Amount former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales will receive to speak at the University of Florida later this month. It will be Gonzales’s first speaking appearance since his departure from the Bush administration.

Barry Richard, the lawyer who “achieved fame for his successful representation of George Bush in the Bush v. Gore recount suits, is set to give a speech blasting the Bush administration Saturday night” at the National Association of Former U.S. Attorneys’ (NAFUSA) annual conference. There will also be a panel discussion featuring two of the ousted U.S. attorneys. The National Law Journal reports:

“I’m sure people will see my name on the program and expect I will be defending the administration,” said Richard, a Tallahassee, Fla., lawyer.

“But I’m a constitutional lawyer. I am concerned with the Bush administration’s assault on American liberties … how the administration deals with habeas corpus and the administration’s posture on electronic surveillance. This administration has gone farther than any other.”

Gareth Porter of Inter Press Service reports that Vice President Cheney has been thwarting the release of a long-overdue National Intelligence Estimate on Iran because it doesn’t deliver the casus belli for war:

A National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iran has been held up for more than a year in an effort to force the intelligence community to remove dissenting judgments on the Iranian nuclear program, and thus make the document more supportive of U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney’s militarily aggressive policy toward Iran, according to accounts of the process provided by participants to two former Central Intelligence Agency officers.

The current dispute over the Iran NIE bears striking resemblance to the controversies that played out over pre-war Iraq intelligence in at least two important ways:

1) Administration Stifling Dissent

NOW: According to IPS, the draft Iran NIE was reportedly completed a year ago, but the White House rejected it because it contained dissenting views. A former intelligence officer said, “They refused to come out with a version that had dissenting views in it.”

THEN: Prior to the Iraq war, the Air Force, Energy Department, and State Department all issued dissenting views on the state of Iraq’s progress towards a nuclear program. Those dissenting views later turned out to be correct, and in the process, greatly undermined the administration’s credibility. The lesson learned by the White House apparently is that this time they need to demolish dissent.

2) Administration Pressuring Analysts

NOW: Former CIA officer Philip Giraldi told IPS that “intelligence analysts have had to review and rewrite their findings three times, because of pressure from the White House.” The draft Iran NIE, for example, did not conclude that there was confirming evidence that Iran was arming the Shiite insurgents in Iraq, according to Giraldi.

THEN: Prior to the Iraq war, Cheney and his chief of staff Scooter Libby visited the CIA headquarters approximately a dozen times to engage the CIA analysts directly on the issue of Iraq’s nuclear development, “creating an environment in which some analysts felt they were being pressured to make their assessments fit with the Bush administration’s policy objectives.”

The New Yorker’s Seymour Hersh has reported that, despite there being very little evidence that Iran is developing a nuclear bomb, the White House is “stovepiping” intelligence and hiding information from the CIA that makes a case for war.

In February, the intelligence community released a National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq that reported Iran was not “a major driver of violence” inside Iraq, disputing administration claims to the contrary. Former CIA officer Giraldi says the the White House is looking for “a document that it can use as evidence for its Iran policy.” Fortunately, not all analysts are willing to “fix the facts around the policy.”

On November 3, 2007, Pakistani President General Pervez Musharraf imposed emergency rule in Pakistan, citing a need to curb terrorism and restrict activist judges. His decision came a few days before Pakistan’s Supreme Court was set to rule on a series of cases that would have challenged his legitimacy to hold the post of president and chief of military simultaneously.

The Provisional Constitutional Order that followed the emergency declaration put Pakistan’s 1973 constitution into abeyance and suspended all fundamental rights, including: Article 9 (security of person), 10 (safeguard as to arrest and detention), 15 (freedom of movement, etc.), 16 (freedom of assembly), 17 (freedom of association), 19 (freedom of speech, etc.) and 25 (equality of citizens) shall remain suspended.

The suspension of fundamental rights is already producing convictions, as four men accused of treason have been jailed for making anti-government speeches. Pakistan’s private TV stations were all blacked-out and sale of satellite dishes was halted. Hundreds of lawyers and activists around the country were detained or put under house arrest, and the most recent estimate is that around 2,500 people are in jail.

The White House has been playing a quiet double game in its dealings with Musharraf — publicly appearing critical of him while privately lending him support.

On Wednesday, President Bush announced that he finally made a telephone call to Musharraf, reportedly urging him to “return Pakistan to civilian rule“:

President Bush telephoned General Musharraf for the first time since the crisis began and bluntly told him that he had to return Pakistan to civilian rule, hold elections and step down as chief of the military, as he had promised. Mr. Bush called him from the Oval Office at 11:30 a.m. Washington time, and spoke for about 20 minutes, according to the White House.

But reputable Pakistani journalist, Hamid Mir reported on Geo TV — Pakistan’s largest private cable news station — that the U.S. gave the green-light for Musharraf to go ahead and call the emergency. According to Mir, the U.S. supported Musharraf because it regarded the ousted “Chief Justice as a nuisance and ‘a Taliban sympathizer.’” That may explain why President Bush’s demands are so light:

Bush administration officials are unanimous in saying that American financial support for Pakistan will continue regardless of whether General Musharraf reverses course.

Moreover, military expert Aysha Siddiqa reports that American diplomats in Pakistan have information suggesting the upcoming elections may be rigged.

The Bush administration has to take a more direct line with Musharraf, ensure honesty and fairness in the elections for all parties, and not merely engage in window dressing.

– Ali Eteraz is editor of Pakistanpolitics.net and he blogs at Eteraz.

This post was submitted through our Blog Fellows program. Make your own contribution — and get paid for it — by clicking here.

ABC News is reporting that a “federal grand jury has voted to indict ex-N.Y. city police commissioner Bernard Kerik on charges stemming from tax evasion and corruption allegations.” Mic Check Radio has a rundown of Kerik’s history:

— Allegedly traded $165,000 worth of renovations on his house from a contractor who wanted a license from the city.

– Quit his post training a new Iraqi police force in 2003 after just four months on the job, telling reporters “he needed a vacation.” [Washington Post]

– Used the apartment donated for weary Ground Zero rescue workers into his own personal love nest to use with his mistress. [NY Times]

– Was named in a civil suit in 1999 as “the architect of a system to force prison guards to work for Republicans in their off-hours.” [Newsweek]

– Had mob ties that include the best man in his wedding, Lawrence Ray, who was indicted in 2000 along with other organized crime figures in a scheme to manipulate the stock market. [Washington Post]

– Is now being sued for stiffing the law firm that kept him out of jail for more than $200,000. [NY Daily News]

Digg It!