By Shira Medding
CNN

November 9, 2008

WASHINGTON MEMO

By  JIM RUTENBERG

That whole anti-American, friend-to-the-terrorists thing about President-elect  Barack Obama? Never mind.

Just a few weeks ago, at the height of the campaign, Representative Michele Bachmann of Minnesota told Chris Matthews of MSNBC that, when it came to Mr. Obama, “I’m very concerned that he may have anti-American views.”

But there she was on Wednesday, after narrowly escaping defeat because of those comments, saying she was “extremely grateful that we have an African-American who has won this year.” Ms. Bachmann, a Republican, called Mr. Obama’s victory, which included her state, “a tremendous signal we sent.”

And it was not too long ago that Senator  John McCain’s running mate, Gov.  Sarah Palin  of Alaska, accused Mr. Obama of “palling around with terrorists.”

But she took an entirely different tone on Thursday, when she chastised reporters for asking her questions about her war with some staff members in the McCain campaign at such a heady time. “Barack Obama has been elected president,” Ms. Palin said. “Let us, let us — let him — be able to kind of savor this moment, one, and not let the pettiness of maybe internal workings of the campaign erode any of the recognition of this historic moment that we’re in. And God bless Barack Obama and his beautiful family.”

There is a great tradition of paint-peeling political hyperbole during presidential campaign years. And there is an equally great tradition of backing off from it all afterward, though with varying degrees of deftness.

But given the intensity of some of the charges that have been made in the past few months, and the historic nature of Mr. Obama’s election, the exercise this year has been particularly whiplash-inducing, with its extreme before-and-after contrasts.

The shift in tone follows the magnanimous concession speech from Mr. McCain, of Arizona, who referred to Mr. Obama’s victory Tuesday night as “a historic election” and hailed the “special pride” it held for African-Americans. That led the vice president-elect, Senator  Joseph R. Biden Jr., to get into the act. During the campaign, Mr. Biden said he no longer recognized Mr. McCain, an old friend. Now, he says, “We’re still friends.” President Bush, in turn, also hailed Mr. Obama’s victory, saying his arrival at the White House would be “a stirring sight.”

Whether it all heralds a new era of cooperation in Washington remains to be seen, and it may be downright doubtful. But for now, at least, it would seem to be part of an apparent rush to join what has emerged as a real moment in American history.

The presidential historian  Doris Kearns Goodwin  said she was hard-pressed to find a similar moment when the tone had changed so drastically, and so quickly, among so many people of such prominence.

“I don’t think that’s happened very often,” Ms. Goodwin said. “The best answer I can give you is they don’t want to be on the wrong side of history, and they recognize how the country saw this election, and how people feel that they’re living in a time of great historic moment.”

Others in the professional political class were not so sure. Some wondered whether simple pragmatism was the explanation.

“My experience is, it’s less an epiphany and more a political reality,” said Chris Lehane, a former Democratic strategist who worked on the presidential campaign of  Al Gore. “I’m thinking they will continue in this direction so long as the polls indicate it’s a smart place to be.”

There are notable exceptions:  Rush Limbaugh  has given no quarter. And while his fellow conservative radio hosts  Sean Hannity  and  Laura Ingraham  have noted the significance of his victory — on Wednesday, Ms. Ingraham said “Obama did make history” and “It’s not the time to vilify him” — they seem to be in line with  Bill O’Reilly  of Fox News. Relishing his new role in the opposition camp, Mr. O’Reilly said, “The guy is still a mystery, so our oversight will be intense.”

Some lawmakers also do not appear inclined to give up the fight. Representative  John A. Boehner, the House minority leader, has already criticized Mr. Obama’s choice of Representative  Rahm Emanuel, Democrat of Illinois, as his chief of staff.

But other people who opposed Mr. Obama, like Senator  Joseph I. Lieberman  of Connecticut, have good reason to try to make up with the winning ticket. As an ardent backer of Mr. McCain, Mr. Lieberman angered the Democrats, who in 2000 nominated him as their vice-presidential candidate. After losing a Democratic primary challenge in 2006 and then winning as an independent, he still continued to caucus with the Democrats.

Attending an event with Mr. McCain in York, Pa., in August, Mr. Lieberman said the race was “between one candidate, John McCain, who has always put the country first, worked across party lines to get things done, and one candidate who has not.”

As a speaker at the  Republican National Convention, Mr. Lieberman went further than Democrats expected by criticizing Mr. Obama for “voting to cut off funding for our troops on the ground.” (Mr. Obama voted for bills that included plans for withdrawal from Iraq and against others that did not.)

This week Mr. Lieberman, who has been asked by the Democratic Senate leadership to consider giving up his position as the chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, released a statement congratulating Mr. Obama for “his historic and impressive victory.” It continued, “The American people are a people of extraordinary fairness.”

Marshall Wittmann, a spokesman for Mr. Lieberman, said that as far as the senator was concerned, “It’s over, and it’s genuinely time to find unity and move forward behind the new president.”

And what about that whole bit about Mr. Obama not always putting his country first? “He believes that President-elect Obama — and, then, Senator Obama — is a genuine patriot and loves his country,” Mr. Wittmann said. “The only point he was making in his campaign was about partisanship.”

Mr. Obama is apparently ready to bury the hatchet with his new fans. “President-elect Obama has made it clear that he wants to put partisanship behind and work together to solve the many challenges confronting the country,” said Stephanie Cutter, a spokeswoman for the Obama transition team. “We’re pleased that others do as well.”

The Senate majority leader,  Harry Reid  of Nevada, who will help decide Mr. Lieberman’s committee assignment, sounded less ready to forgive, at least when it came Mr. Lieberman’s support for Mr. McCain. “Joe Lieberman has done something that I think was improper, wrong, and I’d like — if we weren’t on television, I’d use a stronger word of describing what he did,” he said on CNN Friday.

Pakistani militants kill 2 alleged U.S. spies

Warnings are found pinned to bodies dumped in volatile border region

November 8, 2008

Posted: 11:37 AM ET

LOS ANGELES (AP)  — Sen. John McCain will make his first post-election TV appearance on the "Tonight" show next week, NBC said Friday.

The Republican presidential candidate is set to join "Tonight" host Jay Leno on Tuesday in honor of Veteran's Day, the network announced. McCain is a former Naval officer and prisoner of war in
Vietnam.

Picking a talk show over a news show for his first TV interview guarantees McCain a more lighthearted experience after his loss to President-elect Obama.

That McCain chose "Tonight" instead of David Letterman's "Late Show" on CBS may have its roots in the campaign. Letterman repeatedly roasted McCain for canceling a September guest shot because of the economic crisis, finally relenting when McCain came on and said he had "screwed up."

The chief executive of Oprah Winfrey's business partner in her Oprah Winfrey Network, or OWN, cable channel said today he expects the Queen of Daytime Talk to retire her nationally syndicated Chicago-based TV show in 2011, but Winfrey's spokeswoman insisted that's not yet set in stone.

OWN is a 50-50 multi-platform venture between Winfrey's Harpo Productions and Discovery Communications that's set to launch next year.

"The expectation is that after [the 2010-11 season] her show will go off of … syndication, and she will come to OWN," David Zaslav, Discovery's president and CEO, said in a call with analysts. "We're talking now about what that presence would be and what programming she would be involved in directly. But this is her Chapter Two, and building the OWN brand online and on-air is something that she and I, we're working [on] together and it's a core mission for her."

Winfrey's current contract with CBS Television Distribution to do "The Oprah Winfrey Show" does in fact expire in 2011 after her 25th season on national TV. But Lisa Halliday, chief spokeswoman for Winfrey's Harpo Productions, cast Zaslav's remark as premature.

"She has not made a final decision as to whether she will continue her show in syndication beyond that," Halliday said in a statement.

CBS Television Distribution, in its own statement, said it "would certainly welcome and hope that 'The Oprah Winfrey Show' would continue in syndication beyond [2011], but that is a decision only Ms. Winfrey will be making."

The talk show continues to be successful despite ratings erosion over the last year or so that some have pegged to her political involvement off-camera in support of Barack Obama's presidential bid. Others have attributed it to changing overall media consumption patterns coupled with the challenge of remaining so dominant for so long.

OWN was announced in January and will replace the Discovery Health channel when it launches in more than 70 million homes in the second half of 2009. Winfrey is its chairman and will enjoy editorial control. What, if any on-camera role she might play has yet to be delineated, however, and, in fact, her syndication deal limits her ability even to put reruns of her daytime show on the channel.

Winfrey has floated the notion of ending the show that originates from her Harpo compound on Chicago's Near West Side before only to reconsider and embrace a lucrative new renewal deal.

It happened in 1997 before she signed a renewal through 2002. When she re-signed in 2002, she said her 20th season in 2006 would be the end. By 2004, she changed her mind again and extended the deal yet once more. She only recently informed CBS that she was picking up the option on the final 2010-11 season of the current deal.

Winfrey has explained she sees OWN as not merely an opportunity to expand her media empire, which already includes O magazine, the "Oprah & Friends" satellite radio channel and a movie and television production company. It is a way to extend her legacy and that of the show that catapulted her to prominence.

"The truth of the matter is one day the show has to end. That may be 2011 and that may be after 2011," Winfrey told reporters in January. "This is an evolution of what I've been able to do every day. I will now have the opportunity to do that 24 hours a day on a platform that goes on forever.

"This network isn't just about me," she said. "It's using the voice and the brand and the vision, but it really is about creating possibilities for any number of people ... to extend the vision in a way that obviously I cannot 24 hours a day."

Marisa Taylor and Michael Doyle

WASHINGTON — When Barack Obama becomes president in January, he'll confront the controversial legal legacy of the Bush administration.

From expansive executive privilege to hard-line tactics in the war on terrorism, Obama must decide what he'll undo and what he'll embrace.

The stakes couldn't be higher.

On one hand, civil libertarians and other critics of the Bush administration may feel betrayed if Obama doesn't move aggressively to reverse legal policies that they believe have violated the Constitution and international law.

On the other hand, Obama risks alienating some conservative Americans and some — but by no means all — military and intelligence officials if he seeks to hold officials accountable for those expansive policies.

These are some of the legal issues confronting him:

•  

• How does he close the Guantanamo Bay prison in Cuba? He's pledged to shutter it, but how quickly can he do so when it holds some detainees whom no administration would want to release?

•  

• Obama has declared coercive interrogation methods such as waterboarding unconstitutional and illegal, but will his Justice Department investigate or prosecute Bush administration officials who ordered or condoned such techniques?

•  

• Will the new administration press to learn the full extent of the Bush administration's electronic eavesdropping and data-mining activities, and will it curtail or halt some of them?

•  

• The Bush administration exerted tight control over the Justice Department by hiring more Republican-leaning political appointees and ousting those who were viewed as disloyal. Will Obama give the department more ideological independence?

Undoing some policies will take time.

With 316 conservative appointments to the federal courts over the last eight years, Obama could attempt to tilt the courts back to the center or even to the left with his nominees. He could alter the Supreme Court's bent by replacing two or three justices who'll probably retire soon.

Civil libertarians, who feel emboldened by a Democrat in the White House, tick off a long list of what they think Obama should do as soon as he takes office. Not only should Guantanamo be closed, they say, Obama should revoke the immunity for telecommunications companies that cooperated with secret eavesdropping, ban the use of secret prisons by the CIA and investigate and perhaps prosecute administration officials for authorizing controversial interrogation methods.

Anthony D. Romero, the executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union, which has led many of the challenges to the Bush administration's terrorism policies, said Obama could take action on most of these fronts "on day one" by issuing executive orders, such as closing Guantanamo.

"Unless he acts quickly, he runs the risk of showing the American people that their hope and optimism may have been misplaced, and reinforcing people's deep-seated cynicism that it's politics as usual in D.C.," he said.

Although Obama is likely to ban waterboarding and other aggressive techniques soon after taking office, prosecuting administration officials not only would be legally challenging because legislation has granted them immunity but also would be seen by Republicans as highly divisive.

Negotiating that minefield may be among the most difficult legal dilemmas Obama faces early in his administration because of pressure from the left and the right.

"There will be hell to pay if people are prosecuted," said Sanford Levinson, a University of Texas law professor. "But there'll be hell to pay if they just walk away scot-free."

He predicted that Obama might sidestep the controversy with the Bush administration's help. If President Bush issues pre-emptive pardons to prevent prosecutions, the Obama administration should form a bipartisan panel, similar to the Sept. 11 commission, to oversee an inquiry, he said. Once pardoned, officials implicated in the controversy would be required to discuss details of the policies because they'd be unable to assert their Fifth Amendment right to avoid self-incrimination.

The best person to lead such a commission? Levinson thinks it's John McCain, who condemned the interrogation techniques when he was running against Obama.

"There would be widespread support if the Obama administration did reach out to someone like McCain," Levinson said. "More people would regard it as not so much of a Democratic vendetta but as a necessary cleansing of an episode in recent American history that has had phenomenal costs to us around the world."

Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, a senior member of the Senate Judiciary and Intelligence committees, predicted that Obama would move to close Guantanamo relatively quickly. She'll reintroduce legislation to do so early next year.

"The handwriting is on the wall," Feinstein said. "It's just a matter of time."

Although Guantanamo isn't expected to be as thorny as the issues of interrogation techniques, detention without charges and eavesdropping, it may take longer to close than Obama wants because of the question of what to do with high-value terrorists. The Obama administration could end up moving them to prisons scattered across the United States as it sorts out who should remain jailed and where others should be sent.

The Bush Justice Department chose to fight the court-ordered releases of many of the detainees, even those whom the military had cleared. Obama's attorney general is likely to soften that stance and begin releasing them with court oversight, or perhaps order new legal reviews of all detainees.

Three dozen district-court and 15 appellate court vacancies await. Appellate court decisions set precedents for multiple states. Whoever fills the vacant seat on the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, for instance, will shape the law covering nine Western states.

For this reason, appellate court vacancies can become battlegrounds. On the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, which spans five states, including the Carolinas, a vacancy lingers after eight years.

Considerable speculation in the legal community has centered on potential female appointees to the Supreme Court, where Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is the only woman. One potential candidate is Judge Sonia Sotomayor, the first Hispanic woman to serve on the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals. Another is Harvard Law School's Dean Elena Kagan, who like Obama was on the University of Chicago Law School faculty.

Noncourt appointments, too, can shape the law in important ways.

Whomever Obama appoints as attorney general and in other top positions in the Justice Department could move in new directions on hot-button issues such as gun control and immigration. And after pledging to tackle the financial crisis and concerns about global warming, Obama might dedicate more resources to prosecuting white-collar and environmental crimes.

Paul Charlton, one of the nine U.S. attorneys whom the Bush administration ousted, predicted that an Obama administration would take a different approach to the death penalty. Charlton clashed with Bush appointees who pushed prosecutors to seek the death penalty in a wide array of cases, including drug trafficking. "I expect there will be a more judicious use of the death penalty," he said.

However, Bush administration critics who hope an Obama White House will be the antidote to what they see as excessive executive power may be disappointed.

Gene Healy, a Cato Institute vice president and the author of the book "The Cult of the Presidency: America's Dangerous Devotion to Executive Power," said expanding presidential power was a bipartisan reflex.

"People tend to think more positively about having robust executive authority when they're the ones who are actually wielding the authority," he said.

Obama, however, is unlikely to be aggressive as Bush. "He'll probably seek congressional approval, and that may be more effective at growing executive power than the unilateral, go-it-alone approach," Healy said.