Warning: Undefined array key "rbname" in /data/rantburg.com/www/rantburg/pgrecentorg.php on line 14
Hello !
Recent Appearances... Rantburg

Home Front: Politix
Tell me again how Trump will drain the swamp...
2022-01-31
[Breitbart] I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, former chief of staff to Vice President Richard Cheney, is reportedly planning to attend a fundraiser in March for embattled Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY), who is targeting Trump on the January 6 Committee.
Trump just doesn't get it. The people who keep on pulling for him in the face of this kind of thing don't get it either.
Libby was convicted in 2007 of obstruction of justice and other crimes related to a leak of the identity of CIA agent Valerie Plame Wilson. The conviction was widely viewed as a miscarriage of justice, especially because Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage later admitted that he was the likely source of the leak, not Libby. President George W. Bush commuted Libby’s sentence, but despite the urging of then-Vice President Cheney, he declined to issue a formal pardon for his aide.

It was only Trump who pardoned Libby in 2018, taking the political heat for doing so and standing up for Libby’s record of public service. Former Vice President Cheney called Trump personally to thank him for pardoning his long-time aide.

Now, both the former vice president and his aide are participating in a fundraiser for Cheney, who defied her own party to participate in the one-sided January 6 committee, which aims to damage Trump ahead of the 2022 and 2024 elections.

The Hill reported Wednesday (emphasis added):

Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) is participating in a fundraiser for Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) in March as the Wyoming incumbent looks to protect her seat against Trump-endorsed Republican primary challenger Harriet Hageman, according to an invitation obtained by The Hill.

Other guests include former Vice President Dick Cheney and his wife; former chief of staff to Cheney Scooter Libby; former U.S. solicitor general Ted Olson; former chief of staff to the late Sen. Bob Dole (R-Kan.) Sheila Burke; and former Rep. Barbara Comstock (R-Va.), among others.

Ironically, Dick Cheney believed that Libby had been the victim of an overzealous prosecutor, a biased Washington jury, and those in the government who wanted to damage the Bush administration because of growing opposition to the Iraq War.
Related:
"Scooter" Libby: 2020-12-24 Trump issues 26 more pardons, including Paul Manafort, Roger Stone and Charles Kushner
"Scooter" Libby: 2009-12-16 Millions of Bush administration e-mails recovered
"Scooter" Libby: 2008-08-12 Appeals court denies Plame appeal on CIA leak lawsuit
Link


Home Front: Politix
Millions of Bush administration e-mails recovered
2009-12-16
Computer technicians have recovered about 22 million Bush administration e-mails that the Bush White House had said were missing, two watchdog groups that sued over the documents announced Monday.

The e-mails date from 2003 to 2005, and had been "mislabeled and effectively lost," according to the National Security Archive, a research group based at George Washington University. But Melanie Sloan, executive director of the liberal-leaning Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, said it could be years before most of the e-mails are made public.

"The e-mails themselves are not what we're getting," Sloan said.

Documents related to the handling of e-mail under the Bush administration and subsequent information regarding how White House e-mails are currently archived will be released under a settlement with the Obama administration, which inherited a lawsuit the groups filed in 2007. But the National Archives must sort out which documents are covered by the Freedom of Information Act and which ones fall under the Presidential Records Act, which means they could be withheld for five to 10 years after the Bush administration left office in January, Sloan said.

"The National Archives will sort this out," she said.

The e-mail controversy dates back to the Bush administration's 2006 firing of the top federal prosecutors in nine cities. After congressional committees demanded the administration produce documents related to the firings, the White House said millions of e-mails might have been lost from its servers. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington and the National Security Archive sued over the issue in 2007, arguing the Bush administration violated federal laws that require presidential records to be preserved.

Court records have shown that the Bush administration knew about the e-mail problems as far back as 2005 and did nothing to fix them, Sloan said.

"They never made an effort to restore them," she said.

But Scott Stanzel, a former deputy press secretary in the Bush White House, said the group "has consistently tried to create a spooky conspiracy out of standard IT issues."
Now they'll just have to think of something else. How about Obama's original birth certificate or something?
"We always indicated that there is an e-mail archiving system and a disaster recovery system," Stanzel said. "We also indicated that e-mails not properly archived could be found on disaster recovery tapes. There is a big, big difference between something not being properly archived and it being 'lost' or 'missing,' as CREW would say."

Monday's settlement allows for 94 days of e-mail traffic, scattered between January 2003 to April 2005, to be restored from backup tapes. Of those 94 days, 40 were picked by statistical sample; another 21 days were suggested by the White House; and the groups that filed suit picked 33 that seemed "historically significant," from the months before the invasion of Iraq to the period when the firings of U.S. attorneys were being planned.

Also requested were several days surrounding the announcement that a criminal investigation was under way into the disclosure of then-CIA agent Valerie Plame Wilson's identity. That investigation led to the conviction of White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby on charges of perjury, obstruction of justice and lying to federal agents investigating the leak.

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington represented Wilson and her husband, former U.S. Ambassador Joseph Wilson, in a lawsuit over her exposure, which they argued was in retaliation for his accusation that the Bush administration over-hyped the intelligence used to justify the invasion of Iraq. A federal judge dismissed the case on procedural grounds in 2007, but Sloan said the missing e-mails raise the "strong possibility" that special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald never received all the documents he requested during the leak investigation.
Link


Home Front: Politix
Ex-Bush spokesman Scott McClellan: President used 'propaganda' to push war
2008-05-28
The spokesman who defended President Bush's policies through Hurricane Katrina and the early years of the Iraq war is now blasting his former employers, saying the Bush administration became mired in propaganda and political spin and at times played loose with the truth.

In excerpts from a 341-page book to be released Monday, Scott McClellan writes on Iraq that Bush "and his advisers confused the propaganda campaign with the high level of candor and honesty so fundamentally needed to build and then sustain public support during a time of war."

"[I]n this regard, he was terribly ill-served by his top advisers, especially those involved directly in national security," McClellan wrote.

McClellan also sharply criticizes the administration on its handling of Hurricane Katrina and its aftermath.

"One of the worst disasters in our nation's history became one of the biggest disasters in Bush's presidency," he wrote. "Katrina and the botched federal response to it would largely come to define Bush's second term."

Bush spokeswoman Dana Perino said the White House would not comment Tuesday because they haven't seen the book.

Frances Townsend, former Homeland Security adviser to Bush, said advisers to the president should speak up when they have policy concerns.

"Scott never did that on any of these issues as best I can remember or as best as I know from any of my White House colleagues," said Townsend, now a CNN contributor. "For him to do this now strikes me as self-serving, disingenuous and unprofessional."
Scott, it would be easier if you just beat your face on an oak tree or something.
Fox News contributor and former White House adviser Karl Rove said on that network Tuesday that the excerpts from the book he's read sound more like they were written by a "left-wing blogger" than his former colleague.

In a brief phone conversation with CNN Tuesday evening, McClellan made clear that he stands behind the accuracy of his book. McClellan said he cannot give on-the-record quotes yet because of an agreement with his publisher.

Early in the book, which CNN obtained late Tuesday, McClellan wrote that he believes he told untruths on Bush's behalf in the case of CIA agent Valerie Plame, whose identity was leaked to the media.

Rove and fellow White House advisers Elliot Abrams and I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby were accused of leaking the name of Plame -- whose husband, former U.S. ambassador Joseph Wilson, had gone public with charges the Bush administration had "twisted" facts to justify the war in Iraq.

Libby was convicted last year of lying to a grand jury and federal agents investigating the leak. Bush commuted his 30-month prison term, calling it excessive. At the time, McClellan called the three "good individuals" and said he spoke to them before telling reporters they were not involved.

"I had allowed myself to be deceived into unknowingly passing along a falsehood," he wrote. "It would ultimately prove fatal to my ability to serve the president effectively."

McClellan wrote he didn't realize what he said was untrue until reporters began digging up details of the case almost two years later.

A former spokesman for Bush when he was governor of Texas, McClellan was named White House press secretary in 2003, replacing Ari Fleischer. McClellan had previously been a deputy press secretary and was the traveling spokesman for the Bush campaign during the 2000 election.

He announced he was resigning in April 2006 at a news conference with Bush.

"One of these days, he and I are going to be rocking in chairs in Texas talking about the good old days of his time as the press secretary," Bush said at that conference. "And I can assure you, I will feel the same way then that I feel now, that I can say to Scott, job well done."
You can buy Scott's book on Amazon, of course.
Link


Home Front: Culture Wars
Plame lawsuit dismissed in CIA leak case
2007-07-20
WASHINGTON - Former CIA operative Valerie Plame lost a lawsuit Thursday that demanded money from Bush administration officials whom she blamed for leaking her agency identity. Plame, the wife of former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, had accused Vice President Dick Cheney and others of conspiring to disclose her identity in 2003. Plame said that violated her privacy rights and was illegal retribution for her husband's criticism of the administration.

U.S. District Judge John D. Bates dismissed the case on jurisdictional grounds and said he would not express an opinion on the constitutional arguments. Bates dismissed the case against all defendants: Cheney, White House political adviser Karl Rove, former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby and former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage.

Plame's lawyers said from the beginning the suit would be a difficult case to make. Public officials normally are immune from such suits filed in connection with their jobs.
Didn't stop them from ginning up the publicity though, did it.
Link


-Lurid Crime Tales-
Heh -- Judge Dismisses Plame Lawsuit
2007-07-19
A federal judge today dismissed a lawsuit filed by former CIA officer Valerie Plame and her husband against Vice President Cheney and top administration officials over the disclosure of Plame's name and covert status to the media.

U.S. District Judge John D. Bates said that Cheney and White House aides cannot be held liable for the disclosure of information about Plame in the summer of 2003 while they were trying to rebut criticism of the administration's war efforts levied by her husband, former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV. The judge said such efforts were certainly part of the officials' scope of normal duties.

The perjury trial of Vice President Cheney's former chief of staff calls up high-profile witnesses.

"The alleged tortious conduct, namely the disclosure of Mrs. Wilson's status as a covert operative, was incidental to the kind of conduct that defendants were employed to perform," Bates wrote in an opinion released this afternoon.

Bates also ruled that the court lacked the power to award damages for public disclosure of private information about Plame. The judge said that was because Plame and Wilson had failed to exhaust other remedies in seeking compensation from appropriate federal agencies for the alleged privacy violations.

The Wilsons' lawsuit claimed that Cheney, his chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, senior White House adviser Karl Rove and former deputy secretary of state Richard L. Armitage violated the couple's privacy and constitutional rights by participating in discussions that led to Plame's identity being publicly revealed. They claimed the leaks to reporters were an effort to retaliate against Wilson.
Link


Home Front: Culture Wars
Bush Commutes Libby Prison Sentence
2007-07-02
'bout friggin time. Now Patrick Fitzgerald....
President Bush commuted the sentence of former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby on Monday, sparing him from a 2 1/2-year prison term that Bush said was excessive. Bush's move came hours after a federal appeals panel ruled Libby could not delay his prison term in the CIA leak case.

That meant Libby was likely to have to report to prison soon and put new pressure on the president, who had been sidestepping calls by Libby's allies to pardon the former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney.

"I respect the jury's verdict," Bush said in a statement. "But I have concluded that the prison sentence given to Mr. Libby is excessive. Therefore, I am commuting the portion of Mr. Libby's sentence that required him to spend thirty months in prison."

Bush left intact a $250,000 fine and two years probation for Libby, and Bush said his action still "leaves in place a harsh punishment for Mr. Libby."

Libby was convicted in March of lying to authorities and obstructing the investigation into the 2003 leak of CIA operative's identity. He was the highest-ranking White House official ordered to prison since the Iran-Contra affair.

Bush said of Cheney's former aide: "The reputation he gained through his years of public service and professional work in the legal community is forever damaged. His wife and young children have also suffered immensely. He will remain on probation. The significant fines imposed by the judge will remain in effect. The consequences of his felony conviction on his former life as a lawyer, public servant, and private citizen will be long-lasting."


Link


Home Front: Politix
Giuliani's Libby Comments Signal New Attitude
2007-06-07
Hat tip: Lucianne.com

Mayor Giuliani's strong criticism of a federal judge's 30-month prison sentence for I. Lewis Libby Jr. signals a departure for the Republican presidential hopeful and former prosecutor, who had previously shied away from speculating about the case. In response to a question at the GOP debate Tuesday night, Mr. Giuliani called the punishment "grossly excessive," a position that aligns him with many conservatives but prompted skepticism from some legal and political scholars, who said it was at odds with Mr. Giuliani's record as an aggressive prosecutor and a tough-on-crime mayor.

"I think the sentence was way out of line," Mr. Giuliani said when asked if a presidential pardon would be appropriate for Libby, a former chief of staff to Vice President Cheney who was convicted of lying to a grand jury and the FBI and obstructing a federal investigation into the leaked identity of a CIA officer. "I mean, the sentence was grossly excessive in a situation in which, at the beginning, the prosecutor knew who the leak was, and he knew a crime wasn't committed," the former mayor added, saying that Judge Reggie Walton's sentence "argues more in favor of a pardon, because this is excessive punishment."

Mr. Giuliani was considerably more circumspect about the case, and a potential pardon, following Libby's conviction in March. "You certainly shouldn't speculate about it while a criminal case is ongoing," he told reporters then.

The Libby question split the GOP field Tuesday night. Senator McCain of Arizona said the president should wait for the appeals process to play out, while Mitt Romney railed against the special prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald, saying he "clearly abused prosecutorial discretion" in pursuing perjury and obstruction of justice charges against Libby when he knew the former White House aide was not the original source of the leak. "He went on a political vendetta," Mr. Romney said.

Mr. Giuliani's campaign declined to elaborate on his views yesterday, but a spokeswoman, Maria Comella, said it was correct to characterize his statement as a criticism of the prosecution. The former mayor has experience on both sides of the issue. He ran President Reagan's pardon office as an associate attorney general in the 1980s and prosecuted thousands of cases as U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York later in the decade.

His assault drew criticism from some legal experts, who pointed out that Judge Walton had followed federal sentencing guidelines in handing down the punishment, which included a $250,000 fine. Judge Walton, who was appointed to the federal bench by President Bush, is known for giving tough sentences. "The statement is really unfair to the court," a former U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, Roscoe Howard Jr., said of Mr. Giuliani. "To me it's a statement clearly aimed at voters leaning Republican."

"It's unfortunate," Mr. Howard said. "It's just unfortunate."

Mr. Giuliani also drew criticism from a rival GOP contender with a background in the law, James Gilmore, who served as both a prosecutor and attorney general of Virginia before becoming governor of the state. Mr. Gilmore said during the debate that a pardon of Libby would be inappropriate. "I'm steeped in the law," he said. "I wouldn't do that."

In an interview yesterday, Mr. Gilmore acknowledged that he hadn't followed the Libby case closely, but he stood by his statement and said he had seen nothing to suggest that justice was not served. "I could have pandered and won some friends someplace," he said.

Judge Walton sentenced Libby within the range recommended by the prosecution. He rejected arguments from the defense that Libby should be spared prison because of his public service. The defense also urged the judge to use different sentencing guidelines that would have resulted in less time, arguing that it was warranted because the prosecution had not proven the existence of the "underlying offense," in this case the leak itself.
Link


Home Front: Politix
Spinning Libby's Conviction
2007-03-07
WASHINGTON - Former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby's conviction capped a four-year, politically charged investigation but did not seal Libby's fate or resolve some of the lingering questions in the CIA leak case. Once the closest adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney, Libby was convicted Tuesday of lying and obstructing an investigation into the leak of a CIA operative's identity. He was the highest-ranking White House official convicted in a government scandal since the Iran-Contra arms and money affair two decades ago.

The trial revealed Cheney's eagerness to discredit a war critic, the Bush administration's policies on talking to reporters and its strategies for dealing with a crisis.
Wow. Revealed all those things, did it? A fine use of the taxpayer dollar.
Link


Home Front: Politix
Libby found guilty in CIA leak trial
2007-03-06
WASHINGTON - Former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby was convicted Tuesday of obstruction, perjury and lying to the FBI in an investigation into the leak of a CIA operative's identity. Libby, the former chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, was accused of lying and obstructing the investigation into the 2003 leak of CIA operative Valerie Plame's identity to reporters.

He was acquitted of one count of lying to the FBI. Libby had little reaction to the verdict. He stood expressionless as the jury left the room.

The verdict was read on the 10th day of deliberations. Libby faces up to 30 years in prison, though under federal sentencing guidelines likely will receive far less. U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton ordered a pre-sentencing report be completed by May 15. Judges use such reports to help determine sentences.

Libby faced two counts of perjury, two counts of lying to the FBI and one count of obstruction of justice. Prosecutors said he discussed Plame's name with reporters and, fearing prosecution, made up a story to make those discussions seem innocuous.

Libby's defense team said he learned about Plame from Cheney, forgot about it, then learned it again a month later from NBC newsman Tim Russert. Anything he told reporters about Plame, Libby said, was just chatter and rumors, not official government information.

Special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald said that was a lie. But Libby's defense team had argued that it would be unfair to convict Libby in a case where so many witnesses changed their stories or had memory problems.

Libby's defense attorney, Theodore Wells, said he would ask the court for a new trial by April 13. Such requests are common following criminal convictions.
Link


Home Front: Politix
Russert Squirms on Hot Seat
2007-02-09
NBC's Tim Russert deflected criticism of his ethics and credibility as he completed a heated second day of cross-examination Thursday in the trial of former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter Libby.

Russert, who testified that he never discussed outed CIA operative Valerie Plame with Libby, was the final prosecution witness before Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald rested his three-week perjury and obstruction case. Libby's attorneys will begin calling witnesses Monday.

The journalist was subjected to the kind of interrogation he usually gives guests on his Sunday television show "Meet the Press," as attorneys flashed excerpts of his previous statements on a video monitor and asked him to explain inconsistencies.

A law school graduate, Russert avoided several traps defense attorneys laid before him. He seemed uncomfortable at times, however, as they asked him to explain why he willingly told an FBI agent about a July 2003 conversation with Libby, then gave a sworn statement saying he would not testify about that conversation because it was confidential.

"Did you disclose in the affidavit to the court that you had already disclosed the contents of your conversation with Mr. Libby," asked Theodore Wells, one of Libby's attorneys.

"As I've said, sir ... "Russert began.

"It's a yes or no question," Wells interrupted.

"I'd like to answer it to the best of my ability," Russert said.

"This is a very simple question. Either it's in the affidavit or it's not?" Wells asked. "Did you disclose to the court that you had already communicated to the FBI the fact that you had communicated with Mr. Libby?"

"No," Russert said.

Wells wants to cast Russert as someone who cannot be believed, who publicly championed the sanctity of off-the-record conversations but privately revealed that information to investigators. Russert said he viewed the FBI conversation and testimony to prosecutors differently.

Russert's credibility is under fire because he and Libby tell very different stories about a July 2003 phone call that is at the heart of the case. The question of which to believe could be a critical jury room issue.

Both men agree that Libby called Russert to complain about a colleague's news coverage. Libby says at the end of the call, Russert told him "all the reporters know" that Plame, the wife of a prominent war critic, worked for the CIA. Russert testified that part of the conversation never occurred.

"That would be impossible," Russert testified Wednesday. "I didn't know who that person was until several days later."

Libby subsequently repeated the information about Plame to other journalists, always with the caveat that he had heard it from reporters, he has said. Prosecutors say Libby concocted the Russert conversation to shield him from prosecution for revealing classified information from government sources.

Libby's attorneys say Russert knew about Plame from colleagues David Gregory and Andrea Mitchell. Mitchell said in an interview that she and other reporters knew Plame worked for the CIA but she later recanted that statement. Wells had hoped to play clips of Mitchell discussing her statements on the Don Imus morning show on MSNBC.

Fitzgerald successfully argued that the tapes not be played.

"We might as well take 'Wigmore on Evidence' and replace it with 'Imus on Evidence,'" Fitzgerald said, referencing the classic treatise on evidentiary law. "There's no Imus exception to the hearsay rule. This has no business in a federal court."

Wells has questioned Russert about other phone conversations he couldn't remember, inconsistencies between his current account and FBI notes of an agent's original interview with him, and the likelihood that he would've let such a high-ranking official off the phone without fishing for some news.

Suggesting that Russert was eager to see Libby face charges, Wells played a video of Russert discussing the impending indictment with Imus. Russert sounded giddy at times in the discussion, laughing and describing the anticipation as "like Christmas Eve."

Russert said he was eager for the story to unfold like any big event.

"Did you take joy in Mr. Libby's indictment?" Fitzgerald asked during follow-up questioning.

"No, not at all," Russert said. "And I don't take joy in being here."

Libby's attorneys also will try to undercut the credibility of former New York Times reporter Judith Miller, who testified that Libby revealed Plame's identity to her. Defense attorney William Jeffress said he intends to call Miller's former boss, Times managing editor Jill Abramson, to try to refute Miller and question her credibility.

Link


Home Front: WoT
Court turns down New York Times in leak investigation
2006-11-28
The Supreme Court ruled against The New York Times on Monday, refusing to block the government from reviewing the phone records of two Times reporters in a leak investigation of a terrorism-funding probe. The one-sentence order came in a First Amendment battle that involves stories written in 2001 by Times reporters Judith Miller and Philip Shenon. The stories revealed the government's plans to freeze the assets of two Islamic charities, the Holy Land Foundation and the Global Relief Foundation.

Like the CIA leak investigation into who in the Bush administration revealed the identity of Valerie Plame, the current Justice Department probe is being conducted by Patrick Fitzgerald, who is prosecuting Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff in the Plame case. In June 2005, the Supreme Court refused to take up the Times' request to hear an appeal in the Plame investigation. Fitzgerald was seeking to compel Miller, who retired from the Times a year ago, to reveal her sources in that case.

That leak probe led to Miller's jailing for 85 days before she eventually agreed to testify in Fitzgerald's investigation. Her testimony was crucial in the indictment of former vice presidential chief of staff I. Lewis Libby.

The current dispute stems from Shenon and Miller calling two charities for comment after learning of the planned freeze on their assets from confidential sources.

The Justice Department says the reporters' calls tipped off the charities of upcoming government raids. A federal judge who ruled in the Times' favor said there is no evidence in the case even suggesting that the reporters tipped off the charities about the raids or that the reporters even knew the government would raid either charity.

In August, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 that federal prosecutors could see the two reporters' phone records.

The government says the fact that the reporters relayed disclosures from a government source to "targets of an imminent law enforcement action substantially weakens any claim of freedom of the press."

At issue are 11 days of phone records the government plans to review in 2001 — for the dates Sept. 27-30, Dec. 1-3 and Dec. 10-13. In a declaration this month, Fitzgerald said the statute of limitations "on certain substantive offenses that the grand jury is investigating" will expire on Dec. 3 and Dec. 13 of this year.

The current leak probe is in Fitzgerald's capacity as U.S. attorney in Chicago. The Libby prosecution is in Fitzgerald's role as a special counsel who was selected by a Justice Department superior to conduct that particular investigation.
Link


Home Front: Politix
Fitzgerald doesn't want to talk about Armitage
2006-10-31
Files to prevent jury considering evidence on who leaked CIA agent's name
Without ever mentioning him by name, Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, in a court filing Monday, argues that a jury in the CIA/Leak trial should not consider evidence concerning why he did not charge former State Department official Richard Armitage with leaking Valerie Plame's name to reporters. It is a crime to intentionally disclose the name of a classified CIA operative.

I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, the former top aide to Vice President Cheney, is the only one charged in the CIA/Leak case. Libby is accused of perjury, obstruction and lying to the FBI about his conversations in 2003 with three reporters regarding how he learned of and what he told them about CIA operative Valerie Plame - but not with leaking the agent's name.
Link



Warning: Undefined property: stdClass::$T in /data/rantburg.com/www/rantburg/pgrecentorg.php on line 132
-12 More