Archive   |   Live Q&As   |   RSS Feeds RSS   |   E-mail Dan  |  
Page 2 of 5   <       >

Afghanistan Pushes Back

Discussion Policy
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.

"If the higher death tolls prove to be correct, however, this would almost certainly be a severe embarrassment to the military, and the deadliest case of civilian casualties caused by any United States military operation in Afghanistan since 2001."

In a separate story, Schmitt writes in the New York Times: "The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff secretly convened a highly unusual meeting of senior American and Pakistani commanders on an aircraft carrier in the Indian Ocean on Tuesday to discuss how to combat the escalating violence along the border between Pakistan and Afghanistan. . . .

"The meeting was prompted by a series of ominous developments: continuing political turmoil in Pakistan, increasingly deadly attacks against Afghan and Western targets in Afghanistan and American complaints that the Pakistani military has been ineffective in stemming the flow of militants who launch attacks in Afghanistan from Pakistani havens.

"American officials pointed to two major Taliban attacks in Afghanistan last week -- a coordinated assault by at least 10 suicide bombers against one of the largest American military bases and another by about 100 insurgents who ambushed and killed 10 elite French paratroopers."

'We're Being Dunced Around Here'

Just how long can the Bush legal team stave off Congress?

Richard B. Schmitt writes in the Los Angeles Times: "Congress and the Bush administration headed for a preelection showdown Wednesday over the issue of executive privilege, with House Democrats scheduling a hearing that would put a key former administration figure under oath and the Justice Department mapping a last-ditch court appeal. . . .

"Rep. John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.), the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, announced that he was calling former White House counsel Harriet E. Miers to appear before the committee on Sept. 11 to answer questions about her role in the firings.

"Conyers also set a Sept. 4 deadline for the administration to turn over White House documents concerning the firings as well as a log detailing what documents it was withholding because of security concerns and why. . . .

"Investigators are trying to determine whether Miers and Karl Rove, Bush's former chief political advisor, were involved in the 2006 firings. Democrats have alleged that the prosecutors were singled out for failing to bring corruption and other cases that benefited Republicans and that the idea was hatched at the White House. Rove has also refused to appear before the House and Senate Judiciary committees and has been held in contempt by both panels. . . .

Matt Apuzzo writes for the Associated Press: "Justice Department lawyers said Wednesday that they will soon ask a federal appeals court not to force the president's top advisers to comply with congressional subpoenas next month. President Bush argues Congress doesn't have the authority to demand information from his aides.

"U.S. District Judge John Bates strongly rejected that stance last month, ordering former White House counsel Harriet Miers to testify and White House chief of staff Joshua Bolten to turn over documents related to the firing of federal prosecutors. . . .

"If the appeals court refuses to temporarily block the testimony, it would essentially be endorsing Bates' ruling against the Bush administration. Miers likely would have to comply with the subpoena, setting a precedent that would give Congress new teeth in its investigations and weaken future presidents.


<       2              >


© 2008 Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive