "The blood was just steady fallin', sort of fallin' … The police grabbed me, threw me on the car, handcuffed me and threw me in the police car. And I was back there for about a hour and a half, maybe about a hour and a half. And I kept telling 'em, you know, I needed some medical attention."

The police took him in for questioning, refusing him medical care until he signed a statement implicating Troy Davis, a man he says he never saw that night, in his attack and the killing of Officer McPhail.

Young told The BRAD BLOG, "So whatever statements that they made me take, I mean, it was just a lot of statements made like, 'Well, you give me a statement of what you need, what we need, and then you'll go to the hospital.' So therefore whatever the statements were that was given was not accurate statements. ... I'm concerned ... about my health, you know. And I'm hearing these clicks in my head still, you know what I'm saying, sitting up there, I'm pretty much kinda scared. So I just pretty much signed what they wanted me to sign and whatever went on the courtroom, you know, I mean it was all pretty much like coerced."

On evidence like this, the State of Georgia may send Troy Davis to his death?...

Guest Blogged by Alan Breslauer

Marian Wright Edelman appeared on Democracy Now today to discuss legislation supported by Democrats and Republicans in both houses, along with 91% of the American people, to extend health coverage to nine million uninsured children. Amy Goodman points out that the expansion of the so-called "S-CHIP program" to cover more children even enjoys "tepid" support from pharma and insurance groups.

Yet, while Americans overwhelmingly want to protect the most vulnerable among us, at least one person fervently disagrees:

Guest Blogged by Alan Breslauer

Following on yesterday's Michael Moore smackdown of Wolf Blitzer, Sanjay Gupta, and CNN specifically and the MSM in general, Moore and Gupta had it out tonight on Larry King Live after Moore fact-checked Gupta's so-called "Reality Check" from the evening before.

The Moore/Gupta appearance is below, broken into three parts...

Part 1

Parts 2 and 3 of the Moore/Gupta appearance on Larry King Live follow below...

Guest Blogged by Alan Breslauer

The continuation of the well publicized brouhaha (ed note: ass kicking!) between Michael Moore and Wolf Blitzer may not provide the fireworks witnessed around the country yesterday but it is still a worthy watch. Blitzer is considerably more conciliatory (ed note: tamed!) this time around referring to parts of Moore's new movie Sicko as "powerful" on more than one occasion. Moore, however, saved the best for last with a classic comment to Blitzer at the very end of the segment that had me laughing out loud and should not be missed.

We just saw Michael Moore's Sicko tonight in St. Louis, and so were pleased to return to our current home base, to find RAW STORY's video coverage of Moore's long overdue smack down with Wolf Blitzer and CNN from earlier this afternoon.

Go watch it. If only for Moore's taking Blitzer and his network to task for helping us into the endless and idiotic Iraq quagmire. (If you can't watch the video, the tull text transcript is now posted here.)

"Just apologize to the American people and to the families of the troops for not doing your job four years ago," Moore excoriated Blitzer after a "Reality Check" report on Sicko by Dr. Sanjay Gupta, which the filmmaker declared "so biased it's unbelievable."

"We wouldn't be in this war if you had done your job. Come on. Just admit it. Just apologize to the American people," he continued in just one choice selection of his rant against the CNN and the mainstream media failures that sent us into --- and have kept us in --- this mess. (After checking out the video, you can send your thoughts to CNN here.)

Thank you, Michael. Again.

As to the movie, go watch that too. We'd have more to say about it, but we're still pondering it all. We had hoped to go with a couple of doctors (our cousins) so they could tell us what was "wrong" with the movie. But for some reason, they weren't interested in going. We hope you will be. It was exceedingly eye-opening even if --- despite all the kudos Moore has received for "his most mature film to date" --- we think he pulled a few punches. Perhaps we preferred him when he was less mature, but maybe that's just us.

But if that was any drawback to his film, and it really wasn't, he made up for it --- in spades --- today with dead on-target ass-whooping to the hapless Wolf Blitzer and friends.

UPDATE 7/10/07: As promised, during his fracas with Blitzer, Moore has now posted a fact-filled refutation of Gupta's so-called "Reality Check". We'll see if CNN and Blitzer, as promised, issues the appropriate apologies and corrections in light of it. Also, well worth reading in response to all of those MSM'ers who so diligently "fact check" when it comes to Moore's film (hey, they need to hold "power" accountable, right? Might as well try to do it once every three years when a Michael Moore film comes out!) see James Clay Fuller's "Commenting on the Commentaries" from Twin Cities Daily Planet. Finally, Moore appears for "Part 2" with Blitzer tonight at 7pm ET on CNN's The Situation Room, and perhaps more notably, with Gupta himself on CNN's Larry King Live tonight at 9pm ET. Someone feel like counting the number of commercials for Health Providers and Pharmaceutical Companies during those two hours alone on CNN, just for yucks?

LATER UPDATES: Video of Part 2 of the Moore/Blitzer interview, aired the next day, now posted here. Video of the Moore appearance with Gupta on Larry King Live now posted here.

Guest Blogged by Alan Breslauer
If it sounds like fascism and looks like fascism, it probably is fascism. This harrowing six plus minute clip is cut from a recent Chris Hedges talk for American Fascists, his newly released book about the totalitarian Christian Nationalist Movement. Hedges believes that the movement has grown to the stage whereby comparisons to Germany in the early 1930s are not unjust. And he reminds Americans that even with the Nazis, the process was a "slow, gradual, almost imperceptible" erosion of society which went unnoticed until it was too late.

Particularly worrisome is that very few leaders, especially within the Democratic party, are "standing up and ringing the alarm bells." One leader who "gets it" is newly elected Senator Jim Webb, who understands the threat that economic dislocation and the creation of an American oligarchy pose to our democracy. It is hardly a new idea, Hedges points out, that the "disparity between the rich and the poor is the worst ailment that can beset any republic."

Another truism dating back to Athenian Democracy is "that the tyranny we impose on others we will one day impose on ourselves." And today we are a country only capable of speaking in the language of violence. That this violence has already begun to show up locally, whether in our prison system or Blackwater mercenaries patrolling the streets of New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina, should scare everyone.

Finally, Hedges worries that in the event of a crisis we will not have the organized power to stand up against them. In an unrelated story, the New York Times and most news outlets are printing bogus articles about Iran in what former administration officials believe is an attempt to spark a conflict.

Guest blogged by Winter Patriot

From Larisa Alexandrovna of RAW STORY:

UN report a 'moral indictment' of US

Anybody surprised? I didn't think so.

I can't quote the whole article but I can encourage you to read it!