Bush Comes Up Empty

"Consistent resistance from the U.S. legal establishment has led to court rulings against the government in a series of cases over the past three years involving enemy combatants held both on the American mainland and the naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. As a result, the approach promoted by President Bush may not outlast his presidency. What to do with some 385 detainees now in Guantanamo may be one of the first questions -- along with how to handle the Iraq war -- that a new president will have to tackle in January 2009.

"Skeptical civilian and military courts, using language both sweeping and technical, have blocked the government's contention that to fight terrorism the president can invoke military powers that supersede traditional legal protections. None of these setbacks has resulted in the immediate release of prisoners, but they raise questions about the long-term viability of the legal regime."

Bravin traces the problem back to "a tactical decision, made soon after 9/11, in which the administration chose not to ask Congress for permission to try alleged terrorists before military tribunals or indefinitely detain Americans arrested at home. Instead, the administration asserted that such powers were inherently assigned to the president by the Constitution. . . .

"Since 9/11, the president has argued that fighting terrorism is like fighting a war: As commander in chief of the armed forces, the president has irreducible authority to direct troops on the battlefield, which the administration argued includes related powers, such as the detention, interrogation and military trial of enemy prisoners. Yet unlike conventional war, the terrorist threat means the battlefield is everywhere -- in the cities and suburbs of the U.S. as much as in Afghanistan. Thus, the administration believed, the president could treat a U.S. citizen arrested in Chicago as if he were an armed guerrilla attacking American forces overseas."

Adam Liptak writes in the New York Times that the administration adopted the position "that supporters of Al Qaeda represented a novel sort of threat and required a new approach. They are neither soldiers nor civilians, the administration said, and the president should be entitled to have the military detain them indefinitely whether they are captured abroad or in the United States."

But there was another way.

"Eric M. Freedman, a law professor at Hofstra who represents men held at Guantanamo, said it was nonsensical and counterproductive to go to war against a group of terrorists. He offered an analogy.

"'The Colombian drug cartel has airplanes and bombs and boats, and it shoots down American airplanes,' Professor Freedman said. 'They're criminals. You can't go to war against the Colombian drug cartel. If you could, then when they shot down an American military airplane, they wouldn't be guilty of anything. They'd have combat immunity.'

"Supporters of the administration say that analogies like that are not only naïve but also prove the need for a third category. On one hand, they say, terrorists cannot be considered civilians because they could not then be singled out for military attack or assassination or held for intelligence gathering. On the other, they are not entitled to the protections granted to soldiers because they do not fight on behalf of nations or follow the laws of war.

"Critics of the administration say that reasoning is convenient, as it gives the government essentially complete discretion to seize and hold anyone it wants without recourse to the courts."

Iraq Watch

The White House says the national government in Iraq is making progress. But in fact, there's almost no national government to speak of.

Damien Cave writes in the New York Times: "Iraq's political leaders have failed to reach agreements on nearly every law that the Americans have demanded as benchmarks, despite heavy pressure from Congress, the White House and top military commanders. With only three months until progress reports are due in Washington, the deadlock has reached a point where many Iraqi and American officials now question whether any substantive laws will pass before the end of the year. . . .

"For the handful of party leaders with the power to make deals, the promise of compromise now carries less allure than the possibility for domination. Long-suppressed Shiites and Kurds now see total victory within their grasp. Previous American benchmarks like elections have failed to bring peace and, after four years of unfulfilled promises, bloodshed and sprawling chaos, once wary glances have become cold, unblinking stares.

"The same forces of entropy and obstinacy have also severed links between the party leaders and their constituencies. In Shiite areas of southern Iraq, Sunni areas of the west and for Kurds in the north, Iraq's central government has become increasingly irrelevant as competing groups within each faction maneuver at the local level for control of public money and jobs. In many cases, especially through mosques, Iran and other foreign powers often provide more institutional support than Baghdad. . . .

"In many provinces, officials have little respect for laws passed in the capital. In the southern city of Basra, the various Shiite parties have already divvied up the spoils of government: the Fadhila Party controls much of the oil industry and the border police are tied to the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council, the party of Abdul Aziz al-Hakim."

Meanwhile, old White House friend Ahmad Chalabi has apparently sabotaged the American-backed plan for reintegrating former Baathists into government.

Walter Pincus and Ann Scott Tyson report in The Washington Post on congressional testimony from Lt. Gen. Martin Dempsey, who until recently led the U.S. military's training effort in Iraq.

"Describing the U.S. effort in Iraq as a labor of Sisyphus, he said the metaphoric stone is 'probably rolling back a bit right now in Baghdad. But I don't think it's going to roll over us.'

"Dempsey depicted the level of violence tolerated by Iraqis as 'mind-numbing' and acknowledged that a dearth of security has made some Iraqis nostalgic for the rule of Saddam Hussein, who was ousted by the U.S.-led invasion in 2003. 'You'll hear people say, "You know, we were a lot more secure and safe during the Saddam regime," ' he told the oversight panel of the House Armed Services Committee."

And that was before this morning's blasts at the Golden Mosque.

Scooter Libby Watch

Ken Herman writes for Cox News Service: "Conservatives urging President Bush to pardon former White House aide Lewis 'Scooter' Libby are counting on a chief executive who would have to ignore Justice Department rules as well as his own pardon history and philosophy in order to give Libby a break. . . .

"Law professor Daniel Kobil of Capital University in Columbus, Ohio, who has studied presidential clemency, said Bush's history 'tells us he is not very merciful at all and doesn't seem to want to use this power to benefit those for whom it's designed.' . . .

"Said Kobil of Bush and clemency: 'He is almost terrified to use it. He uses it in only the most minor sort of cases where somebody can't possibly quarrel with the use of the power.'"

The Associated Press reports: "I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby wants what Martha Stewart got. The former White House aide, who faces 2 1/2 years in prison for perjury and obstruction, cited the domestic celebrity in court documents Wednesday as part of his bid to put his sentence on hold."

The Gillespie Appointment

Tyler Whitley of the Richmond Times-Dispatch had the scoop yesterday: "Edward W. Gillespie will step down as Republican Party of Virginia chairman today to become counselor to President Bush in the White House.

"He will replace Dan Bartlett, who resigned recently to return to his native Texas. Several GOP sources, requesting anonymity, confirmed the move.

"Sources said Gillespie, a longtime power broker on Capitol Hill, was reluctant to leave as state party chairman after a tenure of only six months, but he answered the president's pleadings."

A Cheney Dynasty?

The Associated Press reports that Lynne Cheney is being discussed as a possible replacement for Sen. Craig Thomas of Wyoming, who died June 4. "Cheney's spokeswoman would neither confirm nor deny the speculation."

Easy Target

John Maynard writes in The Washington Post: "Talk about your easy target.

"With President Bush's approval ratings at historically low levels, Comedy Central goes for some broad-based Bush-bashing with its new animated series 'Lil' Bush.'"

Matthew Gilbert writes in the Boston Globe: "One of the easiest targets in comedy is, of course, George W. Bush's manner. Jokes about the President's sloppy grammar, his malapropisms, his smug comebacks, and his cowboy attitude now run a penny a dozen. They are to humor writers what Lindsay Lohan is to the paparazzi: run-of-the-mill fare. Years after T-shirt companies and late-night hosts built an industry around Bush's unpresidential demeanor, the material evokes little more than a yeah-so-what-else-is-new shrug.

"So 'Lil' Bush: Resident of the United States' arrives on Comedy Central tonight at 10:30 about seven years too late. The mildly amusing animated series would have packed more of a punch back when Americans were still a little shocked about Bush's seeming arrested development, but these days it comes off as merely facile."

Mike Hale writes in the New York Times: "Too lil', too late."

Watch Watch

Maggie Rodriguez reports for CBS News on how Bush's watch vanished as he was being greeted by enthusiastic Albanians. But White House spokesman Tony Snow insisted at yesterday's briefing that Bush's watch was not stolen: " No, it was not. . . . [T]he President put it in his pocket, and it returned safely home."

Amy Argetsinger and Roxanne Roberts write in The Washington Post: "It's not unusual for the president to remove his wedding ring and watch before working a crowd, confirms our colleague Peter Baker."

Cartoon Watch

Tony Auth and John Sherffius on the rule of law; Mike Luckovich on border security; Pat Oliphant on immigration; Tom Toles on Bush and Gonzales; and Walt Handelsman on the Sopranos approach to White House strategy.

Live Online

I'm Live Online today at 1 p.m. ET. Come join the conversation.