In case you missed it, here’s Hillary’s 3:00 AM telephone commercial.

0:30 video

Obama’s less-than-devastating response.

0:31 video

OK, we now know Obama is ready: ready to disarm, ready to withdraw, ready to surrender, even at 3:00 AM.

And what exactly was the experience Hillary had as First Lady that qualifies her?

Hotline On Call (including sound):

Slate’s John Dickerson asked the obvious question:

“What foreign policy moment would you point to in Hillary’s career where she’s been tested by crisis?” he said.

Silence on the call. You could’ve knit a sweater in the time it took the usually verbose team of Mark Penn, Howard Wolfson and Lee Feinstein, Clinton’s national security director, to find a cogent answer. And what they came up with was weak — that she’s been endorsed by many high ranking members of the uniformed military.

Spanish Police don’t fool around with this hostage-taking bank robber.

0:55 video

Can’t you just imagine the protests and lawsuits if this happened in New York?

——————————————

Hat tip to Anti-Idiotarian via Stop the ACLU via MacRanger.

Matt Yglesias experiences a moment of satori, and suddenly understands why conservatives are not very happy about having John McCain as GOP standard-bearer.

Having heard this, I think it seems somewhat obvious in retrospect, but I met a smart conservative thinker last night who explained to me the conservative base’s fear about John McCain in understandable terms for the first time. Basically, McCain or no McCain this still looks like a bad year for the GOP. If he wins, it’s likely to be a personal win based on his persona and tarnishing Obama’s persona, in which the Democrats still pick up some House and Senate seats. Next up, it’s governing time. McCain’s not someone who enjoys a strong personal or professional relationship with John Boehner or Mitch McConnell, and he doesn’t owe any great debt to the GOP activist base. Under the circumstances, it’s plausible to imagine him striking a bunch of compromises with Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi on domestic issue in order to get a freer hand with which to conduct foreign policy.

That does seem plausible to me.

AP reports that the Justice Department has reminded Nancy Pelosi that the Executive Branch of the US Government has the ability to decline to enforce Congressional edicts which overstep the bounds of the separation of powers.

The operations of government require that members of the Executive Branch have the ability to discuss policy decision frankly, freely, and in privacy. Cynical Congressional fishing expeditions seeking material for political scandal-mongering over legitimate Executive Branch decisions (like the hiring or firing of US attorneys) ought to be refused cooperation.

Attorney General Michael Mukasey on Friday rejected referring the House’s contempt citations against two of President Bush’s top aides to a federal grand jury. Mukasey says they committed no crime.

Mukasey said White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten and former presidential counsel Harriet Miers were right in refusing to provide Congress White House documents or testify about the firings of federal prosecutors.

“The department will not bring the congressional contempt citations before a grand jury or take any other action to prosecute Mr. Bolten or Ms. Miers,” Mukasey wrote House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

The House voted two weeks ago to cite Bolten and Mukasey for contempt of Congress and seek a grand jury investigation. Most Republicans boycotted the vote.

Pelosi requested the grand jury investigation on Thursday and gave Mukasey a week to reply. She said the House would file a civil suit seeking seeking enforcment of the contempt citations if federal prosecutors declined to seek misdemeanor charges against Bolten and Miers.

Mukassey took only a day to get back to her. But he had earlier joined his predecessor, Alberto Gonzales, in telling lawmakers they would refuse to refer any contempt citations to prosecutors because Bolten and Miers were acting at Bush’s instruction.

I think Susan Estrich‘s prediction is dead on.

A funny thing is about to happen to Barack Obama. No matter how much he thinks he’s ready for it, he isn’t. No matter how many people warn him, he’ll be surprised. And hurt. And angry.

His friends in the press are about to turn on him.

They may not even know it yet, but they will.

They can’t help themselves. They’ve been caught fawning, made fun of for favoritism, become the subject of their own scrutiny.

Which means they won’t be able to resist.

There’s an old parable about a scorpion that asks a frog to carry him across the lake. The frog is afraid of being stung. The scorpion assures him not to worry, that if he stings the frog, they’ll both drown. Of course, halfway across, that’s exactly what he does. “But why?” the frog asks, as both face death. The scorpion’s answer: I can’t help it. It’s my nature.

It’s the press’s nature to turn on those they most adore. The bigger the buildup, the bigger the letdown. Watch the balloon fill with air. Watch them start pricking holes. Watch the balloon lose air. Wait to see if there’s still a balloon at all in the end.

Mark my words. It’s about to begin.

Read the whole thing.