For those with nostalgic longings for Cynthia McKinney, meet Congressman Keith Ellison:

On comparing Sept. 11 to the burning of the Reichstag building in Nazi Germany: “It’s almost like the Reichstag fire, kind of reminds me of that. After the Reichstag was burned, they blamed the Communists for it and it put the leader of that country [Hitler] in a position where he could basically have authority to do whatever he wanted. The fact is that I’m not saying [Sept. 11] was a [U.S.] plan, or anything like that because, you know, that’s how they put you in the nut-ball box — dismiss you.”

As Lileks notes, yup…could happen. In fact, I think he’s too late.

There’s more lunacy at the link.

Robert Novak describes the “attack on Joe Wilson”:

Armitage was giving me high-level insider gossip, unusual in a first meeting. About halfway through our session, I brought up Bush’s sixteen words. What Armitage told me generally confirmed what I had learned from sources the previous day while I was reporting for the Fran Townsend column.

I then asked Armitage a question that had been puzzling me but, for the sake of my future peace of mind, would better have been left unasked.

Why would the CIA send Joseph Wilson, not an expert in nuclear proliferation and with no intelligence experience, on the mission to Niger?

“Well,” Armitage replied, “you know his wife works at CIA, and she suggested that he be sent to Niger.” “His wife works at CIA?” I asked. “Yeah, in counterproliferation.”

He mentioned her first name, Valerie. Armitage smiled and said: “That’s real Evans and Novak, isn’t it?” I believe he meant that was the kind of inside information that my late partner, Rowland Evans, and I had featured in our column for so long. I interpreted that as meaning Armitage expected to see the item published in my column.

The exchange about Wilson’s wife lasted no more than sixty seconds.

The notion that Wilson was being “punished” by “outing” his wife never made any sense, except to the Bush deranged. And as the article notes, Fitzgerald knew this before he ever deposed Libby, and yet decided to go on his fishing expedition anyway.

Robert Novak describes the “attack on Joe Wilson”:

Armitage was giving me high-level insider gossip, unusual in a first meeting. About halfway through our session, I brought up Bush’s sixteen words. What Armitage told me generally confirmed what I had learned from sources the previous day while I was reporting for the Fran Townsend column.

I then asked Armitage a question that had been puzzling me but, for the sake of my future peace of mind, would better have been left unasked.

Why would the CIA send Joseph Wilson, not an expert in nuclear proliferation and with no intelligence experience, on the mission to Niger?

“Well,” Armitage replied, “you know his wife works at CIA, and she suggested that he be sent to Niger.” “His wife works at CIA?” I asked. “Yeah, in counterproliferation.”

He mentioned her first name, Valerie. Armitage smiled and said: “That’s real Evans and Novak, isn’t it?” I believe he meant that was the kind of inside information that my late partner, Rowland Evans, and I had featured in our column for so long. I interpreted that as meaning Armitage expected to see the item published in my column.

The exchange about Wilson’s wife lasted no more than sixty seconds.

The notion that Wilson was being “punished” by “outing” his wife never made any sense, except to the Bush deranged. And as the article notes, Fitzgerald knew this before he ever deposed Libby, and yet decided to go on his fishing expedition anyway.

Robert Novak describes the “attack on Joe Wilson”:

Armitage was giving me high-level insider gossip, unusual in a first meeting. About halfway through our session, I brought up Bush’s sixteen words. What Armitage told me generally confirmed what I had learned from sources the previous day while I was reporting for the Fran Townsend column.

I then asked Armitage a question that had been puzzling me but, for the sake of my future peace of mind, would better have been left unasked.

Why would the CIA send Joseph Wilson, not an expert in nuclear proliferation and with no intelligence experience, on the mission to Niger?

“Well,” Armitage replied, “you know his wife works at CIA, and she suggested that he be sent to Niger.” “His wife works at CIA?” I asked. “Yeah, in counterproliferation.”

He mentioned her first name, Valerie. Armitage smiled and said: “That’s real Evans and Novak, isn’t it?” I believe he meant that was the kind of inside information that my late partner, Rowland Evans, and I had featured in our column for so long. I interpreted that as meaning Armitage expected to see the item published in my column.

The exchange about Wilson’s wife lasted no more than sixty seconds.

The notion that Wilson was being “punished” by “outing” his wife never made any sense, except to the Bush deranged. And as the article notes, Fitzgerald knew this before he ever deposed Libby, and yet decided to go on his fishing expedition anyway.

Yusaf Islam (aka “Cat Stevens”), who thinks that Salmon Rushdie should be murdered in the name of the Religion of Peace™ is singing “Peace Train” on Al Gore’s Live Aid Concert, which may have had a bigger carbon footprint than Afghanistan.

The mind boggles.

[Update a little later]

The American Thinker is on the case.

Elaine McArdle has an article at the Harvard Law Bulletin about the prospects for the Supreme Court overturning Parker, or upholding the Second Amendment as an individual right. I do think they’re likely to uphold, but it’s by no means a sure thing, and I do think that gun-rights advocates are taking a gamble.

It would have been nice if the framers could have foregone that purpose clause, because it certainly allows gun opponents to throw a lot of obfuscatory mud around the issue. I wonder how the prospects would be for an amendment to remove it? That might be the only relief if the court rules the wrong way.

Brendan Nyhan (once again, and it should be needlessly) points out the nonsense.

Sorry to upset your delusions, Bill.

Brendan Nyhan (once again, and it should be needlessly) points out the nonsense.

Sorry to upset your delusions, Bill.

Brendan Nyhan (once again, and it should be needlessly) points out the nonsense.

Sorry to upset your delusions, Bill.

Does anyone really believe that Hillary didn’t know about this?

Rosen’s attorney, Paul Mark Sandler, did not return a call asking for comment. Mrs. Clinton’s lawyer on campaign finance matters, David Kendall, said, “The Senate Campaign Committee has fully cooperated with the investigation. Mr. Rosen worked hard for the campaign, and we trust that when all the facts are in, he will be cleared.”

The businessman who hosted the event, Peter Paul, has told federal authorities that it cost more than $1 million and that he had been surprised when he saw that most of the contributions were not reported.

The money from the fund-raiser went to Mrs. Clinton’s successful campaign for a Senate seat from New York, the Democrats’ national Senate campaign organization and a state Democratic Party committee.

The joint fund raising made the rules more complicated because the gala raised both “hard money” — funds given to candidates subject to federal limits — and “soft money” that was unregulated and unlimited under the former campaign finance law.

Underreporting the cost of the event allowed the committee to spend less of the coveted hard money, contributions that unlike soft money could be used to cover Clinton’s campaigning costs.

Federal law governing such joint fund-raisers was designed to prevent joint committees from circumventing restrictions on the contributions given directly to candidates.

Peter Paul claims she did. I wonder if she’ll have to take the stand in a trial? And whether or not she will “recall” anything?