Office of the Independent Blogger

Mayor Mike Bloomberg has dismissed his Presidential campaign, saying he never planned anything of the sort and anyone who says otherwise is a lying reporter. In friendlier terms, of course. The real reason he isn’t running for President is because he’s too smart to spend a billion of his own dollars on such a campaign when he knows he can’t win because of the system and because of his sexual harassment issues in the past.

Kind of sad to know he won’t run, though, as he could do a lot of good by bringing issues to the public’s consciousness.

The New Yorker is running n article about American war plans in Iran. Essentially, it details the President’s concerns about Iranian intervention in Iraq, his instruction to the Joint Chiefs of “Preparation for surgical strikes” and the possibilities that every scenario poses. On this I’ve always been clear — we should have plans in place, just in case, but we probably shouldn’t attack. And I think that’s the President’s general view, which is illustrated by this:

I was repeatedly cautioned, in interviews, that the President has yet to issue the “execute order” that would be required for a military operation inside Iran, and such an order may never be issued. But there has been a significant increase in the tempo of attack planning. In mid-August, senior officials told reporters that the Administration intended to declare Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps a foreign terrorist organization. And two former senior officials of the C.I.A. told me that, by late summer, the agency had increased the size and the authority of the Iranian Operations Group. (A spokesman for the agency said, “The C.I.A. does not, as a rule, publicly discuss the relative size of its operational components.”)

“They’re moving everybody to the Iran desk,” one recently retired C.I.A. official said. “They’re dragging in a lot of analysts and ramping up everything. It’s just like the fall of 2002”—the months before the invasion of Iraq, when the Iraqi Operations Group became the most important in the agency. He added, “The guys now running the Iranian program have limited direct experience with Iran. In the event of an attack, how will the Iranians react? They will react, and the Administration has not thought it all the way through.”

The coming months will be interesting, to say the least.

Forgive me, but I will be in Washington D.C. tomorrow and the rest of the weekend. I will return Sunday night, and I will speak to you then.

Be well and know.

Though it has been airing for a few years, I first watched the HBO documentary, Nine Innings From Ground Zero, a few days ago. It’s a film about the 2001 World Series and its effect on those whose lives were forever changed on 9/11. Rudy Giuliani plays a prominent role in the film, as he should, but mementos of the past aren’t enough for him — he has absolutely no reason to run for President, see, and he lacks the charisma or righteousness that would make him President. So he has to rely on 9/11 to gain support, political and financial, to the dismay of all with a sense of decency.

The International Association of Fire Fighters accused Republican Rudy Giuliani of exploiting the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks because a supporter is holding a $9.11-per-person fundraiser for the presidential candidate.

The union _ already a vocal critic of Giuliani’s _ said Tuesday that the fundraiser’s “$9.11 for Rudy” theme is an abuse of the image and symbols of the 2001 attacks.

“It is nothing short of disrespectful to the legacy of the thousands of civilians and 343 brave firefighters who died at ground zero,” IAFF president Harold Schaitberger said.

The campaign of Democratic presidential candidate Chris Dodd called the theme “unconscionable, shameless and sickening.” The firefighters’ union has endorsed Dodd.

If Rudy Giuliani’s lack of clear positions, numerous wives and lisp weren’t enough to turn you off on him, this should do it. It’s almost as bad as the news that Michael Mukasey defended an Iranian frontgroup in court.

I couldn’t make that up.

Mahmoud Ahmaniac! was ripped apart at Colombia University. I am happy to hear it, and hope that this is the last I hear of Mahmoud until the day he and his ugly, violent regime die.

Good and bad news in Burma today: good? The Monks are fighting for their rights against the military dictatorship. Bad? There’s a military dictatorship in Burma fighting its own people.

The best of my karma and wishes go out to the Monks as they bravely defend their right to be.

Mahmoud Ahmaniac! and William Fallon say:

“Well, you have to appreciate we don’t need a nuclear bomb. We don’t need that. What need do we have for a bomb?” Ahmadinejad said in the “60 Minutes” interview taped in Iran on Thursday. “In political relations right now, the nuclear bomb is of no use. If it was useful it would have prevented the downfall of the Soviet Union.”

He also said that: “It’s wrong to think that Iran and the U.S. are walking toward war. Who says so? Why should we go to war? There is no war in the offing.”

Before leaving Iran, Ahmadinejad said the American people have been denied “correct information,” and his visit will give them a chance to hear a different voice, the official IRNA news agency reported.

Washington has said it is addressing the Iran situation diplomatically, rather than militarily, but U.S. officials also say that all options are open. The commander of the U.S. military forces in the Middle East said he did not believe tensions will lead to war.

“This constant drum beat of conflict is what strikes me, which is not helpful and not useful,” Adm. William Fallon, head of U.S. Central Command, said in an interview with Al-Jazeera television, which made a partial transcript available Sunday.

Believe it or not? I, for one, am unsure. I think that Ahmaniac! is a maniac and his threats against the Jewish people should be taken seriously. I don’t believe that he has no interest in building a nuclear bomb. He can’t truly believe that nuclear weapons are useless because they didn’t save the Soviets. And Douglas MacArthur didn’t believe our tensions at the Yalu River would lead to the Chinese intervention in the Korean War, so who knows.

Terror is coming to America, and there are a few things to note about it. First, the excerpt:

Ahmadinejad sparked outrage last week by requesting an official tour of Ground Zero. The proposed visit, which was promptly rejected by the NYPD, sickened victims’ relatives and U.S. leaders. Ahmadinejad said he was “amazed” by the negative reaction. But he has said he will abandon his plans to lay a wreath on the hallowed ground where nearly 3,000 people were killed by terrorists - an attack he has suggested was an inside job carried out by U.S. intelligence agents.

Columbia has refused to cancel Ahmadinejad’s appearance at its School of International and Public Affairs. University President Lee Bollinger has vowed to challenge Ahmadinejad on his denial of the Holocaust, his alleged sponsorship of terrorism, his pursuit of nuclear weapons and the imprisonment of journalists and scholars in Iran. But several political leaders and religious groups have slammed Columbia for inviting the madman to mouth off.

“Anyone who supports terror, pledges to destroy a sovereign nation [Israel], punishes by death anyone who ‘insults’ religion … denies the Holocaust and thumbs his nose at the international community has no legitimate role to play at a university,” Catholic League President Bill Donohue said.

The State Department has issued Ahmadinejad an extremely restrictive C-2 visa. It lasts 29 days and the holder must remain within a 25-mile radius of Columbus Circle. The NYPD and a Secret Service detail will accompany Ahmadinejad during his visit - and protect him despite his repeated threats against the U.S.

Mahmoud Ahmaniac!’s invitation to Colombia University bothers me if he isn’t challenged at the forum. If he is greeted with heavy criticism and the reception is cold, then Colombia deserves some respect but if it turns out to be a love-fest and Mahmoud Ahmaniac! is allowed to criticize the Western world and call for a people’s demise, someone should lose their job. What bothers me more is the fact that the NYPD and the Secret Service will be protecting him.

Oh, it’s probably standard operating procedure but it’s rather disgusting, all the same, and I hope that they take the opportunity to spy on his phone calls and log his activities. Espionage!

I can believe this, but barely.

In a speech defending his administration’s Iraq policy, Bush said former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein’s brutality had made it impossible for a unifying leader to emerge and stop the sectarian violence that has engulfed the Middle Eastern nation.

“I heard somebody say, Where’s Mandela?’ Well, Mandela’s dead because Saddam Hussein killed all the Mandelas,” Bush, who has a reputation for verbal faux pas, said in a press conference in Washington on Thursday.

Jailed for 27 years for fighting white minority rule, Mandela became South Africa’s first black president in 1994. He won a Nobel Peace Prize for preaching racial harmony and guiding the nation peacefully into the post-apartheid era. References to his death — Mandela is now 89 and increasingly frail — are seen as insensitive in South Africa.

This, too, is something I can believe but barely.

BARACK OBAMA gets morning breath. Elizabeth Edwards felt her rib pop during some good loving with her husband, John. And Rudolph W. Giuliani, by the testimony of no less than his third wife, is a really-high-testosterone guy. […] So Mr. Obama’s penchant for leaving dirty socks around the room is revealed by his wife, a teenager in New Hampshire asks John McCain if he’s too decrepit to be president, and reporters dissect Hillary Rodham Clinton’s (very discreet) hint of cleavage. The professional-image types shudder at the questions. But the answers set their heads to throbbing. […] Michelle Obama may be a lead scout on T.M.I.: Campaign Trail 2008. She’s already told us that her husband (you know, the buff dude in the bathing suit?) leaves dirty socks around the house and is “snore-y and stinky” in the morning, and that her daughters talk to her about menstrual periods. […]

[…]Walk farther down the T.M.I. trail and find Judith Giuliani, who posed sitting in her husband’s lap, holding his face and kissing him for Harper’s Bazaar. She purred about her adoration of “strong, macho” men. “Rudy’s a very, very romantic guy. We love watching ‘Sleepless in Seattle,’ ” she told the magazine. “Can you imagine my big testosterone-factor husband doing that?”

Someone at the New York Times took the time to write such nonsense? Jeez. I expect it out of Time magazine when one of Time’s editors is looking to get into Ann Coulter’s gun cabinet but this is ridiculous.

Hillary Clinton was asked, “rumor says you’re a lesbian — so, are you a lesbian?” and she said, No. Afterward, the interviewer was interviewed and said, “Well, gee, I’m convinced that she’s a heterosexual woman!” and that’s the end of that. So you had doubts about her sexuality but a ten minute interview dispelled those doubts? And let me get this straight: you were thinking about Hillary Clinton’s sexuality? Investigative journalism at its finest, though I contend that it would’ve been chic of her — in the very best way — to define herself as a lesbian. Everybody’s doing it! But since she doesn’t want to explore a new world within herself, perhaps she can follow the Russians, the Canadians and the British, all of whom have jump-started an era of oceanic “exploration”.

Britain is preparing territorial claims on tens of thousands of square miles of the Atlantic Ocean floor around the Falklands, Ascension Island and Rockall in the hope of annexing potentially lucrative gas, mineral and oil fields, the Guardian has learned. The UK claims, to be lodged at the UN Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, exploit a novel legal approach that is transforming the international politics of underwater prospecting. Britain is accelerating its process of submitting applications to the UN - which is fraught with diplomatic sensitivities, not least with Argentina - before an international deadline for registering interests.

As I’ve written before, Russia and Canada have claimed the north pole as their own with absolutely no regard for Santa Claus. England wants the Falklands, whatever the Argentinans say. I don’t know why, but it all reminds me of a quote from The Criti: “Son loves Mother: sweet romance. Poor old Father has no pants.”

Yeah, it’s a rough fit, but like any good autocrat I’ll find a way to get it done.

Death and taxes, right?

Believe it or not, Cook County — where Chicago lies — is thinking about a tax hike up to 11 percent. That’s a two percent increase. That is, to the average American, a huge deal, and I can’t say I like such a large increase on the sales tax. I prefer to support tax increases on certain things (cigarrette taxes) that are vice and voluntary, as opposed to a sales tax which hurts everyone from those shopping for pizza puffs to those staying in a Hotel room to those buying socks.

More important on the subject of taxes is Barack Obama’s pledge to cut taxes and raise them, something I understand in principle but which I take exception to.

Earlier this week, Obama announced a tax plan that would give $80 to $85 billion in tax cuts to America’s “workers, seniors and homeowners.” Under his plan, 150 million Americans would receive up to a $1,000 tax cut. It would also institute a universal homeowners’ tax credit that would benefit an estimate 10 million people and would eliminate income taxes for senior citizens making under $50,000 a year.

Obama plans to pay for this tax cut by closing corporate loopholes that allow American businesses to escape paying taxes by moving offices overseas and increasing the dividends and capital gains rate for the top bracket of earners. The senator has also suggested overturning the Bush tax cuts, but this money would be used to pay for his health care plan.

Sounds good? Until I read this, it did:

1) This will be very expensive 2) Some of it is a blatant giveaway to those who don’t need it; seniors already do *very* well out of the US government. 3) The tax simplification thing will not work. Most people itemize because they have to. It directly wars with his plan for a refundable mortgage credit. 4) The refundable tax credit for working families to “rebate” their tax credits is silly; they’re already rebated to the poor via the EITC. Expanding the EITC would make sense, but not this silly giveaway to the middle class. 5) The AARP may go nuts over the payroll tax refund; they hate any implication that it’s a tax, not a contribution. Presumably the lowered taxes on seniors are supposed to buy their support. 6) Overall, not a good plan. There are better, more economically efficient ways to achieve what he is proposing, and there’s not all that much money to be clawed back by repealing tax cuts on the over $250K set.

I think I concur. I’m open to any emails arguing against the plan, but it seems solid. It’s got a firmer grip on reality than Barack Obama seems to, not just because his tax plan isn’t all that great but also because he thought Oprah’s endorsement would be some sort of boost to him. It’s not, and that’s the long and short of it.

“Water.”

“Watergate.” “Whitewater.” And now? “Blackwater.” And no, it has nothing to do with Jesse Jackson claiming that Barack Obama isn’t acting black enough then denying he ever said it. The US has been pimping our soldier’s security out to private contractors and now the chickens are coming home to roost after a variety of nasty incidents have occurred. Apparently, the US government is instructing its soldiers not to leave “The Green Zone” in Baghdad, and that goes for the CIA as well, due to the lack of protection being given them now that Blackwater is in trouble.

Know what other cities Blackwater has “protected”?

New Orleans.

It’s a beautiful world.

In response to the Republican Party’s Presidential candidates ditching events and forums sponsored by minorities, 1996 Vice Presidential candidate Jack Kemp says, “We sound like we don’t want immigration; we sound like we don’t want black people to vote for us. What are we going to do — meet in a country club in the suburbs one day? If we’re going to be competitive with people of color, we’ve got to ask them for their vote.”

More:

Making matters worse, some Republicans believe, is that the decision to bypass the Morgan State forum comes after all top GOP candidates save McCain declined invitations this month to a debate on Univision, the most-watched Hispanic television network in the United States. The event was eventually postponed.

“For Republicans to consistently refuse to engage in front of an African American or Latino audience is an enormous error,” said former House speaker Newt Gingrich (Ga.), who has not yet ruled out a White House run himself. “I hope they will reverse their decision and change their schedules. I see no excuse — this thing has been planned for months, these candidates have known about it for months. It’s just fundamentally wrong. Any of them who give you that scheduling-conflict answer are disingenuous. That’s baloney.”

Former Republican National Committee chairman Ken Mehlman urged candidates to “reconsider this opportunity to lay out their vision and other opportunities in the future.”

Maybe Republicans will be more interested in minorities when the general election comes about but the truth is that the Republicans don’t care about minorities at this point because of the limited number of black Republicans that will be voting in the primaries. I, for one, can count them on two fingers, and they’ve both been Secretary of State for George W. Bush. Besides, they don’t want to antagonize the southern primaries, because we all know how brutal those can be if you’re “too close” to “black people.”

Now, to other business. Want to have your faith in government ruined? Here! The White House is doing all it can to cover up contracting fraud in the wars. And he wants to compare himself to Harry Truman? Harry would’ve never stood for that.

Today’s post has no central, guiding theme. There are too many stories to talk about, and I can’t tie them together. Let’s just get to them, eh?

Uh oh Mitt Romney, your liberalism — and humanity! — is showing!

ABC’s The Note highlights this flyer which was posted by the Massachusetts Democratic Party on RomneyFacts.com. “As that shakes out, ABC has obtained one flier Romney doesn’t want you to see. It’s from 2002, with Romney was running for governor with Kerry Healey as his running mate. ‘Mitt and Kerry Wish You a Great Pride Weekend! All citizens deserve equal rights, regardless of their sexual preference.’ (It’s even pink.)” It was said to have been handed out during the 2002 gay pride parade.

How ever will you win the Republican nomination now? What ever will you do? (Besides deny it and swear that you’ve seen the light. Maybe point to someone you fired years ago and say, “They were responsible, not I! After all, what is a politician but another man’s creation? But I swear to you, I am my own man now!”)

More interesting than the kinder, gentler, hypocritical side of Mitt Romney is this article, which is critical of the Israeli attack on Syria. As you know, the rumor is that they hit a nuclear operating area aided by North Korea but there are intelligence analysts who are skeptical of the claim. I’m not sure who’s right or wrong, but I do think it’s interesting. Unfortunately, my sources in the CIA are limited, but still: espionage provides some of the most fascinating material in the world’s history, and this is great intrigue.

One more story to note: “Mukasey may soothe the rift between Democrats and Republicans.” Not a chance in hell. He’s better than Olson, yeah, but we must keep a vigilant eye on this government.

Bush and the Pentagon have set two thousand targets for attack in Iran. This means one of two things: America has decided to go to war in Iran or America has a plan in case we go to war with Iran. The article I linked to alleges that the White House has decided upon a war in Iran. I disagree, as the Pentagon had war plans against Iran just in case during the 1990s. Will we attack Iran? I don’t know. Will we invade Iran? Probably not. Has Bush decided? I don’t think so, but if he does attack Iran, it’ll be foolish at this stage, because the Israelis have the responsibility of disabling middle eastern nuclear weapons, not us, and the President is a lame duck with little international credibility so any attack by George W. Bush would strengthen the Iranian regime. Unless he absolutely destroyed it, which he wouldn’t. However, the situation isn’t as simple as “Bush opposes Iran, might attack, likely won’t,” because this story complicates matters greatly.

THE world should “prepare for war” with Iran, the French Foreign Minister, Bernard Kouchner, said on Sunday, escalating tensions over the country’s nuclear program. Mr Kouchner said that while “we must negotiate right to the end” with Iran, if Tehran possessed an atomic weapon it would represent “a real danger for the whole world” and the world should “prepare for the worst … which is war”. His comments came after the US reminded Iran that “all options were on the table” in confronting its nuclear policy, which many Western officials believe has the ultimate aim of arming a nuclear warhead, despite Iran’s claim that it is for civilian purposes.

The Iranian President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, said yesterday that Iran had mastered nuclear technology and would never yield to international pressure over its atomic drive. “Of course we will not step back,” Mr Ahmadinejad said in reply to a question on Iranian television. “We have mastered the technology to enrich uranium and we have arrived at an industrial stage. “The West are talking about imposing sanctions on us but they cannot do this.”

Iran’s official media accused France of pandering to the US. “The new occupants of the Elysee [presidential palace] want to copy the White House,” the state-owned IRNA news agency said in an editorial. It accused the French President, Nicolas Sarkozy, of taking on “an American skin” and said “the French people will never forget the era when a non-European moved into the Elysee”.

The five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council - Britain, China, France, Russia and the US - plus Germany, are due to meet this week to discuss a new draft UN resolution on sanctions against Iran.

This is a dangerous situation. I’ve told people all along that Ahmaniac! was Hitler II and it seems that the Germans, the French and the Americans all agree and understand that his declared threats are legitimate and he must be confronted.

If you remember, I quoted Greenspan’s comments about Iraq last night. He’s “clarified” them to be, I think, more accurate. “Saddam has to go for a variety of reasons, economics and oil are on that list but don’t define it.” That’s better, Mr. Greenspan, although I do wonder if you were forced to by your angry insider friends or if you mean it. I mean, I believe in what he’s saying now over the idea that we went into Iraq to control the oil supplies, but it’s nice to hear him say.

I’ll bet the reaction he got from his friends in the GOP was similar to the one this Swiss artist has received from Muslims after drawing Mohammed as a dog.

Now if you’ll excuse me, Dear Reader, I’d like to end this post by mentioning how much I love Sally Field. It’s a lot.

You’ll definitely have to forgive me for being absent yesterday. It’s been a hectic weekend, but I fully intend on getting right back to work. Three playful notes: Pedro Martinez continues to be amazing, curried chicken-coconut soup is delicious and The King of Kong is excellent. Want more good news? Good, Syrious news? You’ve got it:

IT was just after midnight when the 69th Squadron of Israeli F15Is crossed the Syrian coast-line. On the ground, Syria’s formidable air defences went dead. An audacious raid on a Syrian target 50 miles from the Iraqi border was under way. At a rendezvous point on the ground, a Shaldag air force commando team was waiting to direct their laser beams at the target for the approaching jets. The team had arrived a day earlier, taking up position near a large underground depot. Soon the bunkers were in flames.

Ten days after the jets reached home, their mission was the focus of intense speculation this weekend amid claims that Israel believed it had destroyed a cache of nuclear materials from North Korea. The Israeli government was not saying. “The security sources and IDF [Israeli Defence Forces] soldiers are demonstrating unusual courage,” said Ehud Olmert, the prime minister. “We naturally cannot always show the public our cards.”

Anytime you can halt the spread of nuclear weapons, you do it. Good for Israel. Want more good news? American, political good news? You’ve got it:

US President George W Bush has chosen a replacement for outgoing US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, reports say. Mr Bush is expected to name retired federal judge Michael Mukasey as his choice for the post. Mr Mukasey has presided over a number of high-profile terror trials and is seen as a conservative, analysts say. Mr Gonzales resigned last month amid accusations that he fired eight lawyers for political reasons and later lied about it - charges he denies. He officially steps down from his post on Monday.

Better than, say, the terrible and rumored Theodore Olson, that’s for sure. Feeling greedy? Need more? You’ve got it (sort of):

ABC News’ John Cochran Reports: Former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan’s memoirs, ‘The Age of Turbulence: Adventures in a New World’ doesn’t go on sale officially until Monday, but already the White House has fired back at two charges he levels. Greenspan writes that “the Iraq war is largely about oil.” That did not go down very well at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue where spokesman Tony Fratto told ABC News he would try to restrain himself. But he still took a pretty good shot at Greenspan: “That sounds like Georgetown cocktail party analysis. The reasons we went to Iraq are well understood and had to do with wmd (weapons of mass destruction), enforcing UN sanctions. To the extent that oil has anything to do with our engagement in Iraq today, it is the danger that al Qaeda could obtain control of oil assets and use them to threaten our interests.”

Is it good or bad news? Bad, I think, because it hurts the credibility of the American Presidency. Good because it hurts the President’s credibility. Bad because it means that somebody in the White House really hurt Paul O’Neill’s feelings and so Alan Greenspan needs to fire back on his behalf. Not that I’m really mocking O’Neill, as he’s a hero, but you’d be foolish not to think that the disrespect afforded O’Neill has an influence on Greenspan.

President Bush spoke about Iraq last night. Absolutely nobody enjoyed his speech. Some believe he is punting the Iraq War to his successor while others believe he is foolishly continuing it and others think he has no plan anymore. I concur with those that think him lost and confused, but that’s been true for months now.

More interesting is this story about the states and energy.

When historians finally take stock, Vermont may look like the mouse that roared – the tiny state that brought the nation’s mighty auto industry to heel by requiring cars that emit fewer greenhouse gases. This is one scenario that could unfold following a federal judge’s ruling Wednesday, which upheld a Vermont law patterned after California’s mandate that the carbon-dioxide emissions of cars sold in the state must be slashed 30 percent by 2016.

The judge’s finding – that federal fuel-economy laws are not in conflict with state emissions laws – is particularly significant, coming on the heels of a US Supreme Court decision in April. That ruling found that the Environmental Protection Agency has the authority to regulate greenhouse-gas emissions, legal experts say. On the one hand, Wednesday’s decision strengthens the hand of states that want to take action against global warming. But in the longer term, the impact from the ruling could lead to one nationwide standard, which is already expected by many.

In addition to the 12 states with California-style laws on the books, another six are close to acting. The ruling this week could start dominoes falling by:

• Prompting the US EPA to grant California a waiver from the Clean Air Act allowing it, along with Vermont and the 10 other states with identical laws, to begin enforcing greenhouse-gas requirements for cars sold within their borders.

• Causing six additional states – Arizona, Florida, New Mexico, Utah, Illinois, and Minnesota – to proceed with their own similar emissions requirements. Altogether, the 18 states that have such laws – or are leaning toward them – make up about half the US auto market.

• Spurring Congress to reconsider the new fuel-efficiency standards it is currently weighing, which are not as demanding as Vermont’s, and mandate a tougher federal requirement that would also reduce greenhouse-gas emissions.

• Causing federal judges in two similar cases brought by the auto industry – one in California, the other in Rhode Island – to dismiss those cases if they determine the industry has had its day in court and further proceedings would be redundant, according to environmental lawyers.

The efforts by the 12 states with laws in place could cut emissions by 100 million tons annually. By comparison, however, US cars and light trucks emit 1.5 billion tons annually. Still, this would be “the most significant step so far” on vehicle emissions and pave the way for broader action, says Michelle Robinson, director of the clean vehicle program at the Union of Concerned Scientists, a Washington environmental group not party to the lawsuit.

Good news, right? Good news.