<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Salon.com > Julia Dahl</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.salon.com/writer/julia_dahl/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.salon.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 00:22:48 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>What constitutes rape?</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/09/30/fbi_rape_definition/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/09/30/fbi_rape_definition/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Sep 2011 16:47:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sexual abuse]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Violence Against Women]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Crime]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false"></guid>
		<description><![CDATA[An FBI definition excludes a wide range of sexual assaults, including ones against men. That might finally change]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For nearly a decade, Carol Tracy, the executive director of the <a href="http://www.womenslawproject.org/">Women's Law Project</a>, has been agitating for a change in what she describes as the FBI's &#160;"archaic" definition of rape.</p><p>This month, the agency made a major step forward to doing just that.</p><p>At a meeting in Washington last Friday, members of the <a href="http://www.policeforum.org/">Police Executive Research Forum</a> (PERF), including representatives from police agencies in Chicago, Baltimore and Philadelphia, came together with FBI officials and victims' advocates to discuss the importance of broadening the definition of a crime that most experts believe is significantly underestimated by the FBI's <a href="http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2009/about/about_ucr.html">Uniform Crime Report</a> (UCR).</p><p>Currently, the only sexual assault the UCR collects data on is "forcible rape," which it defines as "the carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will." &#160;Because "carnal knowledge" is defined as penetration of the penis into the vagina, the definition excludes oral and anal rape, as well as assaults with foreign objects. It also excludes male rape.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/09/30/fbi_rape_definition/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/09/30/fbi_rape_definition/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>24</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why can&#8217;t we watch Al Jazeera?</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2011/01/28/dahl_al_jazeera/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2011/01/28/dahl_al_jazeera/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Jan 2011 21:22:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media Criticism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2011/01/28/dahl_al_jazeera</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The English version of the Arab news channel is putting MSNBC, CNN and Fox to shame. Too bad no one can see it]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>This was originally published at</em> <a href="http://www.guernicamag.com/"><em>Guernica</em></a> <em>in 2008</em></p><p>Al Jazeera English's only bureau in the Western Hemisphere occupies five floors of a nondescript office building on Washington, D.C.&#8217;s K Street. The lobby is drab -- just a hallway and two elevators. There is no sign on the door, no gold symbol affixed on the wall. In fact, the name Al Jazeera does not appear anywhere. If you didn&#8217;t know better, you might think the building was home to dentist&#8217;s offices or mid-level lobbying firms, instead of the most controversial news channel in the world.</p><p>To get upstairs, a non-employee must have an escort, and on a cold day last spring, mine was Lauren McCollough. McCullough works for Brown Lloyd James, the public relations firm that represents the Qatar-based channel in what has proven -- and might have been expected -- to be the hostile territory of the United States.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/01/28/dahl_al_jazeera/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2011/01/28/dahl_al_jazeera/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>66</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>You say loitering for sex, I say just hanging out</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2010/08/30/prostitution_zone_constitutional/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2010/08/30/prostitution_zone_constitutional/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Aug 2010 11:01:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Prostitution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Crime]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2010/08/30/prostitution_zone_constitutional</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Are "prostitution-free zones" and other new law enforcement tactics for snaring sex workers constitutional?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>This originally appeared at</em> <a href="http://thecrimereport.org/"><em>The Crime Report.</em></a></p><p>In late June I witnessed something unusual in New York City&#8217;s Midtown Community Court: a trial on a prostitution charge. Hundreds of people are arrested for a prostitution-related offense in Manhattan each year, but only a fraction challenge the arrest at trial.</p><p>This trial was even more interesting because the charge was not actually prostitution. The defendant, a woman, had not been caught in the act of agreeing to sex for money; rather, she had been charged with "loitering for the purpose of engaging in a prostitution offense," a nebulous -- some say unconstitutional -- charge that allows police to arrest a man or woman they suspect is attempting to engage in prostitution. In New York, both charges are B misdemeanors that can carry a penalty of 15 to 90 days in jail.</p><p>The testimony of the arresting officer was just as intriguing. He told the court that, while sitting in an unmarked police vehicle early on the morning of May 21, he observed the defendant "engaging in conversation" with two men and "attempting to stop" another on the west side of midtown Manhattan, an area he testified is "frequented by prostitution."</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/08/30/prostitution_zone_constitutional/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2010/08/30/prostitution_zone_constitutional/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>15</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The killing of Jamie Dean</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2007/09/05/james_dean/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2007/09/05/james_dean/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Sep 2007 12:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Iraq war]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/09/05/james_dean</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Police in rural Maryland staged a military stakeout and shot a troubled Army vet. As his family plans to sue, they are asking how a soldier being treated for PTSD could be shipped to Iraq.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jamie Dean had been holed up in his childhood home for six hours when the tear gas canisters came crashing through the windows. It was a little after 4 a.m., the day after Christmas 2006, and Sgt. James Emerick Dean, 29, formerly of the 25th Infantry Division, knew he was surrounded. The white farmhouse was tucked beside a grove of trees in Leonardtown, a rural hamlet in southern Maryland, where Dean's family once raised tobacco. Now, from behind the blinds, Dean could see cops with flashlights creeping around his backyard. He could see police cars on the dirt road outside the house. He could hear the sirens and the shouting and the buzz of the police radios. </p><p>It had been a month since Dean had gotten word he'd have to go back to war. He had already served a year in <a href=http://dir.salon.com/topics/afghanistan/>Afghanistan.</a> He'd done and seen things over there he couldn't talk about, and now they were sending him to <a href="http://dir.salon.com/topics/iraq_war/">Iraq.</a> Like tens of thousands of soldiers fighting the post-9/11 wars, Dean was being treated by the Department of Veterans Affairs for <a href="http://dir.salon.com/topics/post_traumatic_stress_disorder/">post-traumatic stress disorder</a> -- but the Army didn't know that because the Army and the V.A. don't typically share medical records. </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2007/09/05/james_dean/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2007/09/05/james_dean/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>117</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Newt goes off message</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2007/08/02/gingrich_2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2007/08/02/gingrich_2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Aug 2007 20:17:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2008 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Newt Gingrich]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2007/08/02/gingrich</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Gingrich tells a group of conservatives that the Republican doctrine is a "failure."]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://dir.salon.com/topics/newt_gingrich/">Newt Gingrich</a> was looking fit and tanned as he stood before a sea of young conservatives this morning at the <a href="http://www.yaf.org/">Young America's Foundation</a> National Conservative Student Conference. The weeklong event, held at George Washington University in Washington, is billed as an "entry point into the conservative movement," and this year's version featured speeches by Robert Novak, Michelle Malkin and, wrapping up the event Friday night, G. Gordon Liddy. With panels titled "Standing Up to the Left in Hostile Places" and "Liberal Bias in School Textbooks," planners may have imagined that Gingrich would give a lively rah-rah-Republican presentation. They would have been wrong. </p><p>Prior to Gingrich's arrival, the crowd -- a mish-mash of polo shirts and pinstriped suits, platform heels and pashmina wraps -- had been worked up by Republican Sen. James Inhofe, who taught them all about the "far left elitists" and their Chicken Little climate change hysteria. Inhofe's PowerPoint included slides of polar bears and "environmentalists" like Leonardo DiCaprio and Barbra Streisand (boo!). He referenced Al Gore's "<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0497116/">science fiction movie,</a>" and finished off the hour with some good news about the war: "A miracle is taking place now in Iraq," he said, and explained that there is now zero anti-American propaganda in the country's mosques and that American troops, instead of retreating to the Green Zone at night, are now "bedding down" with Iraqi families. </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2007/08/02/gingrich_2/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2007/08/02/gingrich_2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>73</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>There was no &#8220;coverup&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2007/08/01/tillman/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2007/08/01/tillman/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Aug 2007 17:24:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2007/08/01/tillman</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Rumsfeld and the generals defend themselves over the misreported friendly-fire death of Pat Tillman.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It has been more than three years since former NFL player <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4815441/">Pat Tillman</a> was killed while serving in Afghanistan. At first, the Army said he'd died on April 22, 2004, during a firefight with the Taliban. But by the end of May, Tillman's family and the public learned the truth: Tillman had been killed by U.S. soldiers. </p><p>This morning, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform held a hearing called "The Tillman Fratricide: What Defense Department Officials Knew." Retired Gens. John P. Abizaid, Bryan D. Brown and Richard B. Myers were on the panel, but the star of the event was former Secretary of Defense <a href="http://dir.salon.com/topics/donald_rumsfeld/">Donald Rumsfeld,</a> who apparently rearranged his schedule at the last minute in order to appear. </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2007/08/01/tillman/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2007/08/01/tillman/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>25</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The politics of postpartum depression</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/30/postpartum/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/30/postpartum/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jul 2007 18:35:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Abortion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Broadsheet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Love and Sex]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/life/broadsheet//2007/07/30/postpartum</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[To pass a PPD research bill, a troubling clause is added about post-abortion depression.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A few weeks ago, Rep. Bobby Rush, D-Ill., quietly scored a small legislative victory. More than six years after he'd originally introduced the <a href="http://olpa.od.nih.gov/tracking/110/house_bills/session1/hr-20.asp">Melanie Blocker-Stokes Postpartum Depression Research and Care Act</a>, on July 19, the House Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection unanimously approved the bill, which would grant $3 million in 2008 to the National Institutes of Health to study and expand treatment and awareness of the condition that strikes as many as <a href="http://newsinhealth.nih.gov/2005/December2005/docs/01features_02.htm">one in 10</a> new mothers. </p><p> But there was a catch. In order to get enough support for the bill, Rush had to add language encouraging the NIH to study the mental health effects of abortion. </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2007/07/30/postpartum/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/30/postpartum/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>17</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>On your mark, get set, pray!</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/27/brownback_prayer/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/27/brownback_prayer/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2007 18:34:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sam Brownback, R-Kan.]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2007/07/27/brownback_prayer</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A Brownback supporter says the senator from Kansas needs "protection from the enemy."]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Does Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., need a little divine intervention in his campaign for the Republican presidential nomination? Some of his supporters think so. On Tuesday, Lonnie Berger, the self-described "prayer coordinator" for a group called "<a href="http://prayforbrownback.com/">Pray for Brownback,</a>" sent an e-mail imploring the faithful to get on bended knee to help Brownback in the upcoming Iowa straw poll. </p><p>"This may be one of the most important prayer alerts I have sent out for Sam," writes Berger, whose e-mail is posted on USA Today's <a href="http://blogs.usatoday.com/onpolitics/2007/07/brownback-praye.html">On Politics</a> blog. And in case supporters aren't certain exactly what to ask God to do, Berger has a list: </p><p> <blockquote>Pray that God would supernaturally activate the Christians in Iowa to pray and go to the straw poll to vote for Sam. (When Christians vote, our values move forward in the culture war when Christians stay home, the enemy wins.) </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2007/07/27/brownback_prayer/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/27/brownback_prayer/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>22</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Curiouser and curiouser</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/27/mueller_testimony/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/27/mueller_testimony/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2007 17:05:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2007/07/27/mueller_testimony</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Does the FBI director's testimony prove Gonzales lied?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>FBI Director Robert Mueller's <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/27/AR2007072700005.html?hpid=topnews ">testimony on Capitol Hill</a> Thursday was supposed to focus on problems with the bureau's use of <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/13/AR2007061302453.html">national security letters,</a> but amid questioning over the now-infamous John Ashcroft <a href="http://www.salon.com/news/primary_sources/2007/05/15/comey_testimony/index.html">hospital visit,</a> Mueller made a statement that seemed to directly contradict <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/24/AR2007072400207.html ">testimony</a> Attorney General <a href="http://dir.salon.com/topics/alberto_gonzales/">Alberto Gonzales</a> gave when he sat before the Senate Judiciary Committee just two days before. </p><p>Gonzales claimed that the intelligence program he and former White House chief of staff Andy Card had been so desperate to get Ashcroft to sign off on was <i>not</i> the National Security Agency's Terrorist Surveillance Program that was revealed in 2005. Gonzales' statement prompted Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., to ask incredulously, "Do you expect us to believe that?" </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2007/07/27/mueller_testimony/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/27/mueller_testimony/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>9</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>No populism, please</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/27/republicans_youtube/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/27/republicans_youtube/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2007 14:22:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2008 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2007/07/27/republicans_youtube</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Only two GOP candidates have agreed to appear at the next CNN/YouTube debate.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Monday's CNN/YouTube Democratic debate was popular with <a href="http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/07/24/cnnyoutube-debate-ratings/">viewers age 18-34,</a> but the format didn't sit well with everyone -- specifically, Republican presidential candidates. </p><p>The <a href="http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2007/07/26/but_dont_ask_him_on_youtube_1.html?hpid=topnews">Washington Post</a> reports this morning that so far, only Sen. <a href="http://dir.salon.com/topics/john_mccain/">John McCain,</a> R-Ariz., and Rep. <a href="http://dir.salon.com/topics/ron_paul/">Ron Paul,</a> R-Texas, have agreed to appear at the next CNN/YouTube debate scheduled for Sept. 17 in St. Petersburg, Fla. <a href="http://dir.salon.com/topics/mitt_romney/">Mitt Romney</a> told the <a href="http://www.unionleader.com/pda-article.aspx?articleId=b13f9547-f27b-4880-9bb6-e959ee62d257">Manchester Union Leader</a> on Wednesday, "I think the presidency ought to be held at a higher level than having to answer questions from a snowman." </p><p>Romney isn't the only Republican turning up his nose at the event. According to the <a href="http://www.sptimes.com/2007/07/27/Worldandnation/Giuliani_may_skip_St_.shtml">St. Petersburg Times,</a> <a href="http://dir.salon.com/topics/rudy_giuliani/">Rudy Giuliani</a> has "scheduling issues." </p><p>So far, reports the Post, 400 questions have been uploaded to <a href="http://www.youtube.com/republicandebate">YouTube</a> in anticipation of the debate. </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2007/07/27/republicans_youtube/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/27/republicans_youtube/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>37</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Who is Fred Thompson?</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/26/thompson_lawyers/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/26/thompson_lawyers/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jul 2007 21:28:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2008 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2007/07/26/thompson_lawyers</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Washington Post reveals the former life of the would-be candidate.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Washington Post has a <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/25/AR2007072502329.html">front page feature </a> on <a href="http://dir.salon.com/topics/fred_thompson/">Fred Thompson</a> that focuses on his distinctly un-GOP former life as a litigator. </p><p> <blockquote> Before he was elected as a tough-on-crime U.S. senator from Tennessee or played a New York prosecutor on TV's "Law and Order," Fred Dalton Thompson worked as a lawyer who argued against the government's authority to regulate drug paraphernalia or to search a boat packed with 14 tons of marijuana. </p><p>Once, two decades ago, he urged that more witnesses refuse to testify before grand juries by invoking their constitutional right against self-incrimination, boasting that "I start on the assumption that my client will not testify." And over the years, lawsuits he filed helped a state worker win reinstatement to her job while exposing a parole bribery scheme and won money for the family of a Marine pilot killed by a helicopter blade when the family could not sue the Defense Department.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2007/07/26/thompson_lawyers/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/26/thompson_lawyers/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>11</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Subpoenas for Karl Rove, Scott Jennings</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/26/subpoenas/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/26/subpoenas/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jul 2007 17:21:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Karl Rove]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2007/07/26/subpoenas</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Sen. Leahy wants to hear from the White House aides about who drew up the list of U.S. attorneys to be fired.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., announced today that his committee will subpoena White House deputy chief of staff <a href="http://dir.salon.com/topics/karl_rove/">Karl Rove</a> and White House deputy director of political affairs Scott Jennings. </p><p>According to <a href="http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/07/26/rove-to-face-subpoena/">CNN's Political Ticker,</a> Leahy said: </p><p>"We've now reached a point where the accumulated evidence shows that political considerations factored into the unprecedented firing of at least nine <a href="http://dir.salon.com/topics/us_attorneys/">U.S. attorneys</a> last year. Testimony and documents showed that the list was compiled based on input from the highest political ranks in the White House, including Mr. Rove and Mr. (Scott) Jennings, and today I will subpoena Mr. Rove and Mr. Jennings." </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2007/07/26/subpoenas/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/26/subpoenas/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>13</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Gravel&#8217;s complaint</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/26/gravel/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/26/gravel/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jul 2007 15:56:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2008 Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2007/07/26/gravel</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The dark horse Democrat is mad as hell, and he's not going to take it anymore.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/05/07/mike_gravel/index.html">Mike Gravel</a> is upset. In today's <a href="http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2007/07/opposing-view-2.html ">USA Today,</a> the former Democratic senator from Alaska, who is running for president, accuses <a href="http://dir.salon.com/topics/hillary_clinton/">Hillary Clinton,</a> <a href="http://dir.salon.com/topics/john_edwards/">John Edwards,</a> MoveOn.org, the Human Rights Campaign and CNN of trying to exclude him from Democratic debates and forums. </p><p>Though some say he's <a href="http://time-blog.com/real_clear_politics/2007/07/gravels_lament.html">whining,</a> it must be pointed out that he's also right. On July 12, Clinton and Edwards were <a href="http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2007/07/13/whispers/index.html?source=rss">overheard</a> calling other candidates (presumably Gravel and Rep. <a href="http://dir.salon.com/topics/dennis_kucinich/">Dennis Kucinich,</a> D-Ohio) "not serious," and expressing interest in cutting them out of future debates. And back in May, Gravel had to <a href="http://www.gravel2008.us/?q=node/640">fight</a> to get onstage at a debate sponsored by CNN and New Hampshire's Manchester Union Leader newspaper. But fight he did, and win he did, mostly through an <a href="http://www.pronetadvertising.com/articles/how-social-media-gave-mike-gravel-an-identity-and-a-platform20196.html">aggressive online campaign.</a> </p><p>The Democratic Party's patience with Gravel may not last forever, but interest in his seemingly Quixotic campaign isn't dwindling yet. Just yesterday, the Los Angeles Times gave Gravel and his Republican counterpart, <a href="http://dir.salon.com/topics/ron_paul/">Ron Paul,</a> a <a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-ronmike25jul25,1,3042581.story?coll=la-headlines-nation&track=crosspromo">Page 1 feature.</a> </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2007/07/26/gravel/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/26/gravel/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>9</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Feinstein for Clinton</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/25/feinstein_clinton/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/25/feinstein_clinton/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jul 2007 21:25:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hillary Rodham Clinton]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2007/07/25/feinstein_clinton</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The senator from California endorses the senator from New York.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., announced her endorsement of <a href="http://dir.salon.com/topics/hillary_clinton/">Hillary Clinton</a> for president today. </p><p>According to <a href="http://thehill.com/campaign-2008/sen.-feinstein-endorses-clinton-2007-07-25.html">The Hill,</a> Feinstein said, "Hillary Clinton, I believe, has the experience, the heart and the strength to be a great American president. There has been no election for president where change is as defined and necessary as this one. The question is who is best equipped to lead that change. I believe it is Hillary." </p><p>Clinton, in response, said in a <a href="http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/release/view/?id=2547">press statement</a>: "Dianne and I have fought side by side in the Senate to expand stem cell research, to take care of our veterans when they return home and to stop the privatization of Social Security ... Dianne is such a respected voice in the Senate, I'm honored to have her support as we work together to bring the war in Iraq to an end and deliver the change this country wants." </p><p>Last week, Clinton received an endorsement from former ambassador <a href="http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2007/07/16/wilson_clinton/index.html">Joseph Wilson.</a></p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2007/07/25/feinstein_clinton/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/25/feinstein_clinton/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>If a contempt citation falls in the woods &#8230;?</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/25/contempt_house/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/25/contempt_house/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jul 2007 17:42:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2007/07/25/contempt_house</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The House Judiciary Committee votes to hold Miers and Bolten in contempt of Congress, but the White House stands its ground.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The House Judiciary Committee voted 22-17 to <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/25/AR2007072501104.html?hpid=topnews">issue contempt citations</a> against White House chief of staff Joshua Bolten and former White House counsel Harriet Miers over their refusals to testify and provide documents in the investigation into the firings of nine <a href="http://dir.salon.com/topics/us_attorneys/">U.S. attorneys.</a> </p><p>The Washington Post reports: </p><p> <blockquote> The <a href="http://dir.salon.com/topics/george_w_bush/">Bush administration</a> has made clear it intends to block prosecution of any contempt charges, arguing that a presidentially-appointed U.S. attorney cannot legally be forced by Congress to flout the president's determination that the materials and testimony sought are protected by executive privilege. </p><p> White House spokesman Tony Snow responded with strong language. </p><p>"Now we have a situation where there is an attempt to do something that's never been done in American history, which is to assail the concept of executive privilege, which hails back to the administration of George Washington and in particular to use criminal contempt charges against the White House chief of staff and the White House legal counsel," he said.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2007/07/25/contempt_house/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/25/contempt_house/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>15</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Baby steps</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/25/veterans_healthcare/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/25/veterans_healthcare/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jul 2007 16:20:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Iraq]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Middle East]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2007/07/25/veterans_healthcare</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Senate votes to upgrade healthcare for vets -- but don't expect changes soon.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Veterans' healthcare is getting some overdue attention this week. </p><p>Today, the Senate unanimously passed the Dignified Treatment of Wounded Warriors Act, <a href="http://murray.senate.gov/news.cfm?id=279706">which includes</a> directives for the Veterans Affairs Department and the Defense Department to collaborate on treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder and traumatic brain Injuries, as well as develop joint electronic records. </p><p>Meanwhile, <a href="http://dir.salon.com/topics/george_w_bush/">President Bush</a> gave a short statement about the issue after meeting with former Secretary of Health and Human Services Donna Shalala and former Sen. Bob Dole (co-chairmen of the President's Committee on Care for America's Returning Wounded Warriors) about their <a href="http://www.pccww.gov/">recommendations,</a> released today, for improving the V.A.'s care: </p><p> <blockquote>I asked these two distinguished citizens to lead an extensive search about how best for this government to respond. We owe a wounded soldier the very best care and the very best benefits and the very easiest to understand system. And so they took a very interesting approach. They took the perspective from the patient, as the patient had to work his way through the hospitals and bureaucracies. And they've come up with some very interesting and important suggestions.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2007/07/25/veterans_healthcare/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/25/veterans_healthcare/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>They&#8217;ve got your number</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/25/fbi/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/25/fbi/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jul 2007 15:03:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FBI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2007/07/25/fbi</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The FBI wants to pay telecom companies to keep your phone records.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/24/AR2007072402479.html?hpid=sec-politics">Washington Post</a> reports this morning that the FBI is seeking $5 million a year from Congress to pay telecom companies to keep customers' telephone and Internet records for two years so that the agency can use them for information relating to counterterrorism investigations. </p><p>"The FBI would not have direct access to the records," writes the Post's Ellen Nakashima. "It would need to present a subpoena or an administrative warrant, known as a national security letter, to obtain the information that the companies would keep in a database, officials said." </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2007/07/25/fbi/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/25/fbi/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>11</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Gonzales on crack</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/24/crack/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/24/crack/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Jul 2007 21:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2007/07/24/crack</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The AG reveals a position on a nasty little corner of the drug war.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Buried between his comments on torture memos and rousing sick old men from their hospital beds, Attorney General <a href="http://dir.salon.com/topics/alberto_gonzales">Alberto Gonzales</a> also managed to reveal a position on a controversial part of the drug war in his Senate hearing today. Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., asked Gonzales about <a href="http://www.sessions.senate.gov/pressapp/record.cfm?id=274454 ">legislation</a> he and three other senators have introduced that would bring more balance to the penalties for possession of crack and powder cocaine. (Because of <a href="http://prospect.org/cs/articles?article=a_crack_in_the_system">guidelines</a> set in the late 1980s, a person caught with just five grams of crack is subject to the same mandatory minimum sentence as someone caught with 500 grams of cocaine.) </p><p>"Has the Department of Justice taken a position on that as of this year?" asked Sessions. </p><p>Gonzales responded with this: "Personally, as I sit here today, I'd say that where we're at today is certainly reasonable. We think crack is more dangerous. It's related to, I think, addiction more quickly. It's more related to more dangerous crimes. The effects of it, I think, are more dangerous. So from a law enforcement perspective, it makes sense to have the kind of sentences that exist today." </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2007/07/24/crack/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/24/crack/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Outtakes from the Gonzales hearing</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/24/gonzales_hearing_quotes/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/24/gonzales_hearing_quotes/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Jul 2007 19:35:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2007/07/24/gonzales_hearing_quotes</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The attorney general and the senators spar on everything from torture to the death penalty.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Attorney General <a href="http://dir.salon.com/topics/alberto_gonzales">Alberto Gonzales</a> recused himself from speaking about the tug-of-war over executive privilege, and failed to clear up the long-standing question of who actually drew up the list of fired <a href="http://dir.salon.com/topics/us_attorneys">U.S. attorneys,</a> but he did address several other issues while before the Senate Judiciary Committee this morning. </p><p> <blockquote><strong>On Guant&aacute;namo Bay:</strong> "I wish we could close Guant&aacute;namo. I'm with everyone else: We should close Guant&aacute;namo. However, a need remains -- and there are legitimate questions about what do you do with these individuals? I guess we could turn them loose, Senator, and they could end up fighting against us again. We could bring them into the United States, although I understand the Senate recently rejected that overwhelmingly. Bringing them into the United States raises some serious legal issues." </p><p><strong>On that late-night visit to John Ashcroft's hospital room:</strong> "Obviously, we were concerned about the condition of General Ashcroft. We obviously knew he had been ill and had surgery. And we never had any intent to ask anything of him if we did not feel that he was competent."</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2007/07/24/gonzales_hearing_quotes/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/24/gonzales_hearing_quotes/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Gonzales on the hot seat</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/24/gonzales_hearing/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/24/gonzales_hearing/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Jul 2007 15:11:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[War Room]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.salon.com/news/politics//war_room/2007/07/24/gonzales_hearing</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Senate Judiciary Committee grills the attorney general, but big questions go unanswered.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The rhetoric was high this morning at the Senate Judiciary Committee's hearing on oversight at the Department of Justice. In his opening statement chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., did not mince words: "The attorney general [has] lost the confidence of the Congress and the American people." </p><p>Attorney General <a href="http://dir.salon.com/topics/alberto_gonzales">Alberto Gonzales</a> leaned forward to listen, his lips pursed into a frown, and crossed and recrossed his arms on the table before him, as Leahy read the charges against him: allowing his subordinates to make personnel decisions based on political considerations; <a href="http://www.salon.com/news/primary_sources/2007/05/15/comey_testimony/index.html">bullying a bed-ridden John Ashcroft</a> into signing off on a controversial domestic spying program; lying about <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/09/AR2007070902065.html "> violations of the Patriot Act</a>; being an "enabler for this administration." </p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2007/07/24/gonzales_hearing/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2007/07/24/gonzales_hearing/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>22</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
