George Bush, Space Cowboy

Syndicated columnist Robert D. Novak writes that "the first election returns were barely in Monday night when the U.S. government began pressing victorious opposition leaders not to impeach the former military strongman." But he blames this, without citing any named sources, on State Department diplomats -- the very people who, according to McClatchy, are trying to break up the White House's love affair with Musharraf. (See Tuesday's column, Bush's BFF Going Down.)

The White House announced today that Bush telephoned Musharraf following his party's loss. But as Barry Schweid writes for the Associated Press: "White House press secretary Dana Perino would not reveal what the two leaders discussed. She said Bush has supported Musharraf all along because he 'helped Pakistan on its path to democracy' and has been a good partner in the war against terrorists. Perino said it is 'up to the Pakistani people to decide' whether Musharraf retains his position."

Change Afoot?

Robin Wright writes in The Washington Post that Washington has been sending Pakistan's Defense Ministry about $80 million monthly, or roughly $1 billion a year for the past six years, ostensibly to support Pakistani troops engaged in counterterrorism efforts along the Afghan border.

"But vague accounting, disputed expenses and suspicions about overbilling have recently made these payments to Pakistan highly controversial -- even within the U.S. government," she writes.

"The poor showing in Monday's parliamentary election by the party of President Pervez Musharraf, whose government has overseen local disbursement of the money, may make Congress look closer at all U.S. financial assistance to the country. Questions have already been raised about where the money went and what the Bush administration got in return, given that pro-American sentiment in Pakistan is extremely low and al-Qaeda's presence is growing steadily stronger. . . .

"U.S. officials say the payments to Pakistan -- which over the past six years have totaled $5.7 billion -- were cheap compared with expenditures on Iraq, where the United States now spends at least $1 billion a week on military operations alone. . . .

"Congressional officials and others are concerned that the administration has been so eager to prop up Musharraf that it overlooked U.S. foreign aid and accounting standards. A congressional oversight subcommittee is also set to begin an investigation next month, while the Government Accountability Office plans to finish its own inquiry in April."

Rendition Watch

AFP reports: "The White House acknowledged Thursday that 'mistakes were made' in not notifying Britain about two so-called 'extraordinary rendition' US flights that refuelled on British soil.

"'It's unfortunate mistakes were made in the reporting of the information, but we will continue to have good counter-terrorism cooperation between the United States and United Kingdom,' said national security spokesman Gordon Johndroe, who referred follow-up questions to the CIA. . . .

"Britain voiced concern earlier Thursday on being told that two US planes carrying terrorist suspects on 'extraordinary rendition' flights had refuelled on British soil, despite earlier US assurances to the contrary.

"Foreign Secretary David Miliband was forced to apologise to parliament for a US 'record error' that had failed to show the planes refuelling on the British overseas territory of Diego Garcia in 2002."

Torture Watch

Libby Quaid writes for the Associated Press: "Republican presidential candidate John McCain said President Bush should veto a measure that would bar the CIA from using waterboarding and other harsh interrogation methods on terror suspects.

"McCain voted against the bill, which would restrict the CIA to using only the 19 interrogation techniques listed in the Army field manual.

"His vote was controversial because the manual prohibits waterboarding -- a simulated drowning technique that McCain also opposes -- yet McCain doesn't want the CIA bound by the manual and its prohibitions.

"McCain, who was tortured as a prisoner of war in Vietnam, is well-known for his opposition to waterboarding, which puts him at odds with the Bush administration. . . .

"President Bush has threatened to veto the legislation, which cleared the House in December and won Senate approval last week."

Signing Statements Watch

Bradley Vasoli writes in the Philadelphia Bulletin about Karl Rove's speech at the University of Pennsylvania yesterday: "The strategist and friend of the president for over three decades . . . said he felt his former boss got unfair treatment on the matter of 'signing statements,' statements the president writes out subsequent to a law's passage to express his view that certain provisions of it are not binding on him.

"One member of the audience alleged that Mr. Bush had simply used these statements as a measure to arbitrarily exercise power over intelligence and terrorism issues, particularly warrantless wiretapping. Mr. Rove noted that when the president issues a signing statement, he does so to express his view that a provision within a law violates the U.S. Constitution and that he is discarding that provision in accordance with his duty as commander in chief. Those who disagree with his doing so, meanwhile, can take on the White House in the courtroom if they feel strongly enough about it, he said."

Glenn Kessler blogs for washingtonpost.com: "Sen. John McCain criticized President Bush today for his practice of issuing signing statements that suggest the president will ignore elements of the bills he had signed into law, saying he 'strongly disagreed' with the practice.

"'My view is Congress passes it, you veto it or you enforce it,' McCain told reporters traveling on his campaign bus. 'That's the way you do it and that's the way previous presidents have done it as well.'

"Asked if he would ever consider issuing a signing statement as president, McCain was emphatic: 'Never, never, never, never. If I disagree with a law that passed, I'll veto it.'"

Cartoon Watch

Stuart Carlson on Bush's fearmongering; Ann Telnaes on Bush's focus on African abstinence; Bruce Beattie on Bush's lonely cheerleading for Musharraf; Ben Sargent on Uncle Sam's Cuban dilemma.